10.3 Panther may not include "Piles"....that's right, although Apple has done research into using the frequently discussed Piles, which are collections of files somewhat like a folder -- a cluster of icons which can be looked at quickly to determine the collection's contents, unlike a folder which has a standardized icon giving no hint as to the contents -- we have been lucky enough to see an early build of Panther that has many new features, some of which are surprising, but there is no support for Piles in the Finder as it stands as of last week's builds.
No kidding!
Quote:
What we saw in the brief few minutes our reporters were allowed to play with Panther is pretty heavily embargoed until more details of Panther become public, but for the time being we can definitely say that Panther is significantly faster across the board than Jaguar (10.2.x) on any system. As with previous releases, the differences are significantly greater on dual-processor systems with modern (Radeon or GeForce) AGP graphics cards....but they are quite noticeable even on the original Bondi Blue iMac G3/233. In all, we got to see Panther in action on seven separate Macs ranging from that iMac to Powerbook G3s and G4s, as well as a dual 1.42GHz PowerMac G4 and a Dual 1.33GHz Xserve. An install was attempted on a PowerMac 9600/200MP which has ran all the previous versions of Mac OS X...and we were surprised to discover that Panther simply would not install -- the installation CD would have a severe kernel panic on boot every time, whereas there was not a single problem with any other of the seven systems we installed Panther upon.
What's the f***in point of telling us this. "We have seen this and that, but sorry - can't tell you about it." And they only had a "few minutes" to play with panther but were allowed to install it on seven systems?? sounds strange
Quote:
More details will be published throughout the week on Panther as well as Apple's use of the PowerPC 970.
Yeah, right!
Quote:
Not only might not the 970 be called a "G5" (Apple may drop the label altogether, calling chips by their names -- new chips in the PPC 750 family from IBM will exceed 1GHz, include 512K-1MB of on-chip L2 cache, and eventually even include a Velocity Engine unit, dropping the Altivec name as Motorola is wiped completely out of Apple's system lineup).....it may show up in Powerbooks a lot sooner than once thought. There's still a chance it might take a little longer than the PowerMacs and Xserves, but the Powerbook will not only move to PowerPC 970 processors very quickly....it may even employ dual PPC 970 processors as well as an impressively updated system architecture in the 17-inch Powerbook as soon as next January.
There's noting in this update form MOSR that havent been discussed on these boards before, and they bring no new wood to the fire. It would have been easier if they have just disappeared altogether. I almost had a wish that their website being down was going to be a permanent thing.
Originally scheduled for May 19-23 in San Jose, the 2003 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) will now be held June 23-27 at San Francisco's Moscone Center. Apple made this change in order to prepare for the next version of its Macintosh operating system, code named "Panther." Panther will mark the third significant upgrade to Mac OS X since its debut. LoopRumors has been hard at work gathering information about the upcoming feline. Here's part two of what we've learned:
[list=a][*]Themes. When Apple introduced OS X to the world, they didn't only retire its predecessor OS 9, they also retired a feature known as themes. These themes were both visual and audible. Sources say we'll see the return of themes with sounds.
[*]User Switching. Unlike Log Out, where the user logs out and all applications quit and documents save, the switching feature allows users to log into their own identity and resume operation with open applications and documents. Talk of user log in with Voice print speech recognition will return to Panther.
[*]More Dock Features. The dock will have smart grouping. Documents from the same program will be grouped together in the Dock.
[*]Piles? Since our last report on Piles, we have heard arguments and reeived evidence that Piles may in fact not be a feature in the new OS. The jury is still out on this feature and time will tell. Piles are definitely being worked on at Apple and development is practically completely refined, but many conflicting reports and some solid evidence that Piles may not see the light of day in Panther.
[*]iChat 2.0. We keep hearing that this will be the best feature to come with Panther. We've already reported on videoconferencing technology and additional features in iChat 2.0, but our sources maintain that iChat will be .
[*]Speed. With most new versions of Macintosh Operating Systems, Apple has touted speed. Panther will be no exception. Speed increase will play a major part of Panther's overall performance, from start-up to system performance, and launching applications.
[*]Safari 1.0. The Safari web browser will be included as golden master. The feedback bug will be eliminated. Support for third party plug-ins will be integrated right into the app.
