Items missing in Tiger.
Ok so there are 200 new features in Tiger
But what's missing.
I'm trying to keep a running total of what didn't make the cut.
1. OpenGL 2.0.
2. Resolution Independence
3. ??? (your suggestion here)
But what's missing.
I'm trying to keep a running total of what didn't make the cut.
1. OpenGL 2.0.
2. Resolution Independence
3. ??? (your suggestion here)
Comments
Originally posted by hmurchison
Ok so there are 200 new features in Tiger
But what's missing.
I'm trying to keep a running total of what didn't make the cut.
1. OpenGL 2.0.
2. Resolution Independence
3. ??? (your suggestion here)
I got the impression that the plumbing is there for the resolution independence piece but there will be a period of transition as developers adjust their UI design accordingly?
Don't know, asking.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Ok so there are 200 new features in Tiger
But what's missing.
I'm trying to keep a running total of what didn't make the cut.
1. OpenGL 2.0.
2. Resolution Independence
3. ??? (your suggestion here)
wow, like four hrs after the announcement of release, already we have a bitch thread about what aint there...this was an ANNOUNCEMENT not a release...this has to be some kind of record...mods?
Originally posted by hmurchison
3. ??? (your suggestion here)
Core Data, Quartz 2D Extreme, although one could argue that those are included in Spotlight and Quartz Extreme respectively. But seeing the details Apple included as features, I was surprised to see the above two missing.
Watch the WWDC webcast about the Graphics layers, they are very specific about why this was done.
PB: Those two are in 10.4, they are just not in the marketing. How do you explain the former to most people, and the latter is for developer's only: users will get the benefits but will never know how things were implemented.
Beyond that, I think everything is hunky dory.
wow, like four hrs after the announcement of release, already we have a bitch thread about what aint there...this was an ANNOUNCEMENT not a release...this has to be some kind of record...mods?
Are we a tad touchy? This thread is for noting what items didn't make the cut in Tiger. Not a bytch thread.
Karl thanks for that info. I have seen that the Rez independent UI was in the Betas. I'll try to locate that WWDC webcast. It seems with LCDs jumping up in resolution we need to have a malleable OSX GUI that can be optimised to a monitors rez.
I'm not worried about the Java and OpenGL I know they're comming. In fact with Apple admitting that they are lengthening the development cycle I'm sure there will be plenty of tech that is implemented in Tiger before 10.5 hits.
Of course the most mythical of all missing features.
PILES!!
Originally posted by the cool gut
I would like the actual folders to change color as opposed to the label, when can I get that?
Beyond that, I think everything is hunky dory.
Agreed. I don't used labels because they look so ugly amongst the gorgeous Aqua UI. Maybe somehow they could affect the colour of the icon's white patches, so i have yellow for a certain college project and all the files (word, pictures, web pages) had a yellow "page" icon instead of white. Of course this could be integrated with a spotlight search type thing?
I wonder if Apple is planning anything for when Longhorn finally ships. Obviously 10.5 will probably be at least 2 years away - can they do anything splashy with a point release?
Will Longhorn be out within the next 2 years then?
Originally posted by Ebby
Is firewire networking official yet?
It has been official in 10.3 for quite some time now. It is just not recommended (the firewire protocol is not a particularly good one for layering TCP/IP on top of).
Originally posted by Karl Kuehn
It has been official in 10.3 for quite some time now. It is just not recommended (the firewire protocol is not a particularly good one for layering TCP/IP on top of).
When I tried using firewire to share a connection for a week or so, it was a real pain in the ass, I had to restart network sharing all the time to get it to work.
Sure it's nice to have the feature, but seems it needs a little further work.
Originally posted by Gon
When I tried using firewire to share a connection for a week or so, it was a real pain in the ass, I had to restart network sharing all the time to get it to work.
Sure it's nice to have the feature, but seems it needs a little further work.
Like I said... tunneling TCP/IP over FireWire sucks... both protocols have connection monitoring built into them, and it winds up that they fight a lot when anything goes wrong. Then there is the fact that FireWire is optimized for large chunks of data, and TCP/IP is best at sending streams of small chiunks. This problem is not limited at all to Apple's implementation, but is a general thing. It is just a bad idea.
To fix the problem you would really have to bridge/tunnel the data across FireWire (probably with some sort of trick-cache system like satellite network providers use), and this would require something proprietary (as there is no standard for this), and it would have to be at both ends. But this is really not worth anyone doing as current FireWire (over anything but fiber) tops out at 800Mbits/sec but Gigbit ethernet (theoretically) tops out at 1000Mbits/sec, and that is bi-directional (the FireWire number is aggregate), and the price difference is not usually worth talking about.
Now don't confuse this with saying there is no place for FireWire, those same protocols that make TCP/IP suck over FireWire also make it the best protocol out there for working with disk drives and other large-data-streaming systems. It just has no real place as a network carrier. I like that Apple has provided a basic setup, as it is nice for emergencies, but any more money spent in this area would just be a waste of resources that could better be used elsewhere.
Originally posted by Karl Kuehn
Then there is the fact that FireWire is optimized for large chunks of data, and TCP/IP is best at sending streams of small chiunks. This problem is not limited at all to Apple's implementation, but is a general thing. It is just a bad idea.
...
I like that Apple has provided a basic setup, as it is nice for emergencies, but any more money spent in this area would just be a waste of resources that could better be used elsewhere.
"It is nice for emergencies." Indeed, and emergencies and ad hoc setups are the only way I want to use this technology. Precisely for that reason I think it should be reliable! If it's slow, no problem, I just want a connection, and I want it to be solid.
Then again, IP over Firewire actually seemed reliable, I could always ping the other machine. Apparently the Internet Sharing system's IPoF component is the problem that I'd like to see fixed.
Most likely its the usual Apple Photoshop magic, however.
Why would you say that picture looks res independent?
Just curious what all that means.
Originally posted by zenatek
What is resolution independent mean?
Why would you say that picture looks res independent?
Just curious what all that means.
You know when you crank the resolution up on your montior and your text and icons shrink to the size of a gnat? Well rez independence would allow you to scale the user interface of the OS back up so that your icons/text will be at a decent size.