What's the earliest version of Mac OS X that 5.5 will support? I'm still using 10.2.8 due to various reasons (mostly graduating and losing my student discount), and I'm wondering whether/hoping that OW will continue to support those of us with older OS versions.

On the other hand, OW 4 was the reason I switched my iBook to OS X in the first place back in '01, so maybe it's the only thing that will get me off my lazy duff and upgrade already.

Yours,
Evan

"OmniWeb 5.5 requires Mac OS X 10.4 or later." from the sneakypeek page

Hardly surprising, given that the build of webkit they're using also requires 10.4.

[NickM]

10.4 will offer you loads more than just being able to run Omniweb too. Upgrade! You won't regret it.

[Ryan]

Especially if you're coming from 10.2! Wow, you'll really like the improvement. Assuming your machine can handle it, the upgrade is worth it.

[BwanaZulia]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Especially if you're coming from 10.2! Wow, you'll really like the improvement. Assuming your machine can handle it, the upgrade is worth it.

I run OSX 10.4 on both a new dual G5 and a 5 year old TiG4 500Mhz. Basically most anything can run Tiger.

BZ

[Ilgaz]

If you have memory, Tiger will run better than 10.2.8 on your lowest machine.

It is not like windows, new versions get "faster" , not "slower".

You can turn off "spotlight" and "dashboard" very easily. There are freeware tools for it even.

[Ryan]

Well, fine, guys. Just go ahead and show that my comment wasn't right. Sheesh. Tough crowd.

[Ilgaz]

It is Apple, OS X frameworks forcing them to drop support for 10.2, not that they wake up one day and say "Lets drop 10.2.8".

For more/background info, read April/March blog entries of http://unsanity.org . I started to call it a "heroic developer" blog. ;)

As end user, in my spare time I try to participate in various shareware mailing lists/boards. It is always developers get the blame for the OS X non backwards compatible system.

I won't be surprised if same thing happens when 5.5 final ships. Is there anything Omni guys can do against it? No.

[Ilgaz]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Well, fine, guys. Just go ahead and show that my comment wasn't right. Sheesh. Tough crowd.

In Windows World you don't upgrade your system if you don't have to. E.g. AVID people are still happily running windows 2000. Why? Easy: New bells and whistles create performance problems with nothing performance wise improved in kernel.

As a guy switched to OS X in 2003, I remember when 10.3 shipped, I have seen no reason to upgrade. A bit later, when some programs required 10.3 , I flamed developers who doesn't support my 10.2 OS.

I was a newbie on Mac and I didn't know in Mac World, a new OS means better performing system.

So I think everyone considered the OP a "windows switcher" and tried to explain things work different in Mac World.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by Ilgaz

In Windows World you don't upgrade your system if you don't have to. E.g. AVID people are still happily running windows 2000. Why? Easy: New bells and whistles create performance problems with nothing performance wise improved in kernel.

Sticking with Win2k is only for the highly knowledgeable. Since MS is not releasing security patches for it, unless the patch is also needed for XP or 2k3, it's filled with security holes.