# Mac OSX snow leopard



## CodArk2 (Sep 3, 2009)

The best review of Snow leopard is here: 
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars

another is here (less technical)
http://reviews.cnet.com/macintosh-os/apple-mac-os-x/4505-3673_7-33676737.html?tag=mncol;lst

I think Snow Leopard a worthwhile update. It saved a good amount of space on the hard drive (36 GB on my imac and 17 GB on the mac mini) as well as well as making most of the apple applications run faster. It hasn't caused any problems on my computers, all of the applications run well enough even if the non apple ones are a bit slow compared to the apple ones. They haven't been rewritten in 64 bit yet so it still needs time for the makers to update them. The new expose in the dock feature is nice, and the menus that come up when you right click on an icon are better looking. There are some problems with HP printers, but they have to update the drivers. There is also the flash problem (see below). 

If you get or have snow leopard, be sure to update your flash player, Snow downgrades it for some reason which can pose a security issue. It only takes like 2 minutes to update. You can do that here: http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/

To check if it has the latest version (10.0.32.18 ) go here: http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/155/tn_15507.html

For a list of compatible software: http://snowleopard.wikidot.com/

At only $29 its still worth it for any intel based mac user to update, if not now, then soon after the few bugs are worked out.


----------



## ToeClaws (Sep 3, 2009)

At work, there's only one of the NOC team I'm on that uses a MAC, but he said it's definitely worth the upgrade for performance, features and stability.  



CodArk2 said:


> At only $29 its still worth it for any intel based mac user to update, if not now, then soon after the few bugs are worked out.



Which is excellent.  Now, I'm not much of an Apple fan personally, but that's a HELL of a lot more reasonable/realistic deal than Microsoft's huge prices for the next version of Windows (which isn't even a very good/stable/useful OS).  If they clued into the pricing scheme that Apple uses, they'd certainly have a lot more people interested in upgrading their Windows.


----------



## Kangamutt (Sep 3, 2009)

CodArk2 said:


> At only $29 its still worth it for any intel based mac user to update, if not now, then soon after the few bugs are worked out.



Damn. That IS worth getting!


----------



## Ziff (Sep 3, 2009)

I got it and it made my internet run slow :/ not too much but just by like 3-5 seconds, but still...


----------



## CodArk2 (Sep 3, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> At work, there's only one of the NOC team I'm on that uses a MAC, but he said it's definitely worth the upgrade for performance, features and stability.
> 
> Now, I'm not much of an Apple fan personally, but that's a HELL of a lot more reasonable/realistic deal than Microsoft's huge prices for the next version of Windows (which isn't even a very good/stable/useful OS).  If they clued into the pricing scheme that Apple uses, they'd certainly have a lot more people interested in upgrading their Windows.



Yeah, I would say its worth it. I don't think windows 7 will be bad, but I still think they are charging too much for the next windows upgrade considering what it offers (UI changes mostly)



Kangaroo_Boy said:


> Damn. That IS worth getting!


hmm, small correction on my part, if you are getting a family pack like i did for up to 5 macs its 50 dollars, but for single user its $29. If you are on tiger you can get the upgrade at $29 too, even though they will say you need the box set (at $169, though it comes with iLife and iWork too) though you can put Snow leopard on there with the $29 upgrade all the same. See http://www.appleinsider.com/article..._leopard_disc_will_install_on_tiger_macs.html



minx112 said:


> I got it and it made my internet run slow :/ not too much but just by like 3-5 seconds, but still...


Hmm, well Snow leopard did slow down everything the first time i ran it. When i first booted up launching any application was slow, but once you shut it down and relaunched it then it would come back on much faster the next time you launched it. If you shut down or restart that tends to help. As for the internet specifically it may be a slow connection, my net is running about the same or a bit faster than before (on safari anyway). Safari is fast to open, and most pages open fast as well, opera is also quit fast with the 10.0 update. Camino is really fast as well, though Firefox is rather sluggish now (it tends to take about 3 or so seconds to do things). Keep in mind that Firefox, Opera and Camino are all 32 bit, so they will run a bit slower than Safari. It may be a connection issue though.

Also, because I like to encourage people to use different browsers...
-Safari ( http://www.apple.com/safari/download/ ) for windows (macs come with it)
-Firefox (http://www.mozilla.com/) for windows, mac, and linux
-Opera (http://www.opera.com/) for windows, mac and linux
-Chrome (http://www.google.com/chrome) for windows (though mac will soon)
-Camino (http://caminobrowser.org/) for mac

If its just one browser try another. Opera is good with slower connections, and Camino is fast. Just depends on what you are using.


