Apple's Snow Leopard to sport Cocoa Finder and ImageBoot

[AppleInsider]

Apple next-generation Snow Leopard operating system will introduce a massive re-write of the Mac OS X Finder and debut a new feature called ImageBoot, AppleInsider has learned.

Cocoa-based Finder

People familiar with matter say the Finder, which currently stands as one of the oldest Carbon-based applications in the Mac OS portfolio, has been completely re-written in the company's native object-oriented application program environment called Cocoa.

Apple has reportedly tapped select members of its developer community to begin testing the updated graphical file system manager as part of a new pre-release copy of Snow Leopard belonging to the build train 10Axxx. In addition, many of the Apple-authored applications accompany the new build are also said to have been wrapped completely in Cocoa.

Microsoft Exchange Support

Other advances are also present in the new test software, such as broader support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 in Snow Leopard's versions of iCal, Address Book and Mail. The implementation of Exchange support remains a work in progress, according to those familiar with the matter. As such, Apple has reportedly asked that developers focus their testing efforts on a subset of Exchange capabilities, such as scheduling events in iCal, adding contacts to Address Book 5.0, and automated account configuration in Mail.

ImageBoot

When it makes its debut, likely at WWDC 2009, Snow Leopard will also introduce a new, third option for disc image-based installation called ImageBoot. Based on Apple's existing NetBoot technology, which allows Macs to boot from a remote disk over the network, ImageBoot will allow users to set up any number of disk images on a secondary partition or external drive, and then selectively boot their system from any one of those disk images at startup.

This new feature will allow users to set up a series of test environments or uniquely configured Mac OS X systems, store the bootable systems as discrete disk images, and subsequently store multiple boot targets on the same disk or partition. Currently, only one bootable Mac OS X installation can be stored on a given disk partition.

With ImageBoot, multiple NetBoot sets can be maintained locally on the same storage partition, and the user can select any one of the disk images available to boot from without having to restore or mount the disk image first. The result is a system that works similar to virtualization software such as Parallels, which can create disk images for different PC operating systems and selectively boot from any of them. The difference is that Mac OS X isn't booting up in a virtual environment; it actually boots a fully native Mac OS X system.

Broader Availability Expected

A little over two weeks ago, AppleInsider noted that Apple was preparing to broaden evaluation of Snow Leopard through software seeds to a limited number of developers. It's now expected that the company's vast developer community, or members of the Apple Developer Connection network, could be added to the mix as early as this weekend.

In June, ArsTechnica's Jacqui Cheng cited sources who suggested that Apple might "eventually wrap everything in Cocoa" with the release of Snow Leopard.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[wheelhot]

Aaah, I didn't know that the Finder was Carbon, so now that it is going to be in Cocoa, will it be faster?, hmm, iTunes 8 is half carbon half cocoa rite?

[MacTel]

For a major release that was promised to not have many new features Snow Leopard is turning out to be feature packed. The Finder re-write has been asked for since practically day one of OSX's release.

I'm still holding hope that it will be a free update for Leopard users.

[Matthew Yohe]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

ImageBoot

When it makes its debut next spring, Snow Leopard will also introduce a third option for disc image-based installation called ImageBoot. Based on Apple's local NetBoot technology, the method will let users boot a Mac simply by placing and launching a disc image on any storage partition outside of the primary partition for which they wish to install copies of Mac OS X.

People familiar with the matter say the technology works through a series of scripts that will convert the disc images to a NetBoot set capable of performing the local install. This will allow users and administrators to share their external drives and partitions with data not associated with their development or testing procedures, those people say.

Well, Mike Bombich does work at Apple now, so maybe this is an offshoot of NetRestore.

[Slewis]

Null.

[riversky]

Originally Posted by MacTel

For a major release that was promised to not have many new features Snow Leopard is turning out to be feature packed. The Finder re-write has been asked for since practically day one of OSX's release.

I'm still holding hope that it will be a free update for Leopard users.

You can almost bet on price. Probably the standard price to go from 10.4 to 10.5 to 10.6. Don't count on a discount!

