OS X 10.2

spring loaded folders
improved Disk Copy.app
interesting new Dock behavior regarding minimized windows
and it's Snappier

You should search the forum about 10.2. There have been a few other threads you should read before asking questions.

[quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:
<strong>...
and it's Snappier?
....
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Ah you beat me to it.

Yes 10.2 is much snappeir. I can tell the difference. When I first booted it up it was much snappier and then as time went on it was back to the same old sluggish OS X.

[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>

Ah you beat me to it.

Yes 10.2 is much snappeir. I can tell the difference. When I first booted it up it was much snappier and then as time went on it was back to the same old sluggish OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Typical clockwork response....

Where in the world are you getting it? If it is beeing seeded or whatever yo call it, it must be pretty near public release, no?

[quote] Where in the world are you getting it? If it is beeing seeded or whatever yo call it, it must be pretty near public release, no? <hr></blockquote>

As far as I know the only seed that you can find on warez sites is 6B11. This is the build that AI reported on a while back. Apparently 6B11 was seeded before iTunes 2 was released, making it a building os 10.2 that was completed a couple of weeks after 10.1 was released. Nobody I now has seen any builds beyond 6B11, and none of the rumor sites have reported on any builds later then that.
With that in mind it isn't a terrible surprise to have people reporting that after a speed jump after install they saw no noticeable difference between 10.1 and 10.2 after a little bit of use. The speed burst they say was probably due more to a clean X install rather then code optimization in 10.2. Considering how early of a build 6B11 is, it isn't surprising that the OS speed hasn't increased much.

Hopefully by the time it is GM in July they will have optimized 10.2 enough that there will be noticeable differences between the speeds of 10.1 and 10.2. Would be nice.

[quote] I think Apple is clamping down on leaked builds big time. No leaks in almost 5 months is pretty impressive. <hr></blockquote>

I actually know one person that claims to have 10.2 betas, but he won't talk about it at all. I really can't decide if we is really in the know or is just pirating 6B11 builds from the net.

I think Apple is clamping down on leaked builds big time. No leaks in almost 5 months is pretty impressive.

[quote]Originally posted by Tarbash:
<strong>I think Apple is clamping down on leaked builds big time. No leaks in almost 5 months is pretty impressive.</strong><hr></blockquote>

They just stopped seeding their builds to all paying developers.

Or maybe they've halted all development work on OS X..

Steve: "WHAT DO YOU MEAN IT ISN'T INSANELY GREAT ALREADY?!?! YOU'RE FIRED!"



-robo

Seems odd that after getting internal builds for so long, the well dries up now. While 10.2 will likely just be what we know already -- some small added features and mostly minor improvements, perhaps they are toying with other new features they want to be secret? But wouldn't they create another development branch for all that stuff? Just seems odd that even if there's no real news, internal build leaks have been plugged.

Maybe there is more to 10.2 then you expect. After almost a year of development I would expect more then a minor update. Wouldn't you?

Just remember:

NO ONE outide Apple's tight circle-of-trust expected Aqua before that fateful morning...

[quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:
<strong>Seems odd that after getting internal builds for so long, the well dries up now. While 10.2 will likely just be what we know already -- some small added features and mostly minor improvements, perhaps they are toying with other new features they want to be secret? But wouldn't they create another development branch for all that stuff? Just seems odd that even if there's no real news, internal build leaks have been plugged.</strong><hr></blockquote>

apple has been VERY open lately with developers about how upset they are. Apple even made changes to the NDA that all developers must read and agree to before entering the site. The changes were almost entirely of the "we're sick of you guys screwing us by leaking stuff" model.
Personally, I like the secrecy, but (as a developer) would appreciate more available builds. what, just cuz i'm not adobe, or MS, i don't get to know what's going on?

[quote] apple has been VERY open lately with developers about how upset they are. Apple even made changes to the NDA that all developers must read and agree to before entering the site. The changes were almost entirely of the "we're sick of you guys screwing us by leaking stuff" model.
Personally, I like the secrecy, but (as a developer) would appreciate more available builds. what, just cuz i'm not adobe, or MS, i don't get to know what's going on?
<hr></blockquote>

If that's the case no wonder we haven't heard much, especially if the little guys are getting any builds. I have to admit I miss not having any new information on future X builds, but I can understand Apple's desire to stop the leaks, especially when it comes to hardware.

