Leopard: worst Mac OS in years

[Splinemodel]

Why? Because it's the first time in years where I've wanted to pick up my mac and smash it to the ground. This happens to me with my Windows PC on a regular basis, but it's new for the mac. I am considering regrading to Tiger, although I feel that's going to be more trouble than it's worth, at this point.

Not only did Leopard completely fry my webserver -- which operated THROUGH THE BASIC OS X FACILITY, but it seems to have trashed anything and everything POSIX that I had setup since 10.1. I expected that there would be some bugs in the first release, but these aren't bugs: they are complete and utter failures of the design team.

Moreoever, things that were simple before are no longer simple. I still can't for the life of me get Leopard to be networkable in a windows environment. The functionality is buried, and it reverts to "off" if the file sharing is cycled. I assume I'll have to cook up an smb.conf file, (it trashed my last one) but there doesn't even appear to be an smb.conf file at all.

Aside from the string-search feature, the rest are forgettable. Quicklook, I can do without, since it's hardly less quick to just open the file. Coverflow is fun for 3 minutes. So much of the rest is just more of the same. The added features in many of the iApps (notably Mail) I think are only useful to a few people in a million.

And the folders look ugly.

[Zoc]

I don't known what's your problem with windows shares, but It works perfectly on my lan (Linux boxes sharing folders with Samba, Windows XP and Vista).

The smb.conf file is into the /private/etc/ folder. This file includes /var/run/smb.conf, which is the customizable part of the SMB configuration.

[teedoff087]

Thanks for the complaints. I'm sure everyone here wanted to hear them.

[segovius]

Originally Posted by teedoff087

Thanks for the complaints. I'm sure everyone here wanted to hear them.

I certainly want to hear more about trashing the webserver.....

I have not yet upgraded and am starting to thank God.

[Daffy_Duck]

Starting off with Leopard, I had trouble connecting to my Windows smb shares. All I had to do was enable the guest account in Windows and make sure Guest had the proper permissions on the shared folders. Some other folders are only accessible to the Admin account so I gave permission to Admin in the security panel of those folders. Can you go into more depth on what issues you are having?

[iPoster]

Early adoption, etc. etc.

Heck, I'm still running Panther, and feel no great urge to upgrade to either 10.4 or 10.5.

Well, except for widgets!

[mdriftmeyer]

Originally Posted by Splinemodel

Why? Because it's the first time in years where I've wanted to pick up my mac and smash it to the ground. This happens to me with my Windows PC on a regular basis, but it's new for the mac. I am considering regrading to Tiger, although I feel that's going to be more trouble than it's worth, at this point.

Not only did Leopard completely fry my webserver -- which operated THROUGH THE BASIC OS X FACILITY, but it seems to have trashed anything and everything POSIX that I had setup since 10.1. I expected that there would be some bugs in the first release, but these aren't bugs: they are complete and utter failures of the design team.

Moreoever, things that were simple before are no longer simple. I still can't for the life of me get Leopard to be networkable in a windows environment. The functionality is buried, and it reverts to "off" if the file sharing is cycled. I assume I'll have to cook up an smb.conf file, (it trashed my last one) but there doesn't even appear to be an smb.conf file at all.

Aside from the string-search feature, the rest are forgettable. Quicklook, I can do without, since it's hardly less quick to just open the file. Coverflow is fun for 3 minutes. So much of the rest is just more of the same. The added features in many of the iApps (notably Mail) I think are only useful to a few people in a million.

And the folders look ugly.

Leopard is the first release where the OS is POSIX through and through.

Whatever you set up should have been backed up and then tested for POSIX after you back it in.

I'm betting the trashing your Apache 2 web server has to do with the fact that this is the first release with Apache 2 installed and configured by the vendor. There are several sites talking about LAMP integration and how to configure it if it breaks the way the former unsupported version worked.

[Daffy_Duck]

Originally Posted by iPoster

Heck, I'm still running Panther

Wow, are you a luddite or something?

[PB]

Originally Posted by Daffy_Duck

Wow, are you a luddite or something?

Luddite or not I cannot know, but he is certainly not alone.

[vinea]

Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer

Leopard is the first release where the OS is POSIX through and through.

Whatever you set up should have been backed up and then tested for POSIX after you back it in.

I'm betting the trashing your Apache 2 web server has to do with the fact that this is the first release with Apache 2 installed and configured by the vendor. There are several sites talking about LAMP integration and how to configure it if it breaks the way the former unsupported version worked.

