Which was worse, Leopard or Lion?

[KoolAid-Drink]

Feeling kind of nostalgic — but I remember many people thinking both Mac OS X Leopard and Lion were hot messes of OSes, with many issues. Tiger and Snow Leopard, respectively, were much better.

Which would you think was worse, though, in your experience — Leopard or Lion? For me, I only used Lion (switched to Mac at that time), but did see a few friends use Leopard and they had some weird issues as well.

 

[GMShadow]

Lion, easily. Leopard's main issues show up when trying to run it on older PPC stuff that is 'compatible' but isn't really equipped to deal with it - lacking RAM and weak GPUs being the main issue. If you've got the hardware it's 'fine', but perhaps not as nimble as Tiger.

Lion, though, was just a buggy mess, which was painful given that it was the last OS for a lot of Macs.

 

[zevrix]

Lion introduced the scourge of animations, some of which still cannot be disabled.

I don't recall anything negative about Leopard.

 

[Nermal]

I can never remember the "code names" for the various OSes, but Lion (10.7) is seared into my memory as being really bad. It's the only time I've gone to the effort of reformatting the machine and reverting to the previous version.

10.5 was a bit slow on older hardware, but otherwise "fine". Yes, it had some bugs at launch, but this was in an era when bugs were actually being fixed in updates.