or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Top Secret Features (leopard)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Top Secret Features (leopard) - Page 2

post #41 of 87
You've obviously never actually tried Parallels. It does do exactly what you claim "80-95% of us" () need. I'm especially pleased with the latest release and it's development in the area of seamless interaction between OS's.
post #42 of 87
TenHanger, you make some very excellent points, particularly with regard to the success of the Ipod and the need for simplicity of use of PCs. I work productively in both the OSX and XP universes. Though I much prefer Apple/OSX, I like it when windows folk point out obvious marketing realities and "blind spots" to Apple devotees. Forums like this need counterpoints presented articulately so that Apple Geekdom can expand its horizons and better understand the rest (95%) of the pc world. Thanks for that TH.

Since this forum is about predictions for top secret features in Leopard, my wish is for full support for Multi-Touch technology (MT) which was previewed in a very understated way by Jobs in the iPhone part of the keynote. This technology, apparently now wholly owned and patented by Apple, will revolutionize the way users interact with computers. See my posts on MT and FingerWorks technology here (towards the end of page 1 and on page 2):

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=70695

Also see the posts here:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=70688
post #43 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celemourn View Post

Microsoft makes IE for Mac.

Nope.

Development ceased in 2003 and it was pulled from the MS website in January 2006.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #44 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by meelash View Post

You've obviously never actually tried Parallels. It does do exactly what you claim "80-95% of us" () need. I'm especially pleased with the latest release and it's development in the area of seamless interaction between OS's.

You are right that I've never tried Parallels, and I never will. That fact that you HAVE tried it, means you are obviosly an Apple devotee, or as I'd call it an "Appostle". Therefore, your eye-rolling makes no sense, as 80-95% of 5% is in reality 4-4.75% of what consumers as-a-whole need. You are in that 4%, I am in the 96%-- listen to me, or rather LISTEN to me. The avg Joe doesn't want to have to purchase Parallels or VMWare or even be required to say those words. He just wants to open the box, plug the device into the wall, throw the directions in the trash, and begin running two operating systems at the same time. At MOST, maybe Apple would require the consumer to buy his own copy of Vista and put the CDs into the CD bay, answering "OK" with a mouse click one, maybe two times after that. Any more complicated than that, and Apple can simply subtract market share from any future projections.
Dear Jobs:
I've never bought a Mac, and never will until Apple has dual OS machine running both Vista and OS X natively and simoultaneously. Niether Boot Camp nor Parallels (bast@rdized Windows ON...
Reply
Dear Jobs:
I've never bought a Mac, and never will until Apple has dual OS machine running both Vista and OS X natively and simoultaneously. Niether Boot Camp nor Parallels (bast@rdized Windows ON...
Reply
post #45 of 87
Quote:
As a PC user, I can tell you exactly when Leopard needs to give Apple the big juicing it needs to stop being a geekland and go mainstream like the iPod.

Wow. You must be new here. How is the iPod not geeky? How is the Mac geeky? Go over to Slashdot and see what real geeks think about Macs.

Quote:
We already have Boot Camp and Parallels, niether of which is what non-Apple buyers want. Boot Camp requires the dreadful reboot, but good side is Windows runs native to processor.

You know this for sure? Market data suggest otherwise - sales suggest otherwise.

Quote:
for instance, when a website doesn't work on safari, you're going to want to open IE (or Firefox) immediately to get the job done, but if you have to reboot, that's a lot of precious time wasted that non-geeks don't have. Reboots aren't an option for the masses, remember this all you geeks, and niether is a complicate installation such as Boot Camp. I don't care HOW easy it is, it's still a pain for the common simpleton like me.

There are at least 8 web browsers that operate on the Macintosh. Safari's WebKit is arguably the best engine out there. And there is Firefox and it's more Mac-like cousin, Camino. I don't consider my aunt to be a geek, and she has absolutely no problem with Boot Camp.

Actually bundling Vista with a Mac is stupid and misses the whole point of buying a Mac. Apple won't do it, and if they did it would suggest a lack of confidence in their product. Plus, Computers would cost a lot more, since they have to buy Vista anyway. I don't want to pay for that POS when I move to Intel. Moreover, the computer essentially would no longer be a Mac, it would be an "Apple (with mac)." Why prostitute the brand like that?