Yah, seriously. Leopard has more significant under the skin changes than UI changes. It's now a full unix with UNIX 03 certification and passes the Posix Certification Test Suite is in the same category as AIX 5L, Solaris 10 and HPUX 11.

This isn't a failure of the design team but user error.

Failed Step 0: Read the docs. That might have clued you in that the "BASIC OSX FACILITY" probably got significantly modified to meet the UNIX 03 standard.

Failed Step 1: Fresh reinstall rather than upgrade a complex install with 3rd party tool chains (like Apache 2). Because there's always breakage moving to a new MAJOR REV of an OS. Yes, it takes longer and is annoying but its less annoying in the long run than an unstable system you want to live with for years.

Failed Step 2: Understanding that changes <> not easy. Its just different. Like where the sbm.conf might live which if you like maybe used Spotlight you could have found...

Failed Step 3: Wait until 10.5.1

Failing Step 3 is probably most significant for anyone that didn't want either the UNIX 03 compliance or the new UI changes you hate. What did you want that you jumped on board the first day?

[kim kap sol]

Originally Posted by vinea

Yah, seriously. Leopard has more significant under the skin changes than UI changes. It's now a full unix with UNIX 03 certification and passes the Posix Certification Test Suite is in the same category as AIX 5L, Solaris 10 and HPUX 11.

This isn't a failure of the design team but user error.

Failed Step 0: Read the docs. That might have clued you in that the "BASIC OSX FACILITY" probably got significantly modified to meet the UNIX 03 standard.

Failed Step 1: Fresh reinstall rather than upgrade a complex install with 3rd party tool chains (like Apache 2). Because there's always breakage moving to a new MAJOR REV of an OS. Yes, it takes longer and is annoying but its less annoying in the long run than an unstable system you want to live with for years.

Failed Step 2: Understanding that changes <> not easy. Its just different. Like where the sbm.conf might live which if you like maybe used Spotlight you could have found...

Failed Step 3: Wait until 10.5.1

Failing Step 3 is probably most significant for anyone that didn't want either the UNIX 03 compliance or the new UI changes you hate. What did you want that you jumped on board the first day?

Are you calling Splinemodel stupid?

[vinea]

Originally Posted by kim kap sol

Are you calling Splinemodel stupid?

Nope. Sorry if it seems that way.

He just made an assumption that because its Apple that Tiger to Leopard would be a smooth transition/upgrade.

Leopard is going to be much better than Tiger. But maybe not 10.5.0 vs 10.4.10. And to get much better they had to break a few things. This is presuming that you feel that UNIX03 and full Posix compliance has some value...

I guess I'm too used to breakage in upgrades and moving platforms. Going from non-Unix (Linux) to Unix (Solaris) is annoying. Heck, moving from one Linux distro to another is bleeding annoying.

Going from non-Unix (Tiger) to Unix (Leopard) I assumed would be more of the same.

Especially if you depend on open source tool chains.

Never upgrade OS's unless you have a couple days to kill.

[Splinemodel]

Originally Posted by vinea

Yah, seriously. Leopard has more significant under the skin changes than UI changes. It's now a full unix with UNIX 03 certification and passes the Posix Certification Test Suite is in the same category as AIX 5L, Solaris 10 and HPUX 11.

This isn't a failure of the design team but user error.

It would be user error if it were documented, or if there were a way to configure the installer. That's not the case. The Apple support forums are abuzz with users annoyed with the lack of grace in the move from Apache 1.x to 2.0. Maybe you should look into it more before dismissing this: it's a real problem and Apple doesn't seem to have any plans to do a better job with it. If they can't perform a simple conversion between a by-the-books server setup in 1.x to 2.0 in Leopard, I consider that an utter failure. Even fly-by-night linux distros (most of 'em) manage to get this right.

The SMB problem I still haven't been able to sort out. Thank you for reminding me where smb.conf should be. . . (sarcasm) . . . It's not there. Again, this is not an isolated issue and the support forums are abuzz, with no solution in sight.

"Early adopter" is no excuse here. Leopard has been in beta for long over a year. Moreover, I've been an early adopter for every release since 10.0, and never have I had to deal with so much grief. I wanted to upgrade so that I could benefit from the much-improved bluetooth drivers (another unfinished work, but still improved). It's unfortunate that doing so caused my setup to be discarded. I would be surprised if these problems are anywhere near the top of the list, so I've relegated myself to waiting for 3rd party developers to work these things out -- I'm too busy right now to spend the time on it.

