Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OS X Yosemite

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 307 posts

Re: OS X Yosemite

#201

Post by [deleted] »

danford wrote: post #191
demallien wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, linux geeks can school Apple on systems engineering when they can deliver laptops with a better battery life than Macs get. As for this latest release, what, adding a new systems programming language and a whole new graphics API isn't enough? At least my Mac recognizes and uses a second monitor when I plug it in, unlike the bloody Fedora 19 box that I use at work. And don't get me started on that second graphics…

> deliver laptops with a better battery life than Macs get Well Linux gets better battery life on my laptop than OS X. (11 hours with ubuntu gnome 14.04). > my Mac recognizes and uses a second monitor when I plug it in Not mine. And this is a common problem: http://www.imore.com/os-x-mavericks-problems-drive-me-nuts-h... Also, I had issues with sound going out and not returning until after a reboot on OS X. This drov…

[deleted]

Re: OS X Yosemite

#202

Post by OWaz »

currysausage wrote: post #30

Am I the only one here who hates to see Lucida Grande be replaced with Neue Helvetica Aslightaspossible? Eager to see how it looks on non-retina displays.

I'm with you. Helvetica Neue in the screenshots looks like placeholder text, waiting for some better typeface to be applied.

Re: OS X Yosemite

#203

Post by sanderjd »

AaronFriel wrote: post #147

I am deeply disappointed by the "development" of OS X. It seems that Apple has long ago gutted their x86 OS group due to dwindling profits and lack of real competition. There are a handful of reasons people buy a Mac, and I would largely put them into three groups: * Students looking for a stable and/or sexy device for their university. * Artists using applications that don't exist on other platforms (or that priorit…

I would add a fourth bullet point, which is "casual computer users who are willing to pay a bit extra for a no-hassle PC with good build quality, and don't much care what OS they're using".

> Sadly, these groups are small groups with eclectic needs that won't be met or improved by real systems engineering with the kernel and core modules. What do I mean by real systems engineering?

My fourth group isn't small (though perhaps shrinking due to the popularity of tablets), but also has no need for "real systems engineering". My question is this: who does need that stuff? Isn't it really just administrators of high performance servers?

Don't get me wrong, I plan to have a lot of fun and learn a lot from reading up on all the things you mentioned that I either haven't heard of or know of only as buzzwords, but I just don't see how any of it is relevant to most peoples' interaction with computers. Selling "we changed some superficial design elements in the window manager" really does make more sense.

Re: OS X Yosemite

#204

Post by alexqgb »

Angostura wrote: post #154
AaronFriel wrote: post #147

I am deeply disappointed by the "development" of OS X. It seems that Apple has long ago gutted their x86 OS group due to dwindling profits and lack of real competition. There are a handful of reasons people buy a Mac, and I would largely put them into three groups: * Students looking for a stable and/or sexy device for their university. * Artists using applications that don't exist on other platforms (or that priorit…

Mavericks introduced a lot of tangible under the hood improvements that perhaps you missed, Ars did a thorough review, perhaps start with how the OS was changed to improve energy consumption: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/12/#energy-sa...

My 2010 MBP, which is obviously getting long in the tooth, saw its battery life double with the Mavericks upgrade. That alone made the transition worth while. Plus, there were a ton of small refinements that I got used to very quickly.

I didn't notice how quickly until I switched back to a Snow Leopard install I maintain for Final Cut Studio (don't get me started on FCP X). All of a sudden the old OS felt...outdated. Totally reliable, sure. But not quite as friendly.

One unexpected change is that Safari has become my favorite browser. Its integration with the OS and iOS, plus the integration of iOS and OS X gave it an edge that Chrome and FF can't match. Judging from what was revealed today, it's looks like that kind of seamless transition between devices is what we can expect a lot more of.

Re: OS X Yosemite

#205

Post by wting »

demallien wrote: post #161
Angostura wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mavericks introduced a lot of tangible under the hood improvements that perhaps you missed, Ars did a thorough review, perhaps start with how the OS was changed to improve energy consumption: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/12/#energy-sa...

Yes, linux geeks can school Apple on systems engineering when they can deliver laptops with a better battery life than Macs get. As for this latest release, what, adding a new systems programming language and a whole new graphics API isn't enough? At least my Mac recognizes and uses a second monitor when I plug it in, unlike the bloody Fedora 19 box that I use at work. And don't get me started on that second graphics…

My 15" rMBP running Mavericks randomly reboots on occasion, and to this day still requires me to manually disable / enable WiFi almost every time I open the lid.

Meanwhile Homebrew is a poor substitute for aptitude and PPAs, multi-monitor support is relatively poor (xmonad excels here), and the Apple keyboard is missing a bunch of keys I use on a regular basis.

