Most stable version of 10.2

[bookem]

For me even though 10.2.4 seems quicker, I'm sticking with 10.2.3 on my Cube, as there seem to be less crashes and kernel panics. Wnat does everyone else use?

 

[twister]

How about all? They all seem the same to me.

 

[Giaguara]

Okay, "all" is a choise

 

[toast]

as there seem to be less crashes and kernel panics.

Not a very good argument for me, as I got ONE kernel panic in one year of OSX intensive use.
System crashes supervene on a regular monthly basis.

I vote for 10.2.3, I have no precise opinion on 10.2.4. I'd like to hear about the guy who voted for 10.2.5.

 

[wtmcgee]

considering i've *never* had a crash or kernel panic in OS X... they all seem the same to me.

although, 10.2.4 is faster than previous versions of 10.2.x IMO.

if you're having *less* panics than another update, you may have some major issues with your machine. a kernel panic shouldn't be a semi-regular happening.

 

[kanecorp]

i've had one kernal panic in OSX...i believe it was in 10.2.3
besides that i would say whatever the newest (which in this case is .4) is the most stable

 

[Bad Co]

Never had a kernal panic! (Never even had one under 10.1.x) And I've always run dual monitors.

 

[owaters]

10.2.4 definately! I had some trouble with 10.2.3.

 

[chevy]

i never had a kernel panic. no, sorry i had one with 10.2.1 and went back to 10.5.1. now i've 10.2.4 and it's ok.

the only pb i have is with the printer (Canon 2100 USB) when printing from Word and using the icon in the tool bar (no problem when using the menu).

 

[Arden]

When I upgraded my iMac to 10.2.3, the Finder began quitting every time I tried to use it, and from what I hear 10.2.4 has some issues with the time resetting up startup, and not knowing about 10.2.1 or 10.2.2, 10.2.0 is the best for me so far. If 10.2.5 solves all these problems, I will probably upgrade then.

 

[Androo]

when i upgraded to 10.2.4 from .2.3, i noticed that it takes 6 minutes to start up. i hate it.... i'll just get a new computer!

 

[Arden]

Originally posted by Androo
when i upgraded to 10.2.4 from .2.3, i noticed that it takes 6 minutes to start up. i hate it.... i'll just get a new computer!

Can I have the old one?

 

[michaelsanford]

Originally posted by wtmcgee
if you're having *less* panics than another update, you may have some major issues with your machine. a kernel panic shouldn't be a semi-regular happening.

Seriously!

I've got a 10 day delay on my Jag CD, but it's nice to hear good things about 10.2.4; I started to get a bit worried hearing about frequent crashes and hang-ups after the update. Nice poll idea.

PS I have had 2 kernel panics in 10.1, both I believe after installing something.

 

[TommyWillB]

My thought...

OS X is getting more and more stable with each release...

... however my computer system is not.

I think the reason is two things:

1. Many application vendors are rusing thier OS X programs out the door without adequate testing... i.e. we have more flakey programs!
   
2. Mac OS X seems to be more like WinDoze in that it seems to get more unstable over time. A clean OS X 10.2.4 is VERY stable, but a system that has had each upgrade over time is less stable. This is just my opinion, but I fear that OS X will require periodic complete system rebuilds just like WinDoze does today. OS 9 never needed that.
   [/list=1]