PDA

View Full Version : Mac OS X 10.2.5 Monday/Tuesday?




MacRumors
Apr 7, 2003, 07:18 PM
MacNews.Net.Tc (http://macintosh.fryke.com) reports that Mac OS X 10.2.5 6L28 has been seeded and should be available in the next few days.



King Cobra
Apr 7, 2003, 07:30 PM
As of this posting, the title is:

Mac OS X 10.2.6 Monday/Tuesday?

Yet the thread is about 10.2.5.

I doubt there will be a 10.2.6, though. There have been plenty of "seeds" for 10.2.5, so a lot of preperation went into 10.2.5. I suspect the rest will go towards 10.3.

Giaguara
Apr 7, 2003, 07:38 PM
AFAIK 10.2.5 has not been out yet for normal users.

10.2.6 will exist, if before that the battery killer and some other issues will not be resolved.

bousozoku
Apr 7, 2003, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Giaguara
AFAIK 10.2.5 has not been out yet for normal users.

10.2.6 will exist, if before that the battery killer and some other issues will not be resolved.

10.2.6 will exist That's rather bold for something that isn't known to exist and may not be possible. Are you creating it?

Hemingray
Apr 7, 2003, 07:49 PM
Yeah, even with the conditional "if" it's still possible that they hold off fixing it until 10.3...

shadowfax
Apr 7, 2003, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by Hemingray
Yeah, even with the conditional "if" it's still possible that they hold off fixing it until 10.3...
if we aren't going to see panther till september, i think chances are OK for a 10.2.6.

t^3
Apr 7, 2003, 08:12 PM
OS updates have been showing up about every two months, so this would put 10.2.6 in June, and if issues crop up, 10.2.7 could possibly be in late July or early August. Of course, since 10.0 went to 10.0.4 and 10.1 went to 10.1.5, perhaps 10.2 will stop at 10.2.6? But I doubt that by the time 10.6 comes around, there would be a 10.6.10.

howard
Apr 7, 2003, 08:35 PM
i'm gonna be pretty pissed if this next update doesn't fix my battery. this kind of thing should happen!!...an update that actually makes your machine peform worse

Freg3000
Apr 7, 2003, 08:54 PM
Is this battery problem on all Apple laptops, or specifically one type, like the iBooks? I am scared about my new 12" Powerbook, and am secretly hoping it ships with 10.2.3 instead. :rolleyes:

Hopefull 10.2.5 resolves all battery issues so there will be no more problems.

Kwyjibo
Apr 7, 2003, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by Freg3000
Is this battery problem on all Apple laptops, or specifically one type, like the iBooks? I am scared about my new 12" Powerbook, and am secretly hoping it ships with 10.2.3 instead. :rolleyes:

Hopefull 10.2.5 resolves all battery issues so there will be no more problems.

I think your OK. I thought most apple products shipped iwht 10.2.1 and gave u the option to upgrade.

Kwyjibo
Apr 7, 2003, 09:22 PM
I jsut repaired all my permissions and I'm ready for the update. Maybe we will have a SUPERTUESDAY. Who knows but heres hoping.

Nermal
Apr 7, 2003, 10:44 PM
Originally posted by Hemingray
Yeah, even with the conditional "if" it's still possible that they hold off fixing it until 10.3...

Just changing the subject a bit, do we have any proof that Panther is actually going to be 10.3? Apple's site just says it's the next version of OS X, and I'm reminded of OS 7 and 8, which skipped straight up to 7.5 and 8.5 without having a .3 or .4 in either case (or a .2 for that matter IIRC).

bwawn
Apr 7, 2003, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by Nermal
Just changing the subject a bit, do we have any proof that Panther is actually going to be 10.3? Apple's site just says it's the next version of OS X, and I'm reminded of OS 7 and 8, which skipped straight up to 7.5 and 8.5 without having a .3 or .4 in either case (or a .2 for that matter IIRC).

Jaguar was 10.2. Apple wants to stick with the "X" naming scheme (since X = 10). It's only logical that Panther will be 10.3.

But there is a chance otherwise.

DaveGee
Apr 7, 2003, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by bwawn
Jaguar was 10.2. Apple wants to stick with the "X" naming scheme (since X = 10). It's only logical that Panther will be 10.3.

But there is a chance otherwise.

I agree 1000%

Apple has a really good OS and the name brand "X" isn't gonna be given up so quickly. Apple never really had this kinda problem before (not really a problem but you know what I mean).