Re: OS X Yosemite

#206

Post by thejdude »

demallien wrote: post #159
dev1n wrote: post #64

If possible, could someone from the Apple community please tell me if Yosemite will be faster / lighter than snow leopard? I don't want an OS that requires 8 gigs of ram to run "fast" like Mavericks requires.

whaaaaat? My 2012 MacBook Air with 4 gigs of RAM and SSD is lightening fast. The thing that kills performance these days on Macs is if you still have a spinning platter of rust as your storage. Don't do that. (Aside: this is not surprising - Apple has spent a lot of effort optimizing the core OS for iOS, which has always been flash-only storage)

Still, if an OS cannot deal with me having a platter disk, it is SLOW (regarding file system access).

Windows is the same, slooooooow. Linux is seriously fast even with a HDD.

Of course, my next PC (whenever I'm gonna need one) will have an SSD, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't optimize "disk" access or filesystem speed in an OS.

Re: OS X Yosemite

#207

Post by shaan7 »

demallien wrote: post #161
Angostura wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mavericks introduced a lot of tangible under the hood improvements that perhaps you missed, Ars did a thorough review, perhaps start with how the OS was changed to improve energy consumption: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/12/#energy-sa...

Yes, linux geeks can school Apple on systems engineering when they can deliver laptops with a better battery life than Macs get. As for this latest release, what, adding a new systems programming language and a whole new graphics API isn't enough? At least my Mac recognizes and uses a second monitor when I plug it in, unlike the bloody Fedora 19 box that I use at work. And don't get me started on that second graphics…

Dell XPS Ultrabook with Kubuntu 14.04 here, without any patches or extra settings. 11W consumption with medium screen brightness, works for ~5 hours with normal browsing (occasional compiling)

Recognizes all monitors and projectors (even the ones Macs fail at) at my work place. The WiFi just works (TM).

You are not using a "Ubuntu laptop". As danford said, just pick a Ubuntu certified machine* and things will just work (TM). And, you will still have more choice than OSX ;)

* http://www.ubuntu.com/certification/desktop/

Re: OS X Yosemite

#208

Post by fredsted »

dev1n wrote: post #64

If possible, could someone from the Apple community please tell me if Yosemite will be faster / lighter than snow leopard? I don't want an OS that requires 8 gigs of ram to run "fast" like Mavericks requires.

Seriously, what is slow about Mavericks? Your experience sounds psychosomatic: "this is newer, it's probably slower."

Re: OS X Yosemite

#209

Post by apendleton »

shaan7 wrote: post #207
demallien wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, linux geeks can school Apple on systems engineering when they can deliver laptops with a better battery life than Macs get. As for this latest release, what, adding a new systems programming language and a whole new graphics API isn't enough? At least my Mac recognizes and uses a second monitor when I plug it in, unlike the bloody Fedora 19 box that I use at work. And don't get me started on that second graphics…

Dell XPS Ultrabook with Kubuntu 14.04 here, without any patches or extra settings. 11W consumption with medium screen brightness, works for ~5 hours with normal browsing (occasional compiling) Recognizes all monitors and projectors (even the ones Macs fail at) at my work place. The WiFi just works (TM). You are not using a "Ubuntu laptop". As danford said, just pick a Ubuntu certified machine* and things will just wo…

Sorry, but 5 hours on an ultrabook is not competitive. Current Macbook Airs are rated for 12 hours with normal use, and third-party testing has found 10 to be realistic.

demallien is right. Nobody on the Linux side has done this kind of aggressive power engineering for consumer-oriented x86 hardware. Google might, for Chromebooks, but it's not clear how portable that will be to the rest of the ecosystem.

Re: OS X Yosemite

#210

Post by bratsche »

alexqgb wrote: post #204
Angostura wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mavericks introduced a lot of tangible under the hood improvements that perhaps you missed, Ars did a thorough review, perhaps start with how the OS was changed to improve energy consumption: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/12/#energy-sa...

My 2010 MBP, which is obviously getting long in the tooth, saw its battery life double with the Mavericks upgrade. That alone made the transition worth while. Plus, there were a ton of small refinements that I got used to very quickly. I didn't notice how quickly until I switched back to a Snow Leopard install I maintain for Final Cut Studio (don't get me started on FCP X). All of a sudden the old OS felt...outdated.…

I think my Mac is a 2011, but I saw a similar thing when I upgraded to Mavericks. I've been pretty happy with it for the most part.

More recently I saw massive power savings by switching browsers. I love Chrome, I love its UI, I love its web devel tools. But even when I only have a few tabs open my Mac's fans just won't stop spinning. :( I kind of swapped back and forth between Safari and Firefox since then, but mostly settled on Firefox. I may give Safari another chance when I install Yosemite.

Post reply on HN