They'll have to charge for Snow Leopard because some people like me will likely skip Leopard and go straight onto it. I was a bit disappointed with Leopard. I expected the performance to be much improved over Tiger. IMO Snow Leopard will be what Leopard should have been on Intel.
But I guess the legacy PPC support dragged them down and they couldn't avoid making Leopard for PPC. Plus the whole focus on the iphone didn't help.
Which parts? The shared Finder preview panel? ExtendedTouchSwitch doesn't refer to touch displays. Changes to the Apple displays software could hint at updated Apple displays though.
SingleSignOnTools is a server log - is this OS X Server he's running? I've never really understood why Apple even have two products. OS X comes bundled with Apache, Kerberos etc so why not just have it as a configuration option on a single installer disc?
Is mid-2009 confirmed or just speculated? I guess they shouldn't have to delay it like last time. 10.5 previewed in June 2006 and scheduled for Spring (March-May) 2007 release. It didn't actually arrive until October 2007.
If it's just an optimization release with few new features and less legacy support required then I don't see why they couldn't release in January 2009.
Look for the API calls and specifically the ObjC syntax calls. Lots of references to deprecated behavior being replaced in a future version.
the information in the Console.app is quite interesting.
Yup. Lots of deprecated calls, even in use by Finder!
I also noticed there's a YahooSync Framework mentioned in System Profiler. So, it looks like it'll sync with more than just Exchange.
Apple saying 'no new features, just performance/stability' is clearly wrong - they seem to be adding in all the iPhone 2.0 enterprise features and changes they made in the iPhone OS.
What?- a whole new OS just to make the iPhone compatible with Windows Exchange?
Whatever.
How in the world did you come to *that* conclusion??
No, nevermind, I don't want to know.
To the non-programmers in the crowd: this is not a 'performance tweak'. This is a rewrite.
Consider you've written a book for sale. It gets published, and over time, it needs some updates as typos and small grammatical errors are found. Those are bug fixes, like 10.5.2 -> 10.5.3. Every so often, you write a new chapter and stick it on the end. Those are feature releases, like 10.4 -> 10.5.
Now your editor comes to you and says "This is great, but you've lost the flow of the book completely with all these new chapters on the end - the beginning chapters no longer make sense. You're going to have to rewrite the entire book to make it cohesive and understandable." You're looking at probably the same amount of work ahead of you now, as what you put in to write the entire book in the first place.
That's what Apple is doing in 10.6.
So... should you give away your completely rewritten book for free, given that there's 'no new content'?
That is what just came to mind, I mean really why worry about Snow leopard at this point. What ever one sees of it now is not guaranteed to be there upon release. Further such a product is always subject to revision.
The only really glaring item that I see here is that Apple was very confident about being able to speed up leopard to go public with any sort of comment related to performance at this early stage. It looks like they have been doing a lot of research, probably in conjunction with iphone, and have identified significant improvement possibilities.
Dave
MacWorld just had a podcast round table (http://www.macworld.com/article/1340...odcast124.html) with a group of Mac developers who are developing iPhone apps. They were all in agreement that writing iPhone apps was changing the way they were writing MacIntosh apps. For the better. It would be no surprise that Apple is finding the same lessons with the OS.
Maybe last years delay while the OS developers were pulled off the OS to work the iPhone is coming back to the benefit the OS.
I don't think we should get hung up too much on whether their are new features or not, Whether we have to pay or not, whether it is €130 0r €50 or whatever.
The main purpose of Snow Leopard 10.6 is to make the OS so much better going into the future. I don't think Apple are trying to hide anything and are being up front and honest. I reckon a lot of people won't need the update at all. Many buy Macs and never update to the newer systems, unless they need to as a requirement for new software.
Those that need the performance increases for certain tasks will probably buy 10.6 as part of the necessary/natural evolution of their setup. It will be like an everyday expense. I think that users who really require these improvements in the system appreciate the hard work being done and are willing to pay for that.
I don't think Apple will care if we don't all run out to get 10.6. What their focus will be mainly on will be seeing 10.6 pre-loaded on new Macs where it will really impress. The next OS where Apple will be looking for a rush to purchase will be 10.7 (or whatever its called) when they get back to adding features. Apple have indicated that they are slowing down in the frequency of OS releases. Give them a break. They can't always be churning out great ideas.
The one thing I wish Apple would do though is re-introduce one or two things that disappeared from the system going from Tiger to Leopard. And I would like them back in this OS, not one we have to pay for.
