Not long ago, I updated my iPhone 3G with the sophiscated iOS 4, which cost me almost everything. Now, still using my iPhone 3G, I am struggling with some basic tasks. Though I am now waiting for the up and coming iPhone 5 (or whatever it is going to be called).

Anyhow, Lion, a much anticipated OS for over a year. On paper and initial test at least, I found it amazing, with features that I think will make it the most advance OS on the planet. Yet, I don’t think the OS may be advance but others are still catching up. Even with Apple’s own software, I am talking about Apple’s professional photo application, Aperture 3. I am a professional photographer and use Aperture extensively. After upgraded to Lion, not only my computer grind to a halt, Aperture just couldn’t move. It would stall from time to time and making my life so much more difficult.

After digging around, it could be the result of 32 and 64 bit coding at kernel level, which makes my already ok 4G Mb RAM insufficient to do anything. Something that Apple must fix because not many computers out there with 8G or more RAM installed. Worst still, most Apple laptops only support 4G and only the later unibody Macbook Pros support 8G (only… in this case).

To sum it up, I have given up. I am now restored back to Snow Leopard until I hear many positive comments about its performance. Thanks to Time Machine (a great Apple invention), I restore without much pain!

A love and hate relationship continues…

Good day!

Catch me on facebook.com/blueprintphotography

Mac OS X Lion

Apple, an innovative company that I fell in love many years ago. The time when the first Macintosh was produced. I’d grown to the changes that Apple threw at me, even when Steve wasn’t there.

So I get really excited whenever Steve announces something new. I am always one of the first to get my hands on the latest OSes and I can confidently say that up until Lion, which was released recently, Snow Leopard was indeed the fastest OS on the planet. I don’t upgrade my computer every year. In fact, I normally use my computer until it either dies or can’t handle my jobs any more. This equates to an average of 3 to 4 years. At current pace of OS releases, each of my computer will experience at least two versions of the OS. In my recent case, the aluminium Macbook Pro 17 inch, Intel Core 2 Duo (Peryn Processor), 2.5Ghz with 4G RAM, upgraded to Seagate 500GB Hybrid Drive, has been through Leopard, Snow Leopard and the latest Lion.

Out of the three OSes, I must admit that Snow Leopard is the fastest for my MBP. I’ve installed Lion, despite revolutionary features, it runs pretty slow. Everything seems to be dragging, from boot up to shut down. I am not entirely convinced with the performance but I will stick with it and see if the next update will fix something.

Snow Leopard was good. Not only its size shrunk, but performance was much faster than Leopard that it replaced. However, I cannot say the same with Lion. After a few googling, I discovered that many users experienced the slowness of Lion, most with computers older than a year. Does it sound familiar? Umm.. yes iOS.

I am pretty much feeling the same disappointment when I upgraded my iPhone 3G to iOS 4. Everything stalled. Well, while not as bad as iPhone 3G with iOS4, but the same sense of losing performance really hinders my passion to Apple’s recent releases.

As I always praise Apple’s design, reliability and performance, but recent updates had made me feel opposite. I don’t want or need to upgrade my entire computer every year or two. I want to use them until I really need to replace it. The new features are useful but if they are only made for the latest hardware. I am not convinced. I just hope that Apple will do something, some day.

God bless Steve, I hope Apple will be good forever. Now everyone’s had a bite, can we taste the sweetness?

Good day!

As you grow older, more responsibilities follow. Now, I am running a few small businesses, one of which is photography. I cannot spare as much time just to shout about my life anymore. Indeed, I use social media but to communicate with a few mates and to promote my businesses, that’s it.

But recently, I feel like blogging again. I want to revisit that feeling of having people listening. Perhaps it’s more difficult before as the world seems to have been drawn to social sites and there are billions of blogs every single day. How can you capture any audience? I am not sure… but I will still write. Starting today… hopefully spare a little time a day to type a few words here.

Best of luck!

Jimmy

I made friends through the internets back in the early 90′s through Internet Relate Chat (IRC). It was typing through a ‘terminal’. It was before MSN or Yahoo messengers. Though people did pretend to be someone else but all-in-all, it was a genuine  experience. In fact, I met most of my friends that way during university days. Today, internet chat considers to be highly dangerous. You wouldn’t meet someone that you don’t know just by chatting over the net.

