What is Digg?377 Comments
- DelMonte, on 08/15/2009, -46/+202Countdown before some clueless Apple-hater mentions that Snow Leopard is a service-pack and should be free. 3...2...1...
- mrBitch, on 08/15/2009, -9/+165FTA :
" .. it's not just quicker, Apple says, it's lighter: Upon install it frees up 6GB of space."
This is similar to what Microsoft have done with Windows 7, in that it's not as bloated, and Win 7 can actually run on some netbooks without too many issues.
I welcome these sort of changes, and maybe (some day), people won't be so hesitant to install an OS upgrade, since the upgrade will make things QUICKER rather than slower... - 8bit_Hero, on 08/15/2009, -13/+145I'm a "Apple Hater" (notice the quotes) that was bitching about Snow Leopard being a SP but that was back when i thought they were charging for a full OS upgrade. $29 is the perfect price point for an upgrade with no major change.
Snow Leopard... Windows Fanboy Approved! - peligro666, on 08/15/2009, -4/+116" .. it's not just quicker, Apple says, it's lighter: Upon install it frees up 6GB of space."
This is due to Apple dropping PowerPC support from the OS. - frstm, on 08/15/2009, -35/+145That's why Windows 7 also costs only $29 like Snow Leopard.
Oh, wait. - ptheroux, on 08/15/2009, -8/+80The main reason it takes up 6 gigs less space is that they removed all the code for running the OS on PowerPC machines.
- mrBitch, on 08/15/2009, -13/+77Good point, but you forgot to mention the biggest reason that you should be happy about Snow Leopard, it was the kick in the butt that caused Microsoft to get Windows 7 right.
There would be no Windows 7 without OS X pushing Microsoft.
Just like there would be no i7 without AMD pushing intel. - niradg, on 08/15/2009, -3/+58I'm waiting for Liger to upgrade
- dolbinau, on 08/15/2009, -41/+94It's funny I've heard clueless Windows-haters say the same thing about Windows 7.
- DelMonte, on 08/15/2009, -10/+61That doesn't make it right on either side.
- sputnikv, on 08/15/2009, -3/+53the developer's preview on my mbp takes less than 2 seconds to shut down completely. both win7 and the developer's preview take the same 26 seconds to start up for me. i'm thrilled with both
- Macintoshreader, on 08/15/2009, -29/+68It looks pretty good, but I have used Windows 7 and it's just as good, IMO. I'm so impressed, actually, that I have been thinking of selling my Mac mini and consoles, and use the money to build a PC. I'm sorry, but even though OS X is a great OS, Apple's hardware is overpriced. I have now realized how much of a better computer I can build with the money.
But anyway, Snow Leopard looks to be pretty good, and so does Windows 7. - rwiggum, on 08/15/2009, -6/+44No, sir. ***** YOU.
- BullBearMS, on 08/15/2009, -5/+37What I find amusing is that Snow Leopard is being priced as a cheap, incremental update even though it includes a feature like Grand Central which is an example of a deep architectural change that is completely absent in the much more expensive Windows 7. So while it's certainly easy to label Windows 7 as nothing more than a service pack, Snow Leopard includes real improvements that again put it years ahead.
Grand Central moves the burden of managing a program's multiple threads and locks while balancing each individual program's load across multiple cores without detracting from overall system performance into the OS itself. This represents a major change from the current way of doing business in Windows, Macs, or Linux.
It's reminiscent of taking the burden of controlling individual peripherals such as a sound card, graphic card, or network card and shifting that burden from the application programmers as was the case in DOS and moving it to the OS as in Windows. This is a big change. Since future processor improvements have shifted away from faster CPU's to an increasing number of cores, this is an extremely important change as well.
More information on Grand Central and how it changes the status quo currently on Macs, Windows, and Linux/Unix is available here: http://images.apple.com/macosx/technology/docs/Gra ... - inactive, on 08/15/2009, -6/+38While I agree with your sentiment, it's misplaced in this thread.
- Chirp08, on 08/15/2009, -6/+37Apple's OSX upgrades have always made things quicker on older hardware, I think it's something they pride themselves on. Installing Tiger on a G3 Powerbook Pismo saw huge speed increases and that was an operating system 5 years newer then laptop (the laptop was even listed as supported for the upgrade).
- Nyaos, on 08/15/2009, -4/+29$10 upgrade if you bought a Mac after June! :)
- mrBitch, on 08/15/2009, -1/+22Since I don't want Microsoft to fail (too many IT support jobs rely on Windows OS for work), I also am quite glad that Win7 has addressed most of the issues with Vista.
