Snow Leopard: What's the hurry to upgrade?

Summary: With any systemwide upgrade, for some users, especially early adopters, things can and will go wrong. However, the new features and the chance for improved performance will always woo many to upgrade sooner rather than later. And Mac OS X 10.6, Snow Leopard is no different than any other software upgrade.

With any systemwide upgrade, for some users, especially early adopters, things can and will go wrong. However, the new features and the chance for improved performance will always woo many to upgrade sooner rather than later. And Mac OS X 10.6, Snow Leopard is no different than any other software upgrade.

Several recent posts show Snow Leopard's promise and potential pitfalls.

Chuck Shotton, president of startup Concluent Systems, Monday morning sent out a pair of warning tweets:

Snow Leopard FAILS! Turned my MacBook Pro into Hellen Keller. No screen, mouse, keyboard, or audio. WTF!?!

Apparently MacBook Pro owners are victims of a cruel QA joke being played by Apple -- "Psych! We never tested 10.6 with your machines!"

This doesn't appear to be the widespread experience of upgraders. Still, it's a good warning.

I always clone my system onto a bootable external drive just before installing any system update so that I can immediately restart holding down the Option key and select the older but more usable system from the Startup Manager. This is in addition to a Time Machine refresh. Depending on your system and applications and workflow, the older, wiser plain ol' Leopard may be your friend.

On the other hand, Lloyd Chambers' Macintosh Performance Guide for Digital Photographers & Performance Addicts blog offers the results of performance tests for Snow Leopard. The tested applications included Adobe Creative Suite 4 and Lightroom, Apple Aperture and D-studio's Helicon Focus.

Running Leopard (10.5) takes 3 percent longer on the test than Snow Leopard/32, and 6 percent longer than Snow Leopard/64. The surprise here is that booting 64-bit Snow Leopard is faster; after all Photoshop CS4 is a 32-bit program. The difference suggests that the 64-bit Snow Leopard kernel is more efficient in general.

A difference of 6 percent might not sound like much, but Apple charges $500 more for a 2.93GHz Mac Pro Nehalem over a 2.66GHz model for a 10 percent speed difference. Think of it like a $300 speed upgrade for $25.

He points out that Adobe Lightroom users may want to check its prefs and make sure that the Open in 32-bit Mode setting is unchecked.

Here are some of his conclusions:

Snow Leopard booted into the 32-bit kernel is always faster than Leopard, with fair to substantial gains, depending on the application.

But Snow Leopard booted into the 64-bit kernel shows a consistent performance advantage over Leopard, and even more advantage over 32-bit Snow Leopard as well. Performance gains of up to 30% were observed, making Snow Leopard by far the best value for the money in a long, long time. At about $25 , you won’t find a more compelling upgrade of any kind, anywhere.

Apple’s decision to default Snow Leopard into 32-bit-kernel mode is a losing proposition for most photography related applications: boot into 64-bit mode if you don’t have any hardware/software that precludes it.

Topics: Hardware, Apple, CXO, Networking, Processors, IT Employment

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

38 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • I'm installing it for one reason only: Boot Camp

    Boot Camp 2.1 drivers don't allow Windows to control screen brightness dynamically which means I have to remember to turn my screen brightness down when on battery and up when plugged in. I'm hoping Boot Camp 3.0 fixes this [b]glaring[/b] bug. And it will only cost me $9.95 (plus tax) for my Windows driver upgrade (bought my Mac quite recently so upgrade is discounted)!! That sounds like quite the deal!! Of course, we won't compare that to how much my Toshiba laptop driver upgrades cost me. That would result in a statement that wasn't 110% glowing positive for Apple.

    Apple: Our driver upgrades only cost $29.95. What a deal!!
    NonZealot
    • Yeah, no ZFS included made snowkitty a yawn

      I guess I'll keep using my machine as a Vista render mule. At least it's quiet and looks good.
      BillDem
      • ZFS?

