I don't understand.
I have both Internet Plug-Ins folders on my Leopard install, with lots installed (Flash Player etc), and it works fine.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why do some people prefer Tiger over Leopard?
- Thread starter asdfTT123
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't understand.
I have both Internet Plug-Ins folders on my Leopard install, with lots installed (Flash Player etc), and it works fine.
I have to admit, after using Leopard for about a month, it's not half bad, even on 512 MB RAM. I hate stacks with a passion, Spaces is useless to me since I am absent minded and have a bad memory, which means anything I put in a different space gets "lost", and I spend the next half hour looking for an open document, before I realize it's in another space.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good OS, but honestly, the only improvment that Leopard has over Tiger for me, is the translucent menu bar. That's cool.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good OS, but honestly, the only improvment that Leopard has over Tiger for me, is the translucent menu bar. That's cool.
my bad!
thnx to karenflower for bringing it to my attention. I have had so many issues with my 2 week old MBP that I must be getting paranoid
Hopefully 10.5.3 will be out by the end of May and I will be a happy camper again. I'm just glad I have 10.4.11 on my PB G4 to help me get by until everything gets fixed.
My bad... there is an Internet Plug-ins folder in Leopard. I just went into the wrong Library folder the first time.I don't understand.
thnx to karenflower for bringing it to my attention. I have had so many issues with my 2 week old MBP that I must be getting paranoid
Hopefully 10.5.3 will be out by the end of May and I will be a happy camper again. I'm just glad I have 10.4.11 on my PB G4 to help me get by until everything gets fixed.
I prefer the "soft" Tiger look over the "chiseled" Leopard look. However, I prefer Leopard's improved functionality over Tiger's.
It is
I think it does its work much faster.
I've used Leopard since the day it came out and while it had stability issues at first, they were dealt with fairly quickly. But even now, 10.5.3 is less stable than Tiger.
The new look to the UI is nice, but hardly a reason to upgrade.
Functionally speaking, outside of Time-Machine, Leopard just doesn't offer the typical user much value for the $130. That adds up a one pricey backup app.
Under the hood, Leopard has some nice changes and for that it will be worth the upgrade once developers start to take advantage of it.
The new look to the UI is nice, but hardly a reason to upgrade.
Functionally speaking, outside of Time-Machine, Leopard just doesn't offer the typical user much value for the $130. That adds up a one pricey backup app.
Under the hood, Leopard has some nice changes and for that it will be worth the upgrade once developers start to take advantage of it.
that is just plane stupid. But funny
Reason Why People Downgrade to Tiger From Leopard
One of the main reasons that people choose to downgrade their operating systems is do to incompatibility issues between their OS and a 3rd Party program of the users choice. Take Pro Tools, which is made by Digidesign. Pro Tools is as commonly used on Mac's as Sonic The Hedge Hog is used on the Sega Genesis, and yet the Genius' over at Digidesign neglected on making sure that the latest version of there software (7.4), to be compatible with the latest version Leopard. So for anyone who purchased one of the New Mac Book Pros, or Mac Pros, that is Running the latest version of Leopard, the only option for them is to downgrade.
One of the main reasons that people choose to downgrade their operating systems is do to incompatibility issues between their OS and a 3rd Party program of the users choice. Take Pro Tools, which is made by Digidesign. Pro Tools is as commonly used on Mac's as Sonic The Hedge Hog is used on the Sega Genesis, and yet the Genius' over at Digidesign neglected on making sure that the latest version of there software (7.4), to be compatible with the latest version Leopard. So for anyone who purchased one of the New Mac Book Pros, or Mac Pros, that is Running the latest version of Leopard, the only option for them is to downgrade.
thankfully I found this thread b4 I posted a new one, now my mind is made up... until it is necessary, no reason to upgrade to Leopard, in fact for Time Machine I have an auto backup feature on my ext HD that only backs up files that have been added/changed since last backup so I don't have to search to find what has been backed up yet...
as for Stacks, I'm fine with the Dock on 10.4.11... still beats the stone age when I was using XP
as for Stacks, I'm fine with the Dock on 10.4.11... still beats the stone age when I was using XP
Why people prefer Tiger over Leopard? Let's see...in my entire experience with Tiger I maybe experienced two crashes over the period of a whole year, while since installing Leopard (freshly) yesterday, I've already crashed twice just today. And this is 10.5.6, after getting rid of silliness like Stacks and changing the dock and menubar from their translucent ridiculousness. The biggest "feature" that I've run into that I enjoy is the simple grid spacing options with the finder, and maybe quicklook. Time Machine? Spare me, I'll use real imaging software like SuperDuper that doesn't require me to have a Leopard disk on hand. Spaces? Somewhat useful, but no substitute for having an extra external monitor. Better Spotlight? Quicksilver is still faster, sorry.
I'll give it maybe another week messing around, but I'm sorely tempted to load up my image of Tiger where everything worked properly.
I'll give it maybe another week messing around, but I'm sorely tempted to load up my image of Tiger where everything worked properly.
I'm just gonna wait for Snow Leopard, cause I really can't justify spending that much money for something so trivial to me.
And all my money is going towards my first car..
And all my money is going towards my first car..
Speaking of crashes- has anyone else had an issue on Tiger with Firefox 3.0.x?
The only crash issues I've had w/ my 2+ yr old MB is with the new Firefox where that lil' pinwheel timer comes on, the whole system locks up to where I can't do a force quit and the only way to restart is to turn the computer off completely
This usually only happens if I've had the computer on for a long period of time and usually late at night(after 12am)
The only crash issues I've had w/ my 2+ yr old MB is with the new Firefox where that lil' pinwheel timer comes on, the whole system locks up to where I can't do a force quit and the only way to restart is to turn the computer off completely
This usually only happens if I've had the computer on for a long period of time and usually late at night(after 12am)
Speaking of crashes- has anyone else had an issue on Tiger with Firefox 3.0.x?
The only crash issues I've had w/ my 2+ yr old MB is with the new Firefox where that lil' pinwheel timer comes on, the whole system locks up to where I can't do a force quit and the only way to restart is to turn the computer off completely
This usually only happens if I've had the computer on for a long period of time and usually late at night(after 12am)
SO IT WASN'T MY COMPUTER!!
I was having this problem, it happened like 3 times a few nights ago so I posted it in the MB forum. My MacBook would totally freeze for a little bit, including my music in iTunes, and then start working again. I got the beach ball crap and was unable to force quit.
I'm running Beta 2 of Firefox.
Tried to do a search on this issue and this same post came up.
So any ideas or any threads on the FF 3.0 Crash in Tiger? It's still happening and hopefully next week when I get my free Leopard upgrade disc from a friend who works for Apple this won't be a problem anymore, but in the meantime, any idea on how to fix this issue?
So any ideas or any threads on the FF 3.0 Crash in Tiger? It's still happening and hopefully next week when I get my free Leopard upgrade disc from a friend who works for Apple this won't be a problem anymore, but in the meantime, any idea on how to fix this issue?
I don't have any solutions other than to suggest trying out the 3.1 beta or to downgrade to version 2.0.
i have the latest 17" mbp..the process shoiuld be simple right ? simply bung in the tiger install dvds and do a clean install ? would all the devices work etc ?
Tiger will not contain the correct drivers for the new battery system, nor graphics system, and quite possibly may have an issue with your RAM.
The main feature I want in Leopard is Boot Camp. I use VMWare, but sometimes it would be nice to have XP or Vista run on the bare metal.
One thing that I am worried about with upgrading is the speed factor. I have a Core Duo 2.0 GHz, and, from what I've seen, Leopard isn't as fleet-footed as Tiger. I hear Snow Leopard is, and I'm waiting for that. I hope my hardware will work well with it.
(Talk about resurrecting a thread...)
One thing that I am worried about with upgrading is the speed factor. I have a Core Duo 2.0 GHz, and, from what I've seen, Leopard isn't as fleet-footed as Tiger. I hear Snow Leopard is, and I'm waiting for that. I hope my hardware will work well with it.
(Talk about resurrecting a thread...)
