Also, do they say this every year before WWDC, ie come look at the future of the Mac platform?
Interesting hidden message perhaps?
"Get an in-depth look at the future of the Mac platformAND a preview release of the next major version of Mac OS X, codenamed "Panther", at Worldwide Developers Conference 2003, June 23-27, in San Francisco." (emphasis mine)
Although it could be one of those depends on what the definition of "is" is things, but it sounds like it's talking about two different items will discussed:
Matthew Rothenberg has weighed in on the WWDC reschedule/relocation and ties it to a deemphasis of MWNY:
"Industry sources concurred with a recent report on Mac-focused Web site Think Secret that Apple CEO Steve Jobs plans to leave his traditional keynote spot at Macworld Expo to Senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing Philip Schiller. The move will reportedly also precipitate a name change for the show that will focus on the content creation market. If Apple goes through with the plan, it will position WWDC as the main summer forum for a Jobs keynote. "
It seems clear to me that Apple is abandoning all trade shows on the east coast and that the WWDC will be become the main summer event for the Mac platform. If Phil gives the keynote at MWNY, that gaurantees no intro of the 970. I think Steve's gonna show it all at WWDC in June: 970 based Power Macs, Panther, 64 bit, everything. It may not all be ready for immediate sale, but the cat(s) will be let out of the bag.
As far as I can see there's only three reasons to move it.
1. Something you want to show is badly behind schedule and if you don't push it back you risk not being able to discuss it at such a sizeable developer event until the following year (although they could hold workshops).
2. You're ahead of schedule and think you can squeeze something in if you just push it back a month.
3. You are delaying showing something or technical difficulties/conflicts have forced a reschedule.
Those seem like really plausible reasons... I do agree!
Unless Apple is just not hyping hardware DHagan4755's post above does not lead me to believe that Apple will show off the 970.
If in fact Apple's goal of switching the dates and the venue is to replace their East Coast "splash" then sure they will announce the 970, but this would also mean they will make Steve's keynote (he does it every year at WWDC so this is already a given) a QuickTime broadcast...which to my recollection they have never done in the past...
At the heart of Mac OS X lies a strong and secure, yet flexible, foundation with features like preemptive multitasking, protected memory and real-time support. The stability and proud UNIX heritage of Mac OS X is reflected here in the core, providing developers who need to access the low-level services of Mac OS X - to write kernel extensions, manage security functions, or work with BSD commands - the power to create truly great applications.
Max OS X State of the Union
To Be Announced
Max OS X ? Just a typo, I'm sure... but certainly an interesting one
I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but looking at the list of presentations available (with and without descriptions) I'd say it's far more likely Apple will tout new QuickTime technologies in 10.3.
It seems clear to me that Apple is abandoning all trade shows on the east coast and that the WWDC will be become the main summer event for the Mac platform. If Phil gives the keynote at MWNY, that gaurantees no intro of the 970. I think Steve's gonna show it all at WWDC in June: 970 based Power Macs, Panther, 64 bit, everything. It may not all be ready for immediate sale, but the cat(s) will be let out of the bag.
A few random points here.
-- Apple will be de-emphasizing expos for the Mac faithful. Fun as they are for all of us, they want to reach markets that they don't already own. Yes, Virginia, they are serious about the "switch" thing
-- re: Panther being a 64 bit OS; I highly doubt it. Most likely the kernel will be tweaked so that it works on a 64 bit processor, but other than that, I'd guess that it will be effectively 32 bit as far as all running apps are concerned
-- re: moving apps over to being 64 bit; yes, it will be easy to do, but no, I don't expect it to happen (or be possible) in the short term. This isn't a big deal; 64 bit addressing doesn't gain you anything, except in some very specific apps
-- if I were Apple, I'd first make my OS work with a 64 bit chip, but keep everything else the same. Then in a future release, I'd change the kernel a bit so that *it* can take advantage of 64 bit addressing, handing off chunks of MMU-mapped memory to the running 32 bit apps, who would never know the difference (benefit: more than 4gb of addressable RAM). Finally, down the road, I'd make it 64 bit in userland, too, for apps that take advantage of it; for those they don't, I'd run 'em in 32 bit more (for compatibility reasons, to save memory, and to not slow things down unnecessarily)
-- re: WWDC moving, it certainly seems to me that doing something like moving a conference such as this with relatively little notice means something important...
