Apple's Snow Leopard: A flurry of changes

news.cnet.com — Mac OS 10.6 is coming soon with some small changes that you'll like a lot. Here's what you need to know about the OS 'refinements.' Aug 14, 2009 View in Crawl 4

Save
Bury

380 Comments

dig1x Aug 16, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

Oh give it a rest. gmail is utter crap. The UI is horrible, it is unstable as frack and the spam filter sucks.

chirp08 Aug 18, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

@cawpin: Core Image wasn't supported by that hardware, that alone would make it worth upgrading to a new machine eventually. The machine gets faster yes, in relation to itself, but not in relation to newer hardware that is much much faster.

fredfredrickson Aug 25, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

"...but I really like that they release improvements to their system in between actual full overhauls. It's much different than the way Microsoft does things..."Ever heard of service packs? Microsoft releases those between major releases, and they contain re-written code, improvements, bug fixes, etc.

enantiodromia Aug 25, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

i take it Turbo doesn't have any soft of professional career. Exchange/Outlook is still the king of corp email.

enantiodromia Aug 25, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

Let's see:$30 x 5 = $150$300 x 3 = $900which looks better to you?

phoomp Aug 27, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

Right. I remember that now. 10.1 was free because 10.0 was pretty beta-quality software; so riddled with bugs and lags that it could almost be compared to Vista.So, we have $675 for MacOS over the last 10 years and $700 for Windows. Which, pretty much supports the position that the total cost of the two OS's across multiple versions is pretty much the same. Apple asks for less more frequently. Microsoft asks for more *less* frequently.

judicar Aug 27, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

Best of luck with that.

j_carcinogen Aug 28, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

SleepEnabler.kext

jimv1983 Aug 31, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

The iMac? Really? They still make that hunk of crap? As far as laptops go Macs are ok but when it comes to desktops all-in-ones SUCK. Mac desktops are so over priced. I just put together a system at newegg. I used the same CPU, amount of memory, video card and a slightly larger hard drive. Everything else I went pretty high end. With tax and shipping it came to $1,198.25. The comparable Mac Pro came to $2,649.00. More than twice as much. Also, what the hell is up with the video card the put in the Mac Pro. A GeForce GT 120 which is the same as a 9500 GT. That is a $65 card. If you add a second one they want an extra $150. That is a markup of 230% over retail price and you know they get a deal on the cards when they buy in bulk. Apples massively more expensive hardware really does make up for the cheaper OS. I knew they were over priced but WOW. For that $2650 I could get an amazing PC.

balanced Sep 3, 2009

0 diggs
-0 / +0

Show Buried Comment
Report

Digg
Bury

It was, at the time... However as time passed Intel kept improving their product line, and Motorola and IBM didn't really. Both seemed much more interested in embedded markets (and IBM still uses the POWER architecture, a 'cousin' to PPC, in some high-end servers)... The embedded markets may be a bit more friendly to them. Console manufacturers don't refresh the product line as often (Although that is changing as Sony and MS upgrade their consoles with small mid-generation tweaks) and seem more concerned with good prices on big orders, whereas Apple wanted to be able to bump speeds regularly.I've heard a lot of low-level hardware guys really liked the PPC. Lots of registers, clean design, etc.it just wasn't keeping up on raw power, unfortunately.

uaedaien Sep 3, 2009