[*]Mail 2.0. Mail will see some major changes. Among them, better support for HTML and animated graphics. Enhanced anti-spam features and return receipt feature built-in.[/list=a]
[list=a][*]Themes: I dont think themes are all that likely, but it would be cool to have an option were you could turn pinstripes off/on. User definable finder text-size would also be cool. [*]User Switching. I would very much like this feature to become part of panther. Very useful on XP.[*]More Dock Features. Grouping sounds useful, but I hope it's not going to work in the same way grouping in XP does. [*]Piles? Well, time will show. I only think this was a rumor that originated outside of Apple, and is not based on "real" leaks anyway. It sound like a cool feature, at least to impress possible switchers, but if it adds to the user experiense is still to be seen. [*]iChat 2.0. If iChat 2.0 is going to be "the best feature", well then it isn't looking too promising for panther. I hope iChat 2.0 to be cool, but I hope there will be other features that eclipses iChat 2.0. [*]Speed. More of an educated guess than insider information I think. However, speed is good, and I expect panther to do slightly better than jagwyre. Not that it will be all that important with the 970 coming out soon [*]Safari 1.0. This is a given. [*]Mail 2.0. This is also very likely. [/list=a]
Hmm. LoopRumors hasn't exactly brought much new information to us with this update. All this "information" is no more than good guess-work in my book. One would have thought that something completely "new" information would have surfaced by now, but sadly it has not. Well I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Hmm. LoopRumors hasn't exactly brought many new information to us with this update. All this "information" is no more than good guess-work in my book. One would have thought that something completely "new" information would have surfaced by now, but sadly it has not. Well I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
I read both their rumors on Panther and was quite let down. Not really much there in my opinion. The good news is that the looprumors information is rumor.
Everything like... iTunes? The best iApp out there (IMHO), and it has been and continues to be Carbon. How about Reason or Shake? Both Carbon.
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Apple is constantly improving Cocoa...and Carbon is always a few steps behind. The Finder with a Cocoa interface would be in tune with what Apple has been doing in the past year: moving their software to Cocoa.
Nonsense. The most important applications for MacOS X have been, and continue to be, Carbon applications. Photoshop. Illustrator. Word. Office. Excel. PowerPoint. Quark XPress (when it comes out), and the list goes on and on.
Apple has a very vested interest in continuing to improve Carbon, and they have been actively doing just that.
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Apple is pushing developers to use Cocoa at this point. Carbon was great for OS 9 apps that needed porting to OS X...but Apple makes it clear that new projects or rewrites should be in Cocoa.
This is not true. Apple is not pushing developers to use Cocoa. Apple is offering developers as many API choices as is reasonably possible.
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
The Finder is in bad shape. Very bad shape. A rewrite in Cocoa would probably solve LOTS of problems as opposed to trying to heal a fatally wounded Carbon Finder...not because it's Cocoa, but because a rewrite would allow Apple to start fresh with things like a a new filesystem in mind as opposed to tacking it on as a hack to the existing Finder.
This untrue. It would be the worst waste of time imaginable for Apple to rewrite the Finder in Cocoa. iPhoto and iCal are both Cocoa -- they are also both dogs when it comes to performance. Cocoa is an API, not a panacea.
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
But let's face it folks...Cocoa allows for toolbars, drawers and quite a few neat-o things coming in 10.3 that won't be available to Carbon developers. Carbon and Cocoa may be unifying more and more but Apple says Cocoa should be used from now on, so why not bite the bullet and follow Apple's words of wisdom.
Apple does NOT say this. Indeed, it would be laughed at if they did.
I'm sick of hearing people saying there are no difference between Carbon and Cocoa. I'm sick of hearing people say that Carbon and Cocoa are merging. They're not...you can have Carbon events in inside a Cocoa app but the two aren't merging.
Cocoa is the future. Carbon will stay but won't get improved.
When the Cocoa aspects offer improved functionality or performance over the carbon portions of the code, Adobe will switch to Cocoa. It will not happen overnight, but it will happen, I predict.
And a very wonderful one that allows devs to spend less time on the little things.
