OK--how about some really wild speculation? (Not as wild as an Apple Tablet, IMHO, but wild, anyway?)
Everybody expects the next generation of laptops to be like fat MBAs, and probably the very next ones will be, but consider: wrapping the MacBook at least in aluminum takes away the color-coding Apple is so fond of. You know: MacBooks come in "Look-at-me-I'm-a-cheapskate" white or "Look-at-me-I've-got-more-money-than-sense" black. What if these pictures we're seeing of the new iPhone are not disinformation, but this is the future: rounded, white or black, plastic or ceramic cases. Anybody but me remember the "Snow" iMac? That's probably what this new design reminds the Apple people of, too, so they code-named the new upgrade "Snow Leopard" because it's designed to run on these new (next back-to-school season?) laptops with a lot of touch features built into the screens? I think touch screens on desktop computers would be ludicrous, but on a laptop, where the screen is no farther away than the keyboard, they make a lot of sense. I think we can expect future laptops to make very heavy use of Cocoa Touch, and maybe they'll get their own touch-centric OS to take advantage of it.
Meanwhile, Microsoft has everybody sitting at their desk, stretching their arms straight out, working their vertical Surface? screens.
OK--how about some really wild speculation? (Not as wild as an Apple Tablet, IMHO, but wild, anyway?)
Everybody expects the next generation of laptops to be like fat MBAs, and probably the very next ones will be, but consider: wrapping the MacBook at least in aluminum takes away the color-coding Apple is so fond of. You know: MacBooks come in "Look-at-me-I'm-a-cheapskate" white or "Look-at-me-I've-got-more-money-than-sense" black. What if these pictures we're seeing of the new iPhone are not disinformation, but this is the future: rounded, white or black, plastic or ceramic cases. Anybody but me remember the "Snow" iMac? That's probably what this new design reminds the Apple people of, too, so they code-named the new upgrade "Snow Leopard" because it's designed to run on these new (next back-to-school season?) laptops with a lot of touch features built into the screens? I think touch screens on desktop computers would be ludicrous, but on a laptop, where the screen is no farther away than the keyboard, they make a lot of sense. I think we can expect future laptops to make very heavy use of Cocoa Touch, and maybe they'll get their own touch-centric OS to take advantage of it.
Meanwhile, Microsoft has everybody sitting at their desk, stretching their arms straight out, working their vertical Surface™ screens.
A Microsoft spokesperson recently said about Surface:
Quote:
We don't want to be in the furniture business.
So they are slipping away from the surface it looks like. And they are slipping away from the camera tracking your fingers for touch thing too it looks like, they are going more down the Apple route.
I don't think adding a touch screen to a regular notebook is a good idea. When they are ready to do that they'll likely make a notebook like this with a screen that twists around and can be put flat (but with a hardware keyboard):
Though I still think they'll make a tablet computer first with no twist screen and no hardware keyboard.
Just a 10" slab with some sort of flip-out rest on the back for placing the device on a table at a comfortable angle.
"Leopard previewed 2 years ago. Snow leopard will show this year and release winter 2009. When MS releases Windows 7 to laughs and tears, Apple will release Lion for the kill."
If this rumour turns out to be true. Surely the update must be free. Who is going to pay to update when all you are getting is better performance and better security. The update is even less interesting than the update from XP to Vista. Most people will wait until 10.7.
Yeah, it is way too soon for an update at MacWorld 2009. They should take all that optimization and wrap it in one of the minor releases of Leopard and call that Snow Leopard. I'd bet that's what they are doing. This won't be a major upgrade nor cost anything.
If this rumour turns out to be true. Surely the update must be free. Who is going to pay to update when all you are getting is better performance and better security. The update is even less interesting than the update from XP to Vista. Most people will wait until 10.7.
I'm surprised so many people are thinking this way.
Who will pay for it? Professionals. And they'll think it is the greatest damn OS upgrade Apple has ever released (if Apple puts the same energy into optimizing the OS they would have put into new features). I am, personally, thrilled to hear this news. I depend on my computer to get things done quickly and reliably, and anything that aids in this task is more than welcome and easily worth a full OS upgrade fee (it wouldn't take long for it to pay for itself). I think the $69 mini-upgrade idea is the best way to go about this.
