PDA

View Full Version : Apple Asking Feedback for Leopard 9A499




MacRumors
Aug 14, 2007, 06:08 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple mailed out a survey link (http://adcweb.apple.com/survey/) for ADC developers asking for feedback on the current Leopard seed (9A499).

The survey is actually asking developers for a comparison between Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard and the shipping version of Mac OS X Tiger (10.4):
This survey is intended to allow you to compare your experiences using Mac OS X Leopard Build 9A499 and a shipping version of Mac OS X Tiger (10.4.x). Please rate all the areas that you have used in 9A499.
The survey provides comparison choices of

- Much Worse
- Somewhat worse
- About the same
- Somewhat better
- Much better

on a wide range of Mac OS X tools and features. The described areas of comparison are broken down into Mail & Web, Graphics & Media, Setup & Mobility, Desktop & Interface, Productivity & Communication, and Sharing & Devices.

You must be an ADC developer to participate in the survey (verified by email).

Apple is expected to ship the final version of Mac OS X Leopard (10.5) in October.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/14/apple-asking-feedback-for-leopard-9a499/)



Vidd
Aug 14, 2007, 06:11 PM
It looks as if they're cutting it close if they're not going to delay it further.
It's mid-August already but it's a good opportunity.

arn
Aug 14, 2007, 06:13 PM
yeah, not sure how much meaningful feedback and changes they can make for something like this.

(by october)

arn

swingerofbirch
Aug 14, 2007, 06:18 PM
I'm an online ADC member and didn't receive this. I guess they only want people with hands on experience to rate it.

galstaph
Aug 14, 2007, 06:21 PM
premier and select adc only I assume?
Does this mean they believe they are close to a final version? (please please) Any guesses on a date yet? (other than in october)

ipedro
Aug 14, 2007, 06:23 PM
October 31st @ 11:59 PST

Luis
Aug 14, 2007, 06:24 PM
yeah, not sure how much meaningful feedback and changes they can make for something like this.

(by october)

arn

Agree.

What can they do if dev's tell them the new finder (or whatever other big feature) sucks? re-write it?

bananas
Aug 14, 2007, 06:25 PM
Apple must think they are doing pretty well, they just wanna know if someone disagrees. This is the last change to fix things before the release.

PlaceofDis
Aug 14, 2007, 06:25 PM
i'm guessing that at this point the finishing touches are being worked on for Leopard and that if they see something though this sort of survey they can act rather quickly since its a focal point. at least i'd hope so.

Mac-Addict
Aug 14, 2007, 06:25 PM
Lol I sent one using a random name I found on Apple Pr Mr Todd Wilder I put the email as twilder@mac.com hehe :D

Luis
Aug 14, 2007, 06:26 PM
premier and select adc only I assume?

Would guess so...

Does this mean they believe they are close to a final version? (please please)

They have to be in the final version or really really close to it if they are going to release it in october.

jrk07
Aug 14, 2007, 06:28 PM
Lol I sent one using a random name I found on Apple Pr Mr Todd Wilder I put the email as twilder@mac.com hehe :D

um....why?:confused:

Schtumple
Aug 14, 2007, 06:31 PM
I can see the news now "Apple further delays leopard (untill 2008) because developers don't like expose icon"

macguy59
Aug 14, 2007, 06:33 PM
I sure hope they get enough feedback on the desktop and interface. The transparent menu bar and new dock needs to be configurable. <ie> Be able to change it back to 10.4.x style.

Mac-Addict
Aug 14, 2007, 06:34 PM
um....why?:confused:

heh just for jokes.. I'm bored... :D

zzcoop
Aug 14, 2007, 06:36 PM
Maybe they should've tried this before releasing the new iMovie.;)

CalBoy
Aug 14, 2007, 06:36 PM
Well, it seems like it's awefully close to be sending out a survey of this importance now. Leopard should be nearly complete, with only minor kinks being worked out at this point.

October 31st @ 11:59 PST

Sadly, I think we are looking at an October 30th or 31st release. If this survey is any indication, Apple will still be hammering out details a few hours before press time.

DOUGHNUT
Aug 14, 2007, 06:38 PM
ummmm...shouldn't they have done this type of survey much earlier? considering they probably have 1 month left for development and polishing before the software goes gold, what if the response they get is largely negative?

i have a feeling that they saw the large negative response from iMovie, and they're trying to make sure it doesn't happen to leopard as well.

Stike
Aug 14, 2007, 06:38 PM
I sure hope they get enough feedback on the desktop and interface. The transparent menu bar and new dock needs to be configurable. <ie> Be able to change it back to 10.4.x style.

Never.
Apple will make sure that there will be no disaster like "Windows XP in Win 2000 look" just for the sake of it, or, gasp, to even save some CPU cycles! No way!

They want a unified look, and such an option would work against it... IF it is possible, probably only in a hidden way, Tinkertool-style.

puuukeey
Aug 14, 2007, 06:38 PM
feature creep?

bottom line for me? I'm really not that excited for the actual release. I'm more interested in what people will do with core animation. I hope to god someone does with it what apple should have done a while ago and start chipping away at the desktop metaphor.

take a look at the feature list. what are you excited for?

puuukeey
Aug 14, 2007, 06:40 PM
to me its obviously to help them make an informed decision on weather to delay are rework

zioxide
Aug 14, 2007, 06:42 PM
I hope people tell them to not make the menubar so ****ing ugly.

PlaceofDis
Aug 14, 2007, 06:42 PM
Never.
Apple will make sure that there will be no disaster like "Windows XP in Win 2000 look" just for the sake of it, or, gasp, to even save some CPU cycles! No way!

They want a unified look, and such an option would work against it... IF it is possible, probably only in a hidden way, Tinkertool-style.

the menubar look has already been said that its optional. but i don't see them doing that for the dock. i just don't like the 'flashlight' look over the current arrows.

acris10
Aug 14, 2007, 06:43 PM
this news does make me a little leery of the october release date, like the move of the spring release date to october, there wasn't much warning

aidensocal
Aug 14, 2007, 06:52 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple mailed out a survey link (http://adcweb.apple.com/survey/) for ADC developers asking for feedback on the current Leopard seed (9A499).

The survey is actually asking developers for a comparison between Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard and the shipping version of Mac OS X Tiger (10.4):

The survey provides comparison choices of

- Much Worse
- Somewhat worse
- About the same
- Somewhat better
- Much better

on a wide range of Mac OS X tools and features. The described areas of comparison are broken down into Mail & Web, Graphics & Media, Setup & Mobility, Desktop & Interface, Productivity & Communication, and Sharing & Devices.

You must be an ADC developer to participate in the survey (verified by email).

Apple is expected to ship the final version of Mac OS X Leopard (10.5) in October.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/14/apple-asking-feedback-for-leopard-9a499/)


So I am not sure if it is just my setup but I find that with BOTH the current and the last leopard build I have consistent instability with MS Office apps. (jokes aside on MS stability in general) others running Leopard try to view a powerpoint presentation in presentation view, I get a crash every time on 2 different machines. I also get crashes in word when dealing with files larger than 10 pages with any type of tables. I did not get this under tiger.

zoozx
Aug 14, 2007, 06:53 PM
Just give me a FINDER that works and previews that draw correctly and as quickly in the finder as previews draw in other imaging aps.
The fact this has not been fixed in X after all of this time is mind boggling!

wavelayer
Aug 14, 2007, 06:53 PM
What does it matter WHEN the new OS is released? We should just let apple do what they do and get it right. Tiger is great. I use it everyday at work and at home. A new OS is nice, but I don't know why people seem to be so freaked out about a later release date.

neven
Aug 14, 2007, 06:56 PM
Leopard's close shipping date is exactly the reason they're doing this. It's a priority list - they want to know what area to devote resources to the most.

There's time to make major changes, just not to the whole OS. If something is seriously broken (i.e. it gets a lot of complaints in this survey) they can at least know to make it a high priority. With less serious complaints, they can at least make provisional plans, estimate what all they need to get into the first major update to Leopard, and see where they can do some PR (i.e. if a feature gets bad feedback simply by the virtue of its existence, they can promote it in a way that will make it less prominent or explained differently).

It's a rather vague list, so I don't expect they'll use it to make any specific changes. Nowhere does it ask "does the new Dock suck?" (though they might get a bit of that in the comments).

anthonyb
Aug 14, 2007, 06:56 PM
It would be nice to have a release on October 15th

Although if we do in fact have to wait a few more months (which I hope we don't), then I would be all for it. Ship a OS that was not rushed and polished.

First post btw, hello everyone!

jbh001
Aug 14, 2007, 07:03 PM
October 31st @ 11:59 PST
Trick? or Treat?

heisetax
Aug 14, 2007, 07:03 PM
October 31st @ 11:59 PST

That sounds a little early to me. But we can only hope!

the vj
Aug 14, 2007, 07:13 PM
By the time they sort all the mail and information is already January.

Too late to make changes.

heisetax
Aug 14, 2007, 07:17 PM
What does it matter WHEN the new OS is released? We should just let apple do what they do and get it right. Tiger is great. I use it everyday at work and at home. A new OS is nice, but I don't know why people seem to be so freaked out about a later release date.


Maybe it makes them think that they are copying Microsoft in more ways than they will admit. Like the many delays in Vista. The large wasted area at the top of Numbers looks like MS Office 2007's ribbons.

Bill the TaxMan

iProd
Aug 14, 2007, 07:19 PM
So I am not sure if it is just my setup but I find that with BOTH the current and the last leopard build I have consistent instability with MS Office apps. (jokes aside on MS stability in general) others running Leopard try to view a powerpoint presentation in presentation view, I get a crash every time on 2 different machines. I also get crashes in word when dealing with files larger than 10 pages with any type of tables. I did not get this under tiger.

Hmm, I wonder if this is why most people call it beta software??

mwxiao
Aug 14, 2007, 07:21 PM
What does it matter WHEN the new OS is released? We should just let apple do what they do and get it right. Tiger is great. I use it everyday at work and at home. A new OS is nice, but I don't know why people seem to be so freaked out about a later release date.

That's interesting. When VISTA got delayed, we all laughed at MS.

Now leopard is delayed, you are telling me it doesn't matter?

CalBoy
Aug 14, 2007, 07:24 PM
That's interesting. When VISTA got delayed, we all laughed at MS.

Now leopard is delayed, you are telling me it doesn't matter?

Oh it matters, but Leopard hasn't gotten as bad as Vista yet. We still have several years to go before it becomes as bad as Vista.

acslater017
Aug 14, 2007, 07:30 PM
That sounds a little early to me. But we can only hope!

if they really wanna push it they could release Leopard in Hawaii or some Pacific island near New Zealand

simon-says
Aug 14, 2007, 07:33 PM
I hope they are working on the bugs... I stopped receiving help on my tickets I submitted. Doubt I upgrade to Leopard, at least for a while.

hob
Aug 14, 2007, 07:34 PM
First post btw, hello everyone!

Hello ant, welcome welcome....

I'm....... looking forward to October still, but this questionnaire does raise some questions:

Is it not more than a little late in the day for them to be asking such questions? If so, will there be delays? If not - is this just for marketing purposes?

I wonder...

I hope they are working on the bugs... I stopped receiving help on my tickets I submitted. Doubt I upgrade to Leopard, at least for a while.

Woah, really? That sounds like they're really busy...

seamuskrat
Aug 14, 2007, 08:07 PM
Based on my use of the latest few builds, there is a LONG road to go for stability and integration and consistency.

We have lost out on some features like rudimentary ZFS and some other under the hood stuff from earlier versions. Not horrible, but I get the feel this is very rushed and taxing the resources of Apple.

I think the cat got let out of the bag with the iPhone way too early. I think the MacWorld announcement was damage control and they forced out a release in June with basic functionality, pulled resources from OS X and iLife and are now regrouping a bit.

I love my iPhone, but it has an unfinished feel. I am confident it will get some updates, but its not up to the expected polish you expect from Apple.

Leopard is nice. But thats is just it, its only nice. All of these secret features were more evolutionary than revolutionary. Timemachine rocks and will change the way we work for sure, but some of what is considered a major feature is just not that substantial, and in my case not very compelling. In the latest build, we have stability issues. ESPECIALLY with older machines, i.e. PPC machines. Apple is never into optimizing for old Macs, but this version will impact those of us with G5 and G4 machines. Yes, I will upgrade soon, but My dual G5 has a few more months in her yet.

iLife is also a let down. Again, I have it and its buggy as sin. I like the overall direction of iPhoto, but on a mac where it was relatively peppy its like molasses. The new iMovie should be called iVid or iMovie light. Its got potential, but I give up too much for it and gain little. I am quite adept with iMovie and I loose nearly every feature I have come to love. The new version makes it easy for my mom to make and edit a quick movie, but set me back a ton. I guess Apple wants the ell up to FCE. But it would be nice to migrate my myriad of costly plugins somewhere.

All in all, it is my OPINION that Apple is experiencing some growing pains and was forced into early admission and release of the iPhone at the expense of iLife and Leopard. I also think based on my experiences that Leopard is far from hard beta and being mid August, if they want to ship in October they need to press in early October that leaves 8 to 9 weeks of development time.

I have been coding a long time, and 8 to 9 weeks can fly by, especially at the bug finding and tracking down the minutia stage of things. I hope Apple can pull it off, but I also hope they have the foresight to pull a mea culpa and delay till January to polish it off.

The stars are aligned and Apple could pull off a nice victory in the public eye with a solid OS release. But they will take a pounding if Leopard is anything less than rock solid stable.

All opinion, but I have to say I want to believe the best is possible, but have been a bit under whelmed by what is coming out of Cupertino lately. I think they can do it, but somehwhere about 10 to 18 months ago, they lost direction and lost time and are working all night to make it up.

Lepton
Aug 14, 2007, 08:25 PM
Most things are the same (i.e. great) no things are worse, a few things are better. Compared to Tiger there is no revolution here. I think what is mainly happening is that in Tiger, foundations were laid for many things. Lots of new technologies were deployed under the hood and have been there for developers, but in Leopard they are now being used throughout the system itself. Core Data, Core Animation, those sorts of things. Leopard runs on all cylinders and I believe it is going to be very fast, very polished, and very solid.