[vinea]

Originally Posted by Splinemodel

It would be user error if it were documented, or if there were a way to configure the installer. That's not the case. The Apple support forums are abuzz with users annoyed with the lack of grace in the move from Apache 1.x to 2.0. Maybe you should look into it more before dismissing this: it's a real problem and Apple doesn't seem to have any plans to do a better job with it. If they can't perform a simple conversion between a by-the-books server setup in 1.x to 2.0 in Leopard, I consider that an utter failure. Even fly-by-night linux distros (most of 'em) manage to get this right.

Moving from Apache 1.x to 2.0 was a pain in the arse. Not RH, not Debian, nor any of the major distros made it bullet proof because the configuration files changed quite a bit. Things moved about. Defaults changed. Not to mention tool changes happened around the same time with PERL, PHP, etc. Sometimes configure.nice worked. Sometimes not. Sometimes Plesk, CPanel, etc worked. Sometimes not.

Mostly problems were likely to occur with mySQL, PHP, Tomcat and other pieces that integrate with Apache. It was always best to save off your .conf files and databases and do a clean install of the OS so there's no conflict between old and new. Check the basic Apache function. Then load mySQL in the right place for PHP to find. Then install the rest of your PHP stuff that relies on mySQL. Then do a DB restore and hope.

The last thing you want is pieces of Apache 1 laying about to confuse the hell out of you. Because in 6 months you'll need to change something and will drive yourself insane wondering why the none of the changes will take and then you realize...duh...I'm editing the wrong conf file.

You jumped a major rev of the OS AND a major rev of Apache. What did you expect when you went with 10.5.0?

And moving to UNIX 03 was advertised. I presume it would also be somewhere in the docs.

[Bonsai1214]

really? i haven't hit any yet. what were you doing?

[Zoc]

No kernel panic for me.

My C2D iMac is running 24/24 7/7 since october 26.

[dutch pear]

To me, Leopard is simply the best OS I ever used.

I upgraded both the home iMac and work Macbook from Tiger without a single problem and both have been rock-solid from day one. I don't have a problem with the transparent menu and actually quite like it. I'm a (hidden) side-docker and mainly use quicksilver anyway so the dock changes don't bother me either.

And now to all the reasons I have for loving Leopard over Tiger and not wanting to go back at all.

• The new finder rocks. The improved sidebar and quicklook are such usability improvements.
• Spaces is just absolutely great. Keeps everything clean without ever needing to minimize something. Simple but perfectly executed IMHO. (I just love how my colleagues are impressed by things like switching spaces back and forth between windows in parallels and safari and then switching to the finder with expose and then invoke quicklook for some extra pizzaz )
• Networking is now great. I use my macbook in a completely windows based network environment at work and it is now so much better at integrating with all the network facilities!
• Time machine just rocks. It feels so great to just know all your latest file changes and new stuff is automatically backed up. I will still use superduper once in a while for a fully bootable disk copy but this thing just rocks.
• Speed!!! Leopard has improved both the UI responsiveness and application launch times and responsiveness noticably on both machines. I hardly ever see the beach-ball anymore. I might start to miss it Really impressive in the light of all the added functionality!
• The improved UI consistency I like a lot. I hated brushed metal and now it's gone
• Frontrow and mail have both improved nicely. The data-detector in mail is great!
• The ease of use of the built-in screensharing (direct over a local network and through ichat) just rocks. My sister who lives on the other side of the coutry just switched to a macbook and this weekend I will setup leopard and ichat for her so I will be able to help and instruct her on her own computer from anywhere in the world. Add the built-in picture/video/file sharing and makes it even better. And you just have to LOVE how the core-animation goodness when you switch from your own to the remote screen and back!
• The great under the hood changes that will bring about some great third-party apps. I am mainly excited about the improved pdf-kit and core-animation and expect some great things here.

OK, all that is not to say I like everything and I really do think some things can- and should be improved (give tose who want it some preference settings for the 3d dock, dock folders and menu transparency, Apple! ), but overall I have a really hard time understanding someone who doesn't feel that overall, Leopard is a big improvement over Tiger.

