Quicksilver has awesome features for the power user (a bit techy for the consumer Mac user), but I hope Quicksilver is coded better than it was when I used it a couple years ago.

It was running very slowly, so I asked them about it. Turns out my hard drive happened to have a lot more files than Quicksilver could handle. But LaunchBar and Spotlight could handle the number of files on my hard drive without slowing down! So Quicksilver said hello to my Trash Can. Maybe it's different now, but at the time, Quicksilver was Not Ready for Bundling with OS X.

Quicksilver is lightning fast on my MacBook. In my experience, it is ready for prime time. However, even though I am an avid user and supporter, I don't advocate it being bundled with the OS. For one, I agree that it can be a little counter-intuitive for the average user. More importantly though, with a few key modifications and some Apple GUI magic, Spotlight could usurp Quicksilver's primary functionality.

I just heard that there is no Classic environment whatsoever in Leopard.

Well, that's still a dealbreaker. I'll stick with Tiger at least until some mission-critical app requires Leopard as minimum OS.

Really? I ditched classic support back in 10.2 and haven't used it since.

I ditched classic as soon as Indesign was available for X... probably late 2001... haven't looked back since...

Why would you need a legacy OS anyway?!

Yup. I can't think of one feature that I would use on a daily basis.

Spaces, nope as I only ever have a few apps open at once
Time Machine, nope as I don't do much to my machine and I back up regularly

After that there is nothing that looks useful to me.

Odd really as each upgrade from 10.0 to 10.4 has been well worth it. But I just don't see the same in 10.5.

I still use SoundEdit 16 to record digital audio. I tried Audacity but it does weird and wonky things to my system sound (gives my computer amnesia and it forgets it's capable of creating sound in any application). Audacity has been banished. I like SoundEdit 16 better anyhow.

I still use Photoshop 3 for everyday graphic editing. Photoshop CS is like using a bazooka to shoot a fly, it annoys the starch out of me by creating a new freaking layer every time I ⌘-V something,

I still use MIDIGraphy to compose pieces or to quickly slap something auditory together (e.g., "Does anybody recognize this tune?"). No other MIDI editor has MIDIGraphy's interface. I hate bar staves.

I still support legacy FileMaker stuff from the dawn of time. FileMaker Pro 5, 4, 3, 2.1, 1.0 anybody?


Sure, I could get by without Classic. I could use SheepShaver for most of this and muddle along with some unfound untried and untested app for the others (I'm sure I'd eventually find something). But for what tradeoff?

a) Spaces. BFD. I'd use it if it would map to actual external monitors, i.e,. when my PowerBook has the flat-screen TFT on the right and and the old Sony CRT on the left as externals, it uses them; when they ain't there, Spaces mimics them, displaying content where I had left it when last I had the 3-screen setup going. But it doesn't do that, does it?

b) Time machine. I've got Retrospect. I don't need or want a backup app that saves copies going back through time. That takes oceans of HD space. I just need one, fully bootable, redundant copy of my everyday environment. One from which I can snag a file or folder if it gets deleted accidentally. One I can plug into a substitute computer and be in my everyday world while my main computer is in the shop, if it ever needs to be. I'd like Time Machine for my servers but I don't need it for my PowerBook.

c) More slick GUI features. Hey, I skin my OSX to look like OS 9, I hate Aqua.

d) No one is claiming it's gonna be faster on my PowerBook than Tiger, are they? No, I didn't think so.

Why Leopard is a good thing (OK, from one point of view):

http://db.tidbits.com/article/9251


I expect to see some of this stuff percolate into the iPhone/TouchPod Mobile OS X before the SDK is released in February.

I'm surprised no one mentioned WebClip. That's one of the things I'm definitely looking for. I can keep eyes on my sites from Dashboard, and it also gives a use for Dashboard too.

No one has been a more staunch critic of Macromedia and Adobe for shelving such a fine product. However, much of my SoundEdit needs have been answered with AmadeusPro. Only thing lacking is the selection coloring--something that NO other audio editor has.

Try Compositor... though I like the Bazooka--it really nails that fly!
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/20585

I like GarageBand, but you cannot export your MIDI. Consider trying out PlayerPro. But other than that, you are right, nothing much out there.
http://sourceforge.net/project/showf...roup_id=139931

However, if your current system is still working for you, why switch?

For a while some applications had no migrated to OS X, so you had users that wanted to run Classic mode so they could run their apps. Or, whomever was in charge of spending money didn't want to purchase all new software licenses, so I was stuck supporting it in Classic.

However, I never even liked the classic Mac OS at all. I hated OS 8 and OS 9 and thought they were extremely nonintuitive. OS X made me a Mac user, if it wasn't for OS X, I would just run Linux and Windows.

Another fine example of Classic being needed for everyday computing is Low End Mac. The site's founder, Dan Knight, still uses Claris Home Page to this day because he cannot find a viable alternative.

Mac Os-x 10.5
 

Hello Mac fans I have use the older Mac and have always love the Mac but took a while before I had my own Mac. I have use Unix, Linux, OS2, MS-DOS, PC-DOS, Win3.11 all the Windows, and Mac-OS 7.5, 8.5. So I do have a little knowledge of computers having built are rebuilt many PCm and I have rebuilt one Mac...Wow, I was suprice it worked! lol.

I am new to the Mac Just got 2 G4 867MHZ dual CPU and I am loving it. The Target disk mode rocks and the new Mac-OS-X I really like the "Time Machine". Great if delete a file by mistake. I would like to know if "Classic Mode" also works in the new Mac-OS-X 5 on an Intel cpu like it does on the G4 cpu.

I know the G5 is "cisc" and the G4 is "risc", so I was wondering if the G5 uses translation software to run G4 code?

Anyone can tell me what they think, but please be nice thanks. :)

I was busy most of the weekend with projects, but last night I got to look at the System forum. Holy mackerel! What a tremendous amount of threads relating to problems with Leopard, especially regarding installation.

I didn't get to os x until 10.4.2, when I purchased my G4 mini in January of 2006. Up until then I'd been using my G4 powermac which was running os 9.1. I imagine that there were a similar amount of problems when there was the transition to os x?

There always seem to be some problems apparently when upgrading to a new major release, for example Jaguar to Panther, or to Tiger, but to Leopard seems more along the lines of the transition from os 9 to os x?

there will always be problems with a new os, just thank god that there no where near as problems as vista had and still has

Just got our copies of Leopard and Leopard Server in the Mail today with our site license software subscription with Apple. I think I am going upgrade my laptop today. I won't upgrade any of the servers anytime soon, and I will not upgrade any user client machines anytime soon. But, I will update my laptop to test drive it. I am sure I am going to probably have some issues, but I guess I could always wipe and reload Tiger.

Well, to start with , I think that you are confusing G5 with Intel (a common mistake with those who have recently switched :)). Both G4 and G5 processors are RISC PowerPC processors that emerged from the AIM Alliance (Apple IBM Motorola). Then Apple switched to Intel, and now we are using Core and Xeon processors (and their various generational derivatives). The Intel processors are CISC in namesake, but have RISC cores.

The crux of the "translation" issue is not whether one processor is RISC and the other is CISC, but merely that the two families of processors have different instructions sets. The Intel Macs use Rosetta (Apple's "translation" engine) to run the older PowerPC instructions.