Leopard the new Vista? No, but it's not manna, either

I've been a bit of a Mac freak since 2002 when I got my first PowerBook. I've since converted many friends, nearly all family, and half my company to the Mac. I can tally up at least $300,000 in Apple hardware and software that I've personally paid for or purchases that I've influenced. I love the Mac.

As for Apple's newest operating system, I like it, too. Kind of how I like cereal. It's there. I eat it. I don't think much about it.

This is, of course, really what an operating system should do: not play at being the center of attention and just let me run the applications that I want. In this, Leopard is great for me. Unlike others (like this Slashdot rant or Dave Rosenberg's own complaint), I've never had Leopard crash. Not once. The upgrade from Mac OS X version 10.4 (Tiger) was completely pain-free. Everything just works.

Maybe this is the problem.

Over the years I've come to expect operating system and application upgrades to be, well, upgrades. I pay for something new: new functionality, new user interfaces, new something. With Leopard, everything just works, same as it did before with Tiger. Time Machine is new, but I haven't gotten around to using it. Spaces? Not interesting to me. Expose in Panther? That was cool. New look to the Dock in Leopard? Snore....

So why did I upgrade? I mean, besides the fact that I'm clearly a mindless Apple zombie? I figured the new applications would take advantage of the power and functionality under the Leopard hood, and in this I assume I won't be disappointed. But for now, everything is the same.

Not quite, of course. Apple has released new software that actually has changed and visually improved. iLife '08, for one, is definitely worth the upgrade. I like some of the innovations in iPhoto and iMovie. But I didn't need Leopard to get the new iLife.

It may well be that we've tapped out the desktop metaphor and won't be seeing much reason to upgrade, whether on the Windows, Mac, or Linux client. Maybe all the innovation is now happening out in the Internet cloud. Maybe it's time to stop feverishly clicking on "Software Update" to get the latest patches and functionality updates to Leopard (or Vista, if that's your persuasion).

Perhaps it's time to just capitulate to the perpetual beta that is the Web. There's always something new happening there.

[scrollinondubs]

3 killer features in Leopard that make it worth the upgrade:
-Time Machine for backups
-screen sharing via iChat for remote tech support
-new spotlight renders quicksilver obsolete

notable mention:
-stacks downloads folder = convenient download mgmt
-safari 3 = snappier browser - replaces firefox as primary
-OS = more responsive & stable
-file thumbnails show preview of document - visual cues = more intuitive

sean

[dogStar1000]

"I can tally up at least $300,000 in Apple hardware and software that I've personally paid for or purchases that I've influenced."

Wow. I'm almost aroused.

[Matt Asay]

@dogStar1000 - I bought $80,000 worth of iPods for an open source conference a few years ago. Big hit, and a big part of that. So save your arousal. :-)

@ scrollinondubs - Good point on Spotlight. I should have called that one out. I hated in Tiger how I'd type the name of an app and then have to scroll down to it. I love how it automatically selects the one it thinks I mean. I use it all day long....

[john55440]

I think the era of "getting excited" over operating systems is over.

On the Windows side, WinXPSP2 "just works" too, so there is no compelling need to rush out and buy Vista.

[aaydogan]

Time machine=intrusive, space hungry
Safari 3=same cludgy crap, different name, doesn't work as universal browser--->worthless!!
OS=feature laden, overhyped

.....and I'm an Apple fanboy! Just imagine what those that have recently switched must be thinking. I like Steve Jobs flair for marketing, but how about a leadership in the QA department. Stop shipping crap. Ship less; ship better.

[andboo1]

First time I fully agree with someone talking about OS upgrades right now. I did upgrade to Vista and I think it rocks. I seem to be the minority, but it's been rock solid for me. I've heard both ways on the latest Mac OS and after reading this short piece had the same moment of clarity. Maybe we've come as far as we can in funcionality of the OS. Maybe other avenues are needed for innovation in the way we work on computers.

[bryanh605]

Ok I am a recent convert from PC. I Love Leopard, its soo much more streamlined then Windows.

I disagree that spaces is useless. Once you set certain programs to open in different spaces it reduce window clutter.

Time Machine is awesome. its mindless.

And how the whole operating system works together is awesome. Its soo tightly intergrated , and its soo much faster then windows.

[DrtyDogg]

Nice post, I do believe you are correct in that we have almost hit a ceiling in OS development.

[macsamillion]

It would seem that you really shouldn't be aware of your OS, it should just be[i] there[/i]. If you have to cope with it at any level, the OS designers didn't do their job.

If the "era of getting excited over an operating system is over," maybe with Leopard we are finally [i]there[/i].

[mreiher]

I think the concept of that we may have hit an innovation ceiling is right on. Computer OS's should be non-intrusive and just be there. Their purpose to provide a solid platform for applications to run and for computers to connect to different devices. That is all. I love some of the new features in OSX 10.5... some are really cool. But I think the next "BIG THING" in OS's needs to be less. Sort of the less is more. Take MS Office and in particular MS Word. It use to be a great word processor. Easy, simple and fast. Now, it still works, but it's such bloat ware. Tons of features I care less about and ones that actually slow me down. I think the OS's are doing the same - especially VISTA and to some extent OSX (at least OSX is fairly snappy on a lessor machine).

I hope Apple takes the lead and gives us more modularity in the future. Give me a great OS foundation that is small in size and not a memory hog and make all the bells and whistles add ons I can take or leave. Just make it fast, and stable and let me take it from there.

[sidster262]

Wow $300000-00. That's like 2 Powerbooks, a mac mini and a couple of iPods. :-P

[miker71]

Sure, Leopard's not for everyone. But the reasons I upgraded are:

* 64bit under the hood exploits my x64 silicon (and all my old 32bit and PPC stuff still works great - for now).

* Time Machine. I thought this was a gimmick. The interface is gimmicky but the fact I now have routine backups effortlessly is not a gimmick.

* The sum of lots of tiny incremental improvements that are too many to list

* After reading the John Siracusa review - which geek wouldn't see the value in upgrading?

I would't want to go back to Tiger.

Am I slightly disappointed at the "top secret features" Jobs hyped up? Yes. I don't even know what they were!

Am I a satisfied customer? You bet!

[Thrudheim]

I agree that Leopard is not revolutionary and that, for the most part, it just works and stays out of the way.

There are new features that I find very useful. QuckLook is way more useful than I expected. . . it's really nice to view email attachments without having to open an app. I like Spaces as well. I know that I will make use of the extremely simple remote desktop capabilities to troubleshoot problems for my dad. Still, it seems that most of the key changes are under the hood and will only become apparent as more apps take advantage of them.

Nevertheless, and this is the key, I find that I miss Leopard when I am at work, where my machine is still running Tiger. I periodically try to use some Leopard feature and then remember that it isn't there. It's been a good upgrade, in other words, despite being evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

[Proustian]

Sometimes Retrotech is the way to go, and it is less painful and less expensive.

I still have a G3 iMac with Mac OS 9 on it, works great.

I know people still using Mac OSX 10.3 and 10.4 and didn't upgrade to 10.5 Leopard.

I know Windows users still using Windows 98 on Pentium machines, the viruses designed for NT/2000/XP and above cannot infect the old Windows 9X systems, but then you cannot hook up an iPod or modern devices to it either. But Windows 2000 and XP run just great if you up the RAM to 256M or 512M on a 200Mhz system or higher and upgrade from Windows 98 to 2000 or XP. Last I checked Pricewatch.com had vendors selling Windows 2000 Pro for $60 and XP Home for $89 in the OEM versions.

I know people using FreeDOS and FreeGEM as the GUI, on older systems. Most of the GEM software was open sourced and released to the public.

[menotbug]

I agree with the idea of modularity - that would be great, to be able to disable whole fancy chunks of the Mac OS, and just use the stable core. Then you could run Leopard on a much older machine for limited purpose.
For example, you can build a G3 powermac for about $100 if you get the right parts used from eBay. I have one based off the "Gossamer" G3 motherboard in a standard PC case, with the A/V card and an old processor. It is a home entertainment machine, plugged into the TV and Stereo.
It doesn't take much to play divx movies and mp3s, so it would be great to run a slim OS that's more modern and stable, like 10.5, but without all the extra features my G3 would not need.
But then Leopard would still be great for modern systems, and you could disable any feature you didn't personally need for a performance boost. The way of the future is efficiency.

[bluemist9999]

Like mreiher's, I feel the OS should be a small, fast, stable piece of software that provides a solid foundation for using the computer. Ideally, it should be input and output device independent, so people who are blind or have other disabilities can use their computers fully, as well.

[rapier1]

For the most part the important changes are under the hood - much like in Vista (there are really substantial changes in there) and these changes are for the best. Little things like auto-tuning of the network buffers and finer grained threading are important - but you don't see it. Unfortunately, everyone has gone crazy about the latest eye candy and it turns out that, for the most part, it really is just candy and its leaves us a little disappointed. We wanted a revolutionary experience but all we got was boring evolution. It used to be that OS development was about how to make the applications work better with greater stability, control, and performance. Lately we've come to see the OS *as* the application and it leads us to expect different things.

[jezmondo]

I think Time Machine is amazing - but you do have to buy a drive to make use of it.

Quick Look is great (especially when using Time Machine to get an old version of a file)

Spotlight's UI is what it should have been from the start - again integration with Time Machine is fantastic.

Mac's new speaking voice is very good (Alex)

The UI is a little improved (the new Dock is very subjective... but the cleaned up window styles are welcome)

Spaces is nice to have, though I hear it's not so good with multiple monitors (I only have a single display - so this is only what I heard).

The Finder is much more snappy (though perhaps this is more a failing in Mac OS X until Leopard rather than something great about Leopard).

I like the new tabbed Terminal (though many users will never touch that).

The new Frameworks for developers are great - animation in applications will be a theme in "Designed for Leopard" software.

Stacks are very cool - but it would be nice to be able to get the old Tiger behaviour as an option.

Things feel faster - but that's been true of every new Mac OS X release (so that's pretty much a given).

As for Leopard "problems" - it broke MySQL for me, but given the fact that's hardly a user level product - I can forgive that. Otherwise it's been OK, though iTunes is crashing a bit and has a few annoying bugs (no show stoppers).

Overall I'm very pleased. I am amazed at iWork'08 it's fantastic, iLife'08? Meh, don't see what the fuss is all about, perhaps I'm missing something. From that iWeb is nice as an end user tool - does a what most (non-technical) people want. Integration in iLife and iWork and indeed Mac OS X itself is well thought out. As I say iLife'08 is a bit "ho-hum" after iWork'08.

[Zhifu]

About time we ask the developers what they think of the different OS. Meaning how long and how much it takes a developer to ship a similar program and their experience total experience between the OS's.

[gnutux]

What people tend to forget about is the under-the-hood things that comes into Leopard. Mainly for me is the full support for 64-bit support, so now all of our (Mac user's) applications can now run at full potential on the Mac hardware. Furthermore, I love the fact that they did away with the stupid metal brushes, it annoys me.

However, the biggest plus is that now MacOS X is the first Mach system to be UNIX certified due to its BSD implementation. Now you can run Linux applications on a Mac (with minor tweaks and compilation)