Mac OS X Snow Leopard Discussion

[giga Veteran]

It's confirmed for Server, but we're not sure about the Client version.

[sanctified Veteran]

As did I. Tiger wasn't unified at all

That is why UNO existed in fact.

[Lasker]

Some screenshots:

[kaiwai]

+1

And nice one giga on all that ZFS info, still, it wont be included in Snow Leopard from the get go right? Only Server?

Seams a little frustrating but then again I guess i'd rather stick with the tried and tested HFS+ and let the 'real' nerds try out ZFS first :D

I love the idea of Checksumming, but dislike the idea of the automatic RAIDing system, I love my little volumes.

What'd be really nice is if we got ZFS support in Snow Leopard, Windows Seven, and Ubuntu 9.

It'd have the compatibility of FAT32 and still kick everything else's ass :D

The person who wrote the article doesn't have a clue; there is storage pools and then its up to you whether, when you add a drive, whether you create another storage pool or whether add that storage to an existing one. Nothing is 'forced' or 'automated' on you.

I'm using ZFS right now on two of my machines (laptop and desktop) along with my external hard disk (750GB Seagate Freeagent). Its worth it imho - it really shines on 64bit machines.

As for ZFS and Mac OS X; they probably don't mention it because it isn't of much interest to the average end user - I am sure it is there, however. Remember, this ia preview, things will and can change.

[Cara Veteran]

Remember, this ia preview, things will and can change.

This is the best statement in the entire thread thus far. ;)

[sanctified Veteran]

This is the best statement in the entire thread thus far. ;)

How much better it will run on current systems? Any estimates? Leopard its already fast enough (some hiccups here and there) so I cant imagine how fast snow leopard could be.

[giga Veteran]

How much better it will run on current systems? Any estimates? Leopard its already fast enough (some hiccups here and there) so I cant imagine how fast snow leopard could be.

ZFS alone should increase I/O performance considerably for intense workloads. A server benchmark: http://www.sun.com/software/whitepapers/so...10/zfs_msft.pdf

No more "long" Time Machine backups if they start using snapshot copies as well.

And from what I've heard, the developer preview of 10.6 is pretty stable as it is.

[sanctified Veteran]

And from what I've heard, the developer preview of 10.6 is pretty stable as it is.

I have heard quite the contrary: That the preview its damn fast but it crashes like James Ballard (Ok, I think no one will get this :p )

[giga Veteran]

I have heard quite the contrary: That the preview its damn fast but it crashes like James Ballard (Ok, I think no one will get this :p )

Really? Interesting--quite possibly depends on the software they're running.

[sanctified Veteran]

Really? Interesting--quite possibly depends on the software they're running.

Also as far as I know ZFS its not gonna be in the consumer edition :o

[Cara Veteran]

Also as far as I know ZFS its not gonna be in the consumer edition :o

I would hope that it would make 10.6 as there has has been a Read/Write Preview available for 10.5 for months now. It wouldn't make sense to exclude the feature from the non-Server release.

[giga Veteran]

Also as far as I know ZFS its not gonna be in the consumer edition :o

All we've got is a preview. Surely we don't need to quote kawai again?

[Cara Veteran]

All we've got is a preview. Surely we don't need to quote kawai again?

Soon that will be chanted like the famed "Developers Developers Developers" mantra...

Remember, this ia preview, things will and can change. Remember, this ia preview, things will and can change. Remember, this ia preview, things will and can change.

;)

[sanctified Veteran]

All we've got is a preview. Surely we don't need to quote kawai again?

We dont need indeed :p (You sounded like one of my elementary school teachers, but replace "quote" with "use" and "kawai" with "a paddling"?

I am damn excited about Snow Leopard. I am addicted to any way necessary to make my hardware last longer and be more responsive and it seems Snow Leopard's goal its exactly that.

[kaiwai]

ZFS alone should increase I/O performance considerably for intense workloads. A server benchmark: http://www.sun.com/software/whitepapers/so...10/zfs_msft.pdf

No more "long" Time Machine backups if they start using snapshot copies as well.

And from what I've heard, the developer preview of 10.6 is pretty stable as it is.

Meh, it'll run like crap on the first generation of Intel Core laptops; anything Core 2 (or better) will work very nicely with ZFS; the slow down is due to the 256bit checksum. Personally, I think it is a very small price to pay for having data security. I can assure you that when I was using my external hard disk with a buggy firewire card - the fact that I could find out whether or not my stuff was being written correctly allowed me to move to the USB 2.0 connector - no errors since. Stats can be found via zpool status:

# zpool status

pool: rpool

state: ONLINE

scrub: none requested

config:

NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM

rpool ONLINE 0 0 0

c1t0d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0

errors: No known data errors

#

As for the preview, as mentioned, it is a preview, things change in previews; need people be reminded of the changes made during the 10.4 development? the 10.5 development? if zfs development goes well; it'll be an option for boot and client, if there are delays, the feature set my shrink.

