Discussion Mac OS 11 Big Sur: Performances and interface: invitation for notations and comments.

What do you think about Mac OS 11 Big Sur performances and interface ?

  • [-2] : Very deceived (retro-gradation).

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [-1] : Dissatisfied (expectations not satisfied).

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • [0] : Neutral.

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • [+1] : Well surprised (enthusiastic).

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • [+2] : Very satisfied (better performances or interface).

    Votes: 1 25.0%

  • Total voters
Nov 13, 2020
Mac OS 11 Big Sur makes me really satisfied, to say the least. Although the download size is slightly higher than 12 Go, (to take the 2 kinds of processors in consideration: Intel, and the upcoming Apple Silicon), my Intel MacBook Pro, of mid-2014 (the latest with Nvidia graphical processor) became much more reactive, with our new Operating System.
I am a pro-Apple, but the difference is really sensibly seen; I think that it is my best enthusiasm of a Mac OS for about 20 years (since X.6 Leopard or so).

So let’s imagine on the upcoming MacBook Air based on Apple Silicon, having higher performances than a MacBook Pro of a few years earlier only!..

The sole thing which does not convince me totally, is the translucid menus bar, which is not more practically visible for me. I also would like the coming back of my battery percentage display in the bar.

About the preliminaries:
I tried the 12 Go download since 19H25 UTC+1; it occurred in my case that it failed 3 times; I thought that I had enough hard memory as I has 33 Go and the upgrade size was of 12 Go, but at the 3rd attempt, I clicked on “more informations”, and saw on Apple’s site that the required space was in fact of 35,5 Go – surely to avoid some fragmentation I think.

As far as I backuped my Bootcamp and Mac OS X.15 Catalina, deleted some HP softwares having had an expired certificate, wholly deleted the rests of a third-part disk optimizer (which was not for SSD or Flash), I nevertheless omitted to update the 11 Go XCode (which could not download either, with my previous 33 available Go).

So I update XCode in the interval, and kept a look at the remaining hard memory size, which was more than the required 35,5 Go – so Mac OS 11 Big Sur downloaded in 7 hours, since about midnight to about 7H a. m.

During the installation, the computer rebooted 4 times, what is normal; on the second occurrence, I guess that it updated the EFI firmware (as there was no countdown on this part); initially provided for half an hour duration from the beginning of the first part, the whole 4 installation parts finished in 40 minutes on my mentioned 2014 Intel Mac, what is reasonable, moreover for the very satisfying result.

As it was already updated in X.15 Catalina, Safari – announced as to receive a major update – got, for the version number, a minor decimal increase during the Mac OS upgrade. It recently added prevention form trackers, what is still the case, but seemingly with increased security, beside more aesthetical updates.

On its side the Bootcamp utility was not updated (what I don’t not require in my case), but it might signify that it won’t be specially updated in the near-upcoming Apple Silicon Macs, but I think that it will be proposed for the Intel platforms.

Although officially not working directly on Apple Silicon with any Bootcamp due to MS license and its corresponding technical limitation, the concurrent main proprietary OS nevertheless is officially supported by the leader of the virtualisation, whose name begins with VM, (and surely by their concurrent, “//”, but I did not verify).

On its side, the main leader of the security (firewall and antivirus, and now VPN) on PCs for decades, and on Macs, whose name begins with N, globally shows an easier installation than months ago, but its password auto-protection for the navigator is difficult to implement, now, (but I don’t use it).

-So if there is a thing to keep in mind: Mac OS 11 Big_Sur is much more smooth in working, even on Intel-Macs!
Reactions: macmanaman


Jan 24, 2007
Thunderbolt (aka "Type C") ports on my M1 mini are too close together and most of my cables won't fit more than one at a time: This is more of a hardware squawk tho. As is the pathetic USB 2.0-spec Type-A-ports.

FIX, get two short "extension cables" and just let the 7" cable hang. (Amazon, less than $10 for a pair). But this won't make the hub work, that's a Big Sur problem...hopefully.<G>

Big Sur's implementation of the Thunderbolt/USB Gen2 drivers will not permit a USB hub connected to one of the ports to work. Same hub works great on Mojave or Windows (haven't tried it on Catalina), There are also reported issues with driving multiple monitors as well, but I don't do that.
Reactions: macmanaman