Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Allan

      Forum Rules   04/13/2018

      Hello folks! As some things are being fixed, we'll keep you updated. Per hour the Forum Rules don't have a dedicated "Tab", so here is the place that we have our Rules back. New Users Lounge > [READ] - InsanelyMac Forum Rules - The InsanelyMac Staff Team. 
kris33

Out in the wild, have anyone tested it?

16 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I guess all of you know that the WWDC Developers Preview has been leaked. Have anyone tried it and have you noticed any differences? What about speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

The Installer is simpler and quicker.

More settings in System Preferences require administrator authorization.

Programs start up slower due to 64-bit but run faster once they've started up.

We have Exchange support.

Xcode is just like the one in the iPhone SDK except for iPhone support.

Finder seems to be using ImageKit to display its icons.

The wallpaper chooser in System Preferences is much better.

It seems to be pretty stable.

 

~matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have it running on my MBP. Works fine but I've gotten some random program crashes which is a bit odd. I guess I'll try it on my PC soon, but I doubt it will work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone got it working with gaming or anything graphics related?

 

Not sure if SL would make that faster, just havn't heard anything about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone got it working with gaming or anything graphics related?

 

Not sure if SL would make that faster, just havn't heard anything about it.

 

 

I can confirm that it is much much faster... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not faster for me either (macbook pro 2.2Ghz, 4Gb memory)

Azureus won't run so I restored a backup.

I installed Snow Leopard by booting from the dvd. Maybe an upgrade wasnt a good idea?

Any way.. its nice to test it, but I wont use it until there is a final. If it really is faster I have no problem paying for it too. OS-X is not expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been testing on two aluminum iMacs. One is an upgrade the other a clean install. Both have noticeably faster responses in all programs I've tested. The internet browsing is phenomenal. I think we may be pleased to actually get an operating system that is tweaked for current hardware. I'm a fan so far....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thrilled with it until I found out that Aperture doesn't work, I guess I'll stick with Leopard for now. :(

 

I take that back, I had restored to Leopard with Time Machine, and then re-upgraded and Aperture is working now. I don't know if my first install went bad, or if the RAW compatibility update I installed after upgrading to 10.6 broke Aperture...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faster than Leopard here on my Macbook Air.So far everything works except java apps (due to the 64-bit JVM) and cider games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, no luck with a PC yet. The architecture is quite a bit different with the 64 bit switch.

 

Anyone noticed the size on the most recent build? Less than a gig!

 

Seems pretty stable, Haven't really noticed a huge difference on my macbook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Might be a silly question, but anyone get it to work on a PC? i would like to install it on an additional partition on my Dell D820
Netkas got it working. Unfortunately you're on your own if you want to run it on a PC, because it is still under NDA. There's lots of hope though, I'm sure someone can get it running with the new boot-132

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my quick review of Snow Leopard. (MacPro 3GHzx4 4G RAM)

 

Noticeably faster response in applications and load times. Very stable for a release this early.

 

But about the Exchange support... don't get carried away.

 

It isn't MAPI. It uses Exchange web services, and requires Exchange 2007. If you select Exchange 2003, it still uses IMAP. I don't have a 2007 server to test it on, and I won't anytime soon. There are some open source projects out there working on a reverse engineering of MAPI. I would strongly prefer the use of that interface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×