Peace
Aug 14, 2007, 08:31 PM
*snippet*

Based on my use of the latest few builds, there is a LONG road to go for stability and integration and consistency.

We have lost out on some features like rudimentary ZFS and some other under the hood stuff from earlier versions. Not horrible, but I get the feel this is very rushed and taxing the resources of Apple.



I'm not going to say anything groundbreaking except this.If you have been doing a lot of coding it must be on the PPC and not Intel.


Next time you're playing with Leopard go have a look at the Intel code for the Kernel..;)

john7jr
Aug 14, 2007, 08:35 PM
the menubar look has already been said that its optional.

Where does anything, anywhere, say that?

It's not optional, by the way. It's always translucent and there appears to be no way to make it solid by any setting at all. At least not visible.

So no... as it stands now the menubar is only what you see.

age234
Aug 14, 2007, 08:54 PM
The icons on these Finder buttons are still one or two pixels too low:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v305/tylerdykstra/leopardicons.gif

TheSpaz
Aug 14, 2007, 09:03 PM
Based on my use of the latest few builds, there is a LONG road to go for stability and integration and consistency.

We have lost out on some features like rudimentary ZFS and some other under the hood stuff from earlier versions. Not horrible, but I get the feel this is very rushed and taxing the resources of Apple.

I think the cat got let out of the bag with the iPhone way too early. I think the MacWorld announcement was damage control and they forced out a release in June with basic functionality, pulled resources from OS X and iLife and are now regrouping a bit.

I love my iPhone, but it has an unfinished feel. I am confident it will get some updates, but its not up to the expected polish you expect from Apple.

Leopard is nice. But thats is just it, its only nice. All of these secret features were more evolutionary than revolutionary. Timemachine rocks and will change the way we work for sure, but some of what is considered a major feature is just not that substantial, and in my case not very compelling. In the latest build, we have stability issues. ESPECIALLY with older machines, i.e. PPC machines. Apple is never into optimizing for old Macs, but this version will impact those of us with G5 and G4 machines. Yes, I will upgrade soon, but My dual G5 has a few more months in her yet.

iLife is also a let down. Again, I have it and its buggy as sin. I like the overall direction of iPhoto, but on a mac where it was relatively peppy its like molasses. The new iMovie should be called iVid or iMovie light. Its got potential, but I give up too much for it and gain little. I am quite adept with iMovie and I loose nearly every feature I have come to love. The new version makes it easy for my mom to make and edit a quick movie, but set me back a ton. I guess Apple wants the ell up to FCE. But it would be nice to migrate my myriad of costly plugins somewhere.

All in all, it is my OPINION that Apple is experiencing some growing pains and was forced into early admission and release of the iPhone at the expense of iLife and Leopard. I also think based on my experiences that Leopard is far from hard beta and being mid August, if they want to ship in October they need to press in early October that leaves 8 to 9 weeks of development time.

I have been coding a long time, and 8 to 9 weeks can fly by, especially at the bug finding and tracking down the minutia stage of things. I hope Apple can pull it off, but I also hope they have the foresight to pull a mea culpa and delay till January to polish it off.

The stars are aligned and Apple could pull off a nice victory in the public eye with a solid OS release. But they will take a pounding if Leopard is anything less than rock solid stable.

All opinion, but I have to say I want to believe the best is possible, but have been a bit under whelmed by what is coming out of Cupertino lately. I think they can do it, but somehwhere about 10 to 18 months ago, they lost direction and lost time and are working all night to make it up.

Agreed... it seems like Apple has too much on their plate right now. I sure hope Leopard isn't as much of a disappointment as iMovie 08... I heard it sucked. Also, lately it seems as if Apple's getting lazier... I hardly get excited for anything anymore... I'm not even excited about Leopard and usually I can't wait for new OSes to be released. Apple is going in the wrong direction and they're acting more and more like Microsoft all the time... I'm kind of tired of it. What happened to the good old software that really made the Mac stand out... now-a-days even Mac users are bashing Macs... that's just not right.

TheSpaz
Aug 14, 2007, 09:08 PM
The icons on these Finder buttons are still one or two pixels too low:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v305/tylerdykstra/leopardicons.gif

Also, the arrows are too close to the center line... it looks as if there's too much space on the pointed ends of them.

akac
Aug 14, 2007, 09:10 PM
As a Mac user and ex-Apple employee - people put Apple in such high regard that Apple bashing by Mac users has been going on for 20 years. Nothing new there.

iLife 08 honestly is very good. A couple bugs that need to be fixed, but iMovie 08 is awesome. True it is not an upgrade to iMovie HD and that makes a lot of unhappy people, but iMovie HD internally could not work with AVCHD properly no matter how much work was put into it. Sure it could be made to import it, but in a very un-Mac like way. Apple really needed a whole new codebase for it and iMovie 08 is it.

Leopard is buggy, but that's nothing new. Tiger was very very buggy 2-3 months before release. Vista is still buggy, but was much more so in the RC1 phase (and we haven't hit RC1 yet in Leopard). And ZFS wasn't any more functioning in early builds than it is now. A lot of rumors and discussion about the possibilities, but not any more functioning so nothing was lost...

My wife's iPhone is awesome. Once we got 1.01, honestly we haven't see any bugs or issues with very very heavy use daily.

My two or three cents.

mnb
Aug 14, 2007, 09:14 PM
A bit late for a usability study, ya think?

This needed to be done at least a year ago.

TheSpaz
Aug 14, 2007, 09:15 PM
As a Mac user and ex-Apple employee - people put Apple in such high regard that Apple bashing by Mac users has been going on for 20 years. Nothing new there.

iLife 08 honestly is very good. A couple bugs that need to be fixed, but iMovie 08 is awesome. True it is not an upgrade to iMovie HD and that makes a lot of unhappy people, but iMovie HD internally could not work with AVCHD properly no matter how much work was put into it. Sure it could be made to import it, but in a very un-Mac like way. Apple really needed a whole new codebase for it and iMovie 08 is it.

Leopard is buggy, but that's nothing new. Tiger was very very buggy 2-3 months before release. Vista is still buggy, but was much more so in the RC1 phase (and we haven't hit RC1 yet in Leopard). And ZFS wasn't any more functioning in early builds than it is now. A lot of rumors and discussion about the possibilities, but not any more functioning so nothing was lost...

My wife's iPhone is awesome. Once we got 1.01, honestly we haven't see any bugs or issues with very very heavy use daily.

My two or three cents.

Okay... so you're happy. Awesome. I've been a hard core Mac user for 10 years or so and this is the first time I haven't been excited for an OS update. I'm losing faith... I really am.

rikers_mailbox
Aug 14, 2007, 09:33 PM
feature creep?

or more commonly known as scope creep. It's a little late to make corrections for that.



I'm more interested in what people will do with core animation. I hope to god someone does with it what apple should have done a while ago and start chipping away at the desktop metaphor.

Couldn't agree more. Computers are due for a new virtual work environment. Even if only an evolution of the Desktop, something different than a 1984-era would be nice. Core animation provides the simplicity and power to develop something great.

kenaustus
Aug 14, 2007, 09:36 PM
Leopard will ship with bugs, just like any other OS has in the past.

While the survey provides Apple with a general feel of the developer community it is going to be the individual bug submissions that really matter. I'm betting that they are assigned a "before release" and "after release" priority as they are being received these days.

At some point Apple will decide that they can ship it and then work on an update that will be posted the first day it is available. They will have some time between going gold and the first selling date and a lot of work can be done during that period.

If things get really tight I can see Apple releasing the Intel version on time, with the PPC version shipped a month or two (or three) later. That would resolve the issue of shipping Leopard with new computers sold, take care of the MacTel user and keep the stock market reasonably pleased. Since we have G4, G5 and Intel Macs in the house I'd have to wait until the full Family Pack is ready, but I can live with that.

danielwsmithee
Aug 14, 2007, 09:37 PM
Maybe they should've tried this before releasing the new iMovie.;)Yeah they would have found that 80% of us prefer the new version.

hayesk
Aug 14, 2007, 09:38 PM
That's interesting. When VISTA got delayed, we all laughed at MS.

Now leopard is delayed, you are telling me it doesn't matter?

Uhm... VISTA was delayed by years - even after pulling all of the major features. Leopard is delayed by less than a year, no features have been pulled.

EagerDragon
Aug 14, 2007, 09:44 PM
October 31st @ 11:59 PST

LOL big line at Apple store to buy it at midnight.

hayesk
Aug 14, 2007, 09:47 PM
Okay... so you're happy. Awesome. I've been a hard core Mac user for 10 years or so and this is the first time I haven't been excited for an OS update. I'm losing faith... I really am.

When I was younger I was excited for every new announcement, but as I got older, I realized that MacOS X is just a tool to help me get work done. Either it has a new feature that will help me, or it doesn't. Was Tiger really a big improvement over Panther? Dashboard is nice, but not everyone uses it, and I don't like Spotlight at all. To me, the last really exciting release was Panther because of Exposť - that changed the way I use my Mac.

I really don't get why the bashing of the menu bar. A menu bar becomes useful when you learn muscle memory for the commands. I rarely even look at the menu bar these days. I couldn't care less if it is transparent or not. And if it really upsets people, they can set their desktop to a picture with a white stripe at the top.

Time Machine looks useful, but to me the useful features are the under the hood, the new iCal, to-dos in mail, and the beefed up Automator.

If you don't find anything useful for you, then that's good - you get to save $129.

kcmac
Aug 14, 2007, 09:47 PM
Uhm... VISTA was delayed by years - even after pulling all of the major features. Leopard is delayed by less than a year, no features have been pulled.
At least none that we know about. ;)

Look, I can't wait to see what Leopard is all about but lets not get into this cat fight.

Does Apple usually do this type of survey before a release? I think its interesting none the less.

drmacnut
Aug 14, 2007, 10:00 PM
A survey like this is most likely not to figure how to fix stuff; so you can all stop worrying and shaking in your boots saying "oooh my gosh you mean there are things still broken in Leopard and we're only a couple of months from release?" They don't need to mail out survey invites to get feedback from ADC members under NDAs.

It is, on the other hand, a great way for the Marketing Dept to get some ideas on how to market Leopard when it comes out, based on the opinions of people who have actually used Leopard in its late stages of development.

Plain and simple.

aLoC
Aug 14, 2007, 10:26 PM
I will fill out this survey later tonight.

I will tell them that the see-thru menu bar is tacky and all the service bloat: Dashboard, Spotlight, Time-machine which are always running and taking up memory and accessing the disk should be able to be turned off cleanly in System Preferences.

Eidorian
Aug 14, 2007, 10:28 PM
I will fill out this survey later tonight.

I will tell them that the see-thru menu bar is tacky and all the service bloat: Dashboard, Spotlight, Time-machine which are always running and taking up memory and accessing the disk should be able to be turned off cleanly in System Preferences.Sadly, you'll probably have to fire up Terminal to do all that.

Hopefully this means that Leopard is somewhat on track and we can expect it earlier then later in October.

Alloye
Aug 14, 2007, 10:42 PM
I just sent my feedback. The next build better be really good if they're going to have Leopard on the shelves in October. I wouldn't consider 9A499 a release candidate by any means.

Stridder44
Aug 14, 2007, 10:48 PM
*Cue the whiners and complainers saying the glass is half empty; how Apple is really going downhill/they really will hate Apple forever this time/"guess I'll have to buy a Vista machine :(:(:("/etc.*


Darn, looks like I'm already too late. Seriously, some of you should write novels. You can pour more drama into a post than I'd ever imagine possible over an OS. I love OS X as much as the next guy, but stop making it your life and acting like some change Apple made will forever change how food tastes or what colors look like. Again, this is only to a few select of you. This crap also applies (even more so) when new hardware comes out. Leopard will be pimptastic.


Anyway, looks like things are coming along nicely. Glad to see Apple asking its users how its software is stacking up.

nickelcokes
Aug 14, 2007, 11:03 PM
Can somebody with the latest Leopard build tell me the version numbers of:

1. zsh (run "zsh --version")
2. Python (run "python -V")
3. cups (run "cups-config --version")
4. rsync (run "rsync --version")
5. gcc (run "gcc --version")
6. wxWidgets (run "wx-config --version")
7. OpenSSH and OpenSSL (run "ssh -V")

Despite all the hype about the new graphical features, these are the things that matter most to me, and nobody talks about them. Also, does the Apple GCC build happen to include a FORTRAN compiler?

Catfish_Man
Aug 14, 2007, 11:04 PM
I will fill out this survey later tonight.

I will tell them that the see-thru menu bar is tacky and all the service bloat: Dashboard, Spotlight, Time-machine which are always running and taking up memory and accessing the disk should be able to be turned off cleanly in System Preferences.

Aaaactually that's only Spotlight. Dashboard is off unless you have widgets loaded or activate it*, and time machine only runs if you set it up.


*technically it makes Dock.app a few kilobytes larger in code size, but that's totally irrelevant and wouldn't go away even if there was an off switch. It's the widgets that munch ram.

MacD
Aug 14, 2007, 11:12 PM
I was terribly surprised to get bugs using the Print Picture functionality of iPhoto 08 in the 3 picture layout.

The Leopard builds are buggy as all, not enjoyable to use, and I can't see that Apple will be ready to release something in October. Even if the do release it on the 31st, it will be renamed the Spooky Buggy release.

ventro
Aug 14, 2007, 11:30 PM
Lets face it. The leopard release is a train-wreck. It's visually arresting, and completely out of character for apple's usually top notch design. They overstretched themselves for the iPhone and leopard releases, and are now paying the price.

Mr. Dee
Aug 14, 2007, 11:38 PM
If things get really tight I can see Apple releasing the Intel version on time, with the PPC version shipped a month or two (or three) later. That would resolve the issue of shipping Leopard with new computers sold, take care of the MacTel user and keep the stock market reasonably pleased. Since we have G4, G5 and Intel Macs in the house I'd have to wait until the full Family Pack is ready, but I can live with that.

