DigiTimes: Apple may delay Leopard release till October

[fisha]

Reason for Edit: Apparently, my grammar needs some improvement.

With new items like this appearing in the new wires this lunch time, do you think there is any plausibility in them?

http://www.macworld.co.uk/macsoftware/news/index.cfm?newsid=17581&pagtype=allchandate


I have to admit though . . . why would it not already be able to support Vista? Vista has been about for while in terms of Beta / pre-release development versions . . . so i would have thought they would have had plenty of time to be able to cope with the final Vista release.

Seems like a semi-plausible comment / excuse to put as the reason behind having to move out the release date of Leopard which already was looking to not make April anyhow ( from reading some of the other threads on here )

[AppleInsider]

Apple Inc. may postpone the launch of its next-generation Leopard operating system in order to bolster dual boot support for rival Microsoft Corp.'s Windows Vista operating system, DigiTimes reported on its website on Friday.

The Taiwanese trade publication cited "industry sources" in saying the launch delay is not due to software design problems with Leopard but instead is attributed to Apple's plan to have its new OS support Windows Vista through an integrated version of Boot Camp.

"Boot Camp is an Apple software application that currently assists in the installation of Windows XP on computers using Apple's latest OS," the publication said. "The company hopes with support for Vista, Mac computers using the new OS can grab more market share, according to the sources."

DigiTimes, whose accuracy in predicting Apple's future directions is mediocre at best, cited its sources in saying that if Leopard supports only Windows XP, then the chances of the new OS attracting Windows users to buy an Apple computer decreases.

For its part, Apple has maintained that it is on track to ship Leopard "this Spring." However, recent developer releases have raised suspicion over whether the Cupertino-based company will be able to meet that self-imposed deadline, as a number of critical issues reportedly remain in the software.

Apple has also stated that it holds some "top secret" Leopard features at bay, which haven't been exposed to widespread testing. It's widely believed that the company would first have to introduce those secret functionalities in developer builds before calling development of Leopard a wrap.

AppleInsider reiterates that DigiTimes' coverage of Apple has been historically inaccurate and therefore its reports should be taken with a grain of salt. Of note, however, the publication's recent predictions that Apple would use LED-backlit displays in its next-generation MacBook Pro line is believed to be accurate.[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2595)

[elron]

I thought Apple said that BootCamp will become a stand-alone product when it finally emerges from beta. Perhaps someone heard that BootCamp will be delayed until October and assumed it meant the entire OS would be put on hold as well.

Then again, given the less-than-promising reports of the quality of recent Leopard builds, I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was delayed until the summer or later.

[PB]

A delay until October just for Vista seems rather suspicious to me. That Leopard could be delayed for several other reasons, this I can believe.

At this point a definite postponing of Leopard seems more and more likely. I don't remember in previous OS X releases so many delay hints 2-3 months before the supposed launch of the major OS update. Someone to refresh my memory?

[MacRR]

First to exclaim FUD!

such BS.

[samurai1999]

First to exclaim FUD!

such BS.

Yep - doesn't make sense at all!

:no: :no: :no:

[JohnnyKrz]

I also call BS. I don't run Vista myself, but I thought Vista support was already a part of Boot Camp beta. If not, I don't see Apple putting off Leopard just for that reason. Instead, I think they would just say that Vista support is coming and update Boot Camp when it is ready. I, for one, would be a little pissy at Apple if they delayed Leopard for Vista users. Screw Vista users.

[backtomac]

I think it will be deayed but for other reasons. It just ain't gonna be ready.

[PB]

Could we have the two threads merged please? :D

[nagromme]

Apple MIGHT do some kind of virtualized "Boot" Camp someday, at a strategic moment--two OS's running at ONCE (if that's what "integrated" means) is very nice--but they sure as heck wouldn't delay their own OS for it. They'd add it later.

Knowing how rumors get mis-repeated, maybe the truth is that this is one of the secret Leopard features, and that this FEATURE will be delayed until the fall. Not the whole OS. Leopard isn't ready now and won't be ready next month I'd say, but October? No.

Or there could well be no basis at all for this report.

[roehlstation]

Vista is not currently supported by Boot Camp, some have gotten it to work, but drivers are still not quite there. It works ok in Parallels I guess, but since there are few AutoDesk Apps that even run in Vista, I haven't tried any of it.

The only part that surprises me on that is the fact that they are going to have to run a lot of patches to support the iPhone on the current OS, just to get by until Leopard. I'm not really too upset by it, the current OS has been fine for me, can't really ask for much more in my opinion.

[ronn]

That makes absolutely no sense. It would mean Apple would spur Vista sales. Steve doesn't gives a rat's arse about Vista sales. If there is a delay, it will be for other reasons. And remember, Spring just started, so Apple has more than 80 days to deliver.

[Slewis]

For the last time, Developer Builds are not Beta Builds.

And I thought Boot Camp already supported Vista.... ? Either way Apple won't delay their products just to make it compatible with Microsoft's latest and greatest <strike>downgrade</strike> product.

There is a reason DigiTimes makes mediocre predictions at best.

Sebastian

[palex9]

the has to be one of the most stupid rumors ever! sure, apple will delay launching a great product to be more compatible with a terrible one? vista is a bunch of cr**, and more and more reviews are stating that fact.

if this turns out to be true, i will switch over to ubuntu linux and sell my macs.


-----------------
the count
http://thecountsworld.blogspot.com/

[d4v1d]

As if Apple would delay their next gen OS just so Windows Vista would work with boot camp. Pointless "news" again from digitimes...

[MacRR]

This was one of two FUD pieces to come out today.

In pre-market trading it had aapl down more than a buck, but it seems investors are starting to pick FUD out and discard it far better as of late because the stock recovered.

I am not sure if anyone has seen the cramer video- he explains how he'd mess with aapl by releasing bad news to dumb sources who love to regurgitate it :D.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=B7VUBPwIhHs

Anyways- apple opens it's stock up to this kind of stuff due to their secretive approach to their products.

That's why I hope the stock doesn't split- nothing worse than making a stock cheaper to open it up to more manipulation.

[ak1808]

Fake. WWDC is in June, and the Leopard sessions are planned in.

[Rolo]

This makes no sense at all. Apple can sell far more Macs when they start shipping with Leopard so there's no reason to delay the whole new OS just because of an issue with Boot Camp and Vista. A simple system update can be issued later once the BC/Vista bugs are worked out. It isn't as if there's a great surge of interest in Vista anyway.

I think Apple will have Leopard ready to roar by WWDC at the very latest, though I'd be happier with mid-May.

[Catman4d2]

Their once was a man from Nantucket...........


:rolleyes:

[vinney57]

This is rubbish. WWDC.

[Joe_the_dragon]

Apple MIGHT do some kind of virtualized "Boot" Camp someday, at a strategic moment--two OS's running at ONCE (if that's what "integrated" means) is very nice--but they sure as heck wouldn't delay their own OS for it. They'd add it later.

Knowing how rumors get mis-repeated, maybe the truth is that this is one of the secret Leopard features, and that this FEATURE will be delayed until the fall. Not the whole OS. Leopard isn't ready now and won't be ready next month I'd say, but October? No.

Or there could well be no basis at all for this report.

then they better come out with a mac that uses lower cost ram then FB-DIMMS as there will need a lot of RAM at least 1-2 gb just for vista.

[fisha]

I'll rephrase my original post a bit.


I think that the delay due to bootcamp/vista is a bit of smoke screening to put a semi-plausible excuse/reason out with which form the basis of a delay in the Leopard release date.

Its probably being taken to the extreme by many news sites and speculated upon to make it look bad, but behind it all, there are some plausible lines of thought behind it.


The other OS threads have shown that in its current releases of builds, the Leopard build numbers ( when compared to the Tiger build numbers ) are tracking such that Leopard wouldn't make April. This also combined with a good few discussions that of those developer builds being released, some developers feel that there are some obvious gaps and that those gaps are not likely to be closed in time for April either.

So if Apple were to come out with the statement that Leopard was to be delayed ( in relation to a previous conjectured date of April release ) then its not unreasonable to use a comment along the lines of making it work with other OS's.

I also dont think it would be unlike Apple to say:
" It could take upto Oct to complete "

Then a month or so down the line:
" The reality distortion field has fast forwarded time itself and now we will be releasing in a month to bring it out in June / July "


Bad news now, Good news later.

Plus, isn't Santa Rosa, one of the the next Intel platforms tracking for a release beyond April anyhow? Why not push out Leopard to align with a new platform for a newmac mini + iMac release.

Announce the 8-core Mac Pro along with Adobe CS3 mid April ( perhaps saying you'll be able to order mid-summer ), show a little bit more of Leopard with perhaps 1 sneek at an OSX secret feature and comment that in order to implement it and a few others, its going to take a little longer than expected, then release the whole lot a couple of months later.

Keeps the community sweet and then throw a huge release mid-summer.

All new mac minis, iMacs, Mac Pros, and a new OS to tie them all together.

[willrob]

The adobe preview of (Creative Suite) CS3 is next week; so we might see some hints of Leopard or even new hardware then. So far Adobe has only said their new products will not require Leopard, but that they run faster on Intel Macs than on PPCs.

[crees!]

How about fixing the grammar in the FIRST sentence. I didn't even bother reading the post because of that.

[Hobbes]

What garbage. Absolute garbage.

I'm sure Leopard's release date will stretch "spring" to its very limit, but Digitimes' stated reason for the delay makes no effing sense.

Updating Boot Camp to work with Vista is not *that* difficult, and by no stretch of imagination would it create a delay of several months for a major OS release like this one. There's even already a couple of hacks out there that will allow you to do it.

[mrjoec123]

I'll rephrase my original post a bit.

The other OS threads have shown that in its current releases of builds, the Leopard build numbers ( when compared to the Tiger build numbers ) are tracking such that Leopard wouldn't make April. This also combined with a good few discussions that of those developer builds being released, some developers feel that there are some obvious gaps and that those gaps are not likely to be closed in time for April either.

So if Apple were to come out with the statement that Leopard was to be delayed ( in relation to a previous conjectured date of April release ) then its not unreasonable to use a comment along the lines of making it work with other OS's.

I also dont think it would be unlike Apple to say:
" It could take upto Oct to complete "

Then a month or so down the line:
" The reality distortion field has fast forwarded time itself and now we will be releasing in a month to bring it out in June / July "


Apple never said Leopard would be ready by April. They said "Spring", which is anytime between two days ago and June 20th. If they release it prior to June 20th, there's no delay.

[TOSmoke]

Why even bother wasting the bandwith posting these nonsense stories from Digi? Post the link and route the stories to them....AppleInsider can't be desperate enough to use these headlines to garner more hits?
Why would any sane company delay an OS product launch on the premis that a small feature won't work well with a crappy product (at best) from Microsoft? What next, delay the next iMac product launch because MS Office Universal Binary is not ready either?
Most if not all sane users of MS OSs are not migrating to Vista in huge numbers anyways. They (Apple) will release 10.5 on schedule or after with "valid" reasons, not because they want to capitalize on the Vista boot. Come on....even the morons at Digi would realize this if they read their story more than once.

[leee]

This would be by far the stupidest reason to delay OS X. Total BS IMO.

[Macvault]

This would be THE MOST F---ED UP reason to delay Leopard! WTF!? Either this is total 100% BS, or Apple is STUPID!

[Kuku]

then they better come out with a mac that uses lower cost ram then FB-DIMMS as there will need a lot of RAM at least 1-2 gb just for vista.

Emmmm... All Xeon class workstations use FB-DIMMS. Way to be somewhat OOC and misinformed. It's part of the Mobo specs.

Those RAM prices are dropping pretty fast as it is. 2gig for $300 is current best price. Which is very low for Workstation class rams.

[Mr. H]

For the last time, Developer Builds are not Beta Builds.

You like saying that, don't you? Do you know what betas are? Just because Apple doesn't call them betas, doesn't mean that they are not.

It works like this: OS X is in a continual state of development. Moving to major new versions, with several major new features and significant "under the hood" changes unsurprisingly brings with it lots of bugs, some of them serious. So you can't just realease that to the public. The OS is continually worked on, and the OS recompiled often. Each new recompile is given a number that is sequentially higher than the previous build.

The numbering system is made up of three parts: a number, a letter, and then another number. Each part works as follows:

The first number: represents major milestones. Panther was 7, Tiger is 8 and Leopard is 9.

The letter: major new versions (i.e. an increment of the first number) start at "A" and this is incremented when significant, but not major changes are made - e.g. they always increment from one 10.x.x to 10.x.x+1 movement (e.g. 10.4.1 was build 8B15, and 10.4.2 was 8C46), and sometimes increment in-between those releases never to see the light of day. This happened with the 10.4.8 to 10.4.9 move - PPC 10.4.8 was build 8L127, PPC 10.4.9 is build 8P135 - M, N and O were all internal.

The second number: represents the number of times that version has been built. No functional changes are made between these builds, it's all about squashing bugs. Any functional changes will result in the letter being incremented. e.g. build 8L started at 8L1, and had that had no problems, would have been released. However, various bits of code had to be corrected, then the OS rebuilt, then everything tested. With 8L, this process happened 126 times to result in 8L127, which was released to the public. Some intermediate builds between 8L1 and 8L127 were released to developers.

Now, what is the point of me saying all this? It is that, whether you like it or not, and whether Apple calls them such or not, any build numbered above a previous release, and below the next release, is a beta. Changes are made from the last release, and these are tested. Most are tested internal to Apple, some are also released to developers to test. Apple uses feedback from internal testing and from developers to determine whether the latest build is ready for release or not. If it is not, corrections (as opposed to functional changes) are made to the code to correct bugs, and a new build with higher "third number" results.

This is definitely what happens when there is a single development train. The question is what about those "top secret features"? Those are presumably being worked on separately, but one has to expect that the foundation of builds with "top secret features" are the builds also being released to developers. i.e., all the problems that we see in developer builds also exist in builds with "top secret features". Presumably, the "top secret features" builds have additional bugs associated with said features.

[bdj21ya]

This was one of two FUD pieces to come out today.

In pre-market trading it had aapl down more than a buck, but it seems investors are starting to pick FUD out and discard it far better as of late because the stock recovered.

I am not sure if anyone has seen the cramer video- he explains how he'd mess with aapl by releasing bad news to dumb sources who love to regurgitate it :D.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=B7VUBPwIhHs

Anyways- apple opens it's stock up to this kind of stuff due to their secretive approach to their products.

That's why I hope the stock doesn't split- nothing worse than making a stock cheaper to open it up to more manipulation.

I'm doubtful that a split somehow opens up a stock to more manipulation. Sure it costs less, but there are more shares to absorb effects. I would guess it's just a wash.

[TheToe]

Some features and applications that Apple has released without ANY public testing, even by developers:

GarageBand
iPhoto
iTunes
Pages
Backup
Keynote
iMovie
Aperture
iWeb
Photo Booth

The list goes on. Many of these are major applications that never saw the light of day until their 1.0 was unveiled.

Why does everyone assume that Apple has to run Leopard's secret features past developers before revealing them?

History proves just the opposite. When Apple has something really juicy to reveal, they keep it hidden until they release it. And then they release a 1.0.1 and so on to address anything that the public discovers after the release.

[fisha]

How about fixing the grammar in the FIRST sentence. I didn't even bother reading the post because of that.

you read enough to be bothered to post a pointless reply.


Apple never said Leopard would be ready by April. They said "Spring", which is anytime between two days ago and June 20th. If they release it prior to June 20th, there's no delay.

Thats fair enough ... my comments on April were based on the conjecture that people were wishing that the next big Apple announcement would be related to Leopard.

[Mr. H]

Why does everyone assume that Apple has to run Leopard's secret features past developers before revealing them?

They don't. Or at least, I don't. What I was pointing out is that builds that are released to developers are betas.

[brianus]

Apple MIGHT do some kind of virtualized "Boot" Camp someday, at a strategic moment--two OS's running at ONCE (if that's what "integrated" means) is very nice--but they sure as heck wouldn't delay their own OS for it. They'd add it later.

I don't understand why some folks on rumor sites are hung up on the term "integrated", as used in the report. It simply means Boot Camp will ship as a part of the (Intel version of the) OS, rather than being a beta you have to download. Apple's been using that term for a year now..

[ciparis]

I've been running Vista on Boot Camp since last summer. This report has no credibility.

[Mr. H]

Can anyone point to any rumour story ever, about anything from Digitimes that has turned out to be correct?

[MacRR]

Of course it does. A cheaper stock is more accessible to the little guy investors- the ones most prone to FUD.

A wash? Nay, my friend. The amount of outstanding shares in any given company do little to absorb market impacts.


I'm doubtful that a split somehow opens up a stock to more manipulation. Sure it costs less, but there are more shares to absorb effects. I would guess it's just a wash.

[Kuku]

Wasn't it stated by Apple that BootCamp would not be intergrated into Leopard....I think this rumor is a little far fetched.

[Mr. H]

Wasn't it stated by Apple that BootCamp would not be intergrated into Leopard....I think this rumor is a little far fetched.

No. It was stated by Apple that they weren't going to integrate virtualisation - that they'd leave that to Parallels and VMware.

The first paragraph on Apple's Boot Camp page (http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/) clearly states that Boot Camp will be included in Leopard.

[stompy]

What!! Leopard dealyed???? From the day Steve said "Spring," I have been waiting to upgrade, now this?????

Digitimes?

Uh, nevermind.

[jamezog]

The list goes on. Many of these are major applications that never saw the light of day until their 1.0 was unveiled.

Why does everyone assume that Apple has to run Leopard's secret features past developers before revealing them?

History proves just the opposite. When Apple has something really juicy to reveal, they keep it hidden until they release it. And then they release a 1.0.1 and so on to address anything that the public discovers after the release.

Agreed. To take it a step further: didn't everyone say that Vista RC1 was really unstable, and then a "stable" RC2 came out a short time later? If MS can pull something like that off, certainly Apple can as well. Ultimately, you never know what's really going on behind the doors in Cupertino.

I think the DigiTimes prediction is total BS, too. If Apple released Boot Camp as an update to Tiger, surely they can release a patch for Vista if one was necessary - for Tiger as well as Leopard. There's no reason to wait six months for such a trivial feature. Talk about incompetent journalism. What is DigiTimes, the tabloid of tech? :err: :grumble:

[Clive At Five]

Ridiculous. Apple isn't trying to win XP -> Vista Switchers, they're trying to prevent XP -> Vista Switchers. Recall Apple's scare-tactic "I'm a Mac" ad where PC is undergoing surgury... They're using OS X as an alternative to the treacherous switch to Vista.

People who have already switched to Vista are likely the die-hard Windows fanboys (or the ignorant) who would never consider switching to OS X.

My father, although historically die-hard, is hesitating to upgrade to Vista. Now would be Apple's time to strike in order to win people like him. If, on the other hand, he had already upgraded, he would say, "I just upgraded to Vista, I'm not switching to another type of computer altogether. Also, I'm diappointed in you for following that hippie, son," and I would say, "I'm an adult now, dad, I can make my own choices!!" and he would say, "You're still a naive fool! I'm a failure for raising you like crap. Get out of my house!"

*tears well up*

Daddy never loved me!

-Clive

[abrooks]

Some features and applications that Apple has released without ANY public testing, even by developers:

GarageBand
iPhoto
iTunes
Pages
Backup
Keynote
iMovie
Aperture
iWeb
Photo Booth

The list goes on. Many of these are major applications that never saw the light of day until their 1.0 was unveiled.

Why does everyone assume that Apple has to run Leopard's secret features past developers before revealing them?

History proves just the opposite. When Apple has something really juicy to reveal, they keep it hidden until they release it. And then they release a 1.0.1 and so on to address anything that the public discovers after the release.
A bit of a difference between applications and the entire OS.

Features that are apparently secret are going to be fully integrated into the OS. They WILL need testing.

[JeffDM]

Can anyone point to any rumour story ever, about anything from Digitimes that has turned out to be correct?

What?! You mean that I should stop waiting for my G5 PowerBook?

[EagerDragon]

They better not hold off until October because of Vista, the heck with Vista, do that in version 10.5.1 or 10.5.2.

Delay for other reasons, but not for Vista.

[bdkennedy1]

Eh, I don't even care anymore. It is what it is.

[bigmig]

People have been booting Vista in Boot Camp for almost a year now. And the whole point of Boot Camp is that you are booting an entirely different OS - there is no "integration" between the two OSes (unlike Parallels, where they run side-by-side).

The idea that Apple would delay their flagship product to add functionality to Boot Camp that already exists is completely absurd. Fortunately, Digitimes has a historical track record of 0% accuracy. You might as well quote something Mac OS Rumors - it's that unreliable. Why Appleinsider sees it fit to publish is beyond me. Must be a really slow Friday.

[JeffDM]

A bit of a difference between applications and the entire OS.

Features that are apparently secret are going to be fully integrated into the OS. They WILL need testing.

It's hard to say without knowing the scale and impact of the features, assuming the secret features do exist. A lot of apps are included with the OS that don't have an impact on the OS itself. The extra secret features could be major updates to iCal, address book, iSync, or some other app that doesn't need a new or modified framework to operate, or that it might need a new framework that's not needed by other apps.

[Ben Nelson]

I think it will be deayed but for other reasons. It just ain't gonna be ready.



I really hope that Apple does not start to follow M$ by delaying its OS for months and months because they can’t get it right...

I’m thinking that there’s either got to be a really top rated special feature that will be worth waiting for ( using .exe within OSX native ) or even "SWITCHING" between OS like switching users ??

If there’s not a top rated feature that makes us go Wow! I will be really disappointed.
:smokey:

[EagerDragon]

They don't. Or at least, I don't. What I was pointing out is that builds that are released to developers are betas.

More like Alphas

[Mr. H]

using .exe within OSX native

That's highly unlikely*…

or even "SWITCHING" between OS like switching users

…and Apple have unequivocally stated that virtualisation won't be in Leopard, so that'd rule that out.


*
1.) Since apple aren't interested in virtualisation, that'd suggest they aren't interested in this either.

2.) Have you used crossover? It's not pleasant. The idea basically involves developing a whole new OS from scratch according to design specifications that you have to reverse-engineer. Not a recipe for a quick development with low bug levels and high compatibility rates.

[Mr. H]

More like Alphas

Good point, given that they don't have all the features.

[EagerDragon]

What?! You mean that I should stop waiting for my G5 PowerBook?

I would cancel the order, according to secret sources (???), The G7 PowerBook is coming, It will run at 6 Ghz, and ue Hidrogen cooling.

[TheToe]

A bit of a difference between applications and the entire OS.

Features that are apparently secret are going to be fully integrated into the OS. They WILL need testing.
Where did you get that? I didn't hear Steve say "fully integrated." Only "secret features."

Things like iSync, Mail.app, and iChat technically features of the OS. But IIRC they were not revealed until release.

[EagerDragon]

top rated special feature that will be worth waiting for ( using .exe within OSX native )

Tiger already has full and complete support for .exe and .com files. have you ever tried double clicking on one of those?

It is perfect, it always does the right thing, which happens to be nothing.

Why would I want to run a set of virus infested, flea infested set of exe files?

[aegisdesign]

Tiger already has full and complete support for .exe and .com files. have you ever tried double clicking on one of those?

It is perfect, it always does the right thing, which happens to be nothing.

Why would I want to run a set of virus infested, flea infested set of exe files?

On my Mac, clicking on an .EXE launches the application inside Windows. Been doing that since Jaguar on a G4. :D

[EagerDragon]

Speaking of Vista, this article is a GEM
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070323-microsoft-announces-more-discounted-vista-licensing.html

[EagerDragon]

On my Mac, clicking on an .EXE launches the application inside Windows. Been doing that since Jaguar on a G4. :D

I guess your G4 is infected, LOL.

[BlackSummerNight]

I'd rather them delay the release rather than put out a OS release that isn't quite ready. I don't like being a beta tester for Apple. Tiger is working just fine, no need to rush.

[JeffDM]

Why would I want to run a set of virus infested, flea infested set of exe files?

That's assuming they are. I have never infected a Windows computer, with exes or otherwise.

[Abster2core]

They don't. Or at least, I don't. What I was pointing out is that builds that are released to developers are betas.
They don't. Or at least, I don't. What I was pointing out is that builds that are released to developers are betas.
Not necessarily. By definition beta means "The last software testing phase before a production rollout"

Obviously it doesn't or is not required that a developer conduct external testing. As we know, Apple has been quite secretive about most things until they are ready to and whether or not any external testing is every done is either not divulged or limited in nature. Either way, we really don't know. However, if the developer doesn't call them betas, I wouldn't. It is not my job to do so.

For sure, if there are more features of the product as Job's stated that are being kept secret, the current set of builds does not fit the definition. Unless of course, Apple has already tested them and has blocked their functionality from the group of testers.

As well, I would be hard pressed to take anybody's word that they have seen or are part of the builds that have been released for testing. I feel assured that you, like me, having the privilege to be part of that program would certainly curtail us from disclosing any informatin that would expose ourself to possible litigation for not complying to the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that we would have had to sign.

Like you, I too agree they are more like alphas. And until the summer solstice, Leopard is on schedule.

[mr O]

… Wow!

Only Microsofties wow!! Please make sure you save the WWDC07 date.


So, what's gonna happen in October?:

1- my Bday!
2- an all new video iPod with touchscreen!!

[Mr. H]

By definition beta means "The last software testing phase before a production rollout"

I disagree.

A beta is a build of a codebase with a particular set of intended functionality. If that build turns out to be perfect, it is no longer a beta and can be released/used etc. If not, changes to the code are made, it's rebuilt, and the cycle continues.

The 9A builds of OS X (Leopard) have a particular set of intended functionality. This set of functionality is the same whether it's build 9A1 or 9A8479, the difference between these builds is that 9A1 didn't achieve the intended set of functionality due to bugs in the code or due to poor implementation. The seeds being released to developers are 9A codebase betas.

Strictly speaking, the 9A builds that have been released to developers are alphas (i.e. pre-beta) of 10.5.0 because they don't have the full intended functionality set of the 10.5.0 release.

[ChevalierMalFet]

I'm assuming DigiTimes beat it's writer day and night for a month with a stupid stick before they wrote that bit of speculation.

They have some ulterior motive they are trying to serve with this bit of BS.

[Abster2core]

I disagree.
As I stated, "Not necessarly."

As the saying goes, "a rose by any other name is still a rose."

My point was that only the developer can call it beta or alpha or anything else that they may want. Some define alpha for versions being tested by third-parties but being conducted internally vs. beta if the testers are doing it off site. Go figure. So I take back my previous definition in part.

Either way, there is no set ground rules and definitions vary considerably. For sure, there is no requirement or law that the software be completely functional as planned for a release to be called a beta version.

So, I can also state, I don't necessarily disagree.

[toneloco28]

Leopard will ship by June people. Unless Apple wants to delay the iPhone also, which is obviously running Leopard, and have tremendous egg on their face I don't see reason for concern. I never expected Leopard at Macworld, or any time shortly thereafter. Spring, which just started btw is when Apple said they'll ship, and what reason do we have to doubt them? The notion that Apple would delay their OS to support Vista in some fashion is patently absurd!

[TheToe]

I'm assuming DigiTimes beat it's writer day and night for a month with a stupid stick before they wrote that bit of speculation.

They have some ulterior motive they are trying to serve with this bit of BS.

The motivation is that anytime they post something about Macs, they get kajillions of hits from Mac fanatics.

It's a proven (if slimy) business/marketing tactic in the tech world... Mac users have a, ahem, bit of a reputation.

[mdriftmeyer]

Apple never said Leopard would be ready by April. They said "Spring", which is anytime between two days ago and June 20th. If they release it prior to June 20th, there's no delay.

Which Spring? Apple's 4th Quarter ends in August, but that is the end of Summer. We'll go with seasonal Spring conditions to make your statement have validation, but don't confuse the two.

Either way, the WWDC sessions chalk full of new Cocoa for Leopard exposed APIs makes it clear that the teams are comfortable with the development of these APIs and that they are reaching a level of maturity that will satisfy GM.

[mdriftmeyer]

I disagree.

A beta is a build of a codebase with a particular set of intended functionality. If that build turns out to be perfect, it is no longer a beta and can be released/used etc. If not, changes to the code are made, it's rebuilt, and the cycle continues.

The 9A builds of OS X (Leopard) have a particular set of intended functionality. This set of functionality is the same whether it's build 9A1 or 9A8479, the difference between these builds is that 9A1 didn't achieve the intended set of functionality due to bugs in the code or due to poor implementation. The seeds being released to developers are 9A codebase betas.

Strictly speaking, the 9A builds that have been released to developers are alphas (i.e. pre-beta) of 10.5.0 because they don't have the full intended functionality set of the 10.5.0 release.

I don't think your original poster realizes that one can have several Release Candidates that reach Gamma level and that the public dev builds being on par with Betas.

[TheToe]

For anyone looking for clarification on what Beta is generally understood to mean, may I suggest...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle

8-)

[Abster2core]

For anyone looking for clarification on what Beta is generally understood to mean, may I suggest...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle

8-)
Compounded by others as stated in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_testing

[wilco]

The motivation is that anytime they post something about Macs, they get kajillions of hits from Mac fanatics.

It's a proven (if slimy) business/marketing tactic in the tech world... Mac users have a, ahem, bit of a reputation.

So what does that say about sites that pick up these stories?

[pocomac]

I personally think this rumor is bunk! There is no way Steve Jobs or Apple would delay the release of it's Next Generation operating system for the sole purpose of interoperating/integrating more Microsoft functionality. To even suggest such a notion is laughable. Thousands of people are switching to the mac platform every month, not because it runs some variant of Windows, but rather the functionality of Mac OS X. Switcher's do appreciate the ability to dual boot, or virtualize windows on a Mac, but ultimatly they've switched for the Mac OS X experience. If you're utilizing the dual OS functionality of an Apple system, its for one or two programs you can't seem to find for Mac OS X. I don't think switcher care whether they can run the latest Windows varient, just so long as they can access some data or functionality from some software that won't "currently" run on Mac OS X.

[Mr. H]

So what does that say about sites that pick up these stories?

The thing about AppleInsider is that its forum allows the story to be debated. Digitimes appears to be a significant publication, even if it is always wrong. I think it's good that AppleInsider picks up on their stories, so that we can all point out what a load of rubbish they all are.

[Louzer]

Leopard will ship by June people. Unless Apple wants to delay the iPhone also, which is obviously running Leopard, and have tremendous egg on their face I don't see reason for concern. I never expected Leopard at Macworld, or any time shortly thereafter. Spring, which just started btw is when Apple said they'll ship, and what reason do we have to doubt them? The notion that Apple would delay their OS to support Vista in some fashion is patently absurd!

There is nothing about the Leopard that would cause a delay of the iphone. Just because the big cat is delayed doesn't mean the version of the software for the phone also has to be delayed. Leopard for the iPhone isn't being released as a general product.

And also remember that most iPhone users will probably be Windows users, so there's no need for software specific in Leopard for it to work.

[Louzer]

It's hard to say without knowing the scale and impact of the features, assuming the secret features do exist. A lot of apps are included with the OS that don't have an impact on the OS itself. The extra secret features could be major updates to iCal, address book, iSync, or some other app that doesn't need a new or modified framework to operate, or that it might need a new framework that's not needed by other apps.

I never have considered the apps that Apple includes with OS X to be part of the OS (sorry, but a Mail app is a Mail app, its not something that should be tied to an OS release).

But your list a great example of why even separate 'apps' need to go to developers. A super-secret update to Mail or iCal can easily break third-party add-ons to such products that can cause a world of hurt. There could be changes that break communications to certain servers that don't get tested until its out the door.

And look at iSync. Maybe something like that might be a great feature, but without giving developers time to get the software to work with their peripherals, it just sits in the Apps folder doing nothing.

And what is the point of keeping the so-called super-secret features super-secret? If they're any good, the ideas are going get duplicated for Tiger and Windows. You can't stop it. And if they aren't good, you're just setting yourself up to be mocked.

[physguy]

I never have considered the apps that Apple includes with OS X to be part of the OS (sorry, but a Mail app is a Mail app, its not something that should be tied to an OS release).

But they are so they're candidates for these features. They're tied to the release because they require the release and they help sell the OS and hardware.

And what is the point of keeping the so-called super-secret features super-secret?

The Buzz.

If they're any good, the ideas are going get duplicated for Tiger and Windows. You can't stop it.

