PDA

View Full Version : Jobs: Leopard Will Anchor Product Schedule For A Decade




Pages : [1] 2

kjs862
Oct 21, 2007, 11:06 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/technology/22apple.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin



flopticalcube
Oct 21, 2007, 11:12 PM
Mr. Jobs said that Leopard would anchor a schedule of product upgrades that could continue for as long as a decade.

“I’m quite pleased with the pace of new operating systems every 12 to 18 months for the foreseeable future,” he said. “We’ve put out major releases on the average of one a year, and it’s given us the ability to polish and polish and improve and improve.”

Hmm... Leopard took more than 18 months. A lot more.

MacinDoc
Oct 21, 2007, 11:18 PM
Hmm... Leopard took more than 18 months. A lot more.
On the other hand, if 10.6 has a separate development team/track from 10.5, then in may come in on time 12-18 months from now and be much more polished than your typical new OS, because it will have had more time to mature.

flopticalcube
Oct 21, 2007, 11:20 PM
On the other hand, if 10.6 has a separate development team/track from 10.5, then in may come in on time 12-18 months from now and be much more polished than your typical new OS, because it will have had more time to mature.

If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.

erandall38
Oct 21, 2007, 11:37 PM
great article, nice find.

Is kind of long but if you have the chance you should read it.

It really makes me wonder... how are people using vista? and how do some people think vista was such a huge innovative step?

sananda
Oct 21, 2007, 11:42 PM
Is kind of long

:confused:

gr8tfly
Oct 21, 2007, 11:44 PM
Guess Steve had nightmares of "egg freckles (http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/retro/timeline/90s/930827.html)"... :p

The Newton easter egg was actually a special frame, not from the above.
(just took this pic of MP 130):

vansouza
Oct 22, 2007, 12:35 AM
If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.

People said the same thing about M$ going gui and leaving DOS behind. Progress!

Mr. Dee
Oct 22, 2007, 12:43 AM
Interesting that the author says that Apple will have released two versions of OS X by Windows 7 which is planned for 2009 or 2010. Could he be referring to Tiger and Leopard or Leopard and 10.6?

If its 10.6, then it seems as if Apple already has it in planning. And know, I don't believe they have parallel development teams since they had to take folks off Leopards development to help with the iPhone effort.

Rodimus Prime
Oct 22, 2007, 12:46 AM
I do not like apples 12-18 months upgrade cycle along with force obsoleting of any previos OS. They drop all major support (anything but security updates) not long after the release of the next OS. This a long with put out all this nice little apps and making sure they do not work on older vs.
Then they get the Devs in on doing the same thing. One thing I like about M$ is they tend to try to do a 3 year cycle on its major OS releases. 95,98,XP and Vista original planned release date were all 3 years apart.
People complain about what M$ charges for it OS upgrades but when you compare it with apple upgrade cost over the same time span M$ is cheaper. Plus add in the fact that with windows one can true get away with only really upgrading when getting a new computer. With an Mac you can bet on you will need to pay for at least one if not 2 OS upgrades.

M$ continues to support there OS and Devs keep making plenty of software for 3+ years after its been replaced. XP support last threw summer of 09 (extended past the original slated drop date of 07)

MacRumors
Oct 22, 2007, 08:26 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

In an interview with the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/technology/22apple.html?_r=1&oref=slogin), Apple CEO Steve Jobs said that the Macintosh has a lot of momentum and the upcoming Mac OS 10.5 Leopard release will anchor a schedule of product upgrades that may continue as long as a decade.

“The Macintosh has a lot of momentum now,” said Steven P. Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, in a telephone interview last week. “It is outpacing the industry.”

Recent numbers from research firm Gartner back up Mr. Job's claim (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/17/apples-3rd-quarter-2007-u-s-marketshare-up-to-8-1/), indicating that Apple's U.S. 3Q 2007 market share rose to 8.1%.

Mr. Jobs also indicated that Apple's pace of OS releases will not continue to drift dramatically slower.

“I’m quite pleased with the pace of new operating systems every 12 to 18 months for the foreseeable future,” he said. “We’ve put out major releases on the average of one a year, and it’s given us the ability to polish and polish and improve and improve.”

In 2004, Apple had said that it was slowing down its development of the Mac OS (http://www.macrumors.com/2004/05/24/mac-os-x-updates-less-frequent/) because the current pace had not been sustainable (Apple had released Mac OS 10.0, 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3 between 2001 and 2004). Since then, Apple has released Mac OS 10.4 Tiger, and will be release 10.5 Leopard this Friday.