I can report Safari 4 does work in some web based text editors that previous versions didn't. I still get the old warning that the text editor doesn't support my web browser but whereas Safari 3 failed Safari 4 is fine.
Oh shiii...SEKRIT APIS. 64-bit Carbon shouldn't exist. Yet the Finder can be launched in 32-bit mode? NO! This is utter bullshit.
This is either:
a) Fake
b) A bug that shows 32-bit mode even though the Finder actually is running in 32-bit mode (yet Activity Monitor says it's running in 64-bit mode)
c) Secret APIs that nobody has access to except Apple
d) a Cocoa Finder (which suspiciously looks exactly like the Carbon Leopard Finder)
I know Apple...I know the Finder team is composed of retarded monkeys...this isn't a Cocoa Finder, the Finder team isn't competent enough to produce a Cocoa Finder in such little time that looks and feels like the current Finder (and why would they copy something when they have a chance to start with a clean slate) so we can safely rule d out. The screenshot is most likely not fake...so it's either b or c. Which is it? Is Apple really flexing their 64-bit Carbon APIs in front of Adobe and MS's faces or has Apple actually written an exact replica of the Carbon Finder in Cocoa? Either answer would disappoint me to no end.
I'm a Mac Guy from years back. I had to switch to Windows to do Business in the corporate world.
This ALL JUST SEEMS A LITTLE TO FAMILIAR TO VISTA. THE ALL SAVING UPGRADE.
WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR WINDOWS X.X TO FIX IT BUT I'M STILL ON XP.
You sound like a Windows guy!
SL will be not a saving upgrade, but an entirely new architecture upgrade allowing the company a new direction rather than trying to fix an old tired architecture (like Windows).
The upgrade price will be more than justifiable, and i do hope Apple does not give in with support for G5s. I will miss my G5, but that will last until the wrapping is off the SL OS.
I applaud Apple for this move and will show my vote at the register (which they don't have \)
Comments
They'll have to charge for Snow Leopard because some people like me will likely skip Leopard and go straight onto it. I was a bit disappointed with Leopard. I expected the performance to be much improved over Tiger. IMO Snow Leopard will be what Leopard should have been on Intel.
But I guess the legacy PPC support dragged them down and they couldn't avoid making Leopard for PPC. Plus the whole focus on the iphone didn't help.
Which parts? The shared Finder preview panel? ExtendedTouchSwitch doesn't refer to touch displays. Changes to the Apple displays software could hint at updated Apple displays though.
SingleSignOnTools is a server log - is this OS X Server he's running? I've never really understood why Apple even have two products. OS X comes bundled with Apache, Kerberos etc so why not just have it as a configuration option on a single installer disc?
Is mid-2009 confirmed or just speculated? I guess they shouldn't have to delay it like last time. 10.5 previewed in June 2006 and scheduled for Spring (March-May) 2007 release. It didn't actually arrive until October 2007.
If it's just an optimization release with few new features and less legacy support required then I don't see why they couldn't release in January 2009.
Look for the API calls and specifically the ObjC syntax calls. Lots of references to deprecated behavior being replaced in a future version.
the information in the Console.app is quite interesting.
Yup. Lots of deprecated calls, even in use by Finder!
I also noticed there's a YahooSync Framework mentioned in System Profiler. So, it looks like it'll sync with more than just Exchange.
Apple saying 'no new features, just performance/stability' is clearly wrong - they seem to be adding in all the iPhone 2.0 enterprise features and changes they made in the iPhone OS.
http://theunixgeek.blogspot.com/2008...-4-review.html
and I'm on Leopard
I also noticed there's a YahooSync Framework mentioned in System Profiler. So, it looks like it'll sync with more than just Exchange.
YahooSync was introduced with 10.4.10. Your Address Book can already do that.
Changes to the Apple displays software could hint at updated Apple displays though.
hasnt almost everything hinted at that.. for far too long
YahooSync was introduced with 10.4.10. Your Address Book can already do that.
I'd not noticed that. Cool. I hope they're spreading it further than just Address Book though.
I have to say that I am already anxious for Snow Leopard. The new Safari icon is brilliant.
I'd love if that was the new icon.
Whatever.
Vista 0sx
or "XP forever, baby!"
What?- a whole new OS just to make the iPhone compatible with Windows Exchange?
Whatever.
How in the world did you come to *that* conclusion??
No, nevermind, I don't want to know.
To the non-programmers in the crowd: this is not a 'performance tweak'. This is a rewrite.
Consider you've written a book for sale. It gets published, and over time, it needs some updates as typos and small grammatical errors are found. Those are bug fixes, like 10.5.2 -> 10.5.3. Every so often, you write a new chapter and stick it on the end. Those are feature releases, like 10.4 -> 10.5.
