OS X 10.7 Lion is more painful than Vista

OS X 10.7 Lion is more painful than Vista

Summary: My beef is not with the deliberate changes Apple made to the OS, but with the colossal number of show-stopping bugs that have been allowed into this release.

SHARE:

Within seconds of the OS becoming available I had begun downloading Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' to my trusty Mac mini. In under an hour I had blown away the Snow Leopard install and was up and running with Lion.

What a mistake that's turned out to be. A mistake that turned out to be far worse than when I first installed Vista on a PC.

Before I begin, I want to make it clear that I don't dislike the OS as it stands. I'm not all that bothered one way or another about the 'iPadification' of the OS as my blogging buddy Jason Perlow put it. I like reverse scrolling but feel a bit 'meh' about many of the new features, but the old OS is still there if you know where to look. My beef with Lion is not down to the deliberate changes Apple made to the OS, but to the colossal number of show-stopping bugs that have been allowed into this release.

Yes, I'm aware that Lion is a .0 release, in other words it's straight out of the gate and yet to see an update, and that hopefully there are updates in the pipeline, but it still is a .0 release and not a beta. And don't even think about throwing that 'but it's only $29' argument at me!

So what are the bugs that I'm seeing? They're three of the bugs that I outlined in an earlier post:

  • Random crashing that results in a totally black screen Once the system crashes, it’s a hard reset time. There’s no solution from Apple yet but it seems that the problem here is down to NVIDIA drivers and forcing the system to use integrated graphics only using a third-party tool (gfxCardStatus) helps alleviate the problem.
  • WiFi dropping This is annoying. (I’m seeing this happen, although not often.) Basically, the WiFi connection drops and the only way to get it back working is to switch the WiFi adapter off and then back on again. A possible solution to this is to create a script that pings periodically ... but even with this I'm seeing problems.
  • Viewing videos causes freezing on new iMacs All video types appear to cause the freeze - Flash, H.264, QuickTime, AVIs, MKVs, YouTube … This is another issue that could be related to graphics card drivers … but perhaps not.

There are a number of other problems, some related to Apple, some not: Coming out of sleep is dodgy. Flash is crappier that it is on any other platform. Searching network shares doesn't pull up any search results. Sometimes the Mac decides for no apparent reason to slow down to a snail's pace.

Having lived with the pain of Vista pre-SP1, I can tell you that the problems currently facing Apple with Lion are worse. Much worse. In fact, it's such a nuisance that I've decided to install Snow Leopard into a different partition and switch to the old OS for the time being, keeping Lion so I can keep an eye on future updates to see if they fix these issues.

Apple, you need to fix these issues, and fix them soon!

Topics: Apple, Hardware, Microsoft, Operating Systems, Software, Windows

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

Talkback

229 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

    No problems at all on my MacBook Air, love it.
    APACloud
    • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

      @CloudinOz No issues on my MBP, White Macbook and Mac Mini... Love what Apple has done here. $29 for all the systems... Anyways, some of the issues mentioned are valid and they are affecting few systems in the wild.. Adrain is right in that Apple should never have released an OS with such glaringly obvious bugs
      browser.
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @browser.
        Funny how you thought "White" was necessary to describe your system. And you even thought it necessary that it be officially part of the model name.
        KenoshaSysAdmin
      • Why is that funny?

        @browser. That's how that model is commonly referred to. They were initially released in black and white. The black model was later discontinued, as was the white model just a short while ago. Google "white macbook" and you'll see just how many headlines use the phrase.

        What are you insinuating by your observation?
        RationalGuy
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @RationalGuy Don't even bother with the troll. He obviously doesn't know what he's talking about and ought to keep his irrelevant remarks to himself.
        SenorAlejandro
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @browser. Well of course the OS is only $29. Apple and $Jobs makes up the difference by overcharging you for standard, off-the-shelf parts that makes up Apple's computers. If you amortize the cost of the OS upgrades against the overpriced apple components, you will probably find you're paying more than double than what you Windows user counterparts are paying for their OS! Plus, a new Windows OS doesn't emerge ever other month!
        tech_ed@...
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @tech_ed

        Bull, first, learn the OS release schedule, so you don't appear so dumb. Second, I challenge you to list a SINGLE system to compare to any Mac system that you think is a component for component match, and that is priced significantly lower than the listed Mac. Get prepared to get schooled on hardware specs (and I won't even bring up the crappy trackpads on your POS Windows boxes).
        .DeusExMachina.
      • Message has been deleted.

        audidiablo
      • RE: Mac Component Challenge

        @deusexmachina

        That is impossible with any brand unless you build yourself. But the point is that the Processors, GPUs, Hard Drives, Ram, LCDs, Capacitors, NIC Chipsets, MB Chipsets, and even many other misc components are practically the same. The casing and board is designed specifically to fit Apple's case just like most other OEMs. No one is challenging that Apple doesn't use fairly high quality parts because they do.

