Mac OS X 'Leopard'-related Discussion


Recommended Posts

So far I'm unimpressed by what I've seen of Leopard. They won't fix the Finder - I don't like the idea of Coverflow previews in the least. Most the 'new' features seem gimmicky. I'm not expecting a revolutionary new OS every 2 years but there are some flaws with OS X that they don't even seem to be addressing.

I'm therefore considering seriously not buying 10.5 and I'm really not even considering buying a new Mac. I'm probably going to install Linux on my iMac G5 and buying a Windows computer. It would genuinely be nice if there were more 'Windows' app makers making OS X apps but since that's not going to happen, I'm going back to Windows - though my Windows computer is not going to connect to the Internet! ;)

To a certain level I have to agree. Mac OS X Leopard isn't really that special. Sure it has some nice improvements and it has a fresh feel to it but there isn't much in there that will really change the way I work on my Mac. But then again, I don't think Windows Vista is that of a big deal compared to Windows XP either. It looks like both Apple and Microsoft have come to an impasse where they can't really fundamentally improve things without drastically change their operating systems and perhaps even the way we interact with computers.

Why you would want to install PPC Linux on your iMac instead of Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger is completely beyond me though.

I'm going back to Windows - though my Windows computer is not going to connect to the Internet! ;)

You're not happy with Tiger or impressed with Leopard, you have posted you'll probably install a Linux distro over your iMac and instead return to a Windows OS with no internet connection.

Am I missing something here? Is this supposed to be a good choice?

So far I'm unimpressed by what I've seen of Leopard. They won't fix the Finder - I don't like the idea of Coverflow previews in the least. Most the 'new' features seem gimmicky. I'm not expecting a revolutionary new OS every 2 years but there are some flaws with OS X that they don't even seem to be addressing.

I'm therefore considering seriously not buying 10.5 and I'm really not even considering buying a new Mac. I'm probably going to install Linux on my iMac G5 and buying a Windows computer. It would genuinely be nice if there were more 'Windows' app makers making OS X apps but since that's not going to happen, I'm going back to Windows - though my Windows computer is not going to connect to the Internet! ;)

"I'm going back to Windows." Did I read that right?

Looks like someone really wants to waste cpu cycles on antivirus software.

But I guess with enough lipstick, shiny surfaces and transparencies, even woefully lousy code can look attractive.

You're not happy with Tiger or impressed with Leopard, you have posted you'll probably install a Linux distro over your iMac and instead return to a Windows OS with no internet connection.

Am I missing something here? Is this supposed to be a good choice?

Windows + no Internet is to avoid all the spyware and crapware. I like to do work on my computer without worrying that someone is going to take it. Ditto for financial software. It can still be connected to a network on occasion to download software. I don't see that being a problem.

@.Neo

I see PPC Linux as something that 'just works'. IBM's done a lot to get its PPC chips working on Linux kernel so I don't see it as a downgrade. True its the same with OS X. But running on my hardware with a Radeon 9600 and 1 Gig RAM, frankly, I'm not impressed with OS X. Typing long documents in Word and Pages is hard because the screen draws in OS X are bloody slow in both programs. I know Word was under is not fully Coco but I'm not paying for the next one. I've tried some smaller alternative word processors some freeware others payware and not impressed with OS X. The new Intel Macs seems to work it fine .... but I'm not buying another Mac.

@LTD - there are some specific apps I need for work and for furthering my career. They are Windows only apps. Guess which platform I'm going to need. And my iMac G5 won't run Windows well. Hmmmm. Nevermind that for a few of these apps, the Mac version is generally several builds behind (yes app maker responsible for that). This effects the quality of the work and the # of bugs in the program.

I could keep writing to justify but I'm stopping. Seems whenever someone buys a Mac everyone says congrats. But when someone moves away from Mac everyone asks ... are you insane? I'm not. I just have a change in priority and know what I need to get my work done.

I see PPC Linux as something that 'just works'.

Interesting view.

From what I can tell you're nothing short of extremely demanding when it comes to Mac OS X, but you are completely willing to let that all go when it comes to Windows or Linux.

