Isn't anybody excited about the imminent release of 10.3.9?
That's just 0.01 away from 10.4 after all ( I know I know. Not real decimals)
Am I the only one to believe that they should finish off 10.3 first?
Not quite, but they can continue with 10.3 for several months after 10.4 comes out.
While they were maintaining a twelve to fourteen month schedual between releases, it was one thing. But if they maintain an eighteen month, or longer, release schedual, as they said they would (to the relief of most business's), then they would have to continue fixing the last release well into the next cycle. The longer the release cycle, the longer it takes to convert users over to the latest release.
"Finish off? You mean like a bullet to its head? "
fix all major bugs so no more updates - with the excpetion, perhaps, of security updates - are needed.
I think you are wrong. I suspect that if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will be fixed in 10.4.x
It doesn't work that way. 10.4 is different than 10.3.9 in many ways. What fixes a bug in 10.3.9 might be written out of 10.4. The code that described the function in 10.3 might be completely different in 10.4.
10.4 will have it's own bugs, which might, or might not, be code related to those in 10.3.
That's why a bug that was squashed might turn up again, and a bug that they couldn't get rid of, might now be gone.
It doesn't work that way. 10.4 is different than 10.3.9 in many ways. What fixes a bug in 10.3.9 might be written out of 10.4. The code that described the function in 10.3 might be completely different in 10.4.
10.4 will have it's own bugs, which might, or might not, be code related to those in 10.3.
That's why a bug that was squashed might turn up again, and a bug that they couldn't get rid of, might now be gone.
I fully understand how software development in Apple works. although bug fixes in 10.3.9 must be going into 10.4 unless
a) They were bugs only in 10.3.8 ( or earlier)
b) As you said a feature is missing
however if there was a bug unfixed from 10.3.0 to 10.3.9 it must be fixed in 10.4 unless they repeat the process again.
That wasn't my point. My point was if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will not be fixed in another 10.3.x release.
I fully understand how software development in Apple works. although bug fixes in 10.3.9 must be going into 10.4 unless
a) They were bugs only in 10.3.8 ( or earlier)
b) As you said a feature is missing
however if there was a bug unfixed from 10.3.0 to 10.3.9 it must be fixed in 10.4 unless they repeat the process again.
That wasn't my point. My point was if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will not be fixed in another 10.3.x release.
First of all, development at Apple is no different than anywhere else.
The only way that bug fixes in 10.3.9 would be going into 10.4 is if all the code from the sequence train that the bug was found in, ends up in 10.4 unchanged. Also, if it is to be believed that 10.4 went GM last night, or today, then they wouldn't have had time to integrate that updated 3.9 code into 10.4. They would have to test for that as well. Remember 10.3.9 itself isn't out yet.
Also, fixes in 10.3.9 can cause problems in 10.4, as I pointed out in my last post. 10.4 has enough different code that many areas that are in 10.3 are no longer there, or are significantly changed. There are whole areas of code that are totally new.
The development lines of 10.3 and 10.4 diverge. Instead of fixing faulty 10.3 code, it might be easier to rewrite it from scratch.
First of all, development at Apple is no different than anywhere else.
....
The development lines of 10.3 and 10.4 diverge. Instead of fixing faulty 10.3 code, it might be easier to rewrite it from scratch.
The vast majority of code in an operating system is common from major release to release.
What you seem to be arguing is that if a bug were discovered in 10.3.x it would not be fixed in 10.4 and that is totally wrong.
In fact lets imagine a bug. A USB dongle does not work with 10.3.4 ( to pick a number rather than a .x). It turns out to be Apple's fault. The manufacturers contact Apple and describe the bug. An engineer is tasked to fix the bug for 10.3.5. The manufacturers can then release with a "works with 10.3.5 and later " badge on the website, or on the box of the shipping product.
Does the engineer:
1) fix it for 10.3.5 only and ignore the fix for 10.4 or
2) Fix it for both
If he does 1) he gets fired. It does not matter if he had to write totally different code to fix the problem in 10.4, by the way, he still must fix it, or all point fix bugs reappear again in 10.4!
In many many cases he would not have to do anything other than add the same code to the same file, which would prbably be common to both releases. If not that simple , however, he stil has to fix it in both trains.
The only case where this would not apply would be if a feature was missing. If a feature was radically changed it is not an excuse to introduce the bug in the next full release ( 10.4) and makes the external manufacturer's liars.
Seriously. An engineer to do that would be fired ( although questions owuld be asked of the testers too).
The vast majority of code in an operating system is common from major release to release.
What you seem to be arguing is that if a bug were discovered in 10.3.x it would not be fixed in 10.4 and that is totally wrong.
In fact lets imagine a bug. A USB dongle does not work with 10.3.4 ( to pick a number rather than a .x). It turns out to be Apple's fault. The manufacturers contact Apple and describe the bug. An engineer is tasked to fix the bug for 10.3.5. The manufacturers can then release with a "works with 10.3.5 and later " badge on the website, or on the box of the shipping product.
