Early reviews of Leopard are in, are positive

Send to a friend Print

Help more people find out about this story

Del.icio.us
StumbleUpon

Danny Gorog25 October 2007, 6:24 AM

The early reviews are in, and basically, Leopard dumps all over Windows.


With Leopard hitting stores shelves tomorrow at 6pm the early reviews are in about the new 'cat on the block'. Already, three heavyweight IT journos have published their reviews of Leopard and all are positive. (We tried our best to get Apple Australia to give us a copy to review before it went on sale, but as always, Apple "the rock" PR didn't budge.)

Influential writer Walt Mossberg got the ball rolling in his column and accompanying video titled "Leopard: Faster, Easier Than Vista". He says that after upgrading his personal iMac to Leopard everything "just worked" and that Leopard puts Apple in front of Windows Vista (which he clearly doesn't like). He even devotes two paragraphs to testing the start-up time between a Leopard and Vista installation and concludes:

It took the Vista machine nearly two minutes to perform a cold start and be ready to run, including connecting to my wireless network. The Leopard laptop was up, running and connected to the network in 38 seconds. In a test of restarting the two laptops after they had been running an email program, a Web browser and a word processor, the Sony with Vista took three minutes and 29 seconds, while the Apple running Leopard took one minute and five seconds.


He liked many of the new features but says in conclusion that Leopard isn't a 'must have' upgrade but adds value to existing machines.

David Pogue from the New York Times also likes Leopard but shares similar criticisms with Walt, namely that the translucent menu bar is just too hard to see. (No doubt someone will have the translucency level hacked in a jiffy, though.) He particularly likes Spaces, Apple's implementation of virtual desktops and the Time Machine automated backup.

He, like Walt, also draws some nice comparisons to Vista and says "Microsoft had it a little easier with Vista, because everybody knew what Windows needed: better security. Maybe Mac OS X is harder to hack, or maybe the virus writers consider the Mac’s 8 percent market share too piddling to bother with. But in its six years, Mac OS X hasn’t experienced a single virus outbreak or spyware infestation."

Lastly Ed Baig from USA Today loves the upgrade and gives most of the new features a big thumbs up. He's in agreement with both Mossberg and Pogue and says 'Long before Leopard pounced onto the scene, I rated OS X superior to Windows for most consumers. With Leopard, Apple's operating system widens its lead aesthetically and technologically.'

So there you have it. Leopard is off to a pretty good start already, and with an estimated installed base of 21 million active machines, Leopard is going to be the biggest software release in Apple's history. While it's not going to overtake Vista for market share, it will certainly beat it for mind share and hopefully convince more consumers that personal computing doesn't need to be dull, tedious and a constant uphill battle.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

RobertC:

More senseless Vista bashing, more Mac fanboyism.

How predictable.

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

RHG:

I don't know anybody who is using Vista. You must be the only one out there!

Are you an IT guy? Because you would be the only IT guy using Vista to my knowledge. I know it must be frustrating to constantly have to restart or reboot and waiting 3-5 minutes every time.

Give it up because MAC's are running windows and you really don't need IT department to keep things going.

I think I'd find a new job......and a MAC!~

Go to YouTube and see "Bill Gates VS Steve Jobs" You need a laugh and let go of your Commodore 64.



29 February 2008, 8:48 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Todd:

The only IT guy using Vista? Heh, sure.. I've been using vista since Beta 2 and yeah sure it can take a little moment to start up, but like it is said in an earlier post, thats because of the use of BIOS. Im my organisation, over 80% of the people here are using Vista, did I mention we were an IT consultancy/repair/reseller/internet lounge? Whats wrong with Commodore 64s? Those things kick arse man, maybe you should learn to use one and appreciate it before slamming it.

On a side note, I dont re-start all that often, good ol hibernation does the trick and whats that a usable state in under 5 secs? I restart maybe once a week, or when ive installed any update and no problems, I think Vista is a decent OS, sure it has bugs and some issues, but my experience has been very good, and I use it every day fixing network issues and other problems without a problem. OSX may be a decent OS also, but cmon after all its still just a mac...... like doing up a mitsubishi magna..... may look decent but its just a magna ahahahaahhaahahaha

29 February 2008, 8:48 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

TonyZ:

Goose.

