POLL: Will you be upgrading to Tiger?
 

It's a long way from Tiger (10.4) being released but I recently say a poll where 86% of the participants were running Panther (10.3). To me, this means that we (myself included) are all suckers for the 'latest' OS offering from Apple and upgrade whether it's truely necessary or not.

So, I was curious how many of us actually planned on upgrading to Tiger.

The scary thing is I'm looking into upgrading to Tiger Server the day it comes out. :D

I'm not so sure that it is a matter of us being sucker's 4 Apple's latest offering as it is developers.

I like to keep most of my software up-to-date. (As do most of us, here on the OSXhints forums, but it won't take long for "Requires OS 10.4 or later" to appear on most of the downloads for the best software.

That's why i'll be upgrading, as I already have dashboard (it's called Konfabulator) & I'm not too interested in any of the other bells & whistles (save maybe Automator).

"suckers" is tongue-in-cheek of course..

You are certainly right, there will be a time when software is "OS X 10.4 required".

I know a lot of people that were clamoring to upgrade to Panther while knowing absolutely nothing about it, and expect the same with Tiger. They wanted to upgrade simply because it was "bigger/better/faster" (which computer companies have a lot of us being guilty of).

You also have to remember, Panther came out a little over a year ago, and there's already the next best thing on the horizon. Spending another $129 isn't high on everybody's list.

I voted that "I will upgrade at some point" but the upgrade might come with a new computer since my PowerBook G4 (Titanium 667 MHz) will likely be on the low end of the scale, if it's on the scale at all, when it comes to Tiger requirements. :)

-- Rob

I just want Spotlight. Along with the proper version :D And I ride bikes....

I skipped Panther (still running 10.2.8).
But I would definitely like to upgrade to Tiger, ASAP. Wish it would arrive in January! A key feature that I’m excited about is the new search technology. If this works as well in real life as in Jobs’ demonstration, that alone is worth the price for me.

ArcticStones

If they've really fixed file sharing so you can share files or folders with the same ease and granularity that you could under System 7, I'll probably upgrade.

Aside from that, I haven't heard anything that makes it sound particularly appealing.

I will go out and get it right away. I don't mean the same day it comes out, but pretty quick. I am wanting server but since i don't want to pay for server and then pay for the upgrade i am just going to wait on that one.

Yes...
 

I think Spotlight and Automator are the only compelling additions for me. I think the Finder still needs some work and hope that Apple will improve the CM menu items for better file manipulation. Jaguar and Panther were such great improvements to the OS, I hope Tiger provides the same thrill.

Tiger Documentation
 

Apple is starting to post a little deeper documentation on Tiger features to its public developer site.

It's mildly technical, but pretty illuminating on how they're thinking.

Here's Working with Spotlight.

I have also voted "update at some point" as I am on the defensive side when it comes to upgrades.

But as a side note to the Admins: You can vote for more than one option. Is that intended or a bug?

It was intended.

Just curious – I see that one person has checked off "Already running it".

Could you please illuminate the rest of us?


;)

Developer's release of Tiger.

Yupp, I got that. But I really would like to hear his/her thoughts and observations. Despite the winking blue face, it was not meant ironically.

Since they'd be under a non-disclosure agreement, probably not very much.

1. I will upgrade one of my G4 hard drives immediately but will keep 10.3.5-10.3.x up-to-date on another hard drive for as long as it takes to make sure all my applications play nice with the Tiger. That gives me the best of two worlds, the challenge of being an early adopter with all the new features to learn and work with and the security blanket of a tame Panther on other hard drives.

2. I will be cautious about taking my old-world ROM 266-mhz Beige G3 (rev A) up from its present OS 10.3.5 to Tiger. The author of XPostFacto, which makes it possible for my old Beige to install/work with Panther is just readying the first post-beta release of XPF. The word is that XPF has allowed installation and operation of Tiger on a Beige but whether the public release of 10.4 will work as well as early developer versions is another question. After I feel confident about putting Tiger through its paces with all my applications on the G4, I'll install on one of my Beige's hard drives.

