Apple releases OS X 10.9 Mavericks Golden Master to developers

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 84
    Apple just has to announce the availability of the Mac Pro for orders, and I'll be first in line to get it!:D
  • Reply 62 of 84
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    akqies wrote: »
    Not really. The Mac Pro can easily get a custom build of the OS.

    You say "not really" then back up my point by saying it would be in the OS. There is no way around it. If the Mac Pro will have TB2 then OS X on the Mac Pro will support TB2, unless you're saying Apple would add the HW but then offer no drivers or higher-level SW support. Does that sounds like something Apple will do? I don't think so. I expect the next MacBook Pros to also support TB2 which would explain their delay.

    I agree with TS as it wouldn't be the first time. Look up 10.2.7 (Blackrider, Smeagol) and why it as never released to the general public.
  • Reply 63 of 84
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    rtamesis wrote: »
    Apple just has to announce the availability of the Mac Pro for orders, and I'll be first in line to get it!:D

    I can't find it. Link?
  • Reply 64 of 84
    akqiesakqies Posts: 768member
    philboogie wrote: »
    I agree with TS as it wouldn't be the first time. Look up 10.2.7 (Blackrider, Smeagol) and why it as never released to the general public.

    That's no different than all new first run HW that comes out at the same time or after an OS ships. It's still in the OS if it's on that OS that is on the device. There is only on example of Apple shipping HW that it did not include SW support for at launch.
  • Reply 65 of 84
    eluardeluard Posts: 319member

    I can't say I care whether it's $20.00 or free but I am certainly looking forward to it. I suppose we non-developers will have to wait to see what all these under-the-hood changes are. OpenGL is one… The others?

  • Reply 66 of 84
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RogueDogRandy View Post

     

    it will be $20 as usual.

    That's all I have to say about that...


     

    ?Considering practically each new release is priced less-and-less as time goes on I don't quite see where you are pulling that "as usual" $20 figure from with a foolish confidence.

     

    Leopard was $129

    Snow Leopard was $29

    Lion was $29

    Mountain Lion was $20

     

    It's safe to say given that they have now moved to a yearly release cycle for OS X versions and for the first time in living memory have yet to announce a price, they may have a new way of doing things in the works. And then considering most of the new additions in Mavericks are under the hood it's probable to gestimate that Mavericks could be free.

     

    That, my friend, is called reason.


     

    foolish confidense? you are the fool for thinking they should give it all away for free. Wont happen-except on newly purchased macs of course. $20 is  a very good guess. Thats all I have to say about that (Forrest Gump) sheesh....

  • Reply 67 of 84
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by seltzdesign View Post

     

     

    That my friend is what's called a Straw man argument. And it just relegated you to my list of blocked users, especially with a footer text that actually makes you look much worse than any Android defender on here.


     

    I was chiming in on how much I thought it would cost.... so **** off 

  • Reply 68 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akqies View Post





    It has to since we know the Mac Pro will include TB2.

     

    Right now, the new Mac Pro is vaporware. We've seen the prototype machine at the August presentation and Apple has a slick webpage on its site. Until Apple announces the price and availability date it remains vaporware. While we're hoping that the announcement will come when Maverick is released there's no guarantee and the initial release of Maverick doesn't necessarily need to include TB2 support, that can be added in a .2. .3 or other release to the system software.

     

    So the reason I asked the question was in hopes that someone who actually had the Golden Master would know and wouldn't be bound to any confidentiality clause and could respond.

  • Reply 69 of 84
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by akqies View Post

    You say "not really" then back up my point by saying it would be in the OS.

     

    No, please read it again. I did nothing of the sort. It doesn’t have to be in the GM, or even the release version (since they’re sometimes different).

     

    The Mac Pro can very easily get its own build, specific to IT and IT alone, that includes Thunderbolt 2 support. The build can be identical to that of the other builds except support for Thunderbolt 2 (and the rest of the Mac Pro’s specific hardware). 

     

    If the Mac Pro will have TB2 then OS X on the Mac Pro will support TB2, unless you're saying Apple would add the HW but then offer no drivers or higher-level SW support.


     

    Apparently something at which I’m still not worthlessly abysmal is coming up with more than one answer to a question. Also, apparently absolutely no one else can wrap their heads around this concept. It’s really strange. :???:



    Having said that, no, that’s not the only option. It’s conceivable that 10.9 won’t have unified Thunderbolt 2 support across all models (even those that don’t support it) until there is a 10.9.x update released after the start of sale of the Mac(Book) Pro.

     

    Say 10.9.0 comes out this month at a point before the release of either of those models. It could very well just support existing Macs while work could continue on those two. Then when they are released, the build number would be different, as it would include the drivers specific to those models of computer. Then 10.9.1 is released–say, before the end of the year–with everything, including the drivers for machines that don’t have whatever new hardware. 

     

    I expect the next MacBook Pros to also support TB2 which would explain their delay. 


     

    Bingo; that’s exactly what I was thinking.