That would be a terrible mistake and PR disaster we have ever seen in the computing industry. First of all, there would be market confusion. Existing Intel Mac user goes to store and buys the Leopard PPC for his Intel Mac. Existing PPC Mac user goes to store and buys Leopard Intel for his PPC Mac. They insert the disk, "platform not supported error message". Your method is possible, but to be safe, it will never happen. Some stupid user ends up buy both just to be safe.

There is no problem in the Universal Binaries themselves to justify your probability. Your probability is likely confused by the fact that Intel Macs come pre-bundled with Tiger for Intel already. But the reason is simple, there were no Intel Macs in retail prior to January 2006, so there was no reason to provide a retail Intel Tiger version then or even now. That is simply why Apple continues to sell a retail version of Tiger PPC. There are many users who are running older versions of OS X that Apple still see as ripe for an upgrade.

When Leopard is ready, there will be one non-confusing version on the market, for existing Intel and PPC Macs.

matticus008
Aug 14, 2007, 11:58 PM
Is it not more than a little late in the day for them to be asking such questions?
That depends entirely on the nature of issues reported. Developers submit comments and bug reports throughout the process. That's not what this is for. This is designed to assess workflow and usability. It seems to me they're looking for what areas need polish and for any potential backwards steps introduced by new features. They're turning their attention to tying up loose ends other than general bugfixing.

Not all of the issues they find will be fixed by the time Leopard ships--not all of them will be fixed at all.
If so, will there be delays? If not - is this just for marketing purposes?
It's taking a step back and looking at the big picture. Developers work so hard on the little details and the single issues and bugs that sometimes it helps to be reminded to lift your nose out of all the corners and crevices.

All it really shows is that they're looking to start the polishing process and to make sure everything is integrated well. I seriously doubt they have any plans to do any major rewrites this close to release. This probably has the greatest benefit to the UI people, not the coders. It has the convenient added benefit of point out areas to highlight in advertising (and areas to avoid calling too much attention to).

Sbrocket
Aug 15, 2007, 12:20 AM
I will fill out this survey later tonight.

I will tell them that the see-thru menu bar is tacky and all the service bloat: Dashboard, Spotlight, Time-machine which are always running and taking up memory and accessing the disk should be able to be turned off cleanly in System Preferences.

You're a developer? Spotlight is always running, yes, because a constantly running daemon is essential to properly accomplish what its supposed to do. Dashboard isn't taking up your cpu cycles in the background (sure, its running...so what?), and Time Machine isn't even constantly running. All Time Machine functions are (currently) handled by a pair of launchd jobs -- the backup daemon is only running right after 1) you plug in a new drive, or 2) its *'o clock on the dot. :rolleyes:

A Pittarelli
Aug 15, 2007, 12:51 AM
i still think this is an awesome way of making better software sooner

MagnusVonMagnum
Aug 15, 2007, 01:29 AM
yeah, not sure how much meaningful feedback and changes they can make for something like this.

(by october)

arn

I think you're missing the point. The idea is they want a COMPARISON of various changed features between Leopard and Tiger. I believe the idea is if people think a new feature 'sucks' then maybe they'll either switch said feature back to Tiger's functionality (for now until they can address it in a future version of Leopard) or maybe at least offer some kind of preference option.

One thing that comes to mind to me is the new 'stacks' system. It looked great on the keynote, but as subsequent testing has shown, if you have more than a few applications, for example, it will look like CRAP from the dock. Compare this to Tiger's functionality where if you hold down the mouse on the application folder in the dock, it presents something VERY VERY similar to the Windows style "Start Menu" whereby you can view the contents of the folder in a menu style list and branch off to view sub-folders and it will scroll up and down. Stacks just make a big mess if there's too many items in a given folder, looking more like a convoluted finder page in a pop-up bubble than something nice and orderly like was apparently intended. Personally, I'd prefer Tiger's scroll menu style to a big mess in Leopard.

I'd be voting 'roll it back for now' until they can come up with something more orderly to do with folders that have dozens of things in them or at LEAST offer the OPTION of using the old style. Really, I think Mac OS should have a lot more styling type options to pick from to begin with.

As nice as MacOS is, I can't help but feel it's also a little like McDonald's. If you don't like it 'their' way (the McSteve way?), you're going to be waiting a LOOOOONG time to get it your way, if at all. They ought to be more like Wendy's, made fresh to order with fresh beef, never frozen! Or better yet like Ruby Tuesday, hand-crafted and made to order with ground sirloin.

System Preferences should be greatly expanded, IMO so you can set MacOS to be YOUR way.

aLoC
Aug 15, 2007, 01:34 AM
You're a developer? Spotlight is always running, yes, because a constantly running daemon is essential to properly accomplish what its supposed to do. Dashboard isn't taking up your cpu cycles in the background (sure, its running...so what?), and Time Machine isn't even constantly running. All Time Machine functions are (currently) handled by a pair of launchd jobs -- the backup daemon is only running right after 1) you plug in a new drive, or 2) its *'o clock on the dot. :rolleyes:

Time Machine and Spotlight both rely on the fsevents framework. This sits in the background monitoring your filesystem activity and keeps an on-disk log, which is never erased (in the normal course of things) of every folder you ever modified and when you did it. This is the kind of thing I think should be opt-out.

seamuskrat
Aug 15, 2007, 04:13 AM
*snippet*



I'm not going to say anything groundbreaking except this.If you have been doing a lot of coding it must be on the PPC and not Intel.


Next time you're playing with Leopard go have a look at the Intel code for the Kernel..;)

True. I only have a G4/G5. My user base is still only using PPC and I do not yet have an Intel Mac. As I originally aid, the legacy users will feel this update has some issues at the current stage.

nja247
Aug 15, 2007, 05:43 AM
the menubar look has already been said that its optional. but i don't see them doing that for the dock. i just don't like the 'flashlight' look over the current arrows.

Yea that was said, but in both 466 and 499 there is no option from what I've seen that actually allows for this. Thus, where is there a source from Apple stating that it will be optional?

Nick

zeusbox
Aug 15, 2007, 05:44 AM
this news does make me a little leery of the october release date, like the move of the spring release date to october, there wasn't much warning

Agreed. I think if the negative feedback is majority, leopard will be late..

psychofreak
Aug 15, 2007, 05:47 AM
The new lit dock dots look dreadful - fortunately for me I am a Quicksilver user, so anything in my dock is open anyway :)

I have yet to test what the menubar "feels" like, but if its that bad, I can always put a white strip on the top of my backgrounds (many are white already)

aliquis-
Aug 15, 2007, 05:53 AM
I sure hope they get enough feedback on the desktop and interface. The transparent menu bar and new dock needs to be configurable. <ie> Be able to change it back to 10.4.x style.The menubar have been all the time, and I think the new dock looks better.

psychofreak
Aug 15, 2007, 05:57 AM
The menubar have been all the time, and I think the new dock looks better.

Where's the option? Others can't find it.

I hope the new dock looks good on autohide, quite small on the left...

Roller
Aug 15, 2007, 06:27 AM
Apple may end up regretting their announced October ship date. If they slip again, they're going to look very foolish. Saying the end of calendar year '07, or even Q1 '08 would have given them more time to play with. Sure, they would have taken more flak (as MS did with Vista), but it isn't as if Tiger is in desperate need of replacement.

quovadis
Aug 15, 2007, 06:35 AM
A survey like this is most likely not to figure how to fix stuff; so you can all stop worrying and shaking in your boots saying "oooh my gosh you mean there are things still broken in Leopard and we're only a couple of months from release?" They don't need to mail out survey invites to get feedback from ADC members under NDAs.

It is, on the other hand, a great way for the Marketing Dept to get some ideas on how to market Leopard when it comes out, based on the opinions of people who have actually used Leopard in its late stages of development.

Plain and simple.

At last! A voice of reason in this thread. How refreshing!

gnasher729
Aug 15, 2007, 07:16 AM
I'm an online ADC member and didn't receive this. I guess they only want people with hands on experience to rate it.

Since you can't legally have a copy of Leopard and post here about it, it would be rather pointless to ask for your opinion about it, wouldn't it?

Southern
Aug 15, 2007, 07:23 AM
I will have to agree with the point that Hayesk makes about expectation and age. I have been waiting for Leopard to make my purchase of an iMac and make the switch. While I have been waiting patiently, my patience has grown thin, but at least my wish to switch to Mac hardware has not slackened.

Now that I have Tiger and am messing around with it on a regular basis on an old dumpy G3 iMac my Dad loaned me (it works surprisingly well, actually), I am quite happy with the additional features (automator, what a brilliant idea!) and apps (free iLife 08 for example) that Tiger has over the ones that XP..err, doesn't. To me, I am happy that I have the apps I need to allow me to do a bit more in less time than I was doing in XP, let alone the whole Leopard/Tiger comparison.

In my position, I will be happy to upgrade to Leopard eventually, but when it does, hopefully I will have had enough time to get used to OSX and all its little quirks. Sure, Bootcamp non-beta and Time Machine will be great features, but for now, I am happy to get to know Tiger that bit better before I upgrade. After all, I'm sure I can afford the £70 upgrade - it'll probably be worth having anyway and certainly cheaper than other* offerings.

*You know who I'm talking about. Grrr Vista...

Southern
Aug 15, 2007, 07:30 AM
I forgot to add that it is unreasonable to consider any OS "perfect" or "bug free", so regardless of the release schedule, there will be bugs in a newly-released OS. This goes for OSX as much as Vista, Linux, whatever, but I don't think it's a particularly big deal if Apple wants to ask questions of its developers, it could be for a variety of reasons. It's whether Apple are able to respond to any particularly taxing problems and fix them properly in a short space of time that is important. Judging by their usual standard, Apple seem to be pretty much on the ball with their fixes and updates, so I don't think it's a cause for concern.

As for the release date, well, it could be Trick or Treat time. I hope there's a line of people in Cupertino willing to try Jobs' office at Infinite Loop on the 31st - I would love it if he said "Instead of sweets, you can have a copy of Leopard instead".

Also I would just like to say:

developers developers developers developers :D

BenRoethig
Aug 15, 2007, 08:46 AM
Agreed. I think if the negative feedback is majority, leopard will be late..

I don't see it being released until MWSF myself.

KingofAwesome
Aug 15, 2007, 09:11 AM
Also, does the Apple GCC build happen to include a FORTRAN compiler?

No, they're trying to push everyone to COBOL... line-sequential is the wave of the future! ;)

shawnce
Aug 15, 2007, 09:27 AM
Can somebody with the latest Leopard build tell me the version numbers of:

1. zsh (run "zsh --version")
2. Python (run "python -V")
3. cups (run "cups-config --version")
4. rsync (run "rsync --version")
5. gcc (run "gcc --version")
6. wxWidgets (run "wx-config --version")
7. OpenSSH and OpenSSL (run "ssh -V")

Despite all the hype about the new graphical features, these are the things that matter most to me, and nobody talks about them. Well it is under NDA still. :)

Lesser Evets
Aug 15, 2007, 09:28 AM
Apple is realizing their own in house research is falling short on their software. What they are looking for are bits that they glossed over. With 150 features, or new features, it is easy to not explore every possibility. There might be some feature creep, but most of this is probably aimed at getting the basic stuff nailed down well.

I assume OS X 10.5 is going to be their major accomplishment, and they want it to be nearly perfect right out the door.

rjwill246
Aug 15, 2007, 09:41 AM
That's interesting. When VISTA got delayed, we all laughed at MS.

Now leopard is delayed, you are telling me it doesn't matter?

Yeah, the difference between months and years. The difference between a new OS and a makeover. The difference between innovation and renovation. No comparison. A short delay, is quite okay.

nickelcokes
Aug 15, 2007, 09:50 AM
Well it is under NDA still. :)

I know... but one has to wonder about the intentions behind the NDA. I imagine there are two possibilities:

1. You don't want to tip your hand to your competitors before you have to. This doesn't apple to these freely-available packages, since the competitors already have equal access to them.

2. You don't want the customer base getting angry when they find out you've backed out Python 2.5 to use 2.4 instead. Of course, most of these packages are probably of more interest to developers than regular users, and developers are more likely to have access to the Leopard previews. It may be you're already tipping your hand to the people who will be most annoyed if you revert to older versions of these packages!

If somebody wants to test my theory that Apple doesn't care about this question, post the version numbers and we'll see what happens!

Sbrocket
Aug 15, 2007, 09:57 AM
Oh geez, this is comical. Apple asks for feedback to put the finishing touches on Leopard's experience, and everyone goes nuts saying "nothing's ready! Leopard's gonna be delayed again, I just can't think of a good reason why! no reason not to panic though!"

How many of yall have seen the latest builds of Leopard? Very very few, I'd imagine, if any. How many have ever used 9A499 for that matter? There is such speculation in this thread that its amazing. Apple asked developers for feedback so they could get the well-know Apple polish even better than before this time. I'm not sure why. Maybe they just value what their developers think, crazy I know. I will tell you, though, that if Leopard went Golden Master right now...I doubt many would be disappointed (in a general sense, sure there's bugs to fix.)

;)

cliffjumper68
Aug 15, 2007, 10:05 AM
Agree.

What can they do if dev's tell them the new finder (or whatever other big feature) sucks? re-write it?

These are typical polishing moves for look and feel. I think this is an effort to find any rough spots still in the software. Good job Apple!

Rhosfelt
Aug 15, 2007, 10:22 AM
Hey everybody, I just joined to say a couple things about the new OS..

I believe that Apple does have their stuff together, but if they plan on rushing the new OS out, isn't that the same mistake other computer companies have had in the past? I say we don't worry on release dates, and focus on the quality of the release..

Sure Vista was delayed umpteen times, however we all know that is Apple delays Leopard as many times as Vista was delayed Time Machine will probably end up taking you back in time.