Quote:
Parallels doesn't run Windows properly, close, but no cigar.

Please explain.

Quote:
Apple became a real company again based on ONE single decision: Jobs finally got smart and ported the iTunes to run on Windows machines.

Half-true. it did boost the marketshare, as well as all the attention the company was getting, as well as having a prominent position in thousands of malls across the country. People saw, and tried.

Quote:
This was the best decision he's made since the early 80s. So now he needs to take the final step, and allow all us Apple-phobiacs to be able to walk into the Apple store, and buy a very cool looking iMac fully knowing it can run either Windows (for Dad) and Apple (for the kids and Mom), and both at the same time.

First off, looks are only a small part of the reason people buy Macs for the second time. It's the OS, the interface, and the design. The aesthetics/cool factor are only a part. Why you are Apple-phobic is beyond me, as is my own Apple phobia from before I used one.

Quote:
Why else would Apple have waited until Vista is shipping a couple of months to release Leopard? It's not because he's trying to hide stuff from Microsoft, he's doing it so he can ship the dual-OS system to run Vista and QA the computer so its seemless.

Because it takes a long time to write code and get it right. Once you've used OS X long enough, you'll understand why people think Parallels, VMWare, and CrossOver are satisfactory. And can you imagine the RAM wasted to keep a whole separate OS working all the time?
Quote:
This is what I hope anyway, and I hope it for Apple, even though it's a company I've never liked, and run by a guy who never learned marketing until recently. If Apple pulls this off, you will see your world change quickly.

Steve Jobs has always been a master marketer. That is the so-called Reality Distortion Field. And actually, most of his advertising was better before the "Get a Mac" ads.

And it's better not to flame meelash's signature, and just ignore it, or else I'll have to start throwing some kittens around.
MacBook Pro C2D 2.4GHz and a battle-scarred PowerBook G4 1.33GHz

"When you gaze long into a dead pixel, the dead pixes gazes also into you"
Reply
MacBook Pro C2D 2.4GHz and a battle-scarred PowerBook G4 1.33GHz

"When you gaze long into a dead pixel, the dead pixes gazes also into you"
Reply
post #46 of 87
How would you propose that this be done?

The majority of Mac users who are recent switchers appreciate the fact that they have Windows available for those one or two apps that are vertical market Windows-only, or required for their work. They do not intend to run mainly Windows on their Mac machines.

Apple isn't going to sell a system that comes preloaded with Vista. Dream on. They need to expand the installed base of their OS, not become another Wintel maker.

As far as websites that won't work on Mac OS, that is the fault of the website. Safari is W3C compliant, and IE is not. If a webmaster is not concerned about cutting off his website from 35 million potential viewers, to hell with him.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TenHanger View Post

The avg Joe doesn't want to have to purchase Parallels or VMWare or even be required to say those words. He just wants to open the box, plug the device into the wall, throw the directions in the trash, and begin running two operating systems at the same time.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #47 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenHanger View Post

I"m trying to give you all a view of what it is like to not spend 100% of my time trying to figure out technology, but 100% of my time USING technology.

If that is the case, why are you using Windows?
post #48 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by wirc View Post

Actually bundling Vista with a Mac is stupid and misses the whole point of buying a Mac. Apple won't do it, and if they did it would suggest a lack of confidence in their product. Plus, Computers would cost a lot more, since they have to buy Vista anyway. I don't want to pay for that POS when I move to Intel. Moreover, the computer essentially would no longer be a Mac, it would be an "Apple (with mac)." Why prostitute the brand like that?

Exactly! If Apple preloaded Vista, they wouldn't really be Macs, and they'd be more expensive. Then they are just another Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. Plus it sends the message that Apple is admitting defeat and surrendering to PC's to all the ignorant noobs who think Bill Gates is the brains and innovator behind the computer industry. If someone can't deal with a vast minority of websites that aren't compatible with Safari and are too lazy to either use a different browser or utilize Boot Camp or Parallels, then by all means, just stick with a PC. I'm not gonna lose sleep over it
post #49 of 87
No kidding, iPeon. As someone who works on XP at work, and MacOS X at home and for my private CS research, I think I can firmly say... XP feels like a toy. More so, it feels like a half-assed, cobbled together monstrosity that is lacking any attention to detail or thought in its design. I spend most of my time fighting the idiotic thing *instead* of getting work done. If it's not doing something completely at odds with itself, it's acting like a hyper three year old trying to be helpful.

