Yosemite, is it worth it?

[dheisler1]

I found a way to go back to OS 10.9, and I'm glad I did!

 

[NateS]

I haven't upgraded yet and am still uncertain as to whether I need to.

I use Excel and Word in Office for Mac 2011 a lot, is it compatible with Yosemite?

If you have a non-Retina Mac, and you do intensive work in Excel and Word, I would think long and hard before "upgrading" to Yosemite. Many complaints of blurry fonts, eyestrain and headaches. I am in that group.

Regards, Nate

 

[gloriapattismyt]

I don't see anything on here about whether Yosemite will screw up my mail like Mavericks did when I tried it (and had to go back to Snow Leopard). But I've been getting messages saying that certain sites no longer support OS 10.6.8, so I probably need to do something. Suggestions?

 

[Slydude]

What did Mavericks do to your mail.

 

[Jima1]

Yosemite

As a Mac user since 1992 ( System 7) I was a beta tester for Yosemite and installed it on one of my MacBook Pro's when it was released to the general public.

However, I installed to an external drive thankfully as it knocked out my Wi-Fi Network amongst other things. I've now reverted back to Mavericks 10.9.5 on both mine and my wife's MacBook Pro and until Apple get Yosemite sorted out at probably 10.10.5 or so, I may just try it again, or stay on Mavericks which works well for me and my wife's MBP's.

To be honest, I don't like Yosemite, it's a backward step and it's flat folders etc remind me of pre OS X systems. I'm in a rural part of England, UK, so my maximum download speed is less than 8 Mbps. Apple's decision to stop supplying major upgrades on DVD's was a bad one, since I now have to download 5GB plus on two copper wires, a small crackle on the line, and I finish up with a corrupt download. Thankfully, my ISP provides unlimited bandwidth at an affordable price.;D

In my opinion, Apple customers just get used to one major upgrade, then wham ! they release another, not necessary in my opinion..............what was wrong with Mavericks ?, or for that matter........Snow Leopard ?. Their Tech Support in the UK is crap, on most occasions they admit to me that I know more about Mac OS X than they do.:Blushing::Blushing:

They have cocked up my settings over the last few days several times, so at 74 years of age I have to burn the midnight oil and sort out the problems myself or with the help of Mac savvy friends both in the UK and abroad. As we say in the UK " they're not fit for purpose". Steve Jobs must be turning in his grave !

Apple needs to review it's future plans for major upgrades, we're not all developers. graphic designers, professional photographers etc, we're just ordinary guys who want a reliable computer that works doesn't drop Wi-Fi, can stream music, and is a pleasure to use.

To be honest, my 9 years old 20" iMac running on 10.4.11 gives me the least trouble, it's CPU is just too slow, and not enough RAM.

Finally, I find even for using a my 2012 15" MacBook Pro as a hobby, shopping, banking, and browsing, 8 GB of RAM is necessary. My wife's 2011 13" MBP has just 4GB, and the difference is noticeable.

Happy New Year, and a Mac fault free one too ( fine chance)

 

[berniw]

I installed it and made my macbookpro crawl

I lost some data as I restored back from Time machine but glad I did, now my system is running ok once again. I would have liked it for family share but not at this expense. This was the worst upgrade I have ever seen from Apple. I believe I will wait a while.

 

[gloriapattismyt]

What did Mavericks do to your mail.

Well, it just made a jumbled mess of everything, with no order or formatting.

 

[berniw]

I forgot to add

It also did not allow me to upgrade my Adobe Cloud program - Premiere pro, not run the old version. There are some bugs that still have to be worked out. Motion did also not work anymore,
B

 

[Pug]

So far so good! However, whoever approved of the eliminating the 3d effects on Icons must have only one eye. I find the new flat style rather primitive, definitely unappealing and cheap looking!

Bill

The clean, crisp Yosemite design is a huge improvement over the faux wood of Photo Booth and other dated, realistic icons. The only holdout I see is GarageBand which still looks too detailed. Yosemite couldn't look better.

 

[Gren]

If you have a non-Retina Mac, and you do intensive work in Excel and Word, I would think long and hard before "upgrading" to Yosemite. Many complaints of blurry fonts, eyestrain and headaches. I am in that group.

Regards, Nate

Thanks, that's useful info, think I'll stick with Mavericks.

 

[chas_m]

I have a non-Retina MacBook Pro with not-great eyes, and I think Yosemite is BY FAR the best looking upgrade (and it is a pretty serious UPgrade) I've seen in years. I'm with Pug 100 percent and suggest the rest of you get new glasses.

Oh, and the designer was some nerd who's won every design award this planet has to offer, but of course its rubbish next to you geniuses ...

 

[NateS]

I have a non-Retina MacBook Pro with not-great eyes, and I think Yosemite is BY FAR the best looking upgrade (and it is a pretty serious UPgrade) I've seen in years. I'm with Pug 100 percent and suggest the rest of you get new glasses.

Oh, and the designer was some nerd who's won every design award this planet has to offer, but of course its rubbish next to you geniuses ...

If you are enjoying Yosemite and have no problems with usability and eyestrain, etc. then we are all happy for you and envious. But that is no basis for ridicule of those of us who are having these serious problems, or for suggesting that we are not smart enough to have already had our vision re-checked professionally after encountering these problems with Yosemite.