By comparison, Microsoft has only released two consumer OS's since 2001: XP and Vista. The New York Times references a rumor that the next Windows release, code-named Windows 7, may not come until 2010.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/22/jobs-leopard-will-anchor-product-schedule-for-a-decade/)

Oirectine
Oct 22, 2007, 08:30 AM
Sounds good to me, as long as this doesn't mean we'll be waiting a decade for 10.6. 12-18 months sounds good :)

wattage
Oct 22, 2007, 08:31 AM
That must be a lot of manpower to release a new OS every 12-18 months. Keep them coming. We love new features!!

Project
Oct 22, 2007, 08:35 AM
Is there a link to the NY Times article?

Brianstorm91
Oct 22, 2007, 08:36 AM
I would love to know when stuff will be coming out
:D:D:D

BenRoethig
Oct 22, 2007, 08:36 AM
Personally, I would push 10.6 back to around 20-24 months and take the time to fix the few things that OSX does not well. How about sending some software engineers to help get the third party drivers up to snuff with the windows drivers. Apple is great with the spectacular, but they have a tendency to get bored and slack off when it comes to the more mundane tasks. Spaces is going to be a great tool, but I would also like the scanner on my AIO to work right.

MacJediDude
Oct 22, 2007, 08:38 AM
Come on sub-notebook! my aging 12" powerbook needs a replacement :D

mkrishnan
Oct 22, 2007, 08:40 AM
In 2004, Apple had said that it was slowing down its development of the Mac OS (http://www.macrumors.com/2004/05/24/mac-os-x-updates-less-frequent/)

This was one of the main things I noticed, also, when I read this in the Times.

As bad as it is, I think we actually can thank Vista in part for that. I don't think Vista is very impressive, but the misguided press and publicity seem to have pushed Apple to feel like they had to respond tit-for-tat by pulling Leopard up. I'm glad to hear that the net result is that they plan on continued rapid development of OS X. :)

Foxglove9
Oct 22, 2007, 08:41 AM
Why do i have a feeling 10.6 is coming in 2010 and it's going to be another major release.

wordmunger
Oct 22, 2007, 08:44 AM
The next Windows is code-named Windows 7? I guess Microsoft is getting tired cow jokes...

twoodcc
Oct 22, 2007, 08:47 AM
sounds good here. i love updates personally. as they keep improving, people will continue to buy their products....

clevin
Oct 22, 2007, 08:47 AM
OSX is a Unix derived system. Even if apple want to dwell on its current incarnation for a decade. Linux will not stop, and if apple won't follow up (which apparently is true as of now), it won't be happy for apple.

Stella
Oct 22, 2007, 08:48 AM
I hope Apple keep the OS cycle as long as 18 months.

Anything less is just too much IMO, especially as low as 12 months.

twoodcc
Oct 22, 2007, 08:48 AM
how come there is no link to the interview?

the.snitch
Oct 22, 2007, 08:53 AM
In contrast, Mr. Jobs said that multitouch drastically simplified the process of controlling a computer.

There are no “verbs” in the iPhone interface, he said, alluding to the way a standard mouse or stylus system works. In those systems, users select an object, like a photo, and then separately select an action, or “verb,” to do something to it.

Not sure where he's coming from here. I unlock my iphone, and it says "Slide to unlock" on the screen. There's a verb right there, and it also involves doing an action.

Many iphone dialogs are also full of verbs, in typical OS X fashion. Where Windows dialogs generally focus around presenting a lengthy description, and "Yes","No","Cancel" /"Abort","Retry","Ignore" buttons, Apple's HIG has always recommended placing Verbs onto the buttons to give a sense of what is going to happen without having to read the entire dialog.
I finished watching a video on the iphone this afternoon, and it presented a dialog asking me if I wanted to remove the video to save space, along with "Keep" and "Delete" buttons. Are these not verbs?

In fact many of the actions on iPhone revolve around "selecting an object", and then separately selecting an action. Due to the lack of features such as selecting text/images and a clipboard, many tasks on the iphone involve selecting a menu (such as the "share" button, presented in different contexts), which then present a variety of choices. e.g. for photos, iPhone gives the options of "Use as wallpaper", "Email Photo", and "Assign to Contact".

Am I missing something here? :confused:

Data
Oct 22, 2007, 08:53 AM
Sounds pretty good to me, every 18 months ;-).