----------



## ToeClaws (Sep 3, 2009)

CodArk2 said:


> Yeah, I would say its worth it. I don't think windows 7 will be bad, but I still think they are charging too much for the next windows upgrade considering what it offers (UI changes mostly)



I'm not sure I'd say "worth it".  If Windows were a free OS, I'd go so far as to say it was a pretty good one, but the fact is that Windows is a very, very expensive OS, and for all that money, you don't get a very good or stable product (or even very good user rights).

The problem with "upgrade" and Windows 7 is that you can only _upgrade_ from Vista.  What's incredibly retarded about that is that XP is the most widely used OS on planet Earth, period.  But if you buy Windows 7 and want to upgrade XP... you can't.  You have to do a new install.  That's just... mind boggling.  It would have made far more sense if they didn't offer an upgrade path from Vista.  

So... the problem with Windows 7 is not only that it's expensive, but you can't upgrade the majority of user's systems with it!  Just not smart.  Oh well - advantage: Apple (and other OS's).


----------



## CodArk2 (Sep 3, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> I'm not sure I'd say "worth it".  If Windows were a free OS, I'd go so far as to say it was a pretty good one, but the fact is that Windows is a very, very expensive OS, and for all that money, you don't get a very good or stable product (or even very good user rights).
> 
> The problem with "upgrade" and Windows 7 is that you can only _upgrade_ from Vista.  What's incredibly retarded about that is that XP is the most widely used OS on planet Earth, period.  But if you buy Windows 7 and want to upgrade XP... you can't.  You have to do a new install.  That's just... mind boggling.  It would have made far more sense if they didn't offer an upgrade path from Vista.
> 
> So... the problem with Windows 7 is not only that it's expensive, but you can't upgrade the majority of user's systems with it!  Just not smart.  Oh well - advantage: Apple (and other OS's).


Hmm, i'd say windows 7 is likely worth at most 50 dollars for a single user at most. It should be free to vista users, or at least a lot cheaper (like 20 dollars). Instead it is like $200, which i agree is ridiculous. I think the new system will be better than xp, but i think microsoft is kinda taking advantage of its vista users with this by making them pay that much for 7 ($119 for the upgrade, 6 times the apple update cost).

I heard that windows 7 actually had a XP emulator in it to run legacy programs, so im suprised you can't upgrade it, but its not suprising. That means clean installs for like 70 percent of the market that is still running xp while making them pay 200 dollars for it. Of course most will likely just get a new pc with 7 on it. But i think apple has the advantage on software pricing at least. 

Overall i think snow leopard is great, but not worth $129, which is what they usually charge. It may not have a lot of user visible features, but the features developers get in this release will mean the future is good for mac users. and because a lot of mac os runs on open standards, many others will benefit as well.


----------



## net-cat (Sep 3, 2009)

One of these days, I really ought to reassemble my Mac mini...


----------



## Kangamutt (Sep 3, 2009)

CodArk2 said:


> hmm, small correction on my part, if you are getting a family pack like i did for up to 5 macs its 50 dollars, but for single user its $29. If you are on tiger you can get the upgrade at $29 too, even though they will say you need the box set (at $169, though it comes with iLife and iWork too) though you can put Snow leopard on there with the $29 upgrade all the same. See http://www.appleinsider.com/article..._leopard_disc_will_install_on_tiger_macs.html



No, I'm sticking with single user, being the only Mac owner in the household and all. Even though this is a Tiger system, no way I'm buying the $169 package. I won't miss iLife, and I've never had iWork. Just means more space on the hard discs for working.

Though I admit 5 keys for $50 is a pretty good deal.


----------



## ToeClaws (Sep 4, 2009)

net-cat said:


> One of these days, I really ought to reassemble my Mac mini...



And... that does leave me wondering what you disassembled it for.  <_<  >_>


----------



## CodArk2 (Sep 4, 2009)

Kangaroo_Boy said:


> No, I'm sticking with single user, being the only Mac owner in the household and all. Even though this is a Tiger system, no way I'm buying the $169 package. I won't miss iLife, and I've never had iWork. Just means more space on the hard discs for working.
> 
> Though I admit 5 keys for $50 is a pretty good deal.


Good. If you are on Tiger the Snow Leopard upgrade disks will work if you have an intel processor, you can even clean install with them. I had to get a family pack since there are 2 macs i use, but still works fine on them both (2007 imac and 2007 mac mini). Both were leopard systems so I dont know how updating from tiger will go. 

