or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple delays Leopard release until October
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple delays Leopard release until October - Page 10

post #361 of 505
"So the real question to ask Mac users is "what type computing user are you? Are you in it now for the Entertainment or the Productivity?" That will determine the efficacy of Leopard thusfar for your needs. Apple is HEAVY into the productivity right now and a bit light on the Entertainment with Leopard. "

I'll bite. Tiger has partial support for metadata in the file system. Spotlight can index embedded metadata but it can't create it. The only option is Spotlight comments which are stored in the index, not in the file. In other words, the data is not portable. Adding Spotlight comments is a very tedious affair. I want Apple to really make metadata a part of the system and give us ways to easily create custom data, embedded in the file which is searchable via Spotlight.

Spotlight has a lot of untapped potential.
post #362 of 505
I don't care too much for the entertainment angle, other than music apps & iTunes.

I guess that's why AppleTV disappoints me so much. I'd rather it be a standalone piece of hardware that would merely gain additional functionality if used with a Mac.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #363 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Can also mean a delivery timeframe in September as well.

Good joke......
post #364 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daffy_Duck View Post

"So the real question to ask Mac users is "what type computing user are you? Are you in it now for the Entertainment or the Productivity?" That will determine the efficacy of Leopard thusfar for your needs. Apple is HEAVY into the productivity right now and a bit light on the Entertainment with Leopard. "

I'll bite. Tiger has partial support for metadata in the file system. Spotlight can index embedded metadata but it can't create it. The only option is Spotlight comments which are stored in the index, not in the file. In other words, the data is not portable. Adding Spotlight comments is a very tedious affair. I want Apple to really make metadata a part of the system and give us ways to easily create custom data, embedded in the file which is searchable via Spotlight.

Spotlight has a lot of untapped potential.

Yes it does. I too wonder if there will be a way to batch assign metadata. Here's a blurb from WWDC 2006

Quote:
5) Spotlight

Spotlight is being enhanced for Leopard. You can search other Macs if you have permissions, and you can search servers. Advanced search options will be available (booleans, filetypes, and other Finder search features). Spotlight will also serve as an applications launcher, and be able to store results of Recent Items.

I like the ability to Spotlight other computers for files I have permission for. Nice way to search ad hoc networks and serverless networks.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #365 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaMac View Post

Anyone remember Tiger OS X 10.4.0? Almost everyone was belly aching about how buggy it was. "Why didn't they wait a few months and work out the kinks? If i'm gonna pay $120 bucks I want the bugs worked out. I don't want to pay for being a beta tester." Well let's hope the release in October is much smoother than Tiger's.

That was a special case. Apple had decided to move to Intel at some time between the start of 10.4, and the early betas.

Once they came up with a strategy, and decided upon a timeline for it, they had to decide when to announce it.

Obviously they decided that the dev conf was the time and place, which made sense.

But, in order to do so they had to move competing issues out of the way. It wouldn't do to announce both Tiger, AND Intel at the same time.

As the move to Intel was, by far, the most important news, they had to get Tiger out of the way early enough so that it wouldn't become an issue at the conf. Therefor, they released it early, even though it wasn't quite ready.

this issue is much different from that. While Apple is blaming the iPhone for thios delay. While I think that is, to some extent, a smokescreen, it's likely to be true to some extent, though not to the extent they are saying.

This is, no doubt, the biggest OS X release Apple has ever made. Apple is big, and rich enough now to be able to hire some more people if they need them. If they are shorthanded, they could have done that. Good coders are not that hard to find, esp. in this environment with much work going overseas.

I'm just hoping that this release isn't proving to be too much to handle. Apple failed to bring at least one major feature they promised us for 10.4. I hope the same thing isn't happening again, and that we see a complete release in October.
post #366 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

So you think that if Vista had only been delayed by 3 months, Apple and all the Microsoft bashers would have stayed silent? Guess again. They would have bashed Microsoft anyway even if Vista was just 1 day late.

that may be true, but the bashing would have ended almost two years ago, and would be forgotten by now.

And MS would be most of the way to another release.
post #367 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Brian

If Apple can deliver a relatively bug free Leopard in October color me amazed. That feat will certainly require more work than the effort to get Tiger out of the door (which was admittedly rocky)

There's a disconnect between Mac users and Apple. OS X is more complex than any OS we Mac users have had access to. Prior to OS X we never had such huge changes and that's why Copeland died. It couldn't be changed as easily to encompass new modern features while preserving legacy support.

