My Quick Leopard Review

Apple’s new OS, Leopard, is here and I’ve finally gotten around to installing it on my MacBook. There’s some things I like, and some things I hate. I was originally going to write a detailed review, but there’s plenty of insanely detailed reviews on the IntarWebs. So, this will just be a quick list of how I feel about each feature.

Terminal – Terminal now supports tabs, anti-aliased text, and a bunch of different color schemes. Yea!

Finder – Some people may love the new changes, or hate the new changes. I like them; ESPECIALLY how easy it is to access networked drives and computers. You don’t have to worry about mounting the drive anymore; you just browse to it, enter the proper password, and you can navigate the drive’s contents in Finder.

Spaces – This is an elegant implementation of virtual desktops.

Safari 3 – Nothing revolutionary here, but it now has spell checking and the new “show webpage in widget” function which is pretty cool.

Stacks – Stacks is a mixed bag. The actual functionality of Stacks is pretty cool. I like the fan and grid view of each stack. (I actually prefer the grid view as it looks like a widget.) What I HATE is the icon stacking in the Dock. Basically, the icon for whatever you dragged into the Stack area of the Dock is a “stack” of all the icons in the folder. So for example, if you dragged the Application folder to the Stacks area of the Dock, the icon you see on top is the icon for the Address Book. (If you’re sorting the Application folder by name anyway.) They really should have added a Dock option to turn that off. In order to get around it, I created a folder called “0” (zero) in my Applications folder, and gave it the same icon as the Applications folder. So now in my Dock there’s a Stack with the Applications icon on top.

Time Machine – I haven’t bought a new external drive for Time Machine yet, so I haven’t used it. Everyone says it’s cool though. šŸ˜‰

OS X 10.5 Performance – Even with all the flash, 10.5 runs just as fast as 10.4 if not faster due to Spotlight using filesystem metadata more efficiently, and more importantly – kernel tweaks.

General Gripes – I don’t really dig the new Dock look, or the menu bar look. For some reason they made the menu bar transparent which I think is pointless, and the reflections in the Dock background is just a waste of computer resources. What’s interesting is that when the Dock is set to be on the left or right of the desktop, it’s appearance is totally different. It looks more like the old Dock. If you type the following command in Terminal, you can make the Dock look that way set to the bottom of the screen as well :

“defaults write com.apple.dock no-glass -boolean YES”
“killall Dock” (this will restart the Dock with the new settings.)

Well, that’s it. Mac OS X 10.5. Mostly good, some bad.

The PC is the Abusive Spouse of the Computer World

There’s a great article on salon.com explaining why, when looking at the big picture, Macs are actually cheaper than PCs. The writer, Farhad Manjoo talks about Mac resale value versus PC resale value, and how the up front additional cost of a Mac doesn’t mean that it’s more expensive to own.

What I wish he would go into is the additional cost of maintaining a PC as compared to a Mac. If you have a PC you need to purchase antivirus and spyware protection tools, and even if you use free tools you still have to spend time upgrading and keeping their detection profiles up to date. If you put any value on your personal time, a PC is tons more expensive than an Apple.

The Windows OS is notorious for crashing. Whenever I hear my friends complaining about their PC hanging, or needing a reboot or needing to be reinstalled I am thoroughly perplexed as to why they put up with it. My MacBook hasn’t hung/froze/kernel panicked in over a year. Keep in mind that I rarely ever turn the thing off, or reboot it. As a matter of fact, the ONLY time it gets restarted is when an OS update requires it. (This might happen once a quarter.) Why do people stay with PCs? They’re like the abused spouse that keeps returning to the house even though they know they’re going to get hit again. I just don’t get it.