[CPressland]

I really do believe that Snow Leopard is a good example of a product that should continue to provide a full experience regardless of delays, weather they be 1 month or 12 months. I'm willing to wait for:

"The Fastest and Most Advanced Operating System"

As for that document on ZFS, 17.5 seconds for filesystem creation over 4 hours for the win :D

[LTD]

There's been a bit of hating on Snow Leopard, even though no one has an RTM copy yet!

And seriously . . . it's OS X. It's always been good and has gotten better with time. I don't see any cause for concern. I'll gladly pay for an improved experience, if there is such a thing.

If you still aren't satisfied, look at the alternatives . . . :no:

Nothing wrong with the alternatives in their own right and taken on their own. They work. But at least in my case, I chose OS X for clear and concrete reasons. No way I'd ever boot anything else on a regular basis.

[Lasker]

"The Fastest and Most Advanced Operating System"

I agree totally with that, I used all kind of Linux distro, Windows 98, Windows 2000, XP and Vista. After I switched to Mac, I am just impressed of the performance and the stability. There are not OS out there that can beat OS X, it is the most advanced OS in the whole planet.

[REM2000]

I like the sound of snow leopard, devoting all effort on streamlining the OS and tightening it up is a good move. As others have pointed out apple is a forward thinking company, your apps will not suddenly stop working, there are still people out there using Mac OS9 and Photoshop 7, for the vast majority of people a lot of the new features brought into new version of Photoshop are not needed (photoshop was used as an example of one application)

I have a powerbook 1.67GHZ and if it's not supported by Snow Leopard then im fine with it. It's coming up to three years old, it will continue to run a cutting edge OS for longer still (Leopard).

As for ZFS vs NTFS vs HFS+. Really ZFS would be a great boon for Mac OSX, as sometimes it can be a little flakey and suddenly lose all data etc.. However thats not putting down NTFS. ZFS is the most technically advanced FS on the planet but that doesn't make NTFS a steamling load of crap. Yes it has been around for a while, but like unix it has been evolved. Vista is not using the same version of NTFS used in NT 4.0. NTFS is very fast and also very reliable, it can handle quite a lot of corruption and still continue. In fact i can't remember a server or workstation loosing data on an NTFS drive, something i have seen many times in FAT/FAT32 and something ive seen a couple of times in HFS+. The thing that worry's me most about ZFS is it's resource requirements both memory and processing cycles.

And also a previous post asked about Windows x64 and x86, there were not merged, there is still a seperate version of vista x86 and vista x64, there is also seperate versions of the server editions to.

I believed microsoft should have pushed 64bit a little harder, i think it's a little short sighted not to. Ok computers at the moment will tick along nicely with 2GB of RAM, but it seems that only a few years ago 512MB was a good space. 4GB 8GB will soon become the norm. Also pushing the 64bit envelop a bit would have also pushed a few vendors to hurry up. It's very strange that even though Microsoft is a large company it's right hand doesn't know what it's left hand is doing. The server division is pushing 64bit quite hard, with no backdown on some quite important products. For example Exchange 2007 is 64bit only (a 32bit test version is available but it's not for production use) Even with a bit of whiplash they kept to their guns and released it. Companies have upgraded their hardware and software and dealt with it, the same could have been done in the consumer space.

P.S. Also im a big fan of Microsoft Exchange i think it's an excellent product, 2007 is a little rough around the edges but it's an amazing piece of groupware software. The one thing i completely agree with is that Microsoft was very anticompetitive to not open up the MAPI connections that outlook has access to.

[Quillz]

I agree totally with that, I used all kind of Linux distro, Windows 98, Windows 2000, XP and Vista. After I switched to Mac, I am just impressed of the performance and the stability. There are not OS out there that can beat OS X, it is the most advanced OS in the whole planet.

Solaris 10

[giga Veteran]

Solaris 10

Different OS meant for different purposes. (at least OS X Client)

[PyX]

I don't see why people seem to bash Snow Leopard. I think the whole issue is with the price, nothing else can be bad about this OS.

They really needed to work on the speed and maintenance of this OS, as well as they do need this kind of release with Windows. I'm almost glad we get no feature for the high-end user, it really became a developper thing these days with all the cores we're adding without knowing much how to code for them. If it can make my Mac feels healthier, I don't see how bad this release can be.

[Cara Veteran]

Solaris 10

Solaris...not much can be said about Solaris except that it's a pain in the ass yet best in class. ;)

[giga Veteran]

This is not going to turn into an OS war thread.

[CPressland]

This is not going to turn into an OS war thread.

I agree, this is specifically about OS X Snow Leopard, so everyone stop comparing to windows, they're different to the point of irrelevance