I normally wait for 10.x.2, but I'll probably jump on 10.5.1 because I've been waiting for Resolution Independence since before OpenStep.
Hmmm. All references to resolution independence seem to have been removed from Apple's Leopard website pages. Does this mean it has been dropped after all?
Leopard is in fact quite stable and it looks like it's "good to go". Some people however might have to do a "clean install" to eliminate some bugs. MS Office for the Mac also does some funky things in Leopard. It will make October I think but get ready for lots of updates.
Are we going to see a new PowerMac to go with the release of Leopard? Isn?t there always a new Mac that comes out with a new OS be it laptop or desktop?
Are we going to see a new PowerMac to go with the release of Leopard? Isn?t there always a new Mac that comes out with a new OS be it laptop or desktop?
PowerMac? Be nice if there would be a new Mac Pro.
It would be nice, seeing as Apple won't creat a mid-tower, if Apple would use smaller disks like the 2.5" SAS disks. Then they could slim down the MacPro enclosure without sacrificing power. It would be nice, but I'm dreaming right?
It would be nice, seeing as Apple won't creat a mid-tower, if Apple would use smaller disks like the 2.5" SAS disks. Then they could slim down the MacPro enclosure without sacrificing power. It would be nice, but I'm dreaming right?
I think it's dreaming because the hard drives aren't a major factor that determine the size of the machine. Something else would have to change too. Not only that, you lose about 80% of your data capacity doing that, costing the same, and for what, louder hard drives?
Could that possibly mean that the door is open for potential unanounced features, like major UI change or the like? Or are we going to get what we see now?
We get what we see. If there is an internal release, it's only to test bug fixes before they send it out to the developers to test. Sometimes they try out a new feature to see if it works before sending it out to the developers. It amounts to the same thing.
The reason for Safari on Windows is not just to familiarize microsofties with Apple software or to provide Apple fans who are forced to do windows with a familiar browser, but to help ensure that sites are developed with Safari compatibility.
There's a bit of an argument about that one.
Some opinions are that Apple is trying to familiarize Windows users with Apple's software, more than with just iTunes, in the hope that they will like it, thusly, encouraging them to switch.
Apple put themselves in a bind, though, because Windows users are used to having all four side of a window to work with, while Apple is stingy in that regard.
Apple is also using Webkit to encourage developers to do web sites in a more standard fashion.
It would be nice, seeing as Apple won't creat a mid-tower, if Apple would use smaller disks like the 2.5" SAS disks. Then they could slim down the MacPro enclosure without sacrificing power. It would be nice, but I'm dreaming right?
Not time yet for those small, slow things. Maybe in another year, or two. They would have to go to 10,000 rpm to give equal access times, and transference speeds.
Hmmm. All references to resolution independence seem to have been removed from Apple's Leopard website pages. Does this mean it has been dropped after all?
This better not be the case. Anyone else have reason to believe that they have dropped RI. (is it still in the newest beta?)
Comments
I normally wait for 10.x.2, but I'll probably jump on 10.5.1 because I've been waiting for Resolution Independence since before OpenStep.
Hmmm. All references to resolution independence seem to have been removed from Apple's Leopard website pages. Does this mean it has been dropped after all?
I thought RI and ZFS didn't make the cut.
Dodgeball! I wondered where that clip came from.
All references to resolution independence seem to have been removed from Apple's Leopard website pages. Does this mean it has been dropped after all?
That would be very disappointing. Independence Resolution and Time Machine were the only features I was looking forward to.
MS Office for the Mac also does some funky things in Leopard.
Why would anyone want to use MS Office for the Mac? NeoOffice is much better in my experience.
^^^^
I thought RI and ZFS didn't make the cut.
ZFS is in, but not default. RI has not been recently commented on.
Actually we're both wrong, SOME G4's aren't supported.
* Intel processor or a PowerPC G4 (867 MHz or faster) or G5 processor
* DVD drive
* Built-in FireWire
* At least 512 MB of RAM (additional RAM is recommended for development purposes)
* A built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied video card supported by your computer
* At least 7 GB of disk space available, or 12 GB of disk space if you install the developer tools
So the eMacs, some early iMacs, and some of the g4 towers won't be supported... according to the current requirements on these seeds.
Let's make it clear. You can't get a "support contract" with anything less than those specs.
The OS will run fine on G4 machines and above.
Are we going to see a new PowerMac to go with the release of Leopard? Isn?t there always a new Mac that comes out with a new OS be it laptop or desktop?
PowerMac? Be nice if there would be a new Mac Pro.
PowerMac? Be nice if there would be a new Mac Pro.
Of course that's what I meant.
I am ready for a new tower.
Of course that's what I meant.
I am ready for a new tower.
It would be nice, seeing as Apple won't creat a mid-tower, if Apple would use smaller disks like the 2.5" SAS disks. Then they could slim down the MacPro enclosure without sacrificing power. It would be nice, but I'm dreaming right?
It would be nice, seeing as Apple won't creat a mid-tower, if Apple would use smaller disks like the 2.5" SAS disks. Then they could slim down the MacPro enclosure without sacrificing power. It would be nice, but I'm dreaming right?
I think it's dreaming because the hard drives aren't a major factor that determine the size of the machine. Something else would have to change too. Not only that, you lose about 80% of your data capacity doing that, costing the same, and for what, louder hard drives?
Could that possibly mean that the door is open for potential unanounced features, like major UI change or the like? Or are we going to get what we see now?
We get what we see. If there is an internal release, it's only to test bug fixes before they send it out to the developers to test. Sometimes they try out a new feature to see if it works before sending it out to the developers. It amounts to the same thing.
Actually we're both wrong, SOME G4's aren't supported.
* Intel processor or a PowerPC G4 (867 MHz or faster) or G5 processor
* DVD drive
* Built-in FireWire
* At least 512 MB of RAM (additional RAM is recommended for development purposes)
* A built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied video card supported by your computer
* At least 7 GB of disk space available, or 12 GB of disk space if you install the developer tools
So the eMacs, some early iMacs, and some of the g4 towers won't be supported... according to the current requirements on these seeds.
Some of that isn't true. They just say that for liability purposes.
The part about the Apple supplied video card is one of those.
The reason for Safari on Windows is not just to familiarize microsofties with Apple software or to provide Apple fans who are forced to do windows with a familiar browser, but to help ensure that sites are developed with Safari compatibility.
There's a bit of an argument about that one.
Some opinions are that Apple is trying to familiarize Windows users with Apple's software, more than with just iTunes, in the hope that they will like it, thusly, encouraging them to switch.
Apple put themselves in a bind, though, because Windows users are used to having all four side of a window to work with, while Apple is stingy in that regard.
Apple is also using Webkit to encourage developers to do web sites in a more standard fashion.
It would be nice, seeing as Apple won't creat a mid-tower, if Apple would use smaller disks like the 2.5" SAS disks. Then they could slim down the MacPro enclosure without sacrificing power. It would be nice, but I'm dreaming right?
Not time yet for those small, slow things. Maybe in another year, or two. They would have to go to 10,000 rpm to give equal access times, and transference speeds.
Hmmm. All references to resolution independence seem to have been removed from Apple's Leopard website pages. Does this mean it has been dropped after all?
This better not be the case. Anyone else have reason to believe that they have dropped RI. (is it still in the newest beta?)
This better not be the case. Anyone else have reason to believe that they have dropped RI. (is it still in the newest beta?)
It is indeed the case. They hope to bring it in around x.2 or x.3