Well, maybe I do in part. GAMES. The only acceptable excuse (in my opinion) for someone to continue to put up with all the weaknesses of the PC is because they want to play PC games. The game selection for Mac is somewhat limited because 1) Game developers/distributers don’t make as many games for Mac and 2) the majority of games out there use Microsoft’s DirectX, which obviously is not available for Mac. While I find this to be a somewhat valid excuse, it’s my opinion that being able to play games on a PC still doesn’t make it worth my while to enter the house of the abusive spouse again. To play games I’ll buy a game system; an Xbox, a Wii, a PS3, whatever. Playing games on the PC is a slippery slope. Once you make the decision to play games on your PC you’re not only deciding to stay with your abuser, but now you’re also paying him to beat you. In order to be a PC Gamer you have to be willing to shell out hundreds of dollars a year to keep your PC up-to-date in regard to hardware so that you can play the newest cool game. So you spent $600 six months ago (I’m being conservative here) to build yourself a new computer, and how have to spend another $400 to upgrade your RAM and video card for Doom 5. Wow PCs are expensive.

Here’s my final example as to why PCs are more expensive than Macs. OS Upgrades. When Apple releases a new version of it’s OS, (here’s a concept) it performs better than the last version! (See this article) When I end up spending $129 on Leopard (Apple’s newest OS) I know that it’ll run great on the Mac I have. I won’t need to upgrade anything. Many people have complained about Windows Vista because in addition to spending $270 on the operating system (the Ultimate version who’s features most closely match Mac OSX) you’ll probably need to upgrade your video card, and RAM. (Perhaps even your processor.) So, to continue with the battered spouse analogy, not only do you keep returning to your home where you’re regularly abused, and paying the abuser to do so, but you’re also buying him a new house hoping that will appease him.

Wake up people! You don’t have to put up the pains of PC! Come over to the Mac-side! We have cookies.

Broke Two Toes on Saturday

I’m an idiot. While goofing around on Saturday, I decided to do a comedic jump through the air in the living room to make Chrissy laugh, and when I did, I accidentally full-force kicked the ottoman. In doing so, I broke my 2 littlest toes on my left foot. They’re now a great swollen shade of purple. Awesome. You gotta love walking with a limp because you’re an idiot.

Time Warner Ads Some HD Channels – Kinda

A while ago, I posted about TNT HD, TNT’s high definition version of it’s cable channel. In that post I complained about how most of the programming on the channel wasn’t in HD, or even in letterbox format; they just stretched the 4:3 standard definition progamming to fit a 16:9 HD set. Well, now there are 2 more channels that have been added to the Time Warner HD tier that are doing the exact same thing. A&E HD and TBS HD.

If this is the future of “HD” programming, what’s the point? We’ve got Dish Network, Direct TV, and Time Warner all bragging about increasing their HD channel selections, but if the programming isn’t there, what’s the point of having a HD channel? Granted, filming shows in HD is a relatively new thing, but they could at least get a hold of the widescreen versions of movies and shows that were filmed in the 16:9 aspect ratio. Don’t just stretch the 4:3 program, broadcasters! Spend a few extra dollars and get the letterbox version to show on your HD channels. Sheesh.

Why True Sci-Fi Movies are Rare

I had intended to write about how good sci-fi movies are hard to come by but instead I found an excerpt from an Isaac Asimov essay that I think says it best…

Ć¢ā‚¬Å“ […] Eye-sci-fi has an audience that is fundamentally different from that of science fiction. In order for eye-sci-fi to be profitable it must be seen by tens of millions of people; in order for science fiction to be profitable it need be read by only tens of thousands of people. This means that some ninety percent (perhaps as much as ninety-nine percent) of the people who go to see eye-sci-fi are likely never to have read science fiction.

The purveyors of eye-sci-fi cannot assume that their audience knows anything about science, has any experience with the scientific imagination, or even has any interest in science fiction.

But, in that case, why should the purveyors of eye-sci-fi expect anyone to see the pictures? Because they intend to supply something that has no essential connection with science fiction, but that tens of millions of people are willing to pay money to see. What is that? Why, scenes of destruction.

You can have spaceships destroying spaceships, monsters destroying cities, comets destroying the Earth. These are called ‘special effects’ and it is what people go for. A piece of eye-sci-fi without destruction is, I think, almost unheard of. If such a thing were made, no one would go to see it; or, if it were so good that it would indeed pull a small audience, it would not be thought of as science fiction of any kind.”

Another Guitar Video – “Clapton Shreds”

This is another video where the audio has been replaced. Again, I find it hillarious. Unlike the others, the drums, keyboard, and saxaphone have been replaced along with the guitar.