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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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?"
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.
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.
Quote:
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.
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.
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
Comments
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.
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
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.
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.
You can get it here:
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/31277
very useful especially if you need to collaborate on something but don't have the time to get together
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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'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.
really? i haven't hit any yet. what were you doing?
Ugh.
2nd kernel panic!
Problem Details:
Fri Nov 9 22:57:39 2007
panic(cpu 1 caller 0x0039CDE0): "m_free: freeing an already freed mbuf"@/SourceCache/xnu/xnu-1228/bsd/kern/uipc_mbuf.c:2742
Backtrace, Format - Frame : Return Address (4 potential args on stack)
0x2115b708 : 0x12b0e1 (0x4555b4 0x2115b73c 0x133238 0x0)
0x2115b758 : 0x39cde0 (0x48cc84 0x1 0x2d21f01c 0x2115b7c4)
0x2115b798 : 0x39d0dc (0x1cda4600 0x0 0x2d0191ec 0x2d01ce80)
0x2115b7b8 : 0x8ea821 (0x1cda4600 0x0 0x20 0x946f1c)
0x2115b8e8 : 0x8f39e5 (0x1 0x0 0x2cff7570 0x2d01cefc)
0x2115bc08 : 0x8f893a (0x1272d2c8 0x0 0x22f3003 0x0)
0x2115bde8 : 0x8f9fb1 (0x1272d2c8 0x0 0x2115bf08 0x127206)
0x2115bf18 : 0x41d143 (0x1272d000 0x2dca700 0x1 0x11dec1)
0x2115bf68 : 0x41c2a0 (0x2dca700 0x0 0x0 0x0)
0x2115bf98 : 0x41bf9a (0x2e99600 0x0 0x2115bfc8 0x125f51)
0x2115bfc8 : 0x19e2ec (0x2e99600 0x0 0x1a10b5 0x48e4ba0)
Backtrace terminated-invalid frame pointer 0
Kernel loadable modules in backtrace (with dependencies):
com.apple.driver.AirPort.Atheros(300.22)@0x8c5000->0x94ffff
dependency: com.apple.iokit.IO80211Family(200.7)@0x8a7000
dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOPCIFamily(2.4)@0x63b000
dependency: com.apple.iokit.IONetworkingFamily(1.6.0)@0x64b000
BSD process name corresponding to current thread: kernel_task
Mac OS version:
9A581
Kernel version:
Darwin Kernel Version 9.0.0: Tue Oct 9 21:35:55 PDT 2007; root:xnu-1228~1/RELEASE_I386
System model name: MacBookPro1,1 (Mac-F425BEC8)
System Config:
Model: MacBookPro1,1, BootROM MBP11.0055.B08, 2 processors, Intel Core Duo, 2.16 GHz, 1 GB
Graphics: kHW_ATIr520Item, ATY,RadeonX1600, spdisplays_pcie_device, 256 MB
Memory Module: BANK 1/DIMM1, 1 GB, DDR2 SDRAM, 667 MHz
AirPort: spairport_wireless_card_type_airport_extreme (0x168C, 0x86), 1.2.2
Bluetooth: Version 2.0.0f20, 2 service, 1 devices, 1 incoming serial ports
Network Service: AirPort, AirPort, en1
Serial ATA Device: ST910021AS, 93.16 GB
Parallel ATA Device: MATSHITADVD-R UJ-857
USB Device: Built-in iSight, Micron, high_speed, 500 mA
USB Device: Apple Internal Keyboard / Trackpad, Apple Computer, full_speed, 500 mA
USB Device: IR Receiver, Apple Computer, Inc., full_speed, 500 mA
USB Device: Bluetooth USB Host Controller, Apple, Inc., full_speed, 500 mA
FireWire Device: OneTouch, Maxtor, 400mbit_speed
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.
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.
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
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
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?
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