[macbot]

I could think of a ton of things that need fixing or adding to the OS.......gthese could possibly come under the heading "stability" though
Proper webdav/dotmac uploading+downloading (it's SO slow it's not useable in real world - forcing purchase of transmit to rectify.
Ability to "scroll" though audio video files playing in the "get info" window in the finder - why did they remove the scroll bar? now it's just a play button
Ability to vastly improve "get info" for audio & video files so i don't have to rely on 3rd party add on's - what type of file is it? mono/stereo what sample rate is it? what bit depth, add+read metadata etc etc - these are REALLY important things for pro's and they are completely AWOL
Make Spotlight useable - it never seems to find what i actaully want in Leopard, or is it just me?
Fix Mail Imap/Google - what's with "dispapperaring" emails and why do i HAVE~ to have an ALL folder always in the way? can't it go in the in box?
that's just off the top of my head
and it would not be the 1st time that bugs get fixed in the NEXT revision, some of the bugs fixed in logic 8.0.2 have been there since 7.0

[KAdamsInCo]

Taking advantage of multi-CPU/multi-core processors and going full 64-bit to be able to address a lot more memory with both be fantastic improvements to OS X. I have read about various problems with Leopard that certain users have dealt with but I haven't had any issues with Leopard running on my MacBook Pro, and 10.5.3 was a flawless upgrade without any hiccups.
Regardless, there does appear to be bugs and stability issues with some hardware configurations/applications, so it would be really good if Apple continues to release fixes to Leopard (10.5.x) between now and next year when Snow Leopard shows up.
I also applaud Apple for having the guts to spend the next year making a really great Operating System even better by focusing on performance and stability instead of bells and whistles.
As people switch from Windows to Mac having a rock-solid OS ready and waiting for them will make all the difference in the world to their first "Mac experience". This is also a great time to make OS X even better as Vista continues to be a hugely problematic OS for Microsoft and people clamor for continued support of XP, against the strong desires of the Redmond crew to kill it off just as soon as possible.

[bigpics]

macbot said:

I could think of a ton of things that need fixing or adding to the OS.......gthese could possibly come under the heading "stability" though

like a version of Safari that doesn't keep grabbing memory and CPU cycles (sometimes they show up as an overload in "windows server" and "kernel") until I sometimes have to reboot.
etc., etc.

but whether this upgrade (or super service pack, excuse the language) has new "features" (as others have pointed out, reliability, speed, security and consistency of interface are, uhhh, reasonably important ... ...features... ...of one's entire digital life -- possibly even more important than, say, widgets (resource hogs I never touch and nearly any of the ones I would use can be replicated by opening a browser tab or via iGoogle) and window translucence (a new feature with an off switch added in a point release).

even in Tiger I've had numerous strange behaviors, frequent loss of AirPort contact (and have to go through numerous poorly labeled screens to launch network diagnostics -- very Windows-like), failures to sync with my shuffle, or read or release CD's, stuttering audio and video, a random percussive system sound which comes on for 10 seconds sometimes daily, weekly or monthly at random, on a recent reboot was launched into visually impaired mode, have had kernel panics, loss of all FireFox passwords memorized, etc., etc.

so since the Mac's big selling point is "it just works," just working would be my killer feature.

and building in more MS support at the OS level (and moving other tacked on stuff there) just removes one more reason for anyone to buy Redmond.

and something close to instant on and/or rebooting into my previous session would be a fantastic "plumbing" improvement increasing my productivity markedly, especially those extra long reboots after installing a security update, etc.

I also don't buy the "it shoulda' been there already" whining more than 50% -- every computer program ever written more complicated than "hello, world" has bugs -- OS design is bleeding edge stuff -- and Apple's mission has been to get the world's attention with an OS more elegant, functional and rational than Windows. that accomplished, a relative pause to remodel and tighten up the plumbing on the R&D that's been invested in this process and prepare for anticipated future developments in microelectronics (and extend integration with OS X Mobile) is a great goal -- especially while MS is floundering with Vista, and Win7 looks to be a) more of the same and b) not out until Snow Leopard's at 10.6.4, 5 or 6, by which time Ocelot or whatever wil be well on its way to deliver with new whizbangy stuff even if Win 7 sucks less.

so if they deliver, I call it a brilliant strategy.

but it would be nice (and rational) if it was $29 or $49 and not $129.

[Rugby]

well plenty of opinion as expected on this announcement but personally I think this is great news; clean up, get the Intel going, improve graphics and other things ...nice.Bugs will always be part of an OS (cough Microsoft..) so be nice and let Apple try to deliver a cool Ice Cool Cat.. I know I want one since I bought my 2 x 2.8 Ouad Core, I have no problems in investing the dough if they get it right

[thebigcheese]

So basically, Snow Leopard is a service pack, except we'll have to pay for it. Heck, it even has "Leopard" in the name. Way to go Steve, you're an even bigger tool than before.
And yes, my primary computer is a Mac. So don't call me a fanboy.