  • Reply 70 of 84
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    TS post above ^

    Exactly!
  • Reply 71 of 84

    I couldn't agree more. I often see people with older Macs that are clearly still running the same major version of OS X that the computer came with. They're often completely unaware or it doesn't occur to them that they can buy an update that'll very likely improve performance significantly, even on older hardware. That or they can't see the point in paying anything considering their computer still works the way it did when they bought it and they don't want to risk upgrading because they're scared about doing something to their computer that they don't understand.

    Most people do understand how to check for updates that are available in the 'Check for software updates' menu item and are comfortable installing that way. If Apple were to push an update out for free through there then I bet they'd see a massive uptake and adoption rate and make Windows 8 look like an even bigger failure in comparison.

    Now is definitely the time to do it. By doing so Mavericks would have the fastest adoption rate of OS X by far. It's not like they can't afford to.

    They can return to charging people for the next version which will have a new iOS 7 style UI, something that most people will see and want to pay for, not just the nerds that read and post on AI! ;)
  • Reply 72 of 84
    rolyroly Posts: 66member
    Mavericks is definitely more RAM hungry. My 8 GB MacBook Pro used to stay in a non rebooted state for weeks using less than 4 GB. These days, after a couple of days use, it's already using virtual memory and swap space. What gives? Perhaps a fresh install would be advisable for the GM (downloading now) as so far I've only been doing updates and my system is definitely due a fresh install.

    There's a few minor things I don't like (including the memory issues) but on the whole it is definitely a nice improvement from a functionality perspective, over previous releases. Now all they need to do is get those new MacBooks out the door and start working on overhauling the UI more in line with iOS. I'm talking about icons and notifications etc. at the moment it looks a bit ridiculous having one style on iOS and a completely style for the same icons and apps on Mac OS. Look at game centre for example. The mac version still has the crappy felt background.
  • Reply 73 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Roly View Post



    Mavericks is definitely more RAM hungry. My 8 GB MacBook Pro used to stay in a non rebooted state for weeks using less than 4 GB. These days, after a couple of days use, it's already using virtual memory and swap space. What gives? Perhaps a fresh install would be advisable for the GM (downloading now) as so far I've only been doing updates and my system is definitely due a fresh install.

     

    Are you still seeing this with the GM? I've not noticed this myself, but it's not uncommon for Apple to leave code in the DPs (likewise during pre-GM iOS betas) to increase logging and perform other monitoring to assist in development and debugging. This additional debugging code can certainly slow down performance and increase memory utilization.

     

    One thing I've noticed with Mavericks is that it seems to use less memory, probably due to how it compresses memory utilized by sleeping processes. This should have the effect of speeding up performance, especially on systems using traditional HDDs for swap. Those of us using SSDs for the boot partition shouldn't notice much difference, although it should certainly increase the lifespan of the SSD boot drive as less read/write cycles would be theoretically used due to decreased paging activity.

  • Reply 74 of 84
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member

    Ideally you want the computer to be using all it's physical memory at all times right? That would mean that when there's memory pressure it has somehow avoided swap (e.g. by using compression), and when there's no memory pressure it's levering the spare memory by doing as much caching as possible.

  • Reply 75 of 84
    rolyroly Posts: 66member
    djames4242 wrote: »
    Are you still seeing this with the GM? I've not noticed this myself, but it's not uncommon for Apple to leave code in the DPs (likewise during pre-GM iOS betas) to increase logging and perform other monitoring to assist in development and debugging. This additional debugging code can certainly slow down performance and increase memory utilization.

    One thing I've noticed with Mavericks is that it seems to use less memory, probably due to how it compresses memory utilized by sleeping processes. This should have the effect of speeding up performance, especially on systems using traditional HDDs for swap. Those of us using SSDs for the boot partition shouldn't notice much difference, although it should certainly increase the lifespan of the SSD boot drive as less read/write cycles would be theoretically used due to decreased paging activity.

    I've not yet installed the GM as I'm on a business trip and just wanted to wait until the weekend. I'm also using an SSD so anything that increased its life is also a good thing. I reckon a clean install of the GM isy best net.
  • Reply 76 of 84
    pbpb Posts: 4,233member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

    OS XI.


    It looks like that would rather be OS X 10.10 Syrah.

  • Reply 77 of 84
    Originally Posted by PB View Post

    It looks like that would rather be OS X 10.10 Syrah.

     

    Why, when I’m not talking about OS X at all? It can use whatever numbers it wants: I’m talking about what comes after it.

  • Reply 78 of 84

    The GM still has a few important bugs regarding Finder and Mission Control, carried over from DP8. Strange. Hopefully a second GM build will fix that before actual launch.

  • Reply 79 of 84
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,393member

    I hope the calendar in 10.9 is as good as the one that was in 10.6. I don't know why Apple 'fixed' the snooze button and why they added that ugly wood grain header to it. 

     

    If anybody here has used the new calendar in 10.9, I'd like to know if it has the snooze options similar (or the same as) to what was in 10.6 (my favorite Apple OS so far).

  • Reply 80 of 84
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,151member

    So got sick of waiting for public release and just updated to the GM today. Everything went flawlessly, performance seems slightly improved. Other than the new front facing apps (maps and books) most of the changes are under the hood, and everything else is extremely subtle. Can't complain, since it improves on an already incredibly solid foundation, and the performance, battery life, and iOS integration improvements are all nice. 

Sign In or Register to comment.