Respectfully, Norm

I like your #1, Norm, and will probably go that route. It isn't usually until around v. .4 or so that things really seem to gell.

As for the expense . . . tax write-off!

- Craig, what is it about 10.4 Server that you like so much?

Well, if you recall I replaced my NT Server with a Beige G3 running OS X Server 10.1 a couple of years back, and it's getting pretty long in the tooth now.

And, if you look at the feature set for Tiger Server it's a pretty impressive laundry list. Stuff like the improved VPN setup, the Software Update server, and the iChat/Jabber server, I can make use of for my business right away. And I'll probably finally migrate my email services from EIMS running on a 6100/66. :)

I'm thinking either a single proc G5 or a used dual G4 would make a fine machine to run this. And keep the Beige around as a DNS server.

As if panther wasn't already bad enough, Tiger will only eat up more of my beloved RAM.

I'm not planning on buying it, i'm planning on buying a new computer just after tiger's release, I know the first thing i'm gonna do is open the terminal and wipe dashboard from total existance!

Well, we all have to upgrade at some point.

Will be following Norm's technique too. Seemed to work well when I moved to Panther from Jaguar. My other technique worked well too - that's letting the really early adopters 'road-test' the latest thing with their data first ;)

Nope, I have no plans of upgrading since I'm using YellowDog Linux instead and will never go back after my Xperience with MacOS X

Wow, that is a nice server set, Craig. Still running 10.1.5 Server here as well, mostly serving web sites. No problems with it, but 10.4 has lots of new really appealing options. :)

That would be me. I am under a disclosure acty thingy, but (bearing in mind I'm running it on a 450mhz iMac Indigo) its faster than panther. And spotlight is soooo good. bad point, it crashes often, but people i know (other developers) say it runs ok. i do have one of the first developer releases though... plus the older computer with beta software isn't a very good idea :)

oh well, its on a 4G 40 GB iPod is my excuse. Actually it runs fine when I boot my mates G5 iMac off the iPod and use it.

Can't wait for the Full Version!

{Got a New Bike yesterday!! :D }

kind of contradicting...... if having a OS crash often is it running ok I'd say that the standard for Apple and their products has just dropped dramitcally :eek: ...thank god I switched to yellowdog linux

I think most of the issues can be handled by deleting the ~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.pebkac.plist preference file. :cool:

one thing during my adventure with MacOS X is that I realized they got rid of the ability to manage virtual memory :confused:...I think that if that feature still existed in MacOS X (if it does, where?) I'd be able to make it smaller and thus reduce if not solve the crashing problem me and my dad have experienced (my dad still experiences it :()

The new technology always looks better from a distance.

I am still on Jaguar because Panther disabled the graphics card for my 2nd monitor and a new graphics card on an old Mac is such an expensive and mediocre option. Also I was really apprehensive about what Panther just might do to my 5 very large external FW drives.

A lot of those "must have" technologies in each OS upgrade mostly turn out to be lame and irrelevant in practice. Still I do want the speed and better UI, if only Panther didn't halve my desktop acreage!!!

Also I wish it wasn't such a pain to upgrade, use multiple OSes and Users in OSX, then I could have the best of all worlds.

Needless to sat Tiger will have teeth, not just cute stripes.

My impression is that Tiger represents a radical forward development for the OS. And if it’s stable, which I have every reason to expect from Apple, I’ll embrace it and put it to use. I will, however, wait to read the reviews and hear the reports from the early adopters -- right here on MacOSXhints. :)

Whenever I talk to PC/Windows users and hear their ongoing troubles, I feel deep gratitude that I "switched" in 1994. Never looked back.

I think it has become something of a tragic standing joke that Microsoft, despite their huge army of programmers and the zillions in their bank account, is utterly unable to resolve security issues. No wonder more and more corporations -- and government agencies -- are desperately looking for alternatives! :eek:

And I, for one, am glad I’m running the alternative. I am very excited about what Apple will come up with in Tiger. And it’s really great to watch Apple’s current market success.
A well-deserved reward for a truly great, visionary company!!

Think different!
ArcticStones

Hexstar, get over it or get lost. Your constant whining about your "Xperience" does me (and i'm sure everyone else too) little interest.

You could always install Panther (and later Tiger) on one of your external hard drives and boot from that when desired. Couple that with arranging to have your Users folder on an external drive (see the macosxhints articles about this) and switching back and forth between OS versions would be just a matter of rebooting.

You should be aware that you probably are violating your NDA by making any statements about your experience with Tiger - even those few that you have given above.

I don't currently have any plans to upgrade. Panther is running quite well on my system, I don't see a real reason to mess with it.

I also felt the same about Jaguar. I went directly from Puma to Panther, skipping Jaguar entirely. I'm really happy about the upgrade, Panther runs on my system much better than Puma did.

Wow... A DEAD heat!

I will upgrade immediately
24 votes
38.71%

I will upgrade at some point
24 votes
38.71%

Or seen from a different angle: over 75 % are planning to upgrade, only about % 9 have no plans to upgrade (slightly fewer than those who like riding bikes :) ), and one single single user wishes to wait for the Lion King.

I’d say those are very positive and impressive numbers!

ArcticStones


PS In a world without walls or fences, who needs windows or gates?

Tiger Upgrade
 

A more apporiate response for me is: I'll upgrade to Tiger whenever I buy I new mac. My old iMac just would be able to handle it. :rolleyes:

-Fernando

Dashboard! Dashboard! Dashboard!

I do actually use separate drives for the OSX versions, but you end up with 2 User folders, 2 lots of mail, 2 lots of Web bookmarks, 2 lots of documents etc etc,... Each not accessable when you are you using the alternate OS.

On top of that try networking with a PC and getting access with both systems.

:confused:

Not to mention keeping all your applications and preferences in order and trying to remember where it all is and which version you did what work in.

My real answer?
 

None of the above.

I need speed and efficiency, not eye candy. This is a work machine, not a play machine. There are things about the "information density" efficiency of OS 9 that I still miss. I could organize and lay my hands on what I wanted when I wanted it far easier than any of the X versions I have tried yet. I think the Dock sux big lemons. Its cute ... bah humbug. Give me my pop up folders back.

I am efficiency obsessive to the point where I count mouse clicks to get done what I need to. One of the big reasons I used a Mac for years instead of a Windows machine even though I have most of a MS admin cert. How many steps does it take to do a given operation?

I used to use Go Mac and pop up folders. Open a common program? One click. I organize all the files that go into a job into one folder, that goes as a pop up at the bottom of the screen where old tired eyes can readily identify what it is and its always in the same place. One click .. its open ..second click ..I have the file I want open and the Finder folder has vanished. Two clicks and I am working on what I need to be and the computer is not bothering me.

The Dock? Sure ..I could put a job folder in the dock same way The little ****er squirms around and you cannot count on what was there before being in the same place the next time, the icons are bigger and take more screen real estate but harder to distinguish from each other ... One click its open .. two clicks I have the file open I want .. now what? I have to switch back to the Finder ... another click or keyboard stroke and then minimize or close the window ... then go back to what I wanted to do. Another three clicks. Not to mention the extra screen real estate that everything takes up. There is hardly room left for viewing the files in a Finder window on a 15" screen. I'm going to have to bump my second screen from a 15 to a 17 just to accomodate it.

These are the same problems I had with Windoze. An extra 2-3-4-5 clicks or keyboard strokes to get done any given thing ..add them up at the end of the day .. and how much interaction with the computer did you do that was utterly unnecessary, takes time, thought and distraction from your work?

Its cute. Bah hum bug. I just now made the switch from 9 to X .. 3 years after intro? That reason was among them.

If Tiger gives me more of that ..then I will upgrade sooner..if it doesnt .. then it will be later or never.

Gary

As a Macintosh professional, I take real offense at this. But you've just switched, so you're still getting used to everything being new. I can understand that. I think you'll change your tune about OS X in a few months.