Undecided
Oct 22, 2007, 08:55 AM
Is there any info on when new Macs will come with Leopard pre-installed?

viniciusc
Oct 22, 2007, 08:55 AM
i didn't get it right. Does that mean we'll have a new version of OS X every 12-18 months or that Leopard will last a decade with plenty of minor upgrades (10.5.*)?

goodmansvp
Oct 22, 2007, 08:57 AM
Preview of 10.6 at MW SF?

juxtaposer
Oct 22, 2007, 08:58 AM
Very pleased with this announcement. As long as the quality of the updates remains at the current high standard I'm more than happy. A new version of OS X every 18 months? Nice. :D

megfilmworks
Oct 22, 2007, 08:59 AM
The article makes me think that a touch interface computer is on the horizon for Apple.

mkrishnan
Oct 22, 2007, 08:59 AM
Is there any info on when new Macs will come with Leopard pre-installed?

They never really disclosed that in past changes. Basically, beginning with store purchases on 10/26 or orders placed on that day, you'll get Leopard. If your order online is CTO, you will probably get it pre-installed, even if you order it on 10/26. Otherwise, it'll be a few days while stock is depleted.

bodeh6
Oct 22, 2007, 09:00 AM
Preview of 10.6 at MW SF?


No......

Darkroom
Oct 22, 2007, 09:01 AM
what does "P" stand for (Steven P Jobs)?

PlaceofDis
Oct 22, 2007, 09:01 AM
OSX is a Unix derived system. Even if apple want to dwell on its current incarnation for a decade. Linux will not stop, and if apple won't follow up (which apparently is true as of now), it won't be happy for apple.

who said that they were stopping development? he only said that leopard gives them a good ground for schedule pacing and development.

FF_productions
Oct 22, 2007, 09:02 AM
Preview of 10.6 at MW SF?

WWDC 08 is the earliest I believe we will see 10.6.

Let's all just enjoy Leopard for now.



It's good to know they are staying constant with the upgrades and the sales are surging.

kwood
Oct 22, 2007, 09:02 AM
Just an observation, but 2010 isn't all that far away. It is only 26 months away. Tiger was released April 29th, 2005 and Leopard will be released October 26th 2007. If my math is correct, then that is 30 months between OS upgrades. Which in my opinion isn't that bad.

I know no one is forcing me to upgrade my OS every-time a new one is released, but it is tempting. And I don't want to upgrade every year, it gets expensive.

If Apple did release a new OS in January of 2010 then it would be less time then what we waited from Tiger to Leopard.

Just a thought.

w0ngbr4d
Oct 22, 2007, 09:02 AM
If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.

I'd like to keep my G5 another 2 years at the minimum. 4 year useful life isn't too bad in the computer world.

Sadly, I'm thinking Virtual PC 7 won't be compatible with Leopard. While I can use my girlfriends Macbook/Parallels in the mean time, I might end up buying a new iMac.

We'll find out Friday. ::fingers crossed::

FF_productions
Oct 22, 2007, 09:03 AM
what does "P" stand for (Steven P Jobs)?

Steven Paul Jobs.

sananda
Oct 22, 2007, 09:03 AM
what does "P" stand for (Steven P Jobs)?

perfectionist. or paul.

FF_productions
Oct 22, 2007, 09:06 AM
Just an observation, but 2010 isn't all that far away. It is only 26 months away. Tiger was released April 29th, 2005 and Leopard will be released October 26th 2007. If my math is correct, then that is 30 months between OS upgrades. Which in my opinion isn't that bad.



We all must consider the Intel Transition occurred in between 2005-2006.

They had to make a version of Tiger for Intel Machines (Yes they already did but they needed to make it stable and ready for the public).

Butthead
Oct 22, 2007, 09:06 AM
Sounds good to me, as long as this doesn't mean we'll be waiting a decade for 10.6. 12-18 months sounds good :)

No, he said 'anchor', which means like OS9, people will be using it on their systems for upwards for a decade, and refuse to switch to the newer versions :p

Is there a link to the NY Times article?
click on the "article link", the NYTime link is on that page.

Personally, I would push 10.6 back to around 20-24 months and take the time to fix the few things that OSX does not well. How about sending some software engineers to help get the third party drivers up to snuff with the windows drivers. Apple is great with the spectacular, but they have a tendency to get bored and slack off when it comes to the more mundane tasks. Spaces is going to be a great tool, but I would also like the scanner on my AIO to work right.

here, here; I hope they get the little things, that are a real PITA done sooner rather than later.

Why do i have a feeling 10.6 is coming in 2010 and it's going to be another major release.

I'll take bets it takes longer, say 2012.