10.3 = 2003
10.4 = 2004
10.5 = 2005
10.6 = 2006
10.7 = 2007
10.8 = 2008
10.9 = 2009 = The year of debate: 'now what do we call it'

Apple is gonna wanna hold on to X for as long as it can. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked to start hearing about 'X v11.0' in another 6 or so years. :D

Dave

shadowfax
Apr 7, 2003, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by DaveGee
I agree 1000%

Apple has a really good OS and the name brand "X" isn't gonna be given up so quickly. Apple never really had this kinda problem before (not really a problem but you know what I mean).

10.3 = 2003
10.4 = 2004
10.5 = 2005
10.6 = 2006
10.7 = 2007
10.8 = 2008
10.9 = 2009 = The year of debate: 'now what do we call it'

Apple is gonna wanna hold on to X for as long as it can. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked to start hearing about 'X v11.0' in another 6 or so years. :D

Dave

what's wrong with OS XI? it's less confusing than X, if not as cool-looking.

coumerelli
Apr 7, 2003, 11:57 PM
Originally posted by Shadowfax
what's wrong with OS XI? it's less confusing than X, if not as cool-looking.

But do we really want to confuse our OS with the SuperBowl? ;)

Coming to a city near you!!! SuperMac XXXIV (v 34.1.4)

Sol
Apr 8, 2003, 02:19 AM
I hope OS X.2.5 fixes that damned date bug introduced in the last version. Nearly every time I boot up the date is the 1st of January, 1970!!

Anyway, apart from that I am very happy with OS X.2 on my dual 800 MHz QuickSilver. I do not have a laptop but those people complaining about their batteries should double check what their Energy Saver settings are, as well as minimize usage of the optical drive and turn down their screen brightness. Oh, and they should also use an AC adaptor when in-doors.

Zeke
Apr 8, 2003, 06:44 AM
You're computer boots to Jan 1, 1970. That's funny. That means instead of saving the date they initialize to the epoch time (initializing the time variable to 0). Oh well, sorry for the lame post. I've been researching computer time the day for my little programming endeavor. For anyone who doesn't know, time is stored in this signed double which is the number of seconds since the aforementioned date. Interesting...

AppleMatt
Apr 8, 2003, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Sol
I hope OS X.2.5 fixes that damned date bug introduced in the last version. Nearly every time I boot up the date is the 1st of January, 1970!!

Have no fear! The first seed of 10.2.5 fixed the date bugs, so no more playing around with network time I'm afraid...:(

AppleMatt

TreeTruckie
Apr 8, 2003, 11:06 AM
Ah, but will the suggestions I've been sending repeatedly to Apple be incorperated? iChat should send my Away message when someone sends me an IM. And attachments in Mail are always a problem for me when I send files to my friends on AOL. If these two things could be fixed, I can start to mend the poor opinion my friends have of Macs (given that I've had to explain these two faults to my PC friends with the "I guess it's because I'm on a Mac" response).

Giaguara
Apr 8, 2003, 11:11 AM
i said 10.2.6 to exist if the battery issue won't be solved before. (it does affect even some powerbooks).

any of the releases so far hasn't have any note it to have been resolved.

it makes no sense to leave that issue open and to "force" the users that otherwise like X.2 (and e.g. have a G3) to migrate to panther. so just invent the battery fix and release that before. if it so far isn't in any release note, it hasnt' been solved.

or in alternative, give me just a new battery and i'll stuck on 10.2.5. ~ 40 minutes of battery life sucks.

unless panther will be faster even on a G3 probably on my 'book i'll stay with jag.

mec
Apr 8, 2003, 11:18 AM
10.8 = 2008
10.9 = 2009...

I'm seems like the next steps would be:

10.10 = 2010
10.11 = 2011 etc.

I doubt in ten years anyone will confuse 10.1.0
and 10.10.0

Giaguara
Apr 8, 2003, 11:24 AM
nope. what happened after 9.1 or 9.2? 9.3?? or X?

so why 10. would have e.g. 10.9 ?

cubist
Apr 8, 2003, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by coumerelli
But do we really want to confuse our OS with the SuperBowl? ;)

Coming to a city near you!!! SuperMac XXXIV (v 34.1.4)

And then later on Mac OS L (v.50.0.0)
And Mac OS C (v.100.0.0)

In Mac OS XI we go from brushed metal to frosted glass. By Mac OS XIV we should be going to oiled teakwood.

t^3
Apr 8, 2003, 11:56 AM
If I remember correctly, Steve Jobs did say that OS X will last Apple for the next 15 or so years when it was introduced, so I have reason to believe that when the next generation OS comes along, it'll be renamed.

gotohamish
Apr 8, 2003, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by coumerelli
Coming to a city near you!!! SuperMac XXXIV (v 34.1.4)

Can you get me a ticket, sounds like a blast!!