Even wonder what your perspective on Apple's current hardware offering we be if we didn't have all these rumors about an imminent G5 release? Or rumors about 1.4 GHz "Apollo" G4s, with DDR, for MWSF 2002. I think it would be really different. Not saying that Apple's hardware is perfect right now, because it isn't, but I think that we over exaggerate how badly Apple needs this technology, or that feature, because we read all these rumors/leaks about it. If there was no leaks about G5, or killer G4s, or OS X 64-Bit with this and that feature I think a lot more of us would be content with Apple's current offering, and maybe that translates into more sales for Apple. Which is more then enough motivation to stop such leaks.

Well, hopefully they will preview the next X build in Tokyo. They are going to release the G5 in Tokyo guaranteed, right!?

[quote]Originally posted by Quarem:
<strong>

They are going to release the G5 in Tokyo guaranteed, right!? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Noooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!

From what I've read/been told Jag has an ETA of MWNY. What it contains other than the stuff that was already leaked is anyones guess. I do know the build numbers should be somewhere in the high 40's (maybe even low 50's) by now.

Dave

[quote] Noooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!
<hr></blockquote>

Jamie I was just joking, hence the wink.

Dave: What do you mean by build 40 - 50s. Does that mean they have only done that many builds? Or are you referring to 6X40-6X50, where X is some letter? Wouldn't 6B11 have already be 100+ builds advanced? Please clarify.

Darwin bugtracker mentions 6B41, at that time they were turning out 1 build a day. Wonder if they've sped it up... Probably not if ETA is MWNY

SYN 6B41? That's it. When were they turning out 1 build a day. They got to be higher then 6B41 if 6B11 was released in October.

What's Darwin Bugtracker/

If there really is a G5 soon to be released, they'd HAVE to stop any leaks on 10.2 builds, because hints on that would be found all over the OS. I personally don't think we'll see a G5 in july, but we won't see any leaked OS X builds month before G5 release for sure.

maybe they finally made an OS that doesnt suck as much as it does now.

There are just too many 'quirks' and blatant bugs to let me truely enjoy this OS right now. Also the fact I spent a small fortune on the iBook 14" and get mediocre quality doesnt make me feel any better

I dont think 10.2 will be the OS that introduces a slew of new features. It is still an incremental release and I'd guess that Apple's main concern is making OSX performance==to OS9. I think the next few releases (.2, .5, .6) will slowly add featres that we miss from 9 (spring-loaded folders, USB printer sharing...y'know the basics).

I haven't looked at the 6b11 build (which I'm told was missing quite a bit of stuff), and obviously nothing beyond that. Anyone think there's a chance that -- should this just be a few UI additions, some bug fixes and more code optimizations -- this will be another software update candidate (say 40 or 50 MB)?

Or will this be the next shrink-wrapped, complete overhaul of all system files, etc. version? I suppose if that's the case, those who bought 10.1 will still have to shell out some dough for it - maybe $39 via the Apple Store or something like that?

From the venerable Andrew Welch of Ambrosia Software: [quote]A few things I do know that are not under NDA:

-- Mac OS X 10.2 will be built with gcc 3.0.x, which has a number of optimizations for the PPC platform in it (rolled in by Apple engineers), including some nice options to reduce function overhead that should result in a 10% speed boost across the board just by recompiling

-- A chance to the way messages are passed in Cocoa speeds up message passing (events, etc.) 15% across the board

-- The first priority for this build is getting some new features done; the second priority is speed. I imagine it will be faster than 10.1.x, but it may not be as dramatic as from 10.0.x --&gt; 10.1.x<hr></blockquote> More speeeeeeed, baby.

All I want in 10.2 (functionally) is support for vertex and pixel shaders for the GF3/4 and Radeon8500.

Give me that, some good documentation to take advantage of it, and I'm happy.

Better drivers for the GeForce 3/4 and Radeon 8500 is a must. I have a GeForce 3 and I am constantly reminded at the poor drivers in OS X every time I play Giants. See Giants can support Bump Mapping on the GeForce 3, but MacPlay can't allow that feature to be used until Apple delivers better drivers, very annoying.

[quote]Originally posted by Quarem:
<strong>Better drivers for the GeForce 3/4 and Radeon 8500 is a must. I have a GeForce 3 and I am constantly reminded at the poor drivers in OS X every time I play Giants. See Giants can support Bump Mapping on the GeForce 3, but MacPlay can't allow that feature to be used until Apple delivers better drivers, very annoying.</strong><hr></blockquote>

though i can't disagree with the need for better drivers, i absolutely believe nvidia should be busting their asses. apple should be helping, and i imagine there are more than a couple engineers dedicated to nothing but drivers, but nvidia (and others) should be putting in a concerted effort.


oh yeah, and i meant to say, write to nvidia, ATI, etc and demand better drivers for OS X. you know, do your part, instead of complaining.