OSX is a Unix derived system. Even if apple want to dwell on its current incarnation for a decade. Linux will not stop, and if apple won't follow up (which apparently is true as of now), it won't be happy for apple.

Not really in competition with Linux, so 2012 for 10.6

how come there is no link to the interview?

It will be fixed soon enough I predict :D

brianus
Oct 22, 2007, 09:10 AM
“I’m quite pleased with the pace of new operating systems every 12 to 18 months for the foreseeable future,” he said. “We’ve put out major releases on the average of one a year, and it’s given us the ability to polish and polish and improve and improve.”

Uh.. what? That was the pace back in 2002-2005. The Tiger-Leopard transition took 30 months. What is he talking about?

Mr.damien
Oct 22, 2007, 09:11 AM
OSX is a Unix derived system.
Not anymore. Today, osx IS a Unix system.:cool:

guzhogi
Oct 22, 2007, 09:13 AM
18 Months sounds OK, I guess. I don't really care. Every 12 months or so is kinda too frequent b/c then we'd have to pay $129 every time. Plus, the extra 6 or however many months would let Apple create more & better features, plus better stability.

I'm not totally sure if/what Apple's going to drop in 10.6. In 10.3, they needed USB ports (bye bye beige G3s!), in 10.4, they needed firewire ports (bye bye first iMacs!) and now, 10.5 needs an 867 MHz or faster G4 (bye bye all G3 iMacs, iBook G3s & Power Mac G3s and some G4s). I know in other threads there's been a debate on whether or not to drop PowerPC support, but good chance all G4s will be. On the one hand, G5s are more powerful than the first Intel Macs. However, if we keep G5s, but drop G4s, there aren't any G5 laptops in consumer's hands and laptops are a big chunk of the Mac population (or Apple pie :p ). It would suck for some people in either case. Either laptop users will be mad or G5 users will be mad. On yet a different hand, it might be easiest for Apple to drop all PowerPC support after 10.5 and focus only on Intel (and whatever the iPods/iPhone run). This would be a lot easier to maintain & program since there aren't so many different architectures. Plus, everyone who has a PowerPC Mac that wants to run 10.6 would have to buy a new Mac, meaning more sales for Apple. On the downside, the consumers will probably hate having to upgrade.

Kipling
Oct 22, 2007, 09:13 AM
the upcoming Mac OS 10.5 Leopard release will anchor a schedule of product upgrades that may continue as long as a decade.



I find that phrase quite interesting, and wonder if it means that those "top secret features" that Jobs alluded to are actually going to arrive in Leopard this week after all.

We just might not be able to see them yet.

As far as I understand it, there are only three possibilities - a) the top secret features don't exist at all; b) they're new additional applications that we haven't seen or heard about yet; or, c) they're hardware dependent and thus require a new piece of kit to be used.

I think c), and I won't be at all surprised if some completely new type of computer comes out in the next few weeks, bringing Multi-touch to the Mac - maybe the fabled MacBook Thin with a new type of giant multitouch trackpad...

:cool:

Egomaniac
Oct 22, 2007, 09:14 AM
Hahaha.


On a side note, I preordered Leopard yesterday. Is the Safari thats included a fully stable 3.0? I've been using the beta for a couple of months and as much as i love it, it beach balls me quite a bit.

Mere mortals are stuck with the 9a559 build of Leopard, so there's really no telling what the final version looks like until it's in our hands.

That said, Safari under 9a559 looks exactly like Safari under 10.4, down to the irritating random beachballs.

BKKbill
Oct 22, 2007, 09:14 AM
This all sounds good. I see iPhone and verbs didn't take long to get into a Leopard OS discussion.

longofest
Oct 22, 2007, 09:18 AM
Is there a link to the NY Times article?

how come there is no link to the interview?

My bad. Totally not intentional. The story has been updated.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/technology/22apple.html

the.snitch
Oct 22, 2007, 09:19 AM
Uh.. what? That was the pace back in 2002-2005. The Tiger-Leopard transition took 30 months. What is he talking about?

the keyword is average. 10.0 arrived in 2001. 10.5 is actually the 6th revision to OS X. so 6 releases between 2001-2007 is one per year ;)

Farani
Oct 22, 2007, 09:19 AM
Could this mean we will be seeing a touchpad employing the same gesture usage as the iphone in the near future, say MB on Friday or MBP in Jan?

Rocketman
Oct 22, 2007, 09:20 AM
It is always interesting to hear what the "general media" has to say about Apple and what they get right or wrong in the process. The media is so horse race focused, not only in politics but in technology companies. Instead of saying what key features you need that are offered, or what policy stances politicians have, they focus on release dates, poll numbers, earnings reports as an indicator of what OS is better. Blah!