But if Photoshop isn't available, among others, I can't upgrade.
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer. Based on this history it is there will be no 10.6 at MacWorld SF January 2009.(thought i think this is a possibility for jan 2010). I'm betting on WWDC June 2010 being the ship time for 10.6. This would put it at 32 months of development time.
So far as the end of the PowerPC, i agree with this given a June 2010 estimated ship date for 10.6. However, I doubt they'll kill 32 bit intel support until 10.7. They were still shipping some 32 bit systems as of mid 07 at least. (Mac Mini) Then again they are Apple so they may bone the 32 bit users but I'm gonna put my money on 64 bit only at 10.7.
Bottom-line, 10.6 at WWDC June 2010 with Intel only support, 32 bit, 64 bit.
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer.
But those aren't the only things to consider. There was an interview with Steve Jobs a few months ago where he said he wants to shorten the development cycle. If that's true, then don't count on a longer wait.
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer. Based on this history it is there will be no 10.6 at MacWorld SF January 2009.(thought i think this is a possibility for jan 2010). I'm betting on WWDC June 2010 being the ship time for 10.6. This would put it at 32 months of development time.
So far as the end of the PowerPC, i agree with this given a June 2010 estimated ship date for 10.6. However, I doubt they'll kill 32 bit intel support until 10.7. They were still shipping some 32 bit systems as of mid 07 at least. (Mac Mini) Then again they are Apple so they may bone the 32 bit users but I'm gonna put my money on 64 bit only at 10.7.
Bottom-line, 10.6 at WWDC June 2010 with Intel only support, 32 bit, 64 bit.
10.7 with 64 bit only support.
This is a reasonable guess.
That would be reasonable if 10.6 offered major new features. From what we rumour right now, its mostly a re-adjustment of the OS focusing on performance, improving the core, and so on. We're looking at Leopard SP1 so to speak - that's why its "Snow Leopard". So Jan 2009 is very reasonable. 14-15 months to get that done - definitely.
I wonder if Snow Leopard won't be a lightweight version of OSX that will run nicely on Netbooks and Nettops that Intel are touting at Computex. IIRC, Atom is a 64 bit cpu. Perhaps this would go into a revised mini with Snow Leopard as the OS. However, these Nettop and Netbook systems are generally priced at the very low end of the market. An area that Apple hasn't historically shown a lot of interest in.
But this is the hottest area of the market right now and Windows really isn't well positioned here. Vista and Windows 7 are never going to compete in this space. MS is using xp to work on these machines.
Maybe it won't be $129, if there are no new features and No PPC and it's called Snow Leopard after Leopard, it may just be an add on for intel users. Say $50 to enhance intel Macs by using only hardware found in new Macs. Kind of like Microsoft did back in the Windows 98 days, you can get 98 and then windows plus (or whatever they called it)
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?
Don't forget that the 30 months between Tiger and Leopard also included a transition to Intel which should be included. And I believe Jobs said he wanted to shorten the release times so 14 months wouldn't be outrageous, even with new features.
You may want to wait for the rumor to be substantiated before you light the torches, grab your pitch forces and summon the town folk.
The only way I can see this as happening is if Apple creates a 2nd OS?like Snow Leopard?that is for NEW 64-bit Intel Macs that is built alongside the normal upgrade path as their other systems. This way, new Macs, which are all 64-bit and Intel can benefit from the streamlined OS development that comes from not having to support 4 different architectures.
If this is done with HW authentication chips onboard then in 4-5 years Apple can then move everything to 64-bit Intel OS that is streamlined, with less R&D needed as it only needs to support one architecture and will make it harder for OSx86 Project developers.
I will say this. Apple SOLD quite a few PPC computers to people right before they came out with Intel systems. If you think people who bought computers just over two years ago are going to take this lying down, you are mistaken. If Apple discontinued the PPc support 5 years after Intel was intro'd, so be it. It's not time yet. Leopard isn't even fully cooked yet. Apple SOLD me a $3200 Powerbook days before the Intel announcement. I should expect that they will not give their customers the shaft.
