If there really is a G5 soon to be released, they'd HAVE to stop any leaks on 10.2 builds, because hints on that would be found all over the OS. I personally don't think we'll see a G5 in july, but we won't see any leaked OS X builds month before G5 release for sure.
maybe they finally made an OS that doesnt suck as much as it does now.
There are just too many 'quirks' and blatant bugs to let me truely enjoy this OS right now. Also the fact I spent a small fortune on the iBook 14" and get mediocre quality doesnt make me feel any better
I dont think 10.2 will be the OS that introduces a slew of new features. It is still an incremental release and I'd guess that Apple's main concern is making OSX performance==to OS9. I think the next few releases (.2, .5, .6) will slowly add featres that we miss from 9 (spring-loaded folders, USB printer sharing...y'know the basics).
I haven't looked at the 6b11 build (which I'm told was missing quite a bit of stuff), and obviously nothing beyond that. Anyone think there's a chance that -- should this just be a few UI additions, some bug fixes and more code optimizations -- this will be another software update candidate (say 40 or 50 MB)?
Or will this be the next shrink-wrapped, complete overhaul of all system files, etc. version? I suppose if that's the case, those who bought 10.1 will still have to shell out some dough for it - maybe $39 via the Apple Store or something like that?
From the venerable Andrew Welch of Ambrosia Software: [quote]A few things I do know that are not under NDA:
-- Mac OS X 10.2 will be built with gcc 3.0.x, which has a number of optimizations for the PPC platform in it (rolled in by Apple engineers), including some nice options to reduce function overhead that should result in a 10% speed boost across the board just by recompiling
-- A chance to the way messages are passed in Cocoa speeds up message passing (events, etc.) 15% across the board
-- The first priority for this build is getting some new features done; the second priority is speed. I imagine it will be faster than 10.1.x, but it may not be as dramatic as from 10.0.x --> 10.1.x<hr></blockquote> More speeeeeeed, baby.
Better drivers for the GeForce 3/4 and Radeon 8500 is a must. I have a GeForce 3 and I am constantly reminded at the poor drivers in OS X every time I play Giants. See Giants can support Bump Mapping on the GeForce 3, but MacPlay can't allow that feature to be used until Apple delivers better drivers, very annoying.
<strong>Better drivers for the GeForce 3/4 and Radeon 8500 is a must. I have a GeForce 3 and I am constantly reminded at the poor drivers in OS X every time I play Giants. See Giants can support Bump Mapping on the GeForce 3, but MacPlay can't allow that feature to be used until Apple delivers better drivers, very annoying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
though i can't disagree with the need for better drivers, i absolutely believe nvidia should be busting their asses. apple should be helping, and i imagine there are more than a couple engineers dedicated to nothing but drivers, but nvidia (and others) should be putting in a concerted effort.
oh yeah, and i meant to say, write to nvidia, ATI, etc and demand better drivers for OS X. you know, do your part, instead of complaining.
<strong>I dont think 10.2 will be the OS that introduces a slew of new features. It is still an incremental release and I'd guess that Apple's main concern is making OSX performance==to OS9. I think the next few releases (.2, .5, .6) will slowly add featres that we miss from 9 (spring-loaded folders, USB printer sharing...y'know the basics).</strong><hr></blockquote>
actually, 10.2 is more than an incremental release. the 'minor' updates are the 10.0.x or 10.1.x etc. this helps to keep from getting into the 10.11.43 bullsh*t.
expect to see each 10.x lasting 6-9 months, and offering the kind of advances previously made in .5 type updates. and don't be surprised if OS X goes 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, etc. each having 3 or 4 minor updates.
It's not better drivers that we need, per se. Because of the disparate implementations of shaders in the two architectures, Apple has made the choice not to support that feature in their OpenGL implementation. Both nVidia and ATI have OpenGL extensions that enable the functionality, but Apple won't expose them in their libraries.
I'm hoping that 10.2 will bring OS X up to OS 9's feature set, and that it will also include performance optimizations.
If Apple can deliver on that, then it will be a great update, and in fact OS X will finally own like it should.
As long as OS X's feature set is less than or equal to OS 9's, I believe the updates will be free. Expect 10.2 to be distributed similarly to 10.1, free to everyone except those who are not near an Apple authorized outlet.
Could we assume that 10.2 will be released, or at least SHOWN at MWT?
Think about it. March 23 (?) 2001, 10.0 was released. Then 6 months later in September, 10.1 was released. Steve stated that OS X was at 6:00. 3 months later at MWSF, with more apps out, he said OS X was at 9:00.