Does the engineer:
1) fix it for 10.3.5 only and ignore the fix for 10.4 or
2) Fix it for both
If he does 1) he gets fired. It does not matter if he had to write totally different code to fix the problem in 10.4, by the way, he still must fix it, or all point fix bugs reappear again in 10.4!
In many many cases he would not have to do anything other than add the same code to the same file, which would prbably be common to both releases. If not that simple , however, he stil has to fix it in both trains.
The only case where this would not apply would be if a feature was missing. If a feature was radically changed it is not an excuse to introduce the bug in the next full release ( 10.4) and makes the external manufacturer's liars.
Seriously. An engineer to do that would be fired ( although questions owuld be asked of the testers too).
In some ways you are agreeing with what I said while trying to say it differently, and in other ways you are reading what I'm saying without any thoroughness.
I'll be really simple.
Sometimes a fixed bug will pass through to the new upgrade. Sometimes the whole code line disappears, along with the bug. Sometimes the code line is rewritten, and the bug is also gone, but a new one may crop up (even the same problem, but it won't be the SAME bug, just look the same).
You are missing the point, even though you repeated what I said at times.
I never said that NONE of the fixes would make it, only that some might. Pay attention please.
I'm pretty comfortable ordering the family pack as soon as it is available. With 5 Macs to move up I have the luxury of starting with the least critical (my wife's iBook) and moving up to the G5 iMac.
I'm aware that it will not be "bug free", but feel that Apple will be comfortable releasing it at its current level. I moved to Panther as quick as I could and have installed every update which, as I recall, all had fixes of one type or another.
Give us a little slack here please, we haven't as yet gotten to the point of polishing our weapons.
This isn't Usenet, and it won't be allowed to come to that. Insults may be the norm on other boards, but not here, and not in this forum. Cool it, or take an enforced vacation. Don't bait, troll, or otherwise antagonize, keep it civil. End of story. If you, or anyone else, have any further commentary on this policy, send it to me in PM, not in here. Danke.
Comments
Originally posted by asdasd
Am I the only one to believe that they should finish off 10.3 first?
Finish off? You mean like a bullet to its head?
Originally posted by asdasd
Isn't anybody excited about the imminent release of 10.3.9?
That's just 0.01 away from 10.4 after all ( I know I know. Not real decimals)
Am I the only one to believe that they should finish off 10.3 first?
Not quite, but they can continue with 10.3 for several months after 10.4 comes out.
While they were maintaining a twelve to fourteen month schedual between releases, it was one thing. But if they maintain an eighteen month, or longer, release schedual, as they said they would (to the relief of most business's), then they would have to continue fixing the last release well into the next cycle. The longer the release cycle, the longer it takes to convert users over to the latest release.
That's what MS must do.
Originally posted by kcmac
Good lord people. What is with this give up spirit? The day ain't over yet!
That's the attitude!
I'm not too hopeful, but i'll probably give apple.com a quick check at 5:30 cupertino-time if i'm around a computer...
Originally posted by melgross
It is amusing. Of course, most of what he is looking for can be done now in 10.3
well not the integration I want, I want smart mailboxes - not at the moment
smart folders - not at the moment
Safari RSS - not at the moment (i don't like using a separate tool and firefox annoys me)
Core Image - also no
dashboard - no, konfabulator is not stable enough or elegant
fix all major bugs so no more updates - with the excpetion, perhaps, of security updates - are needed.
I think you are wrong. I suspect that if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will be fixed in 10.4.x
Originally posted by asdasd
I think you are wrong. I suspect that if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will be fixed in 10.4.x
Probably not.
Originally posted by asdasd
"Finish off? You mean like a bullet to its head? "
fix all major bugs so no more updates - with the excpetion, perhaps, of security updates - are needed.
I think you are wrong. I suspect that if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will be fixed in 10.4.x
It doesn't work that way. 10.4 is different than 10.3.9 in many ways. What fixes a bug in 10.3.9 might be written out of 10.4. The code that described the function in 10.3 might be completely different in 10.4.
10.4 will have it's own bugs, which might, or might not, be code related to those in 10.3.
That's why a bug that was squashed might turn up again, and a bug that they couldn't get rid of, might now be gone.
It doesn't work that way. 10.4 is different than 10.3.9 in many ways. What fixes a bug in 10.3.9 might be written out of 10.4. The code that described the function in 10.3 might be completely different in 10.4.
10.4 will have it's own bugs, which might, or might not, be code related to those in 10.3.
That's why a bug that was squashed might turn up again, and a bug that they couldn't get rid of, might now be gone.
I fully understand how software development in Apple works. although bug fixes in 10.3.9 must be going into 10.4 unless
a) They were bugs only in 10.3.8 ( or earlier)
b) As you said a feature is missing
however if there was a bug unfixed from 10.3.0 to 10.3.9 it must be fixed in 10.4 unless they repeat the process again.
That wasn't my point. My point was if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will not be fixed in another 10.3.x release.
Originally posted by asdasd
I fully understand how software development in Apple works. although bug fixes in 10.3.9 must be going into 10.4 unless
a) They were bugs only in 10.3.8 ( or earlier)
b) As you said a feature is missing
however if there was a bug unfixed from 10.3.0 to 10.3.9 it must be fixed in 10.4 unless they repeat the process again.