But hey if you have your reasons to switch to another system you should. That's what I did as well. :) Investing money in something you don't feel comfortable with is one of the worsts things one could do.

Edited by .Neo
Windows + no Internet is to avoid all the spyware and crapware. I like to do work on my computer without worrying that someone is going to take it. Ditto for financial software. It can still be connected to a network on occasion to download software. I don't see that being a problem.

@.Neo

I see PPC Linux as something that 'just works'. IBM's done a lot to get its PPC chips working on Linux kernel so I don't see it as a downgrade. True its the same with OS X. But running on my hardware with a Radeon 9600 and 1 Gig RAM, frankly, I'm not impressed with OS X. Typing long documents in Word and Pages is hard because the screen draws in OS X are bloody slow in both programs. I know Word was under is not fully Coco but I'm not paying for the next one. I've tried some smaller alternative word processors some freeware others payware and not impressed with OS X. The new Intel Macs seems to work it fine .... but I'm not buying another Mac.

@LTD - there are some specific apps I need for work and for furthering my career. They are Windows only apps. Guess which platform I'm going to need. And my iMac G5 won't run Windows well. Hmmmm. Nevermind that for a few of these apps, the Mac version is generally several builds behind (yes app maker responsible for that). This effects the quality of the work and the # of bugs in the program.

I could keep writing to justify but I'm stopping. Seems whenever someone buys a Mac everyone says congrats. But when someone moves away from Mac everyone asks ... are you insane? I'm not. I just have a change in priority and know what I need to get my work done.

OK, I get most of that - makes sense.

I use a Windows PC at work as well. In fact, the software we run is industry-related and Windows-specific (accounts recovery software called ACE), so obviously. And I do understand that some people need particular Windows apps at home as well. But for everything else, and there's *alot* of "else", why choose Windows? I use Windwos because I have to. I'm forced to do it at work. I come home to my Mac where, incidentally, I feel most productive in terms of getting the most out of a computer. I'd say buy an Intel-based mac and you'll have a system that has greater shelf life and usability than anything else out there. But you don't seem to be motivated to do so. You don't think it's worth the money in terms of what you'll use it for. I can understand that, I suppose.

You're a computer *user*, and not really a platform afficionado. You've got your reasons. In fact, it's kind of good that you don't mind switching from system to system. If you're equally comfortable in Windows as you are (were) in OS X, and perhaps in Linux, then more power to you. Fair enough.

Can someone with Leopard and InDesign tell me if Quick Look can preview INDD files please.

I just tried it for you, and no, currently Quick Look won't preview INDD files. Either Apple or Adobe will probably (and hopefully) release a CS3 Quick Look plugin once Leopard hits GM.

Viewing already supported files, especially documents be it from Word, Pages or simply .rtf, isn't exactly picture perfect either.

Edited by .Neo
To a certain level I have to agree. Mac OS X Leopard isn't really that special. Sure it has some nice improvements and it has a fresh feel to it but there isn't much in there that will really change the way I work on my Mac. But then again, I don't think Windows Vista is that of a big deal compared to Windows XP either. It looks like both Apple and Microsoft have come to an impasse where they can't really fundamentally improve things without drastically change their operating systems and perhaps even the way we interact with computers.

Why you would want to install PPC Linux on your iMac instead of Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger is completely beyond me though.

Both Leopard and Vista have included major improvements under the hood. In a way, having new user interfaces are sort of a "bonus." Vista, for example, uses a radically improved kernel based on Server 2003, but you'd never know this as it's not something you can see. The same thing with Leopard. The kernel has been improved a bit, as it's not true Unix, and it features improved networking, especially with other PCs.

I agree that there isnt anything major added to OS 10.5 but thats for the same reason that people dont see the major improvements in Vista.

99% of the work is under the hood

50% of the improvements are only noticeable on powerful machines.

Vista has a Major work under the hood, too boring to go into but OS 10.5 is more then likely the same.

