Apple simultaneously developing several Mac OS X updates

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 96
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member


    But my point is valid. Apparently Apple thinks every update to their software requires re-jiggering every freakin' thing in the OS. Some might make sense, others are just stupid (the loss of the internet prefernce pane was just stupid, it should've been expanded to cover all apps, not lost). They also changed Process Viewer to Activity Monitor (oh, such a better name). Moving features around (disk copy functionality moved into disk utility, disk copy lost). But where's the benefit? This time System preferences are apparently changing again (I remember now reading how its kind of hooking spotlight into it, losing groups or the toolbar or something). People are actually going to be typing panel names to find them? Hey then, here's an idea, why not lose the icons altogether and just type in all the names. In fact, you could do that with the Finder too! Hey, we could then lose the need for the mouse altogether (no more complaints about lacking two-buttons, Apple's getting rid of the mouse!). In fact, if they could throw out Quartz and Aqua (two things that really slow down your computer), you'd have one kick-ass computer!



    Or here's an idea. How about, rather than spending manpower on updating, testing, etc, existing pieces of the OS that worked before, putting them towards fixing some of those reported bugs (hey, like that dude's SCSI issues!).



    (Mod Note: Edited to remove personal bickering - JL)
  • Reply 42 of 96
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Wow's it's starting to sounds like bridge night at the old women's home in here. gripe, gripe, gripe, gripe.



    Of course 10.4.1 is in the works when 10.4 is frozen. I'd bet even money they have a pretty good idea which items will be pushed off to 10.4.2, no less. That's just how it goes in software engineering, when it is done right. The public production numbers are just artificial lines in the sand for the customers, the actual work never really stops.



    Louzer, the prefs panel isn't icon-less, they just added a dynamic search panel ala iTunes that also hooks into the Help content, not just the panel names. You're jumping to conclusions that are pretty far out there. This will be a huge benefit to a lot of people. (And Process Viewer was renamed when they added the abilities to watch memory, disk, and network activity... obviously those aren't processes. The name change wasn't just cosmetic, but for a new tool.)
  • Reply 43 of 96
    tinktink Posts: 395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross



    This was EXACTLY what I was afraid of in the other threads about this release.

    ......

    ........... that they know has bugs that they have to rush to squash? What are they going to do, release the OS and the update at the same time?

    .................

    What bothers me even more, is all of those new Mac buyers. What are they going to think when this happens?

    ..........................

    This is going to be compared to Longhorn, and if it needs updating as soon as it's out, it will be the butt of quite a few jokes. Does Apple need that?




    IF , this thread of speculation is true....then,



    Ditto!

  • Reply 44 of 96
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,605member
    The sooner Tiger is released, the better.



    The point of deminishing returns come in to play at some point, and Apple knows where that point is. When you have tested to the max, so be it. Release and bring on the .1 update. There will always be bugs and HUGE bugs will always slip through at some point during major changes in OS's timeline.



    Let's get it over with, move on, and look foward to 10.4.5!



    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross



    This is going to be compared to Longhorn, and if it needs updating as soon as it's out, it will be the butt of quite a few jokes. Does Apple need that?




    If that is the case, then we don't have to worry about this until 2007! So stop worrying...
  • Reply 45 of 96
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,620member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gon

    No one is forcing you to update, right? Just leave the updates sit for six months.



    I'm security minded and I'd rather have all updates as soon as they roll off the assembly line.



    BTW, that story of yours about SCSI devices is fantastic. They still haven't fixed what they broke at 10.3.0?




    I don't mean the security updates. Let them come whenever they have to. Just make sure that they don't cause trouble like the last two have.



    No, they still haven't fixed it. I quess that the .9 update will be their last chance. But I don't think that they care.



    Ir reminds me of MS. When they came out with Powerpoint 98 it broke printing to film recorders.



    I spoke to several levels of MS techs. The answer was that it was the fault of ALL the film recorder manufacturers, and it was up to them to fix it.



    Well, after a lot of screaming from the industry, they finally did fix it.



    But I'm sure that they broke it on purpose. They were putting animation into the program at the time, and it could only be used with a computer. Film recorders didn't fit within their desired upgrade path.



    My feeling is that we're seeing the same thing here with SCSI from Apple. They don't want to support it any longer. They want to move us to USB 2, Firewire, and S-ATA.
  • Reply 46 of 96
    Ok, obviously I can only put forward my opinion, not facts, but here goes...



    Quote:

    Some might make sense, others are just stupid (the loss of the internet prefernce pane was just stupid, it should've been expanded to cover all apps, not lost). They also changed Process Viewer to Activity Monitor (oh, such a better name). Moving features around (disk copy functionality moved into disk utility, disk copy lost). But where's the benefit?



    The loss of the 'Internet' Preference Pane I completely agree with. Never seen the rhyme or reason for that.



    Process Viewer being renamed to Activity Monitor? Absolutely understandable. That particular app happens to monitor 'activity' of all types... not just view processes. Not sure what's so crazy about that.