[Superbass]

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

What bugs me the most is that every year and a half that Apple .1 updates OSX, the new OSX isn't compatable with a lot of existing software (see ProTools, etc), but new software frequently requires the new OS version...

I'd be more than willing to pay $300-400 once every 6 years like the Windows model (instead of $150 every year and a half-2 years) and get the updates/new features for free, especially since the change in philosophy would force Apple to make the compatibility transitions smoother and not penalize folks who upgrade/don't upgrade...

Just a thought. Maybe the grass is always greener, and I do admit that Apple's model allows the company to generate extra hype on a more regular basis (although CocoaFinder and ImageBoot aren't really much to get excited about for the average user...)

I realize this mail exposes me to the potential to a ridiculous number of flames, which really aren't necessary, so please, put away your negative crayons.

[ascii]

If they have rewritten Finder in Cocoa, I wonder have they made a framework for "Sidebar apps".

With the use of the blue sidebar in Finder, iTunes, Mail, iPhoto I have thought it would make sense to make an XCode template/framework for these kinds of apps.

[themoonisdown09]

Originally Posted by riversky

You can almost bet on price. Probably the standard price to go from 10.4 to 10.5 to 10.6. Don't count on a discount!

I agree that it will cost the same as any other major release and I also think that they should charge for it.

[Booga]

Originally Posted by wheelhot

so now that it is going to be in Cocoa, will it be faster?

No. In general, rewriting things in Cocoa makes them slower because of dynamic binding and less optimization opportunities for the engine. However, because Apple has much more expertise in Cocoa and it integrates better into the latest frameworks, it's probably still the right move. If they're going to be creating a platform on which to build new capabilities, it's better to be on a technology and toolchain everyone's familiar with.

[Hattig]

Originally Posted by Superbass

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

Thank your lucky stars that you get performance increases with the .1 updates. XP certainly didn't do that with each service pack slowing down the system.

The .1 updates have given a lot of new features with each release. That is what you pay for! Features!

[Slewis]

Null.

[bluedalmatian]

I bet in typical Apple fashion its still single threaded so a sluggish connection to a file server makes the whole Finder look as if its hung

[wbrasington]

Originally Posted by Superbass

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

This was good for a laff and a haff.

The way I remember it, didn't new releases of OS X pack enough punch to cause MicroSoft to completely go back to the drawing board and delay Vista for like..... years?

[wordwise]

Originally Posted by Superbass

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

What bugs me the most is that every year and a half that Apple .1 updates OSX, the new OSX isn't compatable with a lot of existing software (see ProTools, etc), but new software frequently requires the new OS version...

I'd be more than willing to pay $300-400 once every 6 years like the Windows model (instead of $150 every year and a half-2 years) and get the updates/new features for free, especially since the change in philosophy would force Apple to make the compatibility transitions smoother and not penalize folks who upgrade/don't upgrade...

Not a flame, but perhaps an explanation...I think Apple would have a harder time convincing someone to shell out $450 to purchase the latest greatest in the middle or towards the end of a 6 year cycle. Nothin' wrong with paying $130 every 1.5-2 years in my mind...

[silverpraxis]

For those that asked for some kind of warning that Apple would remove FireWire, here is your warning (and there have been a few previous already) that Carbon is on the way out.

[Slewis]

Null.

[bloodstains]

Originally Posted by Superbass

I realize this mail exposes me to the potential to a ridiculous number of flames, which really aren't necessary, so please, put away your negative crayons.

If you don't want to get flamed then you shouldn't post flame bait.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by Superbass

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?...

Not really disagreeing with you, but a minor point to think of is that the cost of OS-X has remained fairly low relative to MS operating systems.

Really rough figures here but ... most consumer goods in North America have been rising at a rate of about 50% every five years or so. OS-X has gone up about 20% in that same time frame. ($129 to $159)

Edit: it's still $129 in most areas it seems so no rise at all i guess.

Another point is that the reason you only pay MS $600 every five years is that it takes them that long to make an OS.