So, by this reasoning, on March 23 2002, will we see 10.2? Not only is it the day of the keynote, but i think its also the 1 year anniversary of OS X. What better day to announce that X has finally come full cirlce, and is at 12:00. He could announce it shipping in April or something, but I have a feeling it will carry the same magnitude of 10.1, and finally bring OS X FULLY up to par with OS 9 in features and performance.
The clock analogy was to show the transition time for OSX. They expect that by the end of the 12 months, the majority of key apps will be ported and working properly in OSX. This has nothing to do with the upgrade cycle. Yes, 10.1 was released at the half-way mark, but I'm not expecting 10.2 in the next couple of weeks. I'd love to be surprised, though!
I understand Starfleet. It was just an idea. Kinda interesting though how the releases mirrored the time passed by on the clock though. (Hours = months)
though i can't disagree with the need for better drivers, i absolutely believe nvidia should be busting their asses. apple should be helping, and i imagine there are more than a couple engineers dedicated to nothing but drivers, but nvidia (and others) should be putting in a concerted effort.
oh yeah, and i meant to say, write to nvidia, ATI, etc and demand better drivers for OS X. you know, do your part, instead of complaining.
<strong>It's not better drivers that we need, per se. Because of the disparate implementations of shaders in the two architectures, Apple has made the choice not to support that feature in their OpenGL implementation. Both nVidia and ATI have OpenGL extensions that enable the functionality, but Apple won't expose them in their libraries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why do you think Apple shouldn't implement this into their OpenGL library and give us the option?
Just goes to show that we need OpenGL 2.0 with a standard library for pixel shaders.
?Fully support Aqua excelleration via the video card
?Optimize the OS 10.2 to the Max to it runs dcently on a G3 233 (I have a G3 266)
My video card isn't being used. I want to see OpenGL excelleration on this computer and @leat 90% of the speed of Mac OS 9.
The eariliest I will be able to get a new PowerMac is MacWorld SF 2004. (I am also not going to buy anything below a 2.2GHZ G5 (at the low end of the line).
Also note I do alot on this computer which slows it down alot. (Apache, PHP, MySQL) etc.
So I really work my computer. but am broke and won't be able to afford a new computer until 2004
<strong>This is what Apple Needs to do in Mac OS X:
?Fully support Aqua excelleration via the video card
?Optimize the OS 10.2 to the Max to it runs dcently on a G3 233 (I have a G3 266)
My video card isn't being used. I want to see OpenGL excelleration on this computer and @leat 90% of the speed of Mac OS 9.
The eariliest I will be able to get a new PowerMac is MacWorld SF 2004. (I am also not going to buy anything below a 2.2GHZ G5 (at the low end of the line).
Also note I do alot on this computer which slows it down alot. (Apache, PHP, MySQL) etc.
So I really work my computer. but am broke and won't be able to afford a new computer until 2004 </strong><hr></blockquote>
Are you hosting your web site off of your 266?
I agree that Apple needs to implement video acceleration in Quartz, but after reading some articles on this I am not sure if its possible to the degree that OS 9's GUI is accelerated by the GPU.
<a href="http://www.railheaddesign.com"; target="_blank">RAILHead Design</a> is reporting that Mac OS X 10.2 will bring back USB Printer Sharing. Finally.
Comments
There are just too many 'quirks' and blatant bugs to let me truely enjoy this OS right now. Also the fact I spent a small fortune on the iBook 14" and get mediocre quality doesnt make me feel any better
Or will this be the next shrink-wrapped, complete overhaul of all system files, etc. version? I suppose if that's the case, those who bought 10.1 will still have to shell out some dough for it - maybe $39 via the Apple Store or something like that?
-- Mac OS X 10.2 will be built with gcc 3.0.x, which has a number of optimizations for the PPC platform in it (rolled in by Apple engineers), including some nice options to reduce function overhead that should result in a 10% speed boost across the board just by recompiling
-- A chance to the way messages are passed in Cocoa speeds up message passing (events, etc.) 15% across the board
-- The first priority for this build is getting some new features done; the second priority is speed. I imagine it will be faster than 10.1.x, but it may not be as dramatic as from 10.0.x --> 10.1.x<hr></blockquote>
Give me that, some good documentation to take advantage of it, and I'm happy.
<strong>Better drivers for the GeForce 3/4 and Radeon 8500 is a must. I have a GeForce 3 and I am constantly reminded at the poor drivers in OS X every time I play Giants. See Giants can support Bump Mapping on the GeForce 3, but MacPlay can't allow that feature to be used until Apple delivers better drivers, very annoying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
though i can't disagree with the need for better drivers, i absolutely believe nvidia should be busting their asses. apple should be helping, and i imagine there are more than a couple engineers dedicated to nothing but drivers, but nvidia (and others) should be putting in a concerted effort.
oh yeah, and i meant to say, write to nvidia, ATI, etc and demand better drivers for OS X. you know, do your part, instead of complaining.
