Poll: Are you upgrading to Sonoma?

[smithrh]

Right, my main concern is my mix of Apple Silicon and Intel machines and OS levels, and if they removed functionality that I (potentially unknowingly) depend on day to day.

It wouldn't be great if I had to upgrade every machine I had all at the same time to keep things working smoothly.

ETA: Thanks for the report!

 

[pshufd]

Right, my main concern is my mix of Apple Silicon and Intel machines and OS levels, and if they removed functionality that I (potentially unknowingly) depend on day to day.

It wouldn't be great if I had to upgrade every machine I had all at the same time to keep things working smoothly.

ETA: Thanks for the report!

Performance is better than I remember it. I've done a ton of testing with Screen Sharing on Macs from 2007 to 2022 and put out a couple of videos on how to use a Mac as a spare monitor. I was considering creating an adhoc Thunderbolt network between my 2015 iMac and my Studio for fast file transfer and shared mouse support.

This means that I can just run programs off my other system and it solves RAM limitations on my Studio and MacBook Pro as I can use them together.

 

[smithrh]

Cool - I remember the Ars article comparing it to Microsoft Remote Desktop, which isn't a bad benchmark...

Can you have multiple machines look at the same Mac at the same time? IIRC this was not supported on Remote Desktop - one remote view only.

 

[pshufd]

Cool - I remember the Ars article comparing it to Microsoft Remote Desktop, which isn't a bad benchmark...

Can you have multiple machines look at the same Mac at the same time? IIRC this was not supported on Remote Desktop - one remote view only.

I'll boot up my Mini and give it a try.

Update. I was able to connect from my Mini but I can only view the other system. I can't change anything on the screen. Sound doesn't come through either. My mini is running Ventura. It was running Sonoma on an external SSD but I forgot that I repurposed that SSD. So I'm going to upgrade the mini to Sonoma and try the new screen sharing again to see if I can remote control from two machines.

 

[pshufd]

I tested it out and only 1 high performance connection is allowed. This is good enough for my purposes as the idea would be to use multiple computers together but may not satisfy workgroup environments similar to Zoom when you need multiple people accessing and modifying screens.

 

[smithrh]

Thanks!

Is there a setting for high performance vs. normal? e.g., would I be able to connect more than one if I were to opt-out of high performance?

And/or is there still the ability to use the old Screen Sharing app or is it just removed entirely?

 

[pshufd]

Thanks!

Is there a setting for high performance vs. normal? e.g., would I be able to connect more than one if I were to opt-out of high performance?

And/or is there still the ability to use the old Screen Sharing app or is it just removed entirely?

Here's what it looks like:

The old way still works too.

 

[CPTmom2wp]

I'm still stuck on Catalina with my old 27-inch mac, unable to upgrade it further, but i've just ordered a new mac that's coming next month so Sonoma will be a nice 4x upgrade

Same. I have a 2012 27" that still works perfectly.....on Catalina. I know the time is coming, but dang......it is so hard to give up a computer that is still functioning beautifully and nice screen size. Apple used to make products that were practically built for "forever".

 

[rforno]

This new screen sharing support is great. I'm screen sharing from my Mac Studio in the basement to my M1 Pro MacBook Pro 16 in the living room using High Performance mode and it's very nice. Sound comes through as well. I see some decent possibilities for this feature, mainly the ability to network computers together. I'm going to try it out with my Intel iMac to see what the performance delta is between Apple Silicon and Intel but I'll have to install OCLP to do this.

Does the new Screen Sharing work on a FileVaulted machine with the firewall enabled? IIRC that was a problem on Monterrey --- you couldn't screen share unless the target machine had dropped shields, which was a non-starter for me.

 

[pshufd]

Does the new Screen Sharing work on a FileVaulted machine with the firewall enabled? IIRC that was a problem on Monterrey --- you couldn't screen share unless the target machine had dropped shields, which was a non-starter for me.

I do not know and I don't think that I have that configuration set up.