One of the main reasons that people choose to downgrade their operating systems is do to incompatibility issues between their OS and a 3rd Party program of the users choice. Take Pro Tools, which is made by Digidesign. Pro Tools is as commonly used on Mac's as Sonic The Hedge Hog is used on the Sega Genesis, and yet the Genius' over at Digidesign neglected on making sure that the latest version of there software (7.4), to be compatible with the latest version Leopard. So for anyone who purchased one of the New Mac Book Pros, or Mac Pros, that is Running the latest version of Leopard, the only option for them is to downgrade.
Or Download the 7.4.2 update that's running just fine under 10.5.7 on my "unsupported" system with a little help from LeopardAssist for the OS install
It's only officially supported up to OS 10.5.4 but it still works under 10.5.7
I now have a nice little dual boot system with Leopard just for testing purposes and plan on getting the Mbox Micro instead of just the Protools 8 DVD so I get a spare USB audio interface for £40 more.
I only use the Mbox2 itself to monitor the audio output and all those "Factory" plug-ins are now freebies with every copy of Pro Tools LE.
If you add the cost of the headache free Audiomedia III PCI card with the additional expense for the "Factory" version of the Mbox2 that was just paying extra for the plug-ins PT LE 8.0 comes with as standard, Digidesign have screwed me out of enough money already to be shelling out for a DVD when I can get hardware for a little more.
I'm not being deliberately bitter, I know they offer a trade in for the Audiomedia III but I'd sooner it was still supported considering how rock solid it was compared with their USB offerings and the only trade in offers they have are for expensive firewire based systems I have no use for and would never afford.
The 10.5.7 update seems to have cured those wi-fi problems it had in previous updates too so I could easily move to Leopard as my main boot OS once I have PTLE 8.0 and a faster GPU to handle the weight of the interface.
Pro Tools LE is far more responsive under a heavy plug-in load than it was under Tiger but Leopard in general has a kind of "Heavy" feel to the interface. Apps launch slower, booting takes at least twice as long and mouse movement can sometimes be a little jumpy. I don't know if this is to do with only having 1Gb RAM, the fact Tiger is on a Maxtor Diamondmax Plus 10 and Leopard is on the 60Gb Maxtor Diamondmax Plus 9 that Mac came with or a combination of the 2.
Sorry for war and peace above
My Opinion
I think some people like Tiger more than Leopard because it was the last Apple OS that focused on Aqua Blue.
Back in 2004/2005/2006, when you thought of Macs, you would think of shiny white cool computers with nice blue glossy wallpaper with a little camera for taking pictures in Photo Booth. Owning a nice white shiny Mac would easily make that cute girl at school talk to you.
Does this picture bring back any memories?
Now, fast forward to today. Gone are the days where Macs where shiny white highschool-girl magnets.
Today, we think of Macs as being more "mature" computers with multi-touch, glass, aluminum, cover flow, and all that. Tiger is a perfect example of my previous paragraph, Leopard is a perfect example of this paragraph.
See this picture:
Sorry for the long post, but I guess my point is, some people prefer the glossy white with Aqua Blue era that Apple has permanently let go, in favor of the new Aluminum, multi-touch era.
EDIT: Cassie, liking the return of the purple text
I think some people like Tiger more than Leopard because it was the last Apple OS that focused on Aqua Blue.
Back in 2004/2005/2006, when you thought of Macs, you would think of shiny white cool computers with nice blue glossy wallpaper with a little camera for taking pictures in Photo Booth. Owning a nice white shiny Mac would easily make that cute girl at school talk to you.
Does this picture bring back any memories?
Now, fast forward to today. Gone are the days where Macs where shiny white highschool-girl magnets.
Today, we think of Macs as being more "mature" computers with multi-touch, glass, aluminum, cover flow, and all that. Tiger is a perfect example of my previous paragraph, Leopard is a perfect example of this paragraph.
See this picture:
Sorry for the long post, but I guess my point is, some people prefer the glossy white with Aqua Blue era that Apple has permanently let go, in favor of the new Aluminum, multi-touch era.
EDIT: Cassie, liking the return of the purple text
+1 Since 10.1 to 10.4 MacOS X was rock solid. In Leopard 10.5.6 I can show you a total system hung up just clicking the "Allow guests connect to this Mac" checkbox. Like MacOS 9 or Windows 98. Or maybe worst.
