Snow Leopard Arrives on 28th August
Apple's new OS, Snow Leopard, will be released on the 28th of August, with pre-orders costing just £25.
For those wanting to upgrade it shouldn't break the bank either, as pre-orders have remained at a very wallet friendly £25. We find it hard not to draw parallels to Microsoft's upcoming Windows 7, which was on a short-term pre-order for £59, before increasing the price.
It's claimed a fresh install of Snow Leopard will actually take up 7GB less space than the current OS and that Apple has been concentrating on performance rather than new features.
A big update for business folk is the support for Microsoft Exchange Server that allows Snow Leopard's native mail, contacts and calender applications to better co-exist in the "standard" work environment.
There's also multi-touch trackpad support for upcoming Apple notebooks, full ZFS support, updated text processing to highlight grammatical and spelling errors and go-faster stripes.
Are you grabbing the latest Apple OS? Is it noticeably better? Let us know your thoughts in the forums.
Previous Article
46 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyInterested in OpenCL and speed increases for apps.
pfft, i think i'd rather wait a few months for 7 tbh
Windows = *growl*
So they're basically charging £25 for a speed-increasing service pack?
Its the equivalent of saying Windows 7 is a 'Bug fixed version of Vista' without elaborating.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/
for more details..
£25 is reasonable though (for once from Apple) for performance users.. Most people will not see that much difference. If I had a laptop though I would definitely buy it.
whereas win7 feels like Vista SP11 with an awesome task bar. (but a task bar that's similar to Mac's dock)
i will be installing OSX 10.5.7 in my netbook, and then wait for a while before considering snowleo. people say Microsoft bring out buggy software, Apple needed 6 releases of Leopard to get it right! (quoted from my mac fanboy friend, who complained about Leopard's crash on the first 2 releases)
Mind you, it gives me an excuse to give to MrsGOO that we really need a new intel based MacMini... :)
To make it even semi legal (questionable initself), you'd need to own a copy of 10.5 first. Snow is an update only, not a full install disk.
http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MAC_OS_X_SNGL
To get a full install, you'd need the Box Set
http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MC209Z/A
Which is £129, but for that you get Snow, iLife 09 & iWork 09 - which isn't a bad deal considering that iLife and iWork are both £69 each if bought singlely
Sure, the Apple fanboys will still be raving about Snow Leopard by then, but the rest of the world will have forgotten about it once Windows 7 hits the shelves.
I think Bauul's analogy of Snow Leopard as a paid-for service pack still stands, despite comparisons to Windows 7 vs Vista.
The average mac user was expected to use Mac OS X to be in any way up to date or competitive, whereas many windows users were quite content (and able) to stick with XP during the Vista era.
For those of us who skipped Vista (and arguably didn't get left behind for doing so) and who are now moving from XP to 7, it's a hell of a lot more than a service pack.
I don't think the same can be said for someone going from any previous version of Mac OS X to Snow Leopard.
Thats not to say Win 7 is not a big improvement over Vista, Ive been running both the Beta and RC versions, but theres not really enough there imo to justify Win 7 being called a brand new OS, more like a couple of service packs rolled into one.
The reality is Apple are always likely to be one step ahead of MS, who are hamstrung by needing to create an everyman OS, While Apples controlled sand box approach allows them to stay one step ahead of the game, leaving them as the innovators and MS as the followers. And before people start, Im not some Apple fan boy, I own both a PC and Mac and I certainly appreciate my PC for gaming and the freedom of choice it offers me, but in-terms of the OS, easy of use and reliability Id pick my Mac every time.
Really? SP2 for XP was a pretty big change, but mostly they're as incrimental as Apple OSX updates such as Snow Leapord. Something like the brand new Win7 task bar is far too large a change to be considered just a service pack.
I think we've been spoiled by the gigantic XP to Vista change. Remember Win 95 -> Win 98 -> Win 98 SE -> Win ME? Four different OSs. Microsoft sort of go in waves of Operating Systems: The early windows, then a big change to Win95/98/ME, then a big change to Win2000/XP, then a big change to Vista/Win7. So, I think it's unfair to say Win7 isn't worth being called a new OS.
Mmm. Not really no. Win7 is giving us a GUI that Apple gave Mac users ages ago ... PC users are catching up is all. Don't forget Snow leopard is giving all Mac users an upgrade to 64bit as standard. Don't forget it costs £25. Don't forget Vista.
OSX in its current form is 32bit everything. Apple are upgrading their Mac users to 64bit. Something MS would charge us minimum of £60 for.
Yes, because Vista was such an abomination of an operating system some of us had no choice if we wanted a stable operating system.
Love the way you word this bit. Visually you are right. But thats where it ends.
GG.
Way to get needlessly holier-than-thou, confrontational and defensive about your favourite OS there, champ - It really works well to dispel the idea that Mac users are snobs... Oh wait.
It kind of saps the drive to argue so I'll step out here, gladly lump you in with the rest of the evangelicals and go back to enjoying my choice of Windows 7, Linux or OSX without prejudice on my systems. ;)
I aint a Mac and I aint a PC, I'm a tech head. See, I call myself myself a tech-head because I am into everything. Anything new, everything fast, anything that is new tech I'll be looking at it, prodding it, poking it, mostly enjoying it.