[Olu]

thebigcheese said:

So basically, Snow Leopard is a service pack, except we'll have to pay for it. Heck, it even has "Leopard" in the name. Way to go Steve, you're an even bigger tool than before.

And yes, my primary computer is a Mac. So don't call me a fanboy.

Have you read any of the previous posts? This is NOT going to be as simple as a service pack. This is going to have almost identical features as Leopard (hence the name Snow Leopard) but be improved and changed under the hood.

It's like swapping out an old big block V8 with a multivalve, variable timing V8, but keeping the body and accoutrements the same. Both cars will get you where you going, but one will be lighter, smoother, and more efficient.

[Pascal007]

airhead said:

Nice to know that all those cores (8) I have will actually get some use in the future. Really I haven't been that pleased with this latest Mac Pro that I bought in comparison to the days that I would update my PowerMacs.

I would feel more appreciative of Apple, and more appreciated by Apple if this were not a full cost OS ($129) update. Because these are typically the research and technologies I expected Apple to have done upon releasing the OS originally. I don't think it's out of line to say that I expected it to be fully optimized when I got it. I didn't think I would have to pay for the fully optimized version of it later.

Compare this to a car. For the 2007 model, the features were cruise control, leather seats and air conditioning. For the 2009 model, the feature will be 43 miles per gallon with accelerations under 7 seconds but your will still get cruise control, leather seats and air conditioning. Because you bought the 2007 model, does that mean you should get the 2009 for free ? Can you argue that you should get it for free because the 2007 model can only do 15 miles per gallon ? Can you say that the 2009 model is proof that the car company had not optimized the 2007 model enough ? No. Why ? Because there has been some research done to improve the 2009 model's motor. Because the the lean and mean attitude of the 2009 model is a feature in itself.

What Snow Leopard is all about is new technologies, new approaches and new APIs to improve the speed of computers with multiple cores. These are the features of Snow Leopard. Granted, they are not in-your-face features, but this doesn't mean this new feature set is not desirable. And these new features do not prove that Leopard (10.5) wasn't optimized well. Because even in its "un-optimized" state, it is faster and more efficient that Vista (and, on my PowerBook G4, it is at least as fast as Tiger). In its current state, Leopard is far from being garbage sold with smoke-and-mirror gimmickry like Vista is.

Snow Leopard is not bad news for current Leopard users (well maybe for me, since I have a PPC-based Mac). On the contrary, Snow Leopard is the promise that our OS will continue to improve over time. Of course, Apple should have done this way before (as far as the classic Mac OS days), but it is nice to see that Apple is finally putting more R&D money in improving performance.

Edit : I hadn't read all the other posts yet. It seems that I wasn't the only one to come up with a car analogy ! :D I guess it was in the air du temps. Sorry about that ! ;-)

[Bruce8]

I think the suggestions fromm tallscot and macbot are spot on.
1) In general, I think a major cleanup, fixup, speedup and addition of usability features to the Finder should be high on the list.
re tallscott (5) Finder file size info - Yes!, and note that Windows XP had this as a tooltip for a while now. Sad to say, there are a few user interface details in Windows that Mac OS would do well to add.
2) Provide file details in a group copy of files from one location to another. Currently Finder only tells you that some are the same name, but no info on size or dates to allow rational choice of whether to proceed or not. Thus one must manually copy one by one, or compare folders to see. This is another case that Windows file copy provides more useful info. I hope this functionality is added.
3) Make Spotlight a real information tool -- that is, provide easy to see size, date, path info (not the micro 'i' button), and allow me to move files from there without making a second copy, and have the date sequence by file modification date, not unix touch date. Either that, or bring back the Find File functionality that was in Panther.
4) Fix Finder so it updates with file change info faster (without me having to change file views to force it); and make icon view remember where things are, without icons suddenly shifting when I drag a new item there in icon view; and please have the list by size view stable (currently, the sequence keeps jumping, occasionally inserting a small item at the very top above all large items).
Re. macbot Finder Get Info providing more useable information on files, especially on media files - Totally! I currently end up opening files in both QT and VLC and MediaRage in order to find out what the file specs really are for video and audio.
This Usability Enchancement Path could become a good article or forum process I think, especially if the list is formally delivered to Apple as a heartfelt list of items to please fix/add.
And undoubtedly, there will be many other thoughts, as people all use their Macs differently, so other items that irk them should be added to the list. ;)
(Note to Mac fans- I use/prefer my iMac to my older windows pc probably by factor of ... at least 10 or 20 to 1. Just saying there are a few user features windows has that would be nice additions to Mac Finder in terms of file management.)