- doshindude, on 08/15/2009, -8/+29Windows 7 runs on most (nearly all) netbooks, not just some netbooks.
- MtheoryX, on 08/15/2009, -5/+26@jakem1:
Snow Leopard full retail (non-upgrade) will cost exactly the same as they have charged for every os in the 10.x line... $129 single license for Client.
The cheapest full retail Windows 7 is what, $199? And goes up to $300 or so?
The upgrade for Win 7,and the full retail is more expensive than Apple's Snow Leopard. That point is now finished. - MtheoryX, on 08/15/2009, -4/+24@ohreilly:
If you still have a PPC machine, you can run Leopard. You just can't upgrade to Snow Leoaprd. Seems pretty simple to understand. - Wilddigi, on 08/15/2009, -0/+20$29 bucks and you have to torrent it.
- MikeDugg, on 08/15/2009, -5/+24Honestly, this is one little feature I can't wait for Snow Leopard for:
Easy PDF text selection.
Here’s an enhancement that exemplifies the pursuit of perfection. When using a PDF viewer such as Preview, have you ever tried to copy text from a PDF document that has more than one column? It’s almost impossible. Instead of selecting only the text you want, your cursor selects all the text across the page, so you end up with a mix of words from every column.
Mac OS X Snow Leopard applies sophisticated artificial intelligence algorithms to fix the problem. It analyzes the layout of each page in the PDF to identify columns of text. So when you use the cursor to select text, you get only the words you want. That’s a real time-saver. - stuffradio, on 08/15/2009, -1/+19Yes
- tao52nyc, on 08/15/2009, -2/+19And I'm tired of so many Winblows wankers trolling digg pages for an Apple article and yammering on and on about Windows 7. We don't care.
- Spuy767, on 08/15/2009, -1/+18From using my developer preview, at revision 10.6.421A I think I'm on, the OS is stable, lightning fast, and has subtle refinements that make it even more of a pleasure to use. And as far as the programming goes, I recoded some applications that I had written to take advantage of multiple cores, and they ran as much as three times as fast as before. They are incredibly small and lightweight applications, so I would have bothered taking all the time to thread them out properly before GCD, but it's so easy now for any developer to realize a huge performance boost in their applications.
- timusca, on 08/15/2009, -3/+19Out in the cold? Just how long should it be supported? I still have a PowerPC and completely understand why I'm being "left out in the cold". Dude, you gotta get with the times... Apple went Intel 4 freaking years ago. It's time to move on.
Should they still support OS 9 too? - bdorry, on 08/15/2009, -1/+17He'd be bitching if they never switched to x86 either, don't even bother.
- BossKey, on 08/15/2009, -2/+18Dugg you up because even as a person who loves his Macs, I am glad I'm not in the market for a Mac desktop right now. While OS X and their portable line are extremely appealing, the Apple desktop range is becoming dangerously un-appealing, especially with the mini and the Mac Pro.
- Syphon9, on 08/15/2009, -3/+18Was the snow pun really necessary?
- MtheoryX, on 08/15/2009, -2/+17People who claim there are "no major changes" haven't been installing the Developer Previews.
You can't just read the specs off Apples Snow Leopard site, and then claim you know what is or is not going to be in the next release. - Dauntless1, on 08/15/2009, -0/+15It rolled out for for business users around a week ago. I've been using it pretty heavily, and it's much more efficient and "speedy" than Vista ever was. Also, at any given time, it's only running one third of the processes, and one tenth the processor power and a little under half the memory that Vista did. Overall, it seems Microsoft did quite a fine job with this. (It's possible that this is an indicator of the Apocalypse.) So, between Win 7 and Snow Leopard the OS scene is looking pretty sweet at the moment.
- Nothlit, on 08/15/2009, -5/+19@ohreilly
Nothing is forcing people with PPC Macs to upgrade to Snow Leopard. They can stay with Leopard as long as they want. And nobody promised them when they bought their PPC Mac that all future versions of the OS would be backward compatible. - whitesaint, on 08/15/2009, -2/+16I can't even begin to explain how wrong you are. I buy a mac for productivity, stability, and multitasking. Productivity is very important for me. Hiding apps, Expose, the Dock, and Unix underpinnings are very nice touches as well. While it's true there is more software for windows, most of it has no where the quality of mac software. Take Garageband for instance. There's no comparable software on Windows that is as easy to pick up and go yet a offer full range of professional features. Any comparable program on Windows will take you at least a month to really learn how to use all the pro features. And this isn't just true for music creation apps, most mac apps have a higher level of quality.