You should check to make sure you have a Intel processor, since Snow Leopard doesn't work on Power PCs. All you have to do is click the apple and "About This Mac" and it will tell you if you aren't sure. If you have a power pc you can still go to leopard though. If you have a core duo its a 32 bit processor, so you may not see as big a speed increase as those using a core 2 duo or the xeons on the mac pros which are both 64 bit processors. With tiger its a bit hard to tell since apple was changing over to intel just before and during the time it was out across the different computer lines. Anything before 2006 won't run Snow Leopard basically as Snow Leopard does not support PowerPC-based Macs (Power Macs, PowerBooks, iBooks, iMacs (G3-G5), all eMacs, and the G4 Mac mini or Power Mac G4 Cube). So hopefully you have something with the word "Intel" in it next to the processor when you go to "About This Mac". Otherwise you'll have to stay with tiger, move to leopard (which is still a good operating system) or get a new system =/


----------



## net-cat (Sep 4, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> And... that does leave me wondering what you disassembled it for.  <_<  >_>


Because I needed the CPU for something.


----------



## The Blue Fox (Sep 4, 2009)

My bigest problem with Snow Leopard is that it's only works with Intel CPUs. Forcing people with IBM CPUs to upgrade there systems.
It looks like apple taking a page from Microsoft's book.

A another thing is does this mean Apple hoping on the X86 bandwagon. And might you soon just be-able to run MAC OS on a non Apple computer with out no moding?
No i am not a big MAC user and only have 1 Apple in my house and rarely ever use it. So i might just be rambling on about nothing.


----------



## net-cat (Sep 4, 2009)

The Blue Fox said:


> My bigest problem with Snow Leopard is that it's only works with Intel CPUs. Forcing people with IBM CPUs to upgrade there systems.
> It looks like apple taking a page from Microsoft's book.


Yeah, you're right. I'm right pissed off that I can't run Snow Leopard on my Mac SE/30. Bastards.



The Blue Fox said:


> A another thing is does this mean Apple hoping on the X86 bandwagon.


Welcome to 2006?


----------



## CodArk2 (Sep 5, 2009)

The Blue Fox said:


> My bigest problem with Snow Leopard is that it's only works with Intel CPUs. Forcing people with IBM CPUs to upgrade there systems.
> It looks like apple taking a page from Microsoft's book.
> 
> A another thing is does this mean Apple hoping on the X86 bandwagon. And might you soon just be-able to run MAC OS on a non Apple computer with out no moding?
> No i am not a big MAC user and only have 1 Apple in my house and rarely ever use it. So i might just be rambling on about nothing.



Well, i should point out that Apple hasn't been using IBM cpus (powerpcs) since early 2006 and Apple announced they were switching to intel on 2005. Apple isn't "forcing" you to upgrade. Steve Jobs will not come to your door and take your mac at gunpoint, which is what you're implying by saying the word "forced". 

What's the point of snow leopard on your ppc? No 64-bit support, no OpenCL support, no multicore support...Your hardware doesn't support any of the new features of Snow Leopard. Snow Leopard without these features would be just... Leopard. You can get that now. No one is forcing you to upgrade, you can stay with your ppc. Snow Leopard for ppc already exists. It's called OS 10.5.8. 

In fact, microsoft supports more processors farther back than apple, but thats what causes a lot of problems for them. Windows has to support a lot of legacy hardware that apple doesn't because apple makes its own hardware. Microsoft has to code for older processors and graphics cards and the like to get them to work right, which requires a larger engineering team, more coding, more testing, more time, and more money. This takes time and effort away from the newer computers so that people who are too cheap to update their hardware can use it. Why should a company have to support 10 year old computers? Since the average computer user updates every 3 to 5 years, the timing is right. The only way for any computer company to really make money is by further improving the hardware and software. That's just how it is...

Apple has been on the x86 bandwagon for almost 4 years. And no, you can't run OSX on a regular intel pc without modding (yet), as the OS requires EFI, something windows pc's don't have. There are hacker communities that can show how to run OSX on x86 though.



net-cat said:


> Yeah, you're right. I'm right pissed off that I can't run Snow Leopard on my Mac SE/30. Bastards.


lol. That was actually the first mac i had a lot of time with. To bad i sold it =( You can likely put system 7 on it though, or system 8 with a processor upgrade.


----------



## net-cat (Sep 5, 2009)

CodArk2 said:


> lol. That was actually the first mac i had a lot of time with. To bad i sold it =( You can likely put system 7 on it though, or system 8 with a processor upgrade.


7.5.5 Unmodified
7.6.1 if I throw in a 32-bit clean ROM
8.1 if I thrown in a 68040

I suppose I could also toss A/UX on there.


