Apple's Snow Leopard rumored to be Gold Master

[AppleInsider]

The latest build of Snow Leopard, Apple's upcoming operating system, is rumored to be the "Golden Master," or final copy before the product will be released for duplication on optical media.

Build 10A432 has been seeded to developers, and French Web site Mac 4 Ever has reported that the latest version is the final build, suggesting the product could be pressed onto discs very soon. The latest version of OS X is due to be released in September, but Apple has not announced an official date.

Mac OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard is priced at $29 for the single user license and $49 for the five-license family pack. The upgrade prices are available for users of the current version of Mac OS X, 10.5 Leopard. Snow Leopard will only be available for Mac users on Intel-based computers.

Also available is Mac OS X Server 10.6 Snow Leopard. Priced at $499, Leopard Server is said to be the most significant improvement to the server operating system since Mac OS X Server was launched. Amazon is also selling box sets with Snow Leopard, featuring the OS, iWork and iLife for $169 and the five-license family pack, iWork and iLife for $229.

To create Snow Leopard, Apple said its engineers focused on refining 90 percent of the more than 1,000 projects in Mac OS X. New features include:

A more responsive Finder
Mail that loads messages 85 percent faster and conducts searches up to 90 percent faster
Time Machine with up to 50 percent faster initial backup
A Dock with Expose integration
A 64-bit version of Safari 4 that boosts the performance of the Nitro JavaScript engine by up to 50 percent and is resistant to crashes caused by plug-ins.
The all new QuickTime X, with a redesigned player that allows users to easily view, record, trim and share video to YouTube, MobileMe or iTunes.
Half the size of the previous version and frees up to 6GB of drive space once installed.

For the first time, system applications -- including Finder, Mail, iCal, iChat and Safari -- are 64-bit, and Snow Leopard's support for 64-bit processors makes use of large amounts of RAM, increases performance, and improves security while remaining compatible with 32-bit applications.

With the Snow Leopard Up-to-Date program, many customers who bought an Apple computer this summer will qualify for an even cheaper upgrade. Customers who purchase a qualifying new Mac or a qualifying Apple Certified Refurbished computer on or after June 8, 2009 that does not include Mac OS X Snow Leopard can upgrade to Snow Leopard for $9.95 plus tax. To participate, your completed order form must be postmarked or faxed within 90 days of the date of your purchase of the qualifying Mac or by December 26, 2009, whichever is earlier.

For more on Apple's upcoming operating system, read AppleInsider's extensive Road to Snow Leopard series.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[eyeless]

Nice!

[OC4Theo]

Sold my G5, got a Mac Pro. And patiently waiting for the new Epic in operating systems. No more teasing, let me have it now!

[ghostface147]

.....

edit: let's not be so open about copyright infringement here.

[camroidv27]

I wonder what tricks they used this time to prevent installs on normal PCs?

I just hope this OS is what they say it is, and not just smoke and mirrors. With all the attention given to the iPhone and its OS, I get a little worried. But I guess for 30 bucks, one can't complain too much if it bombs out a lot for the first few point updates. As long as we don't have the file deletion errors, or the current networking shared drive problems, then I'll be happy with a 30 dollar upgrade.

[SpamSandwich]

Guess I'll be waiting for the last iteration of the Intel-iMac before I get Snow Leopard. My PowerMac hasn't taken a complete dive yet (despite the scary HD issue I previously wrote about). Wonder when they dump Intel in favor of another chipmaker?

[cmf2]

I'm having a tough time deciding between the $29 version and the bundle. I bought Leopard for my Tiger system, so it has an old version of iLife and I also purchased iWork08. The box set is a good deal, but I don't know if I would get enough value out of it The new iPhoto features would be nice, but $29 is such a low price.

[iansilv]

Can someone tell me i Snow Leopard will run a 64-bit kernel in a MBP with a 2.2 GHz core 2 duo? I have the one with the Santa Rosa chipset, and I cannot confirm this anywhere.