Also, "Snow Leopard (if that's the real name)" has no business being a paid for OS release if all it does is optimize and secure the system better. That is a service pack, point release, bug fix, etc. Surely Apple does not think its customers are total idiots, because that is what they are saying if they try to SELL it to you. It should be a free download. AND it should support PPC. No doubt about it.
Maybe it won't be $129, if there are no new features and No PPC and it's called Snow Leopard after Leopard, it may just be an add on for intel users. Say $50 to enhance intel Macs by using only hardware found in new Macs. Kind of like Microsoft did back in the Windows 98 days, you can get 98 and then windows plus (or whatever they called it)
If this rumour is true in any way, I'd expect it to be a build that is mainly for new Intel Macs. They come with install discs that only work their models anyway. But Apple would still support older machines on about a 5 year cycle so the next major release wold have to have two flavours, one with code for multiple types of machines and the one with code only for 64-bit Intel Macs.
Yeah, it is way too soon for an update at MacWorld 2009. They should take all that optimization and wrap it in one of the minor releases of Leopard and call that Snow Leopard. I'd bet that's what they are doing. This won't be a major upgrade nor cost anything.
You're missing the main point though. Leopard has a certain amount of features and a baselline level of support. APIs can be tweaked during the evolutionary process but Apple really can't "take" anything away. The rumors for 10.6 are that Apple is going to make some definitive moves towards removing support in some areas and optimizing the remaining supported hardware. If they were to drop PPC support they certainly couldn't market Leopard as the 50% PPC supported OS. Tech support nightmare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by duel1ghz
There is no reason to expect 10.6 in January 09.
OS X 10.0 = March 2001
OS X 10.1 = September 2001 - 6 months
OS X 10.2 = August 2002 - 11 months
OS X 10.3 = October 2003 - 14 months
OS X 10.4 = April 2005 - 18 months
OS X 10.5 = October 2007 - 30 months
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer. Based on this history it is there will be no 10.6 at MacWorld SF January 2009.(thought i think this is a possibility for jan 2010). I'm betting on WWDC June 2010 being the ship time for 10.6. This would put it at 32 months of development time.
So far as the end of the PowerPC, i agree with this given a June 2010 estimated ship date for 10.6. However, I doubt they'll kill 32 bit intel support until 10.7. They were still shipping some 32 bit systems as of mid 07 at least. (Mac Mini) Then again they are Apple so they may bone the 32 bit users but I'm gonna put my money on 64 bit only at 10.7.
Bottom-line, 10.6 at WWDC June 2010 with Intel only support, 32 bit, 64 bit.
10.7 with 64 bit only support.
This is a reasonable guess.
You're neglecting to mention some salient data that explains the delay.
10.4 was the first OS that enabled support for Intel based Macintosh. Clearly that would increase the amount of work involved in developing Tiger as Apple is now developing and testing two distinct hardware platforms.
10.5 Leopard marks Apple's push into different platforms with the Apple TV and iPhone and potentiall yet another platform due this year.
One cannot take the data you've presented and extrapolate it anything meaningful without having a better historical context of the platform(s) involved.
I think your numbers are way off. Apple is NOT going to support PPC for another 2yrs from this WWDC.
I'm surprised so many people are thinking this way.
Who will pay for it? Professionals. And they'll think it is the greatest damn OS upgrade Apple has ever released (if Apple puts the same energy into optimizing the OS they would have put into new features). I am, personally, thrilled to hear this news. I depend on my computer to get things done quickly and reliably, and anything that aids in this task is more than welcome and easily worth a full OS upgrade fee (it wouldn't take long for it to pay for itself). I think the $69 mini-upgrade idea is the best way to go about this.
But if Photoshop isn't available, among others, I can't upgrade.
That is a bunch of crap.
I am a professional and I will NOT pay for a bug fix/service pack/ point release, just because it has a code name and pretty packaging.
If apple goes this route, it destroys the good faith its customers have in them. Apple - the company that went out on a limb to try to get rid of DRM and keep a sales model instead of subscription. Apple, the SECURE hardware/ software company who's products "JUST WORK" - yeah right -- if they go this way, they are no better than MS (sure it will work - so long as you keep paying for the same thing - over... and over... and over...) If Apple does this, screw them.
You have a very foolhardy mentality here my freind. to quote you:
I depend on my computer to get things done quickly and reliably, and anything that aids in this task is more than welcome and easily worth a full OS upgrade fee (it wouldn't take long for it to pay for itself).
i think not. If you depend on your Mac to get just work, then Apple needs to make their OS jsut do it. You have already paid for it. You should not need to pay again, just so it does what it was supposed to already do in the first place. think for a second, man.
Apple will ahve the mindless drones who will agree with everything they do and even come up with some psycho rationale for it all (courtesy of the RDF factor). the rest of us will see through it and either hold off on purchases, or simply just become less enthused with the once shining knight of the computing industry. Paying for service packs is a bad trend to start. Don't drink the Kool-Aid so fast my friend.
That would be reasonable if 10.6 offered major new features. From what we rumour right now, its mostly a re-adjustment of the OS focusing on performance, improving the core, and so on. We're looking at Leopard SP1 so to speak - that's why its "Snow Leopard". So Jan 2009 is very reasonable. 14-15 months to get that done - definitely.
the 10.5.X are mini SP so calling it SP1 will not fit in may call in Leopard SE / Leopard reloaded M$ was going to have a XP reloaded but that turned into SP2.
I'll never understood why people get worked up over rumours. Seriously, you're only looking at a portion of the information - there's no way to know 10.6 won't have any major features for sure. Why are people getting their knickers in a twist when it might not even be true at all? You truly think Apple would do something as big as stop Carbon apps and not tell the big publishers? If it's true it's a safe bet Adobe and co have known for some time.
Apple is not stupid. They do not randomly go around killing compatibility for some of the biggest professional applications. At the very least it would be a message to some developers to stop clinging to completely Carbon apps.
Comments
Everybody expects the next generation of laptops to be like fat MBAs, and probably the very next ones will be, but consider: wrapping the MacBook at least in aluminum takes away the color-coding Apple is so fond of. You know: MacBooks come in "Look-at-me-I'm-a-cheapskate" white or "Look-at-me-I've-got-more-money-than-sense" black. What if these pictures we're seeing of the new iPhone are not disinformation, but this is the future: rounded, white or black, plastic or ceramic cases. Anybody but me remember the "Snow" iMac? That's probably what this new design reminds the Apple people of, too, so they code-named the new upgrade "Snow Leopard" because it's designed to run on these new (next back-to-school season?) laptops with a lot of touch features built into the screens? I think touch screens on desktop computers would be ludicrous, but on a laptop, where the screen is no farther away than the keyboard, they make a lot of sense. I think we can expect future laptops to make very heavy use of Cocoa Touch, and maybe they'll get their own touch-centric OS to take advantage of it.
Meanwhile, Microsoft has everybody sitting at their desk, stretching their arms straight out, working their vertical Surface? screens.
OK--how about some really wild speculation? (Not as wild as an Apple Tablet, IMHO, but wild, anyway?)
Everybody expects the next generation of laptops to be like fat MBAs, and probably the very next ones will be, but consider: wrapping the MacBook at least in aluminum takes away the color-coding Apple is so fond of. You know: MacBooks come in "Look-at-me-I'm-a-cheapskate" white or "Look-at-me-I've-got-more-money-than-sense" black. What if these pictures we're seeing of the new iPhone are not disinformation, but this is the future: rounded, white or black, plastic or ceramic cases. Anybody but me remember the "Snow" iMac? That's probably what this new design reminds the Apple people of, too, so they code-named the new upgrade "Snow Leopard" because it's designed to run on these new (next back-to-school season?) laptops with a lot of touch features built into the screens? I think touch screens on desktop computers would be ludicrous, but on a laptop, where the screen is no farther away than the keyboard, they make a lot of sense. I think we can expect future laptops to make very heavy use of Cocoa Touch, and maybe they'll get their own touch-centric OS to take advantage of it.
Meanwhile, Microsoft has everybody sitting at their desk, stretching their arms straight out, working their vertical Surface™ screens.
A Microsoft spokesperson recently said about Surface:
We don't want to be in the furniture business.