Some things to need to be added, like having a built in uninstallation application. It's a real pain to have to download the Parallels Trail just to uninstall Parallels from my system.

but I really believe that OS X will make a sudden change for the better (like Vista RC1-RC2) we'll get a sudden improvement about two weeks before the launch, then after a few months Leopard will become more stable and powerful then tiger.

Well, I didn't really mean to make that style universal, but yeah, since Leopard has a constant UI, it would be obvious that other apps look the same... So I tried to wok a little bit on Safari, the result isn't all that ugly IMO, I really like it :

hey i quite like that! :D i think it looks MUCH better than the current brushed metal look :)

Both Leopard and Vista have included major improvements under the hood. In a way, having new user interfaces are sort of a "bonus." Vista, for example, uses a radically improved kernel based on Server 2003, but you'd never know this as it's not something you can see. The same thing with Leopard. The kernel has been improved a bit, as it's not true Unix, and it features improved networking, especially with other PCs.

Mac OS X Leopard on Intel is true UNIX. Apple got the official certificate for it.

Overall the amount of end-users features of Mac OS X Leopard are a bit disappointing. Doesn't matter how you twist it, regular people won't cough up ?129 (or in Windows Vista's case ?300+) because the OS received a bunch of under-the-hood changes.

there are lots of reasons that i cannot wait for this release. mostly, time machine, spaces, and a fully unified UI. i will be sure to snag this as soon as i can get my paws on it!!

Like always going back to the previous Mac OS X version, in this case 10.4 Tiger, is a bit of a pain. No doubt about that! :D

The UI looks very clean now compared to Tiger, starting to love the new Menu Bar as well:

picture1xg6.png

The more I see of Leopard the more I like it. I've tried an earlier build which was impressive but had the transparent menu bar. But these screenshots and others posted around of the current developers release just keep getting better.

Roll on October

is coverflow really that useful?

i dont use it in itunes (some of the songs i have dont have an album art, too local, too whatever, so no need) and yea im not sure wheather it really makes sense... even in pictures-folders i highly doubt it. i prefare the thumbnail-view...

