On Dec 27, 2008, at 10:13 AM, Carl Witthoft wrote:
I'm a new user of MAC/Unix. I want R on a powerbook MAC with OS
10.3.9.
How come a new user has a long-obsolete OS?
So he got a free machine. I use 10.3.9 at home on my snowball iMac
because it's solid, stable, and Just Works(tm). Since the only
reason to blow a C-note on 10.4 (or 5) would be to let me use
various chunks of software, I haven't.
In fact 10.4 is quite a bit faster than 10.3 on the same (old)
hardware, which is one of the reasons why 10.3 is so hard to find
those days. Essentially anyone who keeps running 10.3 isn't really
doing himself a favor, so it takes a really good reason to keep it ;).
I can do far more than I need w/ R-2.2.1 for home use. I do use
2.8.x at work (where, as a cheap old %...@*#^$#, I haven't upgraded
from 10.4.11 *_*).
The 10.4 vs 10.5 question is not that straight forward anymore -
10.5's "felt" speed on PPC machines is actually slower than 10.4
(regardless of RAM etc.), so it's all about features there. For Intel,
there is no question, though ;).
Cheers,
S
My recommendation to the OP would be to use 2.2.1 w/ the install
package unless there are specific R-packages you cant live without.
_______________________________________________
R-SIG-Mac mailing list
[email protected]
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mac
_______________________________________________
R-SIG-Mac mailing list
[email protected]
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mac