[camroidv27]

Originally Posted by iansilv

Can someone tell me i Snow Leopard will run a 64-bit kernel in a MBP with a 2.2 GHz core 2 duo? I have the one with the Santa Rosa chipset, and I cannot confirm this anywhere.

Core 2 Duo = 64bit
Core Duo = 32bit

Aka: The first gen of MBPs are 32 bit only.

[Logisticaldron]

Originally Posted by iansilv

Can someone tell me i Snow Leopard will run a 64-bit kernel in a MBP with a 2.2 GHz core 2 duo? I have the one with the Santa Rosa chipset, and I cannot confirm this anywhere.

Originally Posted by camroidv27

Core 2 Duo = 64bit
Core Duo = 32bit

Aka: The first gen of MBPs are 32 bit only.

The ability to run the 64-bit kernel is based on more than having a 64-bit CPU. MacBooks and MacBook Pros with only the Nvidia IGP will not have the 64-bit kernel option, and i don’t think older MBPs will get the option as well.

[bulk001]

Originally Posted by ghostface147

Woohoo.....time to torrent when leaked!

Hopefully you are just making a joke about getting it ASAP. If not, it is only $29.00 and we should be rewarding Apple for selling it so cheaply by buying it legally.

[ghostface147]

Originally Posted by bulk001

Hopefully you are just making a joke about getting it ASAP. If not, it is only $29.00 and we should be rewarding Apple for selling it so cheaply by buying it legally.

Yeah hopefully, but not really. They can make their money elsewhere.

[ghostface147]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Wonder when they dump Intel in favor of another chipmaker?

Yes maybe they can call up Transmeta.....wait they are gone. Bitboys Oy!? Nope. Ummm, yeah Intel is the only game in town unless they want to look into AMD. I really wished that PPC was as scalable as Intel's chips are. PPC was so much better from an internal plumbing standpoint.

[iansilv]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

The ability to run the 64-bit kernel is based on more than having a 64-bit CPU. MacBooks and MacBook Pros with only the Nvidia IGP will not have the 64-bit kernel option, and i don’t think older MBPs will get the option as well.

Wait- this is what I've got:
GeForce 8600M GT:

Chipset Model: GeForce 8600M GT
Type: Display
Bus: PCIe
PCIe Lane Width: x1
VRAM (Total): 128 MB
Vendor: NVIDIA (0x10de)
Device ID: 0x0407
Revision ID: 0x00a1
ROM Revision: 3175

Will I get a 64-bit kernel?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by ghostface147

Yes maybe they can call up Transmeta.....wait they are gone. Bitboys Oy!? Nope. Ummm, yeah Intel is the only game in town unless they want to look into AMD. I really wished that PPC was as scalable as Intel's chips are. PPC was so much better from an internal plumbing standpoint.

It was as scalable, maybe more, but there was no interest.

[jazzguru]

Originally Posted by ghostface147

Yes maybe they can call up Transmeta.....wait they are gone. Bitboys Oy!? Nope. Ummm, yeah Intel is the only game in town unless they want to look into AMD. I really wished that PPC was as scalable as Intel's chips are. PPC was so much better from an internal plumbing standpoint.

AMD is making solid chips, these days.

I'm not a big fan of Intel from a business standpoint - they've done some pretty despicable things to get where they are today. I'd love to see AMD and Apple collaborate.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by jazzguru

AMD is making solid chips, these days.

I'm not a big fan of Intel from a business standpoint - they've done some pretty despicable things to get where they are today. I'd love to see AMD and Apple collaborate.

AMD is well behind Intel. Also, Apple has learned from their experience with IBM that they need a steady supplier. I hope they never move to AMD. They don't even make their own chips anymore. They are going to suffer from that.

[Foo2]

Anybody know if SL will run full 64-bit on a Mac that has only a 32-bit EFI?

I know Mac Pros have 64-bit EFIs since early 2008, but do any Apple laptops have 64-bit EFI?

[Dlux]

Originally Posted by cmf2

I'm having a tough time deciding between the $29 version and the bundle. I bought Leopard for my Tiger system, so it has an old version of iLife and I also purchased iWork08. The box set is a good deal, but I don't know if I would get enough value out of it The new iPhoto features would be nice, but $29 is such a low price.

I'm planning to get the basic $29 upgrade when it comes out, and then buy the box set in January '10 (or whenever the next iThing updates arrive). By then the first few point releases of SL should be rolled into the newer DVD, and I can have a single disc for all my Apple apps. It will probably be the last disc they press until 2011.

[Mazda 3s]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

The ability to run the 64-bit kernel is based on more than having a 64-bit CPU. MacBooks and MacBook Pros with only the Nvidia IGP will not have the 64-bit kernel option, and i don’t think older MBPs will get the option as well.

Maybe I'm just dumb or something, but as long as your motherboard supports the 64-bit features of your CPU (and the CPU is 64-bit), it should be able to run a 64-bit operating system. All other hardware is supported at the driver level.

Now, I'm new to Macs having just bought my first one a few weeks ago, but this is how it works on the PC/Windows side.

[Logisticaldron]

Originally Posted by jazzguru

AMD is making solid chips, these days.

I'm not a big fan of Intel from a business standpoint - they've done some pretty despicable things to get where they are today. I'd love to see AMD and Apple collaborate.

Intel still bests AMD with notebook-grade chips, which is what Apple mostly uses, and I doubt that AMD could keep up with what Apple’s bulk needs of the exact same chip, so I see nothing that looks like Intel will be pushed out anytime soon.

[ghostface147]

Originally Posted by melgross

It was as scalable, maybe more, but there was no interest.

Yes a desktop version was scalable, but got very hot to the point where Apple introduced liquid cooling on the PowerMacs. Also, the G5 never could get cool enough to stick in a laptop. Oh well, we have to work with what's given us. SL FTW......(torrented of course)

[melgross]

Originally Posted by ghostface147

Yes a desktop version was scalable, but got very hot to the point where Apple introduced liquid cooling on the PowerMacs. Also, the G5 never could get cool enough to stick in a laptop. Oh well, we have to work with what's given us. SL FTW......(torrented of course)

Intels chips were even hotter in the end with the Prescott. As the chips get scaled down with new process technology, they got cooler.

I would imagine that a 45nm G6 or G7 would have been pretty cool (in more ways than one).

[wooster]

Originally Posted by ghostface147

Yeah hopefully, but not really. They can make their money elsewhere.

What kind of mentality is this? Do you like to work for free? Why should you not pay for something a lot of people have spent a lot of money and resources to create?

[camroidv27]

Originally Posted by iansilv

Wait- this is what I've got:
GeForce 8600M GT:

Chipset Model: GeForce 8600M GT
Type: Display
Bus: PCIe
PCIe Lane Width: x1
VRAM (Total): 128 MB
Vendor: NVIDIA (0x10de)
Device ID: 0x0407
Revision ID: 0x00a1
ROM Revision: 3175

Will I get a 64-bit kernel?

That is the description for your graphics card. I don't believe your graphics card has anything to do with running a 64bit kernel. I think the other poster was talking about the current 9400 chipsets (which are the main hub for all memory, hard drives, usb ports, etc.) and those chipsets have the graphics card (GPU) built into them.

Check with the other poster, but your machine should be new enough to at least run 64 bit programs.

[Logisticaldron]

Originally Posted by Mazda 3s

Maybe I'm just dumb or something, but as long as your motherboard supports the 64-bit features of your CPU (and the CPU is 64-bit), it should be able to run a 64-bit operating system.

Oh, it’s capable of running a 64-bit kernel, but Apple didn’t write the 64-bit kernel to support all their 64-bit CPUs. Don’t ask me why, I don’t know, but that is how it has been done in every beta so far.

