or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple offers developers new Tiger, Intel pre-releases
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple offers developers new Tiger, Intel pre-releases

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
Over the weekend Apple equipped its Developer Connection members with a new pre-release of Mac OS X 10.4.3 and also updated Mac OS X for Intel to coincide with the release of Mac OS X 10.4.2, according to online reports.

Mac OS X 10.4.3 is the next maintenance release scheduled for Apple's Tiger operating system. The latest build of the software is said to be Mac OS X 10.4.3 build 8F24, which ads nearly 75 bugs fixes or improvements to the previously reported 400.

Some recent changes in the software pertain to the continued improvement of .Mac synching, iChat, Spotlight, Automator, AppleScript, Mail, OpenGL, Safari and USB. However, the system update continues to experience .Mac synching issues alongside a few other bugs affecting Pages, printing from Preview.app and Keychain Access.

Separately this weekend, Apple updated its Mac OS X for Intel project for the first time since the company announced that it would be switching to Intel processors in its Macintosh product line.

Developers renting one of Apple's $999 test systems should be able to download Mac OS X 10.4.2 build 8B1072, which brings Mac OS X for Intel up to speed with the latest public release of Mac OS X Tiger.

According to reports, this latest Intel build includes new anti-piracy measures to prevent hackers from running Mac OS X smoothly on Intel-based computers not authorized by Apple.

Software applications -- both included with and compiled on build 8B1027 -- will not run on the previous Mac OS X for Intel pre-release. This means that all new Universal Binaries will fail to operate with the much hacked and pirated initial pre-release of Mac OS X for Intel.

The first and only prior pre-release build of Mac OS X for Intel made its debut in July in the form of Mac OS X 10.4.1 build 8B1025.
post #2 of 26
The previous replies to this post have been split to General Discussion

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=57546
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #3 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by AppleInsider
According to reports, this latest Intel build includes new anti-piracy measures to prevent hackers from running Mac OS X smoothly on Intel-based computers not authorized by Apple.

I think that the reports are jumping to conclusions. The thing making old Universal Binaries incompatible could very well be because of advancements in the code.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #4 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by AppleInsider
According to reports, this latest Intel build includes new anti-piracy measures

Anti-piracy measures?

I'd be interested in hearing exactly what these "anti-piracy measures" are.
post #5 of 26
I could care less about Apple changing the protection of the Intel development version. It's totally their right to do so, and no person impacted paid for the software, so they have no right to complain.

As for me, I am happy to read that the patch to Tiger may FINALLY make Tiger usable and an acceptable quality level.
post #6 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by BWhaler
As for me, I am happy to read that the patch to Tiger may FINALLY make Tiger usable and an acceptable quality level.

It's been that way since, I dunno, 10.4.0?
post #7 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by Placebo
It's been that way since, I dunno, 10.4.0?

I dunno. With 10.4.2, I've seen my PM G5 lock up HARD maybe three or four times, with a big switch notice on the screen telling me to cycle the power. It happened with some USB devices, when I ran a scanner.

Maybe you'd be surprised, but since 1998, I've only had maybe three or four BSODs with Windows NT and 2000, one or two was bad hardware, another was the wrong driver and the fourth is unknown, so no, I can't say Tiger is necessarily acceptably stable.
post #8 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by Placebo
It's been that way since, I dunno, 10.4.0?

I suppose it depends on how complex your system is and how many 3rd party "extentions" and such you have.

I've got a pretty complex system, and I waited until 10.4.2. But even now I've got problems from it. Some have been solved by getting even later updates from those third parties, but some are definitely Apple's fault.

There is still the Firewire problem which started big time from 10.3.8. It's now worse than ever. I just lost another drive a few days ago.

With all of the major bugs Apple has acnowledged and fixed so far, I don't understant how, at this time, people aren't agreeing that something has been wrong. The new update will fix another 500. Some of which are still major.

I don't remember bug fixing at this level before.

