ArsTechnica Posts Mac OS X 10.2 Review

hype7 writes "ArsTechnica have posted their review on Mac OS X 10.2. John Siracusa has been writing the reviews of Mac OS X since way back with the developer previews, and in my experience they've been the most thorough, thoughtful and unbiased reviews of Mac OS X on the web. Well worth a read." He does do a fine job; so if you needed one last fix of looks at Jaguar, here you go.

Comments

From a Mac geek...

[singularity]

10.0.x were for the true bleeding edge.

10.1.x were for most Mac users.

10.2 is for every Mac user.

A fairly computer illerate mac user asked me about a week ago if they should get Jaguar (10.2). I replied "With 10.2, there is no reason anyone with a machine that Apple says can run OS X is not running it."

Unless you are running a specialized application that does not run under Classic, there is no reason not to be running OS X if your machine supports it.

The speed, support, and stability are all there to make this a great operating system.

The fact that I was able to throw in an old video card, a spare 100Base-T card and a USB card into my G4 at once and have them all immediately recognized and supported is simply amazing. Apple has done wonderful work with this transition.

And I have a two-button scroll optical mouse natively supported, for everyone who might chime in with that.

It's not supposed to be personal.

[elocutio]

John's review was very thorough, as usual. While the Mac enthusiast is bound to disagree with his overall sentiment, I think the review is a must-read for the deeply entrenched Linux fan.

I do think that he began picking at nits somewhat (who cares if people call it Jag-Wire), and ultimately, he drew all of his 10.2 comparisons on a combination of the earlier incarnations of itself (like 10.1) and some unknown ethereal ideal (like "PerfectOS, version 3").

The charts on window server performance with Quartz Extreme were pretty neat, and while the review does not offer an exhaustive look at Jaguar's new features, the information offered was remarkably detailed and helpful, which allows readers to draw their own conclusions.

I was really hoping to see more comparisons of OS X versus other Linux flavors, or even Windows or Solaris. Instead, the review often sounded almost adversarial and at least reactionary, which I could personally do without. Whether or not he had an axe to grind, John is a very talented writer and computer savant. This lengthy review is worth your time to read.

Re:Ars Technica?

[Van Halen]

Give me a break. I know from reading many of your posts that you're a very thoughtful, intelligent sort of person. But I also know that you rush to defend the Macintosh platform at all costs, throwing that thoughtful intelligence to the wind if absolutely necessary. It's getting kind of old.

The guy provides the most in-depth, unbiased technical review of Jaguar that I've seen to date. Overall his review is very positive and enthusiastic. But he also points out the things that still need fixing or improvement. As soon as you read that part, I'm sure your brain was thinking "Blasphemy! Must defend beloved, infallible OS!"

Puh-lease.

Sure, he gets a little nitpicky with a few problems that bother him personally, but the fact is that they remain problems that Apple needs to fix. You may not agree with everything he says either, but to dismiss the entire thing because he makes a few good points that expose weaknesses in your beloved platform is like walking around with blinders on.

I absolutely love the Mac platform. Mac OS X is, far and away, the best OS I've ever used (out of all flavors of Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, IRIX, HPUX, AIX, Solaris, VMS, DOS, OS/2, BeOS, you name it). Like you, I tend to be quick to defend Apple and Mac OS X against FUD and damaging misinformation. Case in point: the graphic designer at my wife's job has to use dialup to get his email because the MCSE network guys said "Macs can't network." I hear that all the time - Macs can't do this, Macs can't do that - and have to correct it. Sometimes it's infuriating to see the ignorant biases against the Mac platform.

But this particular review is very well researched and thought out - and accurate! The shortcomings he lists are, indeed, shortcomings. I really hope the engineers at Apple read every one of his reviews and take them into account - the next version of Mac OS X will be that much better because of it. Imagine that - as good as Jaguar is, imagine having something even better. Great, isn't it?

Small nits, pickwise

[fm6]

I do think that he began picking at nits somewhat (who cares if people call it Jag-Wire),

Or what kind of graphics are used for the box or startup screen!

Of all the system architecture pundits I've read, Siracusa is the most literate and intelligent. But he has a certain tendency to get bogged down in minor details and issues. Which keeps him from developing much influence outside the Mac user community. Which is a pity.