-- Apple will be de-emphasizing expos for the Mac faithful. Fun as they are for all of us, they want to reach markets that they don't already own. Yes, Virginia, they are serious about the "switch" thing
-- re: Panther being a 64 bit OS; I highly doubt it. Most likely the kernel will be tweaked so that it works on a 64 bit processor, but other than that, I'd guess that it will be effectively 32 bit as far as all running apps are concerned
-- re: moving apps over to being 64 bit; yes, it will be easy to do, but no, I don't expect it to happen (or be possible) in the short term. This isn't a big deal; 64 bit addressing doesn't gain you anything, except in some very specific apps
-- if I were Apple, I'd first make my OS work with a 64 bit chip, but keep everything else the same. Then in a future release, I'd change the kernel a bit so that *it* can take advantage of 64 bit addressing, handing off chunks of MMU-mapped memory to the running 32 bit apps, who would never know the difference (benefit: more than 4gb of addressable RAM). Finally, down the road, I'd make it 64 bit in userland, too, for apps that take advantage of it; for those they don't, I'd run 'em in 32 bit more (for compatibility reasons, to save memory, and to not slow things down unnecessarily)
-- re: WWDC moving, it certainly seems to me that doing something like moving a conference such as this with relatively little notice means something important...
-- re: WWDC moving, it certainly seems to me that doing something like moving a conference such as this with relatively little notice means something important...
Maybe they just need some more time for making a good Panther preview available? After all, Apple needs to get everyone on the OSX boat, and it looks like WWDC is all about OSX...
Quote:
Originally posted by Jared
Actually they have, just not in the context that we want...
Well, where? I nor anyone else have seen any proof on OSX going 64 bit!
Well, where? I nor anyone else have seen any proof on OSX going 64 bit!
In Apple's developers site it does make mention of future 64 bit computing... I can't dig up the reference but I did see it... I think someone over at ars (in their GPUL thread) linked to it.
Comments
4. Cuz Steve said so
Originally posted by jante99
Also, do they say this every year before WWDC, ie come look at the future of the Mac platform?
Interesting hidden message perhaps?
"Get an in-depth look at the future of the Mac platform AND a preview release of the next major version of Mac OS X, codenamed "Panther", at Worldwide Developers Conference 2003, June 23-27, in San Francisco." (emphasis mine)
Although it could be one of those depends on what the definition of "is" is things, but it sounds like it's talking about two different items will discussed:
1) Future of the Mac Platform
2) Panther (10.3)
"Industry sources concurred with a recent report on Mac-focused Web site Think Secret that Apple CEO Steve Jobs plans to leave his traditional keynote spot at Macworld Expo to Senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing Philip Schiller. The move will reportedly also precipitate a name change for the show that will focus on the content creation market. If Apple goes through with the plan, it will position WWDC as the main summer forum for a Jobs keynote. "
It seems clear to me that Apple is abandoning all trade shows on the east coast and that the WWDC will be become the main summer event for the Mac platform. If Phil gives the keynote at MWNY, that gaurantees no intro of the 970. I think Steve's gonna show it all at WWDC in June: 970 based Power Macs, Panther, 64 bit, everything. It may not all be ready for immediate sale, but the cat(s) will be let out of the bag.
Originally posted by Telomar
As far as I can see there's only three reasons to move it.
1. Something you want to show is badly behind schedule and if you don't push it back you risk not being able to discuss it at such a sizeable developer event until the following year (although they could hold workshops).
2. You're ahead of schedule and think you can squeeze something in if you just push it back a month.
3. You are delaying showing something or technical difficulties/conflicts have forced a reschedule.
Those seem like really plausible reasons... I do agree!
Dear Developer,
We wanted you to be among the first to know that Apple has
rescheduled WWDC 2003 in order to provide attendees with a preview
CD and in-depth session coverage of the next major release of Mac OS
X, codenamed "Panther." WWDC will take place June 23-27 at Moscone
West in San Francisco, California.
This will be Apple's biggest WWDC ever, featuring:
- Extensive coverage of "Panther"
- A first-ever Enterprise IT Track
- An expanded QuickTime Track that covers content creation and delivery
- More than 170 detailed sessions, labs, and feedback forums
- Expert guidance from Apple's technical architects and lead engineers
- A unique opportunity to network with your peers in the Mac community
And now -- WWDC is set against the dramatic backdrop of the "City by
the Bay," San Francisco. This is one WWDC you won't want to miss!
We posted more than 140 session descriptions on our web site today
and there are more to come. We invite you to visit our site today
for all the details. Session descriptions are available at
http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/descriptions.html
For five days this June, WWDC 2003 will bring the most innovative
Mac developers together with Apple's best and brightest engineers in
one of the world's most beautiful cities.
Get empowered. Get inspired. Get registered.
We hope to see you there.
Apple Developer Connection
http://developer.apple.com/wwdc
If in fact Apple's goal of switching the dates and the venue is to replace their East Coast "splash" then sure they will announce the 970, but this would also mean they will make Steve's keynote (he does it every year at WWDC so this is already a given) a QuickTime broadcast...which to my recollection they have never done in the past...
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Seems as though the email does not hint at anything hardware and puts squarely into focus Panther.
That is true, but if you were going to release a major processor why would you ruin the surprise.
