I agree with you but I can also see Apple's viewpoint which is
"We're spending considerable resources to support a platform that should eventually diminish with each new refresh"
I thought creating UB apps would be easy but considering the growing amount of apps I see coming that are Intel only I think the facts are adding PPC support is more difficult and some developers are focsing on people with more recent Macs. It's not necessarily right or wrong but it is what it is.
I don't think that it the difficulty of creating UB apps. I thnk it is the expense and pain if doing QA on a second app which has a rapidly shrinking portion of the marketplace. A rapidly shrinking portion which has hardware that is not anywhere near as fast as current hardware.
That pair of issues makes for development headaches, because you either program to the speed of the lowest common user and forgo some nifty new potential features, or you make those features dog slow. Then you also need to do full testing against both architectures which takes a lot of resources too. Economically, is just doesn't make sense to make many spiffy new high-falutin' apps for users which have displayed reasons they don't want to spend on upgrades. Often they don't like spending for new software either. Those users with older HW have every right to sit comfortably where they are and expect a good 4-5 years of active OS development for their machines, but at some point that cuts off and then it's just maintenance/security updates.
The tech press would kill Apple if they came out with a new OS in early 2009 that dropped support for carbon apps and PPC hardware. It would be like Vista all over again.
Oh what's that? You bought a new OS and now none of your apps work? What? You can't install it on the hardware that you bought three years ago? Come on! Apple has been publically making fun of Vista because of these type of shortcomings.
And what about all of the Apple apps that use carbon? The Finder, iTunes, Final Cut Pro/Express and the rest of the Pro apps? The two biggest Mac developers, Adobe and Microsoft, most of their software won't work: Photoshop, Acrobat, InDesign, Office, MSN Messenger, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc.
Plus releasing an OS that focuses purely on performance, stability and security is like Apple admiting that Leopard was a huge mess.
Look at Tiger and Panther - people on these forums complained like crazy about all the bugs. Apple released *eleven* point updates for Tiger, and *nine* for Panther. That's where you take care of performance, stability and security - point updates.
Is there really and good reason to just drop carbon support? Look at all the trouble Apple went through to keep Classic going despite declaring OS9 "dead" - it stayed in the OS until 10.4. They added Rosetta just so that PPC apps would work under Intel.
Well answer me this if you can. I don't have the answer but perhaps others do.
Which Apple apps are 64 bit Cocoa apps? Is Apple ready to eat its own cooking here, provided the rumor IS accurate?
I don't think any are. Something tells me Leopard is close to offering a 64-bit system from Kernel to UI but there are probably "gotchas" here and there.
I think the scope of changes that Apple needs to make are beyond calling it 10.5.x
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro
I don't think that it the difficulty of creating UB apps. I thnk it is the expense and pain if doing QA on a second app which has a rapidly shrinking portion of the marketplace. A rapidly shrinking portion which has hardware that is not anywhere near as fast as current hardware.
Good point. Also if Apple charges say half the price for 10.6 but doesn't offer PPC support nor any real new whizzbang features the transgression could be excused for those that have been cut out.
I don't believe that 10.6 will be about just security and stability.
I see nothing wrong with Apple making substantive updates to various parts of
the OS. iCal could certainly use a UI makeover. I'd like Mail to improve in stability and featureset. Toss in Rez Ind and ZFS Read/Write support and polish the new API and you've got a worthy $70-80 upgrade for recent model Mac. PPC people could easily live on Leopard for another 16 months.
Doesn't anyone wonder why there are 19 TBA sessions for WWDC? THere's already alot of iPhone coverage listed. Methinks 10.6 and Apple's roadmap for Carbon/Cocoa, 32bit/64bit and PPC/Intel will be divulged.
The tech press would kill Apple if they came out with a new OS in early 2009 that dropped support for carbon apps and PPC hardware. It would be like Vista all over again.
Oh what's that? You bought a new OS and now none of your apps work? What? You can't install it on the hardware that you bought three years ago? Come on! Apple has been publically making fun of Vista because of these type of shortcomings.