what are your experiences?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Creative Sound Blaster AE-X PCIe review: your headphones will love it by Steven Parker If you have been reading Neowin for any length of time, you may remember that I reviewed the Sound Blaster Audigy FX Pro back in April. I found it to be an excellent budget sound card, even though it lacked support for formats such as DTS over the included SPDIF port. Anyway, Creative reached out to me again asking if I was interested in reviewing the Sound Blaster AE-X. It is a card mainly targeted at headphone wearers, which I'll get into a bit later. Before we get underway, here is a disclaimer: Creative Labs provided a free sample without any review pre-approval. Here are the full specs of it: Creative Sound Blaster AE-X Dimensions: 179 x 126 x 18 mm Weight: 263g / 9.28 oz Platform: PCI-e DAC: ESS ES9039Q2M Connectivity Options Side: Rear: 1 x HD Audio Front Panel Connector, 1 x ⅛“ Headphone port, 1 x RCA Line-out (Left) port, 1 x RCA Line-out (Right) port, 1 x Coaxial SPDIF-out port, 1 x ⅛“ Mic in/Line-in port, 1 x TOSLINK SPDIF-in port Surround: No DNR / SNR: THD+N: 0.0001% Dynamic Range 130 dB Recording Resolution: PCM up to 32-bit / 192kHz (Stereo) Direct Mode: Line Out (Stereo): PCM up to 32-bit  384 kHz Coaxial SPDIF Out: PCM up to 24-bit 192.0 kHz Headphone Amp: PCM up to 32-bit / 384kHz (Stereo) Native DSD: DSD64, DSD128, DSD256 Output Impedance: 1Ω, Supported Headphone Impedance: 8–600Ω, IEM: 0.5Vrms, Low: 1.5Vrms, Mid: 3Vrms, High: 6Vrms, Maximum output power: 350mW @ 32Ω (High), Maximum output voltage: 6Vrms (High) Front Panel Headphone Amp: PCM up to 32-bit / 192kHz (Stereo) Native DSD: DSD64, DSD128 Output Impedance: 10Ω, Supported Headphone Impedance: 32–300Ω, Maximum output power: 40mW @ 32Ω, Maximum output voltage: 1.9Vrms ASIO: ASIO 2.3 Total Harmonic Distortion: THD+N: 0.0006% Dynamic Range: 114 dB Scout Mode: Yes EMI shielding: No (but it passed all the FCC emission tests) Operating temperature: 0–45°C Input Power: 12V⎓0.5A Warranty: 1 Year (MSRP) Price: $179.99 / £169.99 The Sound Blaster AE-X was announced at the end of May, and it becomes clear that it is mainly for headphone wearers. I should also note that the card does not support DDL/DTS encoding technology, but it is said to support decoding through the coaxial SPDIF port. I was able to test this working with the classic Windows Sound properties, but I could not get a DTS (decode) signal through my Logitech Z906, it defaulted to 3D sound whenever I played DTS content through Plex or Emby. In addition, this card only supports two channels (stereo) over the speakers. The surround support is limited to the Headphone Amp, so before I get underway, what we have here is a card mostly intended for headphone use, especially with its SPDIF In (Toslink) port where you could connect another device like a console. So what about the highlights of this card? The AE-X is powered by the ESS SABRE DAC (ES9039Q2M), which is capable of a 130 dB dynamic range. In addition, it supports 32-bit/384 kHz playback for deeper detail and clarity. The headphone amplifier delivers up to 350 mW @ 32Ω, which admittedly far surpasses standard onboard audio, offering support for studio-grade headphones. DSD256 and ASIO 2.3 are also supported. What doesn't it have? No support for What-U-Hear, Super X-Fi, or the SmartComms Kit No EMI shielding, but it passed all the FCC emission tests (from the FAQ) I also want to make it clear that I am no audiophile. For me, it's purely subjective and it should just "work" out of the box. First impressions As I said in the introduction, I was a bit sad to see that the AE-X only supports stereo output, meaning it would not be on par with my ALC1220 over my speakers, as I mentioned it seems like this card is marketed toward headphone users. Since I am not an avid gamer that would rule me out as a potential customer, but I can still test its capabilities! The card arrived in a nice-looking box, as shown above. It's quite a bit larger than the Audify FX Pro that I reviewed back in April, and at first I thought the covering meant that it was EMI shielded, but it isn't as mentioned above in the highlights section. What's in the box: 1 x Sound Blaster AE-X PCIe card 1 x 3.5 mm CTIA TRRS to Dual TRS Headset Splitter Cable 1 x Quick Start Guide Aside from the Quick Start Guide, which someone at my age (I guess) needs a magnifying glass to read thanks to the tiny fonts, Creative Labs also has the manual online, which first requires you to prove that you're human in order to access it (so I can't direct link it). Anyway, the box is mostly made up of cardboard, and the only plastic in it is the anti-static bag for the card itself. Design Top Bottom The card itself looks pretty cool and actually wouldn't look out of place in an all-white build. There's only one connector, and for some reason it is awkwardly placed on the side (front-facing) that is for the front panel audio connector, which will let you use the headphones through the front PC audio jack. Since the front panel Headphone Amp has fewer capabilities than the rear headphone port, I decided not to use it. Rear of card PCI-e interface The rear of the card is completely open and is normally where you would find the front panel connector. The PCIe interface side is completely covered, which initially made me think it was EMI shielded. I/O panel Side (front-facing) with Front panel connector On the outer