• Software

  • Small Review on Mac OS X Leopard

i have always been so eager to sit down and try out Apple's Operating System and really get the hang of it, and i was able to do so a couple of months ago when i got OS X86 10.4.11 working on my notebook, then OS X86 10.5.6 a couple of weeks ago.

therefore, having used Windows Vista for over 2 years and Windows 7 very recently, i have to say that Leopard is very well built, user interface-wise. all the applications, native or 3rd-party applications, match in the interface, which isn't the case in the Windows operating system. the absence of viruses and spyware (which i didn't really find irritating in Windows anyway) and the speed aren't that bad either. almost everything in Leopard is as good and sometimes better than Windows Vista or 7, except for the File Manager.
Windows Explorer is far more superior than Finder, especially in Windows 7. the different Icon Views, the detailed files information and the various sorting and grouping columns make of Windows Explorer one of the few fields where Microsoft has really excelled, compared with other operating systems.

though it is rumored that in Snow Leopard, the upcoming Apple Operating System, the Finder will be completely rewritten in the Apple's Cocoa API, so let's just hope they add more features to it.
Um... I'm sorry but how are you "reviewing" hacked versions of OS X? The OS was meant to run and work on Apple hardware, therefore testing hacked and cracked versions of it on other platforms seems quite inaccurate. I also tend to disagree about what you said concerning the file managers on both OS, its quite clear that the new Explorer was a blatant rip of Finder and Nautilus, doesn't work as well either.
If he enjoyed the experience of a hacked version of OS X, he'll undoubtfully enjoy the real OS on the real machine. He wasn't biased with his review. I believe its fair.

I tend not to compare operating systems, its really relative to the user.

Here's my layout of operating systems/platforms.

Legend: UF = User Friendliness, ST = Stability, SP = Speed, FF = Fun Factor

Windows :
UF : 10 (There's no doubt that windows's user friendliness is beyond good)
ST : 5 (Another undebatable factor)
SP : 5 (Regardless of hardware, you will always notice that speed is an issue)
FF : 8 (With all the customization you can do, fun factor gets a plus)

OS X :
UF : 8 (Unlike windows, it takes users some time to get used to, but its still very nice)
ST : 9 (Credit goes to it being built on bsd)
SP : 10 (Undebatable)
FF : 10 (Another undebatable point)

Linux (General) :
UF : 6 (Despite the effort and the available nice WMs, this still needs work)
ST : 10 (No doubt)
SP : 10 (No doubt)
FF : 5 (Although i stated it as a 5, this relative to the person using it)
I wouldnt put OSX stability higher then windows.
Also OSX in my opinion is more user friendly then windows.
EDIT: Scratch what i said below, i didn't notice the "In my opinion"

rolf wroteAlso OSX in my opinion is more user friendly then windows.
Hence what i said:
xterm wroteI tend not to compare operating systems, its really relative to the user.
Chris wroteUm... I'm sorry but how are you "reviewing" hacked versions of OS X? The OS was meant to run and work on Apple hardware, therefore testing hacked and cracked versions of it on other platforms seems quite inaccurate...
what i was mainly reviewing was the interface and layout, not the speed of the system nor the functionality. so basically, there isn't much difference between the UI of both the hacked and legitimate versions of OS X.
Chris wrote...I also tend to disagree about what you said concerning the file managers on both OS, its quite clear that the new Explorer was a blatant rip of Finder and Nautilus, doesn't work as well either.
everyone's ripping off the other; Windows ripped off tons of interface features from Apple and Apple's Safari ripped off Google's Chrome Browser etc.
in the end, it all comes down to the customer choosing what best suits him and his work, not who came up with the idea first and who stole it or whatever, for it's the functionality that mostly matters.

on a side note, i will be purchasing a MacBook Pro in a year or two, installing the hacked version was my way to try out the operating system and get used to it early.
22 days later
doesn't 5 for Windows stability seem a bit too high ? (Think of the BSOD ...):lol:
xterm wroteOS X :
UF : 8 (Unlike windows, it takes users some time to get used to, but its still very nice)
I disagree, I think OSX is more intuitive. The main reason people have the impression that it's less user-friendly than the Windows operating system is because they have been using it for so long that anything new might not seem as easy to grasp (up until they get used to it for, say, half the time they used MS Windows). For example, installing a software in Mac OSX is as easy as moving the *.app in the Applications folder and running it. Furthermore, built-in functions like QuickLook and CoverFlow enhance productivity.
rahmu wrotedoesn't 5 for Windows stability seem a bit too high ? (Think of the BSOD ...):lol:
It all comes down to the user. I used Windows XP for a year, with few stability issues. (Hint: use a limited account and some common sense).
I agree with Samer. I tend to think that Ubuntu or Mac OS X are way more user-friendly than Windows. It's the switch that's difficult, especially that Windows can give some really bad reflexes (regedit anyone ?).

And about it being stable, you're probably right, it comes down to the user, but I didn't know the limited account trick until I got to Linux (never used Windows since).
rahmu wrotedoesn't 5 for Windows stability seem a bit too high ? (Think of the BSOD ...):lol:
You should never get a bsod if you have good hardware and proper drivers.

About intuitivity, yeah OSX is more intuitive, windows is pretty annoying with all buttons, quick launch on the left, notification icons on the right.... and in vista it gets so much worst, with the redundant confirmation dialogs, and the navigation in the "network and sharing center" (center???) thingie is definitely counter intuitive.

Still, Im sure lots of windows users went though one of these moments where you spend 1/2 hour looking for some feature and cant find it, and finally give up :) ("oh well, i guess you cant shut down this machine..." :))Some people had this when windows 95 first came out. If you put a windows 3.1 user in front of a windows 95 machine where the taskbar is set to autohide, you can bet it will take them up to 1 hour to find the start button and use the machine, if they ever do.

I vaguely remember something like that happening to me on the old mac os (before osx, i thin its called os 9).

man im getting old :lol:

Anyway I think ubuntu is pretty intuitive too!... what is more intuitive then something like
" `head -1 locate chess|grep bin|grep games` "
:D

(no seriously ubuntu gui is simple and easy to use)