I know why it happened, but that doesn't make it any better.
post #9 of 26
melgross is right. I have noticed a lot of crap intro'd in 10.3.8 is in Tiger. Huh?

Tiger is possibly the buggiest OS X yet. However, 10.2.8 was HORRENDOUS too, at least for some people, and I was one.

Here's to hoping they took their sweet time and 10.4.3 will put us on back on par with OS X's legendary rock-solid performance and stability.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #10 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by Aquatic
melgross is right. I have noticed a lot of crap intro'd in 10.3.8 is in Tiger. Huh?

Tiger is possibly the buggiest OS X yet. However, 10.2.8 was HORRENDOUS too, at least for some people, and I was one.

Here's to hoping they took their sweet time and 10.4.3 will put us on back on par with OS X's legendary rock-solid performance and stability.

10.3.9 must have been the worse one ever released; buggy and fault ridden at every possible level - bloody annoying.

Tiger is just as bad unfortunately; so bad that I'm actually looking at selling my iMac G5 and purchasing a Ultra 20 workstation from SUN, loaded with Solaris/GNOME - atleast I know that the damn bugs that get reported are actually fixed rather than swept under the carpet or if there are bugs fixed and features added, as the case with Webkit, we'll have to wait another year and a half for those changes to be made available in the next upgrade.

To be completely bloody honest, it is a rip off the way Apple is running things.
post #11 of 26
I don't have any problems with 10.3.9
I've been happily running it for quite some time.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #12 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by Flounder
I don't have any problems with 10.3.9
I've been happily running it for quite some time.

Hmm, maybe I just had bad luck

I understand as each release goes by, things get more complex, but at the very least, Apple should have spent WAY more time improving the code quality and stability.
post #13 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by kaiwai
Hmm, maybe I just had bad luck

I understand as each release goes by, things get more complex, but at the very least, Apple should have spent WAY more time improving the code quality and stability.

Maybe bad luck, which I'm willing to concede for the moment. I have had some problems but nothing nearly severe enough to justify yet another platform jump, I really didn't have that big of a problem with the previous platform I was using.

I personally hope 10.4.3 fixes enough things, so I'm willing to wait it out a bit.

The Ultra 20 comment intrigued me, I looked it up, I didn't know Sun was making x86 workstations. Their "value" comparison was hillarious, they compared the value of their entry level 1P workstation with HP's high end dual-Opteron-capable xw9300 (up to four cores, up to 16GB RAM, SLI capable), which is a whole different order of a beast than the Ultra 20. It's actually more comparable to the Sun W2100z, not their Ultra 20, though missing SLI and some other stuff. I guess that's Jonathan Shwartz for you, my impressions in the past that he's as much Mr. RDF as Steve Jobs.
post #14 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by JeffDM
Maybe bad luck, which I'm willing to concede for the moment. I have had some problems but nothing nearly severe enough to justify yet another platform jump, I really didn't have that big of a problem with the previous platform I was using.

I personally hope 10.4.3 fixes enough things, so I'm willing to wait it out a bit.

The Ultra 20 comment intrigued me, I looked it up, I didn't know Sun was making x86 workstations. Their "value" comparison was hillarious, they compared the value of their entry level 1P workstation with HP's high end dual-Opteron-capable xw9300 (up to four cores, up to 16GB RAM, SLI capable), which is a whole different order of a beast than the Ultra 20. It's actually more comparable to the Sun W2100z, not their Ultra 20, though missing SLI and some other stuff. I guess that's Jonathan Shwartz for you, my impressions in the past that he's as much Mr. RDF as Steve Jobs.

The new series just released by Sun are inexpensive and have received good notice in the industry.

But a Sun is not really a serious choice for someone who bought a Mac for what it is in the first place.

If you want Linux, buy almost any cheap box. You don't really want Solaris. Just remember that there is nothing comparable in Linux. If you REALLY will go to Linux, you should have gone there first. The two OS's are at the opposite ends of the spectrum.
post #15 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
The new series just released by Sun are inexpensive and have received good notice in the industry.