[ranum]

Well, after daily freezing that happens whether in Safari or working on papers for my graduate classes in Pages or performing some other minor tasks like opening programs or printing to PDF or performing software updates, it's not hard for me to understand how Leopard is not (yet) a big improvement over Tiger. I've completely reinstalled 10.4.10 on our less than one month old iMac and the iMac is running smooth again, so I think the freezing issues are software related, not hardware. Once Apple has successfully worked out those issues, I'll be happy to use Leopard. As it is, I'm happier using Tiger for the time being.

[physguy]

Originally Posted by Splinemodel

Why? Because it's the first time in years where I've wanted to pick up my mac and smash it to the ground. This happens to me with my Windows PC on a regular basis, but it's new for the mac. I am considering regrading to Tiger, although I feel that's going to be more trouble than it's worth, at this point.

Not only did Leopard completely fry my webserver -- which operated THROUGH THE BASIC OS X FACILITY, but it seems to have trashed anything and everything POSIX that I had setup since 10.1. I expected that there would be some bugs in the first release, but these aren't bugs: they are complete and utter failures of the design team.

Moreoever, things that were simple before are no longer simple. I still can't for the life of me get Leopard to be networkable in a windows environment. The functionality is buried, and it reverts to "off" if the file sharing is cycled. I assume I'll have to cook up an smb.conf file, (it trashed my last one) but there doesn't even appear to be an smb.conf file at all.

Aside from the string-search feature, the rest are forgettable. Quicklook, I can do without, since it's hardly less quick to just open the file. Coverflow is fun for 3 minutes. So much of the rest is just more of the same. The added features in many of the iApps (notably Mail) I think are only useful to a few people in a million.

And the folders look ugly.

Leopard was a far EASIER upgrade for me than tiger, WRT under the hood customizations. I have highly customized by httpd.conf file with a custom mysql installation and custom php installation. I had read in the documentation that told me that the switch to Apache 2 had been made so I was prepared for that. Because they finally include php 5 with the install the only thing I had to do was enable php in the apache 2 configuration file and copy my /usr/local over from my Previous System folder (I always do archive install) and the one other fix that's been required for some time for some custom mysql installs (ln -s /var/mysql/mysql.sock /tmp/mysql/sock).

The only major change that affect my customization is that I believe that StartupItems is no longer supported, they have gone to complete launchd requirement. I think this is a good thing. Somewhat painful but is forward looking.

[dacloo]

Originally Posted by Splinemodel

Why? Because it's the...

Your personal experience doesn't reflect the general user experience. IMHO the only thing that sucks with Leopard is the translucent menu bar and the 3D dock, but you can't expect a huge upgrade to work 100% in all kinds of custom environments...

[Akac]

Originally Posted by vinea

Yah, seriously. Leopard has more significant under the skin changes than UI changes. It's now a full unix with UNIX 03 certification and passes the Posix Certification Test Suite is in the same category as AIX 5L, Solaris 10 and HPUX 11.

This isn't a failure of the design team but user error.

Failed Step 0: Read the docs. That might have clued you in that the "BASIC OSX FACILITY" probably got significantly modified to meet the UNIX 03 standard.

Failed Step 1: Fresh reinstall rather than upgrade a complex install with 3rd party tool chains (like Apache 2). Because there's always breakage moving to a new MAJOR REV of an OS. Yes, it takes longer and is annoying but its less annoying in the long run than an unstable system you want to live with for years.

Failed Step 2: Understanding that changes <> not easy. Its just different. Like where the sbm.conf might live which if you like maybe used Spotlight you could have found...

Failed Step 3: Wait until 10.5.1

Failing Step 3 is probably most significant for anyone that didn't want either the UNIX 03 compliance or the new UI changes you hate. What did you want that you jumped on board the first day?

Amen. All of this stuff was documented and discussed by any server admin and so on. It was well understood that Leopard made many major changes to the BSD layer and the UNIX services.

I run a commercial server on an XServe Xeon with Tiger. I plan to move to Leopard Server for the 64-bit support so I can run MySQL in 64-bit mode (I can do that in Tiger, but its not supported, where it is under Leopard). However I won't just do an upgrade. I know better. Not because I've been running Leopard but because I did some research.

[sc_markt]

I also think (up to this point so far) this is Apple's best OS ever.

However, I DON'T LIKE THE CHANGES APPLE DID WITH THE FIREWALL... And in fact, I am considering repartitioning my HD and reloading 10.4.x on the other partition for web use.