Vista:

- Closed (businesses want open standards having paid the the expensive M$ tax for too long)

- Buggy

- Driver support wanting

- Not as secure as Linux/Unix variants (including Mac)

- Irritating UAC

- And has nothing special that XP doesn't have

- And yes, still uses BIOS. No excuses for that, M$ could have made it have dual BIOS UEFI support

Everything else (i.e. Mac, Linux etc):

- Looking better every minute

29 February 2008, 8:48 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

SpeedyPClolz:

Compare Apples to Oranges: Influential writer Walt Mossberg compares startup times. The Apples use UEFI, Vista uses BIOS. Its a bit lax to not mention the fact that the sole reason Vista was slower to boot was because BIOS is old and slow. Vista itself is fine. Microsoft has stated that the only reason they didn't base Vista of UEFI is becuase hardware manufacturers have been slow to respond.
I know that most end users don't care about the REASONS behind performance, but APC's readers should.

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymuos:

Best for:
Consumers/home users: Leopard
Businesses and enterprises: Windows
Servers: Linux, Windows Server
Gamers: Windows
Designers and Eye-candy lovers: Leopard
Media pros (Audio-video): Leopard
Cost/Budget conscious users and geeks, Open source advocates, MS haters: Linux
Developers: Maybe all

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Slippery Jim DiGriz:

I agree.

Most of the OS wars are stupid when you can virtualise most of them and use the best OS for the job. I wrote a letter to APC on the subject a few weeks ago that I think will be in next months mag.

Just for the record, I think Leopard is worth it for Time Machine and Stacks alone.

29 February 2008, 8:48 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymuos:

Forgot to add: Home theater/Media Center PCs: Windows/Linux.

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

wired076:

Sounds great.

I would love to get the Mac OS running on my windows pc even if only virtually through a virtualisation software for testing purposes.

Does anyone know how to do this?

Sounds like Apple's os is going extremely well.

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

JH:

OSX86

29 February 2008, 8:48 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

techdribble:

When OSX can run easily on hardware other than Apples I may be interested until then I will stick to my Vista and Linux machines.

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

sygul:

Why compare with Vista ?
Is this an upgrade to Vista or OS X.
Will anybody be upgrading their Vista PC to
Leopard ?

If I were a Mac owner I'd like to know differences between current & new version not a totally different product.

(Wave pinky finger)

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymouspinky:

With the boot time comparison is the hardware the same or is it another case of macfanboy comparing his $4000 machien with some "el cheapo" bargain low cost rubbish pc?

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Eddie:

Of course it's going to run better since they know "exactly" what hardware it will running on. It's so much more difficult for a company like Microsoft to a design an Operating System that works and is compatible with such an open and complex market that is the PC market today. Half the problems on Windows machines are caused by other software anyway.

Plus I would never touch an Apple product due to how expensive they are, like Nike, you just pay for the brand. Also if I had to switch I would be spending forever trying to find alternative software since barely any of the software I use on Windows would have an OSX variant. Not to mention how many games I cannot play.

Lastly, if I wanted to modify my hardware or upgrade, oh wait.. I can't.

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

AXT:

Maybe ill consider installing this on my PC as soon as the patch version is released. (which is already running, but the hacker is waiting to release it after the Official release date.)

29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Apple Pie:

Mac's are never going to take over windows market share and become the leading OS out there. Simply because of the large market base windows has with companies and businesses. But for the home user mac is looking a better option every day with the simple things that most people want to do with there computers, pictures, video editing, website making, listening to music and just general eye candy are easier and simpler on a mac.

Macs tend to have less problems and crashes, which make them perfect for home users and little kids. The other great thing about them is they are stylish and easy to set up... no hunting for drivers that went missing for that printer. They are something you want to show off, not something you want to hide in the corner cause it hurts they eyes. (I dont know a single person that thinks the macbook pro is ugly when sitting it next to even sony viao's or other leading laptop manufacturers)


I wouldn't be surprised if in the next ten years we see macs leading the way in the home/personal computer area and windows based machines being primary in the workplace.

They are two different systems really and thats getting more obvious every day.



29 February 2008, 8:48 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply