How would you change Leopard?

Alright, so you've had seven whole days (and a few minutes now on the East coast, but who's counting?) to wrap your loving / skeptical arms around Apple's latest operating system, toss it on your machine and test out "300+ new features" that Cupertino managed to include. During the past week, we -- along with quite a few others -- looked this OS up and down in order to determine if it really was worth the $129 asking price, and while we wouldn't deem Leopard unflawed, we've yet to find ourselves itching to downgrade. 'Course, we're sure there's a plethora of you out there still perusing the feature list and wondering if it'll work on your near-decade-old machine, but this space is for the resolute souls who wiped their calendar clean last weekend to sit diligently behind a keyboard / mouse and put OS X 10.5 to the test.

For those of you who fit the aforementioned description to a T, we're beyond curious to know how your experiences have been. Have you found that Leopard makes your life a little less hectic? Roiled senseless by countless bugs? Are there any features you wish Steve's drones would have programmed in at the eleventh hour? Considering that over two million of you have already made the leap to Apple's latest feline, we know there's a flood of squawks just waiting to be unleashed -- so go on, we're all ears.

[finnith @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:25PM]

This won't end well.

[momothelemur @ Nov 4th 2007 5:32PM]

I'd change it to windows.

[andi @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:45PM]

True... look at how many flames THIS will bring

I'd change Leopard.. with Ubuntu

[JohnTitor @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:57PM]

I'd just make it Windows compatible

[John @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:08PM]

I have to say I'm somewhat disappointed. I've found Leopard to be somewhat buggy in my tests, especially with the upgraded apps like iChat and Mail. iChat has caused my CPU to run at 100% capacity more than once, and Mail has hung up on me on several occasions. WMV video support is crap and Quicktime hangs on me when I try to play a file. Quick Look is disappointing, considering I'd much rather hover over an icon to get it to play rather than hit a shortcut. Furthermore, attachments in Mail can be viewed with Quick Look, but both Mail and Quick Look hang up whenever I try. Quicksilver shows up in my dock now, even when I try resetting the settings multiple times (and now that it's open source, the website seems to be down). I think the interface is much more trite than previous iterations, focused more on the eyecandy factor than functionality. The fact that my docked Applications folder shows up as Address Book with additional layers behind it is MADDENING. Stacks are pointless, considering I have way more applications and documents than it actually lets you view, so now instead of one click, I have to click TWICE to view my files. Cover Flow is bulky and unintuitive, as is the sidebar in finder. The designers also darkened the blue that separates each file line in list mode, which I find distracting and hiders my reading ability (noticeably, and I'm only 20) I've also noticed that my battery life drains like crazy, and instead of the screen dimming, it goes completely black after 15 seconds of idle time. Furthermore, I've tried to get help with these issues on the discussion forums to absolutely no avail.

WHEW! I didn't realize I had so many issues with it. Regardless, it's still a lot smoother of an experience than any Windows PC i've had. Possibly its best redeeming quality (and probably the most important for me) is the fact that it connects almost instantly to a wireless network when I wake the computer up, as opposed to having to wait a few seconds for the computer to connect.

If anyone has solutions for any of these issues, let me know please.

[Jack O Lantern @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:30PM]

@ John - sounds like you should go back to 10.4 Tiger

I have similar complaints about stacks - not sure why users lost the ability to keep traditional folders in the dock. Its almost impossible to explain a stack to a new computer user - this seems like it should have been an OPTION for advanced users.

my only other complaint is the loss of the bluetooth connection from Address Book to cell phones. I use to be able to wirelessly connect my cell to address book and then receive caller ID, send and receive SMS messages, dial out and answer calls right from OSX without having to take my cell out of my pocket. It was a little known feature but now it is totally gone. WTF!!

[Jon @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:57PM]

it is an option, i think you have to hold down command while you drag it.... or something.

[Karan @ Nov 2nd 2007 9:35PM]

@John: Upgrade to at least b52 from http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/14831

[johnboy @ Nov 3rd 2007 7:07AM]

@Jack O Lantern

How do you do that thing with the phone? Sounds smart!! :P
Im using a sony erricson k810i, will it work with that?

[Jeff @ Nov 7th 2007 7:20PM]

@ John - "The fact that my docked Applications folder shows up as Address Book with additional layers behind it is MADDENING. "

Stick an empty folder named "AA" in your applications folder and BAM you have a folder icon for your applications stack. better yet, take a picture of a pretty lady and name her AA and stick it in your applications folder.

There we go thinking outside the box again ;)

[Carbo @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:03PM]

By not installing it! It's junk. $100 service pack that should be free.

[Justin @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:36PM]

A service pack is an orderable or downloadable update to a customer's software that fixes existing problems.

In computers, an upgrade is a new version of or addition to a hardware or, more often, software product that is already installed or in use.