So they are slipping away from the surface it looks like. And they are slipping away from the camera tracking your fingers for touch thing too it looks like, they are going more down the Apple route.
I don't think adding a touch screen to a regular notebook is a good idea. When they are ready to do that they'll likely make a notebook like this with a screen that twists around and can be put flat (but with a hardware keyboard):
Though I still think they'll make a tablet computer first with no twist screen and no hardware keyboard.
Just a 10" slab with some sort of flip-out rest on the back for placing the device on a table at a comfortable angle.
Below MacBook Air? Define below here?
I'm thinking smaller screen and touch keyboard, and maybe sacrificing some features due to its size. Like a larger iPhone with a more complete OS.
They might leave a phone in there though...
If this rumour turns out to be true. Surely the update must be free. Who is going to pay to update when all you are getting is better performance and better security. The update is even less interesting than the update from XP to Vista. Most people will wait until 10.7.
Yeah, it is way too soon for an update at MacWorld 2009. They should take all that optimization and wrap it in one of the minor releases of Leopard and call that Snow Leopard. I'd bet that's what they are doing. This won't be a major upgrade nor cost anything.
If this rumour turns out to be true. Surely the update must be free. Who is going to pay to update when all you are getting is better performance and better security. The update is even less interesting than the update from XP to Vista. Most people will wait until 10.7.
I'm surprised so many people are thinking this way.
Who will pay for it? Professionals. And they'll think it is the greatest damn OS upgrade Apple has ever released (if Apple puts the same energy into optimizing the OS they would have put into new features). I am, personally, thrilled to hear this news. I depend on my computer to get things done quickly and reliably, and anything that aids in this task is more than welcome and easily worth a full OS upgrade fee (it wouldn't take long for it to pay for itself). I think the $69 mini-upgrade idea is the best way to go about this.
But if Photoshop isn't available, among others, I can't upgrade.
OS X 10.0 = March 2001
OS X 10.1 = September 2001 - 6 months
OS X 10.2 = August 2002 - 11 months
OS X 10.3 = October 2003 - 14 months
OS X 10.4 = April 2005 - 18 months
OS X 10.5 = October 2007 - 30 months
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer. Based on this history it is there will be no 10.6 at MacWorld SF January 2009.(thought i think this is a possibility for jan 2010). I'm betting on WWDC June 2010 being the ship time for 10.6. This would put it at 32 months of development time.
So far as the end of the PowerPC, i agree with this given a June 2010 estimated ship date for 10.6. However, I doubt they'll kill 32 bit intel support until 10.7. They were still shipping some 32 bit systems as of mid 07 at least. (Mac Mini) Then again they are Apple so they may bone the 32 bit users but I'm gonna put my money on 64 bit only at 10.7.
Bottom-line, 10.6 at WWDC June 2010 with Intel only support, 32 bit, 64 bit.
10.7 with 64 bit only support.
This is a reasonable guess.
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer.
But those aren't the only things to consider. There was an interview with Steve Jobs a few months ago where he said he wants to shorten the development cycle. If that's true, then don't count on a longer wait.
There is no reason to expect 10.6 in January 09.
OS X 10.0 = March 2001
OS X 10.1 = September 2001 - 6 months
OS X 10.2 = August 2002 - 11 months
OS X 10.3 = October 2003 - 14 months
OS X 10.4 = April 2005 - 18 months
OS X 10.5 = October 2007 - 30 months
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer. Based on this history it is there will be no 10.6 at MacWorld SF January 2009.(thought i think this is a possibility for jan 2010). I'm betting on WWDC June 2010 being the ship time for 10.6. This would put it at 32 months of development time.
So far as the end of the PowerPC, i agree with this given a June 2010 estimated ship date for 10.6. However, I doubt they'll kill 32 bit intel support until 10.7. They were still shipping some 32 bit systems as of mid 07 at least. (Mac Mini) Then again they are Apple so they may bone the 32 bit users but I'm gonna put my money on 64 bit only at 10.7.
Bottom-line, 10.6 at WWDC June 2010 with Intel only support, 32 bit, 64 bit.
10.7 with 64 bit only support.
This is a reasonable guess.