Now, when I used Leopard I had some MAJOR issues..I know it is a beta, but my iMovie and iDvd, plus the MS suite, and even mail didn't work properly. I know I installed it right, plus I even did a fresh install to experience the whole new feel of the OS. That kind of worries me, but I haven't tried out the new build, and I will not just because I want to wait for the final version, due to the fact that I am pretty lazy, and busy, and just to see how much it has changed since I last used it.

The one thing that I loved about the new OS was the spaces feature. I use a lot of programs at once, and even though I have a 20" iMac and a MBP, I tend to run out of space on the desktop.. So the spaces feature was really nice, but in addition to having certain windows move onto certain "screens" I would also like to see the ability to put whatever document on whatever screen you wanted to. In other words, I want the ability to have 1-32 desktops :P

BTW nice to met you all.

Random Ping
Aug 15, 2007, 10:22 AM
I'm an online ADC member and didn't receive this. I guess they only want people with hands on experience to rate it.

Have you downloaded and installed the latest beta? Maybe Apple tracks that and only sent out email to those who have installed it. Or maybe Apple just sent out email to a random sample of developers.

Don't know. I got one though. :p

BKKbill
Aug 15, 2007, 10:24 AM
That depends entirely on the nature of issues reported. Developers submit comments and bug reports throughout the process. That's not what this is for. This is designed to assess workflow and usability. It seems to me they're looking for what areas need polish and for any potential backwards steps introduced by new features. They're turning their attention to tying up loose ends other than general bugfixing.

Not all of the issues they find will be fixed by the time Leopard ships--not all of them will be fixed at all.

It's taking a step back and looking at the big picture. Developers work so hard on the little details and the single issues and bugs that sometimes it helps to be reminded to lift your nose out of all the corners and crevices.

All it really shows is that they're looking to start the polishing process and to make sure everything is integrated well. I seriously doubt they have any plans to do any major rewrites this close to release. This probably has the greatest benefit to the UI people, not the coders. It has the convenient added benefit of point out areas to highlight in advertising (and areas to avoid calling too much attention to).

Thank you for your usual well thought out comments and none of the sky is falling the sky is falling mindset that has creeped into this thread. Of course I have a vested interest in this as I will be getting my new iMac as soon as Leopard comes out so do hope there is no delay. We all know mistakes are made and there will be updates, that just goes with the territory. Lets hope none are major.

Random Ping
Aug 15, 2007, 10:26 AM
October 31st @ 11:59 PST

About 6 weeks ago an Apple rep told a friend of mine that they were shooting for October 31st. Given the complaints on stability that I have read about on web sites like these, the Apple engineers are going to have a tough 6-8 weeks ahead of them.

We should send them pizza, chocolate, and soda.

Sbrocket
Aug 15, 2007, 10:34 AM
Given the complaints on stability that I have read about on web sites like these, the Apple engineers are going to have a tough 6-8 weeks ahead of them.

They will be working hard, but many of the stability issues have been fixed in the last 10 builds. Build 9A499 was release to developers a good while ago; there have been many builds since then.

Mr. Dee
Aug 15, 2007, 10:37 AM
Now that I have Tiger and am messing around with it on a regular basis on an old dumpy G3 iMac my Dad loaned me (it works surprisingly well, actually), I am quite happy with the additional features (automator, what a brilliant idea!) and apps (free iLife 08 for example) that Tiger has over the ones that XP..err, doesn't. To me, I am happy that I have the apps I need to allow me to do a bit more in less time than I was doing in XP, let alone the whole Leopard/Tiger comparison.

In my position, I will be happy to upgrade to Leopard eventually, but when it does, hopefully I will have had enough time to get used to OSX and all its little quirks. Sure, Bootcamp non-beta and Time Machine will be great features, but for now, I am happy to get to know Tiger that bit better before I upgrade. After all, I'm sure I can afford the £70 upgrade - it'll probably be worth having anyway and certainly cheaper than other* offerings.

*You know who I'm talking about. Grrr Vista...

Unfair analysis and comparison. First of all, iLife '08 comes pre-bundled with new Macs since (August 7, 2007) or a $79 dollar retail price. You are using an iMac G3 which probably came out in 1999, which probably came with OS 8.6 or OS 9.1 (iLife '08 requires a G4 processor). In this case you had to upgrade at a cost. iLife is not a part of Tiger. Applications similar to iLife are either free downloads for XP and or come with Windows Vista. They may not be the same quality as iLife, but they are available to the user on Windows with the OS or as a download.

I don't have a problem with comparisons, but make them true and fair. Right now, its Vista vs. Tiger, simply because those are the latest from both Company's. Similar to when Apple was promoting Tiger vs. XP because those were the latest on the market when making comparisons. I have read a lot of hypocrisy in this thread. When Microsoft delayed Vista, you made fun of Microsoft from dawn till dust. When its the other way around, its sacred and right. Apple is not immune to software development issues. The only "only" feature Microsoft dropped from Vista was WinFS, everything else that was promised, came with the RTM. Vista's issues are not related to buggy software either, its device driver support thats the problem and in most cases its the 64-bit version, not the 32-bit version which comes with all OEM machines and in the retail versions of Vista. The only thing I see missing in Vista, is an automation tool, but, its likely with so much third party support for the platform, you should be able to find one anyway.

I don't want to be a party pooper either, but, OS X upgrades over the years cost just as much or even more than Vista today:

OS 10.0 - $129
OS 10.1 - $29
OS 10.2 - $129
OS 10.3 - $129
OS 10.4 - $129
OS 10.5 - $129

Total: $674

For the majority of Windows users, when they buy a new release of Windows through retail, its usually the upgrade version:

XP Home $99
XP Professional $199

Vista Home Premium $220
Vista Business $250

Still cheaper than OS X upgrades over the years.
Other factors include that XP was ready at RTM, OS 10.0 was not ready at GM and both were released in 2001. Consumers see XP as good enough even today that Microsoft had to create more activation keys for it. It took OS X until Panther to reach good enough state. Also, Academic upgrade pricing does not count, since thats only a segement of the market. If do want to count it in, I will do the same with Vista which usually cost $40 when purchased through the University.

(Runs for cover).

Rhosfelt
Aug 15, 2007, 10:46 AM
I don't want to be a party pooper either, but, OS X upgrades over the years cost just as much or even more than Vista today:

OS 10.0 - $129
OS 10.1 - $29
OS 10.2 - $129
OS 10.3 - $129
OS 10.4 - $129
OS 10.5 - $129

Total: $674

For the majority of Windows users, when they buy a new release of Windows through retail, its usually the upgrade version:

XP Home $99
XP Professional $199

Vista Home Premium $220
Vista Business $250


That is all well and good. However, which OS would you rather buy..

hayesk
Aug 15, 2007, 11:04 AM
Have you downloaded and installed the latest beta? Maybe Apple tracks that and only sent out email to those who have installed it. Or maybe Apple just sent out email to a random sample of developers.

It's probably those ADC members who either have been to WWDC or have a software Seed Key. It is possible for an online user to receive a seed key from a Select member.

Alloye
Aug 15, 2007, 11:22 AM
They will be working hard, but many of the stability issues have been fixed in the last 10 builds. Build 9A499 was release to developers a good while ago; there have been many builds since then.

That's great to hear. Can't wait for the next seed.

acslater017
Aug 15, 2007, 11:41 AM
iLife is not a part of Tiger. Applications similar to iLife are either free downloads for XP and or come with Windows Vista. They may not be the same quality as iLife, but they are available to the user on Windows with the OS or as a download...

...I don't want to be a party pooper either, but, OS X upgrades over the years cost just as much or even more than Vista today...

(Runs for cover).

You make a fair argument - purchasing every OS X upgrade would cost more money than purchasing every Windows upgrade. What makes a Mac "worth" the cost for me is the integration of the programs and the dependability of the system as a whole. Sure, a Windows user could download 5 programs that do photo, music, movies, etc. for free. An OS X user could do the same. But you can bet that those 5 programs won't play nice with each other.

My Dell that I bought in 2002 became sluggish and unusable by 2003. That's why I bought an iBook in 2004. Ease of maintenance and durability factor into cost, not just the number labeled on the box. And for me, the frequent upgrades are a good thing - I enjoy upgrading every 1-2 years to get the most cutting edge features. It's better than every 5 years with a couple of Service Packs thrown in.

It might be different for you - but that's why I, and many others, see OS X as less "costly" than Windows, even if in the end it costs more dollars.

nja247
Aug 15, 2007, 01:53 PM
It's probably those ADC members who either have been to WWDC or have a software Seed Key. It is possible for an online user to receive a seed key from a Select member.

When he said "online member" I'm 100% positive he meant the 'freebie' version of ADC that anyone can join w/o paying Apple any money. These accounts do not have access to the Leopard Early Seed Kit thus they don't need to provide feedback on it.

Nick

Mr. Dee
Aug 15, 2007, 03:13 PM
You make a fair argument - purchasing every OS X upgrade would cost more money than purchasing every Windows upgrade. What makes a Mac "worth" the cost for me is the integration of the programs and the dependability of the system as a whole. Sure, a Windows user could download 5 programs that do photo, music, movies, etc. for free. An OS X user could do the same. But you can bet that those 5 programs won't play nice with each other.

My Dell that I bought in 2002 became sluggish and unusable by 2003. That's why I bought an iBook in 2004. Ease of maintenance and durability factor into cost, not just the number labeled on the box. And for me, the frequent upgrades are a good thing - I enjoy upgrading every 1-2 years to get the most cutting edge features. It's better than every 5 years with a couple of Service Packs thrown in.

It might be different for you - but that's why I, and many others, see OS X as less "costly" than Windows, even if in the end it costs more dollars.

Dependability and OS X is very debatable. I purchase Macworld and I read numerous Mac forums, and the conclusion I have come to is that OS X is just about the same as Windows in terms of reliability and performance. But, I will give you the edge though that OS X is still faster than Windows Vista. I was running the hacked OS X x86 on my AMD Sempron and I came up with some interesting results:

OS X - Boot Time - 15 seconds from Apple logo to desktop
Windows Vista - Boot Time 46 seconds in addition 20 seconds to load desktop.

But I have experienced OS X getting just as groggy as Windows over time, it might handle it better, but its not out of the blue. Both have journaled file systems but, I have experienced the performance issues on both first hand. I also give OS X the edge on compatibility. For instance, I installed Panther on 3 old G3's the other day, I am talking about 1998 to 1999 era systems and I was just astounded by how well OS X performed on these systems. XP is less desirable of course, so I won't even go there when it comes machines from these era.

The thing is, I want be fair with my comparisons between both operating systems. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. As for integration, its just as easy on Windows as it is on OS X:

iPhoto - Windows PhotoGallery
iTunes - Windows Media Player
iMovie - Windows Movie Maker
iDVD - Windows Movie Maker / Windows DVD Maker
Garage Band - N/A

Windows Vista's multimedia applications work just as well with each other as the iLife suite. I can select 20 photos in PhotoGallery and click create dvd slide show and it automatically launches a DVD Maker wizard, I arrange, choose background music, choose appropriate aspect ratio, titles, themes, preview and burn.

I can further edit in Windows MovieMaker, save the project and add it to DVD Maker as a part of that project. So, the deep integration across the multi-media applications in Vista is well done and comparable to iLife. The themes though are not as top notch as iDVD but, in terms of functionality and ease of use, Mac OS X, iLife, Vista are on the same level.

I enjoy upgrading every 1-2 years to get the most cutting edge features. It's better than every 5 years with a couple of Service Packs thrown in.

Hmm, I don't know, Windows and Mac OS in my opinion are still just traffic cops that allows your software to communicate with your hardware. If you say you upgrade for cutting edge, then it took you 3 releases of OS X to start seeing some real results. The true innovation and attractiveness of OS X never began until around version 10.3. Again, its debatable. But, again, the cutting edge functionality you speak of is delivered in the OS and as free updates on the Windows side in addition to Service Packs.

DarkArchon
Aug 15, 2007, 03:40 PM
But, again, the cutting edge functionality you speak of is delivered in the OS and as free updates on the Windows side in addition to Service Packs.
When is the last time you applied a Service Pack?

People say all the time, that 6 years worth of OSX upgrades cost more than Vista, and that Microsoft gives away similar upgrades for free as "Service Packs", but look at the changes. Service packs for Windows are more like security fixes, and combined bugfixes. The only new feature in XP SP2 was the Windows firewall.

About the pricing, I wasn't aware that many people actually bought 10.0. It clearly wasn't ready to replace OS 9. I waited to 10.1 to switch. Waiting for 6 years to go from XP to Vista is closer to waiting 6 years for going from 10.4 to 10.5 than it is from 10.0 - > 10.5. Other than the UI, Vista isn't very different. Of course, Microsoft announced tons of neat features for Vista, but they all got dropped.

twoodcc
Aug 15, 2007, 04:19 PM
i think this is a good sign that Leopard is on schedule

Peace
Aug 15, 2007, 04:24 PM
i think this is a good sign that Leopard is on schedule

It is.More than people realize.

There is functionality in Leopard I know most people don't realize exists in an almost GM state.

Laugh all you want folks but until you go inside the guts of Leopard and know what you see I just take this discussion with a grain of salt.
Like I've said before there are portions of Leopard that don't seem up to snuff only because of outside influences.
E.G. contracts etc.

Fairly
Aug 15, 2007, 04:51 PM
What can they do if dev's tell them the new finder (or whatever other big feature) sucks? re-write it?
Good question. Of course Finder has sucked for almost ten years now and that hasn't stopped them.

bananas
Aug 15, 2007, 05:03 PM
I don't want to be a party pooper either, but, OS X upgrades over the years cost just as much or even more than Vista today:


If it was about price everybody would be running Linux and FreeBSD.
It's not like you have to buy every new release of OSX.

..and btw I AM running Linux, and no it's NOT about the cost..

Mr. Dee
Aug 15, 2007, 05:15 PM
When is the last time you applied a Service Pack?

People say all the time, that 6 years worth of OSX upgrades cost more than Vista, and that Microsoft gives away similar upgrades for free as "Service Packs", but look at the changes. Service packs for Windows are more like security fixes, and combined bugfixes. The only new feature in XP SP2 was the Windows firewall.