When Leopard went on pre-sale, several sales outlets reported swamped servers (indicating a poor resource allocation model there) and the media I heard said in effect that this indicated the switch from Vista to Leopard. Hmmm. It seems like 100% of Leopard retail package buyers are already Mac owners!

Blah!

Filter the media.

But Apple is ramping CPU market share rapidly which IS an indication of a flow from Wintel to Mactel. Leopard uptake is about double the speed of Tiger, partly because more people have been pre-sold on features and partly because online buying is much more widely adopted by general consumers and more trusted than 2 years ago or so.

Rocketman

Wayfarer
Oct 22, 2007, 09:22 AM
Hmm...

Quoted for post of the day!

Ahh... it's great to hear from Mr. Steven P. Jobs. At this rate, maybe we'll hear about Mac OS X 10.6 Lynx next week? :rolleyes: [/wishful thinking] (or IS IT...?)

samh004
Oct 22, 2007, 09:23 AM
Preview of 10.6 at MW SF?

I wouldn't be happy about that, that'd mean they'd been focusing on the new cat when they should of been readying Leopard for release.

Not sure I'd want to upgrade every 18 months, I've lasted through 30 months of Tiger and I am quite happy with it, if Leopard wasn't on the horizon I wouldn't be worried about Tiger at all, it's rock solid.

I think 24 - 30 months between upgrades would suit me better.

And as for the next cat, 2010 - 2011, but not 2012.

At this rate, maybe we'll hear about Mac OS X 10.6 Lynx next week? :rolleyes: [/wishful thinking]

Surely it's Lion :p

flopticalcube
Oct 22, 2007, 09:23 AM
Old news. We were talking about it last night.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=4364401

mdntcallr
Oct 22, 2007, 09:24 AM
Well, the good news is that Macintosh OSX is remarkable stable and quality.

notwithstanding some problem areas, it does get continually refined. A much better approach than Microsoft's Windows. Which takes the approach of delivering buggy and problematic operating systems.

Vista has been uniformly reviewed as horrible and most software does not take advantage of it properly.

mr.fancypants
Oct 22, 2007, 09:26 AM
Could someone define what to "anchor a product schedule" means? Sounds iike they're just saying, "we've got great products coming up over the next 10 years, stay tuned." In that case: duh.

Also, for some reason I was thinking 10.5 was the final OSX release. Opinions on OSXI anyone?

pgwalsh
Oct 22, 2007, 09:26 AM
I hope Apple keep the OS cycle as long as 18 months.

Anything less is just too much IMO, especially as low as 12 months.I disagree. I think the pace they've had has been good and an update every year is no problem in my book. Ubuntu gets one every 6 months and it keeps getting better. As long as they don't go through another entire architecture change which causes developers to rewrite their apps, I'm all for updates. Remember, you can always skip a release or two and still upgrade for the same price. All the innovation going into leopard really puts it ahead of Vista and XP. If they keep that up, then they'll really put the vista and xp behind the 8 ball.

darthraige
Oct 22, 2007, 09:27 AM
"...that the next Windows release, code-named Windows 7, may not come until 2010."

We can only imagine what Apple will have out by then...

Dreamer2go
Oct 22, 2007, 09:27 AM
I really don't mind with a later update...
maybe mid 2009 early 2010 for 10.6 (roughly tiger to leopard's time period is great)

One day SR MBP will become obsolete...so with more frequent updates, the less the hardware will support the hardware...

current trend is G3 isn't supported in Leopard
G4 not supported for 10.6 (According to the article in macrumors.com)
Intel macs 10.7? (The Core Duo ones and early Core 2 Duo)
lol

yzp
Oct 22, 2007, 09:28 AM
I should really get apple stocks...

kamiboy
Oct 22, 2007, 09:32 AM
Steve Jobs is a better man than I, taking things slow and slowly pecking away at their mountainous lead. If I were in his place I would have put all those Apple millions to work on a most foul James-Bond-villain-esque scheme to destroy m$ once and for all. Bwah hah hah hah hah hah hah!

That was my evil victory laugh by the way.

Project
Oct 22, 2007, 09:34 AM
I wouldn't be happy about that, that'd mean they'd been focusing on the new cat when they should of been readying Leopard for release.


No it wouldn't. The first few months of development of a new OS will probably be spent on concepts, pre planning etc. The people who are involved at this stage are not the same as those who are bug fixing during crunch time.