Originally posted by TJM
From: Apple WWDC Descriptions
Track: Core OS
At the heart of Mac OS X lies a strong and secure, yet flexible, foundation with features like preemptive multitasking, protected memory and real-time support. The stability and proud UNIX heritage of Mac OS X is reflected here in the core, providing developers who need to access the low-level services of Mac OS X - to write kernel extensions, manage security functions, or work with BSD commands - the power to create truly great applications.
Max OS X State of the Union
To Be Announced
Max OS X ? Just a typo, I'm sure... but certainly an interesting one
Originally posted by strobe
What do you mean by confirmed? Apple has yet to utter the number 64
Actually they have, just not in the context that we want...
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
It seems clear to me that Apple is abandoning all trade shows on the east coast and that the WWDC will be become the main summer event for the Mac platform. If Phil gives the keynote at MWNY, that gaurantees no intro of the 970. I think Steve's gonna show it all at WWDC in June: 970 based Power Macs, Panther, 64 bit, everything. It may not all be ready for immediate sale, but the cat(s) will be let out of the bag.
A few random points here.
-- Apple will be de-emphasizing expos for the Mac faithful. Fun as they are for all of us, they want to reach markets that they don't already own. Yes, Virginia, they are serious about the "switch" thing
-- re: Panther being a 64 bit OS; I highly doubt it. Most likely the kernel will be tweaked so that it works on a 64 bit processor, but other than that, I'd guess that it will be effectively 32 bit as far as all running apps are concerned
-- re: moving apps over to being 64 bit; yes, it will be easy to do, but no, I don't expect it to happen (or be possible) in the short term. This isn't a big deal; 64 bit addressing doesn't gain you anything, except in some very specific apps
-- if I were Apple, I'd first make my OS work with a 64 bit chip, but keep everything else the same. Then in a future release, I'd change the kernel a bit so that *it* can take advantage of 64 bit addressing, handing off chunks of MMU-mapped memory to the running 32 bit apps, who would never know the difference (benefit: more than 4gb of addressable RAM). Finally, down the road, I'd make it 64 bit in userland, too, for apps that take advantage of it; for those they don't, I'd run 'em in 32 bit more (for compatibility reasons, to save memory, and to not slow things down unnecessarily)
-- re: WWDC moving, it certainly seems to me that doing something like moving a conference such as this with relatively little notice means something important...
Originally posted by moki
A few random points here.
-- Apple will be de-emphasizing expos for the Mac faithful. Fun as they are for all of us, they want to reach markets that they don't already own. Yes, Virginia, they are serious about the "switch" thing
-- re: Panther being a 64 bit OS; I highly doubt it. Most likely the kernel will be tweaked so that it works on a 64 bit processor, but other than that, I'd guess that it will be effectively 32 bit as far as all running apps are concerned
-- re: moving apps over to being 64 bit; yes, it will be easy to do, but no, I don't expect it to happen (or be possible) in the short term. This isn't a big deal; 64 bit addressing doesn't gain you anything, except in some very specific apps
-- if I were Apple, I'd first make my OS work with a 64 bit chip, but keep everything else the same. Then in a future release, I'd change the kernel a bit so that *it* can take advantage of 64 bit addressing, handing off chunks of MMU-mapped memory to the running 32 bit apps, who would never know the difference (benefit: more than 4gb of addressable RAM). Finally, down the road, I'd make it 64 bit in userland, too, for apps that take advantage of it; for those they don't, I'd run 'em in 32 bit more (for compatibility reasons, to save memory, and to not slow things down unnecessarily)
-- re: WWDC moving, it certainly seems to me that doing something like moving a conference such as this with relatively little notice means something important...
Good to hear Moki's take on all this.
Originally posted by moki
-- re: WWDC moving, it certainly seems to me that doing something like moving a conference such as this with relatively little notice means something important...
Maybe they just need some more time for making a good Panther preview available? After all, Apple needs to get everyone on the OSX boat, and it looks like WWDC is all about OSX...
Originally posted by Jared
Actually they have, just not in the context that we want...
Well, where? I nor anyone else have seen any proof on OSX going 64 bit!
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
Well, where? I nor anyone else have seen any proof on OSX going 64 bit!
In Apple's developers site it does make mention of future 64 bit computing... I can't dig up the reference but I did see it... I think someone over at ars (in their GPUL thread) linked to it.
Dave
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
Well, where? I nor anyone else have seen any proof on OSX going 64 bit!
It is mentioned in the context of portability on Apple's ADC pages.
I am sure that someone here can give you the link.
But Apple has 'uttered' the words 64-bit.
Originally posted by strobe
Did anybody take advantage of the G4's 36bit memory addressing?
Somebody might have, but Apple didn't.
Mac OS 9 was incapable of seeing more than 1.5GB of physical RAM, so there was no point.