And what about all of the Apple apps that use carbon? The Finder, iTunes, Final Cut Pro/Express and the rest of the Pro apps? The two biggest Mac developers, Adobe and Microsoft, most of their software won't work: Photoshop, Acrobat, InDesign, Office, MSN Messenger, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc.
Plus releasing an OS that focuses purely on performance, stability and security is like Apple admiting that Leopard was a huge mess.
Look at Tiger and Panther - people on these forums complained like crazy about all the bugs. Apple released *eleven* point updates for Tiger, and *nine* for Panther. That's where you take care of performance, stability and security - point updates.
Is there really and good reason to just drop carbon support? Look at all the trouble Apple went through to keep Classic going despite declaring OS9 "dead" - it stayed in the OS until 10.4. They added Rosetta just so that PPC apps would work under Intel.
Which is why it won't add any new features over the currently shipping version of Leopard, and most likely won't cost $129. It's an optional OS for those with the latest 64-bit Intel hardware that doesn't provide any new features. This is a great move for Apple. It let's both Apple and 3rd party developers work on a version of the OS that is free from legacy issues while not alienating anyone.
Apple is indeed well into the development of Mac OS X 10.6, which the company has internally code-named "Snow Leopard," according to ArsTechnica.
Citing a person familiar with the situation, the technology website confirms several details of the next major Mac OS X upgrade first reported on Tuesday, including a scheduled release as soon as Macworld 2009 this coming January, and that it will not introduce any major new features.
Instead, Snow Leopard is said to focus heavily on performance optimization and security, a move that will in all likelihood widen the gap between Mac OS X and Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system in those areas.
"Things like the MacBook Air, iPhone, iPod touch, and other mysterious devices that have yet to be announced need better performance for better battery life, and that's definitely something Apple wants to excel at in the years to come," wrote Ars' Jacqui Cheng.
Unconfirmed is whether the software will be shown off or discussed at the company's annual developers conference next week. However, AppleInsider in recent weeks has been told to expect discussion of "another big cat" at the event.
Also unconfirmed, but somewhat likely, is that Apple will completely wrap Snow Leopard in its Cocoa application programming interface (API) set, meaning that applications written via the company's legacy Carbon API will fail to run on the new system.
Adding corroboration to an AppleInsider report published last September, Ars adds that Mac OS X 10.6 is expected to support only Intel-based Macs, leaving owners of PowerPC-based systems of yesteryear out in the cold.
Update: Ars updates its report saying: "There may be some disagreement here as to what exactly "Cocoa-only" means, so take that into account when thinking about this. For example, Apple may only axe Carbon UI stuff."
For the Mac to break out of the mold it can't keep having to make it work on PPC as well.
It's like mom and dad forcing you take your little brother along with you everytime you walked out the door. Until he could handle his own, he was just a drag.
Anyway, I don't see any issues here. You have a choice to upgrade and most likely one wouldn't do it if there wasn't anything compelling to take advantage of it. Certainly, with Boot Camp, there is no reason that both X OS's couldn't or wouldn't be capable to run on the same machine.
And until Apple cuts the cord so to speak, we won't really see what the full power of OS X on an Intel Mac could be truly capable of.
The tech press would kill Apple if they came out with a new OS in early 2009 that dropped support for carbon apps and PPC hardware. It would be like Vista all over again.
Oh what's that? You bought a new OS and now none of your apps work? What? You can't install it on the hardware that you bought three years ago? Come on! Apple has been publically making fun of Vista because of these type of shortcomings.
And what about all of the Apple apps that use carbon? The Finder, iTunes, Final Cut Pro/Express and the rest of the Pro apps? The two biggest Mac developers, Adobe and Microsoft, most of their software won't work: Photoshop, Acrobat, InDesign, Office, MSN Messenger, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc.
Plus releasing an OS that focuses purely on performance, stability and security is like Apple admiting that Leopard was a huge mess.
Look at Tiger and Panther - people on these forums complained like crazy about all the bugs. Apple released *eleven* point updates for Tiger, and *nine* for Panther. That's where you take care of performance, stability and security - point updates.