:D :D :p

NavyIntel007
Apr 8, 2003, 03:11 PM
I hate these rumors.

jg3
Apr 8, 2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Nermal
I'm reminded of OS 7 and 8, which skipped straight up to 7.5 and 8.5 without having a .3 or .4 in either case (or a .2 for that matter IIRC).

Ah, but there was an 8.1. :)

Windowlicker
Apr 8, 2003, 03:35 PM
seems like the monday?tuesday guess was a bit too early :P

if someone then I am waiting for this update as it might solve my problem of getting unexplained major crashes (the grey green thing with "you have to shut down your computer"..)

PLEASE APPLE PLEASE!!

hvfsl
Apr 8, 2003, 04:41 PM
First the last version of Mac OS x will be 10.9.x SJ said that Mac OS X will last them 10 years. The new version naming scheme is based on the Unix version naming scheme and the NEXT OS that SJ created.

jimjiminyjim
Apr 8, 2003, 04:59 PM
What was this discussion about again?
OS X to be renamed??
Why not just call it OS XP? (ducks the flames)
Muhahahaha!

I suppose we're all sick of discussing the dates. rightly so. And as for features, well i guess we can't expect too terribly much.

Maybe something to make our nice flat panel screens touchscreens? (avoids more flames)

Well, it's getting hot in here. I'm going somewhere else. iPods tuesday?

Giaguara
Apr 8, 2003, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by jimjiminyjim
What was this discussion about again?
OS X to be renamed??
Why not just call it OS XP? (ducks the flames)

Well, it's getting hot in here. I'm going somewhere else. iPods tuesday?

:D yea, i still am waiting for THE ipods ... THE tuesday ... :p

OS XP? that sux. (win) XP comes from .. mixing 2 smiles: :-p and X-( .. so it is about X-p (a vomit-smile). Or what ever it is, it has nothing to with anything X.. just poor windoz guys couldn't invent even the name so they had to copy even that from macs.

King Cobra
Apr 8, 2003, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by NavyIntel007
I hate these rumors.

A small voice of reason is recognized among the audiance.

#1: Apple updates their OS every year, no matter what the version number. We went a long time with OS 9 before OS X became increasingly popular. Then again, we went three years for non-clone Macs to start booting from System 1.x to System 2.x (Jan. 1984 to March 1987). There was also a System 1.1 update in between.

#2: The previously suggested update scheme for Mac X 10.2.6 does not make sense. (You know who you are...) Yes, it would be a coincidence, but it does not mean there will be a trend. IF 10.2.6 were to debut, what happens at 10.5.9 to 10.6? Is that a minor update to the OS or a major one? Does the x.x.1 make a big difference in the chance of an operating system? What happens at the very end of the 10.6.x series? Does it go to 10.6.10?

As far as memory serves, Apple has not once publicized a version of their OS with a two-digit sub-subversion. And even if there was, why not incorporate that trend years ago with System 1, or even with the initial Mac X 10.0.0?

My opinion about this X scheme, inspired by a few other board members, is "X" is a generalization, a symbol. In all honesty, "XI" does not either look or sound like a catchy symbol.

Ocelot
Apr 8, 2003, 07:50 PM
I swear that everytime macrumors post information about an update its delayed by two weeks.

I can almost guarantee that this update was postponed due to the recent exploit/update to Samba yesterday (based purely on conjecture).

Apple almost always seems to release updates on Friday-Thursday nights- if my memory serves me correctly... of course maybe that's my imagination..

I'm willing to bet we shall see 10.2.5 next Thursday or Friday!

AND If it happens to show up in software update later tonight- I wont complain

-Ry

King Cobra
Apr 8, 2003, 08:23 PM
Some lawmakers totally suck...

Then, again, Apple seems to plan the least expected occassion for an event or an update. When a majority of the people think this update will be out at some date A, Apple plans it for date B. This could be by coincidence, or it could be not.

Above all else, though, whether or not Murphy's law is in effect, one effectiveness for Apple's strategy is playing mind games with both its customers and Microsoft's customers. Microsoft customers can't help but stare at Apple's products (iPod, iMac G4, Powerbook), and Apple customers can't help but wonder when a new product or update will be available.