Take offense if you want
 

I'm certainly not the only person who has made the same observations. There are a number of articles from long time Mac users about the loss of user interface efficiency out there, some of them pretty scathing.

http://www.asktog.com/columns/061PantherReview.html

Are there advantages to switching to X? Certainly ..or I wouldnt have done it. Expose' is great stuff. The interface wasn't one though. I'm also faced with a huge expense of replacing my CAD software, so the switch wasn't a trivial decision for me. Obviously the reasons why outweighed why not.

Gary

Loss of interface efficiency is all about perception.

I disagree
 

Its not perception, its time and work performed to accomplish an end result. Same holds true for any line of work. Method is a huge part of that.

I have worked in many and owned several cabinet shops. Take the same machines in the same square footage, change the shape of the space or the arrangement of the machines on the floor and you can cut time and steps and the work flows so you dont even think about the shop itself, or you can make your work day a nightmare of entanglements backtracking and tripping over yourself.

Just by arrangement.

Thats 26 years of in the trenches experience talking.

What you perceive is efficient or inefficient might differ from how I perceive it. Neither of us is right or wrong.

Personally, I find OS X a wonderful departure from the click and wait of OS 9 and pre-OS 9. Threaded processes makes me far more efficient at what I do and am able to do. Darwin is a huge improvement for stability and configurability and support.

4 years ago I made the switch to OS X as my primary OS. It was not easy and there were a lot of growing pains (especially) as I dragged all my users with me. Now when I have to deal with OS 9 or pre-OS 9 boxes, it makes me cringe. Because my perception has changed.

But this is all a tanget from what the original discussion was all about. Your vote was, "I have no plans on upgrading". Thanks for voting!

I will agree that as a
 

"computer operating system" this is far better in every way that can be thought of. Which is why I made the change, even though it will cost me huge amounts of time, trouble and money to make that change. The price of the CAD software is more than the computer and all the rest of the software put together.

Classic OS still has a denser, more efficient interface that enables you to lay your hands on what you want with fewer steps and clarity.

I edited my first post to include examples of what I mean.

Cheers ... speaking of work .. I have to get back to it

Gary

MS-DOS was both very efficient in terms of resources, and the software was often cheap too.

Perhaps we should have an 'Will you be upgrading to MS-DOS?' poll. :cool:

very cheeky
 

not applied to the issue at all and utterly ridiculous .. if the X interface was so good, why has it undergone such major changes with every release? It has nothing to do with under the hood what you cannot see function, it has to do with interaction of a person and a machine in a work space.

I agree with what is outlined here:

http://www.asktog.com/columns/044top10docksucks.html
(and the prior link) From someone directly involved with Mac OS interface design ..its all very cute, but not efficient.

In the Coat Room, one's sense of humor needn't be checked at the door. :rolleyes:

Gary, I like your quote. It reminds me of another that I once read on a restroom wall:

"Reality is for those who can’t handle drugs." ;)

chuckles
 

maybe why that why I gave up on drugs 25 years ago ..*rolls eyes*

I'm afraid my sense of humor on this subject is tempered by customers after prints and extra damn hunting around for what I need .. working with what this thing will do so I can lay my hands on what I want when I need it with the minimum of fuss and the impending prospect of 1.5-3 thousand dollar price tags of software.

What have you been imbibing, Gary? That’s one hell of a sentence structure. Reads like a Lawrence Ferlinghetti or Allen Ginsberg stream-of-consciousness poem... without the literary merits. :D

rotflmao
 

too many hours and never enough time

Hmm, we all have 168 hours a week.
Now let’s see, if we’re working 40-50 hours a week...

"All you have to decide is
what you're going to do with
the time you are given."

JRR Tolkien
(Gandalf, Lord of the Rings)

Somehow they always manage to include one feature that I really want in each new OS. If it comes out before a major gift giving holiday, I'll get it a whole lot sooner than otherwise.

I fully agree. I've been on OSX since it was a full release, but really just a public beta, however it has been a rocky road. Once I committed though it was hard to go back. I became trapped by long file names and file types that were unreadable in OS9.

We could start a thread just on things that suck in OSX.

Starting with:

Cmd shift N for new folders: Why the NEXT programmers foisted this one on us was beyond me it is directly opposite what happens internally in everything except iTunes.