Is there really and good reason to just drop carbon support? Look at all the trouble Apple went through to keep Classic going despite declaring OS9 "dead" - it stayed in the OS until 10.4. They added Rosetta just so that PPC apps would work under Intel.
How long are we supposed to give developers to move to Cocoa? Software can and should be updated. I'm not a big fan of hanging on too long to legacy apps. Microsoft routinely gets in trouble with the balance between supporting what today's people need and supporting yesterday's tools
If CS4 is Cocoa then problem solved. Apple surely is preparing their Pro apps for Cocoa as well. The reasons would likely involve the ability to get most developer on Cocoa which enables Apple to pour more resources into Cocoa to good effect. Carbon is for legacy apps and eventually legacy apps have to be modernized.
People complain about bugginess of Apple's OS but somehow fail to see the causal forces at work. Supporting Carbon and Cocoa just bifurcates the message and energy.
If this is really turns out to be a speed/stability release and drops support for PowerPC and/or Carbon, then I predict that they will position 10.6 as a concurrent alternative to 10.5.
This would also play into the code names.
If you want legacy, PowerPC, Carbon app support -- Leopard.
If you want the latest, greatest, fastest, and you have an Intel Mac, and you don't care about Carbon apps -- Snow Leopard.
Both developed, same features. Snow Leopard development serves as basis for future OS developments (10.7+, or 11). Leopard is last PowerPC release, but it is maintainted well into the double digits (e.g., 10.5.10+) for at least another 2-3 years.
Leopard to Snow Leopard upgrade price would not be $129. Maybe $49 or $69 -- it'd be hard to market a big upgrade price for no new features.
Anyway, that's how I can see it playing out judging just from the Ars article
Snow Leopard is a cool cat and it would be weird if they used it later after leopard came out and it makes sense to use it right afterwards. I kind of like the idea of an OS mainly made for making everything run smooth and speedy, but at the same time, I love new applications and changes.
LOL I'm still using Tiger on a iBook G4. Time to upgrade...
I missed seeing where the article said 10.6 was gonna cost $129. Perhaps a bit presumptive to assume it'll be the same price as OS upgrades in the past. (The bad news: it will probably cost more -- the jet fuel's gone through the roof.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon
who will pay $129 for no major new features and alot of now working older apps?
and no ppc or 32bit x86??
Apple better have a $800 - $2100 desktop system like they did back in the PPC days and the imacs screen is not good for photo work as well. The mini is over priced and weak.
also apple has good technology that makes Windows' 32/64bit support look bad so why dump it after one OS release?
It's about time that Apple realised that it has to polish and optimise the Mac OS, rather than adding layers of useless eye-candy.
If this is indeed true, I'll be at the front of the line come 10.6's release...
I agree, but I wouldn't pay for it. There has to be more to it than that. There's no "real strong" marketing angle there. No, I don't buy it.
Snow Leopard? The snow is multi-touch integration. It's a sure sign their tablet is coming. Mark my words. Otherwise it wouldn't come this soon and it wouldn't have Leopard in it's name. The adding on of a word onto Leopard suggests some icing on the cake if you will, a new layer on top. That will likely be a touch sensitive layer.
Good lord, Ireland, you're going to keep beating the tablet drum until one day you're right, aren't you? You're starting to sound like Dvorak re: Intel migration. "See! See! I was right!" Yeah, it only took a decade of being dead-wrong first...
We're marking your words, dear boy... oh yes, we are marking them.
I know that with leopard, everything was supposed to be unified gui wise, so why after 6 months are there still scroll bars from aqua in our interfaces...the only ones that changed, that i remember on the fly, are itunes and iPhoto...I want to see total unification of the user interface, different scroll bars looks kinda tacky. just my 2 cents. i think 10.6 without any visual upgrades or new programs would be a bad move an steves part. no one that doesn't completely love their mac would buy it.
It's an optional OS for those with the latest 64-bit Intel hardware that doesn't provide any new features. This is a great move for Apple. It let's both Apple and 3rd party developers work on a version of the OS that is free from legacy issues while not alienating anyone.