 

[minik]

Upgraded on three Apple silicon Mac and one Intel-based Mac here, so far I'm happy with a fresh OS.

 

[Paradoxally]

under-the-hood enhancements. stability. speed. security. viva sonoma.

Stability on a x.0 release lol

Viva Ventura.

 

[fisherking]

Stability on a x.0 release lol

Viva Ventura.

this is based on your experience on sonoma? or just some words you're saying.... 🤔

 

[Willeford]

Mini 2018 Intel, 32gb ram, everything's OK and, to me, far better than Ventura.

 

[thebart]

I did. Nothing broke, as far as I can tell. Notice no difference

I read the feature list and it looks like create web site as app is the only thing I'll be using. Eh.

 

[fisherking]

I did. Nothing broke, as far as I can tell. Notice no difference

I read the feature list and it looks like create web site as app is the only thing I'll be using. Eh.

i dunno, i always care most about the under-the-hood stuff; how my needed apps work, how mail, the web works. how stable things are. and in that regard, sonoma's a good OS, even if a small step up from ventura

it's all small steps between OSes in the present. it makes sense, and makes it easy to adapt to each new iteration...

 

[Steve Ballmer]

i dunno, i always care most about the under-the-hood stuff; how my needed apps work, how mail, the web works. how stable things are. and in that regard, sonoma's a good OS, even if a small step up from ventura

it's all small steps between OSes in the present. it makes sense, and makes it easy to adapt to each new iteration...

This has been true for a long time. Windows 3.1 was an iterative upgrade over 3, yet added a lot of new features and was just overall better. Windows 98 was the same way compared to 95. macOS no different here, releases like Snow Leopard, Mountain Lion, and now Sonoma, have all been great (so far for the latter).

 

[Paradoxally]

this is based on your experience on sonoma? or just some words you're saying.... 🤔

It's based on the experience of over 15 years of using Macs.

x.0 releases are not stable. They have bugs, they break workflows, and some apps will just not work or are buggy while developers work on releasing updates.

I save myself the headache and wait until x.2 or x.3. YMMV.

 

[fisherking]

It's based on the experience of over 15 years of using Macs.

x.0 releases are not stable. They have bugs, they break workflows, and some apps will just not work or are buggy while developers work on releasing updates.

I save myself the headache and wait until x.2 or x.3. YMMV.

sonoma in it's first official release has been stellar here; of course, i only speak for myself.

my mac usage is about 25 years. and in my experience, there's no 'perfect moment' with .2 or .3 versions; OS development is a constant evolution, and an update may fix one bug but add a new one. hence the endless betas and official releases.

of course, we're all free to believe what we want...

 

[Paradoxally]

I believe in what Apple says. For example, this Configurator issue breaks one of my workflows.

People can say what they like, but every year it's the same thing: x.0 releases are not stable. Apple's focus is to get the OS out of the door to meet their yearly deadline.

The improvements come later, so it is wise to hold off from updating day 1 and upgrade from Monterey or Ventura to Sonoma when you know it won't break things you use daily. Any IT department that knows their stuff would make the same recommendation for mission critical devices.

Obviously, if you're installing Sonoma on a machine which is just used for leisure that's less of a concern.

 

[pshufd]

sonoma in it's first official release has been stellar here; of course, i only speak for myself.

my mac usage is about 25 years. and in my experience, there's no 'perfect moment' with .2 or .3 versions; OS development is a constant evolution, and an update may fix one bug but add a new one. hence the endless betas and official releases.

of course, we're all free to believe what we want...

I started out with the Apple ][.

 

[fisherking]

I started out with the Apple ][.

but only 'over 15 years of mac use'? anyway, you win... something... 🤔

 

[MacYak]

The choice "Yes, I have 14.0, but I have issues" is missing.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

I always upgrade. It gives me a reason to complain. 🥳

j/k

 

[Lioness~]

OP might consider correcting the 2nd choice.
It’s not a matter of: IF Apple release will release 14.1 or 14.2, but a matter of WHEN.