Inconsistency in the GUI: This is a continuation of the above. The GUI in OSX is all over the place compared with OS9.

Lack of navigation shortcuts: In OS9 I could jump quickly and accurately to almost anywhere within Finder and dialog boxes using keyboard shortcuts.

Disorientation: The UI in Classic was so tight it was hard to get lost. Even after all these years in OSX I am constantly having to triple check where I am, whether files have really transferred, whether file types have taken etc.

The mishandling of fonts: This has been a killer for designers.

Slow downs: Even in Tiger it runs slower than with OS9 and I get all sorts of erratic painful waits for the system to catch up with me, sometimes for over a minute.

Networking glitches: I can't get the simple filesharing of OS9 to even remotely work the same in OSX and on top of that security upgrades knock off what worked before. I waste so much time on this. Even Windows looks simple by comparion.

Progressive incompatibilities: Ever since OSX knocked off effectively SCSI and my scanners it has gotten worse with every version. Something else goes each time to annoy me. That is why I dread the upgrades.

These are just a few items in a long long list. Not that I am anti OSX, after all I am using it day to day. I love the stability, superior multi-tasking and long file names, but foolishly thought we would get all this with all the benefits of OS9 as well. The NEXT programmers went out of their way to throw the baby out with the bath water. I think this was either professional arrogance or jealousy maybe both.

What does everyone else think?

I think it's time to start a new thread.

That's fine by me.

I think we have got past the point where devoted users could not bear any critiscm of OSX because it was taken as disloyalty to the "cause".

I generally agree with the principle that the UI should not take precedence over or preclude efficiency. However, every GUI does impact performance negatively; if you want the most speed, use the CLI. The question I guess is where to draw the line.

When people say Windows XP is ugly, I tell them I don't buy computers because they are pretty. However, I do find the OS X interface to be more productive and quicker for ME to use. I achieved that efficiency in a couple of days, after using Windows since version 2, and being a Windows/DOS support person for 20 years. You can make XP as pretty as you want, and you can make it look exactly like OS X, but you can't make it *behave* like OS X.

So what you're saying is that Windows XP is perfect, because it hasn't been updated in five years? When people ask me why OS X might be better for them than Windows, one thing I point out is that Apple has had four major releases while Windows remains stagnant with nary an improvement, although processors have about tripled in speed in that time. Processor speed is relevant because UI improvements need more performance, most of the time.

That's what has driven me toward OS X; the constant improvements and adjustment to user needs make for a better UI.

Good. Then do so.

You might as well review this too.

I'd say that OSX 10.0 came out as beta and they have been restoring features that were in Classic and fixing bugs. That is principally why we have had 3 paid upgrades. That and fiddling with the GUI, mostly for reasons other than efficiency, although I give a thumbs up to the side bar in Tiger (copied from Windows btw)

Edit - OK, this seems as good a point as any to re-open it; please try to keep it on topic. New threads may be started by pressing the 'New Thread' button.

Thank you.

Back on topic then, my PowerBook came with Jaguar and I haven't moved over to Panther, partly due to finances, partly because I think Jaguar sounds cooler than Panther, but mostly because I didn't really see the main advertised feature set as must have items. There are some small advancements that I would appreciate, but I think now that Tiger is on the horizon, I'll be waiting until then. Apart from anything else, I expect that security updates for Jaguar will stop when Tiger is released. And Tiger sounds cooler than Jaguar.

I've got 10.2 on an old iMac (400MHz/320MB/10GB) and 10.3 on my new PowerBook G4 17". The PowerBook is my primary computer while the iMac is mostly for goofing off and miscellaneous tasks.

I definitely like 10.3 better. I can't point to any major things, but I think Finder is much more usable if you spend a lot of time using it, particularly when it comes to networking. I'd have a hard time coming up with $130 worth of improvements, but I do like it better.

Let's assume that you will be using Panther for 1 year before upgrading to Tiger.
If you use your Mac for work and you save a minute a day by using Panther instead of Jaguar, it would pay for itself if your billing rate is $20/hr or more. Enhanced pleasure ("I do like it better") is a bonus.