Glenny2lappies
Oct 22, 2007, 09:34 AM
Windows 3, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, ME, NT 3.1, NT3.51, NT4, 2000, XP, Vista... now Windows 7.

Just think, a whole bunch of code in their latest and "greatest":D Vista is dedicated to working with MS Dos. Little wonder it sucks like a Dyson.


Not sure it's cheaper with OSX though; there's been 5 versions since 2000 (10.0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and now 10.5).

It sure as hell is a lot better!

majordude
Oct 22, 2007, 09:36 AM
...had to respond tit-for-tat...

To quote Benny Hill, "In that case, 'tat'."

Whoshnot
Oct 22, 2007, 09:38 AM
I hope Apple keep the OS cycle as long as 18 months.

Anything less is just too much IMO, especially as low as 12 months.

Don't worry, all the work on future iPhones will slow down the development of 10.6 ... :rolleyes:

SiliconAddict
Oct 22, 2007, 09:38 AM
Umm Microsoft has the foundation now. The next OS update will be in 2009-2010. Once again this is no different the the introduction of OS 10. It took them a damn long time to release it. Once released they refined, buffed the crap out of that OS until you have Leopard. MS will do the same thing. The foundation of Vista IS solid. It simply needs fine tuning with 2 or 3 service packs released over a 2 year period.
And the reason MS doesn't update their OS any sooner is because of the IT industry. The enterprise would completely ignore anything released in an 18 month cycle. This is why Apple will never own the enterprise. They are way too fast and loose with new OS's.

WildPalms
Oct 22, 2007, 09:39 AM
Not anymore. Today, osx IS a Unix system.:cool:

Well said, my man, well said :)

pixlnet
Oct 22, 2007, 09:43 AM
I'd like to get 10.X OS upgrade every 24-36 months with the 10.X.x updates in between. 10.6 is supposed to have a new file system right? I remember reading an Apple article or something about it saying it will open doors to new things.

People buy Macs for OS X so they will definitely have that at the center of their strategy. Especially now since Apple TV, Macintosh, iPhone, iPod Touch, etc. are running OS X. I wouldn't expect them to slow down on releases. Even Linux will have a tough time keeping up. Sorry Linux fans, it's true.

Heinekev
Oct 22, 2007, 09:43 AM
Come on sub-notebook! my aging 12" powerbook needs a replacement :D

I'm dying here waiting for a sub notebook... even just an announcement, so I can stop looking at the macbooks and scheming.

*$&%*($&%

Manatee
Oct 22, 2007, 09:45 AM
I'm looking forward to the MacRumors on-line feed of the OS X 10.6 intro at Mac World '17. :)

Ok, I'm sure that's not what Steve meant, but hey -- my latest Vista installation has autoexec.bat and config.sys.

Stridder44
Oct 22, 2007, 09:46 AM
Word association: Eggs.

Cloudsurfer
Oct 22, 2007, 09:49 AM
So, we will continue to see Mac OS X for 10 years?

Now I'm really curious what OS XI will bring us.

benpatient
Oct 22, 2007, 09:50 AM
Why does everything have to be presented in such a biased way? Why mention how long between windows releases in a thread about os x releases? When the mods want us to stop the flame wars, but the top of the news feed is asking for one, isn't that perpetuating the issue?

I'll bite: Where is resolution independence that was promised in 10.4? Where is the intelligent, system-wide, user-friendly metadata that Spotlight was supposed to be, that exists in Vista right now? Why does adding Exposé and fixing a bunch of system bugs count as a "new" OS that you have to pay for, when SP1 and SP2 don't count as new versions? Do they not count as new versions because they're free? Because they are still called XP? Because Leopard is still technically called OS X and at this point OS X has cost 649.75 if you're a loyal mac user (10.0, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5 were each 129.95). That's as much as Vista Ultimate and XP Pro (299.99 + 329.99) combined.

It also ignores the 2005 release of Media Center edition and the server/mobile versions that were released.

I'm typing this on a MacPro. I get it. But please stop acting like fanbois on the front page. It makes us all look dumb to the general population.

guzhogi
Oct 22, 2007, 09:54 AM
One thing I really wish will happen in the next version of the Mac OS after 10.5 (10.6? XI?) is get rid of Carbon. It's so old and antiquated, it should've been dead and buried in 10.2 or something. Especially the speech recognition/text-to-speech technology. It's pretty much unchanged since OS 7 it seems like. The voices sounded awful back then, and they sound even worse now. Once the Mac OS goes Intel only, that's when Carbon should be out.