[ 03-04-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</p>
<strong>I dont think 10.2 will be the OS that introduces a slew of new features. It is still an incremental release and I'd guess that Apple's main concern is making OSX performance==to OS9. I think the next few releases (.2, .5, .6) will slowly add featres that we miss from 9 (spring-loaded folders, USB printer sharing...y'know the basics).</strong><hr></blockquote>
actually, 10.2 is more than an incremental release. the 'minor' updates are the 10.0.x or 10.1.x etc. this helps to keep from getting into the 10.11.43 bullsh*t.
expect to see each 10.x lasting 6-9 months, and offering the kind of advances previously made in .5 type updates. and don't be surprised if OS X goes 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, etc. each having 3 or 4 minor updates.
If Apple can deliver on that, then it will be a great update, and in fact OS X will finally own like it should.
As long as OS X's feature set is less than or equal to OS 9's, I believe the updates will be free. Expect 10.2 to be distributed similarly to 10.1, free to everyone except those who are not near an Apple authorized outlet.
Think about it. March 23 (?) 2001, 10.0 was released. Then 6 months later in September, 10.1 was released. Steve stated that OS X was at 6:00. 3 months later at MWSF, with more apps out, he said OS X was at 9:00.
So, by this reasoning, on March 23 2002, will we see 10.2? Not only is it the day of the keynote, but i think its also the 1 year anniversary of OS X. What better day to announce that X has finally come full cirlce, and is at 12:00. He could announce it shipping in April or something, but I have a feeling it will carry the same magnitude of 10.1, and finally bring OS X FULLY up to par with OS 9 in features and performance.
The clock analogy was to show the transition time for OSX. They expect that by the end of the 12 months, the majority of key apps will be ported and working properly in OSX. This has nothing to do with the upgrade cycle. Yes, 10.1 was released at the half-way mark, but I'm not expecting 10.2 in the next couple of weeks. I'd love to be surprised, though!
<strong>
though i can't disagree with the need for better drivers, i absolutely believe nvidia should be busting their asses. apple should be helping, and i imagine there are more than a couple engineers dedicated to nothing but drivers, but nvidia (and others) should be putting in a concerted effort.
oh yeah, and i meant to say, write to nvidia, ATI, etc and demand better drivers for OS X. you know, do your part, instead of complaining.
[ 03-04-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I absolutely agree, I'll be sure to send my feedback into Nvidia.
<strong>It's not better drivers that we need, per se. Because of the disparate implementations of shaders in the two architectures, Apple has made the choice not to support that feature in their OpenGL implementation. Both nVidia and ATI have OpenGL extensions that enable the functionality, but Apple won't expose them in their libraries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why do you think Apple shouldn't implement this into their OpenGL library and give us the option?
Just goes to show that we need OpenGL 2.0 with a standard library for pixel shaders.
<strong>
Why do you think Apple shouldn't implement this into their OpenGL library and give us the option?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>
Sorry, misunderstood what you were saying, thanks for clarifying.
?Fully support Aqua excelleration via the video card
?Optimize the OS 10.2 to the Max to it runs dcently on a G3 233 (I have a G3 266)
My video card isn't being used. I want to see OpenGL excelleration on this computer and @leat 90% of the speed of Mac OS 9.
The eariliest I will be able to get a new PowerMac is MacWorld SF 2004. (I am also not going to buy anything below a 2.2GHZ G5 (at the low end of the line).
Also note I do alot on this computer which slows it down alot. (Apache, PHP, MySQL) etc.
So I really work my computer. but am broke and won't be able to afford a new computer until 2004
<strong>This is what Apple Needs to do in Mac OS X:
?Fully support Aqua excelleration via the video card
?Optimize the OS 10.2 to the Max to it runs dcently on a G3 233 (I have a G3 266)
My video card isn't being used. I want to see OpenGL excelleration on this computer and @leat 90% of the speed of Mac OS 9.
The eariliest I will be able to get a new PowerMac is MacWorld SF 2004. (I am also not going to buy anything below a 2.2GHZ G5 (at the low end of the line).
Also note I do alot on this computer which slows it down alot. (Apache, PHP, MySQL) etc.
So I really work my computer. but am broke and won't be able to afford a new computer until 2004
Are you hosting your web site off of your 266?
I agree that Apple needs to implement video acceleration in Quartz, but after reading some articles on this I am not sure if its possible to the degree that OS 9's GUI is accelerated by the GPU.
<a href="http://www.railheaddesign.com"; target="_blank">RAILHead Design</a> is reporting that Mac OS X 10.2 will bring back USB Printer Sharing. Finally.