Question: I have an Intel Core Duo MacBook Pro... I think it was the second update of the line... anyway, if it's a 32bit system, will I be able to run 10.6? Rumor is that 10.6 is 64bit native. Or will my MacBook Pro become an oversized paperweight?
Stability would be the best Mac OS X feature EVER!
Finder improvements too, such as scrollable Fan-view, less is better in Finders column view, multiple menu bars for multiple monitor setups (I hate to say this but?something similar to XP will do).
Comments
I agree with you but I can also see Apple's viewpoint which is
"We're spending considerable resources to support a platform that should eventually diminish with each new refresh"
I thought creating UB apps would be easy but considering the growing amount of apps I see coming that are Intel only I think the facts are adding PPC support is more difficult and some developers are focsing on people with more recent Macs. It's not necessarily right or wrong but it is what it is.
I don't think that it the difficulty of creating UB apps. I thnk it is the expense and pain if doing QA on a second app which has a rapidly shrinking portion of the marketplace. A rapidly shrinking portion which has hardware that is not anywhere near as fast as current hardware.
That pair of issues makes for development headaches, because you either program to the speed of the lowest common user and forgo some nifty new potential features, or you make those features dog slow. Then you also need to do full testing against both architectures which takes a lot of resources too. Economically, is just doesn't make sense to make many spiffy new high-falutin' apps for users which have displayed reasons they don't want to spend on upgrades. Often they don't like spending for new software either. Those users with older HW have every right to sit comfortably where they are and expect a good 4-5 years of active OS development for their machines, but at some point that cuts off and then it's just maintenance/security updates.
The tech press would kill Apple if they came out with a new OS in early 2009 that dropped support for carbon apps and PPC hardware. It would be like Vista all over again.
Oh what's that? You bought a new OS and now none of your apps work? What? You can't install it on the hardware that you bought three years ago? Come on! Apple has been publically making fun of Vista because of these type of shortcomings.
And what about all of the Apple apps that use carbon? The Finder, iTunes, Final Cut Pro/Express and the rest of the Pro apps? The two biggest Mac developers, Adobe and Microsoft, most of their software won't work: Photoshop, Acrobat, InDesign, Office, MSN Messenger, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc.
Plus releasing an OS that focuses purely on performance, stability and security is like Apple admiting that Leopard was a huge mess.
Look at Tiger and Panther - people on these forums complained like crazy about all the bugs. Apple released *eleven* point updates for Tiger, and *nine* for Panther. That's where you take care of performance, stability and security - point updates.
Is there really and good reason to just drop carbon support? Look at all the trouble Apple went through to keep Classic going despite declaring OS9 "dead" - it stayed in the OS until 10.4. They added Rosetta just so that PPC apps would work under Intel.
Well answer me this if you can. I don't have the answer but perhaps others do.
Which Apple apps are 64 bit Cocoa apps? Is Apple ready to eat its own cooking here, provided the rumor IS accurate?
I don't think any are. Something tells me Leopard is close to offering a 64-bit system from Kernel to UI but there are probably "gotchas" here and there.
I think the scope of changes that Apple needs to make are beyond calling it 10.5.x
I don't think that it the difficulty of creating UB apps. I thnk it is the expense and pain if doing QA on a second app which has a rapidly shrinking portion of the marketplace. A rapidly shrinking portion which has hardware that is not anywhere near as fast as current hardware.
Good point. Also if Apple charges say half the price for 10.6 but doesn't offer PPC support nor any real new whizzbang features the transgression could be excused for those that have been cut out.
I don't believe that 10.6 will be about just security and stability.
I see nothing wrong with Apple making substantive updates to various parts of
the OS. iCal could certainly use a UI makeover. I'd like Mail to improve in stability and featureset. Toss in Rez Ind and ZFS Read/Write support and polish the new API and you've got a worthy $70-80 upgrade for recent model Mac. PPC people could easily live on Leopard for another 16 months.
Doesn't anyone wonder why there are 19 TBA sessions for WWDC? THere's already alot of iPhone coverage listed. Methinks 10.6 and Apple's roadmap for Carbon/Cocoa, 32bit/64bit and PPC/Intel will be divulged.