To make my employer happy, I use the XP machine. For real work, I use my Mac... because it stays out of my way, and it just works.

And TenHanger, isn't that exactly what you'd rather be doing, instead of dealing with Windows?
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #50 of 87
I disagree that it feels like a toy. It's a very responsive system in general, more responsive than MacOS which has quite some delays even with 2GB of memory. Also file management is far more effective.
However, MacOS feels more stable, and when something crashes, MacOS doesn't go beserk like Windows (strangely the harddrive is going beserk, paging stuff I guess). Also, sound is much better on MacOSX, much more responsive.

They both give a different experience, I think it's easy to bash OS #1 and praise OS #2.
post #51 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

I disagree that it feels like a toy. It's a very responsive system in general, more responsive than MacOS which has quite some delays even with 2GB of memory. Also file management is far more effective.

I agreed with you on the former, (as long as you don't tax the poor thing - OS X is much better at handling a couple dozen open apps at once) but whaaaa? File mgmt is *effective*? How so? There's no rhyme nor reason to the where things go on the disk. It's like dealing with Mac OS9 in that regards, but without the obvious clues as to why things are where they are. User accounts are obviously an after-thought, and it feels even worse at trying to hide 'the real disk' from you than even OS9 did.

Or are you speaking of moving files around?

Quote:
They both give a different experience, I think it's easy to bash OS #1 and praise OS #2.

Every OS has issues, and problems, no doubt. What I'm talking about is the complete lack of craftsmanship and attention to detail that I run into in XP on a daily basis. It *feels* like something slapped together by committee, without a unified design plan. For instance...

I read a review of Vista that said that Windows (XP an Vista both) is like a hyper 3 yr old, endlessly wanting to make sure you know how helpful they are, and apparently terrified you might forget that they're there, while MacOS X is like a gentleman's gentleman, standing silently on the side until an opportunity for assistance is noted, given, and then shrugged off as simply business as normal. I couldn't agree more. I am constantly barraged by notices on my XP laptop that serve zero useful purpose. My favorite one on Friday was plugging in a USB 2.0 USB key, and having it tell me 1) New hardware had been detected. 2) New hardware was now ready for use. 3) The USB device would work faster if plugged into a USB 2.0 port.

1) Thank you for stating the obvious - it should always be detected. I would not expect you to tell me that a key on my keyboard had been pressed every time I did it, nor would I expect this. Unless the standard situation is that hardware is *not* detected, ie, it fails, then this shouldn't be a notification. Notify me when the unexpected occurs, not when things are as normal. The fact that anyone thought this was a necessary notification puts a chill up my spine. It reads like something you have in there while you're debugging, and don't expect it to work.

2) How very odd. You said it was detected, then you make a second notice to tell me it's ready... why not just... let me use it? Bring up an Explorer window showing the data device, or otherwise give me *any* visual feedback that it has been mounted? To be fair, it does bring up a dialog asking how I want to interact with the data device, giving me a list of possibilities like "View pictures as slideshow", and in there is "View device in Explorer". This just strikes me as that hyper 3 yr old again though - the tools to show slideshows, etc, are already in Explorer, (and *very* prominent in that silly task bar on the left, I might add,) so why add an unnecessary barrier to interacting with the device I just plugged in? Note also that *any* feedback here, even the original notification, makes the notice in #1 utterly superfluous.

3) Here's the icing on the cake. Okay, this is kind of useful, in a way, even though most users won't have a clue what it means. I think to myself "Ok, so there's a USB1.x bus, and a USB 2.0 bus on this machine. Common enough. But I only saw two USB ports... hmm..." Into the Hardware panel I go, and find out... the machine *has no USB 2.0 ports*. So please, explain why it gave me the useless notice? Can't the OS tell what hardware it has underneath?