Now we have OS X which is a toddler at 6yrs old. If you look at the difference between 10.3 and 10.5 it's mind boggling what Apple has done.

Moved to Intel processors- Painless
Moved to 64-bit full software stacks- Maybe not so painless

The Top Secret features are coming and they'll be flashy to entice the "I want my OS to Entertain me" crowd but the stuff that is going to make a difference to those who need productivity will be further maturation of the OS.

Sync services that work
Systemwide Calendar data
Webkit becoming fully modern (AJAX and CSS3)
Quicktime overhauled
Applescript- don't call it a comeback

Like the iPhone Apple has to deliver a working OS X Leopard because people like you who want to use their expensive Mac to get their work done demand that the features work as described.

Apple has offered no SLA to consumers. They said spring 2007 for their shipdate but no contracts were signed.

I want them to launch both products "correctly" and I do think that giving themselves 4 more months will allow them to do that. And trust...we will be happy.

Applause!
post #368 of 505
By Peter Cohen

No sooner did Apple announce that Leopard had been delayed did the gnashing of teeth and the rending of clothes begin among Macintosh users. Curse the iPhone! It’s nothing but a distraction to Apple, which has more and more become a consumer electronics company!

No. The iPhone is the point.

When the iPhone ships in June, it will be the second consumer electronics device to ship this year that uses a version of Mac OS X but isn’t a Mac. The first, of course, was the Apple TV, Apple’s interface for widescreen TVs that makes it possible to sync and stream the contents of your iTunes library to your home entertainment system.

This is exactly what many of us have been waiting years for Apple to do—migrate out of a singular focus as a computer company and to bring the technology that powers its computers and its design sensibilities to many different products. And it’s something that Apple’s main competitor in the computer space—Microsoft—has been doing for years.

The iPod, of course, has served as Apple’s gateway drug, introducing many people who’d never consider a Mac to their first taste of Apple product ownership. Most of the evidence is still anecdotal, but there’s definitely an indication that consumers who get iPods are more likely to consider the Macintosh when it comes time to buy their next computer. And they’re definitely visiting Apple retail stores and checking out the Mac while they’re in there.

But the iPod doesn’t leverage OS X, and it doesn’t really give its users a “Mac-like” experience. The same goes for the Apple TV—it’s largely just a bridge between iTunes on your Mac or PC and your home entertainment system.

That’s really different from the way the iPhone will work. The iPhone provides a fundamentally different and, from what’s been shown so far, a much more Mac-like, user experience. It has Wi-Fi. It has a variation on Safari for browsing the Web. And it’ll integrate perfectly with the Mac. With any luck, it’ll have an even more profound influence on future generations of computer buyers than the iPod has had.

But that doesn’t change the fact that Apple has announced a delay in shipping Leopard from June, around the time of its Worldwide Developer Conference to October. Again, this isn’t a bad thing.

At least some of the people I’ve spoken to, including those involved in Mac OS X application development, are relieved at the delay. It gives them more time to make sure that their code is up to snuff. It also gives Apple more time to resolve any remaining issues, and get developers working on supporting the new features in Leopard. Lest we forget, Apple on Thursday also indicated that it plans to present a complete feature-set to developers who attend WWDC.

There are others who I’ve spoken to about this that are equally grateful for the extra time—IT staff responsible for supporting Macs in their installations, for example. Any additional time they have to prepare for the transition is welcome.

By and large, it seems like the biggest percentage of people really put out by this delay are consumers who wanted to buy new Macs but didn’t want to pay for Leopard on top of that—people who were counting on getting a free upgrade or getting a new machine with OS X 10.5 pre-installed.

But I really think that that’s putting the cart before the horse. You should buy a new computer when you need the new computer, not hedging your bet that you can wait it out for something better to come down the road. It’s inevitable that a better model is just around the corner and that you’re going to feel some sense of buyer’s remorse: Almost every time we post an article about a new Mac model, one of the first posts in response will be from a reader who’s upset because he or she just bought the model that it replaces.

Getting back to my first point here, I fully recognize that the iPhone isn’t everything to everyone: There are certainly a fair number of folks out there who say the iPhone isn’t for them. In some cases it’s the price. In other cases it’s the carrier. There are countless justifications for why some people aren’t going to get the iPhone, and all of them are perfectly valid. I certainly know a lot of Mac users who don’t have iPods or Apple TVs, and have no interest in getting them, either. That’s fine.

But at the end of the day, Apple’s goal here is to present a product that’s got the fit and finish we’ve come to demand from Apple. It’s one of the few companies out there that can really deliver what it has promised, even if the deadline slips.