Similarly, blogging has gone through the same process. I used to share my feelings on my daily blog, generating quite a few views a day and eventually built up a list of audience. They shared my feelings, talked back to me through commenting my blogs. They were real. I didn’t meet them however, never had the chance. Several years down the line, things changed. People moved on. When I look back, I could have meet some of them and may be they would become my good friends. I hardly see blogs like that these days. Not unless you are ‘authorised’ to read someone’s blog (obviously for security reasons). There are billions of blogs out there and most of which are meaningless.

So, I will blog when I feel it. I don’t blog daily or even monthly. I write reviews and continue my day jobs as usual. I am not young anymore and perhaps I have grown out of blogging. Life is shot and we should enjoy more than just the computer screens!

Enjoy your day!

Jimmy

I am not trying to be bias and frankly, I am a fan of Apple and a Mac user since 1989. Apple products were never ‘cheap’ but I always considered it as ‘value for money’. All the Macs I owned in the past might not be the ‘fastest’ nor the most ‘powerful’ computers in the  world, but they were all reliable and provided me years of virus-free and trouble-free computing experience. Apple had always been an innovator and a designer. Everything they produced was something that PEOPLE want! I love their first all-in-one Macintosh back in 1985 and the much forgotten Newton PDA with unbelievable hand writing recognition technology (that’s in the early 90′s by the way). Then the trackpad on the laptops, iMacs, iPods and the iPhone (well… of course the iPad!). These are all very interesting products that, like what Jobs said, seamlessly integrated to the Mac environment or your digital life. I love this idea!

Back to the iPhone talk, I thought the original iPhone was a masterpiece in mobile technology. The OS was so slick that it blew all the competitions away. A touch-screen based smartphone was not a novel idea but no one had ever implemented so successfully. Apple seems to be the only one that understands usability and friendliness. Others seem to concentrate everything at one time but never integrate technologies as good as Apple. The gradual evolution of the iPhone was a prime example of ‘user-readiness’ and more importantly ‘technology readiness’.

Time is critical for any technology launch. Implementation and execution are crucial for success. Apple understands this. Despite all the fuzz about attenuation, not trying to protect Apple or bias, and judging by the videos Apple provided in their website (http://www.apple.com/antenna/), it’s clear that this indeed is a industry wide problem. However, I do think that the stainless steel surround exposes the problem more than other designs. Yet, Apple’s recent performance has attracted many envy eyes and anything could trigger a series of bad media. I have tried iPhone 4 myself and couldn’t generate the signal drop many are talking about, until I specifically block the little gap at the lower left corner. So I guess, it’s a limited problem depending on how people hold their phones (that’s how Jobs put it right?). Like a Chinese saying “Big Tree attracts more wind”.

So, put the antenna problem aside, iPhone 4 is a cracking piece of engineering. When I first held it, it was solid and beautifully put together. Every inch screams quality and passion in design to your face. The screen is among the list of greatest I’ve ever seen. It’s so sharp that I couldn’t believe the level of details you can see from it. To be exact, that’s 4 times the resolution than the previous generations of iPhones. Then the processor, Apple’s own A4 really mated the device perfectly. Like any Apple products, its operation is slick and smooth. iOS4 is really advance and put a smile on my face as soon as I discover more features. The multi-tasking aspect is very interesting but I guess this will open the door to disaster. Why? Well, I can see the evolution of iPhone apps. They are getting more and more power and memory hungry, just like computers. It also means, your phone will become obsolete sooner than any previous iPhones. Multi-tasking requires processing power and memory. This isn’t going to help. But in the mean time, it works.

Then the camera, the video, the Gyro and Accelerormeter , simply put all other rivals away. At the end, I am not looking at the spec of the product but rather I prefer to analyse how they perform in real life, its usability and reliability. I just don’t think any smartphone is even come close, yet. But technology moves so quickly that Apple will have to work harder to ensure it’s leading position. Apple no longer lives in its own world. That disappeared after the launch of iPod.

So is iPhone 4 a make? Yes, it certainly isn’t a break for Apple. The antenna problem will slow things down a bit but at the end of the day, it’s the public who decides its success. So far, all I know is that everyone still wants the iPhone 4, the iPad, the Macbook Pro, iPod… the list can go on.

Have a great day.