But a Sun is not really a serious choice for someone who bought a Mac for what it is in the first place.

If you want Linux, buy almost any cheap box. You don't really want Solaris. Just remember that there is nothing comparable in Linux. If you REALLY will go to Linux, you should have gone there first. The two OS's are at the opposite ends of the spectrum.

How does one actually define what a Mac user is today? its more than just the arty-farty, skivvy wearing brigade; there are actually now scientists and engineers who are now considering it; once the main cash cow for SUN's UltraSPARC workstations.

Times are changing honey; there is no "Mac customer" there are now just those who are customers who just so happen to have considered purchasing a Mac.
post #16 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by kaiwai
How does one actually define what a Mac user is today? its more than just the arty-farty, skivvy wearing brigade; there are actually now scientists and engineers who are now considering it; once the main cash cow for SUN's UltraSPARC workstations.

Times are changing honey; there is no "Mac customer" there are now just those who are customers who just so happen to have considered purchasing a Mac.

Are you one of those scientists or engineers needing this for your work? There have always been the R&D crowd using Macs as far back as I can remember. I use CAD/CAM myself at times. More UNIX apps are being moved over to OS X than are being used on Linux these days. NASA has far more MACS than UNIX or Linux machines.

But the vast majority of Mac users out there are either in K-12 (kindergarden to 12th grade school use), and home users. They are NOT candidates for a non-Mac UNIX.
post #17 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by kaiwai
How does one actually define what a Mac user is today? its more than just the arty-farty, skivvy wearing brigade; there are actually now scientists and engineers who are now considering it; once the main cash cow for SUN's UltraSPARC workstations.

Times are changing honey; there is no "Mac customer" there are now just those who are customers who just so happen to have considered purchasing a Mac.

Researchers who buy Macs use them just like they would use Linux boxes. They mainly buy it to have X11 and Powerpoint on the same box, without having to restart. I don't think they can be called Mac customers.
(By the way, I am a researcher myself, but I have been using Mac OS since Junior High... And the so-called Mac users in my lab who do not know what the Finder is and who say "Koala" instead of "Cocoa" just bother me!)
Basically everything goes round. We're 80% dinosaur.
-- Alex James
Reply
Basically everything goes round. We're 80% dinosaur.
-- Alex James
Reply
post #18 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by The One to Rescue
Researchers who buy Macs use them just like they would use Linux boxes. They mainly buy it to have X11 and Powerpoint on the same box, without having to restart. I don't think they can be called Mac customers.
(By the way, I am a researcher myself, but I have been using Mac OS since Junior High... And the so-called Mac users in my lab who do not know what the Finder is and who say "Koala" instead of "Cocoa" just bother me!)

That's only because they're from Australia.
post #19 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by The One to Rescue
Researchers who buy Macs use them just like they would use Linux boxes. They mainly buy it to have X11 and Powerpoint on the same box, without having to restart. I don't think they can be called Mac customers.

Where will they go in the next upgrade cycle in light of Wine / Crossover Office?
post #20 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
That's only because they're from Australia.

They're only dumb French people working in some boring place in Japan, actually!
Oh wait... I am a French people working in some boring place in Japan! DAMN!!! \
Basically everything goes round. We're 80% dinosaur.
-- Alex James
Reply
Basically everything goes round. We're 80% dinosaur.
-- Alex James
Reply
post #21 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by JeffDM
Where will they go in the next upgrade cycle in light of Wine / Crossover Office?

That will probably bring even more researchers to Mac OS X actually. Being able to run OS X apps, Windows apps, and Linux apps (well, open source Linux apps, with some tweaking... Damn, why can't Apple use the standard path for accessing GLUT headers!!!) on the same OS, without having to use dual boot and all, certainly is a good point.