[smee]

Originally Posted by sc_markt

I also think (up to this point so far) this is Apple's best OS ever.

However, I DON'T LIKE THE CHANGES APPLE DID WITH THE FIREWALL... And in fact, I am considering repartitioning my HD and reloading 10.4.x on the other partition for web use.

Me too, I think its the best thing in the world. I've had no problems whatsoever.
I also love the new icons, the new Dock (cuz I can change it) and the new menu bar. It's all totally awesome. And it runs super fast

The only app that I had that didn't work was PhotoShop 7.0 (no duh), so I just installed Tiger onto one of my External HD's (so I can run PhotoShop 7.0 on it) and now I can choose between the two OS's on startup (like you do in BootCamp) by pressing the alt/option key.

I love Apple ..........

Just me' two cents'
Parker

[Outsider]

Originally Posted by sc_markt

I also think (up to this point so far) this is Apple's best OS ever.

However, I DON'T LIKE THE CHANGES APPLE DID WITH THE FIREWALL... And in fact, I am considering repartitioning my HD and reloading 10.4.x on the other partition for web use.

And thanks to Leopard, you can now repartition without erasing the original partition.

[Daffy_Duck]

Originally Posted by sc_markt

I also think (up to this point so far) this is Apple's best OS ever.

However, I DON'T LIKE THE CHANGES APPLE DID WITH THE FIREWALL... And in fact, I am considering repartitioning my HD and reloading 10.4.x on the other partition for web use.

Do you do some sort of super-secret sensitive stuff that would warrant such a drastic measure all because of a firewall? I haven't found a reason to use one although I do connect through a router.

I'm just curious.

[Gizmo-xl]

It has a GREAT firewall IPFW as part of the OS you just need to use the command line or a program like WaterRoof - 1.9 to set it up. Just requires you to understand what you are doing.

You can get it here:
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/31277

[Bonsai1214]

so i used the screensharing today with a friend of mine to work on a powerpoint presentation. its definitely class.

very useful especially if you need to collaborate on something but don't have the time to get together

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by iPoster

Early adoption, etc. etc.

Heck, I'm still running Panther, and feel no great urge to upgrade to either 10.4 or 10.5.

Well, except for widgets!

Same here, as I said before... don't ever, EVER make a major upgrade with a working machine until the major bugs have been squashed. Give it 4 to 6 months. Seriously, people!

[dfiler]

If by "worst" the OP meant "buggiest", then I would tend to agree.

On the other hand, this is to be expected. The longer the time between OS releases, the more drastic of changes that will have been implemented. 10.5 had a longer development cycle and thus is expected to be more buggy than other OS X releases. It is pretty much impossible to release a commercial OS and have the initial version be bug-free. All things considered, I'd have to give apple good marks for OS 10.5.

As a point of reference: It was impossible to use a modem on a dual processor Mac for a very long time. It would guarantee a kernel panic or hard lock-up within minutes. In 10.0 and 10.1, I had to disable the second processor in order to use my modem.

Let's not forget just how buggy 10.0 was. Dare I say, it was even buggier than Vista. (ducks and runs for cover)

There are certainly many bugs to fix in 10.5. However, it is a far stretch from the sky actually falling.

[sc_markt]

Originally Posted by Daffy_Duck

Do you do some sort of super-secret sensitive stuff that would warrant such a drastic measure all because of a firewall? I haven't found a reason to use one although I do connect through a router.

I'm just curious.

I check my banking and occasionally, buy and sell stuff online and this to me is super-secret sensitive stuff. I don't want anybody snagging my passwords and logins because the firewall isn't doing it's job.

And what is wrong with being upset that the firewall in 10.5 looks like it's not as good as the one in 10.4? 10.5 is way better than 10.4 (for example, speed wise and under the hood). So why did the firewall have to go backwards?

One last comment. I have been a mac user since about 1990 and have always extolled the virtues of the mac system, so much so that over the last 4 or 5 years, many of my friends have suggested I should be working for Apple selling their computers. Well, a big selling point that I often mentioned was the higher level of security in the macs. No I'm not sure if this is true.

[mdriftmeyer]

Originally Posted by sc_markt

I check my banking and occasionally, buy and sell stuff online and this to me is super-secret sensitive stuff. I don't want anybody snagging my passwords and logins because the firewall isn't doing it's job.