Indeed.
*cough*llvm*cough*
No way.
The tech press would kill Apple if they came out with a new OS in early 2009 that dropped support for carbon apps and PPC hardware. It would be like Vista all over again.
Oh what's that? You bought a new OS and now none of your apps work? What? You can't install it on the hardware that you bought three years ago? Come on! Apple has been publically making fun of Vista because of these type of shortcomings.
And what about all of the Apple apps that use carbon? The Finder, iTunes, Final Cut Pro/Express and the rest of the Pro apps? The two biggest Mac developers, Adobe and Microsoft, most of their software won't work: Photoshop, Acrobat, InDesign, Office, MSN Messenger, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc.
Plus releasing an OS that focuses purely on performance, stability and security is like Apple admiting that Leopard was a huge mess.
Look at Tiger and Panther - people on these forums complained like crazy about all the bugs. Apple released *eleven* point updates for Tiger, and *nine* for Panther. That's where you take care of performance, stability and security - point updates.
Is there really and good reason to just drop carbon support? Look at all the trouble Apple went through to keep Classic going despite declaring OS9 "dead" - it stayed in the OS until 10.4. They added Rosetta just so that PPC apps would work under Intel.
Which is why it won't add any new features over the currently shipping version of Leopard, and most likely won't cost $129. It's an optional OS for those with the latest 64-bit Intel hardware that doesn't provide any new features. This is a great move for Apple. It let's both Apple and 3rd party developers work on a version of the OS that is free from legacy issues while not alienating anyone.
Apple is indeed well into the development of Mac OS X 10.6, which the company has internally code-named "Snow Leopard," according to ArsTechnica.
Citing a person familiar with the situation, the technology website confirms several details of the next major Mac OS X upgrade first reported on Tuesday, including a scheduled release as soon as Macworld 2009 this coming January, and that it will not introduce any major new features.
Instead, Snow Leopard is said to focus heavily on performance optimization and security, a move that will in all likelihood widen the gap between Mac OS X and Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system in those areas.
"Things like the MacBook Air, iPhone, iPod touch, and other mysterious devices that have yet to be announced need better performance for better battery life, and that's definitely something Apple wants to excel at in the years to come," wrote Ars' Jacqui Cheng.
Unconfirmed is whether the software will be shown off or discussed at the company's annual developers conference next week. However, AppleInsider in recent weeks has been told to expect discussion of "another big cat" at the event.
Also unconfirmed, but somewhat likely, is that Apple will completely wrap Snow Leopard in its Cocoa application programming interface (API) set, meaning that applications written via the company's legacy Carbon API will fail to run on the new system.
Adding corroboration to an AppleInsider report published last September, Ars adds that Mac OS X 10.6 is expected to support only Intel-based Macs, leaving owners of PowerPC-based systems of yesteryear out in the cold.
Update: Ars updates its report saying: "There may be some disagreement here as to what exactly "Cocoa-only" means, so take that into account when thinking about this. For example, Apple may only axe Carbon UI stuff."
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Great move!
For the Mac to break out of the mold it can't keep having to make it work on PPC as well.
It's like mom and dad forcing you take your little brother along with you everytime you walked out the door. Until he could handle his own, he was just a drag.
Anyway, I don't see any issues here. You have a choice to upgrade and most likely one wouldn't do it if there wasn't anything compelling to take advantage of it. Certainly, with Boot Camp, there is no reason that both X OS's couldn't or wouldn't be capable to run on the same machine.
And until Apple cuts the cord so to speak, we won't really see what the full power of OS X on an Intel Mac could be truly capable of.
No way.
The tech press would kill Apple if they came out with a new OS in early 2009 that dropped support for carbon apps and PPC hardware. It would be like Vista all over again.
Oh what's that? You bought a new OS and now none of your apps work? What? You can't install it on the hardware that you bought three years ago? Come on! Apple has been publically making fun of Vista because of these type of shortcomings.