Jimmy

This is a very hot topic, like ever from the day I picked up my first camera. Every serious photographer is always dreaming for something portable, pocket-size camera that produces high quality prints (I do mean prints and not images for viewing on screen). It doesn’t need super high resolution but just enough to print something like 10×8 or A4 prints. But after the death of film, though I still use it occasionally, all small digital cameras have disappointed me.

To me, the camera industry has been evolving rather slowly over the past 100 years or so. The iconic boxy large format plate camera to the popular rangefinders during war time and recently the modern SLRs. But in 2010, everything is about to change again. Despite the stablising compact digital camera market, the SLR arena sees no sign of slowing down. Yet in 2009, there has been a few breakthroughs. The Four/Third alliance introduced a smaller form of their invention, the micro Four Third (MTF, M43 or M4/3, I would rather call it MTF as M43 may be confusing to some who used M39 and M42 systems before).

Panasonic G1

First was Panasonic’s G1 then GH1, but their forms remain a familiar SLR shape. That’s all changed when Olympus launched its EP1, a retro looking Pen camera that traced back to the 1960′s. Then Panasonic’s attack with GF1, an equivalent shape (a bit like a small rangefinder without a viewfinder window). I will get to each a little later. But what really triggered my imagination is Leica’s X1 and Ricoh’s latest GXR. (At time of writing, Samsung has announced NX10, a new compact system camera, mirrorless SLR-looking camera, very much like G1 but with an APSC CMOS sensor. It uses a new bespoke NX mount which isn’t compatible with any other systems…. strange and brave move indeed).

All these cameras are aiming at similar targets. Enthusiasts and professionals who want something smaller, a walk-around system that produces SLR quality or consumers who want something cleverer but not too big. Being a professional photograher myself, I understand the burden from a large SLR system, especially when you have a range of fast primes and zooms. My work bag can easily weight about 20kg with various lenses and two bodies. But in general, my travel gear will consist of one SLR, three lenses, a flash and some filters. Doesn’t sound alot but the whole package still weights around 8kg! When I trialled the new Leica M9,  I was so impressed just how ‘portable’ and rugged it was. But the famous red dot commands a premium price tag that not many could reach or justify, despite the perfectly design and super sharp lenses.

Leica X1

Now comes the more practical and affordable systems. Leica responded with the much anticipated and ‘affordable’ new model, promised to be the best compact system camera in the world. Many was hoping that it would be a MTF Leica amid its tight link with Panasonic. Here it comes the X1, a new compact camera with a fixed prime lens with an APSC CMOS sensor. Similar to what we already seen with Sigma’s DP1, DP2 and DP2s. It was some how disappointing but after seeing the quality of its prints and photos, I just believe Leica may be right about this little gem. But then, the high price still more than most of the aforementioned models. Just a small comparison, you can buy all the Sigma compacts DP1, DP2 with all accessories just for one X1.

Olympus EP1

Olympus’s EP-1 got me thinking for quite a while with its full manual controls and the ‘right’ size. But then Panasonic’s GF1 announcement really put me off the Olympus camp after reading some reviews and tested in person. Why? I love the GF1 simply because it handles and performs better in the field than EP1. The focus on GF1 is so fast that it beats EP1 hands down. It’s simpler and that 20mm F1.7 pancake is just a cracker lens! Yet it didn’t feel quite right on the hand somehow. It doesn’t matter how good the GF1 is, for me, it’s just another system camera in a smaller body. It’s only marginally smaller than an entry level DSLR once you put the zoom lens on. So, not for me? I am not sure just yet but I am sure many will love and buy one.

Sigma DP2

Sigma may have been the prioneer in large sensor compacts but so far, the DP1 and 2 has impressed only the IQ demanding professionals. It’s relatively slow performance has been the big hinder for such gem. Yet, the body design certainly hasn’t helped and looks something from the Stone Age when compare to Olympus’ EP series.

Ricoh has been so kind in the compact market. I can only say Ricoh has produced some amazing small compacts in the past. The GR series is a prime example. In film days, the GR1 series was the dream backup or walkabout camera for every enthusiast and professional alike. In digital days, the GRD series and the zoom equivalent GX series. The latest GRDIII is quite a performer in its own right and it also got me thinking for a bit. Yet it uses a tiny sensor that is limited to low ISO settings (oh boy, we are so soiled with these digital ISO settings these days… in film days, we rarely go above ISO400!). So it’s very limited at times and it will be outdated when a new model comes out.