And what is wrong with being upset that the firewall in 10.5 looks like it's not as good as the one in 10.4? 10.5 is way better than 10.4 (for example, speed wise and under the hood). So why did the firewall have to go backwards?

One last comment. I have been a mac user since about 1990 and have always extolled the virtues of the mac system, so much so that over the last 4 or 5 years, many of my friends have suggested I should be working for Apple selling their computers. Well, a big selling point that I often mentioned was the higher level of security in the macs. No I'm not sure if this is true.

It didn't go backward. You're not getting it. The firewall move to the application space as it should be. It's modular design and compliance with POSIX for Federal Security standards forces 3rd party applications to become compliant or break due to the fact that they were exploiting loop holes, beforehand.

Example: Skype.

Apple is now going to extend their work on Firewall protection to make some middle layer that will ease this transition.

Understand this: Security isn't a point and click solution. That is what has been the problem.

By imposing the 3rd party app space to become compliant it means they have done the hardwork of configuring their network communications to be secure so you don't have to bother learning how to deal with IPSec and write firewall rules.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by Splinemodel

And the folders look ugly.

New folders are modern and minimal, and unlike Vista, are designed to be basic-looking for a reason. I love them, "especially" in Mail and the Finder.

[smee]

Originally Posted by Ireland

New folders are modern and minimal, and unlike Vista, are designed to be basic-looking for a reason. I love them, "especially" in Mail and the Finder.

Yes, I second that.
The new folders look way more modern, for the good and I like them.

[kim kap sol]

Originally Posted by smee

Yes, I second that.
The new folders look way more modern, for the good and I like them.

Thirded.

Anyone calling the new folders ugly (after having used the Aqua monstrosities for 5+ years) needs their heads examined.

They look like System 7 folder icons (that is they actually look like folders). There's no stupid 3D perspective to them. They're flat so it's now easy to put a watermark on them. And the watermark is a nice defined silhouette (shape trumps color considering some people are colorblind). Granted perhaps the watermark contrast isn't contrasty enough for some people but these icons are professional-looking and they scale well...they look good at 16x16 (not something that can be said about the piece of shit Aqua folders of yore) right up to 512x512. And these folders are easily recognizable within a set of documents or applications because they don't have a stupid colorful badge on them that makes them look like another app or document at first glance.

If anyone disagrees (I'm looking right at you Gruber and Siracusa ), I only have one thing to say "is your epeen long enough to touch your butthole?"

[Daffy_Duck]

Originally Posted by kim kap sol

Thirded.

Anyone calling the new folders ugly (after having used the Aqua monstrosities for 5+ years) needs their heads examined.

They look like System 7 folder icons (that is they actually look like folders). There's no stupid 3D perspective to them. They're flat so it's now easy to put a watermark on them. And the watermark is a nice defined silhouette (shape trumps color considering some people are colorblind). Granted perhaps the watermark contrast isn't contrasty enough for some people but these icons are professional-looking and they scale well...they look good at 16x16 (not something that can be said about the piece of shit Aqua folders of yore) right up to 512x512. And these folders are easily recognizable within a set of documents or applications because they don't have a stupid colorful badge on them that makes them look like another app or document at first glance.

If anyone disagrees (I'm looking right at you Gruber and Siracusa ), I only have one thing to say "is your epeen long enough to touch your butthole?"

I'll admit that I didn't like the new folders at first but they have grown on me. They are better than the previous folder design which I ended up replacing with "world of aqua" folders.

[Splinemodel]

Originally Posted by Ireland

New folders are modern and minimal, and unlike Vista, are designed to be basic-looking for a reason. I love them, "especially" in Mail and the Finder.

They look chintsey, like something I'd find in Ikea. The designer seems to have taken Adobe's lead in icon design, which is BAD: first lesson in graphic design is that human vision responds as the lowest level to lines and contours (phase) and not color (frequency). Even so, my gripe about the folders is 90% joke. I'm not terribly bothered with the folders, just with the fact that they spent the time to make 300 new features instead of making the basic things work right. That's a page out of Microsoft's book.

The text-search, however, is epic. Alone, it almost makes up for the rest.

Originally Posted by vinea

Moving from Apache 1.x to 2.0 was a pain in the arse. Not RH, not Debian, nor any of the major distros made it bullet proof because the configuration files changed quite a bit. Things moved about. Defaults changed. Not to mention tool changes happened around the same time with PERL, PHP, etc. Sometimes configure.nice worked. Sometimes not. Sometimes Plesk, CPanel, etc worked. Sometimes not.