But they can be delayed - significantly - therefore creating more potential sales for Leopard for the people who want those features.

[keithw]

"Boot Camp is an Apple software application that currently assists in the installation of Windows XP on computers using Apple's latest OS," the publication said. "The company hopes with support for Vista, Mac computers using the new OS can grab more market share, according to the sources."

DigiTimes, whose accuracy in prediction Apple's future directions is mediocre at best, cited its sources in saying that if Leopard supports only Windows XP, then the chances of the new OS attracting Windows users to buy an Apple computer decreases.
][/url][/c]

This is total nonsense. Vista works today and works well. I'm running Vista x64 with absolutely no problems, and have been since December. If they are going to delay it, it won't be because of Vista.

K.W.

[EagerDragon]

A long delay past June would be bad as too many other products have not yet been released that aparently have a dependency on Leopard. They are going to lose a lot of sales and not meet the expectations if they don't start releasing something good soon. Delay if you have to, but not for Vista, do that in 10.5.1 or 2.

Lets get all the other products out, and get those credit cards going.

[SonomaCider]

This announcement has to be B$%^ S@#$ because:

1. Microsoft has already declared that your Vista License does not allow virtualization (yeah, like who cares?)
2. XP will run all the applications anyway!
3. If someone is itching for new GUI experiences, Leopard appears far better that Vista even in beta!
4. The source has its head firmly stuffed up somewhere not known for a commanding view!!!
:lol:
5. Apple knows that a lot of us are waiting for the next machines and their Leopards -- and they want to sell hardware!

[Mr. H]

This announcement has to be B$%^ S@#$ because:

1. Microsoft has already declared that your Vista License does not allow virtualization (yeah, like who cares?)

Boot Camp isn't virtualisation. Some versions (the expensive ones) of Vista are allowed to be run on a virtualised machine, can't remember which ones.

This announcement has to be bullshit because it comes from Digitimes.

[donebylee]

This announcement has to be B$%^ S@#$ because:

1. Microsoft has already declared that your Vista License does not allow virtualization (yeah, like who cares?)
2. XP will run all the applications anyway!
3. If someone is itching for new GUI experiences, Leopard appears far better that Vista even in beta!
4. The source has its head firmly stuffed up somewhere not known for a commanding view!!!
:lol:
5. Apple knows that a lot of us are waiting for the next machines and their Leopards -- and they want to sell hardware!

Actually, Vista will allow you to run on a virtual system if you pay up for the "Ultimate" experience.

But, yes, I think Digitimes, or whatever they're called, is full of it on this one. I can't imagine anyone walking into Jobs' office and saying: "We have this great idea to delay the new OSX for two to three months--you know the one you promised the whole world be ready this spring--so that we can let people run our competitor's OS--you know the one we make fun of all the time--on the same system even better than it currently does." :err: :no: :err:

Oh yeah, that'll fly alright.

[lucina]

If the OS is so great, why support another?

Does Apple expect users to pay $200 more to put Vista on their boxes?

This rumor doesn't make sense.

[AISI]

Gartenberg spoke with Apple (http://weblogs.jupiterresearch.com/analysts/gartenberg/archives/2007/03/is_leopard_dela.html) about this rumor. Leopard is still scheduled to ship "this spring" and once again Digitimes appears to be wrong.

[Xool]

Delaying Leopard for Vista is insane. Vista's been out for a while, let alone the dev releases. The only reason Apple would delay Leopard would be for internal reasons, either its not ready or they're waiting on new key hardware.

That said, I don't see why it wouldn't ship. CS3 will like it. Final Cut Pro will like it. iApps (work and life) will like it. Just ship it!

The only shocker was that Apple TV didn't ship with Leopard, but I'm sure they wanted to get it out the door and didn't want it to wait for Leopard either.

[aresee]

Gartenberg spoke with Apple (http://weblogs.jupiterresearch.com/analysts/gartenberg/archives/2007/03/is_leopard_dela.html) about this rumor. Leopard is still scheduled to ship "this spring" and once again Digitimes appears to be wrong.

Didn't Apple say in mid February that the rumors were wrong and that the aTV would ship at the end of February. And then have to latter admit that the rumors of a mid March shipment were indeed correct?

[mr O]

If the OS is so great, why support another?

While Tiger is great to manage/fulfill my Life and Office needs, I still desperately need Vista as Autodesk Inventor only runs on Vista/XP. So, I am actually eagerly awaiting the Leopard release as it will get rid of the Bootcamp Beta label!

So, my Vista experience is gonna be limited to using Inventor and listening to Sasha's dj sets that appears not to work on my mac (ASF/ASX? music files).


:O

[Louzer]

The only shocker was that Apple TV didn't ship with Leopard, but I'm sure they wanted to get it out the door and didn't want it to wait for Leopard either.


Why is that a 'shocker'? There's really so little to the AppleTV, why burden it with a in-progress bug-riddled OS, when you could go with something that's been tested and isn't being changed weekly?

[aegisdesign]

I guess your G4 is infected, LOL.

The old ways are so easily lost on the new crowd. :err:

[aegisdesign]

The letter: major new versions (i.e. an increment of the first number) start at "A" and this is incremented when significant, but not major changes are made - e.g. they always increment from one 10.x.x to 10.x.x+1 movement (e.g. 10.4.1 was build 8B15, and 10.4.2 was 8C46), and sometimes increment in-between those releases never to see the light of day. This happened with the 10.4.8 to 10.4.9 move - PPC 10.4.8 was build 8L127, PPC 10.4.9 is build 8P135 - M, N and O were all internal.