One other thing I'd really like to see (but will never happen) is for Apple to open up Mac OS to other hardware. Macs are good, but I'd like to add stuff that Apple doesn't currently supply & there's no easy to get Mac OS X on a generic PC. I'd love to be able to build my own computer & use Mac OS X on it, but oh, well. I know some off you will say "Well, if you're not happy w/ Macs, don't buy them!" I am happy w/ Macs (both the computers & OS), I could by happier.

Stella
Oct 22, 2007, 09:54 AM
Why do people still go on about the 'secret features'?

All was revealed in WWDC.. there are NO secret features.


I find that phrase quite interesting, and wonder if it means that those "top secret features" that Jobs alluded to are actually going to arrive in Leopard this week after all.

Pants Dragon
Oct 22, 2007, 10:00 AM
I'd like a short preview at WWDC 08, big preview at MWSF 09 and release in summer of 09 (Around WWDC). I think that's a fair timeline.

hayesk
Oct 22, 2007, 10:01 AM
Is there any info on when new Macs will come with Leopard pre-installed?

When the old supply runs out.

foniks2020
Oct 22, 2007, 10:04 AM
Umm Microsoft has the foundation now... The enterprise would completely ignore anything released in an 18 month cycle. This is why Apple will never own the enterprise. They are way too fast and loose with new OS's.

You have to wonder if the enterprise has adopted that mindset BECAUSE windows is unpredictable with their updates... sure they do legacy support all the way back but they also change the way the system works for the user, requiring re-training... and they introduce it not just in the OS but also in Office which is what most people are using on Windows anyways. Seems to me they had a rock-solid foundation in Windows 2000/NT that they could have enhanced with new underlying foundation technology, without re-thinking/re-working the interface. OR if they had done it in smaller increments, it would have been less of a shock to the users.

Imagine if they had updated just the security model in XP first, (wait 18 months) then added in the Composited windowing system (without changing the interface look), (wait 12 months) updated Office to show off the windowing w/ some smaller additions to wMedia, etc... (wait 18 months) then finally announced a new version (Vista) which brought the OS UI and features up-to-date with all the underlying technologies they had earlier introduced (and tested/patched/upgraded).

That is the difference between OS X and Vista... OS X was incrementally improved with lots of user testing and developer tweaking as it went. This is actually easier to support from an IT POV than a big massive all-encompassing OS update.. ie: they only have to pay attention to a few changes at a time each year, rather than try to support a complete paradigm shift every 4 years or so.

JackSYi
Oct 22, 2007, 10:05 AM
Is there any info on when new Macs will come with Leopard pre-installed?

All Macs sold on the 26th will have the DVD in the box.

Jon the Heretic
Oct 22, 2007, 10:06 AM
Windows 3, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, ME, NT 3.1, NT3.51, NT4, 2000, XP, Vista... now Windows 7.

Just think, a whole bunch of code in their latest and "greatest":D Vista is dedicated to working with MS Dos. Little wonder it sucks like a Dyson.


DOS is emulated/virtualized under XP and Vista; so are Win16s (16-bit Win 3.1 apps). They are essentially encapsulated, separate environments and do NOT affect the stability of overall OS. This is a very safe way to convey backwards compatibility.

What keeps Vista in the realm of the bloated are features that run amok, plus a need for last generation software to run NATIVELY (this includes all 32-bit app from Win95 and NT onward.) Keeping your last gen software runnning natively means lots of hacks to your OS so as not to break too much. This CAN hold you back.

Ironically, running old apps is not the problem. Win3.1 and DOS apps run neatly without making the overall OS stable; but running that copy of Office 97 does have some substantive tradeoffs.

Apple is in the same boat with keeping PPC and Carbon apps running natively on the MacOS X kernel, but that hasn't gotten out of hand yet. Last gen software compatibility always involves some tradeoffs, even for Apple. But running DOS/Win3.1 compatibility is more like Classic for Apple; removing this type of backwards compatibility doesn't make the core OS even a whit more stable, because the individual applications aren't running natively on the kernel anyway. They can't even talk directly to the hardware. Very safe.

For MS, there is no good reason to drop compatibility with these really old apps, and for newer apps, which do give them problems, well they feel like they can't drop compatibility with them. Apple's dropping Classic is really just out of meanness and disdain for their traditional base of Mac users and for the old OS. There is no technical advantage to having done so, not even a monetary one (cost almost nothing to keep it around). Dropping Rosetta support and Carbon however might actually help the core OS in lots of ways, but like MS, I am sure Apple doesn't feel like they could get away with that.

pdjudd
Oct 22, 2007, 10:07 AM
And the reason MS doesn't update their OS any sooner is because of the IT industry.