And what about all of the Apple apps that use carbon? The Finder, iTunes, Final Cut Pro/Express and the rest of the Pro apps? The two biggest Mac developers, Adobe and Microsoft, most of their software won't work: Photoshop, Acrobat, InDesign, Office, MSN Messenger, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc.
Plus releasing an OS that focuses purely on performance, stability and security is like Apple admiting that Leopard was a huge mess.
Look at Tiger and Panther - people on these forums complained like crazy about all the bugs. Apple released *eleven* point updates for Tiger, and *nine* for Panther. That's where you take care of performance, stability and security - point updates.
Is there really and good reason to just drop carbon support? Look at all the trouble Apple went through to keep Classic going despite declaring OS9 "dead" - it stayed in the OS until 10.4. They added Rosetta just so that PPC apps would work under Intel.
How long are we supposed to give developers to move to Cocoa? Software can and should be updated. I'm not a big fan of hanging on too long to legacy apps. Microsoft routinely gets in trouble with the balance between supporting what today's people need and supporting yesterday's tools
If CS4 is Cocoa then problem solved. Apple surely is preparing their Pro apps for Cocoa as well. The reasons would likely involve the ability to get most developer on Cocoa which enables Apple to pour more resources into Cocoa to good effect. Carbon is for legacy apps and eventually legacy apps have to be modernized.
People complain about bugginess of Apple's OS but somehow fail to see the causal forces at work. Supporting Carbon and Cocoa just bifurcates the message and energy.
This would also play into the code names.
If you want legacy, PowerPC, Carbon app support -- Leopard.
If you want the latest, greatest, fastest, and you have an Intel Mac, and you don't care about Carbon apps -- Snow Leopard.
Both developed, same features. Snow Leopard development serves as basis for future OS developments (10.7+, or 11). Leopard is last PowerPC release, but it is maintainted well into the double digits (e.g., 10.5.10+) for at least another 2-3 years.
Leopard to Snow Leopard upgrade price would not be $129. Maybe $49 or $69 -- it'd be hard to market a big upgrade price for no new features.
Anyway, that's how I can see it playing out judging just from the Ars article
LOL I'm still using Tiger on a iBook G4. Time to upgrade...
who will pay $129 for no major new features and alot of now working older apps?
and no ppc or 32bit x86??
Apple better have a $800 - $2100 desktop system like they did back in the PPC days and the imacs screen is not good for photo work as well. The mini is over priced and weak.
also apple has good technology that makes Windows' 32/64bit support look bad so why dump it after one OS release?
education is also still a big user of PPC.
That's the best thing I've heard in years.
It's about time that Apple realised that it has to polish and optimise the Mac OS, rather than adding layers of useless eye-candy.
If this is indeed true, I'll be at the front of the line come 10.6's release...
I agree, but I wouldn't pay for it. There has to be more to it than that. There's no "real strong" marketing angle there. No, I don't buy it.
Snow Leopard? The snow is multi-touch integration. It's a sure sign their tablet is coming. Mark my words. Otherwise it wouldn't come this soon and it wouldn't have Leopard in it's name. The adding on of a word onto Leopard suggests some icing on the cake if you will, a new layer on top. That will likely be a touch sensitive layer.
We're marking your words, dear boy... oh yes, we are marking them.
(But I hope you're right.
How about a more pro sounding name.
How about some loving for dogs... Labradoodle v.10.7
It's an optional OS for those with the latest 64-bit Intel hardware that doesn't provide any new features. This is a great move for Apple. It let's both Apple and 3rd party developers work on a version of the OS that is free from legacy issues while not alienating anyone.
Bingo. Hence the diverging bridges...
Bingo. Hence the diverging bridges...
I think the most obvious answer is the divergence in the SDK for Mac and iPhone/Touch platforms.
Good lord, Ireland, you're going to keep beating the tablet drum until one day you're right, aren't you?
Yes. But ultimately it's Apple who's going to come round to my thinking
Finder improvements too, such as scrollable Fan-view, less is better in Finders column view, multiple menu bars for multiple monitor setups (I hate to say this but?something similar to XP will do).