Which OSX was the most stable?

[BR485]

You need to watch the video of Apple's WWDC presentation then go through all of the material on Apple's Lion and iOS 5 webpages if you want to be taken seriously as a member of this forum.

Of course Apple's WWDC presentation is a completely objective and unbiased view of what the company's goals are. 🙄 It's basically Apple propaganda, which, incidentally, I don't hold against them. They're in business to make money and a smooth, polished presentation glorifying the company is to be expected.

I find most enthusiastic adopters of anything Apple are the users who jumped on board with the iPhone/iOS wave. Pre iOS users seem to be more critical and, IMO, realistic about Apple's current and future ambitions.

To gain a better picture of what Apple's (or any company's) objectives and priorities are, it's best to critically examine information from a variety of sources (and users) rather than relying solely on information provided by the company.

(If you want to be taken seriously as a human being with a functioning brain you need to question your uncritical acceptance of Apple gospel.)

 

[John T]

Post deleted.

 

[MisterMe]

Of course Apple's WWDC presentation is a completely objective and unbiased view of what the company's goals are. 🙄 It's basically Apple propaganda, which, incidentally, I don't hold against them. They're in business to make money and a smooth, polished presentation glorifying the company is to be expected.

...

Apple's objectivity and motives have nothing to do with your post that prompted my response. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I was trying to get you to understand that you were simply wrong in your comments about MacOS X 10.7. If you had bothered to watch Apple's presentation or to read the information available in the Lion pages of Apple's website, then you would know that your "concerns" were unfounded.

However, it appears that you do not want genuine concerns allayed. You use the cheap troll tactic of calling everything counter to your narrative a "lie." You use the typical troll tactic of accusing members of this forum of being unthinking fans of Apple.

If you want help or to share user experiences with other Mac users, then you will find this forum to be very useful. If you persist in attacking the other members of this forum and in false-based attacks on Apple, then you will find this forum to be a very unpleasant place.

The choice is yours.

 

[BR485]

If you want help or to share user experiences with other Mac users, then you will find this forum to be very useful. If you persist in attacking the other members of this forum and in false-based attacks on Apple, then you will find this forum to be a very unpleasant place.

The choice is yours.

I'm finding the forum quite pleasant, thank you. I also find your pretentious, er, belief that you are some sort of spokesperson for this forum rather amusing.

If you choose to pretend that Apple is somehow above criticism and label anyone even remotely critical of the company a "troll" I will call you on it.

Have a nice day.

 

[Makosuke]

I actually had a few problems with 10.4. They were, admittedly, rather obscure. On my primary computer 10.6 is, I'd say, the most stable I've ever personally used, though I didn't have many issues with 10.5, either. My i7 iMac hasn't been quite so rock solid under 10.5 or 10.6, but I suspect that's due to some sloppy OS migration when I switched from a G5 tower.

 

[daneoni]

Tiger unquestionably.

 

[RichardBeer]

If you want help or to share user experiences with other Mac users, then you will find this forum to be very useful. If you persist in attacking the other members of this forum and in false-based attacks on Apple, then you will find this forum to be a very unpleasant place.

To be fair, BR485 initially voiced an opinion. Then he/she was attacked, I find it odd that he/she is being placed in the position of antagonist.

In regards to Lion, what can be taken from WWDC and Apple's site is the objective factual breakdown of what is or is not in the OS. Whether they are good features or bad features or work as expected will be proved by hands on testing in time to come and also by individual circumstance and opinion.

 

[kalsta]

Impossible to remember each and every version, but OS X has always been pretty stable from memory — that is, until 10.6.5 (Snow Leopard), when I started getting fairly regular system freezes on my 2007 MBP. On the other hand, with Snow Leopard Apple quietly addressed a Mail bug (that was driving me crazy), and so far I've had no problems with 10.6.7 on my 2011 MBP. It's certainly my favourite OS when it's stable!

 

[limo79]

Do not tell other people that OSX is absolutely stable and crash free. Why? Because that is not true!

Even OSX can crash totally. I have few crashes just trying to connect my Nokia via BT under Leopard. Few weeks ago my Leopard installation died totally - just restarts.

 

[roadbloc]

Tiger was the best for stability in my opinion. Solid as a rock. Never crashed.

Although Snow Leopard, in the most recent updates, is also proving just as good.

 

[err404]

Other then my Mac Mini, OS X essentially never 'crashes' (my mini occasional over heats). That said there have been bugs of various severity over the years. By that measure Tiger was the most reliable.
Keep in mind that my initial experience with Tiger was well into it's life cycle, so any critical issues had already been addressed.

 

[lexvo]

Some people mention a version which was stable after a fresh install. When I'm going to upgrade from SL to Lion, I don't want to do a fresh install. Do I have to worry? I guess most major upgrades go without problems?

 

[Jolly Jimmy]

I recall Tiger being particularly sharp by the time it got to 10.4.8 or so. I never got that feeling with Leopard. Snow Leopard on the other hand is rock solid now.