I know people that have wanted to buy a mac purely for Garageband or iPhoto as they might not want to devote a ***** load of time to learn how to use crappy software. I've written a clipboard manager that will blow away anything you can find on windows, for instance. A lot of people I know are also frankly fed up with viruses, instability of programs, and constantly trying it to get it to work the way they want.
And no, it doesn't take a genius to use VMWare or Parallels. But 99% of the time that isn't even necessary either. Name one thing you can do on Window that you can't do on a Mac. And most of the time, it does it better. Seriously. - Brandoskey, on 08/15/2009, -1/+15dunno why you're being dugg down since you are correct. netbook hardware isn't varied very much, so if it runs on one it will likely run on them all.
been running win7 on my samsung nc10 for a while not and it blows xp out of the water. - DelMonte, on 08/15/2009, -5/+19My point wasn't to show that cluelessness was exclusive to Apple-haters, I simply wanted to point out an annoying pattern about Snow Leopard threads on digg.
- adriaaan, on 08/15/2009, -10/+23For your information ohreilly, the Pentium 3 uses the same architecture as todays Core2Duo's. But sure, MS does have longer support periods. Which is a large part of the reason why coding for Windows is so much more of a hassle than it should be, as compiled code must be able to run on all their supported operating systems (currently 2000, XP, Vista and 7)
- Macintoshreader, on 08/15/2009, -3/+16No...
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/fam ...
My model costs $600, but it's a year-old, though it's still selling for $525-550 on eBay, and I upgraded the RAM to 2.5GB. Plus I can get $200 for the consoles and accessories, leaving me with $750. For that I can build a system that will handle anything and use it for gaming, too (Radeon HD 4870). For that much I won't have to cut any corners.
Should be at least 5x faster than the mini. - gurp13, on 08/15/2009, -2/+15Whenever I buy an electronic item (HDTV, computer, ebook reader, mp3 player, etc.) I fully expect that within 2 years I will look at the newest models and know that they are way better than what I'm using. I own several iPods, a couple Macs, a Kindle and so on. I don't expect that the piece of electronic equipment that I bought a year or two ago is going to keep getting better for years to come. I mean, Honda doesn't show up in my garage to upgrade my engine just because the technology improved. I don't expect to get better gas mileage as the years go on. Nobody loads energy effiecient software into my fridge that's five years old. If I want better equipment I have to buy it. Why is everyone always bitching about Apple improving their technology and not other companies? Have you ever heard anyone say, "Damn, I just bought this car two years ago. Now the new ones have bluetooth integration, get better mileage and need fewer tune-ups! Effing Honda always screws their loyal customers!"
- kipmarlowe, on 08/15/2009, -1/+14@ darrellcskinner, you're literally being hurtful with this piece of work, perhaps the most anti-constructive criticism in this God-forsaken Apple-hating thread: "My only problem with Applefans is that when they purchase a Mac 9 times out of 10 it's for the look of the device and it's OS. They're purchasing it as if it's a ***** fashion statement, rather than what they will use it for."
If you're not a troll (with the inherent issues associated with them) then you're either thoroughly and willfully ignorant or just outright bigoted for thinking that everyone online who's every expressed enthusiasm for Macs are just shallow eye candy eaters, or cool-aid drinkers. Come on!
I wish you could walk around Cambridge, MA, home of Harvard and MIT, take the train, take classes, talk to people, frequent book stores, libraries, and coffee shops. When you look around here at all the professionals, business people, doctors and engineers and scientists, Harvard and MIT students and faculty, you begin to wonder if maybe there's something more to the Mac. I don't care if I've written this before, here it is again because you need some information, badly:
Did you know that on a Mac — an application is one single file with a pretty icon? Not even a folder. You just unzip the internet download and the application is basically, literally installed. You just drag the file/app anywhere you want. Or drag 100 apps from one Mac to another, if you're migrating to a new Mac or drive, effectively installing 100 apps in one fell swoop, all at once! No, really. Try that in Windows.
There's no registry hive, etc. written to, no .xxx files scattered around the drive. So when you UN-install a Mac app (by simply dragging it to the trash) the most that'll ever be left behind is a small and harmless Preference file in the "Preferences" folder, and once in a while a small and harmless folder in the "Application Support" folder.
Some Mac users bother to do a quick Spotlight search of the app's name to find the related preference file and support folder, and then drag them to the trash along with the application. Others use one of the various uninstall apps like AppZapper that are aimed at Windows switchers who think they need an uninstaller, when all these infamously needless programs do is the simple Spotlight search I mentioned.