Personally, I think Apple should lower the price to something like 99 bucks. It's getting to the point where it's more advantageous to get folks to upgrade their systems than it is to price it out of their reach. Because Snow Leopard will, on the surface, appear hardly different than Leopard, it's possible that Apple might take this opportunity to lower the price further.

Final point:
"Windows 7" will really be "Windows 6.1" and it will be released very soon. it will be interesting to see if it also comes in 18 different versions and costs hundreds and hundreds of bucks.

[Virgil-TB2]

No personal offence slewis, but ...

I must say that I find your giant sig with the advertisement for roughly drafted forum in it to be highly obnoxious.

You might notice that almost no one else on the forum has a sig, and that a sig with an advertisement/link in it is kind of poor netiquette (if anyone cares about netiquette anymore).

[silverpraxis]

Originally Posted by wordwise

Not a flame, but perhaps an explanation...I think Apple would have a harder time convincing someone to shell out $450 to purchase the latest greatest in the middle or towards the end of a 6 year cycle. Nothin' wrong with paying $130 every 1.5-2 years in my mind...

I agree with you 100%. Many compared the 1st gen iPhone as cheaper in the long run to the iPhone 3G that cost less up front but paid itself back and then a bit in the end, and long how that's going. iPhone sales through the glass ceiling the first model created. Granted, new tech added to sales, but I'm sure inital price was a major factor.

OS X at $129 every 1.5-2 years is still a better deal initially than Windows OS at $400 every... um do they even have a regular release schedule? No they don't. So it could be $400 every 6 years, 5 years, 4 years? Less?

Who cares! I'd pay more for OS X than Windows any day. Paying it in installments is only an added feature in my book.

[Slewis]

Null.

[AeronPrometheus]

Originally Posted by Superbass

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

What bugs me the most is that every year and a half that Apple .1 updates OSX, the new OSX isn't compatable with a lot of existing software (see ProTools, etc), but new software frequently requires the new OS version...

I'd be more than willing to pay $300-400 once every 6 years like the Windows model (instead of $150 every year and a half-2 years) and get the updates/new features for free, especially since the change in philosophy would force Apple to make the compatibility transitions smoother and not penalize folks who upgrade/don't upgrade...

Just a thought. Maybe the grass is always greener, and I do admit that Apple's model allows the company to generate extra hype on a more regular basis (although CocoaFinder and ImageBoot aren't really much to get excited about for the average user...)

I realize this mail exposes me to the potential to a ridiculous number of flames, which really aren't necessary, so please, put away your negative crayons.

The time between Tiger and Leopard was two and a half years, the time between Panther and Tiger was two years. Snow Leopard is going to be the exception to the rule Steve Jobs laid down when OS X first came out, 'As time goes on OS X upgrades will be less and less frequent'. Because Snow Leopard is a massive engine upgrade and catch-up-to-features-we-promised release.

And I'd rather pay 129 every couple of years than 4 or 500 every five or six years. Beside the fact that it would take three OS X upgrades to equal the price of a single Windows upgrade, no version of Microsoft Windows has ever actually been worth 300, 400, 500 dollars. Especially not Vista. In reverse, OS X is worth a lot more than 129, and that's the fully featured version. You have to pay a 'Microsoft tax' to get all the features from Windows now.

In short, it's a very fair price in my eyes for what you get and if Snow Leopard is 129 like every other version then I'd be more than willing to pay it. Not just because it's a fair price for what they're changing but because companies like Apple have long since earned my respect for the dedication they have towards their products.

[silverpraxis]

Originally Posted by Slewis

Depreciated but not gone yet, there's been no indication that Carbon would be eliminated in 10.6, probably in 10.7 or 10.8.

Sebastian

Well, it's just a really advanced warning if your statement proves true.

I like your choice of word: depreciated. I'll use that from now on describing FireWire. Thanks!

[trboyden]

Originally Posted by Matthew Yohe

Well, Mike Bombich does work at Apple now, so maybe this is an offshoot of NetRestore.