[ryanplusplus]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

Oh, it’s capable of running a 64-bit kernel, but Apple didn’t write the 64-bit kernel to support all their 64-bit CPUs. Don’t ask me why, I don’t know, but that is how it has been done in every beta so far.

Where can I find more information about which Macs will be able to run the 64-bit kernel?

[iansilv]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

Oh, it’s capable of running a 64-bit kernel, but Apple didn’t write the 64-bit kernel to support all their 64-bit CPUs. Don’t ask me why, I don’t know, but that is how it has been done in every beta so far.

Could the beta, like, be restricting the 64-bit-ness of snow leopard?

[Logisticaldron]

Originally Posted by camroidv27

That is the description for your graphics card. I don't believe your graphics card has anything to do with running a 64bit kernel. I think the other poster was talking about the current 9400 chipsets (which are the main hub for all memory, hard drives, usb ports, etc.) and those chipsets have the graphics card (GPU) built into them.

Check with the other poster, but your machine should be new enough to at least run 64 bit programs.

Running 64-bit apps is possible, but that has nothing to do with running a 64-bit kernel. Apple did not do a blanket 64-bit kernel for all C2D CPUs. I’ll have to jump onto the developer site to get the release notes later.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by ghostface147

Yeah hopefully, but not really. They can make their money elsewhere.

They can, but that doesn't mean ripping off software is justified.

[iansilv]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

Running 64-bit apps is possible, but that has nothing to do with running a 64-bit kernel. Apple did not do a blanket 64-bit kernel for all C2D CPUs. I’ll have to jump onto the developer site to get the release notes later.

Please do- I would love to finally get a straight answer on this. If they aren't going to do a 64bit kernel with my mbp then fine, I just want to know- I will be buying it anyway, but I am curious.

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

The ability to run the 64-bit kernel is based on more than having a 64-bit CPU. MacBooks and MacBook Pros with only the Nvidia IGP will not have the 64-bit kernel option, and i don’t think older MBPs will get the option as well.

And why would having only an nVidia IGP prevent you from running a 64-bit kernel? IGP only and MBPs with IGP and discrete graphics use the same 9400M chipset. They should all run fine. It's hard to believe that Apple would not be supporting 64-bit kernel on their currently selling 13.3" MacBook Pros among other models.

And if I'm not mistaken, trying to run early Snow Leopard builds in 64-bit mode only worked on the original 667MHz 65nm Merom Core 2 Duo iMacs and MacBook Pros with the Napa platform because 64-bit drivers were written for them first. Which makes sense since they are a known, mature platform. The only Macs that shouldn't support the 64-bit kernel are the 32-bit Yonah Core 2 Duo Macs.

What I'd like to know is what level of OpenGL support exists. Leopard was OpenGL 2.1. Presumably Snow Leopard will be at least OpenGL 3.0 since that introduced interoperability with OpenCL. Hopefully, OpenGL 3.2 support comes quickly since one of it's key features is that it's easier to port DirectX applications to OpenGL which can only be a good thing.

Edit:
http://news.worldofapple.com/archive...le-seed-notes/

I guess the early Snow Leopard developer builds weren't supporting 64-bit kernel for the early 667MHz FSB Core 2 Duos. They started 64-bit support for early 2008 Mac Pros, MacBook Pros, and XServes. Basically 45nm Penryn and up, with Harpertown being a Penryn derivative. Of course, support could have expanded or contracted since then.

[stonefree]

Not all Core 2 Duos run Snow Leopard? That's pretty confusing. Why wouldn't they? Is Apple going to do chart like this

[Logisticaldron]

Originally Posted by ryanplusplus

Where can I find more information about which Macs will be able to run the 64-bit kernel?