----------



## Hendikins (Sep 7, 2009)

net-cat said:


> 7.5.5 Unmodified
> 7.6.1 if I throw in a 32-bit clean ROM
> 8.1 if I thrown in a 68040
> 
> I suppose I could also toss A/UX on there.



Ah, that brings back the memories... Mac Plus with 2.5MB RAM and a 20MB external HDD running System 7.1...

Those were the days!


----------



## net-cat (Sep 7, 2009)

Indeed. My SE/30 is actually decked out with 64MB RAM  and a 1GB hard drive. System 7.5.5 with MODE32. (If I had a CD-ROM drive for it, It'd have A/UX.)

... not that I've turned it on in two years.


----------



## CinnamonApples (Sep 7, 2009)

Snow Leopards "gestures" are slightly different than Leopard... that's going to take some getting used to.


----------



## Danale (Sep 7, 2009)

Dumb blonde question here:

If you upgrade to snow leopard, do you lose all your data and settings? Or does it maintain all the data and settings on your computer, and just update the OS?

Thanks.


----------



## Runefox (Sep 7, 2009)

Danale said:


> If you upgrade to snow leopard, do you lose all your data and settings? Or does it maintain all the data and settings on your computer, and just update the OS?



I'm not really very experienced at all with Mac OS (and I'm not about to buy Apple hardware for any reason in the near future), but if Microsoft can do an in-place upgrade, Apple most assuredly has mastered it.

That said, the upgrade cost is far lower with Mac OS because it's tied to the hardware - You've already likely paid a premium for the system hardware itself (take a look at the current MacBook Pro RAM upgrade option, for example: $1,000 for 2x4GB DDR3 SODIMM; They're less than $800 for a Corsair dual channel kit on Newegg, and that's just the first thing I found. It's not just the Pro, either; The regular Macbook's RAM upgrade option for 2x2GB DDR2 SODIMMs is $100, about double what Newegg's 2x2GB kits are ($50-60), and they're all brand name). This, combined with the fact that if you want to keep upgrading, you'll buy a new Apple PC at some point, you're basically paying for the upgrades during the life cycle of your Apple via the "Apple tax" on the hardware.

I know how much of an anti-Apple freak that makes me sound (and I'm no fan of Apple, to be sure), it's not untrue.


----------



## Kangamutt (Sep 7, 2009)

CodArk2 said:


> You should check to make sure you have a Intel processor, since Snow Leopard doesn't work on Power PCs. All you have to do is click the apple and "About This Mac" and it will tell you if you aren't sure. If you have a power pc you can still go to leopard though. If you have a core duo its a 32 bit processor, so you may not see as big a speed increase as those using a core 2 duo or the xeons on the mac pros which are both 64 bit processors.




It's core 2 duo. Made sure of that when I ordered. I got mine at the end of the generation cycle, and when Leopard came out a few weeks later, I was pretty much kicking my own ass. But oh well; c'est la vie. I'm not too fond of the wafer-thin keyboard anyway. Not much feel for the keys, kinda like texting with my touch-screen. That and it's hell on my wrists. But I digress.



> If you are on Tiger the Snow Leopard upgrade disks will work if you have an intel processor, you can even clean install with them.



By the sound of that, it can be installed without wiping my hard drive clean, right?


----------



## CodArk2 (Sep 7, 2009)

Danale said:


> Dumb blonde question here:
> 
> If you upgrade to snow leopard, do you lose all your data and settings? Or does it maintain all the data and settings on your computer, and just update the OS?
> 
> Thanks.


Hmm, when I upgraded from leopard it kept most of my settings the same. It did delete my desktop background for some reason, but other than that everything was the same. It doesnt delete applications or data and the like. For the most part just the OS is updated, though it does change some things.



Kangaroo_Boy said:


> It's core 2 duo. Made sure of that when I ordered. I got mine at the end of the generation cycle, and when Leopard came out a few weeks later, I was pretty much kicking my own ass. But oh well; c'est la vie. I'm not too fond of the wafer-thin keyboard anyway. Not much feel for the keys, kinda like texting with my touch-screen. That and it's hell on my wrists. But I digress.


Good, in that case it should run the new OS just fine. You likely could have updated with the mac up-to-date program if it was within a month of purchase for a much reduced cost (like 10 or 20 dollars i think). However, this one is about the same cost for the modern os.



Kangaroo_Boy said:


> By the sound of that, it can be installed without wiping my hard drive clean, right?


Well i know on leopard you dont have to wipe the hard drive. On tiger I am not certain. From what I hear you dont, but i have no first hand experience with going from tiger>snow leopard. That being said, yes, upgrading from Tiger works (archive & install) without wiping. o be completely clear, the disk you get in the box set and the disk you get for $29 are the same disk.


----------