Should we really expect anything less than excellence from Apple? I certainly don’t want to. The alternatives just aren’t good enough.

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/edit...pard/index.php
post #369 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Alexei I agree. Trying to launch two major projects so close was foolish. Apple learned something here that is going to be very valuable.

I'm willing to bet money that the morale within OS X engineering teams just skyrocked. Being behind generates a lot of stress. Now they can take a breather and fix the issues knowing the "June ship date" Guillotine isn't going to chop their heads off.

I can't say that I'm not surprised about the petulant behavior of some "fans". There are many people who love to use such events to become the persecutor. They got their justification to launch invective at Apple. Pretty sad and pathetic.

I hope the Apple Engineers know that their efforts are appreciated. "Some" of us know that Leopard is a phenomenal update, and phenomenons take time.

Apple is now trying to do what MS has been doing for many years. Get their OS into different product streams.

What they haven't yet learned is that the can't start with a team that is marginal in size, and spread them out between the divisions.

They simply need to get sufficient people in place first. They need to create several complete teams for each product, and coordinate their efforts so things don't move in different directions.

This seems to be the second time in a year when they needed to remove people from one team to made good in another project. This is managements fault. They should have learned from the Aperture project, but perhaps they didn't.
post #370 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apple is now trying to do what MS has been doing for many years. Get their OS into different product streams.

What they haven't yet learned is that the can't start with a team that is marginal in size, and spread them out between the divisions.

They simply need to get sufficient people in place first. They need to create several complete teams for each product, and coordinate their efforts so things don't move in different directions.

This seems to be the second time in a year when they needed to remove people from one team to made good in another project. This is managements fault. They should have learned from the Aperture project, but perhaps they didn't.

Excellent points Melgross. I was thinking about the whole Aperture brouhaha and how it was similar. Aperture is on its way to stardom so things worked out.

I don't know if people realize this but payroll is a companies biggest expense and Apple seem to be wringing a lot of production out of a relatively small employee staff. Jon Gruber stated that the OS X team has only increased headcount by %10

http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/bottleneck

Quote:
According to an engineering source at Apple, the OS group headed by Bertrand Serlet has only grown just under 10 percent in the last five years. The apps group, on the other hand, has grown significantly during the same period, and now outnumbers the OS group.

Wow. Are these guys and gals allowed to have lives?
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #371 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apple is now trying to do what MS has been doing for many years. Get their OS into different product streams.

What they haven't yet learned is that the can't start with a team that is marginal in size, and spread them out between the divisions.

They simply need to get sufficient people in place first. They need to create several complete teams for each product, and coordinate their efforts so things don't move in different directions.

This seems to be the second time in a year when they needed to remove people from one team to made good in another project. This is managements fault. They should have learned from the Aperture project, but perhaps they didn't.

Yes, Apple's growing pains translate into our buying and investing pains. It's just a matter of getting the right people in place, but they will have to be some pretty extraordinary people to keep the quality and deliverables in top form. I know of no comparable organization who could pull this off, other than The Mormons.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #372 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Yes, Apple's growing pains translate into our buying and investing pains. It's just a matter of getting the right people in place, but they will have to be some pretty extraordinary people to keep the quality and deliverables in top form. I know of no comparable organization who could pull this off, other than The Mormons.

I have to say something about coders, admittedly, something I haven't done in years.

There are a hell of a lot of very talented coders out in the marketplace right now.

With industry bringing more work overseas, and bringing people here from overseas, there are a lot of people looking for positions, either because they have lost theirs, or because they think they will lose theirs.

It isn't the fault of the coders that projects are late. It's the fault of the people who are running the projects, and even the smaller speciality teams. It's the fault of software management for refusing to understand that sometimes just a few more bodies will make a difference.

When Apple was a much smaller company, it might have been different. They simply couldn't have thought of taking on the work they are now doing. But, as they have decided to do so, they must also understand that it requires a proper effort from them, as well as from the people in the cubby holes.

Project managers must go into meetings and say that they need more people. They have to take that risk. If they don't, they will be in a much worse hot seat later, as their team fails to deliver a proper product.
post #373 of 505
Just a thought.

What's the status of the new Campus? A quick search shows an AI article just a little under a year ago on April 25th.
post #374 of 505
Looprumors reporting Steve will be presenting at NAB!

http://looprumors.com/article.php?ap...age,2712181245
post #375 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashraman View Post

Looprumors reporting Steve will be presenting at NAB!

http://looprumors.com/article.php?ap...age,2712181245

I need confirmation from another source. LoopRumors isn't amongst my "trusted" sources for info like this. If Stevo is doing to the presentation then this certainly means that the new product introductions will be fairly significant IMO.

