Would you say Tiger is recommended for the average Home user?

On my hardware (both the PB and the iBook you see in my sig), Tiger - as of now - is not _that_ much faster than Panther. This is, however, improving with every build. I guess we can't really say anything about the final performance of Tiger just yet. I would expect improvements for _any_ kind of supported hardware, though.
 
Is there any thing thats absoultely groundbreaking? I know Spotlight is the best feature coming, but its not all that important, something we can all live without in one way or another. Maybe well have to wait till 10.5 or even 10.6.
 
i think Tiger will be groundbreaking for people who are blind or have general poor eyesight. When you are in that situation there is a pride in being able to manage without external help, and a built in text-to-speech UI will truely be groundbraking in the word's denotative meaning; it will set a new standard of what you in the future will demand of a modern OS.
 
I'll upgrade because I like to keep up to date with Apple stuff.
All major updates of OSX have been really useful and enjoyable for me, although I think I skipped 10.2.

It seems to me like the theme of this update is "workflow".
Besides Dashboard, Automator & Spotlight another thing that I would like to be able to use is the general cross-integration of applications.
This was promised in OSX, but it seems like it's starting to get implemented only in tiger, really.
I mean that you'll be able to add stuff to iPhoto from Mail, or Spotlight or the Finder.
Things like that.
Actually DB, Automator & SL all seem to do just that, accessing your info in yet another way, so you'll be able to do what you want in more & more places and ways.

Also Tiger's iSync will support my cellphone, finally.

Just a thought.
Some major changes between updates are said to rely on things that are in the core of the OS.
Like, no, this or that iLife app will not work in panther because it relies on the new coreaudio or whatever.
It seems to me like this is becoming a way to sell software more and more, to make updated apps depending on some core functionality in the OS, so you'll have to upgrade completely.
Maybe there's a programmatic reason to it, but I think they also use it as a marketing approach.
Anyway....
 
I will defaintly upgrade, as soon as i can convince my parentals to get me it though. One thing that really made me interested was that xgrid thingy. Like i might be wrong but this is my understanding - like computers on a network can become a small cluster and can undertake tasks ?? Sounds pretty good to me, might be good for schools/universities etc.

Some of Tigers cosmetic features might not be as useful to me, however i really expected more new features like Expose' (meaning a revolutionary new feature) to Tiger. But then again with some of the technical and cosmetic stuff is once again just one big step ahead of windows.
 
In my opinion, Tiger is a need for me. I mostly like the Spotlight and Automator Feature, as well as the new H.264 technology for DVDs and stuff. But another feature that hasn't been mentioned that much on Apple's site, is XGrid. With this little nice gimmick you can turn a group of Macs (no server required!!) into a supercomputer. How COOL is that?! Then I will turn my iMac (1.8 GHz G5) and PowerBook (1.33 GHz G4), both with 1 GB RAM, into a cluster - and then play, let's say, Unreal Tournament 2004 or Doom 3 on it... :D :D :D

XGrid
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/xgrid/
 
Hmm... Isn't, for those games, the graphics card the deciding factor rather than the processing power? I mean sure: You probably _can_ do some good with a better processor. But if the card doesn't give you more FPS, it's just overkill to even set up Xgrid for that...
 
Let's not forget that there is an over head for the networks used, unless you have some really fast low latency network connections.
 
XGrid at home is basically worthless(but still cool :)) and if I am reading this right it only works on Xgrid enabled applications:

Without any extra effort, you can increase the power of special Xgrid-enabled applications simply by adding more Macs to the cluster
Click to expand...

I am looking forward to the new Java features (and hopefully a java speed increase).
 
You have to program for XGrid, it's not just as simple as clicking a button. You can make anything distributed as long as you can find a way to break it up into smaller chunks to be processed which are not time sensitive or order sensitive.

It's not going to work for games because the network is too slow and your frame has to be rendered in milliseconds. The graphics cards process data in the order of many GB per second.
 
Hmm... What about a stack of Mac minis to improve Photoshop performance? (That is should Adobe ever release an Xgrid enabled version, of course... I'm thinking theoretically.) I guess Xgrid makes sense for stuff where you otherwise would wait like six or seven hours for something to render. But would it also make sense to use it for smaller stuff, like I said: For Photoshop filters?
 
I guess you could, but that would depend of Adobe coding Photoshop to do that for it to work with all the built in filters.

I think that you can install other filters that companies make, so theoretically that company could probably write that into their filter.

The image would be split up into parts and each part sent off to another computer running Photoshop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top