That would be reasonable if 10.6 offered major new features. From what we rumour right now, its mostly a re-adjustment of the OS focusing on performance, improving the core, and so on. We're looking at Leopard SP1 so to speak - that's why its "Snow Leopard". So Jan 2009 is very reasonable. 14-15 months to get that done - definitely.
I wonder if Snow Leopard won't be a lightweight version of OSX that will run nicely on Netbooks and Nettops that Intel are touting at Computex. IIRC, Atom is a 64 bit cpu. Perhaps this would go into a revised mini with Snow Leopard as the OS. However, these Nettop and Netbook systems are generally priced at the very low end of the market. An area that Apple hasn't historically shown a lot of interest in.
But this is the hottest area of the market right now and Windows really isn't well positioned here. Vista and Windows 7 are never going to compete in this space. MS is using xp to work on these machines.
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.
There is no reason to expect 10.6 in January 09.
OS X 10.0 = March 2001
OS X 10.1 = September 2001 - 6 months
OS X 10.2 = August 2002 - 11 months
OS X 10.3 = October 2003 - 14 months
OS X 10.4 = April 2005 - 18 months
OS X 10.5 = October 2007 - 30 months
Don't forget that the 30 months between Tiger and Leopard also included a transition to Intel which should be included. And I believe Jobs said he wanted to shorten the release times so 14 months wouldn't be outrageous, even with new features.
You may want to wait for the rumor to be substantiated before you light the torches, grab your pitch forces and summon the town folk.
The only way I can see this as happening is if Apple creates a 2nd OS?like Snow Leopard?that is for NEW 64-bit Intel Macs that is built alongside the normal upgrade path as their other systems. This way, new Macs, which are all 64-bit and Intel can benefit from the streamlined OS development that comes from not having to support 4 different architectures.
If this is done with HW authentication chips onboard then in 4-5 years Apple can then move everything to 64-bit Intel OS that is streamlined, with less R&D needed as it only needs to support one architecture and will make it harder for OSx86 Project developers.
I will say this. Apple SOLD quite a few PPC computers to people right before they came out with Intel systems. If you think people who bought computers just over two years ago are going to take this lying down, you are mistaken. If Apple discontinued the PPc support 5 years after Intel was intro'd, so be it. It's not time yet. Leopard isn't even fully cooked yet. Apple SOLD me a $3200 Powerbook days before the Intel announcement. I should expect that they will not give their customers the shaft.
Also, "Snow Leopard (if that's the real name)" has no business being a paid for OS release if all it does is optimize and secure the system better. That is a service pack, point release, bug fix, etc. Surely Apple does not think its customers are total idiots, because that is what they are saying if they try to SELL it to you. It should be a free download. AND it should support PPC. No doubt about it.
Maybe it won't be $129, if there are no new features and No PPC and it's called Snow Leopard after Leopard, it may just be an add on for intel users. Say $50 to enhance intel Macs by using only hardware found in new Macs. Kind of like Microsoft did back in the Windows 98 days, you can get 98 and then windows plus (or whatever they called it)
If this rumour is true in any way, I'd expect it to be a build that is mainly for new Intel Macs. They come with install discs that only work their models anyway. But Apple would still support older machines on about a 5 year cycle so the next major release wold have to have two flavours, one with code for multiple types of machines and the one with code only for 64-bit Intel Macs.
Yeah, it is way too soon for an update at MacWorld 2009. They should take all that optimization and wrap it in one of the minor releases of Leopard and call that Snow Leopard. I'd bet that's what they are doing. This won't be a major upgrade nor cost anything.
You're missing the main point though. Leopard has a certain amount of features and a baselline level of support. APIs can be tweaked during the evolutionary process but Apple really can't "take" anything away. The rumors for 10.6 are that Apple is going to make some definitive moves towards removing support in some areas and optimizing the remaining supported hardware. If they were to drop PPC support they certainly couldn't market Leopard as the 50% PPC supported OS. Tech support nightmare.
There is no reason to expect 10.6 in January 09.