I thought the technology sounded familiar. I don't get how it's any different from booting from a cloned external drive? Maybe just that it applies to installation of the O/S?

Definitely interested to see more details on it anyways. I've been using SuperDuper forever now, and never had any issues. The only thing I wish was faster was the cloning to image process. Using CloneZilla on a Windows-based PC, I'm able to create a disk image in 10 minutes, vs. 45 minutes for an OS X image with SuperDuper. There definitely seems like there is room for some improvement there.

I've tried NetBoot in the past, but wasn't thrilled with the performance. The types of apps people use on a Mac just aren't meant to be used in a NetBoot or Citrix type environment.

[Tauron]

Will Snow Leopard run super fast on the new macbook pros with nvidia gpus?

[Slewis]

Null.

[aaronsullivan]

The nice thing about going Cocoa right now is that the iPhone has brought at least a metric ton of developers to the platform via the iPhone. On top of this, Apple has invested heavily in optimizing Cocoa in ways that only coding for an underpowered tiny device can force one to do. This should translate directly into some pretty nice side effects in this new OS.

It seems like very good timing, and the brave decision to take that performance and foundational leap as soon as possible by limiting the focus on more easily marketable features speaks to a maturity in a tech company that is rare. Seeing it come from Apple which has had a history of dipping into the most childish of company cultures is encouraging.

[bonch]

Originally Posted by Superbass

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?

I don't believe Apple has announced the pricing for Snow Leopard yet.

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

I don't know what you were running, but each release has increased the speed on my machines. Tiger in particular was a large bump in performance, especially the Finder. As far as internals go, there were major foundation changes beyond the addition of Time Machine and Expose, and I think Apple's done a good job adding value to each update so that people who aren't aware of the technical changes are still interested.

[lloeki]

Originally Posted by bluedalmatian

I bet in typical Apple fashion its still single threaded so a sluggish connection to a file server makes the whole Finder look as if its hung

Isn't it multithreaded since Leopard? it seems so to me.

[mcarling]

Originally Posted by silverpraxis

I like your choice of word: depreciated.

I think that was a typo. He probably meant deprecated.

Carbon should have been deprecated at about 10.3 or 10.4. Hopefully, Apple will not ship any Carbon apps with 10.6 and will pull all Carbon support from 10.7.

[wheelhot]

I'd be more than willing to pay $300-400 once every 6 years like the Windows model (instead of $150 every year and a half-2 years) and get the updates/new features for free, especially since the change in philosophy would force Apple to make the compatibility transitions smoother and not penalize folks who upgrade/don't upgrade...

Well thats you, but for most of us, if an OS would be a price like that, there is no way we will be upgrading. Its just too much money to flush out at a time and if 6 years? Then the OS will be out dated too much and Apple will end up like MS mistake which is XP to Vista, too long and too late. Besides by 6 years is most likely you will buy a new notebook or PC....6 years is just too long, so far Im happy with Apple releasing minor updates and improving on stuffs rather then suddenly release a major one and ended up screwing up a lot of things....this again reminds me of V for Vista baby!

About the pricing, think about this, why do you think many teenagers can afford an iPhone? Its because its sold at $199, that's cheap, but when you sum up the monthly payment, then its actually not that cheap. But people don't feel it, how would you feel if an iPhone is sold at around $1k? Will you buy it? Will the consumers (especially to the teenagers) buy it? I doubt so.

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

Yes cause you forget to realize something, for each revision of OS X the coding will be improved to make the OS faster, by how much? Well I also do not know.

[steveH]

Originally Posted by Superbass

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?

No, which is good, because you haven't had to pay for . releases.

Apple chose to keep the "X" naming convention for marketing/branding reasons.

The changes between 10.4 and 10.5 are about the same scale as another company's NT 4.0 to NT 5.0.

That said, when did Apple ever hold a gun to your head while they rifled through your wallet?

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by Superbass

Anybody else sick of having to shell out $150 for a .1 update to OSX?