rear bracket side we have the TOSLINK SPDIF in, Coaxial SPDIF out, RCA line out (Right), RCA line out (Left), Headphone out, and Mic/Line in ports. On the front facing portion of the card itself is the F-panel connector. Usage Test System Our test system consists of the following: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D Gigabyte X870E AORUS MASTER (BIOS F12) Corsair RM1000x (2024) Thermal Grizzly Kyronaut (33x33x0,2mm) 2x 32GB Kingston Fury Beast RGB DDR5 6000MT/s CL36-38-38-80 T-Force Z540 2TB (PCIe Gen5) NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition (NVIDIA) Creative Sound Blaster AE-X Windows 11 25H2 Pro I installed the card into the Gigabyte X870E AORUS MASTER which includes the RealTek ALC1220 onboard audio. For our subjective listening tests, I used the Coaxial SPDIF port to my Logitech Z906 speakers. For headphone tests I used the OneOdio Studio Max 2 Wireless DJ Headphones that I reviewed last month. After installing the audio driver, I installed Creative Nexus, which is a relatively new app designed for the latest Sound Blaster cards. Then I discovered the AE-X needed both a driver update from 1.00.15.0001 to 1.01.09.000 and a firmware update from 1.00.06.0000 to 1.00.06.0002, then I was set to go. It should be noted that the card did not work without the driver (not Plug and Play). As you can see above, you can manage the firmware, driver, and inputs via Advanced Settings on the Device tab. By default Nexus enabled "Direct Mode". Upon clicking on Acoustic Engine, the Equalizer can be enabled and set to four different presets, which are: Gaming Music Movies Footsteps Enhancer There's also a dedicated Scout Mode for gamers. I mainly used Tidal and Spotify in the past week to listen to some of my Liked Songs (which now total over 700) in Shuffle mode; there were no pops or interference that I could hear. I also found a 5.1 Surround Music playlist on Tidal that sounded really great over Studio Max 2 headphones. When I reviewed the Audigy FX Pro, I went out and purchased a Logitech Z906 set second-hand for €100 specifically to use with the card, but in this instance all I could get on the AE-X was the 3D output of surround sound through Coaxial SPDIF and although it still sounded great, it isn't quite as good as DTS Interactive via my onboard Realtek ALC1220. Conclusion So what have I learned? The AE-X lacks multi-channel support for 5.1/7.1 setups and drops support for modern surround technologies like Dolby or DTS, functioning strictly as a stereo output device. So to really benefit, you will need Studio-grade headphones to "hear" the benefits of this card. With that being said, I can imagine it will appeal to gamers who are switching between console and PC. By utilizing the SPDIF in port, you could just plug your headphones into the AE-X (front or rear port) and then switch between PC and Console without having to move the headphones to a different port. As I said in the Sound Blaster Audigy review, the EQ in the Creative Nexus app offers safe presets, which allows a user to further tweak the lows, mids, and highs for a personal listening experience. Of course it all depends on the headphones you hook up to it. Speaking of headphones, I kind of wish I had higher-quality Studio-grade headphones to really test this card with; I'm not usually wearing headphones in my day to day duties. The only time I will wear them is if I want to listen to music very late at night and I don't want to disturb my neighbors, so my rating (verdict) is based on this fact. Someone with a PC/Console setup and wears headphone religiously to game, and consume media will benefit much more than I from the high-quality Headphone Amps that are included in the AE-X. Once again, I do feel like Creative could have gone the extra mile to support the S/PDIF port a bit more. Why include it if you're not supporting the main popular digital formats? It seems like the decision was more of a legacy-based one, offering uncompressed 2-channel PCM audio, for users with high-fidelity audio systems and external DACs. Maybe I will be lucky enough to review a card that truly includes all these features in the future. I am sure readers with far more knowledge on audio systems than me will correct me in the comments below. I'll just say I am happy to learn what I don't know! Where to buy The Sound Blaster AE-X is available to purchase now in preorder for $179.99 on the U.S. Creative website, or for £169.99 on the Creative UK website and will start shipping to customers from June 25.
    • $80 or 90%, anything else would be financial suicide one way or another.
    • Or... just use Bitwarden. Free, and has on-prem option as well. Works both on desktop and mobile, wherever you are. The age of local password files is over.
    • Thanks
    • I actually got to use one of those so called "backup codes" once. It was for a customer, I choose the backup code option, and by the grace of god, they actually hade them printed out. Imagine my surprise, when after using the backup code, Google then told use we had to enter a code they just sent to the gmail address we currently did not have access to. I was not amused, Google backup codes should be the end all get out of jail free card, because you had to have access to the account to even get them.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      164
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      88
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!