And those preference and support files? They can simply be dragged, both inside the same settings folder, to a new Mac or drive and all your application's settings will be intact. Just like that. Try that in Windows.
Another nice thing about Mac applications, besides ease of installation / uninstallation, and migration is that OS X is Unix and Cocoa is Objective C, so that application file is actually an "application bundle" that you can crack open by converting it into a simple folder, wherein you can manipulate plist files, inject code into the application, and do all the myriad things you normally can with Unix. All the configuration files are text files, you have access to DTrace, you can add kernel extensions, and on and on.
A Mac is a power user's dream, yet digg's techies know so little about that aspect, or about Unix. Honestly, you wouldn't miss hacking the registry at all, nor the significant limitations it shackles Windows with. I'd keep a Windows partition on my Mac if Windows 8:
- gets rid of the registry (which they tried, but corporations balked)
- did an even more radical number on the driver architecture
- hid just out of site rarely used functions and/or just made things more clean visually (the Win 7 theme is beautiful but visually noisy, busy and dense with visible elements)
- became less menu-centric, more icon-with-text oriented
- solved the Taskbar's truncated text problem (though hovering for thumbnails helps some)
- redid the System Tray
- standardized all application layouts with that "elegant" and dynamic combination of toolbar/sidebar/slide out drawers/ slide down dialog sheets that make the various standard Cocoa app layouts so appealing
God, why do diggers hate on each other over such shallow, material things? digg parasite site writes hit-whoring Apple sucks hit piece, or iPhone is the second cumming review, it gets diggs and hits front page, idiot Apple troll spouts idiocy, but diggers actually LOVE what's just been written, so they can hate on Apple. And vice-versa, switch Apple and/or iPhone hating for Microsoft and/or Vista hating.
(In digg's early years, before iPod, iPhone, and Mac market share increases, Microsoft was the favored target, and Apple users the hating descenders. Same diff, doesn't matter either way.)
So if it's inevitable, and we're going to hate, why not reserve that hatred only for meaningful differences like political orientation, for instance? - BullBearMS, on 08/15/2009, -1/+14Microsoft Technet would like to call ***** on you.
"Windows 7 is built on the same basic architecture as Windows Vista"
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd35019 ...
No other operating system takes the burden of managing multiple threads and locks away from the application programmer. In all currently shipping Operating Systems threads are supported. Locks are supported. The difference is that application programmers manage them manually instead of the Operating System doing it automatically. Now that performance increases are going to have to come from taking advantage of multiple threads running on multiple cores instead of having CPU's get faster, the difference is vital.
How about you show me in either Technet or MSDN where Windows 7 does this? - jwdav, on 08/15/2009, -1/+13It's not like Microsoft wasn't trying to release a new OS and take your money ...
- kipmarlowe, on 08/15/2009, -4/+16Wow, I honestly mean no disrespect. We're all wrong from time to time, and continually, actually. But in this case you're simply mistaken on every single account.
Didn't you know that on a Mac — an application is one single file with a pretty icon? Not even a folder. You just unzip the internet download and the application is basically, literally installed. You just drag the file/app anywhere you want. Or drag 100 apps from one Mac to another, if you're migrating to a new Mac or drive, effectively installing 100 apps in one fell swoop, all at once! No, really. Try that in Windows.
There's no registry hive, etc. written to, no .xxx files scattered around the drive. So when you UN-install a Mac app (by simply dragging it to the trash) the most that'll ever be left behind is a small and harmless Preference file in the "Preferences" folder, and once in a while a small and harmless folder in the "Application Support" folder.
Some Mac users bother to do a quick Spotlight search of the app's name to find the related preference file and support folder, and then drag them to the trash along with the application. Others use one of the various uninstall apps like AppZapper that are aimed at Windows switchers who think they need an uninstaller, when all these infamously needless programs do is the simple Spotlight search I mentioned.
And those preference and support files? They can simply be dragged, both inside the same settings folder, to a new Mac or drive and all your application's settings will be intact. Just like that. Try that in Windows.
Another nice thing about Mac applications, besides ease of installation / uninstallation, and migration is that OS X is Unix and Cocoa is Objective C, so that application file is actually an "application bundle" that you can crack open by converting it into a simple folder, wherein you can manipulate plist files, inject code into the application, and do all the myriad things you normally can with Unix. All the configuration files are text files, you have access to DTrace, you can add kernel extensions, and on and on.