The other effectiveness is both sides will give in. :)

Nermal
Apr 8, 2003, 09:40 PM
Originally posted by jg3
Ah, but there was an 8.1. :)

I was just kinda hoping that we'd go straight from 10.2 to 10.5, not that there's any functional difference between them!

Yes I know there was an 8.1, I just upgraded from 8.1 to 10.2.1 about 2 months ago, of course it involved a new computer :)

JJTiger1
Apr 9, 2003, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by Shadowfax
what's wrong with OS XI? it's less confusing than X, if not as cool-looking.

... if you look at XI upside down, it becomes IX.
... OS 9 exists. :D
-
Ancient OS Installer CD's include 7.6 and 8.6. :eek:

cubist
Apr 9, 2003, 03:59 PM
If the X doesn't mean 10, we ought to get rid of it.

We should stop saying "MacOS X 10.2.5", etc. We should either say "MacOS X.2.5" or "MacOS 10.2.5", but not both. Otherwise there are two 10s in there.

There is no rhyme or reason to Apple's version numbers, nor anyone else's. There were Finder versions, but the first version you see labelled a "System" was "System 6". (Was the name inspired by the name of an older IBM system?) There were only a few releases of System 6 before System 7 came along. Then there came 7.0.1, various 7.1's, various 7.5's, and 7.6. When the clones appeared, the "System" disappeared, and it became "MacOS 7.6". What would have been 7.7 became 8.0 to stiff the cloners; then came 8.1, 8.5, 8.6, 9.0, 9.1 and 9.2. There is little difference between 7.6 and 8.0; 9.0 has a lot of changes.

Apple has said repeatedly that the X means "10". It certainly does not mean "Experimental", nor is it a wildcard ("any MacOS").

maradong
Apr 10, 2003, 04:53 AM
Do you think there will be a 10.2.6 release before they start the panther selling ?

DaveGee
Apr 10, 2003, 07:10 AM
Think Panther, Think September... So yea 10.2.5 will no doubt be available before then.

...edit...

read that last post way too fast... 10.2.6 hmm I dunno I guess we could see one more release before then.

...edit...

D

GroundLoop
Apr 10, 2003, 07:18 AM
MacCentral just posted:

"Apple on Thursday added a new product to its online store for customers running Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar: The Mac OS X 10.2.5 Update CD. Information posted to Apple's Web site gives details on what will be fixed in the as yet unreleased Mac OS X 10.2.5 update.

According to Apple, the update delivers enhanced functionality and improved reliability for the following applications, utilities, services and technologies: Address Book, AirPort, AppleScript, Bluetooth, Classic compatibility, Disk Copy, Disk Utility, Finder, Help Viewer, iChat, Image Capture, IP Firewall, Kerberos, Mail, OpenGL, Print Center, Rendezvous and Sherlock.


The update also includes improvements to AFP, Web services, dial up connections over PPP and Windows file services, as well as audio, disc recording, graphics, and printing improvements and USB, FireWire and SCSI device compatibility enhancements.

The update also provides updated security services and includes the latest Security Updates.

The update CD could be beneficial in labs or other environments where many computers are being used that would make downloading the often large updates from Apple a hassle. The Update CD will install on Mac OS X 10.2 through 10.2.4.

The cost of the CD is US$19.95 and has an estimated ship time of 1-2 days from the online Apple Store. More information can be found in the Apple Software section of Apple's online store."

Can't wait to give it a whirl!

Hickman

JJTiger1
Apr 10, 2003, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by Brian Hickman
MacCentral just posted:

"Apple on Thursday added a new product to its online store for customers running Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar: The Mac OS X 10.2.5 Update CD. Information posted to Apple's Web site gives details on what will be fixed in the as yet unreleased Mac OS X 10.2.5 update.

[snip]

Can't wait to give it a whirl!

Hickman

I ordered my copy of the CD just a moment ago. Total cost including shipping and sales tax is just a few cents more than $25. :)

I hate long downloads too.
... I hope that 10.2.5 is not as pokey as the previous versions.

JJTiger1
Apr 10, 2003, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by JJTiger1
I ordered my copy of the CD just a moment ago. Total cost including shipping and sales tax is just a few cents more than $25. :)

I hate long downloads too.
... I hope that 10.2.5 is not as pokey as the previous versions.

-----
I just got an email response from Apple that my 10.2.5 CD is being shipped !!!

$25.80 total. Ground Shipping. It could be in my greasy hands Monday. :D

I will review the tracking data if/when I get antsy.
-
JJ

Tassilo
Apr 10, 2003, 01:53 PM
Guess I'll wait a few days before I dare to install. It's available via Software Update.