I'm kind of hoping that Apple has the "balls" to make the next Pro Apps "Leopard Only" and force developers and users to quickly migrate to Leopard.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #376 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashraman View Post

Looprumors reporting Steve will be presenting at NAB!

http://looprumors.com/article.php?ap...age,2712181245

I don't understand how a black iMac would fit in with the event. Was the 17" MBP at the 2006 show really a surprise? If it's hardware that was really targetted at pros, why would it be a surprise to see it updated at a pro show? That whole post really doesn't set well with me.
post #377 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I don't understand how a black iMac would fit in with the event. Was the 17" MBP at the 2006 show really a surprise? If it's hardware that was really targetted at pros, why would it be a surprise to see it updated at a pro show? That whole post really doesn't set well with me.

I'm not sure why Looprumors is thought so highly by some. They are, well, loopy.

That doesn't mean that they don't guess correctly sometimes. I think that Jobs has given the presentation at NAB before, or at least a speech.

As far as black goes, it does make sense in that most pro equipment is black. But if a black iMac does come out, I can't understand why it would be the 17" model. Surely that is the most consumer sized model Apple makes, and schools don't care..

Corporations also like black. White is just not considered to be anything other than a consumer color.

They don't state that they have any kind of info, just that they "expect" that certain things will happen.

I "expect" that certain things will happen as well, but I don't have a website to express them on.
post #378 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


I "expect" that certain things will happen as well, but I don't have a website to express them on.

ahem. Get to it.

www.melgross-media.com



Looking forward to reading your thoughts on tomorrows announcements. I'm still flabbergasted that Apple has actually plugged all leaks. I remember the "good ole" days when Thinksecret would leak the details the day before.

I guess with Apple's stock so high ..it's not worth risking your options. :P
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #379 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

As far as black goes, it does make sense in that most pro equipment is black. But if a black iMac does come out, I can't understand why it would be the 17" model. Surely that is the most consumer sized model Apple makes, and schools don't care..

The loop rumors page didn't say 17" iMac that I noticed. White has looked institutional to me for some time now.

Quote:
I "expect" that certain things will happen as well, but I don't have a website to express them on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

ahem. Get to it.
www.melgross-media.com

Final Cut Pro needs to include 16 core nanite video soap running OS X! stat!
post #380 of 505
Well guys, thank you very much, but I couldn't access it.

Heh heh. You're right about the 17" iMac, Jeff. I took the iMac and the 17" from the MBP from your post, and somehow put them together.

I must be getting crosseyed.
post #381 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Well guys, thank you very much, but I couldn't access it.

It's not a real site or even a registered domain, just a suggested site name for humor.
post #382 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

It's not a real site or even a registered domain, just a suggested site name for humor.

I was hoping it was someone else with my name.
post #383 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

this issue is much different from that. While Apple is blaming the iPhone for thios delay. While I think that is, to some extent, a smokescreen, it's likely to be true to some extent, though not to the extent they are saying.

This is, no doubt, the biggest OS X release Apple has ever made. Apple is big, and rich enough now to be able to hire some more people if they need them. If they are shorthanded, they could have done that. Good coders are not that hard to find, esp. in this environment with much work going overseas.


You know nothing about software development, that much is clear. Hiring top people who are familiar with the code, the platform, the objectives, and the working environment and processes with less than six months to go on a project the size of OSX would be sheer lunacy and a bigger disaster (by far) than delivering it 6 months late. And then after the project Apple would either be stuck with oversized staff, or they would have to lay off the people who just finished their product for them and are therefore best equipped to track down bugs (which are inevitable, especially with new programmers on the team).

No conspiracy theories are needed here.

The attitude prevalent in this thread is all wrong. Delaying 10.5 by 4 months is a good thing, not a bad one. Much of the OSX development team continues to work on 10.5, so it will end up being a better product thanks to the delay. And really, what is the rush to get it out in June? We have a fine OS already, and while some of the new features are shiny and cool we have managed to live without them for a long time. The only people really hurt by this are developers who want to release software products that require 10.5... but you make your planning choices and you live with them. Its always possible for any project to slip its schedule.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #384 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Programmer View Post

You know nothing about software development, that much is clear. Hiring top people who are familiar with the code, the platform, the objectives, and the working environment and processes with less than six months to go on a project the size of OSX would be sheer lunacy and a bigger disaster (by far) than delivering it 6 months late. And then after the project Apple would either be stuck with oversized staff, or they would have to lay off the people who just finished their product for them and are therefore best equipped to track down bugs (which are inevitable, especially with new programmers on the team).