So, you pidgeon hole me where ever sweetheart. I'll also retire now to enjoy all my Apple products, my PCs, my laptops, my OSX, my Win7 OS's, my XP, my Vista, my Linux distro, you name it I'm enjoying it for what it is. It's evolution, it's where we've been and where we're going, it's the future. And yeh I may be back to defend the OSX update because lets face it, its better coming from someone who is actually USING the tech than someone who just THINKS about the tech.
Let this PC versus Mac BS rest already. If you notice this is just another Apple thread gate crashed by the Mac haters. So EXCUSE ME for jumping in to defend Snow Leopard from unnecessary posts by people never likely to even see the update to give an educated statement but there you go.
but thats Apple/mac for you, they charge for everything even to make their products better they charge you to do it lol point in case the iPhone lol
Eh? :|
I understand what your saying, but Win 7 to me still feels more like a halfway house than a new OS, to the point where Vista could be its first beta. Also, as with Vista, some features do seem somewhat borrowed from a certain rival, but less well integrated, still firmly leaving MS in the position of follower rather than innovator.
Still, I'm not looking to start some fan boy BS, Im just saying (as someone who uses both a PC and Mac) I still prefer OSX to anything MS is offering and that includes Win 7.
Its now up to MS to prove me wrong, but I still feel SL (service pack or not) will keep Apple a step ahead in terms of having the more user friendly, efficient and reliable OS.
HourBeforeDawn,
The thing is, Apple are upfront about bleeding you dry; MS get their hooks into you first and then do it from the inside; point in case, the Xbox 360. lol
In other words, you've been given the shaft 20 times and now you like it.
Neither W7 nor OSX SL are worth their full price just for the upgrade. In the end, what counts is what you get from your apps, not what your taskbar does. Think absolute, not relative.
Very true, which is why I'd never use OSX. Windows's library of software (read Games) will always trump Apple's.
Sorry, sorry, couldn't help myself. I'm not here to get into an argument that's completely unwinnable as both OSs have plus and minus points. Apple does less, better, and Windows does more, worse. Which you prefer is down to you.
I have to inform you that you are wrong. I ran Vista for 3 years and it was more stable than XP for me. There was so much false information out there about Vista it's ridiculous.
Why are mac users so partisan anyway? It's the consumer that loses out because of blind loyalty to an artificial brand.
Actually I'm not wrong. I'm speaking of mine and my friends personal experiences. Why is it as soon as someone mentions Vista and problems in the same sentence they can't possibly be speaking of their own experiences and it must be all 'that hype' surrounding the OS that has influenced someones own opinions?!
Mac ... partisan ... blahblah. Sorry fell asleep. Yet another pro-PC boo-Mac poster. Live a little, expand your mind and knowlexdge instead of being blindly loyal to one tech.
A Mac is a PC isn't it? It's the same hardware anyway. You come across as very pro mac, as you basically went on saying how rubbish Microsoft is and how good Apple is, and saying how terrible Vista was. Where I and many many other people I know all ran it without a hiccup. It's only a tool to do a job at the end of the day, and the windows tool, especially vista, worked and was stable.
If anything, we have recently been moaning at how Windows 7 is less stable (in terms of BSODs, crashes, etc.) than Vista. In 3 years, the only crashes I ever had were when I was trying to boost my overclock (got up to about 3.18ghz ^^). In XP, crashes were a fact of life. I don't know how frequently OS X crashes as I seldom use it, but my point was you were saying Vista crashes like a bitch when it doesn't, not for me and not for anyone else I know who has used it.
Valid criticisms of Vista are that it uses too much memory (or rather, it allocates memory to prefetching even on systems with limited amounts of memory), or that UAC is a PITA, or that nvidia suck at making drivers for it.
But Vista is the same kernel as Windows server 2008, it is incredibly stable, unless you are messing about with it (hacking the OS, installing unsigned drivers, that kind of thing). All drivers (which cause majority of crashes in XP) must be digitally signed to ensure they don't crash (this isn't a problem with Mac, because they only use one set of hardware / drivers).
I have to agree with Zac:
Take a chill pill. I come on bit tech because it's the best tech journalism out there, not to engage in 'mac fanbois vs pc fanbois' arguments I would more commonly see on youtube comments.
Mmmk. Please quote me where I said MS was rubbish ... you can't because I didn't.
Please quote me where I say Apple is good ... you can't because I didn't.
Please quote the exact phrase where I say I am pro-Mac ... you can't because that is how you have twisted my posts to suit your own agenda. I'm pro-tech. You don't see me on MS threads bashing MS and you never will. You don't see me in Nvidia threads or ATI threads bashing them. But you will see me defend anything and any company that receives all this unecessary BS. If people aren't intrested in the tech then stay out the threads, it isn't hard is it?
1. I've been using the open beta of Win7 on my main desktop with 8gb ram, Q9450, 4870 X2. The only crash so far has been Firefox.