Ricoh GXR with A12

Ricoh’s answer is producing something that is ‘adaptive’ and ‘flexible’. It produces a new kind of breed. The GXR. Technically it cannot be called a camera on its own. It doesn’t have a lens or even a sensor. It’s separated into two parts, the body which hosts the LCD screen, the buttons, battery and memory card, the other part is the lens and sensor ‘unit’. Interesting. In theory, it will never be outdated. When a new sensor or better optic comes out, simply ‘swap’ the unit. Sounds simple? Indeed it is. I’ve tried it myself and it’s simple and fast. At launch, Ricoh offers only two units, a zoom and a prime. So, if you want something small, slide the zoom unit and you get a GX200 with slightly better overall system. But everything changes when you put the prime on. It’s not strictly small but the prime produces some SLR quality images! Lovely bokeh and sharp details. But it’s still no pocket size.

Panasonic GF1 with 20mm f1.7

So here we are, EP1 and EP2, GF1, X1 and GXD. Which one is the best? I can’t decide. I do not think there’s a best camera here or a winner. It really depends what you want. I want something as a walkabout or backup and all MTF cameras are out, they are fine with the pancake lenses but when a zoom is attached, it’s no smaller than any SLR. So, it’s down to X1 and GXR. X1 is rather expensive but high quality lens and sensor. GXR is cheaper and equality good lens and sensor. So I guess the winner, for me at least, is here. GXR. I can do some street work with the zoom unit and portrait work with the prime. When new units come out in 2010 or later, I can add to it to suit my style. X1 is good but simply not flexible enough for me to invest, even with the red dot on it.

I will await the GXR to develop a bit to see what’s on the horizon. I will definitely buy one when there’s a 35mm GR lens with CMOS sensor. We will see. As I am writing this, Panny has announced a few more optics for it’s MTF bodies, one mega zoon 200-300mm, a 8mm fisheye and a 14mm pancake! Awe… this may change the game!

Hope it’s a good read. Have a nice day.

Jimmy

www.blue-print.me.uk

Like myself, I grew up in a world packed with computerised technologies. My first camera was a Ricoh automatic compact camera and my first SLR was a Canon EOS 50E, with eye control systems and advance multi-zone metering. I became accustomed to LCD screens and buttons. Canon was one of those companies who ditched the aperture ring on the lenses since the introduction of EF mount for their EOS cameras. That made everything even more ‘digital’, well, at least back in the days. Now with my latest 5D Mark II, there are even more buttons for different settings like white balance, ISO, file format, picture styles, micro-focus adjustment… just to name a few. It’s like operating a computer! The day of simple photography has long gone… until last week.

I finally got my hands on the first (for Leica) and the smallest full frame system camera – the Leica M9, at their London’s headquarter in Mayfair. I attended a short talk by Brett, a renown photographer and an independent Leica consultant. Brett was brilliant. His success shared by his passion and enthusiasm in photography and I was mostly inspired by his knowledge in the field. I also got a few pointers from him that afternoon too.

Throughout the talk, he showed us pictures he took, both during travel and at weddings, all of which were taken using the Leica M digital bodies, namely M8, 8.2 and the latest 9. He shocked me when he said that all the wedding photos were taken using only one camera and one lens, a fixed 50mm F2.0. “Wow”.

I guess most modern photographers are spoiled with technologies and the choice of lenses. I took most of my wedding photos in 2.8 zooms despite knowing that primes would give me sharper pictures. It was hard for me as I had to adapt to the changing environment almost at every stage of the wedding day. Shooting weddings in the City isn’t easy after all.

Brett, just like myself, likes to shoot in available lights. I am more surprised by the sharpness in Leica optics even when it’s wide opened! Most Bret’s photos were taken at the widest aperture, mostly at 2.0 and sometimes 4.0. My Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8L is no where near as sharp at 2.8. Ok… stop there before I start talking more about lenses, that will be a separate topics altogether.

So I had a quick play around with all the M digital bodies, the 8.0, 8.2 and the latest 9. All three bodies were so similar and you would be mistaken the M8 to be an M9 if you don’t look more carefully. That’s good, why change the perfectly good and timeless design? True and I guess, fifty years later, no one would even notice you are holding an old Leica! The “RED” dot says it all.