Basically, in basic terms, you don't know what you're talking about. Mac users aren't familiar with service packs because they don't release an incomplete operating system. This would be an upgrade. I mean, it's okay, i'm sure you heard Dvorak or someone on the blogosphere make their attempt at being witty by calling Leopard a "service pack". Stop being such a sheep.

[Joel @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:42PM]

Fair enough, it isn't a service pack. How about we call it a feature pack instead?

[salut @ Nov 2nd 2007 9:49PM]

Retard!

[Morgan @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:28PM]

I would change the name. Leopard makes me think of trampy older women. Ick.

[robotrock @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:05PM]

Ahem...you've got your cats mixed up.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cougar

[Elliott @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:26PM]

I felt if they named it Liger instead it would've sold more copies.

[BirchB @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:42PM]

Flippin' sweet

[Carbo @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:28PM]

By not installing it! $130 for a service pack no thanks. It's junk.

[Enils @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:35PM]

I'm not agreeing with you in the slightest, but let's for a moment play that I am.

Exactly what would Leopard need to have for it to pass as a "new OS version" in your eyes?

Why do you conder it to be a service pack? The fact that it's a 0.1 upgrade? Just like the NT 5.0 to 5.1 upgrade was, by the way.

[Travis @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:34PM]

So did you use it or are you just bitching about being poor.... $130 isn't much in this game these days.

[paloooz @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:59PM]

Vista w/ all features = $400
Leopard w/ all features = $130
Linux w/ all features = $0

[James @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:09PM]

XP Pro with all the features. $124.96 (on Ebay =])
The true win..

Seriously I love all OS's =]




Except Vista =[

[eh @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:29PM]

Leopard is actually not a bad upgrade compared to the other OS X versions. Since its release I think OS X has only seen 2 real upgrades, 10.3 with its introduction of a new Finder that doesnt suck and Expose which is extremely useful, and 10.5 with a further improved Finder that finally generates thumbnails and the other features everyone already knows about.

10.1, 10.2, and 10.4 could all be considered "service packs" since they really offered nothing worthy of a new OS. Leopard does add some things that make it worthy as an upgrade instead of just a service pack though. Usually anytime Finder gets improved it will be a good upgrade since Finder is the backbone of the system.

10.6 will probably be another lame update though like 10.4.

[rp @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:02PM]

@ eh

wow... you MUST be a newb to the Mac. Let me school ya a bit:

I'm not sure if anyone who ever used 10.0 would ever DARE to call 10.1 a service pack as you have so eloquently described it. Did you even use 10.0? Well, not many did, because it was basically unusable on any system. I actually opted to stay with 9 and risk possible crashing rather than use 10.0 because it was so incredibly slow that doing anything productive in it was next to, if not entirely, impossible. Not to mention the fact that nearly nothing worked for it anyway, since all the apps were still classic. 10.1 was an incredible speed improvement (i'd say on the order of ten billion %) and should have been called Cheetah, not to mention the massive amount of bug fixes and other nice little details. The stability improved substantially as well. Most people would actually call 10.1 the real first version of OS X, and I've never heard of anyone suggesting that it was basically a useless upgrade and not worth the money. Only a truly insane person would upgrade from 10.0 to 10.1 and suggest that it did little to make things better.

You're a little bit closer in your assertions that 10.2 and 10.4 were service packs, although 10.2 did incredible things for the stablility and further speed of OS X. 10.4 was basically nothing great, but seemed to improve minor things. So yeah, those are basically service packs.

Plus, you said that Expose is useful. No, it's really not useful. In fact, it's basically just useless eye candy. The old finder was essentially the same as the new finder, so I'm not exactly sure what your gripe is there, but I guess adding a the brushed metal does add functionality for some people.

[Damien @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:05PM]

I use exposé daily, several times a day. Now that I have it, I sincerely do not know what I would do without it. I usually have at least a dozen windows open - that need to be open, and exposé comes in more than handy. Useless eye candy it is not.

[Hawkman @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:04PM]

@eh: Funny, I regarded 10.4 as a massive update, with Spotlight and Dashboard making a big impact on my daily use. Not to mention technologies like Core Image that made cool stuff possible, and the fact that Safari suddenly became a good browser and Mail a decent email client. But I guess it depends what you're looking for. (PS. I suspect you regard 10.1 & 10.2 as less significant because you now take the stuff they introduced for granted, like the rest of us... Quartz Extreme & Bonjour, anyone?)

[JosephMohmed @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:08PM]

rp, you don't think Exposé is useful? I find it extremely useful, I use it constantly and have it as my squeeze function. Exposé is one of the features I miss most when using Windows and find myself constantly trying to squeeze my mouse when trying to switch windows. I don't see how you think it is useless, though it isn't nearly as awesome if you have it set as a hotkey or a button in your dock.

[moe @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:38PM]

because the next upgrade is 11.0 like every other mac OS. this is a service pack, a very big service pack, but a service pack.

[Jeff Lewis @ Nov 2nd 2007 8:53PM]

@ Paloooz

Actually, you're comparing the full retail copy of Vista with what is essentially the upgrade version of MacOS X (not too many people own Macs that came with no installed OS...)

The upgrade of Vista Ultimate is $260.

The OEM version of Vista Ultimate (which is legal to buy - Microsoft has said this publically) is $200.

And considering there are very few features in Ultimate that the average non-business user really can use - you can get most of the same features in MacOS X (and some that aren't in it, like Media Center) by buying Vista Home Premium, which is just $150 for the upgrade and $120 for the OEM version.

That makes Vista for the average user actually *cheaper* than MacOS X.

Prices sourced from: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/campaigns/campaigntemplate.asp?CampaignID=37

[Chris @ Nov 2nd 2007 10:42PM]

10.4 brought Spotlight which is pretty huge. It's the beginning of true metadata support in the system. I don't see how anyone can consider any of the paid releases of OS X as service packs. XP SP2 was recognized as one of the largest Windows service packs ever and it brought 15 new features, most relating to security. Anyone calling Leopard, Tiger, Panther, etc. service packs simply has no freakin' idea what they are talking about.

Also, Expose is very useful to many people. I find myself instinctively trying to activate it daily on my Windows machine at work...and I have dual monitors there.

[Chris @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:30PM]

Stacks is completely, completely broken. Please, please, PLEASE give us back the option of having straightforward nested folders.

And yes, the 3D Dock is ugly, and I shouldn't have to go into the Terminal to make it not so.

Otherwise... I'm honestly pretty happy!

[johnny powers @ Nov 2nd 2007 10:14PM]

The 3D dock really sucks if, like me, prefer the dock on the side of your screen and not along the bottom (widescreen monitor gives me more horizontal space, why waste precious vertical room with the dock?!)

I find the stacks nice, however, I add my own _Downloads and _Docs folder within my download and docs folder, give them the downloads/documents icon, and then sort stack by name. It's the only way I can have the proper icons on the stack itself.

I do the same thing with my Applications folder (wayyyyyy better than a Start menu!!) but make it Grid out, instead of fan.

[Tom @ Nov 3rd 2007 6:36AM]

You obviously aren't even using leopard, because if you were you would know that the dock IS NOT 3d when it's placed on the side of the screen.

[bossfn @ Nov 3rd 2007 10:35AM]

It was in the beta versions (and it looked terrible)...maybe he hasn't upgraded to retail yet :)

[jimmyboy @ Nov 3rd 2007 10:40AM]

MAYBE that's why he thinks the 3D dock sucks, because it's NOT 3D on the side.

Everyone is so mean around here. Christ.

[Adam @ Nov 3rd 2007 11:15AM]

Yeah I hate the 3D dock too... but the 2D dock in Leopard is really slick looking.

[David Freese @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:31PM]

One bug I ran into with automator caused it to lock up when I would try to adjust the offset of a watermark on a pdf. And with automator you have variables, but you can't really use them effectively. You can't put them into names of files and other forms within workflows. Other than that I would like to see general application compatability.

[Rollins @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:30PM]

I would have made Stacks scrollable when there's too many items to display instead of forcing the user to open the folder in the Finder. I also wouldn't have had folders in the Dock take the icon of the first item in the folder; it just doesn't make sense.

[cashmonee @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:30PM]

Ok, guess I will actually make a suggestion instead of a fanboy comment.

Get rid of Stacks. It stinks. Bring back the ability to have a folder with a list of the files.

[resource @ Nov 2nd 2007 6:30PM]

Installable on Windows boxes!

I'd love to try Leopard but don't want an expensive MacBook.

[paloooz @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:01PM]

A Windows box could also be a Mac. ;)

[Xtopher Robin @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:32PM]

If you have an Intel processor, you can. Google OSx8686.

[Xtopher Robin @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:34PM]

Oops, make that OSx86. My bad!

[eh @ Nov 2nd 2007 7:34PM]

http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showforum=85

[John @ Nov 2nd 2007 9:00PM]

a windows box could also be a mac.... if you bought a mac. You can install windows on either, but then you need to hack around to get mac os on the other. The inability to install Mac OS on non-Apple hardware is my main problem with it.

[Nathan @ Nov 2nd 2007 9:43PM]

@Xtopher Robin

i thought for a second you said OSX 8086
i was having terrible flashbacks.

[JT_X @ Nov 2nd 2007 10:34PM]

Then get the cheap MacBook.

[Scooby Doo @ Nov 3rd 2007 10:59AM]

Then Apple would have to deal with all the different hardware drivers/issues. It's not going to happen. It's a closed system which is it's strength and it's weakness. Personally, I'd prefer to choose my own hardware.

[RedBull Runner @ Nov 3rd 2007 3:35AM]

Hey, Writing this from an Osx86 Leopard box with an AMD 64 3400+

Running beatifully. I honestly would only change one thing with leopard... make the stacks nestable, where if I open a stack, then click on a folder, it should open that folder in the current stack, not open it in finder.