No conspiracy theories are needed here.

The attitude prevalent in this thread is all wrong. Delaying 10.5 by 4 months is a good thing, not a bad one. Much of the OSX development team continues to work on 10.5, so it will end up being a better product thanks to the delay. And really, what is the rush to get it out in June? We have a fine OS already, and while some of the new features are shiny and cool we have managed to live without them for a long time. The only people really hurt by this are developers who want to release software products that require 10.5... but you make your planning choices and you live with them. Its always possible for any project to slip its schedule.

One must be careful using such an argument because it's a slippery slope. To admit that there is no need to rush Leopard is also admitting that there's no need of it at all. If Tiger does everything that people need to do today, there's no fundamental reason to work on leopard at all.

Apple will make the case as to why we need Leopard and not Tiger (or prior cats) in the months ahead. But to suggest that Apple can take all the time it wants to release Leopard is to also insinuate that Leopard isn't needed and that Tiger is all that people need to do everything they want to do.

I believe that Apple is making the right choice to delay Leopard, but in saying so, I also hold them accountable and will be very upset with them if we're issued updates immediately due to stability issues. They've worked on Leopard longer than any other cat thus far. That fact had better be reflected in the sheen of the OS when it is released.
Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
Reply
Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
Reply
post #385 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Green View Post

One must be careful using such an argument because it's a slippery slope. To admit that there is no need to rush Leopard is also admitting that there's no need of it at all. If Tiger does everything that people need to do today, there's no fundamental reason to work on leopard at all.

True, although the extra time can and will translate to a better delivered product which gives the users more reason to want it. There is an obsessive now-now-now attitude amongst consumers and who don't seem to realize that there is a trade off between early delivery and quality. Four months will fly by before you know it, and is nothing compared to a decade ago when Apple's OS releases slipped by years before eventually being cancelled completely.

Quote:
But to suggest that Apple can take all the time it wants to release Leopard is to also insinuate that Leopard isn't needed and that Tiger is all that people need to do everything they want to do.

I wasn't suggesting that they take an arbitrarily long time. The project planning by Apple in the last few years has been very impressive and suggests that they know how to figure out how much time they need to finish a product (as opposed to just continuing to work on it indefinitely). As anyone who has actually brought a product to market knows, there is a skill and an art to finishing.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #386 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Green View Post

Apple will make the case as to why we need Leopard and not Tiger (or prior cats) in the months ahead. But to suggest that Apple can take all the time it wants to release Leopard is to also insinuate that Leopard isn't needed and that Tiger is all that people need to do everything they want to do.

Insinuate? Heck, I'll say it outright. I don't understand the need to use loaded terminology for this. Your current computer is not broken. Tiger, as a whole, is not broken. If it was, you probably wouldn't be using it.

Leopard isn't needed and Tiger is all that people need to do everything they want to do. A few years from now, that will change, but four months is nothing.

I don't have a problem with Apple taking a few more months because I don't want Leopard to be broken on release.

Don't reduce the argument to absurdity and act as if it will be years before Leopard is released.
post #387 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Programmer View Post

You know nothing about software development, that much is clear. Hiring top people who are familiar with the code, the platform, the objectives, and the working environment and processes with less than six months to go on a project the size of OSX would be sheer lunacy and a bigger disaster (by far) than delivering it 6 months late. And then after the project Apple would either be stuck with oversized staff, or they would have to lay off the people who just finished their product for them and are therefore best equipped to track down bugs (which are inevitable, especially with new programmers on the team).

No conspiracy theories are needed here.

The attitude prevalent in this thread is all wrong. Delaying 10.5 by 4 months is a good thing, not a bad one. Much of the OSX development team continues to work on 10.5, so it will end up being a better product thanks to the delay. And really, what is the rush to get it out in June? We have a fine OS already, and while some of the new features are shiny and cool we have managed to live without them for a long time. The only people really hurt by this are developers who want to release software products that require 10.5... but you make your planning choices and you live with them. Its always possible for any project to slip its schedule.

Thank goodness for some sanity. I would have thought most of the people here would have at least heard of 'The Mythical Man Month'.
post #388 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Insinuate? Heck, I'll say it outright. I don't understand the need to use loaded terminology for this. Your current computer is not broken. Tiger, as a whole, is not broken. If it was, you probably wouldn't be using it.

Leopard isn't needed and Tiger is all that people need to do everything they want to do. A few years from now, that will change, but four months is nothing.

I don't have a problem with Apple taking a few more months because I don't want Leopard to be broken on release.

Don't reduce the argument to absurdity and act as if it will be years before Leopard is released.

Using such an argument means there's no need for Leopard at all. Apple has achieved all they need to with Tiger and that's it. No need to update again. After all, "your computer is not broken."

People upgrade because they want to. When people trade in their cars for a new one, it's not because they have to. It's not because the car they are buying is much better than the one it is replacing. They do it because they can.

Most people ought to care less about the time Leopard arrives. After all, we all know that airlines never arrive on time. We all pretty much predict that's the case. The same ought to be applied to hardware and software too. Just assume it'll be late, and just sometimes...you'll be right.
Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
Reply
Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
Reply
post #389 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Programmer View Post

You know nothing about software development, that much is clear. Hiring top people who are familiar with the code, the platform, the objectives, and the working environment and processes with less than six months to go on a project the size of OSX would be sheer lunacy and a bigger disaster (by far) than delivering it 6 months late. And then after the project Apple would either be stuck with oversized staff, or they would have to lay off the people who just finished their product for them and are therefore best equipped to track down bugs (which are inevitable, especially with new programmers on the team).

No conspiracy theories are needed here.

The attitude prevalent in this thread is all wrong. Delaying 10.5 by 4 months is a good thing, not a bad one. Much of the OSX development team continues to work on 10.5, so it will end up being a better product thanks to the delay. And really, what is the rush to get it out in June? We have a fine OS already, and while some of the new features are shiny and cool we have managed to live without them for a long time. The only people really hurt by this are developers who want to release software products that require 10.5... but you make your planning choices and you live with them. Its always possible for any project to slip its schedule.

Kudos! The voice of experience, the voice of reason on a board populated with too many "chicken littles".
post #390 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagerDragon View Post

Very well said, you make perfect sense, however I would like Apple to just spell it out and not make excuses and lies. Just say .... "guys we gave it a hell of a try, but then we ran into problems with all the new fangled features. Adding a, b, c, d, turned out a lot harder than we figured, so it is going to take us a few more months".

Be honest to the customers.

Well, which do you want EagerDragon? First you say you don't want them to make excuses, then, as an example of what you would like them to say, you give another excuse. You don't want them to lie, but at the same time, you want them to lie about why it's being delayed ("we ran into problems with new fangled features," when actually it was because of developers working on another product, which is what they said). If you can't figure out what you want from Apple, think about what the committee's of people at Apple are having to go through trying to figure out what to tell people like you.

This is what I think happened. Some reporter asked the spokesperson at Apple if the rumors that there would be a delay were true. Until a committee sits down and decides whether there will be a delay, then there is no delay. So the person said there was no delay. It's as simple as that. That's called "life in a major corporation." You can contrast that to "life in EagerDragon's head." Life is a pretty complicated game sometimes. Why don't you join us?
post #391 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Green View Post

Most people ought to care less about the time Leopard arrives. After all, we all know that airlines never arrive on time. We all pretty much predict that's the case. The same ought to be applied to hardware and software too. Just assume it'll be late, and just sometimes...you'll be right.

That's a ridiculous comparison. One is a service. The other is a product. Getting accurate estimates of how long it takes to go between two points is logistically far simpler than accurately estimating the design and development time of any electronic or software product.

Software development might look like magic to you but the process is much more difficult to predict how long it's going to take doing something that hasn't necessarily been done before than it is to predict the timeliness of a service that has been done thousands of times so that the variables are much more refined.
post #392 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Programmer View Post

You know nothing about software development, that much is clear. Hiring top people who are familiar with the code, the platform, the objectives, and the working environment and processes with less than six months to go on a project the size of OSX would be sheer lunacy and a bigger disaster (by far) than delivering it 6 months late. And then after the project Apple would either be stuck with oversized staff, or they would have to lay off the people who just finished their product for them and are therefore best equipped to track down bugs (which are inevitable, especially with new programmers on the team).

Well, you aren't paying attention to what I said. It's hardly likely that Apple just learned of these problems. They have been creeping up bit by bit. It should have become obvious long ago that this would be a difficult ride.

You also have to read more of my posts on this before you make such a silly, overriding comment on what I know.

I also said that Apple should have had teams in place before they started these projects, that would be adequate. Obviously, they didn't.

Don't be so defensive.

Quote:
No conspiracy theories are needed here.