OS X 10.0 = March 2001
OS X 10.1 = September 2001 - 6 months
OS X 10.2 = August 2002 - 11 months
OS X 10.3 = October 2003 - 14 months
OS X 10.4 = April 2005 - 18 months
OS X 10.5 = October 2007 - 30 months
If you look at the trend you'll see that each release takes longer. Based on this history it is there will be no 10.6 at MacWorld SF January 2009.(thought i think this is a possibility for jan 2010). I'm betting on WWDC June 2010 being the ship time for 10.6. This would put it at 32 months of development time.
So far as the end of the PowerPC, i agree with this given a June 2010 estimated ship date for 10.6. However, I doubt they'll kill 32 bit intel support until 10.7. They were still shipping some 32 bit systems as of mid 07 at least. (Mac Mini) Then again they are Apple so they may bone the 32 bit users but I'm gonna put my money on 64 bit only at 10.7.
Bottom-line, 10.6 at WWDC June 2010 with Intel only support, 32 bit, 64 bit.
10.7 with 64 bit only support.
This is a reasonable guess.
You're neglecting to mention some salient data that explains the delay.
10.4 was the first OS that enabled support for Intel based Macintosh. Clearly that would increase the amount of work involved in developing Tiger as Apple is now developing and testing two distinct hardware platforms.
10.5 Leopard marks Apple's push into different platforms with the Apple TV and iPhone and potentiall yet another platform due this year.
One cannot take the data you've presented and extrapolate it anything meaningful without having a better historical context of the platform(s) involved.
I think your numbers are way off. Apple is NOT going to support PPC for another 2yrs from this WWDC.
I'm surprised so many people are thinking this way.
Who will pay for it? Professionals. And they'll think it is the greatest damn OS upgrade Apple has ever released (if Apple puts the same energy into optimizing the OS they would have put into new features). I am, personally, thrilled to hear this news. I depend on my computer to get things done quickly and reliably, and anything that aids in this task is more than welcome and easily worth a full OS upgrade fee (it wouldn't take long for it to pay for itself). I think the $69 mini-upgrade idea is the best way to go about this.
But if Photoshop isn't available, among others, I can't upgrade.
That is a bunch of crap.
I am a professional and I will NOT pay for a bug fix/service pack/ point release, just because it has a code name and pretty packaging.
If apple goes this route, it destroys the good faith its customers have in them. Apple - the company that went out on a limb to try to get rid of DRM and keep a sales model instead of subscription. Apple, the SECURE hardware/ software company who's products "JUST WORK" - yeah right -- if they go this way, they are no better than MS (sure it will work - so long as you keep paying for the same thing - over... and over... and over...) If Apple does this, screw them.
You have a very foolhardy mentality here my freind. to quote you:
I depend on my computer to get things done quickly and reliably, and anything that aids in this task is more than welcome and easily worth a full OS upgrade fee (it wouldn't take long for it to pay for itself).
i think not. If you depend on your Mac to get just work, then Apple needs to make their OS jsut do it. You have already paid for it. You should not need to pay again, just so it does what it was supposed to already do in the first place. think for a second, man.
Apple will ahve the mindless drones who will agree with everything they do and even come up with some psycho rationale for it all (courtesy of the RDF factor). the rest of us will see through it and either hold off on purchases, or simply just become less enthused with the once shining knight of the computing industry. Paying for service packs is a bad trend to start. Don't drink the Kool-Aid so fast my friend.
That is a bunch of crap.
I am a professional and I will NOT pay for a bug fix/service pack/ point release, just because it has a code name and pretty packaging....
Dude, chill out. You are replying to a rumour as if it's true and seem to be getting worked up over it.
This is what happened to the last guy who got worked up over an Apple Insider rumour...
That would be reasonable if 10.6 offered major new features. From what we rumour right now, its mostly a re-adjustment of the OS focusing on performance, improving the core, and so on. We're looking at Leopard SP1 so to speak - that's why its "Snow Leopard". So Jan 2009 is very reasonable. 14-15 months to get that done - definitely.
the 10.5.X are mini SP so calling it SP1 will not fit in may call in Leopard SE / Leopard reloaded M$ was going to have a XP reloaded but that turned into SP2.
Apple is not stupid. They do not randomly go around killing compatibility for some of the biggest professional applications. At the very least it would be a message to some developers to stop clinging to completely Carbon apps.