You're being an apologist. It took literally one line of shell to sort out the bulk of the Apache conversion, and this should have been handled by the installer. (Yes, I did that before posting the thread). If it hadn't been for 3rd party users of the Apple support forum, there's no way I would have figured out what's wrong, as I don't have a terribly complicated webserver setup, and web sites aren't an area of expertise for me. I have a few services that seem to need reinstalling, and these are the ones I'm waiting on. However, I still can't sort out the SMB problems. I'm totally lost on that front.

[MyMac8MyPC]

Originally Posted by sc_markt

However, I DON'T LIKE THE CHANGES APPLE DID WITH THE FIREWALL...

The firewall issues have already been addressed and you will see them in a couple of weeks when 10.5.1 is released. Pass the popcorn

[MyMac8MyPC]

Originally Posted by ShawnJ

2nd kernel panic!

This doesn't necessarily have to be related to Leopard, it could be a sign of failing memory. I would test it ASAP and read this page. Hope that helps

[matt_s]

Originally Posted by Splinemodel

Why? Because it's the first time in years where I've wanted to pick up my mac and smash it to the ground.

Some in this thread say Leper is the best OS ever, yet for some it's the worst.

Chances are it lands somewhere right in the middle :-)

Stability-wise, I find it excellent. Solid. I like the security features, there are some smart moves here and some revolutionary ones, some of which few people in the media really understand.

Under the hood there are some fabulous changes, solid and smart ideas.

The UI is a bit rough, but that's just my personal opinion. I do not like the de-featured nature of the OS, however, there were some good things removed.

For me, not being able to connect my cell phone any longer to the Address Book via Bluetooth & send SMS's & dial out is just plain boneheaded. In Tiger, this was a snap and really useful. Why did Apple remove this fantastic feature?

In the Dock, losing ƒ navigation and being force-fed icon view in Stacks is undesired, unwanted and a speed bump on the path to fast navigation. We have folders with hundreds upon hundreds of folders within them, and Stacks is about 105% worthless here. We'd really like to have this functionality back. Right now on several test machines, we're placing aliases of key folders into the Dock in order to at least be able to get to that folder quickly.

Time Machine is worthless to us, we have SuperDuper backing everything up. But that's just us, I can see how this would be very useful for many individual users.

Nobody here has ever really used Dashboard or widgets, they're remarkably ugly to begin with and they just slow the system down. Having Apple check them every few minutes is kind of creepy to us, so we've disabled them across the company's network.

Spaces has no benefit to us but I'm sure others will find a use.

We like the new Mail features, and iCal looks promising. Both seem very fast.

Folders still do not update dynamically. This should have been fixed in Panther.

With rare exception, we do not see any real speed increases over Tiger.

We still cannot print to most of our printers and none of our scanners work. This is abysmal, really, for a modern OS.

Setting folder view over and over again is stupid and time consuming. Why must we be force-fed again and ordered about like this was Windows? I want my Mac to obey my commands, not tell me what to do. Very annoying.

The biggest gripes I get from our team is Stacks; the poor choice of having ƒ icons changing in the Dock; the loss of using custom ƒ icons; the loss of hierarchical navigation functionality; Safari still crashing on Java code & script (it's always choked on this); inability to print & scan; and, the loss of Address Book Bluetooth connectivity.

The biggest hurrahs I get from our team is Mail's new features, stability & speed; Preview's very cool new stuff (especially regarding PDF's), and believe it or not, a lot of people really like TextEdit's new features.

There are some truly great things in Leopard, and some truly lousy things in Leper. Here's hoping .1 & .2 return key functionality & features to the OS.

Why de-feature & kill key functionality anyway?

[MyMac8MyPC]

Originally Posted by matt_s

Time Machine is worthless to us, we have SuperDuper backing everything up.

Apparently you didn't see what Dave @ SuperDuper said about TM. He feels both are needed for several reasons. Apple included TM to address the importance of backing up. Many people aren't like you or me and they won't take the time to go and buy SuperDuper and then make those backups everyday. TM does all of this in the background and is also integrated into the OS, something that SuperDuper could never do. We use both, at least we will use both as soon as SuperDuper comes out with a Leopard compliant version. When backing up, redundancy is a good thing