    'Disk Copy' was a horrendous hang-over from OS 9, and made no sense to anyone who'd not used OS 9. How exactly does it make sense to have "Disk Copy" open when you mount a disk image? From the user's POV, that should be the Finder's job, no? Copying disks, burning images, creating images, scanning fileystems, etc. are utilitarian functions... to do with disks. I don't see a problem with the Disk Utility monkier.



    OS X has until 10.3 (IMHO) very much been a 'work in progress'. 10.3 is the first OS that gave me the feeling that Apple were happy with how the minutiae worked... and I've been using it since 10.0. I would have hated to see OS X stagnate at the level of 10.2.



    Quote:

    This time System preferences are apparently changing again (I remember now reading how its kind of hooking spotlight into it, losing groups or the toolbar or something). People are actually going to be typing panel names to find them?



    Er. No. Have you ever seen someone new to OS X use System Prefs? Do you remember what it was like when you first used it? It's much less jumbled than Windows's Control Panel, but you have to do a lot of exploring to find out what each option does.



    The Search text box allows full text-search based on the features provided. You don't have to type 'Accounts' to access accounts! Just click the damn icon like you always have done. But if you're interested in 'securing my account', it'd be interesting to have both Accounts highlighted (because of admin privs, auto-login options etc) and 'security' (for file vault, password requests, etc)



    It's simply something to help people who don't want to spend their time plumbing the depths of a configuration screen learning what's possible, and an aide memoire for us old timers.



    Quote:

    Hey then, here's an idea, why not lose the icons altogether and just type in all the names. In fact, you could do that with the Finder too! Hey, we could then lose the need for the mouse altogether (no more complaints about lacking two-buttons, Apple's getting rid of the mouse!).



    Ease off on the hyperbole.



    Quote:

    In fact, if they could throw out Quartz and Aqua (two things that really slow down your computer), you'd have one kick-ass computer!



    See previous comment.



    Quote:

    Or here's an idea. How about, rather than spending manpower on updating, testing, etc, existing pieces of the OS that worked before, putting them towards fixing some of those reported bugs (hey, like that dude's SCSI issues!).



    GUI coders and graphic designers don't write hardware drivers. Specialists in database design and development (think Spotlight) don't write drivers. Driver writers write drivers.
  • Reply 47 of 96
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    Developers have the final release, they don't need a boxed version on the shelves. They've been working on their programs for months.



    No, Apple doesn't seed the final release - they ship it to developers after it is available in stores.
  • Reply 48 of 96
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by twinturbo

    Portable Home Directories isn't the same thing as the "Mobile Accounts" feature of OSX 10.3 Server, is it?



    No, it's an addition to Mobile Accounts where the home directories can be synchronised with a copy on the server.
  • Reply 49 of 96
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    But my point is valid. Apparently Apple thinks every update to their software requires re-jiggering every freakin' thing in the OS.



    Try and exaggerate just a little more, please





    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    Some might make sense, others are just stupid (the loss of the internet prefernce pane was just stupid, it should've been expanded to cover all apps, not lost). They also changed Process Viewer to Activity Monitor (oh, such a better name).



    I don't think that most Mac users know what a process is, and as said earlier it shows you more than processes. Activity Monitor is actually a better name IMHO.





    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    Moving features around (disk copy functionality moved into disk utility, disk copy lost). But where's the benefit?



    Consolidation.





    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    This time System preferences are apparently changing again (I remember now reading how its kind of hooking spotlight into it, losing groups or the toolbar or something).



    Or something? How about trying it for yourself before bitching? Groups are not gone and very little has changed in SysPrefs.





    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    People are actually going to be typing panel names to find them?



    Yes, Apple is going back to a text based interface. Again, how about trying it for yourself before bitching?



    Spotlight is an ADDITION!!!!





    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    Hey then, here's an idea, why not lose the icons altogether and just type in all the names. In fact, you could do that with the Finder too! Hey, we could then lose the need for the mouse altogether (no more complaints about lacking two-buttons, Apple's getting rid of the mouse!). In fact, if they could throw out Quartz and Aqua (two things that really slow down your computer), you'd have one kick-ass computer!



    Hey then, here we have a new search technology. How about not putting it in our apps - people don't like to search anyway.
  • Reply 50 of 96
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,620member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JLL

    No, Apple doesn't seed the final release - they ship it to developers after it is available in stores.



    That would be very strange for any company. They don't know that it's the final release until it gets back to them without changes.



    For example if Adobe sends me a FRC #4, and we report the last bugs, and get sent #5, and report it satisfactory (it's not really like that, but close enough), then that one (#5) is said to be final release.



    Adobe then checks it one last time, and it is declared GM.



    They don't have to send the final release BACK to us, because we already have it.



    I can't imagine that Apple is any different. All beta programs I've been involved with over the years work the same way.
  • Reply 51 of 96
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    This one doesn't.



    The installers and such change from the dev to the final... dev builds *require* a full erase and reinstall, while the commercial product allows you to archive and install, install in place, etc. There are changes, just not to the actual code. You'll see differing version strings, sometimes icons get tweaked, etc, but the code is the same.