Incidentally, I went from a three year old MBPro non-r running Mavericks to a brand-new MBPro non-r running Yosemite and there is a dramatic overnight difference and I can still see the difference in visibility etc. when running them side-by-side. Apple even replaced the one recently purchased, but the replacement causes the same suffering.

If you think that we are just a few cranks and whiners, I suggest that you google "Yosemite" and "blurry." The problem is all over the internet, including Apple's own support communities.

When we are using our computers, we have to look at the screen, not at Jony Ive's awards for physical product design.

Best wishes, Nate

 

[chas_m]

I can only tell you that most of my clients are seniors, and so I get a lot of requests to make fonts bigger, but have as of yet not encountered either personally or with friends who are upwards of 90 any problems with blurriness.

 

[NateS]

I can only tell you that most of my clients are seniors, and so I get a lot of requests to make fonts bigger, but have as of yet not encountered either personally or with friends who are upwards of 90 any problems with blurriness.

How much bigger do the seniors ask you to make their fonts?

What is the average new font size your seniors report as finding comfortable?

What is the maximum new font size you have set for any one of them in order to give him/her reading comfort?

Isn't true that even blurry fonts can be read if made large enough?

Nate

PS _ By the way, I've read your essay entitled "Keeping your Mac in top form" and it is very well-written.

 

[chas_m]

Usually 12-14 point (ie, no smaller than) unless they have glaucoma something severe like that (this would be in Safari, typically the most-used app).

Some just turn off the font smoothing for smaller-sized but unavoidable fonts (such as the menubar).

Thanks for the kind words on the essay.

On my 20-inch monitor and non-Retina MacBook Pro, I can truthfully say that I do not see any "blurry" fonts, from the menubar to the Dock. There's a difference between something that a young person with 20/20 vision would still report as being "blurry" (ie its on the screen, even in screenshots) and what the *user* might perceive as "blurry" (after, say, a long day at work or a few glasses of scotch), that's what I was trying to say.

 

[NateS]

Usually 12-14 point (ie, no smaller than) unless they have glaucoma something severe like that (this would be in Safari, typically the most-used app).

Some just turn off the font smoothing for smaller-sized but unavoidable fonts (such as the menubar).

Thanks for the kind words on the essay.

On my 20-inch monitor and non-Retina MacBook Pro, I can truthfully say that I do not see any "blurry" fonts, from the menubar to the Dock. There's a difference between something that a young person with 20/20 vision would still report as being "blurry" (ie its on the screen, even in screenshots) and what the *user* might perceive as "blurry" (after, say, a long day at work or a few glasses of scotch), that's what I was trying to say.

Reading all the complaints about eyestrain, blurry fonts, headaches etc. on the Apple Support Communities, I get the impression that professionals who use their Macs working in the applied arts, desktop publishing etc. are more apt to use specific language in describing the problem they are encountering, with terms such as "blurry" etc. whereas the average home users may simply say things like "That typed part needs to be bigger for me" etc. or "I'm having a hard time reading that size print" etc.

If that's the case, complaints about blurry fonts, eyestrain, headaches etc. may simply come through as a request for a larger font size by many users. So I am suggesting that those seniors you are servicing by increasing font sizes may have had their request triggered by the loss of sharpness of the fonts even though they have not articulated it to you that way.

As for the professionals, I really don't think that those complaining about these problems since Yosemite are whiners or malcontents; they just want to get their work done.

Best wishes, Nate

 

[parasbuy]

So, the question I have is.. why can newer operating systems not be able to be installed onto older Macs? Yes, it would be slower and certain features that require particular hardware may not work; but it seems that over the last few years that the conversation has turned to can't. My Mom has a 2006 Core Duo and cannot go past Snow Leopard. Yosemite requires iMacs mid-2007 or later. I would like to understand what the link is between an older processor and the requirements of a newer operating system that cannot use it.

Just wondering.

Thanks,
Paras.

 

[chscag]

So, the question I have is.. why can newer operating systems not be able to be installed onto older Macs?

Simple answer.... the newer operating systems require newer hardware, specifically better graphics, more memory, and processor. Your mother's 2006 Core Duo may be fine for her use, and that's OK.

 

[Alex 3]

Yosemite

I always wait 6 to 8 months to upgrade a new operating system.Clear the bugs, make some necessary patches. Hear what other users say. wait for the dust to settle. Am I right?

Having and continuing to deal with an iPad and iPhone that were useful for 20-24hr before Apple's upgrade to iOS 8 and all its cousins and now can hardly make it through 8 hr without being plugged in, I will continue to chuff along on OS 10.7.5.
Apples has become a bruised commodity since Jobs passed. The whole thinh is about money for the bankers who seem to be in charge now.

 

[TerrySmythe]

I've been happily running Adobe Creative Suite 2 under Snow Leopard, does everything I need. Almost every day, I receive a pop-up inviting me to upgrade to Yosemiti - FREE! I stupidly capitulated, did the upgrade, and to my horror, CS2 no longer works, no longer supported. DAMMMMMMMM I have no need to upgrade CS2, for significant $$$$, as CS2 does everything I need. So I bit the bullet, wiped my drive and reinstalled Snow Leopard and over a couple days eventually got everything working again. Not a nice experience.