2. I've been using the open beta of Win7 on 2 of my laptops. No crashes.
3. My Vista crashed all the time, neither me nor my friends use Vista and went back to using XP ages ago.
You see how yours and my experiences differ? Now I'm not calling you a liar and don't expect to be called one back so how about we just agree that our experiences are different.
It wasn't incredibly stable in my experience. The net was alive with people slagging off Vista for a reason, I take it you were around to witness all the negativity surrounding the Vista release and subsequent months after release?
Strange you are still here doing exactly that. AND accusing me of being a Mac fanboi which I'm clearly not, I just can't stand the dicks on these forums getting unecessary with their useless anti-Apple posts. We agree the journalism may be good in here but maybe we disagree that the readers leave a lot to be desired.
most of vista BSOD (should of been called NvBSOD) was related to nvidia when playing games or at desktop dono why MS certified them, main problem with vista is how harsh it is on the hard disk most of my time wasting was installing printers or software taking longer then thay should be to install some times 20 mins for something that should take 5 or less, if you used vista under RAID 0 you unlikely notices it or SSD (as SSD loves lots of I/O), id say 99% of my crashs was related to the video card on vista
on windows 7 on my main pc i have only had BOSD relating to an USB Pen drive every time i plugged it in (dono what it was but does not do it now), but a lot of stuff is far smoother on windows 7 compared to vista thinks jsut happen (but that mite just be the Corsair S128 SSD i have now :) but the the responsive system is on my laptop as well that is running an norm laptop 120gb hdd)
i am posting this on opera on an 1.7ghz M P4 with 756mb of ram,W7 and the system is responsive (anti virus as well) boot up time is good , if i had vista running on this now i would of likely put XP on it long time ago
the Key on Vista and windows 7 are 32bit and 64bit dual key its the disk that determines if you have 32 or 64 not the key (apart from starter thats 32bit only) download an 64bit disk and use your 32bit key it will work
apple computers are as they are if you want to spend a lot of money and get something that looks nice you got them, apple OSX has been a lot more bolted lately so they need this OSX Update to bring the performance up an bit
i fix computers my self and work with all sorts of systems Vista is an slow arse OS to mess with when its on systems with no RAID or SSD in system very annoying waiting for the system to do all the disk trashing, superfetch service (Give NO I/O priority to other programs that Wants disk access when filling ram up) and trustedinstaller/system restore halting software/hardware installs for long times are the main problems with vista
and XP just works norm very stable (say Vista and 7 are more stable now due to drivers) and every thing just works as intended no fuss
security wise Vista and 7 set to high level (i have mine set 1 from the bottom as i find making the whole screen go dark is annoying) is good, XP is ok but lacks the UAC to stop admin Level up, apple is most likely the least secure OS (as been proven lots of times) but its to small user base to Bother making virus for it or malware for it (Most if not at most all (apart form SQL) of security risks on windows are User faults for installing it from an web site not faults with the OS it self for been insecure you can get upto 2-4 warnings on vista or 7, 2-3 on XP {depends on how the download is started or going to be started if it blocked the popup download first} on apple it 1 maybe depends if key thing is turned on or not), security ends when you run something your not sure about
this type of stuff is better left on other forums that like flames (does bit-tech/custom PC have an TS or vent server) as typing comments about apple OSX and M$ OS tends to turn into an flame war as its hard to type what i think for the most part
the update for OSX should be nice for the users who can install it or want it
as for vista crashes hmm
vista is fine. Disable all the crap. And it beats xp in every situation. Win 7 has alot of stability issues to go through before ill upgrade it( yes i do have it pre orderd) on rc, It had major issues with ATI drivers (4850 card on 2nd pc) ( just would not install a driver so you could not even boot it) Had to manuel enter safe mode to install a working driver. I like vista never really had that many issues with it. win vista just needs 4gb of ram to keep it happy ( win 7 is no dif) And a fast hard drive ( win 7 is no dif again) if you have both of these components it flys along.
I want to see fps comparisons of games on win vista vs win 7 and then we will all see if an upgrade is worth while. Till its done by this site i think most are happy to sit on the fence and wait.
You are both losers. Get over yourselves.
You are both holier-than-thou. It's a sickness. Don't you see it?
I can save you all if you accept my truth.
That's just pornographic.
It's called Mac OS X Snow Leopard.
He means in terms of the disc/sleeve design, as it was previously the big X.
I know a lot of people who didn't get their copies yesterday, or at least didn't when I was talking to them early afternoon. What time did you get yours RTT?
Yeh because that makes even more sense now you've explained it.
Got mine this morning.
Well seeing as they've never been so cash rich I guess they can afford to do whatever they like.
wuyanxu, how long have they been using the X design? Obviously if its only a couple of weeks then you could be right.
they've been using the X theme since day one of OS X.
Sorry, I thought you were making a point somewhere in your posts.
It's a press copy belonging to TR ;)
Now do I attempt to replace the drive, or tell MrsGOO that my laptop is broken and I need a new one? ;)
Both, and Ebay off the old one with the new drive in :)