It's precisely this sort of thing that drives me nuts. It's just a complete lack of attention to detail in places that matter, leading to an explosion of semi-useful or downright false information being thrown at the user. I don't care if it's a computer, a car, or any other kind of tool, lack of design detail makes my brain boil over.

And that's just the user experience. As a developer, it's much, much worse.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #52 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post

3) Here's the icing on the cake. Okay, this is kind of useful, in a way, even though most users won't have a clue what it means. I think to myself "Ok, so there's a USB1.x bus, and a USB 2.0 bus on this machine. Common enough. But I only saw two USB ports... hmm..." Into the Hardware panel I go, and find out... the machine *has no USB 2.0 ports*. So please, explain why it gave me the useless notice? Can't the OS tell what hardware it has underneath?

I thought I was the only one. This drives me absolutely insane every time I plug in a flash drive. It's just SO STUPID. It just happened to you last Friday? I have to deal with this every freakin' day and it gets more irritating as time goes on, not less, believe me....
post #53 of 87
RE: Please Do Not Feed the Trolls
I will handle the moderation, if you don't mind. Your post is off-topic.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #54 of 87
Had a thought and dug up this thread as being appropriately titled. What if one of the secret features was an Apple polished and spruced up Open Office??? This might make sense given the way that Jobs/Apples seems to have opened up the taunting factor against MSFT/Vista. People here have worried in the past about alienating the Mac BU and MSFT and them cancelling the Office product for Mac. With the ongoing progress with ODF adoption and even MSFT's ODXML and Apple participation in the open source software this might make a lot of sense. ?????
post #55 of 87
er.. what would happen to iWork
post #56 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenHanger View Post

You are right that I've never tried Parallels, and I never will. That fact that you HAVE tried it, means you are obviosly an Apple devotee, or as I'd call it an "Appostle". Therefore, your eye-rolling makes no sense, as 80-95% of 5% is in reality 4-4.75% of what consumers as-a-whole need. You are in that 4%, I am in the 96%-- listen to me, or rather LISTEN to me. The avg Joe doesn't want to have to purchase Parallels or VMWare or even be required to say those words. He just wants to open the box, plug the device into the wall, throw the directions in the trash, and begin running two operating systems at the same time. At MOST, maybe Apple would require the consumer to buy his own copy of Vista and put the CDs into the CD bay, answering "OK" with a mouse click one, maybe two times after that. Any more complicated than that, and Apple can simply subtract market share from any future projections.

You bitch and whine about wanting a dual OS machine yet you won't even consider trying Parallels or Bootcamp???That right there takes away any credibility you may have had.
post #57 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by meelash View Post

er.. what would happen to iWork

To me iWork offers other things, or better things, or different things. I'm not sure but if the Mac NEEDs office for compatibility with the Window's world then this could be a way. It may be tat the OO source base is to bloated and convoluted for this to happen, or not? I really don't know but if ODF takes off as a standard, like Texas and Mass. and Minn. are leaning then this might be a was to break this dependency.
post #58 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by drnat View Post

I would like better iCal integration with iMac, so I can view my callanders & edit them on-line from any computer, including a PC (which I have to use at work with a direct link from iMac

It's called .mac syncing. I have done this with Tiger. Sure, it's not free, but nothing is now in days.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Beardsley View Post

I'm guessing we won't see a new finder in Leopard. Why would they waste the time to add grid spacing to icons in the current finder if it was going to be replaced with something else? I may be wrong about this, but sadly I'm not expecting much to happen in finder land.

I think Finder will be updated -- it needs to be with Explore being updated. i find the search functionaitly in it being very, very unuseful. Maybe it's just me not being able to use it correctly. Will it be "new and improved"? Who knows.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TenHanger View Post

Virtualization
Redesigned Finder / UI Overhaul
Resolution Independance
Stickty Widgets (widgets floating on screen without dashboard open
Heavily meta data based Finder



Wow, this was a great thread start, but I was totally disappointed with the answers. I think the problem is you are all Mac users. As a PC user, I can tell you exactly when Leopard needs to give Apple the big juicing it needs to stop being a geekland and go mainstream like the iPod.