If your model name is that or higher you have 64-bit kernel. Unless they’ve added some more support there is no MacBookPro3.x or lower that will be 64-bit capable, and no MacBook that is 64-bit kernel capable. You can still run 64-bit apps just fine and these will running by default as they have no barring on the kernel.

[cmf2]

Originally Posted by stonefree

Not all Core 2 Duos run Snow Leopard? That's pretty confusing. Why wouldn't they? Is Apple going to do chart like this

All intel macs can run Snow Leopard, the only question is if they can run the 64bit kernel or not. If they can't, they will run the 32 bit kernel, which is included in the install anyway.

[camroidv27]

I think some people (including myself) are getting all sorts of confused by the 64bit kernel versus 64bit OS vers 64bit Processor vers 64bit IGC and what computers will run what bits of 64bit.

[Logisticaldron]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

And why would having only an nVidia IGP prevent you from running a 64-bit kernel? IGP only and MBPs with IGP and discrete graphics use the same 9400M chipset. They should all run fine. It's hard to believe that Apple would not be supporting 64-bit kernel on their currently selling 13.3" MacBook Pros among other models.

Seems like it wouldn’t be an issue and that Apple would want to get all their C2D-based Macs on 64-bit, but insofar as the last Beta it’s not supported with Mac notebooks only running the 9400M. This includes the cheap 15” MBP.

System Software Overview:

System Version: Mac OS X 10.6 (10A421a)
Kernel Version: Darwin 10.0.0
Boot Volume: Macintosh HD
Boot Mode: Normal
Computer Name: xxx
User Name: xxx
Secure Virtual Memory: Enabled
64-bit Kernel and Extensions: No
Time since boot: 1 day15:11

What I'd like to know is what level of OpenGL support exists. Leopard was OpenGL 2.1. Presumably Snow Leopard will be at least OpenGL 3.0 since that introduced interoperability with OpenCL. Hopefully, OpenGL 3.2 support comes quickly since one of it's key features is that it's easier to port DirectX applications to OpenGL which can only be a good thing.

Where can i find info on OpenGL versioning in OS X?

Originally Posted by stonefree

Not all Core 2 Duos run Snow Leopard? That's pretty confusing. Why wouldn't they? Is Apple going to do chart like this

All Intel-based Macs will run Snow Leopard.

[Mazda 3s]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

Oh, it’s capable of running a 64-bit kernel, but Apple didn’t write the 64-bit kernel to support all their 64-bit CPUs. Don’t ask me why, I don’t know, but that is how it has been done in every beta so far.

That seems pretty dumb (not you, but Apple)

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

The ability to run the 64-bit kernel is based on more than having a 64-bit CPU. MacBooks and MacBook Pros with only the Nvidia IGP will not have the 64-bit kernel option, and i don’t think older MBPs will get the option as well.

That really doesn't make sense, because the IGP isn't the CPU. If Apple really is going to do that, then I'm a bit disappointed. Remember the Keynote slide showing the Apple computers that are 64 bit capable? It was the entire lineup except the mini, which only had a Core Duo chip at the time. There's no sense in promoting 64 bit capability in machine models that won't get a 64 bit kernel.

Originally Posted by Logisticaldron

Oh, it’s capable of running a 64-bit kernel, but Apple didn’t write the 64-bit kernel to support all their 64-bit CPUs. Don’t ask me why, I don’t know, but that is how it has been done in every beta so far.

That doesn't make sense either because Apple doesn't use a big variety of CPUs. For example, the models with the nVidia IGP don't use different kind of CPU as the ones that used a discrete nVidia chip, it's just a different clock speed. Excepting the Air of course, I don't know about that one.

[stonefree]

Doesn't the two different kernels require separate drivers for both? That could get confusing with third parties. I thought the main difference between Leopard and Snow Leopard (as far as the OS architecture) was Leopard's 32 bit kernel since everything else is already 64 bit. I have a Penryn / Santa Rosa Macbook (4,1). Will it be fully 64 bit?