A Mac is a power user's dream, yet digg's techies know so little about that aspect, or about Unix. Honestly, you wouldn't miss hacking the registry at all, nor the significant limitations it shackles Windows with. I'd keep a Windows partition on my Mac if Windows 8:
- gets rid of the registry (which they tried, but corporations balked)
- did an even more radical number on the driver architecture
- hid just out of site rarely used functions and/or just made things more clean visually (the Win 7 theme is beautiful but visually noisy, busy and dense with visible elements)
- became less menu-centric, more icon-with-text oriented
- solved the Taskbar's truncated text problem (though hovering for thumbnails helps some)
- redid the System Tray
- standardized all application layouts with that "elegant" and dynamic combination of toolbar/sidebar/slide out drawers/ slide down dialog sheets that make the various standard Cocoa app layouts so appealing
You get my point, factsahoy? No matter what the OS, any user can play the nitpicking game, even with an OS as admittedly good as Windows 7 (yes, I've used it). Someone, I'm sure could counter with Leopard beefs, especially if that someone is wired for or used to Windows or Ubuntu.
God, why do diggers hate on each other over such shallow, material things? digg parasite site writes hit-whoring Apple sucks hit piece, or iPhone is the second cumming review, it gets diggs and hits front page, idiot Apple troll spouts idiocy, but diggers actually LOVE what's just been written, so they can hate on Apple. And vice-versa, switch Apple and/or iPhone hating for Microsoft and/or Vista hating.
(In digg's early years, before iPod, iPhone, and Mac market share increases, Microsoft was the favored target, and Apple users the hating descenders. Same diff, doesn't matter either way.)
So if it's inevitable, and we're going to hate, why not reserve that hatred only for meaningful differences like political orientation, for instance? - geoken, on 08/15/2009, -3/+15I'm pretty sure the netbook market was the kick in the pants as they didn't want to support XP for eternity on account of their modern OS being to heavy.
- fryke, on 08/15/2009, -1/+13Hm. I'm not sure I see this correctly, but WinXP came in 2001, and Vista took ye-e-ears to arrive and seems to have been a B- at best, when it arrived. Win7 looks like a much better candidate for an OS to improve on WinXP, but it's 2009 now. On the other hand, you have Mac OS X 10.0 in 2001 and quite steady improvements over the past 8 years. I rather have steady improvements every one or two years than "believing the next one will be better" for years with only service packs fixing the most serious flaws.
Sure, Apple's king in making bubbles about some minor stuff (like calling Dashboard one of the most important things in decades of computing innovation, or counting "hundreds of new features" that include, like, each and every new desktop picture), but overall, Apple had a very, very good base with OpenStep, transformed that into Mac OS X in only a four years (bringing along the big developers with Carbon, not a small feat...) and have constantly improved and streamlined the development features as well as user features and GUI over time. And even with this streamlined and steady progress, they've still managed to surprise us with incredibly easy-to-use features.
Whether you think TimeMachine is really a "good" backup solution is only a secondary notion when you think about how it got many, many more people to actually _create_ up-to-date backups. (I'm talking about the installed user-base here.) - Chirp08, on 08/15/2009, -1/+12I really like how Win7 and OSX are moving closer and closer to each in functionality while still being different enough to drive each others innovation.
- mrBitch, on 08/15/2009, -4/+15From the comments section FTA :
" by Renegade Knight :
Fair point. Apple has always charged for "service packs". That said since 7 is essentially a service pack that makes Vista work so at WORST 7 should cost as much as Snow Leopard.
Now for the Vista fans, sorry guys you can't take "vista underpinnings" and call it all new especially when it's touted as the replacement for what everyone said was broke.
Having used 7, and Vista, and XP and found a BETA 7 worked better than a SP1 Vista, I'm just not feeling charitable about the fix." - Kerrigore, on 08/16/2009, -0/+11@cawpin
Unless, you know, the newer machines give bigger speed increases than upgrading the OS does... - Daimwn, on 08/15/2009, -4/+14Damn. Arguing two different conversations here?
ohreilly is trying to point out the size decrease is because Apple (completely) stopped supporting not so old yet expensive hardware.
MtheoryX and Nothlit are arguing that people should complain because they they have no option to upgrade and no one promised that the machine would not be supported in the near future.
Ms and Apple are the guys setting the standards so you can't compare them to anything but themselves. They work in opposite ways here. They both choose trade-offs.
Apple chooses to not bloat it's OS with semi old code at the expense of it's recent customers having to upgrade(if they want to).
MS tries to support as many previous versions for lasting customers at the expense of developers bloating it's OS.
It's all opinion. But I know I'd rather not feel the lack of options and having my hardware obsolete that much quicker. But that is my ***** opinion. -
Show 51 - 100 of 383 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is