That's good for Apple too, since researchers are the ones when it comes to attracting geeks with tech demos!
Basically everything goes round. We're 80% dinosaur.
-- Alex James
Reply
Basically everything goes round. We're 80% dinosaur.
-- Alex James
Reply
post #22 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
If you want Linux, buy almost any cheap box.

I could do that, and have, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. I'm not convinced of the quality of such cheap hardware. For example, I don't get stability problems with Windows other people complain about when I ran it on x86 workstations.
post #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by JeffDM
Where will they go in the next upgrade cycle in light of Wine / Crossover Office?

I'm not so sure tha Wine/Crossover is going to have a major impact. Even in the Linux world it doesn't seem popular. People who use Linux/UNIX, for the most part, don't want to use MS apps. They will stick with OO simply because it's NOT an MS app, even though it really isn't as good.

What I see happening, even in the sciences, is that the Mac OS is used for everything except for those programs that are only available in UNIX form. Then they usually go to X11.

What I also see happening at an ever increasing rate is that those apps are moving over to Aqua. Even scientists don't like poking around in their machine if they don't have to. The difference between these tech types is that they will teach themselves to program if they need an app that doesn't exist. UNIX has been the preferred medium, but there is a lot of movement over to OS X and even Aqua. Pharmaceuticals would be another good example of this.

But all of thes hi-tech users only compose, right now, a couple of hundred thousand machines a year, at most.
post #24 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
I'm not so sure tha Wine/Crossover is going to have a major impact. Even in the Linux world it doesn't seem popular. People who use Linux/UNIX, for the most part, don't want to use MS apps. They will stick with OO simply because it's NOT an MS app, even though it really isn't as good.

What I see happening, even in the sciences, is that the Mac OS is used for everything except for those programs that are only available in UNIX form. Then they usually go to X11.

What I also see happening at an ever increasing rate is that those apps are moving over to Aqua. Even scientists don't like poking around in their machine if they don't have to. The difference between these tech types is that they will teach themselves to program if they need an app that doesn't exist. UNIX has been the preferred medium, but there is a lot of movement over to OS X and even Aqua. Pharmaceuticals would be another good example of this.

But all of thes hi-tech users only compose, right now, a couple of hundred thousand machines a year, at most.

From what I understand there is a move to push from X11drv to Wine using Cairo; which in turn will make the Mac port that little bit easier.

As for Wine; it actually runs Access quite well; if they can get Project to work as well, you'll start to see quite a number of people consider Mac as their platform of choice.
post #25 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by kaiwai
From what I understand there is a move to push from X11drv to Wine using Cairo; which in turn will make the Mac port that little bit easier.

As for Wine; it actually runs Access quite well; if they can get Project to work as well, you'll start to see quite a number of people consider Mac as their platform of choice.

One of the problems with Wine and Crossover is that they only work with some programs. There are too many API's for them to get them all this way. Each program has to be checked and often needs individual work.

Anyway, this is fine for those programs that aren't available on the Mac. I'd hate to see people using them INSTEAD of Mac programs.
post #26 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
One of the problems with Wine and Crossover is that they only work with some programs. There are too many API's for them to get them all this way. Each program has to be checked and often needs individual work.

Anyway, this is fine for those programs that aren't available on the Mac. I'd hate to see people using them INSTEAD of Mac programs.

Alot of the main parts of the win32 API have already been implemented; its mainly the small obscure parts and some parts of the API that have work arounds that some programmes rely on - undocumented features, for example.

Ultimately, however, I don't think it would ever replace native applications; the fact is, a Windows application, no matter how good the ABI (Application Binary Interface), the fact will still be that end users will want native look and feel - and knowing that their software is going to be fully supported on that particular platform.

I'd say that most people would simply use it to run Microsoft applications - a company who would never consider, for example, porting their Project management sotware.

One that will be interesting to see is how well the Mono implementation of winforms go and whether it will be able to run Microsoft C# applications like ASP.NET Matrix, which is a freebie download.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple offers developers new Tiger, Intel pre-releases