About the pricing, I wasn't aware that many people actually bought 10.0. It clearly wasn't ready to replace OS 9. I waited to 10.1 to switch. Waiting for 6 years to go from XP to Vista is closer to waiting 6 years for going from 10.4 to 10.5 than it is from 10.0 - > 10.5. Other than the UI, Vista isn't very different. Of course, Microsoft announced tons of neat features for Vista, but they all got dropped.

None of what you said makes any sense. In addition to that, you are contradicting the company. Mac OS 10.0 was released as a major upgrade from OS 9 that would be the default operating system on all Macs by July of 2001. Apple reneged on that decision because users were frustrated with both the 10.0 and 10.1 and did not make OS 10 the default OS until January 2003 (Jaguar) even then users were still frustrated and to maintain compatibility, OS 9 was still available through Classic mode. But it was a bad start and Apple realized this, thats why they hurridly provided 10.1 to persons who bought the 10.0 release for 19.99. You say you aren't aware that many people bought 10.0, I don't get that, it doesn't make any sense. The previous person I responded to said they like upgrading to new releases of the Mac OS. Also, a lot of persons bought the 10.0 preview in addition to 10.0 GM which many were disappointed by because they thought this was a chance to break free of Classic who's heritage goes all the way back to Mac OS 1.0. OS X may not have been ready at 10.0 to replace OS 9, but Windows XP was ready at RTM to replace Windows 9x, NT 4 and 2000 because it merged the ease of use of 9x with the stability of 2000 and of course the compatibility.

You seem to don't understand the difference between Service Packs and actual free ad-ons to Windows. Tweak UI, Themes, Internet Explorer, Windows Desktop Search (Tiger for OS X folks), Windows Media Player, Windows Live Messenger (new versions of iChat come at a cost). Most of these features required numerous upgrades of OS X while they have been free ad-ons for Windows.

Waiting for 6 years to go from XP to Vista is closer to waiting 6 years for going from 10.4 to 10.5 than it is from 10.0 - > 10.5.

That does not make any sense at all, XP is a fully modern, functional operating system at RTM and did not require numerous upgrade releases for users to say, I think OS X is stable enough to use for the long term or on a daily basis (10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3). You might have found it ready at 10.1, but thats just you, you are not a representation of the entire Mac OS X user base. If you look at the Leopard release and read the numerous comments and feedback Apple is getting about it, you will realize, its not that well received so far. Many are saying, the new global menu bar is following the fashion of Vista's semi-translucent Taskbar but with an inelegant approach. Sidebar in the Finder is similar to XP's task oriented TaskPane Explorers, the new Dock so far is not well received and looks like a rip off of SUNs Project Looking Glass. They are just adding uniformed Finder windows, the UI is considered not customizable. The top secret features so far have been considered more evolutionary than revolutionary and more of a gimmick than a necessity.

Of course, Microsoft announced tons of neat features for Vista, but they all got dropped.

List them. I sense frustration in that statement. The only thing Microsoft dropped from Vista (Longhorn) is WinFS and that was a under the hood feature targeted to developers. Windows Presentation and Communication foundations are in Vista (Avalon and Indigo) in addition to WinFX (.NET 3). So, I would really like to get a clearer picture of what "tons of neat features" are.

A lot of WinFS functionality is even in Vista, here is a quote from the "Developer's Guide to Interoperability and migration in "Longhorn" version 1.0"

"WinFS (Data) - WinFS simplifies the process of finding and storing important user data. In addition to streamlined APIs for accessing relational data, WinFS introduces a new centralized storage subsystem and API for storing and searching documents and contacts.

By defining common schema's and a centralized API for metadata access, "WinFS" enables different applications to access each other's data in a previously unrealizable way. Metadata, including categorization and linking across items, can be added to any object in the file system, allowing for more powerful search and organization functionality"

Sounds familiar:
Vista supports Meta data inside the Explorer (tagging), instant search from the Start menu and Explorer, organization with live previews, stacks and archived search for organization in addition to OLE which has been in Windows for years. So, I would recommend getting the facts straight first, I did for OS X, I am sure you can too for Windows.

offwidafairies
Aug 15, 2007, 05:21 PM
yeah, not sure how much meaningful feedback and changes they can make for something like this.

(by october)

arn

yeah i agree, but asking for feedback is a positive thing anyhoo...
maybe they want to start working on 10.6 :D

ZachPruckowski
Aug 15, 2007, 05:26 PM
I don't want to be a party pooper either, but, OS X upgrades over the years cost just as much or even more than Vista today:

OS 10.0 - $129
OS 10.1 - $29
OS 10.2 - $129
OS 10.3 - $129
OS 10.4 - $129
OS 10.5 - $129

Total: $674

For the majority of Windows users, when they buy a new release of Windows through retail, its usually the upgrade version:

XP Home $99
XP Professional $199

Vista Home Premium $220
Vista Business $250

Still cheaper than OS X upgrades over the years.


Your logic assumes that all OS X users use computers from 1999 or 2000 and have purchased every update. This describes (at best) 5% of all Mac users. You would have to hack Leopard (and Tiger) to get it to run on a machine from 2000. And I dare you to run Vista on a 1.4 GHz Pentium 4 (fastest PC processor at the time).

Anyone who's main Mac is newer than 27 months old never even bought Tiger. Only Macs 4 years old (ok, 3 years, 10 months) or older would even need to buy Panther. We're talking 1 GHz G4 iMacs and first-gen PM G5s. Those are old computers.

Additionally, there's nothing that says that you have to buy every version of OS X. One could skip Tiger, and according to El Jobso at the WWDC 2007 keynote (http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/d7625zs/event/), between a third and a quarter of OS X users run Panther or earlier. Panther is still supported by Apple, and will be at least until 10.5 (Leopard) comes out.

So realistically, you're paying for only 1-2 upgrades per machine (if you pay for one at all), making the average cost roughly in line with the costs for Vista Home Premium or Ultimate upgrades.

Now consider this thought experiment. You and I buy identically priced computers around Christmas of 2003. I get Panther, you get XP. Those two OSes are approximately equal. Then in 2005, about 16 months later, I get Tiger, and have a superior OS for 1 year and 8 months, until you buy Vista Ultimate in Jan. of 2007. Then we have equal OSes for 9 months, and then I buy Leopard, and I have a superior OS for a period of 2 years (presumably, I'll ditch the computer with 10.6, as it'll then be 6 years old).

That breaks down to both of us paying $250 - $260. However, I have a superior OS for 2/3rds of the time.

ZachPruckowski
Aug 15, 2007, 05:57 PM
That does not make any sense at all, XP is a fully modern, functional operating system at RTM and did not require numerous upgrade releases for users to say, I think OS X is stable enough to use for the long term or on a daily basis (10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3). You might have found it ready at 10.1, but thats just you, you are not a representation of the entire Mac OS X user base.


You're both discussing the state of Mac vs. Windows in 2001-2003. This thread, as near as I can tell, is about "news". Let's focus on Panther, Tiger, and Leopard (each of which can hold its own vs. XP).


If you look at the Leopard release and read the numerous comments and feedback Apple is getting about it, you will realize, its not that well received so far. Many are saying, the new global menu bar is following the fashion of Vista's semi-translucent Taskbar but with an inelegant approach. Sidebar in the Finder is similar to XP's task oriented TaskPane Explorers, the new Dock so far is not well received and looks like a rip off of SUNs Project Looking Glass. They are just adding uniformed Finder windows, the UI is considered not customizable. The top secret features so far have been considered more evolutionary than revolutionary and more of a gimmick than a necessity.

I've heard many excellent things about Leopard, but I'll address your issues first. The Sidebar in the Finder is not new to Leopard. It's new to 10.3 (and thus is 4 years old). The only differences are the integration of Time Machine, the more distinct separation of shared and local volumes, and the addition of a few smart searches. Opinions about the new Dock have been rather mixed, with the primary complaint being that developers or designers who obsess over how their icons look have to retouch them to adjust for the new shadows. The translucent* menubar does suck, but can be turned off. You accuse Leopard of being a knock-off of Looking Glass, when Looking Glass is not a shipping product, only a theoretical project.

Now onto the strengths of Leopard you just brushed aside:

Multi-threaded OpenGL 2
Obj-C 2.0 w/ garbage collection
Core Animation
Time Machine
Full 64 compatibility


Three of those are developer technologies. It might appear to you that they're not important, but they're a big deal if you plan on running applications (especially GUI applications). Multi-threaded OpenGL 2 is a rather large deal for an operating system that uses the GPU for GUI much more frequently than Vista. Obj-C 2 allows for quicker application development and is more powerful. It's a big deal if you're a Cocoa developer (I am not), and means that most of the apps most Mac users run will be more efficient. It also allows (well, the new xCode allows) for one of the easiest multi-threaded programming systems available in an object-oriented language. Core Animation allows for amazing and useful animation effects with only a few lines of code. Aside from the cool demos, this allows for superior applications, and will likely be reflected in both 1st and 3rd party apps by mid-2008.

Then there's Time Machine, which people either think is an amazing revolution in the desktop use paradigm or completely useless. I'm in the first camp, and I think that by this time in 2008, most people will be there with me.

Finally, there's 64-bitness. Unlike Vista, which requires a separate version for 64-bit installations and separate drivers, Leopard is 64-bit native. Most Cocoa applications and all non-GUI applications are a recompile away from full 64-bit capability, which is pretty darn nice for a lot of applications.

In short, Leopard would be worth buying only for the developer features (because they would result in superior Leopard-only apps).

* = translucent means "semi-transparent". Something can not be semi-translucent unless it is completely three dimensional, and is translucent in one dimension while opaque or transparent in another. As everything on Macs and PCs is only faux-3D (we don't have holo-screens), nothing in a UI is "semi-translucent". Not trolling, just trying to explain.

Mr. Dee
Aug 15, 2007, 06:51 PM
Your logic assumes that all OS X users use computers from 1999 or 2000 and have purchased every update. This describes (at best) 5% of all Mac users. You would have to hack Leopard (and Tiger) to get it to run on a machine from 2000. And I dare you to run Vista on a 1.4 GHz Pentium 4 (fastest PC processor at the time).

Anyone who's main Mac is newer than 27 months old never even bought Tiger. Only Macs 4 years old (ok, 3 years, 10 months) or older would even need to buy Panther. We're talking 1 GHz G4 iMacs and first-gen PM G5s. Those are old computers.

Additionally, there's nothing that says that you have to buy every version of OS X. One could skip Tiger, and according to El Jobso at the WWDC 2007 keynote (http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/d7625zs/event/), between a third and a quarter of OS X users run Panther or earlier. Panther is still supported by Apple, and will be at least until 10.5 (Leopard) comes out.

So realistically, you're paying for only 1-2 upgrades per machine (if you pay for one at all), making the average cost roughly in line with the costs for Vista Home Premium or Ultimate upgrades.

Now consider this thought experiment. You and I buy identically priced computers around Christmas of 2003. I get Panther, you get XP. Those two OSes are approximately equal. Then in 2005, about 16 months later, I get Tiger, and have a superior OS for 1 year and 8 months, until you buy Vista Ultimate in Jan. of 2007. Then we have equal OSes for 9 months, and then I buy Leopard, and I have a superior OS for a period of 2 years (presumably, I'll ditch the computer with 10.6, as it'll then be 6 years old).

That breaks down to both of us paying $250 - $260. However, I have a superior OS for 2/3rds of the time.

I am not saying that, but some Mac OS X users are using machines from 1999 and 2000, you and I don't know how many there are. But many have toted that as probably a strength of the platform itself, long lasting hardware. But, the point is even if you and I bought equal systems in 2003 (Mac/PC), XP would still have the edge, because you bought the Tiger upgrade to get features that XP either have built in or got as free downloads.

OS X did not get Fast User Switching until Panther (10.3), Instant Search until Tiger (10.4). XP users got Instant search technology as a free download with the MSN Desktop Search tool in 2005. You can try and claim the edge with Dashboard, but I could rebuttal with Konfabulator which was available for both Mac OS X and Windows prior to the release of Tiger.

Anyone who's main Mac is newer than 27 months old never even bought Tiger. Only Macs 4 years old (ok, 3 years, 10 months) or older would even need to buy Panther. We're talking 1 GHz G4 iMacs and first-gen PM G5s. Those are old computers.

You must be rich to make such a statement. Another contradiction, because even Apple disagrees with that statement. Why would they then make the minimum system requirement for Leopard be a PowerPC G4 800 MHz with 512 MBs of RAM? Ha, gotcha didn't I? The first gen PPC G5 tower (June 2003) ran at 1.6 to 2 GHz, you really, really are trying to tell me those Macs are too old to upgrade to either Panther (October 2003) or Tiger? Come, Apple released a 2.1 GHz G5 iMac in October of 2005, 4 months before the Intel iMac? When Tiger was released in April of 2005, Apples fastest G4 and G5 systems were 1.5 GHz and 2.5 Ghz respectively. The first Gen iMac with the PPC G5 released in fall of '04 were running at 1.6 to 1.8 Ghz, 8 months before Tigers release in April 2005. And YOU are seriously trying to tell me those machines are too old to upgrade to Tiger. Don't talk garbage man, makes you look really, really stupid. Tiger even runs on G3 systems! Again, there is a reason why Apple continues to sell PPC Tiger.

And I dare you to run Vista on a 1.4 GHz Pentium 4 (fastest PC processor at the time).

I have dared you, Vista runs on a minimum of 800 Mhz with with 512 MBs of RAM (1GB recommended), reading it right here on my Vista Ultimate product box, so whats your point? At least I don't have to hack my system from 2000 to install the latest OS. :P XPOSFACTO anyone? My point is, to call OS X a worthy upgrade, that designation never came until Panthers release in October 2003. XP claimed that from October of 2001.

DarkArchon
Aug 15, 2007, 06:57 PM
I got a white iBook in July '01. It had 10.0, but I'm pretty sure it first booted up in 9. I don't recall anybody actually switching to 10.0 or purchasing a license, but it came packaged for free on my computer, so I didn't complain. I went to Comp USA and got a 10.1 upgrade CD for free.