No. But Apple has never been above using one thing as an excuse for another. I have no doubt that they had to remove staff from the main 10.5 project to work on the iPhone. But, that just proves that what I said about inadequate staff is true.

Quote:
The attitude prevalent in this thread is all wrong. Delaying 10.5 by 4 months is a good thing, not a bad one. Much of the OSX development team continues to work on 10.5, so it will end up being a better product thanks to the delay. And really, what is the rush to get it out in June? We have a fine OS already, and while some of the new features are shiny and cool we have managed to live without them for a long time. The only people really hurt by this are developers who want to release software products that require 10.5... but you make your planning choices and you live with them. Its always possible for any project to slip its schedule.

I have no problem with the delay. I've always been among the first here to tell people to calm down about release dates. I always stand up for a quality product, rather than a botched, rushed one. For that reason, I would always prefer to see a release come out near the end of the expected time instead of it's being released as early as possible to meet some nebulus artificial date. And if it's going to be late, that's fime as well.

But, let's not fool ourselves as to the reason.
post #393 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Insinuate? Heck, I'll say it outright. I don't understand the need to use loaded terminology for this. Your current computer is not broken. Tiger, as a whole, is not broken. If it was, you probably wouldn't be using it.

Leopard isn't needed and Tiger is all that people need to do everything they want to do. A few years from now, that will change, but four months is nothing.

I don't have a problem with Apple taking a few more months because I don't want Leopard to be broken on release.

Don't reduce the argument to absurdity and act as if it will be years before Leopard is released.

We may not "need" Leopard, but Apple does.
post #394 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

We may not "need" Leopard, but Apple does.

I can understand that. I'm just saying that *we* don't need it so desperately that four months is an undue burden. I think you've been saying things to that effect too.
post #395 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

Thank goodness for some sanity. I would have thought most of the people here would have at least heard of 'The Mythical Man Month'.

Just like Programmer is missing the point, you are as well.

This has nothing to do with your "Mythical Man Month".

What this has to do with is that Apple themselves just announced, though not so directly, that they don't have enough people do do both projects, and get them both out on time.

This is Apple's own statement about moving staff from the main 10.5 line to the offshoot, not mine!

Even if we are to believe what they said 100%, it shows that they are short staffed.

If we can figure that they are also encountering more problems than they thought they would, back when the projects began, then we can also figure that they didn't do a proper accessment when they started.

It's truely absurd to say that if they didn't spot problems as they went, that they couldn't have increased their staffing level a bit at a time as developement went forward.

Dispite Programmer's insistance that I don't know anything, I think his knowledge is less than he claims, as I've never seen companies fail to add to staffing as projects went forward, and they saw that they were falling behind, or needed more bodies.

If it's being thought that I'm saying that 6 months ago, Apple should have doubled it's staff in one big push, well, that's absurd!
post #396 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I can understand that. I'm just saying that *we* don't need it so desperately that four months is an undue burden. I think you've been saying things to that effect too.

I have no problem with waiting. I've made this clear many times over the years, which it's so funny that people who have been here for a long time read one post I write, don't understand that.

My only gripe, and it's not a really big one, is that Apple is NOT always as up front about what is going on as they could be. They do so much in the dark, partly to conceal any problems they may be having. It isn't only to hide features from the enemy. Anyone who thinks that is just naive.

There is a lot of self deception when running a project. It's no different from putting a Broadway play on. The procedure is amazingly the same.

And the same problems occur. How many dead ends has Apple gone down over the years? Quite a few!

You can get all the way to the end before you release it and see it won't work. And sometimes, you need an outside, or new eye, to see the problems.
post #397 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Just like Programmer is missing the point, you are as well.

This has nothing to do with your "Mythical Man Month".

What this has to do with is that Apple themselves just announced, though not so directly, that they don't have enough people do do both projects, and get them both out on time.

This is Apple's own statement about moving staff from the main 10.5 line to the offshoot, not mine!

Even if we are to believe what they said 100%, it shows that they are short staffed.

If we can figure that they are also encountering more problems than they thought they would, back when the projects began, then we can also figure that they didn't do a proper accessment when they started.

It's truely absurd to say that if they didn't spot problems as they went, that they couldn't have increased their staffing level a bit at a time as developement went forward.

Dispite Programmer's insistance that I don't know anything, I think his knowledge is less than he claims, as I've never seen companies fail to add to staffing as projects went forward, and they saw that they were falling behind, or needed more bodies.

If it's being thought that I'm saying that 6 months ago, Apple should have doubled it's staff in one big push, well, that's absurd!