It happened in the first MacBook Pro I bought and I thought it was a hardware failure (memory or something) and I returned it to Apple. Then in a Mac Mini that I also returned to Apple due many unsolvable permission problems and now in the new MBP.
Solution: never try to activate the guest account:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1947258&tstart=0
I think some people like Tiger more than Leopard because it was the last Apple OS that focused on Aqua Blue.
Back in 2004/2005/2006, when you thought of Macs, you would think of shiny white cool computers with nice blue glossy wallpaper with a little camera for taking pictures in Photo Booth. Owning a nice white shiny Mac would easily make that cute girl at school talk to you.
Does this picture bring back any memories?
Now, fast forward to today. Gone are the days where Macs where shiny white highschool-girl magnets.
Today, we think of Macs as being more "mature" computers with multi-touch, glass, aluminum, cover flow, and all that. Tiger is a perfect example of my previous paragraph, Leopard is a perfect example of this paragraph.
See this picture:
Sorry for the long post, but I guess my point is, some people prefer the glossy white with Aqua Blue era that Apple has permanently let go, in favor of the new Aluminum, multi-touch era.
EDIT: Cassie, liking the return of the purple text
Although you hit a pretty good point, it doesn't really apply to this discussion. (did I just contradict myself? oh well, who cares?)
Everyone was comparing the OS differences between Tiger and Leopard, while you compared the Aqua Blue Wallpaper and Hardware (white macs) to the newer unibody Macs (which just so happen to come with Leopard pre-installed).
For example, I'm rockin' a 2006 white macbook with Leopard 10.5.7, with the Aqua Blue Wallpaper. *looks around for high school girls*
Edit: removed the quoted pics to save intertubes real estate.
@Maclover001 - Yeah, I don't really think the hardware has much to do with the Tiger/Leopard discussion. Also, I still like my early 06 whitebook. It's still cool at college, even though more people have them.
And, on the iMac pictures, they're not really displaying Leopard so much as they are the new iLife. I can put that on Tiger if I want to. And cover flow doesn't impress me too much (honestly, I miss explorer).
I don't mean to jump on you or anything, but hardware is a little off-topic, and I don't get what you are saying about Aqua Blue (I've left Aqua mostly behind anyway).
And, on the iMac pictures, they're not really displaying Leopard so much as they are the new iLife. I can put that on Tiger if I want to. And cover flow doesn't impress me too much (honestly, I miss explorer).
I don't mean to jump on you or anything, but hardware is a little off-topic, and I don't get what you are saying about Aqua Blue (I've left Aqua mostly behind anyway).
I'm saying, some of the Tiger-lovers out there probably prefer Tiger to Leopard for nostalgic reasons. Some people prefer the White/Blue era to the Aluminum/Glass era.
My first Apple product was a blue iPod Mini. I remember lusting over the "brand new" iMac G5s, and wanting one so badly. When I got my WhiteBook in mid 2008 (3 years later). I decided that I like Tiger better because it really reminded me of Macs back when I first discovered them. Then a few months later, Leopard grew on me, and Tiger looked dated.
Arguably, girls may call Tiger "cuter"-looking.
Exactly, the "aluminum era" seems more professional and business like. These would be the type of computers that would go very well in a house full of contemporary furniture (Hint: IKEA designs!) or classical furniture (Office with ornate desk etc).
The older style, white iMacs, etc, seems more like it belongs in a college kid's dorm room, but still also would work well in a contemporary furniture design. It doesn't go great with classical furniture though, like the alu iMacs. The Black MacBook and MacBook Pros of this era would fall under the "aluminum era" In my opinion, as these go great with classical furniture, or contemporary.
I hope I make sense, Lol.
The older style, white iMacs, etc, seems more like it belongs in a college kid's dorm room, but still also would work well in a contemporary furniture design. It doesn't go great with classical furniture though, like the alu iMacs. The Black MacBook and MacBook Pros of this era would fall under the "aluminum era" In my opinion, as these go great with classical furniture, or contemporary.
I hope I make sense, Lol.