It felt like the jump from and Panther to Tiger and Tiger to Leopard were about as big performance-wise as the jump from SP1 to SP2 and SP2 to SP3 on XP, with the main difference being the addition of Time Machine and Exposé. Does that really warrant spending all the money upgrading?

What bugs me the most is that every year and a half that Apple .1 updates OSX, the new OSX isn't compatable with a lot of existing software (see ProTools, etc), but new software frequently requires the new OS version...

I'd be more than willing to pay $300-400 once every 6 years like the Windows model (instead of $150 every year and a half-2 years) and get the updates/new features for free, especially since the change in philosophy would force Apple to make the compatibility transitions smoother and not penalize folks who upgrade/don't upgrade...

Just a thought. Maybe the grass is always greener, and I do admit that Apple's model allows the company to generate extra hype on a more regular basis (although CocoaFinder and ImageBoot aren't really much to get excited about for the average user...)

I realize this mail exposes me to the potential to a ridiculous number of flames, which really aren't necessary, so please, put away your negative crayons.

Go away Windoze troll!

[steveH]

but then it was stupid to make something called "mini DVI" and "mini DisplayPort" so I wouldn't put it past them, not all of Apple's recipes taste great though.

Yes, it was such a stupid idea to include a video interface port that lets you connect to anything from VGA on up to HDMI and DVI monitors with the addition of an inexpensive adapter.

Especially since some of the monitors' interface connectors wouldn't fit on a laptop as thin as the new MB/MBP set.

What could they possibly have been thinking?

[naphtali]

A little off-topic, but

I'm thinking of getting CS4, but am concerned that Mac OS X seems to be moving towards being Cocoa-only.

Got burnt when my PS stopped working on Leopard, and hope not to go through that again.

It seems quite unlikely that Apple will drop Carbon support altogether, but it's tweaked stuff here and there before

Any ideas on whether to wait or get CS4?

[Quillz]

Originally Posted by wbrasington

This was good for a laff and a haff.

The way I remember it, didn't new releases of OS X pack enough punch to cause MicroSoft to completely go back to the drawing board and delay Vista for like..... years?

No. Vista was delayed because in 2004, its kernel was shifted from XP to Windows Server 2003.

[hmurchison]

ImageBoot sounds pretty nice.

Cocoa Finder- I'm beyond the era in which the mere evocation of "Cocoa" makes me think
something is automatically going to be better. We'll see when SL hits if Cocoa and standard evolution make for an improved finder.


I'd like to see more copies in the hands of developers.


I have no problem paying full pop for SL as long as I get.

1. A very stable and "lean n mean" OS. I hope the size reductions that I've seen are true and that Apple engineers are working hard at eliminating bugs and optimizing the hell out of what they have.

2. New tech like OpenCL and Grand Central are delivered without the 1.0 gotchas that you often see.

3. Quicktime truly has a vast improvement. I'm tired of reading about improvements only to find they are relatively miniscule.

4. Some sort of surprise that no on saw coming.

[silverpraxis]

Originally Posted by Slewis

I'll pass your compliments to the chef (Apple) as they're the ones who listed almost every Carbon framework in Leopard (if not all of them, don't remember) in their Xcode documentation.

Firewire is another story, it would be stupid to take it out of either the Macbook Pro and Mac Pro, but then it was stupid to make something called "mini DVI" and "mini DisplayPort" so I wouldn't put it past them, not all of Apple's recipes taste great though.

Sebastian

Apple's just doing what many other hardware companies are doing, and it's not new for them at all. Creating proprietary ports to lock consumers into your product line is good business, plus who can argue too much over smaller ports on a portable?

Then again extra dongles suck.

[silverpraxis]

Originally Posted by mcarling

I think that was a typo. He probably meant deprecated.

Carbon should have been deprecated at about 10.3 or 10.4. Hopefully, Apple will not ship any Carbon apps with 10.6 and will pull all Carbon support from 10.7.

Depreciation and deprecation follow each other, and I'm not knowledgeable enough on the subject to know which occurred first.