But I think the point that everyone is missing here (those who are subscribing to conspiracies or lies) is that this is just what Apple said. Their release says '.. we HAD to BORROW some key software engineering and QA....' [emphasis mine]. This is saying 'we misjudged and are adapting as we can' . No company is simply going to say 'we screwed up'. Can you imagine the reaction here if they did, given the reaction to what they did say??? And, as Programmer said, it still may make more sense, even half way though the project (about 1-year ago from the timeline presented for both iPhone and Leopard) to risk the delay of one of the project rather than staffing up in such a way that they would end up overstaffed. They took a risk, and lost, and a very minor loss at that and that's basically what they said.
post #398 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

But I think the point that everyone is missing here (those who are subscribing to conspiracies or lies) is that this is just what Apple said. Their release says '.. we HAD to BORROW some key software engineering and QA....' [emphasis mine]. This is saying 'we misjudged and are adapting as we can' . No company is simply going to say 'we screwed up'. Can you imagine the reaction here if they did, given the reaction to what they did say??? And, as Programmer said, it still may make more sense, even half way though the project (about 1-year ago from the timeline presented for both iPhone and Leopard) to risk the delay of one of the project rather than staffing up in such a way that they would end up overstaffed. They took a risk, and lost, and a very minor loss at that and that's basically what they said.

Of course, while we all love to make our own pronouncements, others are saying this as well.

MS has long had perhaps 20 times as many programmers as Apple, possible much more than even that. They need them so they can run many different projects at once.

I'm not saying that their projects are devoid from error. We know better than that. But those problems are likely for other reasons. But now that Apple is emulating MS in trying to get its OS into other devices (and, yes, I do know that Windows Mobile products aren't really Windows, but they are an OS), Apple has to have sufficiently complete programming teams that are fully competent on their own..

With the problems with Aperture, we see that they don't. If anyone thinks that that problem is not extending to their OS products, they are obviously wrong, from Apple's own statement of need.

And how would they be overstaffed?

If they are understaffed now, why would staffing to full levels leave them overstaffed? It isn't as though they are wrapping up all of their OS projects.

When 10.5 is out, they will still need a significant staff to continue development on that track, with the rest of them going to to work on 10.6.

The same is true for the other projects. From Apple's own mouth, the OS on the phone is a complete OS, except for what they removed that was unnecessary for that small device. They then added what was needed for the phone. The same is true for the ATv.

Does anyone here believe that continued development of both of these other OS X versions is going to really slow down? If anything, the will be adding more to them.
post #399 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Sure. A mid-size application versus two Operating Systems with 3 versions. The embedded OS X and the Client/Server flagship OS.

There is no comparison.

No joke, hotshot. There's no question working on the flagship OS is tougher than working on "a mid-size application", as you put it.

Like a number of others, you've missed the point. Apple's ability to grow is directly tied to its ability as a company to deliver. I'm hard pressed to remember the last time Apple failed to deliver an OS release when Steve said they would. I certainly believe this is the first refresh missed during the OS X, era, the Mac OS X Public Beta aside. If I'm wrong, please refresh my memory.

What I was stressing in my post was to look at the long game. With this delay, Apple has just demonstrated it has issues, as a company, in delivering multiple software projects. They seem to be able to deliver either an OS update, or an application (new or new version) project within a year, but not both. This could well prove a problem going forward.

In fairness to Apple, it stands to reason their programmers are really working on three OS updates at once: Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, and Mac OS X Embedded. Under the best of circumstances, this would tax any software company.
post #400 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Damon View Post

No joke, hotshot. There's no question working on the flagship OS is tougher than working on "a mid-size application", as you put it.

Like a number of others, you've missed the point. Apple's ability to grow is directly tied to its ability as a company to deliver. I'm hard pressed to remember the last time Apple failed to deliver an OS release when Steve said they would. I certainly believe this is the first refresh missed during the OS X, era, the Mac OS X Public Beta aside. If I'm wrong, please refresh my memory.

What I was stressing in my post was to look at the long game. With this delay, Apple has just demonstrated it has issues, as a company, in delivering multiple software projects. They seem to be able to deliver either an OS update, or an application (new or new version) project within a year, but not both. This could well prove a problem going forward.

In fairness to Apple, it stands to reason their programmers are really working on three OS updates at once: Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, and Mac OS X Embedded. Under the best of circumstances, this would tax any software company.

That's right. The concern is not that Apple won't deliver a quality product, but that it is stretching its resources in doing several of them at once.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple delays Leopard release until October