VIRTUALIZATION: There's now 2 cores running x86, and maybe 4 in the near future. We already have Boot Camp and Parallels, niether of which is what non-Apple buyers want. Boot Camp requires the dreadful reboot, but good side is Windows runs native to processor. for instance, when a website doesn't work on safari, you're going to want to open IE (or Firefox) immediately to get the job done, but if you have to reboot, that's a lot of precious time wasted that non-geeks don't have. Reboots aren't an option for the masses, remember this all you geeks, and niether is a complicate installation such as Boot Camp. I don't care HOW easy it is, it's still a pain for the common simpleton like me.
Parallels doesn't run Windows properly, close, but no cigar. What new-to-Mac users want is the ability to go from Apple OS to Windows with the press of a "Switch" button on the keyboard that's big and green and simple. Can't get a website to work in Safari? SWITCH. The software you want only comes in Windows flavor? SWITCH. Boom, you are done. Apple became a real company again based on ONE single decision: Jobs finally got smart and ported the iTunes to run on Windows machines. This was the best decision he's made since the early 80s. So now he needs to take the final step, and allow all us Apple-phobiacs to be able to walk into the Apple store, and buy a very cool looking iMac fully knowing it can run either Windows (for Dad) and Apple (for the kids and Mom), and both at the same time. No reboots, no complicated installs, SWITCH. Right on the keyboard so my 75 year old father can do it without even knowing what he's doing. Maybe it doesn't have to be a button on the keyboard, but it better be damn easy, as easy as switching from Firefox to IE browser. Why else would Apple have waited until Vista is shipping a couple of months to release Leopard? It's not because he's trying to hide stuff from Microsoft, he's doing it so he can ship the dual-OS system to run Vista and QA the computer so its seemless. This is what I hope anyway, and I hope it for Apple, even though it's a company I've never liked, and run by a guy who never learned marketing until recently. If Apple pulls this off, you will see your world change quickly. If not, this board will continue to have geeky comments posted by the same APPostLE crowd that's always followed this company like a religion-- small beans.

Maybe the key to your problems is not Virtualization, but emulation. Meaning, Safari 3.0 being able to emulate an IE environment. Meaning that Apple's OS will be powerful enough to emulate some, if not all, programs that run on Windows. Linux has been doing some of this for quite some time, anf if they can pull of broswer emulation...that would be great.


And guys, you MUST have Finder. Go into Safe Boot and try to use Spotlight. it's disabled. Why? I don't know. So yea...
post #59 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macintosh_Next View Post

Parallels doesn't run Windows properly, close, but no cigar. What new-to-Mac users want is the ability to go from Apple OS to Windows with the press of a "Switch" button on the keyboard that's big and green and simple. Can't get a website to work in Safari? SWITCH. The software you want only comes in Windows flavor? SWITCH. Boom, you are done.

Uhm, dude, that is EXACTLY what parallels allows you to do
post #60 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celemourn View Post

Microsoft makes IE for Mac. Also there are FireFox and Opera available. Of those three, Safari has been found to be the most compatible with web pages which use web standards. Only the rogue pages who do stupid customized stuff tend to not work.... there was a post somewhere around here about that.... Go wiki Acid_2 test.

One of the wonderful aspects of BootCamp is that it walks us right through the process. It's really (no, I mean REALLY. Like, literally) just as easy as installing a fresh copy of windows. Oh, right. Ok, never mind then.

BTW, the more opinionated a post is around here, the more the writer gets flamed. Just thought I'd give ya a heads up.

Microsoft made IE for Mac. Made IE for Mac. Piece of shit it was, too.
post #61 of 87
re: this post and especially the previous post>> ummm... deja vu? \
post #62 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by meelash View Post

re: this post and especially the previous post>> ummm... deja vu? \

meelash, is this worth moving to a new thread to get out of the meaningless background, or not worth it? what do you think?
post #63 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutch pear View Post

Uhm, dude, that is EXACTLY what parallels allows you to do

Yea...I didn't say that...for some reason TenHanger's post didn't quote properlly..it should be fixed now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by max_naylor View Post

Microsoft made IE for Mac. Made IE for Mac. Piece of shit it was, too.

Yes it was, and yes it was...it won't even load quickly...its like dial up even if you have cable internet....I had it...but its just not worth it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meelash View Post

re: this post and especially the previous post>> ummm... deja vu? \

And if u are referring back to my and dutch pear's post, your right. I quoted someone (TenHanger) and it didn't quote or I did so,ething..not sure. Then dutch pear said the exact same thing someone said to the other guys post....soooo....yea. "deja vu?"
post #64 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenHanger View Post

Who writes software for Mac first and then Windows, almost no one.

I believe Adobe would fall into this category.
post #65 of 87
Quote:
ZFS File System addition to HFS+
Resolution Independence
FTP features in the finder
Core Animation UI where you have a 3D view of file/folder hierarchy
Quartz Extreme 2D
Automator 2 beefed up controls. Easy and Pro modes
Core Text- Unified API for font control
Core Data 2
Core Audio Extreme
Core Image/Video 2
Built in Mapping
Built in GPS

I agree with the above and also add the folowing:

Piles - New way of organising groups of files
Multi Touch - Ready for a new breed of touch displays later in the year
Virtualization - Install and run Windows apps in OS X

I really hope the built in mapping and GPS functionality do happen.
post #66 of 87
There aren't any secret features.

The whole point of Beta testing is that features get tested.

So you don't suddenly do a release with loads of stuff that wasn't in the test versions.

IF (IF IF) there are secret features, then the release of Leopard will be put back for MONTHS.
post #67 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by krispie View Post

There aren't any secret features.

The whole point of Beta testing is that features get tested.

So you don't suddenly do a release with loads of stuff that wasn't in the test versions.

IF (IF IF) there are secret features, then the release of Leopard will be put back for MONTHS.

Not if they're applications.
post #68 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by krispie View Post

There aren't any secret features.

The whole point of Beta testing is that features get tested.

So you don't suddenly do a release with loads of stuff that wasn't in the test versions.

IF (IF IF) there are secret features, then the release of Leopard will be put back for MONTHS.


Well, Jobs came right out and said at WWDC they weren't showing us everything....... I fail to see why apple would say that if it wasn't true.
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 #69 of 87
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpinDrift View Post

I agree with the above and also add the folowing:

Piles - New way of organising groups of files
Multi Touch - Ready for a new breed of touch displays later in the year
Virtualization - Install and run Windows apps in OS X

I really hope the built in mapping and GPS functionality do happen.

I don't know how many times we have to go over this. There will be no new display from Apple that has Multi-touch unless that display is tablet, and Jobs has given his opinion of an Apple tablet, now hasn't he?
post #70 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

I don't know how many times we have to go over this. There will be no new display from Apple that has Multi-touch unless that display is tablet, and Jobs has given his opinion of an Apple tablet, now hasn't he?

haha, as he gave his opinion of the video on the iPod, and TV shows on Macs and the Newton.....

Bottom line is, he is a reasonable man that will change his mind if conditions change and the implementation of something becomes practical. I think Multi-touch does this for tablets in a huge way, now that it's been established that they actually exist...
post #71 of 87
As said, separate applications can be tested on their own.
Also, those of us who are Select/Premier do not get the uber-secret builds that the big third-party developers get. And even above that can be internal Apple testing. For example, none of the iApps are released to Select/Premier for testing - all of that is done by Apple QA and by a small list of trusted groups.

Quote:
Originally Posted by krispie View Post

There aren't any secret features.

The whole point of Beta testing is that features get tested.

So you don't suddenly do a release with loads of stuff that wasn't in the test versions.

IF (IF IF) there are secret features, then the release of Leopard will be put back for MONTHS.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #72 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

Not if they're applications.

Now we're talkin'! I think you're right on target.
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
post #73 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by krispie View Post

There aren't any secret features.

The whole point of Beta testing is that features get tested.

So you don't suddenly do a release with loads of stuff that wasn't in the test versions.

IF (IF IF) there are secret features, then the release of Leopard will be put back for MONTHS.