Now your editor comes to you and says "This is great, but you've lost the flow of the book completely with all these new chapters on the end - the beginning chapters no longer make sense. You're going to have to rewrite the entire book to make it cohesive and understandable." You're looking at probably the same amount of work ahead of you now, as what you put in to write the entire book in the first place.
That's what Apple is doing in 10.6.
So... should you give away your completely rewritten book for free, given that there's 'no new content'?
That is what just came to mind, I mean really why worry about Snow leopard at this point. What ever one sees of it now is not guaranteed to be there upon release. Further such a product is always subject to revision.
The only really glaring item that I see here is that Apple was very confident about being able to speed up leopard to go public with any sort of comment related to performance at this early stage. It looks like they have been doing a lot of research, probably in conjunction with iphone, and have identified significant improvement possibilities.
Dave
MacWorld just had a podcast round table (http://www.macworld.com/article/1340...odcast124.html) with a group of Mac developers who are developing iPhone apps. They were all in agreement that writing iPhone apps was changing the way they were writing MacIntosh apps. For the better. It would be no surprise that Apple is finding the same lessons with the OS.
Maybe last years delay while the OS developers were pulled off the OS to work the iPhone is coming back to the benefit the OS.
The main purpose of Snow Leopard 10.6 is to make the OS so much better going into the future. I don't think Apple are trying to hide anything and are being up front and honest. I reckon a lot of people won't need the update at all. Many buy Macs and never update to the newer systems, unless they need to as a requirement for new software.
Those that need the performance increases for certain tasks will probably buy 10.6 as part of the necessary/natural evolution of their setup. It will be like an everyday expense. I think that users who really require these improvements in the system appreciate the hard work being done and are willing to pay for that.
I don't think Apple will care if we don't all run out to get 10.6. What their focus will be mainly on will be seeing 10.6 pre-loaded on new Macs where it will really impress. The next OS where Apple will be looking for a rush to purchase will be 10.7 (or whatever its called) when they get back to adding features. Apple have indicated that they are slowing down in the frequency of OS releases. Give them a break. They can't always be churning out great ideas.
The one thing I wish Apple would do though is re-introduce one or two things that disappeared from the system going from Tiger to Leopard. And I would like them back in this OS, not one we have to pay for.
To the non-programmers in the crowd: this is not a 'performance tweak'. This is a rewrite.
If this is true, then exactly what is being rewritten? All of the frameworks? Wouldn't a rewrite on this scale take quite a while?
If this is true, then exactly what is being rewritten? All of the frameworks? Wouldn't a rewrite on this scale take quite a while?
It's not a rewrite but a reimplementation that has been developed, in parallel, and ready to be put in when business markets deem it right.
You can choose 32-bit mode if you wish
Oh shiii...SEKRIT APIS. 64-bit Carbon shouldn't exist. Yet the Finder can be launched in 32-bit mode? NO! This is utter bullshit.
This is either:
a) Fake
b) A bug that shows 32-bit mode even though the Finder actually is running in 32-bit mode (yet Activity Monitor says it's running in 64-bit mode)
c) Secret APIs that nobody has access to except Apple
d) a Cocoa Finder (which suspiciously looks exactly like the Carbon Leopard Finder)
I know Apple...I know the Finder team is composed of retarded monkeys...this isn't a Cocoa Finder, the Finder team isn't competent enough to produce a Cocoa Finder in such little time that looks and feels like the current Finder (and why would they copy something when they have a chance to start with a clean slate) so we can safely rule d out. The screenshot is most likely not fake...so it's either b or c. Which is it? Is Apple really flexing their 64-bit Carbon APIs in front of Adobe and MS's faces or has Apple actually written an exact replica of the Carbon Finder in Cocoa? Either answer would disappoint me to no end.
I'm a Mac Guy from years back. I had to switch to Windows to do Business in the corporate world.
This ALL JUST SEEMS A LITTLE TO FAMILIAR TO VISTA. THE ALL SAVING UPGRADE.
WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR WINDOWS X.X TO FIX IT BUT I'M STILL ON XP.
You sound like a Windows guy!
SL will be not a saving upgrade, but an entirely new architecture upgrade allowing the company a new direction rather than trying to fix an old tired architecture (like Windows).
The upgrade price will be more than justifiable, and i do hope Apple does not give in with support for G5s. I will miss my G5, but that will last until the wrapping is off the SL OS.
I applaud Apple for this move and will show my vote at the register (which they don't have