Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Example of why Mountain Lion is good but Lion wasn't

I

infobleep

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 10, 2008
141
0
Hi there

I have a MacBook 2009 edition which only has 4GB of memory, 2 of which I allow for Windows 7 when running VMWare Fusion 4. It also has about 15-19GB of disc space free.

Earlier this week I suspended my virtual Windows 7. I then plugged in 2 firewire hard drives.

I then let CarbonCopyCloner clone my internal hard drive and Time Machine run it's back up. The next morning I got up and all was well, the jobs having been done.

In fact I repeated the process a couple of nights later and again all was well. Great. Just how I like it.

However when I did the exact same steps under Lion, it would cause my computer to effectively crash. It wouldn't be able to find the external hard drives and other things might occur but these only happened after I had run VMWare Fusion. I would have to restart the computer. This might often mean a backup being delayed as I may not want to restart my computer.

May be VMWare fixed a bug in Fusion but the impression I get from reading posts in the past when I was experiencing the problems, was that it were Mac OS related bugs.

I've yet to try Time Machine whilst VMWare Fusion 4 is running but I am confident it would just work.

Moral of the story, if your stil on Lion and your Mac can support Mountain Lion, upgrade. Lion must be Apple's version of Windows Vista. Unlike Microsoft though, they upgraded quicker. I only upgraded to Lion because I wanted to use iCloud. Now I can use iCloud and an OS which works better!

If you have any other examples of where Mountain Lion fixes a problem that Lion had, post them here.
 
5

50548

Guest
Apr 17, 2005
5,039
2
Currently in Switzerland
infobleep said:
Hi there

I have a MacBook 2009 edition which only has 4GB of memory, 2 of which I allow for Windows 7 when running VMWare Fusion 4. It also has about 15-19GB of disc space free.

Earlier this week I suspended my virtual Windows 7. I then plugged in 2 firewire hard drives.

I then let CarbonCopyCloner clone my internal hard drive and Time Machine run it's back up. The next morning I got up and all was well, the jobs having been done.

In fact I repeated the process a couple of nights later and again all was well. Great. Just how I like it.

However when I did the exact same steps under Lion, it would cause my computer to effectively crash. It wouldn't be able to find the external hard drives and other things might occur but these only happened after I had run VMWare Fusion. I would have to restart the computer. This might often mean a backup being delayed as I may not want to restart my computer.

May be VMWare fixed a bug in Fusion but the impression I get from reading posts in the past when I was experiencing the problems, was that it were Mac OS related bugs.

I've yet to try Time Machine whilst VMWare Fusion 4 is running but I am confident it would just work.

Moral of the story, if your stil on Lion and your Mac can support Mountain Lion, upgrade. Lion must be Apple's version of Windows Vista. Unlike Microsoft though, they upgraded quicker. I only upgraded to Lion because I wanted to use iCloud. Now I can use iCloud and an OS which works better!

If you have any other examples of where Mountain Lion fixes a problem that Lion had, post them here.
Click to expand...

I've never had any issues with Lion and was not at all excited with ML...in any case, I decided to take the plunge and upgrade - and I must say that, so far, no bugs were found apart from my Cyborg RAT drivers which are as useless as under Lion, as well as with airplay mirroring that seems to resize the mouse area weirdly.

So I tend to agree that, despite my criticism of its iOSification, ML was a painless upgrade for me.
 
I

infobleep

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 10, 2008
141
0
brand said:
Lion is 10.7
Mountain Lion is 10.8

Obviously Mountain Lion is better.
Click to expand...

Just because an OS has a higher number, doesn't mean it's better. Whilst there were some good points about Lion, was it better than Snow Leopard? Yes it had some good enhancements but they also took way some features such as exposé. They also brought in sandboxing for files you'd created yourself, causing them not to run in Unix. This bug may have been fixed in Mountain Lion, I've not checked but it wasn't great when I came across it in Lion. Also it took a few service packs for them to fix an issue with their own supported wireless mouse.

Speaking to a colleague at work, he was far from impressed with Lion. I've not used Windows Vista but I've heard lots of people say XP was better. I do use Windows 7 though and think that is better than XP.

I have used other software where later versions are not always as stable as earlier versions. However if the enhancements outweigh the stability issues I may still upgrade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom