WWDC and the future of APPLE

1101113151622

Comments

  • Reply 241 of 436
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,445member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    <snip> QT is quite possibly the one single most important strategic weapon in Apple's technological arsenal, and I don't think I'm exaggerating.



    I don't think you're exaggerating at all. QT is the engine in which Apple builds such nifty applications. I don't think Final Cut Pro can really add the necessary changes for the future without a new healthy QT update.



    I definitely see QT breaking out and becoming more of a "must have" technology. I see it perhaps being used in other devices like STB and mobile devices. I would be happy with WWDC is only two products really shine. One is Tiger the other is QT.



    If QT7 is a monster that I hope. Then WWDC 2004 sets off the "Big Bang" of new apps and technology coming to our platform. Usher in Mac multimedia 21st century style.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 242 of 436
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    So much hype. I'll be so disappointed if we don't get a sneak peak of QT7 at WWDC now.



    Hopefully QT7 = rewrite. Hopefully, it'll come with Tiger as a major feature. And hopefully, H264 will be done and it'll be part of QT7 when Tiger ships.



    I'd pay for Tiger *JUST* to get QT7...just like I paid for Panther for Exposé.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 243 of 436
    limtclimtc Posts: 82member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kim kap sol

    So much hype. I'll be so disappointed if we don't get a sneak peak of QT7 at WWDC now.



    Hopefully QT7 = rewrite. Hopefully, it'll come with Tiger as a major feature. And hopefully, H264 will be done and it'll be part of QT7 when Tiger ships.



    I'd pay for Tiger *JUST* to get QT7...just like I paid for Panther for Exposé.




    QT 7 should works with older OS X version too, or else it will limits itself (and all the applications depend on it) to just 10.4, and developers won't use it. Our application, for example, required support of 10.2 and above, asking users to upgrade to 10.4 in order to use it will not be realistics. But I think this is probably the time to drop OS 9 support.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 244 of 436
    limtclimtc Posts: 82member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SS3 GokouX

    If QuickTime is getting a major rewrite, I think a beta version of QT7 would be necessary. There's just too many apps out there now that utilize QT. It would hurt lots of developers if Apple released a final version QT7 without notice and killed tons of applications functionality.



    The QT6 beta seemed to have been a success, and if this is a huge update we all hope it to be, Apple is gonna need lots of feedback to fix bugs.




    When Apple goes from Java 1.3 to 1.4, which is a rewrite from Carbon to Cocoa, it lets both of them exists. The QuickTime for Java rewrite that completely change the framework, also lets the API stays but deprecated. I think this will be the same for QT 7.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 245 of 436
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    I think you're confusing forward and backward compatibility...



    Backwards compatibility: 10.4 will include QT6 libraries such that older QT API apps will still work.



    Forwards compatibility: QT7 will most likely *not* work on 10.2, and only *maybe* on 10.3. Apps written to a new QT7 API will *require* 10.4.



    I think this is completely reasonable.



    New/massively updated apps using the new APIs (probably) require an OS upgrade. Old apps still work on the new OS version.



    The only people left out are those that want the new apps, but don't want to upgrade the OS. Well, they have a choice to make.



    As for the hype: there isn't any. This is all complete speculation. Nobody knows what QT7 will look like, when it will come out, or what it will include. We *suspect* that it will be a reentrant, threadsafe version, which will require a substantial rewrite from the ground up. Add in the desire to ditch the old OS 9 memory code, and it becomes a whole new product. Also add in the borderline necessity in making a Cocoa (or at least OO) API, and it suddenly is a huge task. These are things we suspect will be in there, and that we'd *like* to see... but nobody knows if they'll be in there, and especially not when.



    Anyone getting their hopes up for WWDC/QT7 is either too young to have gone through this circus enough times to get jaded, or too naive to learn from previous years.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 246 of 436
    rolorolo Posts: 686member
    AFAIK, Apple won't have a satellite broadcast of WWDC on Monday so the stores won't carry it. Maybe a Webcast? Could Apple intro any new HW if there won't be a store event? Does this mean no G5 iMacs at WWDC?



    I checked the Apple store online today and you can get a 20" iMac shipped same biz day.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 247 of 436
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    Anyone getting their hopes up for WWDC/QT7 is either too young to have gone through this circus enough times to get jaded, or too naive to learn from previous years.



    I've been trying to properly express that sentence for years now.



    My hopes up, but only because by maintaining reasonable expectations, I am seldom let down.



    It's likely (but not certain) that we'll see a preview of QT7 in the keynote with a public beta available immediately or in a few months. Then, it'll be at least another 6 months before the final. And that's if we're lucky. But still, this will be enough to entertain me. Like I need QT7 to enjoy life or earn a living.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 248 of 436
    ionyzionyz Posts: 491member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Rolo

    AFAIK, Apple won't have a satellite broadcast of WWDC on Monday.



    Yeah, thats really upsetting. I have a sat dish ready to go
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 249 of 436
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler

    I've been trying to properly express that sentence for years now.



    My hopes up, but only because by maintaining reasonable expectations, I am seldom let down.



    It's likely (but not certain) that we'll see a preview of QT7 in the keynote with a public beta available immediately or in a few months. Then, it'll be at least another 6 months before the final. And that's if we're lucky. But still, this will be enough to entertain me. Like I need QT7 to enjoy life or earn a living.




    6 months before the final? Does that mean

    no Tiger for the next 6 months? If QT7 isn't one of 10.4's major features, it would be disappointing.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 250 of 436
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member
    I don't understand how a new iMac could be introduced without a broadcast.

    That's throwing away millions of dollars of free press around the world.



    What's Quicktime TV and the xServe for, if not times like this?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 251 of 436
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    I don't understand how a new iMac could be introduced without a broadcast.

    That's throwing away millions of dollars of free press around the world.



    What's Quicktime TV and the xServe for, if not times like this?




    the people who watch these things know about their release the second it is announced anyway and most dont need convincing. its usually only a couple thousand people anyway, not much.



    it saves apple money to just tape it and post it as a on demand stream later the same day
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 252 of 436
    ensign pulverensign pulver Posts: 1,193member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    it saves apple money to just tape it and post it as a on demand stream later the same day



    So why have they broadcasted them dozens of times before? Apple suddenly can't afford the cost?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 253 of 436
    ionyzionyz Posts: 491member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ensign Pulver

    So why have they broadcasted them dozens of times before? Apple suddenly can't afford the cost?



    Right. We were tuned in to last years WWDC and recorded it to a few tapes for some friends. I'd love to sit at work watching it live this year... \
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 254 of 436
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ensign Pulver

    So why have they broadcasted them dozens of times before? Apple suddenly can't afford the cost?



    im talking the live streams. the keynotes/special events are always satelite fed. whether or not the coordinates are made public is another thing. a couple years ago WWDC keynote was a private satelite feed.



    it all depends on the year. either way, every single time one of these comes around people get all bent out of shape. apple announced it very close to the actual day. just way and see. if nothing is announced expect an on demand stream late afternoon from apple
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 255 of 436
    snipesnipe Posts: 97member
    There is two ways to look at no announcement (so far) of sat feed of SJ keynote



    glass half empty crowd: says if it was a big announcement they would

    have billboarded this event live on QT and Sat weeks in advance.



    glass half full crowd: says SJ want to shock the world with new stuff

    and will wait till close to the date to announce QT and sat co-ordinates



    I'm with the latter crowd as I cannot see SJ coming out to address a couple

    of thousand developers and show ''Tiger'' and a sub 2ghz iMac. He realizes

    that it is his LACK of public appearances that make his addresses such

    a media event.

    btw last time I looked Sat transponder time on C band was only $18,000 an hour so they can probably afford it



    pps Thanks Kormac77 always the most interesting read on any Mac fourm
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 256 of 436
    jamiljamil Posts: 210member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TWinbrook46636

    Apple has several prototypes that have been shelved. Of course, one of them could evolve into something else as has happened in the past. The fact is, most of the hardware Apple works on doesn't make it to market. They do incorporate parts of them into devices that do however and they learn quite a few things along the way as well. People would be amazed at the stuff they don't release though.



    Now, how do you know this or the Q71/79 stuff? is this inside info or speculation as well?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 257 of 436
    existenceexistence Posts: 991member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    I think you're confusing forward and backward compatibility...



    Backwards compatibility: 10.4 will include QT6 libraries such that older QT API apps will still work.



    Forwards compatibility: QT7 will most likely *not* work on 10.2, and only *maybe* on 10.3. Apps written to a new QT7 API will *require* 10.4.



    I think this is completely reasonable.



    New/massively updated apps using the new APIs (probably) require an OS upgrade. Old apps still work on the new OS version.



    The only people left out are those that want the new apps, but don't want to upgrade the OS. Well, they have a choice to make.



    As for the hype: there isn't any. This is all complete speculation. Nobody knows what QT7 will look like, when it will come out, or what it will include. We *suspect* that it will be a reentrant, threadsafe version, which will require a substantial rewrite from the ground up. Add in the desire to ditch the old OS 9 memory code, and it becomes a whole new product. Also add in the borderline necessity in making a Cocoa (or at least OO) API, and it suddenly is a huge task. These are things we suspect will be in there, and that we'd *like* to see... but nobody knows if they'll be in there, and especially not when.



    Anyone getting their hopes up for WWDC/QT7 is either too young to have gone through this circus enough times to get jaded, or too naive to learn from previous years.




    So there won't be a QT 7 for Windows? Apple might as well take QT out back and shoot it in the head.



    If it works with Windows, it should work with anything north of OS 9.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 258 of 436
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Existence

    So there won't be a QT 7 for Windows? Apple might as well take QT out back and shoot it in the head.



    If it works with Windows, it should work with anything north of OS 9.




    You have technical data to back that assertion up?



    There's 'should work' and there's 'should work without an unreasonable amount of excess work and maintenance'.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 259 of 436
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Existence

    So there won't be a QT 7 for Windows? Apple might as well take QT out back and shoot it in the head.



    If it works with Windows, it should work with anything north of OS 9.




    Uh, no. Early versions of OS X were missing fairly basic functionality at the system level. CoreAudio, for example, still wasn't done when Panther shipped, which is why there's been such a delay getting non-Apple music apps ported. In Apple's defense, it's not at all easy to get time-critical code running on a preemptive kernel, and it's obviously taken much longer than they thought it would to get OS X solid as a next-generation multimedia architecture.



    Windows limped through the same building-up phase with NT 3 and 4, and to a lesser extent 2000. 2000 and XP should be capable of handling QT 7. Everything else will probably be orphaned along with earlier OS X's and MacOS, and for the same reasons.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 260 of 436
    sam damonsam damon Posts: 129member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Existence

    So there won't be a QT 7 for Windows? Apple might as well take QT out back and shoot it in the head.



    If it works with Windows, it should work with anything north of OS 9.




    I'm with Kickaha on this; I see 10.2 support going away, unless something funny happens. I'd view 10.3 support as very likely indeed.



    As for the dark side, keep in mind iTMS only works with Win 2K and XP. I would expect the same for QT 7.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.