I'm sorry but iTunes is not 'the best one' (in reference to the best carbon app.) It's poorly threaded, takes awhile to launch and is full of little (unpleasant) surprises. It's a decent app...but if this is the 'the best one', oh boy.
Why would rewriting the Finder be a waste of time? Was rewriting iDVD in Cocoa a waste of time? Was rewriting iMovie in Cocoa a waste of time? Java 1.4.1...oops...waste of time too.
Rewriting allows for things to be rethought out and improved on.
Apple is definitely moving to Cocoa. There are still quite a few apps that haven't moved to Cocoa yet but Apple's getting there.
Cocoa is 'just an API', true...but a damn good one that Apple would rather concentrate their efforts on.
Here...lemme twist your quote around..."It would be the worst waste of time imaginable for Apple to continue improving Carbon when they could continue to improve Cocoa."
I think Apple's biggest nightmare so far is getting both Carbon and Cocoa to look and feel the same. This hasn't happened yet. Maybe 10.3? I doubt it...but I hope *you* can prove me wrong, moki my boy.
I can't tell the difference between nib-based carbon and cocoa apps which use the standard interface objects in Jaguar.
Cocoa is much easier for lots of people. Like me. But can you imaging porting Photoshop to cocoa? Or Quark? These are HUGE applications.
There is even advantages to carbon, because if an application is properly optimized carbon can be FASTER than cocoa!
But that's all irrelevant, because you're missing the point. Why should anyone REWRITE anything in cocoa? Carbon is perfectly good from a user's perspective, and unless you're writing something from scratch and are equally fluent in carbon and cocoa programming, in many cases better from a programmer's perspective.
yea but iTunes has had like 5 times more development time than any other iApp. The closest one to iTunes is iMovie, and that was ported to Cocoa (also became a much better app when this was done)
But it wasn't cocoa that made it a better app interface/feature wise. iMovie 3 a rewrite, which made sense because Apple wanted a radically different and improved application (and presumably the original codebase wasn't flexible enough). Cocoa is great for getting things done fast in many cases and others have that pointed out. However, because of this rewrite it is not optimal speed wise. It will take a few more updates for it to be as optimized as the old carbon version.
Cocoa is good for some things. Carbon is good for some things. Swing is good for some things. Moki's very fond of saying "choices are good", and there's a reason this is so. Because having different ways to program makes X suitable for the development of more stuff.
Comments
So I take it by your post costique that you believe they will upgrade their ENTIRE hardware line so that they can put Panther on some rinky dink G3s?
I would believe however that Panther will be even more G4 optimised than Jaguar already is, but not working at all on a G3?
Oi.
--PB
Originally posted by PosterBoy
Uh, sorry but Not having Panther workable on a G3 would just be silly. Apple's business sense may be clouded, but it isn't non-existant.
OMG! Is this still being discussed!!! Panther WILL work on G3's!!!
.
From MOSR
Monday, May 19 2:37 AM
10.3 Panther may not include "Piles"....that's right, although Apple has done research into using the frequently discussed Piles, which are collections of files somewhat like a folder -- a cluster of icons which can be looked at quickly to determine the collection's contents, unlike a folder which has a standardized icon giving no hint as to the contents -- we have been lucky enough to see an early build of Panther that has many new features, some of which are surprising, but there is no support for Piles in the Finder as it stands as of last week's builds.
No kidding!
What we saw in the brief few minutes our reporters were allowed to play with Panther is pretty heavily embargoed until more details of Panther become public, but for the time being we can definitely say that Panther is significantly faster across the board than Jaguar (10.2.x) on any system. As with previous releases, the differences are significantly greater on dual-processor systems with modern (Radeon or GeForce) AGP graphics cards....but they are quite noticeable even on the original Bondi Blue iMac G3/233. In all, we got to see Panther in action on seven separate Macs ranging from that iMac to Powerbook G3s and G4s, as well as a dual 1.42GHz PowerMac G4 and a Dual 1.33GHz Xserve. An install was attempted on a PowerMac 9600/200MP which has ran all the previous versions of Mac OS X...and we were surprised to discover that Panther simply would not install -- the installation CD would have a severe kernel panic on boot every time, whereas there was not a single problem with any other of the seven systems we installed Panther upon.