You seem to don't understand the difference between Service Packs and actual free ad-ons to Windows. Tweak UI, Themes, Internet Explorer, Windows Desktop Search (Tiger for OS X folks), Windows Media Player, Windows Live Messenger (new versions of iChat come at a cost). Most of these features required numerous upgrades of OS X while they have been free ad-ons for Windows.

You're right, Apple would NEVER release new versions of iTunes, or Quicktime unless you bought the new OS. Windows Live Messanger is complete garbage, and themes just change the colors a little, and they add no functionality. Windows Desktop Search is the only significant addition.



That does not make any sense at all, XP is a fully modern, functional operating system at RTM and did not require numerous upgrade releases for users to say, I think OS X is stable enough to use for the long term or on a daily basis (10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3). You might have found it ready at 10.1
You kidding?!?!? XP was received terribly. It wasn't really stable until SP2. People had the same attitude then as they do now. They felt Win2K was the first reasonable OS Microsoft released, and were VERY adamant about not switching to XP.

Since 10.2, the new versions of OS X haven't been about stability. Here are the reasons why I've upgraded since 10.2. 10.3 added Core Audio(which is awesome compared to kmixer), expose(alone made the upgrade worth it), FileVault, and fast user swapping. 10.4 added Spotlight, Dashboard, and Automator. I'm very excited about Spaces, Quick Look, Time Machine, the new scheduler, and fully 64 bit applications framework(about damn time Apple). The only thing that could get me excited about non-beta boot camp is if they included a more robust partition manager. I don't program much, so I really don't know a lot about Apple's frameworks like Cocoa, but from what I've heard, it is a much more pleasant experience to write programs for Macs.


List them. I sense frustration in that statement. The only thing Microsoft dropped from Vista (Longhorn) is WinFS and that was a under the hood feature targeted to developers. Windows Presentation and Communication foundations are in Vista (Avalon and Indigo) in addition to WinFX (.NET 3). So, I would really like to get a clearer picture of what "tons of neat features" are.
Off the top of my head, the promised PC->PC syncing, and a scripting shell. I wasn't really paying attention to all the Microsoft promised features, and I remembered those. The lack of WinFS isn't exactly small either.


I use Vista Business X64, and for the record, I do like it a lot better than XP, but it has some pretty major problems. It pops up with that "security" thing even when you go to change minor preference things that are in no way related to security. It gets to the point where I just ignore it because hitting accept is the automatic response. You could claim the admin password requirement in OS X is the same, but it is used so rarely that it actually grabs attention instead of becoming an automatic motion. I have 3 GB RAM, and Windows is still somewhat sluggish with multitasking. I can be running tons of stuff in OS X and experience no slowdowns when I launch another application. The window management is still awful. The "flip" feature is a joke. Microsoft's own software isn't internally consistent. When I went to the Microsoft site to get updates using the 64 bit version of IE, it failed to install the ActiveX plugin that made the WGA calls, so I had to download the program that created the WGA code and enter it automatically. Updates need to be installed serially. There aren't "combo updates." It feels like I install updates, restart, install more updates, restart again, etc. Program crashes are still messier than in OS X. Finally, about half the times when I try to shut down, Vista freezes. I thought this might be a bad install, but I talked to a friend who has a "built for Vista" laptop running 32 bit Vista Business, and he has the same problem.

Mr. Dee
Aug 15, 2007, 08:10 PM
You're both discussing the state of Mac vs. Windows in 2001-2003. This thread, as near as I can tell, is about "news". Let's focus on Panther, Tiger, and Leopard (each of which can hold its own vs. XP).



I've heard many excellent things about Leopard, but I'll address your issues first. The Sidebar in the Finder is not new to Leopard. It's new to 10.3 (and thus is 4 years old). The only differences are the integration of Time Machine, the more distinct separation of shared and local volumes, and the addition of a few smart searches. Opinions about the new Dock have been rather mixed, with the primary complaint being that developers or designers who obsess over how their icons look have to retouch them to adjust for the new shadows. The translucent* menubar does suck, but can be turned off. You accuse Leopard of being a knock-off of Looking Glass, when Looking Glass is not a shipping product, only a theoretical project.

Now onto the strengths of Leopard you just brushed aside:

Multi-threaded OpenGL 2
Obj-C 2.0 w/ garbage collection
Core Animation
Time Machine
Full 64 compatibility


Three of those are developer technologies. It might appear to you that they're not important, but they're a big deal if you plan on running applications (especially GUI applications). Multi-threaded OpenGL 2 is a rather large deal for an operating system that uses the GPU for GUI much more frequently than Vista. Obj-C 2 allows for quicker application development and is more powerful. It's a big deal if you're a Cocoa developer (I am not), and means that most of the apps most Mac users run will be more efficient. It also allows (well, the new xCode allows) for one of the easiest multi-threaded programming systems available in an object-oriented language. Core Animation allows for amazing and useful animation effects with only a few lines of code. Aside from the cool demos, this allows for superior applications, and will likely be reflected in both 1st and 3rd party apps by mid-2008.

Then there's Time Machine, which people either think is an amazing revolution in the desktop use paradigm or completely useless. I'm in the first camp, and I think that by this time in 2008, most people will be there with me.

Finally, there's 64-bitness. Unlike Vista, which requires a separate version for 64-bit installations and separate drivers, Leopard is 64-bit native. Most Cocoa applications and all non-GUI applications are a recompile away from full 64-bit capability, which is pretty darn nice for a lot of applications.

In short, Leopard would be worth buying only for the developer features (because they would result in superior Leopard-only apps).

* = translucent means "semi-transparent". Something can not be semi-translucent unless it is completely three dimensional, and is translucent in one dimension while opaque or transparent in another. As everything on Macs and PCs is only faux-3D (we don't have holo-screens), nothing in a UI is "semi-translucent". Not trolling, just trying to explain.

Ok, Leopard right now has the edge on distribution method and I admit, it kicks Vistas you know what with the 32/64 bit device driver support. Thanks for the correction on the translucent issue. :rolleyes:

When it comes to developer tools, its more under the hood and Windows developer tools are powerful in their own right and thats proven by the large developer base.


Multi-threaded OpenGL 2
Obj-C 2.0 w/ garbage collection
Core Animation
Time Machine
Full 64 compatibility


I could answer all the above with Visual Studio 2005 and 2008 (beta 2) in addition to the various API's and technologies in Vista such as .NET 3, Windows Communication and Presentation Foundations. But my concerns were focused on the double standard when it comes TCO and double standard.

MrCrowbar
Aug 15, 2007, 08:52 PM
Tiger works on a 1999 Powermac...

Anyway Leopard doesn't bring much new bling like Vista did after XP. Leopard brings tons of good stuff for the developers like xCode2.0, garbage collection, core animation etc. Consumers will see Time Machine and the better windows network integration at first. Then there will be new applications that use the new developer technologies and that's where Leopard will really shine.

Just be patient and check it out when the time has come. I bet there are some gimmicks that are absent in the developer releases of Leopard. I hope they'll get all those icons to 512x512 by the time it ships, that's like the most important thing :D

Mr. Dee
Aug 15, 2007, 09:25 PM
I got a white iBook in July '01. It had 10.0, but I'm pretty sure it first booted up in 9. I don't recall anybody actually switching to 10.0 or purchasing a license, but it came packaged for free on my computer, so I didn't complain. I went to Comp USA and got a 10.1 upgrade CD for free.

And your point? XP at RTM comes pre-bundled on systems in September of 2001. Thats what you call OEM, same case with your OS 10.0. I am remember watching ZDNet TV in 2001 (The Screen Savers) and I remember Leo Laporte talking about getting the 10.1 CD for 19.99 upgrade, some might have gotten for free. There was also an issue for Apple that the 10.1 upgrade CD could be turned into a full version by altering a file.


You're right, Apple would NEVER release new versions of iTunes, or Quicktime unless you bought the new OS. Windows Live Messanger is complete garbage, and themes just change the colors a little, and they add no functionality. Windows Desktop Search is the only significant addition.

They still bundled iTunes with iLife when the first version was released in 2003, can you run iTunes 7 on OS 10.0, 10.1, 10.2? NO, but I can run Windows Media Player 11 on XP just fine. WLM maybe garbage in your opinion, but its still free to users of Windows 2000, XP and Vista. You actually have to wait on a new release of OS X to get a new version of iChat. You contradict yourself again with the themes statement. I would assume when Apple moved from pin stripe that came with OS X versions 10.0, 10.1 to a smooth Aqua theme in 10.3 and now to a smooth metallic theme in Leopard, that does not count as functionality? Oh, so I guess you would prefer to stick with OS 8.6 and 9.2 look and feel then, it wouldn't bother you? Get your facts straight, its very important.

You kidding?!?!? XP was received terribly. It wasn't really stable until SP2. People had the same attitude then as they do now. They felt Win2K was the first reasonable OS Microsoft released, and were VERY adamant about not switching to XP.

Back that up with a quote. Of course everyone is not gonna be pleased with a new release, the Windows userbase is so large, it is expected to have a few nay sayers. OS X had 5 million users by 2003, XP trippled that 20 times over by 2003, obviously a majority of users were pleased with it to have such a huge uptake. XP was stable at RTM, XP SP2 improved the built in Firewall by turning it on by default, included post updates since SP1, IE 6 with Pop-up blocker, better wireless and bluetooth support. It simply improved. Hey, at least I didn't have to pay for it.

Since 10.2, the new versions of OS X haven't been about stability. Here are the reasons why I've upgraded since 10.2. 10.3 added Core Audio(which is awesome compared to kmixer), expose(alone made the upgrade worth it), FileVault, and fast user swapping. 10.4 added Spotlight, Dashboard, and Automator. I'm very excited about Spaces, Quick Look, Time Machine, the new scheduler, and fully 64 bit applications framework(about damn time Apple). The only thing that could get me excited about non-beta boot camp is if they included a more robust partition manager. I don't program much, so I really don't know a lot about Apple's frameworks like Cocoa, but from what I've heard, it is a much more pleasant experience to write programs for Macs.

At least I didn't need to buy a new version of OS X to gain functionality, thats delivered through Service Packs. All the other functionality mentioned are similar to in some ways to features already in XP and Vista. 64-bit is not gonna benefit every one btw, so toting it as a holy grail feature is really not a big deal for the majority of users on either on the OS X or Windows platforms.

Off the top of my head, the promised PC->PC syncing, and a scripting shell. I wasn't really paying attention to all the Microsoft promised features, and I remembered those. The lack of WinFS isn't exactly small either.

You said tons of features, and I explained that functionality in WinFS is already in Vista, meta data, search and organization. So whats your point again? PC to PC syncing by my standards is not a ton of missing features. Here is the scripting Shell you speak of, its called Windows Powershell:
Free btw :P
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/management/powershell/default.mspx


I use Vista Business X64, and for the record, I do like it a lot better than XP, but it has some pretty major problems. It pops up with that "security" thing even when you go to change minor preference things that are in no way related to security. It gets to the point where I just ignore it because hitting accept is the automatic response. You could claim the admin password requirement in OS X is the same, but it is used so rarely that it actually grabs attention instead of becoming an automatic motion. I have 3 GB RAM, and Windows is still somewhat sluggish with multitasking. I can be running tons of stuff in OS X and experience no slowdowns when I launch another application. The window management is still awful. The "flip" feature is a joke. Microsoft's own software isn't internally consistent. When I went to the Microsoft site to get updates using the 64 bit version of IE, it failed to install the ActiveX plugin that made the WGA calls, so I had to download the program that created the WGA code and enter it automatically. Updates need to be installed serially. There aren't "combo updates." It feels like I install updates, restart, install more updates, restart again, etc. Program crashes are still messier than in OS X. Finally, about half the times when I try to shut down, Vista freezes. I thought this might be a bad install, but I talked to a friend who has a "built for Vista" laptop running 32 bit Vista Business, and he has the same problem.

Why are using IE 64-Bit in the first place when IE 32 bit is the default browser in Vista x64? You just did that to prove a useless point. Were you using the 64 bit technologies in Tiger through the command line? No, so why use 64 bit IE when you know 100 % that most web sites don't have 64 bit native ActiveX controls, even if its a Microsoft based website. If you are using IE 64 Bit on Vista, why aren't using or complaining about 64-bit Windows Mail, Media Player and other applications that come as 64 bit in Vista too. Combo updates on XP are known as Service Packs, on OS X Tiger in particular, you have had 11 of them so far. If you downloaded all post updates since XP SP1 for instance, then you would automatically be upgraded to XP SP2 without having to download the entire update itself. Your shutdown issue is likely hardware based and it could be coincidental with your friends machines. But since you are pointing out flaws I guess you don't mind me pointing out the audio popping issues that users have experienced with the 10.4.10 update. Come on, its called a maintenance update, it should be fixing problems in the OS not adding them. Also, the 10.4.10 update required some users on PowerBooks and MacBook Pros to restart their systems. When you say application crashes are messier, please explain. At least Windows Problems and Solutions offers suggestions. When you get a kernel panic on OS X, you only get two options, cold reset or reinstall to fix the issue. In fact, you have repair permissions everytime you do a maintenance update on OS X just to be safe. So if you want point flaws in an operating system, make sure you do it across the board my friend.

DarkArchon
Aug 15, 2007, 11:16 PM
And your point? XP at RTM comes pre-bundled on systems in September of 2001.But 2000 didn't. How many years did Apple throw both OS 9 AND 10 on their computers?


You contradict yourself again with the themes statement. I would assume when Apple moved from pin stripe that came with OS X versions 10.0, 10.1 to a smooth Aqua theme in 10.3 and now to a smooth metallic theme in Leopard, that does not count as functionality?
No, I don't consider simply changing color, or pattern functionality. How is that a contradiction if I didn't count that as a new feature for OS X either?
Oh, so I guess you would prefer to stick with OS 8.6 and 9.2 look and feel then, it wouldn't bother you? Get your facts straight, its very important.
That is a change in interface and layout, not just a change in color. If you can't understand something that simple...