Far from it. I used to work for a software development company and we would never release full versions for public Beta testing. Core functionality would go out, but any new developments, or so called secret features would be tested in-house. Public Betas are only really needed to test robustness on a large scale. It wouldn't be the first time that Apple have introduced a few new features on launch.
post #74 of 87
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lundy View Post

As said, separate applications can be tested on their own.
Also, those of us who are Select/Premier do not get the uber-secret builds that the big third-party developers get. And even above that can be internal Apple testing. For example, none of the iApps are released to Select/Premier for testing - all of that is done by Apple QA and by a small list of trusted groups.

Or more example of Apps that don't have public Betas:

iTunes
iLife
Aperture

But Secret Features are not indicative of no public beta testing. The features could be announced before the release and thus are subject to public beta testing, but they just haven't been announced yet.

The primary reason for a beta (in my mind at least) is development. In OS betas it's development of Apps that run on the new OS. In software it is to get feedback from users to the software can be better developed, and I mean developed in the broad sense of the word, not the technical sense, per se.
post #75 of 87
So we'll see.

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #76 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

I don't know how many times we have to go over this. There will be no new display from Apple that has Multi-touch unless that display is tablet, and Jobs has given his opinion of an Apple tablet, now hasn't he?

iPhone has a version of Leopard. It has multi-touch. I think that alone tells you it's possible that Leopard will have multi-touch.
post #77 of 87
Wouldn't programs need to take advantage of a multi-touch API in order to use it well? I'm sure Apple could add some basic functionality through the magic of Cocoa that all Cocoa apps would receive, but I doubt the cooler aspects of multi-touch could be utilized until apps were updated. And by the look of things, Apple won't be revealing this multi-touch API until after Leopard ships.
post #78 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfe2211 View Post

Since this forum is about predictions for top secret features in Leopard, my wish is for full support for Multi-Touch technology (MT) which was previewed in a very understated way by Jobs in the iPhone part of the keynote. This technology, apparently now wholly owned and patented by Apple, will revolutionize the way users interact with computers.

It's an absolutely fascinating technology, though I'm not convinced that it's wholly owned and patented by Apple. Jeff Han has been working on this for a few years now.

MR posted an extraordinary demo from Perceptive Pixel. Check it out and drool.

I'm convinced Leopard will feature some of this stuff, but I'm not sure about the feasibility of bringing multi-touch to existing displays. The big question, to my mind: is a single iSight powerful/savvy enough to detect user movement without the necessity of a touch-sensitive screen? If so, then Apple bundling in iSights for every Mac w/ a display for the past two years begins to look like part of a much larger, interesting, and ambitious plan.

Also, Apple has to deal with Kickaha's patent.
post #79 of 87
Is there a good description/definition of Multi-Touch technology (MTT)? I thought MTT referred to the hardware capability to simultaneously detect two or more points of interaction with the screen. On that video I could only identify a few gesture derived from that capability

- point (basic mouse gesture)
- zoom (in or out)
- rotate (in screen or out of screen (tilt))
- anchor and move (keep one area or object stationary while moving another)

Beyond that what is seen is a whole lot of UI ideas implemented with these basic gestures. What are people asking for in Leopard, these gestures or a whole new UI based on them? The later is much much tougher to make something good.

Or am I missing the whole point here??
post #80 of 87
Quote:
Beyond that what is seen is a whole lot of UI ideas implemented with these basic gestures. What are people asking for in Leopard, these gestures or a whole new UI based on them? The later is much much tougher to make something good.

Agreed -- I'm expecting a refreshed UI for Leopard: a less bubbly, more minimal and sleeker look & feel that uses perspective, light, shadow, and some dramatic and snazzy animations via CoreAnimation... plus major Spotlight, and smaller Finder, Dock, and general UI enhancements.

I'm not expecting a revolutionary new gesture/multi-touch/voice recognition-based UI... at least not just yet (Leopard+1, anyone?).

But one can dream.

* * *

More on Han and Perceptive Pixel here.

Of interest is that MSR (Microsoft Research) has also been working on this -- they call it TouchLight -- and are selling high-end versions (50K+) for medical 3D imaging.

As usual, though, Apple seems to be the first to take it, in a popular, usable form, to the mainstream consumer market.

It will be interesting to see just how far back Apple's patents extend.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Top Secret Features (leopard)