I was quite shock by how heavy the M9 was, given its relatively compact size. But it’s a reassuring type of heavy, solid metal body. I personally enjoy the experience with the optional handgrip. Perhaps I am still more familiar with the SLR handling.

One major differences between a rangefinder and a SLR is that rangefinder doesn’t have a reflection mirror and a prism. It gives two advantages, first, to me is one of the greatest over a SLR is that the vibration caused by the mirror-flipping action is completely eliminated. It means you can shoot at a much slower shutter speed. It really helps. Because of this reason, you will not need lenses with ultra large aperture and yet keeping a few things in focus. Second, perhaps it is more arguable, is the focusing. When you look through the viewfinder, as it is not link to the lens, you will not be distracted by the DOF, though, many would prefer to have DOF preview to ensure how the photo would have turned out. Because everything is sharp in the viewfinder, I can compose the picture as a story board, I could see clearly what’s happening in the back or fore ground. Then focus the subject… click, it’s done. Of course, one thing that a range finder can’t do is like continuous focusing (AI Servo… etc), so it’s not a camera for sports.

The ‘M’ is now digital, so you can’t avoid a few buttons, despite being traditional. The operational dials on the top plate remain similar to those on the film bodies, shutter speeds, shutter button… etc. The back is now dominated by the LCD screen. I am a little disappointing to see that Leica hasn’t employed the latest 920k dots LCD. It’s a rather modest 230k, similar to my 3 year-old Canon 5D Mark I. The button layout and menu are logically placed and arranged and something that I cannot fault. It was strange to see how slow the M9 write to the memory after each click. Like the M8 and 8.2, the new Leica uses SD or SDHC cards, perhaps not the fastest memory medium but I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw that ‘red’ light kept on flashing seconds after I pushed the shutter button. Later I learned that Leica uses DNG raw format. There isn’t anything wrong with DNG but it shocked me when I saw the file size. The M9 can generate either compressed or non-compressed DNG. I haven’t tried the non-compressed version but a seemingly compressed version came out 38Mb per photo! Despite being only 18.1Mp, it’s nearly 50 percent larger than my 22Mp 5D Mark II’s raw file. Something that puzzles me.

Apart from the flashing red light, I enjoyed the Leica. From the bottom of my heart, I wanted to buy one there and then. I couldn’t. At this moment in time, I couldn’t justify the expense to set up a new system for work or personal use. I have invested thousands of pounds if not more in Canon and it will cost me double that in Leica to get something equivalent, though i will get top quality optics for sure. The quality of the sensor is something that I wasn’t too sure just yet either. It starts to show signs of noise from ISO600 onwards. I would perhaps wait for a M9.2 or M10. It’s the first full frame Leica and the digital Leica that every fan wants. Is it the one? To me, not yet but it isn’t far off. I will await an updated version first. Now, if I am going for Leica, I will get an M7 and some glasses first.

Next test… I am waiting to test the Leica X1, the large sensor compact with 28mm Elmarit f2.8 lens! It’s not available until January 2010. Watch this space.

I have no intention to compare images from different cameras or brands that I’ve used. So here I am. The infamous Canon EOS 5D MKII has been out for a few months now and thousands of people have bought this new full frame camera since it’s launch. Frankly, I didn’t buy it at first. My trusty old 5D MKI was perfectly adequate for my use. As a wedding portrait journalist and a occasional travel photographer, I enjoy the extra depth of field a full frame provides. Nonetheless, I cannot get used to cropped sensor cameras partly due to my experience in film photography. I was a late adopter in digital photography, despite owning a few compacts before I finally bought my 5D, first DSLR in my shelf in 2005.

Canon shocked the world by announcing their first affordable full frame DSLR since the famous 1Ds series. Its relatively low price attracted a lot of the traditional photographers to jump into the digital arena. It was a tough decision for all the film user as digital photography was a different beast altogether. The fun of learning different characteristics of films and development processes have gone, what came is the new digital darkroom processing.

