SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Apple

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Tomorrow OS X 10.6 will be released and my MacBook Pro will be happier than ever... I think.

You see, 10.6 is a true 64-Bit OS that has had the universal binaries removed decreasing the size of the OS's footprint significantly from 10.5. However, I'm not sure if this is just a bit of smoke and mirrors.

It has come to my attention that Apple's new file size definitions will be adjusted from 1KB = 1024 bytes to 1KB = 1000 bytes. This is a really nice way to show how an OS has slimmed down significantly without actually doing anything. I personally don't care which size they choose to use, but if this is part of a marketing gimmick I am shaking my head in disapproval.

On another sneaky note, there has been much discussion about 10.6 having anti-malware software embedded (but disabled for now) in the OS.

Either way, I'm still looking forward to many of the improvements that 10.6 will offer. I am especially excited about getting rid of Entourage and being able to use Mail with Exchange.

Is anyone else planning to get the OS soon?

Posted: Aug 27 2009 08:53 pm

I don't use Macs, so no.

Posted: Aug 27 2009 09:04 pm

I'm just surprised that they couldn't find another cat besides the Snow Leopard. Is this just an incremental update, or is this basically a ground-up new OS (I don't use Macs, so I'm not familiar with the update frequency or naming conventions).

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Char Aznable wrote:

I'm just surprised that they couldn't find another cat besides the Snow Leopard. Is this just an incremental update, or is this basically a ground-up new OS (I don't use Macs, so I'm not familiar with the update frequency or naming conventions).

They aren't adding many new features so it will appear to the common buyer that there isn't much different between 10.5 and 10.6. The majority of the changes will be seen for power users who are able to get larger speed gains out of a better optimized OS. Keeping with the same cat name makes sense for this one.

Still, at a certain point they will have to give up the fact that you can't keep calling your OS version 10.x when the product no longer even resembles the original os 10.

OS 6 through 9 look more similar to each other than 10.1 to 10.6.

Posted: Aug 28 2009 07:49 am

I've seen people on Twitter and Facebook talking about Snow Leopard, but it was always vague stuff line "so excited for Snow Leopard" or "Snow Leopard tomorrow!".

I assumed it was some hot new rapper I wouldn't give two shits about. Now I know it's an OS I don't give one shit about. Finally I can sleep.

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

Snow Leopard is a piss poor title

First we had the Tiger, then we had the Leopard. Now the Snow Leopard? What about the Lion? or the Sabertooth? or a Cheetah?

Posted: Aug 28 2009 10:58 am

Def Leppard > Snow Leopard
Snow Patrol > Snow Leopard
Def Leppard = Snow Patrol?

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

First impressions:

Much like Windows 7, it never requires a reboot and things that are usually flakey don't break.
Shutdown and Startup are insanely fast. Shutdown before the reinstall took me about 15 seconds, now it takes about 3. Startup seems to be cut in half.
The style change around stacked lists in the dock is appreciated. It is easier to read and use.
Expose does work a little better. It makes more sense to me where things are.
Regular Mac Apps are lightning fast. They launch almost instantly, however non-mac apps don't seem that different.
Icons seem cleaner on the desktop and in the Finder.
Search is actually faster
I couldn't figure out how to play with that much discussed Chinese character input recognition tool. For the large amount of hype they gave it... where is it?
Mail connecting to Exchange is awesome. You give your email address and password and it connects everything with no other settings.
If you have a Mac OS installed on the hard drive there is no way through the standard installer to clear it and install a new fresh OS. Instead you must use the Disk Utility to erase the partition data and then run the installer. This is the dumbest shit I have ever heard of. It is confusing and time consuming.

If you don't have a lot of stuff on your computer and you are running 10.5, then maybe it is worth upgrading, however if you have installed a ton of apps and really configured the OS the way you like it, avoid this upgrade and wait for 10.7. On the other hand, if you are running 10.4 on Intel hardware, upgrade ASAP.

Posted: Aug 30 2009 04:38 am

I would hope they would slim it down.

OSX 10.4 used 86 Million SLOC. (Source Lines Of Code.) For comparison, Vista has about 50 million SLOC.

More lines of code, more chance of things not being coded right.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Knyte wrote:

I would hope they would slim it down.

OSX 10.4 used 86 Million SLOC. (Source Lines Of Code.) For comparison, Vista has about 50 million SLOC.

More lines of code, more chance of things not being coded right.

While I am not sure of how many lines of code were written, I do know that the OS size was reduced by about 7GB in size. I imagine that this is either due to significant optimization and reusing of code.