N is external as of a few days ago. AppleTV runs 8Nnnn, which incidentally is turning into a nice little box now that peopl have managed to get ssh, ard and afp running on it and put bigger hard disks in. Give it a few weeks for someone to hack the USB port and people will have it running as a full computer instead of just it's intended purpose.

I wonder what M and O were though? Airport Extreme and the iPhone (providing it doesn't actually need Leopard)?

[Mr. H]

I wonder what M and O were though? Airport Extreme and the iPhone (providing it doesn't actually need Leopard)?

10.4.9 was under development for a long time. I think under normal circumstances, M would have been 10.4.9 and what we've got now would be 10.4.12

[Democaster.]

My two cents:

I think Vista functionality has been slightly overvalued. Despite reports that it would only take a very small patch to fix the drivers for Vista in Boot Camp, you have to remember that if somebody is looking into a Mac for the first time, they've probably had enough of Windows altogether. When Leopard comes out, if you stood outside the main Apple Stores in New York, London and California and interviewed everybody who came out with a new Mac, how many of them do you think would say they bought a Mac because it can run Vista? If Vista's that important then you just buy a £300 Vista box from PC World. Boot Camp is, at best, a bonus for switchers. It's a handy little service. But I'd be surprised if Apple would delay the release (and look foolish as a result, considering all the times they taunted Windows for pushing back Vista) sheerly to accomodate these people who won't buy a Mac if it can't run Vista like a charm, because I'm not sure if those people actually exist.

[ecking]

No! That's not true! That's impossible! It's impossible!

[xsmi]

This is definatley FUD and it pisses me off that Mac-Centric sites are helping to spread it. What makes you think for one iota that Apple is going to hold up its product because it does not play nice with someoneelses' especially M$? Think people and shame on you AI for even reporting this! Look back at intel launch did Apple wait for a single developer? Think people PLEASE.........

[Slewis]

You like saying that, don't you? Do you know what betas are? Just because Apple doesn't call them betas, doesn't mean that they are not.

It works like this: OS X is in a continual state of development. Moving to major new versions, with several major new features and significant "under the hood" changes unsurprisingly brings with it lots of bugs, some of them serious. So you can't just realease that to the public. The OS is continually worked on, and the OS recompiled often. Each new recompile is given a number that is sequentially higher than the previous build.

-and cut
Sebastian

Now, what is the point of me saying all this? It is that, whether you like it or not, and whether Apple calls them such or not, any build numbered above a previous release, and below the next release, is a beta. Changes are made from the last release, and these are tested. Most are tested internal to Apple, some are also released to developers to test. Apple uses feedback from internal testing and from developers to determine whether the latest build is ready for release or not. If it is not, corrections (as opposed to functional changes) are made to the code to correct bugs, and a new build with higher "third number" results.

This is definitely what happens when there is a single development train. The question is what about those "top secret features"? Those are presumably being worked on separately, but one has to expect that the foundation of builds with "top secret features" are the builds also being released to developers. i.e., all the problems that we see in developer builds also exist is builds with "top secret features". Presumably, the "top secret features" builds have additional bugs associated with said features.

You're right, some testing is being done by developers, but only features developers will be looking at. Example, Developers need to make Apps Time Machine compatible, use Core Animation if they want to, and get familiar with Xcode 3. But let's say Preview was to get this really "cool" feature where it could make a Picture sparkle (this is just a stupid example) like it's covered in glitter and save it like that. Developers wouldn't need that feature at all in their builds. The only way it would make it into Developer builds is if Apple decided it wasn't worth taking out just to keep it a secret.

The only thing that matters for Developers are the Tools and the Frameworks in the new OS that will be used by Developers. Sparkling Glittering Images in Preview isn't quallified for either, hence the reason Apple dubbed them Developer Previews instead of Betas.

Besides that, you just squashed the world of Alphas and Release Canidates. They can also have letters and Pre 1.0 version numbers (OK, RCs would just add RC x to it but oh well)

Sebastian

[Slewis]

If the OS is so great, why support another?

Does Apple expect users to pay $200 more to put Vista on their boxes?

This rumor doesn't make sense.
In Order:
Marketing reasons for people who have never used Mac OS X

No, it's just a selling point to people who a) Require for so and so a reason and b) People who never used it

No it doesn't... at all.

Sebastian

[shook ones]

If the OS is so great, why support another?

Does Apple expect users to pay $200 more to put Vista on their boxes?

This rumor doesn't make sense.

Couldn't say it better!

[xsmi]

I am apologizing for my earlier post because a delay til October is a delay til October. No matter what we don't get the OS for 6 mos. Oh well....

[Dstryr]

I've looked around and couldn't see anyone having posted this previously. Apologies if it's a duplication.

It would appear that Digi aren't the only people to think Leopard will be released in October.

Source: http://www.apple.com/hotnews/

Apple Statement

iPhone has already passed several of its required certification tests and is on schedule to ship in late June as planned. We can’t wait until customers get their hands (and fingers) on it and experience what a revolutionary and magical product it is. However, iPhone contains the most sophisticated software ever shipped on a mobile device, and finishing it on time has not come without a price — we had to borrow some key software engineering and QA resources from our Mac OS X team, and as a result we will not be able to release Leopard at our Worldwide Developers Conference in early June as planned. While Leopard's features will be complete by then, we cannot deliver the quality release that we and our customers expect from us. We now plan to show our developers a near final version of Leopard at the conference, give them a beta copy to take home so they can do their final testing, and ship Leopard in October. We think it will be well worth the wait. Life often presents tradeoffs, and in this case we're sure we've made the right ones. [Apr 12, 2007]