So, I dropped my Canon EOS 1v, picked up my 5D for weddings. My previous report would have talked a lot about my experience of using my 5D. Three years on, I upgraded to the new 5DMKII. I didn’t actual notice the difference when I first took it out from the box. In fact, it felt and looked so much the same as the old 5D.
One thing did strike me was the extra large LCD screen at the back of the camera. Now becomes standard in pro-spec cameras, the 3in screen screamed at me when I turned it on. My 2.5in LCD on my 5D was perfectly ok until I saw this. An ultra clear and bright screen, perfect for review pictures and now the contrast is much higher and means that what you see in the LCD is pretty much you will get.

I does feel a little more well built than my old 5D but still, I feel the Nikon D700 is slightly better in this respect. The new finish on the metal gives a high-end touch. Making it look and feel a much more expensive camera however. There are a few rearrangement in the button areas. The top light button is now on the right most side when it was on the left on the old model. The back looked similar but now the print button doubles up as a live-view activation act.  One good improvement was the viewfinder, now stands at 98%, though I would prefer it to be 100%, is brighter and better.

I can’t comment on its weather seal as I don’t usually go on to safari or in some extreme environments. I did use my old 5D in some pretty wet areas and it was fine. With the new seals, I can’t imagine it would be worse than before.

Using the new 5D is like an evolutional experience. First, shutter sounds slightly muted, better in this case. The AF does, seem to be faster despite having exactly the same AF points (a slight disappointment and I thought it would increase it to at least match the Nikon’s offering). Metering is more accurate but I still need to do the same trick as with my old 5D with some EV compensations. Auto White Balancing is much improved however and the new ISO range is simply unbelievable.

I can now shoot constantly at 800 ~ 1600 without worrying about noise (I had to keep my 5D at 600~800 before). However, the ultra high resolution sensor now reveals all the imperfections of all my lenses. To make use of all the pixels in this brilliant sensor, you will require to pump money into your glass. I used to love my primes 35mm f2.0, 50mm f1.8 (Mark I) and my 100mm f2.8 Macro but now they don’t seem to be that sharp. Even my 24-70mm f2.8L USM seems a little soft at wide open. The only lens that still shines in the beast and my personal favorite, 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM. You can see sample photos of all these lenses in my flickr page.

As a wedding journalist, speed, accuracy and quality is paramount! 5D is the perfect partner. I do not require the continuous speed of 1D or 7D, 3.9 fps is perfect fine for my use (during confetti!).

All in all, the new 5D certainly worths the upgrade, I personally do not think it’s a revolution, not like the original 5D. It’s no doubt an evolution. Now, the quality is equal if not better than the flagship 1Ds Mark III (before Mark IV comes out). Slimmer, lighter and more discrete (when not used with the battery grip). To me, it’s the best Canon so far. It will definitely satisfy any serious photographer, landscape, architecture, portrait and wedding photographers alike. It’s not a camera for sports, perhaps the new 7D takes that crown (to me, yes, it beats the 1D Mark III).

Arh, one note, the new 5D also shoots full high definition video. I have a fabulous Canon Hv30 but when I use better lenses on the new 5D, the quality is simply unbelievable… I may not be a film director but I am impressed with the quality and having lots of fun just from shooting bugs in the garden (oh yes, use that macro lens!!).

Enjoy if you are going to buy one. If you haven’t, try it first to see it for yourself.

Jimmy

PS: Don’t forget to get a few more hard drives and a faster computer, the files are big!!!

Grand Central Dispatch in Snow Leopard

Despite my Master Degree in Computing, I am not knowledgeable to write anything too technical about the Snow Leopard. But I am a proficient Mac user, since the inception of the first Macintosh. My last post already provided my first impression of Snow Leopard, Apple’s brand new (evolved OS). It’s lighter and faster. A week on after installing the new OS, I am now writing how I feel about this update.

I haven’t had a desktop Mac but I do have a few laptops lying around my house and office. My main computer is the last Aluminium Macbook Pro 17″ with 2.5 Ghz Duo Core, 4Gb RAM and 200Gb 7200rpm HD, and a matt screen. I also have my lovely Macbook Air with 1.86 Ghz Duo Core, 2Gb RAM and 128Gb SSD. My other laptops are all PowerPC based Powerbook, which unfortunately no longer supported and incompatible with Snow Leopard. So, I have installed Snow Leopard to both my Macbook Pro and Macbook Air.