Docinsano's Channel 63 · Posted: Sep 01 2009 02:07 am

One question. Does it support PowerPC or did Apple finally phase out the PowerPC with this upgrade?

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

docinsano wrote:

One question. Does it support PowerPC or did Apple finally phase out the PowerPC with this upgrade?

It absolutely, positively, certainly, does NOT.

First listed requirement:
* Mac computer with an Intel processor

Joined: Jun 30 2009 Location: Left Posts: 13

I think imma get it.
I could use the extra 7GB for my horse porn, and i hate waiting for startup.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

The most complete review I have seen:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars

Posted: Sep 02 2009 07:37 am

Will it hold me at night and tell me everything is gonna be okay?

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Syd Lexia wrote:

Will it hold me at night and tell me everything is gonna be okay?

Clearly not.

Those who practice the ancient religion of Mac Fanboydomology believe strongly that they must persevere as loners in this life until their demi-god Hercujobs permits them entry into X-Servia, their version of Heaven. To be cuddled would be a grave offense and such heresy would doom one's soul to the great Virumoria where it would be tortured for all of eternity.

Posted: Sep 02 2009 11:11 am

will it go out and look for a job so it could pay for itself, since macs are rather pricey

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

username wrote:

will it go out and look for a job so it could pay for itself, since macs are rather pricey

You really need to read this.

Posted: Sep 02 2009 02:07 pm

GPFontaine wrote:

username wrote:

will it go out and look for a job so it could pay for itself, since macs are rather pricey

You really need to read this.

touche good sir

Posted: Sep 04 2009 12:55 pm

From INQ:

RED-FACED APPLE has admitted that its Leopard operating system has an ancient version of Java that's an open door to hackers.

The Java flaw is important and the patch can be downloaded from Apple. Basically it allows a hacker to take control of the user's machine if they visit a dodgy webpage. Normally Apple waits six months before releasing Java security patches, so it must have thought this one was bad.

What is less amusing is that Apple has shafted those people who are still using Tiger by not providing a patch for the older operating system. Perhaps the idea is that it will force people to pay their Apple tax to upgrade. Of course in the case of Snow Leopard it also means that it will break all those Tiger machines which use non-Intel chips, so it is a win-win for Jobs' Mob.

The patch updates Leopard to Java versions 1.6.0_15, 1.5.0_20, and 1.4.2_22, which Java creator Sun Microsystems released on 5th August.

Apple, which has been flogging its own products on the basis that they are more secure than Microsoft, is fast becoming the laughing stock of the security industry.

The Cappuccino-based outfit seems to have rushed to gets its Snow Leper out the door in a desperate bid to put a spoiler on Windows 7's launch. Not only do some important applications fail to work because third party developers were not ready, but it seems that Snow Leopard shipped with known security holes.

It turns out that Apple shipped Snow Leopard with an old version of Adobe's Flash Player that leaves users vulnerable to software exploits embedded in dodgy Flash videos.

Sophos' media friendly insecurity analyst Graham Cluley said in his blog that Mac users who applied security patches did not deserve to have their security downgraded because they upgraded to Snow Leopard.

Posted: Sep 04 2009 01:53 pm

I can't use a Mac. The commercials indicate that Macs are strictly for the cool kids.

Posted: Sep 04 2009 01:54 pm

Ice2SeeYou wrote:

I can't use a Mac. The commercials seem to indicate that Macs are strictly for the cool kids.

or douchebags like justin long

Posted: Sep 06 2009 04:53 am

i liked Justin Long in Waiting but now he has gotten annoying.

Posted: Oct 21 2009 10:05 am

Yesterday's new Mac announcements kept me fairly excited until Thursday. Apple has decided to fight Windows 7 with it's marketing: We're pretty great already. Honestly, it works.

The reason why Windows 7 is so anticipated is because Vista was so unwieldy. Frankly, in the past few months Vista has gotten worse for me! I'm starting to think it's intentional.

I upgraded to Snow Leopard because I could. Besides the new QuickTime I haven't noticed much of a difference -- okay, my version of Aperture no longer works. I really didn't have any complaints about the previous version and I definitely have none for 10.6. All I ask is for the Mac to keep running smoothly.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's good to be bi... Computer-wise. Wink

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

If enjoying Windows and OS X makes a person bi, what would you call someone who is into any OS? I mean, Linux is hard to love, so lets assume that Google's OS ends up being ok... Is it still bi?