Back that up with a quote. Of course everyone is not gonna be pleased with a new release, the Windows userbase is so large, it is expected to have a few nay sayers. OS X had 5 million users by 2003, XP trippled that 20 times over by 2003, obviously a majority of users were pleased with it to have such a huge uptake. It's called OEM licensing... ever heard of it?

XP was stable at RTM, XP SP2 improved the built in Firewall by turning it on by default, included post updates since SP1, IE 6 with Pop-up blocker, better wireless and bluetooth support. It simply improved. Hey, at least I didn't have to pay for it. And OS X's wireless support and networking has always been, and still is better. What's your point?


At least I didn't need to buy a new version of OS X to gain functionality, thats delivered through Service Packs. As you said to me, You seem to don't understand the difference between Service Packs and actual free ad-ons to Windows.

All the other functionality mentioned are similar to in some ways to features already in XP and Vista. 64-bit is not gonna benefit every one btw, so toting it as a holy grail feature is really not a big deal for the majority of users on either on the OS X or Windows platforms. Since when did I tout being 64-bit as a holy grail? It was one feature out of many?

Why are using IE 64-Bit in the first place when IE 32 bit is the default browser in Vista x64? You just did that to prove a useless point. Were you using the 64 bit technologies in Tiger through the command line? No, so why use 64 bit IE when you know 100 % that most web sites don't have 64 bit native ActiveX controls, even if its a Microsoft based website. It isn't just a Microsoft based website, it is THE Microsoft website. You'd think they would support their own CURRENT software...

If you are using IE 64 Bit on Vista, why aren't using or complaining about 64-bit Windows Mail, Media Player and other applications that come as 64 bit in Vista too. I haven't used them yet. I just use webmail for mail, VLC is a million times better than WMP, or Quicktime for simple video playback, and I just happened to decide to upgrade software before installing Firefox, which I still haven't tried on the Microsoft site.

Combo updates on XP are known as Service Packs. So if I want to update my Windows OS before they release a Service Pack with everything in it, and I haven't used Windows in a while? I guess I need to update the OS ONE UPDATE AT A TIME.

on OS X Tiger in particular, you have had 11 of them so far. And on a fresh Tiger reinstall, I was able to go right up from 10.4 to 10.4.10 without any issues.

But since you are pointing out flaws I guess you don't mind me pointing out the audio popping issues that users have experienced with the 10.4.10 update. If you want to talk about audio problems, I have one word for you... KMIXER. You can't even get decent digital out in Windows without figuring out how to bypass how Windows handles audio, and that ISN'T a bug.


When you get a kernel panic on OS X, you only get two options, cold reset or reinstall to fix the issue.The only time I've had kernel panics was when I was messing with funky kernel extensions. Removing the EXT2 kernel extension installed cleared up the problem. But speaking of issues like that, what do you do whey your machine blue screens?

In fact, you have repair permissions everytime you do a maintenance update on OS X just to be safe. So if you want point flaws in an operating system, make sure you do it across the board my friend. How often do you defrag your hard drive? At least repairing permissions is fast.

Edit: A quick google search shows that I'm not the only one that has problems on shutting down Vista.

Peace
Aug 15, 2007, 11:46 PM
This thread is going downhill fast.

http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=72871&stc=1&d=1177144777

pomus
Aug 15, 2007, 11:48 PM
Unfair analysis and comparison. First of all, iLife '08 comes pre-bundled with new Macs since (August 7, 2007) or a $79 dollar retail price. You are using an iMac G3 which probably came out in 1999, which probably came with OS 8.6 or OS 9.1 (iLife '08 requires a G4 processor). In this case you had to upgrade at a cost. iLife is not a part of Tiger. Applications similar to iLife are either free downloads for XP and or come with Windows Vista. They may not be the same quality as iLife, but they are available to the user on Windows with the OS or as a download.

I don't have a problem with comparisons, but make them true and fair. Right now, its Vista vs. Tiger, simply because those are the latest from both Company's. Similar to when Apple was promoting Tiger vs. XP because those were the latest on the market when making comparisons. I have read a lot of hypocrisy in this thread. When Microsoft delayed Vista, you made fun of Microsoft from dawn till dust. When its the other way around, its sacred and right. Apple is not immune to software development issues. The only "only" feature Microsoft dropped from Vista was WinFS, everything else that was promised, came with the RTM. Vista's issues are not related to buggy software either, its device driver support thats the problem and in most cases its the 64-bit version, not the 32-bit version which comes with all OEM machines and in the retail versions of Vista. The only thing I see missing in Vista, is an automation tool, but, its likely with so much third party support for the platform, you should be able to find one anyway.

I don't want to be a party pooper either, but, OS X upgrades over the years cost just as much or even more than Vista today:

OS 10.0 - $129
OS 10.1 - $29
OS 10.2 - $129
OS 10.3 - $129
OS 10.4 - $129
OS 10.5 - $129

Total: $674

For the majority of Windows users, when they buy a new release of Windows through retail, its usually the upgrade version:

XP Home $99
XP Professional $199

Vista Home Premium $220
Vista Business $250

Still cheaper than OS X upgrades over the years.
Other factors include that XP was ready at RTM, OS 10.0 was not ready at GM and both were released in 2001. Consumers see XP as good enough even today that Microsoft had to create more activation keys for it. It took OS X until Panther to reach good enough state. Also, Academic upgrade pricing does not count, since thats only a segement of the market. If do want to count it in, I will do the same with Vista which usually cost $40 when purchased through the University.

(Runs for cover).

I totally disagree. To properly upgrade vista, I would have to spend $600 bucks. I went to cpmpusa to try out Vista only to be dissapointed by its sluggish speed on a new system because vista is a power hog. I am currently running running xp only to have to reboot my computer every other month. To make the long story short. Vista sucks and I would rather wait for Leopard to buy a new Mac than to upgrade to vista.

Windoze doesn't work for me, and I can't wait for leopard.:apple::D:D


Yay apple won over another windoze user

Viva la revolution!
;)

Mr. Dee
Aug 15, 2007, 11:49 PM
But 2000 didn't. How many years did Apple throw both OS 9 AND 10 on their computers?

Your knowledge of Windows distribution and marketing is very embarrassing. Windows 2000 did come through OEM licensing and retail distribution (FPP - Full package product) in addition to Volume Licensing.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1999/oct99/launchdtpr.mspx

Microsoft provided Windows through OEM licensing, NT and 9x since Windows 1.0 so your "Apple throw both OS 9 AND 10 on their computers?" is baseless.

No, I don't consider simply changing color, or pattern functionality. How is that a contradiction if I didn't count that as a new feature for OS X either?

That is a change in interface and layout, not just a change in color. If you can't understand something that simple...

Thanks for proving my point, because Windows XP includes two themes, Classic and Luna, Luna includes the two pane Start menu in addition to color changes you mentioned. You should change your name to "I need to get the facts". You can also maintain the the classic look and feel with the Luna Start menu.

It's called OEM licensing... ever heard of it?

And your point? Microsoft has been doing that since the 1980's.

And OS X's wireless support and networking has always been, and still is better. What's your point?

It has always been good in XP, just improved for the better. Leopard just added differentiation between secure and unsecured wireless networks in the latest Leopard build 9A499. Vista and XP have had that a good while now. So who's better here.


As you said to me,

Since when did I tout being 64-bit as a holy grail? It was one feature out of many?

You made it sound that way.

It isn't just a Microsoft based website, it is THE Microsoft website. You'd think they would support their own CURRENT software...

Safari doesn't work with all websites, but many cross platform browsers such FireFox and Opera do a way better job. The point, there is a full version of IE 7 that is the default browser in Vista that works with the Microsoft website. So you point is still moot.

I haven't used them yet. I just use webmail for mail, VLC is a million times better than WMP, or Quicktime for simple video playback, and I just happened to decide to upgrade software before installing Firefox, which I still haven't tried on the Microsoft site.

So if I want to update my Windows OS before they release a Service Pack with everything in it, and I haven't used Windows in a while? I guess I need to update the OS ONE UPDATE AT A TIME.

And on a fresh Tiger reinstall, I was able to go right up from 10.4 to 10.4.10 without any issues.

Same with Windows XP, you have multiple options, in fact, you can download imagex utility from Microsoft download center and apply updates in whatever order you want and drop the image of the OS on the machine without any problems.


If you want to talk about audio problems, I have one word for you... KMIXER. You can't even get decent digital out in Windows without figuring out how to bypass how Windows handles audio, and that ISN'T a bug.


Double click the Volume control in the Notification areas. Vista's Audio takes the cake already with features like per-ap volume, so your points continue to drop.


The only time I've had kernel panics was when I was messing with funky kernel extensions. Removing the EXT2 kernel extension installed cleared up the problem. But speaking of issues like that, what do you do whey your machine blue screens?

First of all, I have never had to mess with the Windows Kernel, and stop comparing the days of Windows 9x blue screens with the stability of NT (2000, XP and Vista's) kernel. I have never had blue screen on those operating systems. And stop acting like Mac OS X has never had blue screens, out the gate Mac OS 10.0 was known as Kernel Panic. I have Macworld that reads "FIX ALL JAGUAR BUGS". It was so embarrassing.

How often do you defrag your hard drive? At least repairing permissions is fast.

That question is irrelevant, I'm running Windows Vista, even if you are on XP running Defrag is a once in a blue moon occasion. Windows had pre-emptive multi-tasking and support for large memory address space since NT 3.1. You just got that "luxury" at 10.0. Which proves the Mac OS has been a nightmare most of its life.

Edit: A quick google search shows that I'm not the only one that has problems on shutting down Vista.

Ok, I am typing up all the comments in a Word Doc from Macworlds comment section about OS X's bugginess. I hope you are ready answer all of them.

DarkArchon
Aug 16, 2007, 02:45 AM
Your knowledge of Windows distribution and marketing is very embarrassing. Windows 2000 did come through OEM licensing and retail distribution (FPP - Full package product) in addition to Volume Licensing.
My point wasn't that Windows didn't offer their other products through OEM licensing, but Apple had both OSes on EACH MACHINE. You didn't need to pick one or the other, or pay more, you just got both.


Thanks for proving my point, because Windows XP includes two themes, Classic and Luna, Luna includes the two pane Start menu in addition to color changes you mentioned. You should change your name to "I need to get the facts". You can also maintain the the classic look and feel with the Luna Start menu.I was under the impression you were talking more about the release of Royal. True, Luna and Classic are significantly different, but Luna and Royale are just color scheme variations.


And your point? Microsoft has been doing that since the 1980's.
The point is XP came on most computers purchased, because it is the OS most manufacturers packaged on their computers, not because it is better. Apple sells their own hardware/software solutions. Before the XBox, Microsoft wasn't doing this. Apple almost collapsed before the return of Jobs. Business strategies are another discussion for another day.

It has always been good in XP, just improved for the better. Leopard just added differentiation between secure and unsecured wireless networks in the latest Leopard build 9A499. Vista and XP have had that a good while now. So who's better here.I haven't tried this in Vista, but last time I wanted to share my internet connection across my second ethernet port in XP, I needed to restart. It seems like a lot of networking changes require a restart before they take affect in XP.

You made it sound that way. I thought the mention of many features was clear.

Safari doesn't work with all websites, but many cross platform browsers such FireFox and Opera do a way better job. The point, there is a full version of IE 7 that is the default browser in Vista that works with the Microsoft website. So you point is still moot.KHTML is pretty good. In some places it follows standards better than Firefox, but I would agree with your post if it was the Apple site Safari didn't work at. I've been using the Safari 3 beta since it came out, and the only sites I have problems with are photobucket, and IE only sites.

Same with Windows XP, you have multiple options, in fact, you can download imagex utility from Microsoft download center and apply updates in whatever order you want and drop the image of the OS on the machine without any problems.That is a lot more work than just opening an updater app.

First of all, I have never had to mess with the Windows Kernel, and stop comparing the days of Windows 9x blue screens with the stability of NT (2000, XP and Vista's) kernel. I have never had blue screen on those operating systems.The NT kernel is indeed MUCH more stable than the old Dos kernel, but in my experience, they still aren't exactly a rare occurrence. Since SP2 though, XP has been more stable.

And stop acting like Mac OS X has never had blue screens, out the gate Mac OS 10.0 was known as Kernel Panic. I have Macworld that reads "FIX ALL JAGUAR BUGS". It was so embarrassing.I never said that OS X never has kernel panics, just in my experience, the only time I was having them was after installing a kernel extension so I could read from/write to EXT2/EXT3 partitions that I was using for Linux, so it was something I did that caused the instability, and it was something I was easily able to undo, fixing it.

OS X isn't perfect. I can't believe you haven't brought up the problem with optimizing after software updates that can break your OS install(or maybe did you and I just missed it?), and I find it ridiculous that Apple doesn't include the remote desktop software in their OS like Windows does. Overall, I like the interface of OS X a lot more. I find that between the dock and expose, it is easier to juggle between open windows, and I wouldn't trade the unified menubar for anything.

But back to the actual issue, 10.4->10.5 is no more an incremental update than XP -> Vista was. If there was one OS X upgrade I would have skipped, it probably would have been 10.3-10.4. It did have the least new features that I cared about, but it did feel faster, and more responsive, I do use dashboard some time, and Core Image is neat. Sure, if you started at 10.0, and worked your way up to 10.5, you would have paid more than a Vista Ultimate license, but I personally feel that 1. It is IMO a better product so I am willing to pay more, 2. There have been more innovations and new features in that time, 3. The steady stream of OS (not application as I don't use most of the packaged in Windows OR OS X applications) improvements and changes is nice as opposed to a new theme(Royal), Windows Desktop Search, then 6 years later finally a new OS. They both got continual bug fixes and security patches. 4. I like not having to mess with drivers. Stuff just works. Windows has gotten significantly better with its auto-detection of hardware. Everything worked for the most part for me with Vista (other than sound).

I got Vista Business X64 free legally through MSDNAA, so for me at least, it has no perceived cost, and yet I'll still chose to drop the money for Leopard, and use it over Vista. I find that OS X has features that, at least for me, make it worth buying even when I have free alternatives.