        Since you like a challenge why don't you point out the components that are so significantly different in an Apple product that makes it so much better and justifys the cost increase. You're argument is like saying trying to say two similar cars cannot be compared because they do not have a component for component match. Get a life dude. There are PCs out there that blow Apple out of the water in terms of quality and price. I can build a PC that would trump a MacPro 10 times over for less money than the MacPro. There are plenty of high quality computers out there from various brands.
        bobiroc
      • Message has been deleted.

        .DeusExMachina.
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @bobiroc<br>"That is impossible with any brand unless you build yourself. But the point is that the Processors, GPUs, Hard Drives, Ram, LCDs, Capacitors, NIC Chipsets, MB Chipsets, and even many other misc components are practically the same."<br><br>No, they are not the same. First, as you alluded to, the parts used by Apple generally are at much higher spec than most other manufacturers. This is part of the reason why they have a separate fab at Foxconn. This is how build to spec works. All capacitors, for instance, are NOT the same. There is a big difference, for instance between the crappy paper dielectric power capacitors used by many Dell machines and the high-capacity caps used by Apple. But in your reply, you appear to know this, even though you then contradict yourself. But for the record, it is NOT true that "No one is challenging that Apple doesn't use fairly high quality parts." It is quite clear that many people are, including audidiablo and the OP.<br><br>"You're argument is like saying trying to say two similar cars cannot be compared because they do not have a component for component match."<br><br>In what way?!? It is NOTHING like that. I am NOT saying that they can't be compared. In fact, I am saying the exact opposite. They most certainly CAN be compared, and when this is done, Apple compares favourably. There is a reason why many Apple systems rate best buys from PC-centric magazines such as PCMag and ComputerShopper. Because when you factor in component costs, they are actually quite cost competitive.<br><br>"Since you like a challenge why don't you point out the components that are so significantly different in an Apple product that makes it so much better and justifys the cost increase."<br><br>First, I notice that you didn't bother to respond to my challenge. So be it. As to yours, first, slot loading optical drives. Sure, you might be fine with tray-loading drives, but if you are going to match specs, that has to be addressed. And it is not a trivial addition. Second, the colour accuracy of Apple's LCDs is FAR beyond what you get in the typical PC panel. Sure there are PCs with nice panels, but they also cost more. Third, as you have already mentioned, is casing. Fourth, as I already mentioned, is the trackpad. Most PCs, even most high end ones, have ABYSMAL trackpads, with low resolution and poor response. Contrary to the misinformed audidiablo, it is NOT simply about supporting multitouch. Again, almost all trackpads on PCs suck. There are several good ones to be found, but again, you have to pay for them. And on and on.<br><br>As to your last bit about there being PCs out there that blow Apple out of the water in terms of quality and price, interesting that you make this claim, and yet STILL fail to post a SINGLE example. Simply saying it on the internet does not make it so. Interesting also that you fail to notice that you contradict yourself in your very first sentence.
        .DeusExMachina.
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @deusexmachina? [i]First, as you alluded to, the parts used by Apple generally are at much higher spec than most other manufacturers.[/i]

        ROFL..... Thanks, I needed that laugh.
        Badgered
    • No problems here either. Vista has been rock solid.

      @CloudinOz: Bought it the day it was released (on a new computer). Not a single problem.
      ye
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @ye

        Yep same with me, although I did buy it installed rather than installing it on old equipment as Adrian seems to have done.

        Vista is an example of the big lie. Keep telling everyone it had huge problems and they'll believe it. What minor problems there were were fixed in the Service Pack. Frankly if Vista played up like the problems Adrian was having, I'd still be using XP.
        tonymcs@...
    • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

      @CloudinOz: No problems with my 2007 Macbook Pro. Quick download. Absolutely smooth and simple OS upgrade. Not a single bump in the road and I love the new features.
      RationalGuy
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @RationalGuy - Yes indeed, and I have seen people post the same thing about Vista. Your response proves nothing.
        Woned B. Fooldagan
    • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

      @CloudinOz Just like how a whole bunch of people didn't have trouble with Vista (myself included). It doesn't mean it wasn't a steaming heap.
      Aerowind
      • It wasn't.

        @Aerowind: [i]ust like how a whole bunch of people didn't have trouble with Vista (myself included). It doesn't mean it wasn't a steaming heap.[/i]

        Vista is a solid OS.
        ye
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @ye
        Same here. I had Vista with absolutely no problems that I could tell - sure, it lacked polish compared to 7, but it was still a great OS. No problems with the service pack either, as far as I remember.
        Walkop
      • RE: Mac OS X 10.7 'Lion' is more painful than Vista

        @ye [i]Vista is a solid OS.[/i]

        As long as you got it post SP1, or were able to get SP1 installed... I agree with you.

        I have run into 3 Vista Systems, pre SP1, that SP1 would not install on. 5 hour phone calls to the phone jockeys couldn't fix it.... I gave up, wiped, and installed 7.
        Badgered