The installation took something like an hour or so, painless. My first boot-up wasn’t exactly fast, perhaps a lot of setting up needed to perform internally. Once the OS was loaded, I immediately noticed the more snappy windows and icons in Coverflow. Another thing I spotted almost came as a shock was the space of my hard drive. The new OS returned almost 9Gb of free space! Well, that’s something I couldn’t justify because it varies depending on machine. I had seen forums that people gained from 5Gb to 10Gb.

Ok, that’s a good start, it seemed the whole computer ran a lot smoother (very true!). Next, I want to test my normal applications, I was pleased to say that most ran smoothly without problems, except a few: Acqusition (my P2P program), Adobe Dreamweaver CS4, Flip4Mac were all no-so compatible with 10.6. Norton’s Anitvirus 11 was also being flagged by the OS itself, something new as a feature. Now the OS would flagged any incompatible software and put it in a special folder.

I always push my computer to the max it could handle. Most of the time I would have a few applications running and this could really test the thread and memory handling with the new OS. When I am working on my photography projects, I would have Aperture (version 2.1.4), Adobe Photoshop CS4, Mail, Safari 4 and Microsoft Office running at the same time. It doesn’t sound a lot but Aperture and Photoshop are both memory hungry boys. My 4Gb memory could easily be eaten by them. Snow Leopard really do a slightly better job in avoiding crashing during my constant exporting and importing between the two photo applications. Together with the background rendering in Aperture for previews and thumbnails. Under 10.5.x, my Aperture was crashing like pin ball machine hitting the bells.

My Macbook Pro doesn’t have the latest graphics card, which the new OS also make use of it in a great deal. Therefore, I couldn’t commend on the graphics improvement. But all-in-all, I do find the 10.6 runs a lot smoother and faster when compare to 10.5.x, which is rare for any new OS as they tend to be heavier with graphics and more memory hungry.

Finally, shut down time, interesting that Apple claims to be 1.8x faster. It seems rather the same to me, on both machines. I will see if any future updates will improve that.

Another day with my machine, on my DVD slideshow. So far, so good

Nice day.

Jimmy

Snow Leopard

An operating system upgrade sounds like a daunting and dangerous task. Despite how safe and sound the upgrade was portrait by the company, whether it is Microsofe or Apple or any other software companies,  it’s often a disappointing experience.

I have been a Mac user for many years, or since the first Macintosh was announced in 1985. Everytime I upgrade the Mac OS was rather simple but the result was never consistent. I often lost some data or worst, had to reinstall programs to make it work. Even today, with the advancement of new OSes, my upgrade from Tiger to Leopard was somehow, disappointing, resulting a complete re-install of the OS to make my Powerbook ran smoothly again. There are always incompatibilities between drivers, programs or extensions. However, it’s true that by comparison, Mac upgrades are much better and simpler than Windows.

To most users, new OS often means “time to get new hardware”. New OS often releases to stage a fade-out timeline for older computer hardware. It’s true. As the underlining programs get more sophisticated, so do the demands on the hardware. More importantly, more graphically intense. Windows Vista, Mac OS Leopard was no different. From my experience, each of my computers would go through one to two OS upgrades before it dies from hardware failure (yes, I can actually over use my computer!). I could also see that each upgrade consumed more of the processing power and hence made it slower, despite more efficient (so they said). I was running my Powerbook G4, when I upgrade from Panther to Tiger, then from Tiger to Leopard. Both instances required me to re-install many programs, more so, the computer felt slower everytime the OS was upgraded.

Snow Leopard is different. I could actually see the difference! When I say ‘SEE’ the different, I mean it. Every window pops out quicker, graphics smoother and  the overall computer feels quicker and more stable. Something that’s rare in the computer world, it really does what it says on the tin! Something even better, after the upgrade, the OS gave me back almost 9Gb of hard drive space! It can only mean that now OS components are better integrated, streamlined and more efficient as a result.

Great, so far, I only experience small incompatibilities for certain drivers but overall it’s a great upgrade, perhaps the best so far. It’s fast, more efficient and if what Apple says about Grand Central’s capability, if future programs use the multi-core threading codes, it could mean substantial increase in performance, even without upgrading hardware! I can’t wait… simply.

Apple has done a great job and continues to deliver innovative ideas and products. Snow Leopard, really refined the principle.

I love Apple, Snow Leopard rocks! Long live my Macbook Pro, hope it doesn’t die that quickly :O

Jimmy