It's not enough to have
your Leopard questions answered, to
hear all about what the new system is like, or to
know that it'll run on your nearly decade-old Mac. Now it's time for the Mac fanboys and Apple early adopters to put the latest version of OS X to the test. We want to know, will it blend? In other words:
- Is your software still compatible?
- Do all of your peripherals still function perfectly? And system hardware?
- How's it playing with Windows boxes on your network?
- Did you encounter any problems installing / upgrading?
- What kinds of bugs are you seeing?
Go ahead, cry into the comfy pillow that is our comments. Tell us what's not working so that others may benefit from your knowledge. We're all here for you. And us? Well, already we've had to give up a few applications that weren't compatible (RapidoWrite and Onyx, to name a couple), and we've seen Time Machine crash enough to give Doc Brown an aneurysm, but how are things on your end?
P.S. -PCs, please sit this one out. The Macs are on a mission, and you already had your chance to
whine with your brethren in a (relatively) fanboy-free environment.
posted Oct 26th 2007 8:49PM
Everything seems to work great except for VPNClient. I'm getting an error 51 since installing 10.5. My IT guy at work is gonna be pissed.
Yeah Cisco VPN client crashes. But everything else runs fine.
Doesn't surprise me...Cisco VPN client broke when going to Tiger for me...Haven't tried Leopard yet but glad to have the heads up...
Look for a VPN client of 4.9.01 build 30 or higher. You can find it out on Google. Downloaded and Im good to go.
It seems you need a password to download this, any suggestions?
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/10317
THANK YOU, that totally fixed it!!
I preordered Tiger back in 2005, installed it the moment it arrived, so excited I was to get Spotlighting and Dashboarding... and then found out the next day that I couldn't use the campus VPN.
Good thing it was the end of the semester!
Aventail VPN client seems to be broken with Leopard too - 'connection reset' error each time try to connect.
It wont boot after installing. It said successful,press restart to continue. BLue screen comes up, I have a cursor and nothing else. :-) I got exactly what I expected, a shiney MAc Book Pro apaer weight and a Working Dell system running XP.
My first impression is that Time Machine is a terrible program that should have spent another year in QA... can't even try it out before it crashes. Still testing the rest out, but alot of my programs don't seem to be compatible...
I'm sorry that Time Machine is crashing, I'm a Vista user but it seemed like Time Machine was (in my opinion) being pushed as one of the big things that would have really topped Vista, hopefully Apple will get it worked out.
Time Machine worked perfectly for me, first time... apparently the experience wasn't as great for everyone :(
.. Isn't Time Machine just like "Previous Versions" on Windows (2003 for sure, and Vista?) but you don't need external storage (can if you want)
@me
Effectively, yes. Obviously Apple has some more eye candy involved.
I won't get into "who is copying who" since Apple announced Time Machine to the public while Vista was late in Beta. I'm just happy that both mainstream consumer OSes have easy, automatic, and painless incremental backup options. It's been long overdue.
You are clueless - "me" why don't you do a little reading and find out the thechnical aspects of Time Machine - it is not just an incremental backup it is SOOO much more. Macs have had Retrospect remote from eons ago - yes even before windows. Retrospect was a Mac only program at one time.
Go back to sleep.
no time machine issues here. And no time machine is not like windows back-up whatever. It does so much more. You should at least watch the video on the apple page. Its pretty amazing.
Time Machine works fine for me.
I've not had a single problem w/ time machine and i've used it to backup an install, reinstall and restore from that time machine backup, all fine... seems rather polished, except for the restore, no granularity aside from "you", "your documents", "your network settings" and one more.
I am having problems with Adium - it can't connect to MSN, but can get on other networks. There are already other reports of it on Adium's website.
Same here.
Adium MSN issue is not Leopard specific... it occurs in Tiger as well.
Actually, Adium works fine with MSN on Tiger. All my friends use MSN Messenger here in Brazil, and it works flawlessly on Tiger.
For me it's definitely Leopard specific. Prior to Leopard - no problem. With Leopard - no connection. Hmm.
Adium works fine on MSN for me.
no problem with audium 1.1.3 here....
Adium works fine for me with everything.
So far its not running very well on my computer, but that's probably cuase I havn't purchaced it yet.
O rly?
Yeah rly.
I found the humor in your comment (ill rank you up 1) :)
+1 for humor, -1 for spelling, so i'll just leave you be.
I almost missed it, too, taking it a bit too literal. But that is the best comment I read all day. Very funny!
@ John
It's supposed to be spelled like that.
"O RLY!?
YA RLY!!
NO WAIIIII!"
On a side note... It's over 9000!!?!?!!!
@ James
he was talking about purchaSed.
and cuase (which should be because) and havn't... :)
blah, why does time Machine keep crashing!
So far all my apps are working but i am kinda disappointed that I can navigate through through hierarchy menu/folders in the doc... or am i nuts? anyone figure out how?
example.. i have my applications folder which contains a video apps folder, when the grid comes up and i select the folder, it opens it in the finder. but i would prefer to navigate without opening the folder?
Am i missing something?
correction: i CAN'T navigate through a hierarchy of stacks/etc like i would with a normal folder in 10.4
I really miss this feature in Stacks. In 9A466, you could click on a folder in a stack, and the folder would load in the same stack. From 9A527 onwards, this has been disabled.
Any possibility of a defaults command that would re-enable it?
Yeah I installed the 9a466 release too and that feature was great... Especially when you want to get your App folder as a stack because you often have subfolders in there like Ms office, WOW or Adobe stuff...
Apple please bring this back :|
I had error upgrading from Tiger to Leopard on a Mac mini (G4 1.42 ghz). I send the error back to Apple. My mini doesn't have many apps installed on it and it's free of clutters because I only use it like a storage server with external HDDs connected to it. I got the error and said installation fail or something but it rebooted and Leopard showed up anyways. I didn't trust it so I formatted the Mini and do a clean install and now it's working fine.
Also, I tried to do a Permission Verify after installation and Disk Utility took a long time (literally 20-30 mins) to verify the permissions. I know the G4 mini is slow, but it went by pretty quick when I was sill using Tiger. Did anyone got the same problem?
Yep, similar issues here with the wife's Mac mini (G4 1.42 GHz) including a never ending Verify Permissions. Might have to reformat her HD.
I just stood in line for two hours and it was definitely worth the wait! :D
My biggest complainant is that I can't use Time Machine with an AFP share on my NAS. :-(
I guess I should have read the specs on TM a little closer.
Hopefully this will be fixed in the near future.
Hardware = MacBook Pro w/ 10.5 & Infrant ReadyNAS NV+
GPGMail, MailTags don't work with Apple Mail 3 yet.
Nor does httpmail.bundle, which I use with Mail to access my Hotmail account. Little Snitch requires a beta update, Fan Control pref pane doesn't work, Bitrocket crashes upon attempting to torrent anything.
Those aside, it's been silky smooth.
Actually, they changed that spec very recently -- up until a few days ago, TM was pitched as working with airport disks via airport extreme -- it worked with all but the most recent development builds too...
I have a NAS and Time Machine cant use it. But it can use a AFP share off my iMac. I believe the reason behind this is the file systems used on the NAS which can not handle large flat files like the HFS file system can.