[ 03-04-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Keda:
<strong>I dont think 10.2 will be the OS that introduces a slew of new features. It is still an incremental release and I'd guess that Apple's main concern is making OSX performance==to OS9. I think the next few releases (.2, .5, .6) will slowly add featres that we miss from 9 (spring-loaded folders, USB printer sharing...y'know the basics).</strong><hr></blockquote>

actually, 10.2 is more than an incremental release. the 'minor' updates are the 10.0.x or 10.1.x etc. this helps to keep from getting into the 10.11.43 bullsh*t.
expect to see each 10.x lasting 6-9 months, and offering the kind of advances previously made in .5 type updates. and don't be surprised if OS X goes 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, etc. each having 3 or 4 minor updates.

It's not better drivers that we need, per se. Because of the disparate implementations of shaders in the two architectures, Apple has made the choice not to support that feature in their OpenGL implementation. Both nVidia and ATI have OpenGL extensions that enable the functionality, but Apple won't expose them in their libraries.

I'm hoping that 10.2 will bring OS X up to OS 9's feature set, and that it will also include performance optimizations.

If Apple can deliver on that, then it will be a great update, and in fact OS X will finally own like it should.

As long as OS X's feature set is less than or equal to OS 9's, I believe the updates will be free. Expect 10.2 to be distributed similarly to 10.1, free to everyone except those who are not near an Apple authorized outlet.

Could we assume that 10.2 will be released, or at least SHOWN at MWT?

Think about it. March 23 (?) 2001, 10.0 was released. Then 6 months later in September, 10.1 was released. Steve stated that OS X was at 6:00. 3 months later at MWSF, with more apps out, he said OS X was at 9:00.
So, by this reasoning, on March 23 2002, will we see 10.2? Not only is it the day of the keynote, but i think its also the 1 year anniversary of OS X. What better day to announce that X has finally come full cirlce, and is at 12:00. He could announce it shipping in April or something, but I have a feeling it will carry the same magnitude of 10.1, and finally bring OS X FULLY up to par with OS 9 in features and performance.

Tarbash:

The clock analogy was to show the transition time for OSX. They expect that by the end of the 12 months, the majority of key apps will be ported and working properly in OSX. This has nothing to do with the upgrade cycle. Yes, 10.1 was released at the half-way mark, but I'm not expecting 10.2 in the next couple of weeks. I'd love to be surprised, though!

I understand Starfleet. It was just an idea. Kinda interesting though how the releases mirrored the time passed by on the clock though. (Hours = months)

[quote]Originally posted by concentricity:
<strong>

though i can't disagree with the need for better drivers, i absolutely believe nvidia should be busting their asses. apple should be helping, and i imagine there are more than a couple engineers dedicated to nothing but drivers, but nvidia (and others) should be putting in a concerted effort.


oh yeah, and i meant to say, write to nvidia, ATI, etc and demand better drivers for OS X. you know, do your part, instead of complaining.

[ 03-04-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

I absolutely agree, I'll be sure to send my feedback into Nvidia.

[quote]Originally posted by Fluffy:
<strong>It's not better drivers that we need, per se. Because of the disparate implementations of shaders in the two architectures, Apple has made the choice not to support that feature in their OpenGL implementation. Both nVidia and ATI have OpenGL extensions that enable the functionality, but Apple won't expose them in their libraries.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why do you think Apple shouldn't implement this into their OpenGL library and give us the option?

Just goes to show that we need OpenGL 2.0 with a standard library for pixel shaders.

[quote]Originally posted by Quarem:
<strong>

Why do you think Apple shouldn't implement this into their OpenGL library and give us the option?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

:confused: They should. I just meant that it is Apple's responsibility and not ATI or nVidias.

[quote]Originally posted by Fluffy:
<strong>

:confused: They should. I just meant that it is Apple's responsibility and not ATI or nVidias.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sorry, misunderstood what you were saying, thanks for clarifying.

This is what Apple Needs to do in Mac OS X:
Fully support Aqua excelleration via the video card
Optimize the OS 10.2 to the Max to it runs dcently on a G3 233 (I have a G3 266)

My video card isn't being used. I want to see OpenGL excelleration on this computer and @leat 90% of the speed of Mac OS 9.

The eariliest I will be able to get a new PowerMac is MacWorld SF 2004. (I am also not going to buy anything below a 2.2GHZ G5 (at the low end of the line).

Also note I do alot on this computer which slows it down alot. (Apache, PHP, MySQL) etc.

So I really work my computer. but am broke and won't be able to afford a new computer until 2004