    Apple != Adobe.
  • Reply 52 of 96
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    I don't mean the security updates. Let them come whenever they have to. Just make sure that they don't cause trouble like the last two have.



    Also other updates besides the ones that are dubbed "security updates" affect security.

    Of course sometimes it will worsen security, but mostly when things are done better and cleaned up in general, bugs are exterminated that no one intended to fix, or even bugs that no one spotted yet.
  • Reply 53 of 96
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,620member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    This one doesn't.



    The installers and such change from the dev to the final... dev builds *require* a full erase and reinstall, while the commercial product allows you to archive and install, install in place, etc. There are changes, just not to the actual code. You'll see differing version strings, sometimes icons get tweaked, etc, but the code is the same.



    Apple != Adobe.




    Yes, I understand that. It is an OS after all.



    But as you say "the code is the same".



    And that's what I'm talking about.
  • Reply 54 of 96
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Yes, and from past experience, having a dev build machine means you don't use the same Software Update mechanism as the consumer products. The devs get different x.y.z updates to test, but they won't install on a dev unit.



    If you stick with 8A425 (or whatever the GM will be), and don't go with the consumer final, Software Update won't work correctly, even for dev releases of updates.



    Dev builds are to be tested on, worked with, and then blown away to be replaced with the consumer build at the first earliest convenience. That's just the way it is. Yeah, I know devs who don't bother, but there's generally some background trickery to be done to get it working smoothly past a couple of upgrades.



    Devs get sent the full consumer release in their monthly mailings when it is available, regardless of whatever else they were sent.



    That's just the way it is in Apple land.
  • Reply 55 of 96
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,620member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chickadee

    Yes, and from past experience, having a dev build machine means you don't use the same Software Update mechanism as the consumer products. The devs get different x.y.z updates to test, but they won't install on a dev unit.



    If you stick with 8A425 (or whatever the GM will be), and don't go with the consumer final, Software Update won't work correctly, even for dev releases of updates.



    Dev builds are to be tested on, worked with, and then blown away to be replaced with the consumer build at the first earliest convenience. That's just the way it is. Yeah, I know devs who don't bother, but there's generally some background trickery to be done to get it working smoothly past a couple of upgrades.



    Devs get sent the full consumer release in their monthly mailings when it is available, regardless of whatever else they were sent.



    That's just the way it is in Apple land.




    That's not so different from the way Adobe and others operate. Consumer updating processes rarely work on any dev builds. The final build usually does contain a few lines of code to prevent this updating from occurring. The company doesn't want the build to be spread and have infinite life of its own.



    But otherwise the program code is the same as the printed version. That's all I'm trying to say.
  • Reply 56 of 96
    ch@osch@os Posts: 6member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    If you stick with 8A425 (or whatever the GM will be), and don't go with the consumer final, Software Update won't work correctly, even for dev releases of updates.



    GM = consumer final.



    If 8A428 is the GM release then Software Update will work correctly with it. This might be why 8A428 isn't easily available - even from ADC. Though in years past Apple has made the GM available to developers early (depending on the release this has been anywhere from 1 - 3 weeks prior to an officially set release date).
  • Reply 57 of 96
    ch@osch@os Posts: 6member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    The final build usually does contain a few lines of code to prevent this updating from occurring.



    I've been an ADC (as well as an AppleSeed member) for a long time and I don't recall this ever being the case for Apple. Maybe so long I'm starting to forget.
  • Reply 58 of 96
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,620member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ch@os

    I've been an ADC (as well as an AppleSeed member) for a long time and I don't recall this ever being the case for Apple. Maybe so long I'm starting to forget.



    I'm not talking about the GM. The code would be removed for that.



    Adobe once forgot to remove the code from Photoshop, I don't now remember if it was for ver 6 or not, and the program expired a month after release. Adobe quickly came out with an update that removed the code.



    Some companies don't use code, the consumer updates look for the ver number instead.
  • Reply 59 of 96
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Bingo. And since the version numbers are one of the things I've seen modified from the build devs got that was later marked GM, to when it ended up in the retail box...



    Granted, Apple may have changed this since last I was on the dev build treadmill, back with 10.2. From the Atlas/Hera days up until then though, the official recommended route was to install the retail package when it arrived in the dev mailing. Anything prior to that (including a build that you may have had that was later marked GM) wasn't guaranteed to work properly with the update system. *shrug*
  • Reply 60 of 96
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,620member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    Bingo. And since the version numbers are one of the things I've seen modified from the build devs got that was later marked GM, to when it ended up in the retail box...



    Granted, Apple may have changed this since last I was on the dev build treadmill, back with 10.2. From the Atlas/Hera days up until then though, the official recommended route was to install the retail package when it arrived in the dev mailing. Anything prior to that (including a build that you may have had that was later marked GM) wasn't guaranteed to work properly with the update system. *shrug*




    Yes, you're right, that's the difference.



    But now I'm intrigued. It seems as though I'll have to get into the dev program to check these things out for myself.



    By the way, Apple's spell-check wants to spell your name as "Chickadee".



    Kind of cute, eh?
Sign In or Register to comment.