[Pascal007]

thebigcheese said:

So basically, Snow Leopard is a service pack, except we'll have to pay for it. Heck, it even has "Leopard" in the name. Way to go Steve, you're an even bigger tool than before.

Service pack = bug fix

Service pack ≠ new feature

Snow Leopard ≠ bug fix to Leopard

Snow Leopard = improvement to Leopard

And I, for one, will not excuse the language because calling Snow Leopard a service pack is not "artistic licence" but a demonstration of flagrant lack of understanding.

[thebigcheese]

I'm pretty sure I'm not the one who isn't understanding it. Service packs to XP brought not only improvements in performance AND bug fixes, but also new features. The Vista service pack ups performance and fixes bugs.
Snow Leopard is doing what? That's right, upping performance, NOT adding any new features. It is a service pack. I could almost understand charging Leopard owners $20 for it, considering how money-grubbing Apple is, but it would be absolutely ridiculous to force us to pay as if it was a real upgrade. But of course, you all will do it anyway, since everything Apple does is so great and apparently requires different terminology than Windows.

[doctor sid]

I wish they would quit acting like using the video processor to add speed is going to be a noticeable improvement. Thats not a fix thats a bandaid to an issue that needs looking into. Why make a computer that can't even be used to its potential by the OS. Tapping into the graphics systems is a joke in reality as far as develoment goes. Lets get with the prgram APPLe and use the computer processor.

[Albertr]

Funny question! I have a iMac G5 with the last Tiger OS. It does everything I need or want. It is also solid as a rock. I read about so many problems by user of Leopard that I am asking myself why did they upgrade? There you have it, Snow Leopard fast as a jet and no more features than Leopard that I rejected? Tiger is great!

[afterhours]

Coming from the server side, let's see what Apple could improve upon:

Well, there's email. Some might argue that email matters. Can we use Apple's GUI tool to manage virtual hosting domain email accounts? We could in Tiger. Wasn't difficult. Completely broken in Leopard, at 10.5.3. Do any of you use email? Does Steve Jobs? Do any of his NeXT engineers? Might be important in some business models. Like being an ISP. Or running a company. Or running a bunch of companies. But can we admin the product successfully from the provided Server Admin or Workgroup Manager to offer email to multiple hosted domains? Not in Leopard. Not even on their radar any more. Significant degradation in 'feature set' -- basically useless save for the single-domain enterprise or school. Oh, but wait -- you can just use the command line to admin your MTA for proper VH hosting. Yes -- but you won't be going back to that pretty little (now useless) GUI for your workgroup management, will you. Or rather, if you do, there's a better-than-50% chance your accounts will now get either killed off or paralyzed. Maybe that works for NeXT programmers, but my old copy of the Addison Human Interface Guidelines suggests that a well-crafted OS works without the user knowing it -- or needing to know it. That the GUI does the hard work and the user gets their job done without the MAChine in the way. It was written by Apple when they didn't have their iPhone/iPod distractions stripping their coding talent from the OS versions. A long time ago -- a concept that Woz and company thought wise at the time. Abandoned now, with the excuse that the CLI is the answer to all unfinished business. Pathetic.

Can they update Mailman, their listserve, to manage multiple virtual host domains? Well, the open source community has had VH support in Mailman since October. The release date of Leopard server. One would hope that such changes might make it into the current shipping product (and not next years' release). But no -- it's not there. Bring this up to an Apple Engineer and he'll tell you 'oh, most of our tools are based on OpenSource projects -- just download and compile what you need." Brilliant -- except that Apple elects to put their code in their own paths, not the standards the open source community adopted. So one has to rip out the Apple code FIRST, then compile and install the opensource. What happens when an admin mistakenly tries to use the Apple GUI to admin the product? Love those beachballs. What happens if Apple elects to actually update the feature in a future release? What gets to work, and what gets scarmbled? So on one had, we're told to gut the $1k product to get it to work. On the other, we're told that there is no telling what a future update might do to our tinkering behind the scenes, and that only the Apple-way is the official way. Tough luck, sucker. If you don't mind all of your lists representing another company, without your company branding, then Apple's abortion of a listserve works. If you need anything more cogent to your operations, you can't use Leopard (or Tiger) server for VH listserves. Products such as LetterRip have passed on, but we should not have to rely upon third-party solutions or GUI-breaking cludges to have a functional server. Broken since 10.0.