BKKbill
Aug 16, 2007, 03:56 AM
Apple Asking Feedback for Leopard 9A499
Interesting discussion Who will win? In this lifetime no one. It all becomes the chicken or the egg thingey.

MrCrowbar
Aug 16, 2007, 05:22 AM
This thread is going downhill fast.

http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=72871&stc=1&d=1177144777

Yep :rolleyes:

main chochacho
Aug 16, 2007, 09:41 AM
this survey pertains more to performance, stability, and other technical issues rather than features. those are most definitely frozen by this point.

ilogic
Aug 17, 2007, 09:16 AM
That's interesting. When VISTA got delayed, we all laughed at MS.

Now leopard is delayed, you are telling me it doesn't matter?

It did matter, but only because a certain gadget with a massive limelight was out and about, Apple is looking to increase the market, it has a better chance of doing that when it releases things contiguously, even if it was not ready at the time it worked out for them to add additional features and enhancements to the lep..

I don't get it, people piss and moan over the smallest nonsense, you can't win

ZachPruckowski
Aug 17, 2007, 10:12 PM
I was running the hacked OS X x86 on my AMD Sempron and I came up with some interesting results...I have experienced OS X getting just as groggy as Windows over time, it might handle it better, but its not out of the blue. Both have journaled file systems but, I have experienced the performance issues on both first hand.

Hacked OSx86 on a Sempron is not a valid comparison to XP for the following reasons (legality and morality aside):

1) Hacked OSx86 is an amalgam of several OS X versions and patched binaries and Darwin code. It's not a streamlined operating system by any means. It's taking parts from 3 or 4 cars and sticking them together.

2) On that Sempron, you're probably missing SSE3. That's basically a death sentence to OS X performance, because OS X is heavily optimized for SIMD (SSE and AltiVec).

3) You're probably losing the benefit of the graphics card, unless you have a driver for it. That's also a major performance hit, because OS X is then doing desktop drawing on the CPU and RAM instead of the GPU.

I am not saying that, but some Mac OS X users are using machines from 1999 and 2000, you and I don't know how many there are. But many have toted that as probably a strength of the platform itself, long lasting hardware. But, the point is even if you and I bought equal systems in 2003 (Mac/PC), XP would still have the edge, because you bought the Tiger upgrade to get features that XP either have built in or got as free downloads.


Mac hardware does last a long time. Most PC users I know (and I know a lot) wind up replacing their PCs every 2 or 3 years. No matter how you slice and dice it, an 8 year old computer is an old computer.

The problem here is that you're comparing built-in, integrated features with downloadable programs. Most XP users don't use Power Tools or other MS downloads like that.

Additionally, you're comparing features as bullet points, instead of comparing operating systems. I've used Macs, Windows, and Linux extensively (I had a class last semester in which the labs were entirely in Linux CLI, so I get around). If you're going to say "Oh, both Tiger and XP have search functions" without comparing the quality of the functions, then you're pretty misguided. I'll bet you consider Flip 3D and Exposť to be of equal-value. Use them. You'll


OS X did not get ... Instant Search until Tiger (10.4). XP users got Instant search technology as a free download with the MSN Desktop Search tool in 2005.


You can't seriously argue that Desktop Search tool is remotely equivalent to Spotlight in terms of performance, features, or usability. Having used both, Spotlight's OS-level integration is ridiculously superior.


You must be rich to make such a statement. Another contradiction, because even Apple disagrees with that statement. Why would they then make the minimum system requirement for Leopard be a PowerPC G4 800 MHz with 512 MBs of RAM? Ha, gotcha didn't I?


How did you get me? I never said that any machine can't run Tiger or Panther. I know that it's possible to install Tiger on any Mac with a PowerPC processor. But "can" and "would" are too completely different things. Both Apple and MS low-ball the system requirements significantly (but Apple's better about it than MS, in my experience).


The first gen PPC G5 tower (June 2003) ran at 1.6 to 2 GHz, you really, really are trying to tell me those Macs are too old to upgrade to either Panther (October 2003) or Tiger?


I made no such claim. I know first-hand (from doing layout work on them) that first-gen G5 PowerMacs can run Panther and Tiger, and I'd probably be willing to try Leopard on one. My claim was that they're relatively old computers.


Come, Apple released a 2.1 GHz G5 iMac in October of 2005, 4 months before the Intel iMac? When Tiger was released in April of 2005, Apples fastest G4 and G5 systems were 1.5 GHz and 2.5 Ghz respectively. The first Gen iMac with the PPC G5 released in fall of '04 were running at 1.6 to 1.8 Ghz, 8 months before Tigers release in April 2005. And YOU are seriously trying to tell me those machines are too old to upgrade to Tiger.


I never claimed that any G5 was too old to run Tiger. I said that computers from 2000 (G3s and pre-7450 G4s) wouldn't run Tiger well, and first-generation G5s (the fastest pre-Panther computers) are considered slow now-a-days. Much like sub-2GHz Pentium 4s are considered slow today.

I am in America as opposed to Jamaica, but I'm not rich, and you don't have to be rich to consider a sub-GHz computer "ultra-low-end" or a 4-year-old computer old. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of trying to claim that the average Mac user had to by all the updates. I'm sure some people did buy two or three updates (or maybe all of them), but most people (especially people who have computers less than 4 years old) only have to buy 1-2 updates to get to Leopard.


I have dared you, Vista runs on a minimum of 800 Mhz with with 512 MBs of RAM (1GB recommended), reading it right here on my Vista Ultimate product box, so whats your point?


My point is that XP runs slowly on such a machine with more than two applications open. Please, install Vista Ultimate on a 800 MHz PC with 512 MB of RAM and use it for a week.


At least I don't have to hack my system from 2000 to install the latest OS. :P XPOSFACTO anyone?

You have to hack a computer from 2005 to install XP. In order to install XP on a computer with a SATA hard drive, you need to buy a floppy drive, load SATA drivers on the floppy drive, and install them from the floppy disk at install. Alternatively, you need to create a custom install disk with the SATA drivers (this is what I do). That's at least as much work as installing Tiger on a pre-G3 computer (ripping and re-burning the install CDs with one text file altered.

They still bundled iTunes with iLife when the first version was released in 2003, can you run iTunes 7 on OS 10.0, 10.1, 10.2? NO, but I can run Windows Media Player 11 on XP just fine. WLM maybe garbage in your opinion, but its still free to users of Windows 2000, XP and Vista. You actually have to wait on a new release of OS X to get a new version of iChat.


The reason for this is pretty straightforward - on Mac OS X, the iApps make use of advanced features. WLM can't do real-time compositing, for instance. It's not like there's a shortage of free IM apps or music players, so I really don't see what the point is here.


At least I didn't need to buy a new version of OS X to gain functionality, thats delivered through Service Packs. All the other functionality mentioned are similar to in some ways to features already in XP and Vista. 64-bit is not gonna benefit every one btw, so toting it as a holy grail feature is really not a big deal for the majority of users on either on the OS X or Windows platforms.


I don't think I toted it as a holy grail feature at all, but it's darn useful, because we need to move over to 64-bit OSes within the next 5 years, and having an easy migration path is better than having one where software and hardware isn't compatible.

And "similar to in some ways to features already in XP and Vista" is a far cry from an answer. A Lincoln is "similar in some ways" to my Ford Taurus, but I think it's pretty clear which I'd rather have.


At least I didn't need to buy a new version of OS X to gain functionality, thats delivered through Service Packs.
...
Combo updates on XP are known as Service Packs, on OS X Tiger in particular, you have had 11 of them so far.


You need to be self-consistent. Either Service Packs are roll-ups of bug fixes, or they add features. Most Service Packs are bug fixes and performance updates.


Come on, its called a maintenance update, it should be fixing problems in the OS not adding them.


Yeah, because Microsoft has never retracted an update, or released an update to an update, or had a feature regression.


At least Windows Problems and Solutions offers suggestions. When you get a kernel panic on OS X, you only get two options, cold reset or reinstall to fix the issue. In fact, you have repair permissions everytime you do a maintenance update on OS X just to be safe.

That's silly. I've repaired permissions exactly once in two years and a dozen updates, and had no update related problems, just like most Mac users.

Most of the time when one gets a kernel panic, it's not reproducible, or is a hardware problem. You should only need to reinstall OS X if you've really screwed something up. A single kernel panic does not force a reinstall of OS X any more than XP crashing forces one.

And I've rarely ever found scripted troubleshooting to be helpful, since it's usually asking obvious questions.

Leopard just added differentiation between secure and unsecured wireless networks in the latest Leopard build 9A499. Vista and XP have had that a good while now. So who's better here.


Tiger and Leopard are still better. The reason is simple: I pick wireless networks from a menu, you need to use a dialog box. Besides, in most situations, which networks I'm authorized to use and which I'm not is generally pretty obvious. I'm not denying that it's a useful feature to be able to tell up front, but it's way better to have it in a menu than in a window.

Safari doesn't work with all websites, but many cross platform browsers such FireFox and Opera do a way better job. The point, there is a full version of IE 7 that is the default browser in Vista that works with the Microsoft website. So you point is still moot.


Safari is way more standards compliant than IE7. And Firefox and Opera also do a way better job than IE7, and work on Macs too. And for the record, in two years of browsing with Safari, I've never had an issue with anything other than an ActiveX control.


Same with Windows XP, you have multiple options, in fact, you can download imagex utility from Microsoft download center and apply updates in whatever order you want and drop the image of the OS on the machine without any problems.


If I was so inclined, I could update OS X in a similar fashion without any help from Apple. In fact, I could update OS X not just update-by-update, but package by package if I was ambitious. However, that's the sort of thing that only 0.001% of the populace needs to do, and isn't worth arguing about.


That question is irrelevant, I'm running Windows Vista, even if you are on XP running Defrag is a once in a blue moon occasion. Windows had pre-emptive multi-tasking and support for large memory address space since NT 3.1. You just got that "luxury" at 10.0. Which proves the Mac OS has been a nightmare most of its life.


Just so we're on the same page, NT wasn't merged with the consumer line until XP (2000 was not a consumer OS). Also, if it's more than 5 years old, you're really wasting your time arguing about it. Focus on the present, future, and recent past. It's a lot healthier for you.


Ok, I am typing up all the comments in a Word Doc from Macworlds comment section about OS X's bugginess. I hope you are ready answer all of them.

Hey, if this makes you happy, then whatever. If I didn't have a life, I could spend 50 years copying and pasting bug reports from XP into here or into a Windows forum. And just out of curiousity, why are we talking about bugs in Jaguar or 10.1 or even Panther in a "News" discussion?

Stadsport
Aug 18, 2007, 03:57 PM
Can somebody with the latest Leopard build tell me the version numbers of:

1. zsh (run "zsh --version")
2. Python (run "python -V")
3. cups (run "cups-config --version")
4. rsync (run "rsync --version")
5. gcc (run "gcc --version")
6. wxWidgets (run "wx-config --version")
7. OpenSSH and OpenSSL (run "ssh -V")

Despite all the hype about the new graphical features, these are the things that matter most to me, and nobody talks about them. Also, does the Apple GCC build happen to include a FORTRAN compiler?
1. zsh 4.3.4 (powerpc-apple-darwin9.0)
2. Python 2.5.1
3. 1.3b1
4. rsync version 2.6.3 protocol version 28
5. Not installed.
6. Not installed.
7. OpenSSH_4.5p1, OpenSSL 0.9.7l 28 Sep 2006

Where's the option? Others can't find it.

I hope the new dock looks good on autohide, quite small on the left...

The menubar? It's not optional, it's just "hackable." You can also just change the PNG it uses. Same with the Dock.

ZachPruckowski
Aug 18, 2007, 05:42 PM
1. zsh 4.3.4 (powerpc-apple-darwin9.0)
2. Python 2.5.1
3. 1.3b1
4. rsync version 2.6.3 protocol version 28
5. Not installed.
6. Not installed.
7. OpenSSH_4.5p1, OpenSSL 0.9.7l 28 Sep 2006


WTF? I thought Leopard came with Xcode 3 preview? Or is it a separate download?

seashellz
Aug 20, 2007, 02:37 PM
I would rather have a solid and stable 10.5-even if we have to wait until Jan 2008, then have a rushed out-just stable enough TOO GET BY.
Then WE become APPLEs unpaid beta testers for the next 5-10 updates.

I remember the huge huzzah when Jaguar (or Panther) was released.
It was going to fly you to the moon AND do the dishes.

It fell flat on its face when huge numbers of reports of USB troubles started pouring in.

This is tiresome- and makes fence sitters, noobs, the media/public and those on XP think twice about moving to that "that other system"

And yes, Apple puts WAY too much energy into design- they seem to be trying to emulate B&O- Bang and Olafson-stereo gear for the rich/chic/untra-trendy types-except their stuff seems to have few or no problems.

APPLES ads are a bit too "trendy" and elitist too seeming to be reaching for the B&O or e-surance types.

Apple has shown it wants to play ball with MS and get out of the cult/botique side of the OS business.


This also might be the time to let other PC makers use OS X-this time, with Jobs overseeing it, it just might work.
---
Also on bug fixes and viruses-NO CONTEST:

SECUNICA 2006 (or maybe 2005) Index of bug/virus fixes showed:

XP with a whopping EIGHTEEN pages of problems (as from my priner)

Mac- a paltry ONE AND A HALF

ZachPruckowski
Aug 20, 2007, 08:21 PM
I would rather have a solid and stable 10.5-even if we have to wait until Jan 2008, then have a rushed out-just stable enough TOO GET BY.
Then WE become APPLEs unpaid beta testers for the next 5-10 updates.


I just want to say that the development builds are probably ahead of what the ADC builds look like. 10.5 could be much more stable than these alpha/beta builds.

TheSpaz
Aug 24, 2007, 07:52 AM
Just found this bit of text on Apple's Leopard site:

"All features referenced in the Mac OS X Leopard website are subject to change. Demos feature Goodnight and Go by Imogen Heap."

By the way, I was browsing the iChat section.