What's the f***in point of telling us this. "We have seen this and that, but sorry - can't tell you about it." And they only had a "few minutes" to play with panther but were allowed to install it on seven systems?? sounds strange
More details will be published throughout the week on Panther as well as Apple's use of the PowerPC 970.
Yeah, right!
Not only might not the 970 be called a "G5" (Apple may drop the label altogether, calling chips by their names -- new chips in the PPC 750 family from IBM will exceed 1GHz, include 512K-1MB of on-chip L2 cache, and eventually even include a Velocity Engine unit, dropping the Altivec name as Motorola is wiped completely out of Apple's system lineup).....it may show up in Powerbooks a lot sooner than once thought. There's still a chance it might take a little longer than the PowerMacs and Xserves, but the Powerbook will not only move to PowerPC 970 processors very quickly....it may even employ dual PPC 970 processors as well as an impressively updated system architecture in the 17-inch Powerbook as soon as next January.
There's noting in this update form MOSR that havent been discussed on these boards before, and they bring no new wood to the fire. It would have been easier if they have just disappeared altogether. I almost had a wish that their website being down was going to be a permanent thing.
Originally posted by Brad
You bumped this falling thread just to yell at the other participants and add nothing substantial?
Eh, sorry
I'm too lazy to read an ENTIRE thread.
sheesh.
Panther details part II
Originally scheduled for May 19-23 in San Jose, the 2003 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) will now be held June 23-27 at San Francisco's Moscone Center. Apple made this change in order to prepare for the next version of its Macintosh operating system, code named "Panther." Panther will mark the third significant upgrade to Mac OS X since its debut. LoopRumors has been hard at work gathering information about the upcoming feline. Here's part two of what we've learned:
[list=a][*]Themes. When Apple introduced OS X to the world, they didn't only retire its predecessor OS 9, they also retired a feature known as themes. These themes were both visual and audible. Sources say we'll see the return of themes with sounds.
[*]User Switching. Unlike Log Out, where the user logs out and all applications quit and documents save, the switching feature allows users to log into their own identity and resume operation with open applications and documents. Talk of user log in with Voice print speech recognition will return to Panther.
[*]More Dock Features. The dock will have smart grouping. Documents from the same program will be grouped together in the Dock.
[*]Piles? Since our last report on Piles, we have heard arguments and reeived evidence that Piles may in fact not be a feature in the new OS. The jury is still out on this feature and time will tell. Piles are definitely being worked on at Apple and development is practically completely refined, but many conflicting reports and some solid evidence that Piles may not see the light of day in Panther.
[*]iChat 2.0. We keep hearing that this will be the best feature to come with Panther. We've already reported on videoconferencing technology and additional features in iChat 2.0, but our sources maintain that iChat will be .
[*]Speed. With most new versions of Macintosh Operating Systems, Apple has touted speed. Panther will be no exception. Speed increase will play a major part of Panther's overall performance, from start-up to system performance, and launching applications.
[*]Safari 1.0. The Safari web browser will be included as golden master. The feedback bug will be eliminated. Support for third party plug-ins will be integrated right into the app.
[*]Mail 2.0. Mail will see some major changes. Among them, better support for HTML and animated graphics. Enhanced anti-spam features and return receipt feature built-in.[/list=a]
Hmm. LoopRumors hasn't exactly brought much new information to us with this update. All this "information" is no more than good guess-work in my book. One would have thought that something completely "new" information would have surfaced by now, but sadly it has not. Well I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Originally posted by NETROMac
Hmm. LoopRumors hasn't exactly brought many new information to us with this update. All this "information" is no more than good guess-work in my book. One would have thought that something completely "new" information would have surfaced by now, but sadly it has not. Well I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
I read both their rumors on Panther and was quite let down. Not really much there in my opinion. The good news is that the looprumors information is rumor.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Why? Apple is clearly moving everything to Cocoa.
Everything like... iTunes? The best iApp out there (IMHO), and it has been and continues to be Carbon. How about Reason or Shake? Both Carbon.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Apple is constantly improving Cocoa...and Carbon is always a few steps behind. The Finder with a Cocoa interface would be in tune with what Apple has been doing in the past year: moving their software to Cocoa.