That wasn't my point. My point was if 10.3.9 is released with bugs they will not be fixed in another 10.3.x release.
First of all, development at Apple is no different than anywhere else.
The only way that bug fixes in 10.3.9 would be going into 10.4 is if all the code from the sequence train that the bug was found in, ends up in 10.4 unchanged. Also, if it is to be believed that 10.4 went GM last night, or today, then they wouldn't have had time to integrate that updated 3.9 code into 10.4. They would have to test for that as well. Remember 10.3.9 itself isn't out yet.
Also, fixes in 10.3.9 can cause problems in 10.4, as I pointed out in my last post. 10.4 has enough different code that many areas that are in 10.3 are no longer there, or are significantly changed. There are whole areas of code that are totally new.
The development lines of 10.3 and 10.4 diverge. Instead of fixing faulty 10.3 code, it might be easier to rewrite it from scratch.
First of all, development at Apple is no different than anywhere else.
....
The development lines of 10.3 and 10.4 diverge. Instead of fixing faulty 10.3 code, it might be easier to rewrite it from scratch.
The vast majority of code in an operating system is common from major release to release.
What you seem to be arguing is that if a bug were discovered in 10.3.x it would not be fixed in 10.4 and that is totally wrong.
In fact lets imagine a bug. A USB dongle does not work with 10.3.4 ( to pick a number rather than a .x). It turns out to be Apple's fault. The manufacturers contact Apple and describe the bug. An engineer is tasked to fix the bug for 10.3.5. The manufacturers can then release with a "works with 10.3.5 and later " badge on the website, or on the box of the shipping product.
Does the engineer:
1) fix it for 10.3.5 only and ignore the fix for 10.4 or
2) Fix it for both
If he does 1) he gets fired. It does not matter if he had to write totally different code to fix the problem in 10.4, by the way, he still must fix it, or all point fix bugs reappear again in 10.4!
In many many cases he would not have to do anything other than add the same code to the same file, which would prbably be common to both releases. If not that simple , however, he stil has to fix it in both trains.
The only case where this would not apply would be if a feature was missing. If a feature was radically changed it is not an excuse to introduce the bug in the next full release ( 10.4) and makes the external manufacturer's liars.
Seriously. An engineer to do that would be fired ( although questions owuld be asked of the testers too).
Originally posted by asdasd
Which is why I believe both 10.4 and 10.3.9 will be announced on the same day.
Wow. Took quite a bit of bandwidth just to say that.
I thought it needed explaining :-)
Originally posted by asdasd
The vast majority of code in an operating system is common from major release to release.
What you seem to be arguing is that if a bug were discovered in 10.3.x it would not be fixed in 10.4 and that is totally wrong.
In fact lets imagine a bug. A USB dongle does not work with 10.3.4 ( to pick a number rather than a .x). It turns out to be Apple's fault. The manufacturers contact Apple and describe the bug. An engineer is tasked to fix the bug for 10.3.5. The manufacturers can then release with a "works with 10.3.5 and later " badge on the website, or on the box of the shipping product.
Does the engineer:
1) fix it for 10.3.5 only and ignore the fix for 10.4 or
2) Fix it for both
If he does 1) he gets fired. It does not matter if he had to write totally different code to fix the problem in 10.4, by the way, he still must fix it, or all point fix bugs reappear again in 10.4!
In many many cases he would not have to do anything other than add the same code to the same file, which would prbably be common to both releases. If not that simple , however, he stil has to fix it in both trains.
The only case where this would not apply would be if a feature was missing. If a feature was radically changed it is not an excuse to introduce the bug in the next full release ( 10.4) and makes the external manufacturer's liars.
Seriously. An engineer to do that would be fired ( although questions owuld be asked of the testers too).
In some ways you are agreeing with what I said while trying to say it differently, and in other ways you are reading what I'm saying without any thoroughness.
I'll be really simple.
Sometimes a fixed bug will pass through to the new upgrade. Sometimes the whole code line disappears, along with the bug. Sometimes the code line is rewritten, and the bug is also gone, but a new one may crop up (even the same problem, but it won't be the SAME bug, just look the same).
You are missing the point, even though you repeated what I said at times.
I never said that NONE of the fixes would make it, only that some might. Pay attention please.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Alright, the condescension in here has gotten a *WEE* too thick. Time to throttle it back, or take it elsewhere, everyone.
Give us a little slack here please, we haven't as yet gotten to the point of polishing our weapons.
I'm aware that it will not be "bug free", but feel that Apple will be comfortable releasing it at its current level. I moved to Panther as quick as I could and have installed every update which, as I recall, all had fixes of one type or another.
Originally posted by melgross
Give us a little slack here please, we haven't as yet gotten to the point of polishing our weapons.
This isn't Usenet, and it won't be allowed to come to that. Insults may be the norm on other boards, but not here, and not in this forum. Cool it, or take an enforced vacation. Don't bait, troll, or otherwise antagonize, keep it civil. End of story. If you, or anyone else, have any further commentary on this policy, send it to me in PM, not in here. Danke.