Leopard is a big step in the right direction (apache 2 over 1.3), but what's with the regressions in functionality? Apple's target market for OSXS is ... who? Can't just be EDU. I thought it definitely included the small business/SOHO market -- the very market that is reluctant to launch Terminal. If one has to sidestep the GUI at every stage to get functional Internet services, what is the point of the GUI? More importantly, does Apple's server group understand how these handicaps (particularly the VH mail support) is crippling to the client? There's no need for OSXS at all if one has to sidestep all of its underpinnings to get a server that actually can support VH pop accounts, broader listserve capabilities, newer (better safer) builds of php, apache and mysql -- and one can CLI without breaking out in a cold sweat at the thought of keystrokes over mouseclicks. Same is true for FTP management. Why can't we have multiple WGM accounts point to the same 'home' or subfolders within the Sites folder structure? Does Apple have only one FTP account to get to their website? I doubt it. Here we have to rely on far superior tools such as CrushFTP

It's pretty embarrassing to be an Apple advocate and find myself telling clients the many reasons NOT to buy Leopard server if it isn't for strict intranet requirements. So few of my clients are willing to move to Leopard on the desktop that any of the baby steps taken toward enterprise management (CalDAV) are insufficient to justify the change. In smaller operations, I've found more satisfaction using busysync. Pity Apple's not interested in this aspect of the server market. If Webstar was fully functional on that OpenTransport dog of 9, you'd think Apple could pull this off in their sleep. From an email server perspective, one is stuck with the likes of CommunigatePro (and at least their web interface supports proper VH management, the ability to permit delegated account management on a per-domain basis via the web interface so clients can manage their own accounts/passwords/etc.) and VH listserve needs.

There is plenty more I could go on about, but to what end? Some other engineers refer to Apple's server product as a 'niche' product -- a LAN server. It certainly has a pretty interface, but it doesn't do much with the powerful underpinnings of the opensource projects upon which it is built. Why can't Apple spend some of that income stream to hire better engineers or more ABLE bodies to craft what could be a stellar product? Why does Leopard Server actually make Win2k3 Server look more feature-rich and vastly more productive (even at the GUI level)? Why regress on functions as important as eMail account management? A Back-to-Basics push -- a sincere and honest correction to the abysmal state of the current server product -- this would be a blessing. This would make a $1k investment that touts no per-seat licensing fees one hell of a toolset. The penetration to the Enterprise and the ISP would be remarkable. But it has to work. And this being an Apple product, one expects the GUI to work WELL and be up to the task. I realize this isn't the typical fair for a MacWorld audience, but a failed GUI experience, a crippling partial adoption of feature sets, a lack of keeping the toolsets current with patch releases, and a regression in features from the last big cat -- these issues directly relate to why Apple isn't successful in today's marketplace. They literally wrote the book about the user experience 20+ years ago. Their server group needs to read it.

[Pennywigeon]

Here is a siple analogy.
Lets say Leopard is a Car model for 2008. With its new body style and interior (new features.)
Now SNow Leopard will LOOK the same (Same body style and interior) BUT it is getting a whole new ENGINE, SUSPENSION, SAFTEY FEATURES, TRANSMISSION, And will set the standard for future models based on that frame.
SO ANyone who owns a 2008 (Leopard) and would NOT see any improvements in purchasing the 2009 model (SNow Leopard) would NOT see any difference other than SPEED that is geared towards INTEL chips. So there would be no distinguishable differences other than what is under the hood for PPC users and INTEL users. Same features just difference performance.
SNow Leopard is not a "bug fix" nor is it a "service pack" but rather an under the hood overhaul.
No new features? Quicktime X, OpenCL, Grand Central, PUsh and SYnc support for ALL the Apple Apps (Mail, Address Book, etc) Better 64bit support, Updated Activity Manger showing BOTH 64bit process and 32 Bit Processes, More Native code support and 64 OS native code for better performance.
SImply put. If the SNow Leopard's revamp of everything under the hood does not interest you then outward appearances Leopard Users and SNow Leopard Users would be using the SAME FEATURES so no user, especially PPC users would feel left out feature wise.
By 2010 Os 10.7 will release and PPC would have been phased out and NEW FEATURES that would be INTEL Only and based on SNow Leopard would then pour forth. The time line still allows PPC users to be compatible with the latest "body style" in features while allowing future development of things to come go on under the hood (snow leopard) so that at first glance both Leopard and Snow Leopard offer the "same features" to users but under the hood there is no more PPC support and APple moves forth with INTEL development, 64 bit, OpenCL, and Grand Central and does so without treating older technology users (PPC) like second class citizens.
Since Snow Leopard will be like getting a new engine, new transmission, new safety systems, new electronics, and new frame for a car even though it shares the same "body style" it should be free?
I bet it will be $49.00 upgrade. And $49.00 for all new stuff under the hood would be worth it if it makes a production machine faster.
After time is money.

Unless of course you feel your time watching a progress bar is productive.
:-)