Nonsense. The most important applications for MacOS X have been, and continue to be, Carbon applications. Photoshop. Illustrator. Word. Office. Excel. PowerPoint. Quark XPress (when it comes out), and the list goes on and on.
Apple has a very vested interest in continuing to improve Carbon, and they have been actively doing just that.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Apple is pushing developers to use Cocoa at this point. Carbon was great for OS 9 apps that needed porting to OS X...but Apple makes it clear that new projects or rewrites should be in Cocoa.
This is not true. Apple is not pushing developers to use Cocoa. Apple is offering developers as many API choices as is reasonably possible.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
The Finder is in bad shape. Very bad shape. A rewrite in Cocoa would probably solve LOTS of problems as opposed to trying to heal a fatally wounded Carbon Finder...not because it's Cocoa, but because a rewrite would allow Apple to start fresh with things like a a new filesystem in mind as opposed to tacking it on as a hack to the existing Finder.
This untrue. It would be the worst waste of time imaginable for Apple to rewrite the Finder in Cocoa. iPhoto and iCal are both Cocoa -- they are also both dogs when it comes to performance. Cocoa is an API, not a panacea.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
But let's face it folks...Cocoa allows for toolbars, drawers and quite a few neat-o things coming in 10.3 that won't be available to Carbon developers. Carbon and Cocoa may be unifying more and more but Apple says Cocoa should be used from now on, so why not bite the bullet and follow Apple's words of wisdom.
Apple does NOT say this. Indeed, it would be laughed at if they did.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
I'm sick of hearing people saying there are no difference between Carbon and Cocoa. I'm sick of hearing people say that Carbon and Cocoa are merging. They're not...you can have Carbon events in inside a Cocoa app but the two aren't merging.
Cocoa is the future. Carbon will stay but won't get improved.
End of ****ing story.
You are incorrect.
Originally posted by jccbin
When the Cocoa aspects offer improved functionality or performance over the carbon portions of the code, Adobe will switch to Cocoa. It will not happen overnight, but it will happen, I predict.
I'll take that bet. It is not going to happen.
Originally posted by Chucker
11. What's wrong with Grap.app?
Ahh, we need to get you to see the light:
http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/utilities/snapzprox/
Originally posted by moki
Cocoa is an API, not a panacea.
And a very wonderful one that allows devs to spend less time on the little things.
I'm sorry but iTunes is not 'the best one' (in reference to the best carbon app.) It's poorly threaded, takes awhile to launch and is full of little (unpleasant) surprises. It's a decent app...but if this is the 'the best one', oh boy.
Why would rewriting the Finder be a waste of time? Was rewriting iDVD in Cocoa a waste of time? Was rewriting iMovie in Cocoa a waste of time? Java 1.4.1...oops...waste of time too.
Rewriting allows for things to be rethought out and improved on.
Apple is definitely moving to Cocoa. There are still quite a few apps that haven't moved to Cocoa yet but Apple's getting there.
Cocoa is 'just an API', true...but a damn good one that Apple would rather concentrate their efforts on.
Here...lemme twist your quote around..."It would be the worst waste of time imaginable for Apple to continue improving Carbon when they could continue to improve Cocoa."
I think Apple's biggest nightmare so far is getting both Carbon and Cocoa to look and feel the same. This hasn't happened yet. Maybe 10.3? I doubt it...but I hope *you* can prove me wrong, moki my boy.
Cocoa is much easier for lots of people. Like me. But can you imaging porting Photoshop to cocoa? Or Quark? These are HUGE applications.
There is even advantages to carbon, because if an application is properly optimized carbon can be FASTER than cocoa!
But that's all irrelevant, because you're missing the point. Why should anyone REWRITE anything in cocoa? Carbon is perfectly good from a user's perspective, and unless you're writing something from scratch and are equally fluent in carbon and cocoa programming, in many cases better from a programmer's perspective.
Barto
Originally posted by kim kap sol
I'm sorry but iTunes is not 'the best one' (in reference to the best carbon app.
He said the best iApp.
Cocoa is good for some things. Carbon is good for some things. Swing is good for some things. Moki's very fond of saying "choices are good", and there's a reason this is so. Because having different ways to program makes X suitable for the development of more stuff.
Barto