        ZFS wasn't happening with Snow Leopard anyway. It was only going to be
        in the Server version by default. They obviously decided it was more
        trouble than it was worth at this point. Though I really wanted it. I can
        wait until it's ready, because then there will be one more compelling
        reason to go with OS X that Windows won't likely ever have. At least until
        OS X has it and they feel left out.
        ewelch
    • Others may find more reasons

      Ars has a very detailed look at Apple's new OS:

      http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars
      Richard Flude
  • Agreed.

    Leopard is just fine, no sense wasting money on an upgrade when they have not done anything really different.

    With no real improvement, why bother?
    GuidingLight
    • There was improvement

      In Leopard, holding down '6' and '4' keys during bootup did nothing at all. Now it does something. That's progress: Apple style! :)
      NonZealot
      • LOL

        NZ, you never fail to slay me. Thanks for that.
        mgp3
        • Shouldn't encourage him

          Whenever I see NZ or LD in these comments, I know they will go off topic and become a total waste of time. They should be blocked permanently.
          jorjitop
          • That's right...

            Cuz none of the Apple or Linux zealots ever go over to the Windows blogs and post off topic, right? Can you post a link to where you complain about that?
            mgp3
          • Let's look at some examples, shall we?

            [u]http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=5253[/u]

            title: Snow Leopard might crash your apps

            Talkbacks? 109, most from the usual anti-Apple crowd (15 snide
            comments from one person alone), railing at Apple for [b]possible[/b]
            incompatibilies.

            Now look here:

            [u]http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=5256[/u]

            Title:Windows Update kills PowerPoint feature

            Talkbacks? 7. And this is about Microsoft's own Windows Update
            [b]actually killing[/b] Microsoft's own PowerPoint.

            So where are all of the Apple and Linux zealots you're talking about?
            Kind of silly to complain about something that is demonstrably false.
            msalzberg
    • Did you actually read the article?

      "Snow Leopard booted into the 32-bit kernel is always faster than
      Leopard, with fair to substantial gains, depending on the application.

      But Snow Leopard booted into the 64-bit kernel shows a consistent
      performance advantage over Leopard, and even more advantage over 32-
      bit Snow Leopard as well. [b]Performance gains of up to 30% were
      observed, making Snow Leopard by far the best value for the money in a
      long, long time[/b]. At about $25 , you won?t find a more compelling
      upgrade of any kind, anywhere."
      msalzberg
      • Except for those who can't boot the 64 bit kernel.

        Thanks to Apple's artificial limits. It would be nice if I could boot my 2nd gen MacBook into the 64 bit kernel.
        ye
        • Let's try this again...

          "Snow Leopard booted into the 32-bit kernel is [b]always faster than
          Leopard, with fair to substantial gains, depending on the
          application.[/b]"

          I'd also suggest reading this:

          [u]http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137229/What_s_the_real_
          deal_with_64_bit_computing_in_Snow_Leopard_[/u]

          which is a pretty good explanation of Snow Leopard's 64-bitness. Even I
          understood it.
          msalzberg
          • But 64-bit SL is faster than 32-bit SL.

            So your point is???
            ye
          • You Watch

            Somehow Apple will spin this and get idiots to believe that they invented the 64bit OS.
            bobiroc
          • And 32-bit SL is faster than Leopard.

            So your point is???
            msalzberg
          • My point is I can't boot 64-bit SL.

            Thus I can't take full advantage of the speed increase offered due to some arbitrary limitation imposed by Apple.
            ye
          • @ye...

            Even if you have a 32-bit EFI, you can still boot to 64-bit.
            msalzberg
          • @msalzberg: That's good to hear.

            [i]Even if you have a 32-bit EFI, you can still boot to 64-bit.[/i]

            Would I use the same proceedure as listed for capable Macs? Or is there some hacking I would need to do?
            ye
        • Last I Knew

          You were opposed to upgrading from Tiger to Leopard, seeing no point
          in spending the money. If you upgraded it would be because you bought
          the new os on a new Mac.

          Gen 2? Are you complaining that Apple left PowerPC behind? You couldn't
          be complaining that your 32 bit G4 or Intel is arbitrarily precluded from
          running 64 bit.
          DannyO_0x98