What about their home users. I would more venture to say that MS has no compelling reason to update windows very often is that every time somebody buys a PC, MS gets a sale of windows. They are a monopoly. Monopolies like MS generally don't have much of a compelling interest to develop when they have guaranteed income. The only time MS releases anything is when they have to - like with Internet explorer.

illegallydead
Oct 22, 2007, 10:09 AM
Ok, as cool as new updates are, I don't like shelling out $120+ every year to year and a half. That's even with an education discount! WTF?
While I certainly agree that Microsoft's schedule kinda sucks, it's not like Apple's price scheme is much different. Windows = $400 every 5 years, Mac = $100 every 1-1.5 years. Not much of a difference, unfortunately.
Regular GOOD updates would be good, rather than new versions all the time...

flopticalcube
Oct 22, 2007, 10:12 AM
Regular GOOD updates would be good, rather than new versions all the time...

I think that was the promise, i.e. you will really like the new OSs so much, you will buy them. Nothing really wrong with skipping a generation occasionally either.

Eric Lewis
Oct 22, 2007, 10:13 AM
i see Mac OSX 10.6 on 10/10/10

and the windows 7 will need 4gigs of ram

Cloudsurfer
Oct 22, 2007, 10:13 AM
I would prefer a 24 month cycle. Give us time to breathe, Apple.

guzhogi
Oct 22, 2007, 10:13 AM
I'm dying here waiting for a sub notebook... even just an announcement, so I can stop looking at the macbooks and scheming.

*$&%*($&%

Maybe Apple's working on bringing Multitouch to the laptops? Would be cool. I'd like to see a tablet Mac. I know Other World Computing sells modded MacBooks as a tablet. Pretty cool. Add in multitouch and that would be AWESOME!

Another product I'd like to see is a Mac Mini, :apple: TV and a DVR/TiVo all in one device. That would be really cool.

I really hope they update the Mac Pros, xServes & xServe RAIDs soon. The current ones are getting a little long in the tooth. For the RAID, it should really have SATA and/or SAS. Most hard drives that I see now are SATA. Plus, make the controllers both independent AND redundant. That way, you can have a 0 + 1, 10 or 50 style RAID as well as a backup function where if 1 fails, the other would kick in for both.

hayesk
Oct 22, 2007, 10:13 AM
I'll bite: Where is resolution independence that was promised in 10.4?

Where and by whom was this promised. I don't remember Apple promising this in Tiger.

Where is the intelligent, system-wide, user-friendly metadata that Spotlight was supposed to be, that exists in Vista right now?

It was supposed to be in Spotlight. I admit I'm not a fan of Spotlight, but I question where you came up with the features that were "promised"

Why does adding Exposé and fixing a bunch of system bugs count as a "new" OS that you have to pay for, when SP1 and SP2 don't count as new versions?

Hmm... maybe because Exposé fundamentally changes the way people used their computers, and SP releases are mostly bug fixes. I notice you conveniently ignored the other features of 10.3

Do they not count as new versions because they're free? Because they are still called XP?

No, because they didn't offer anything meaningful.

Because Leopard is still technically called OS X and at this point OS X has cost 649.75 if you're a loyal mac user (10.0, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5 were each 129.95). That's as much as Vista Ultimate and XP Pro (299.99 + 329.99) combined.

I don't buy that comparison. I could easily argue that I didn't have to purchase every OS X version in between to maintain similar functionality to Windows. Not only that, people tend to buy new Macs which come with the latest OS. Even if they don't, they could happily work with 10.2 to this day (as my Mom does) and their computers work as well as they always did.

skellener
Oct 22, 2007, 10:17 AM
I just hope Apple spends more time on the Mac in 2008 than the iPod, iPhone and AppleTV. There wasn't enough focus on the Mac in 2007. Now with Leopard ready to be released, they will pay more attention to the Mac. I'd like to see some new hardware options and some great new (completely new) software from Apple.

iJawn108
Oct 22, 2007, 10:19 AM
is os x past the 2040+ unix issue?

flopticalcube
Oct 22, 2007, 10:20 AM
I just hope Apple spends more time on the Mac in 2008 than the iPod, iPhone and AppleTV. There wasn't enough focus on the Mac in 2007. Now with Leopard ready to be released, they will pay more attention to the Mac. I'd like to see some new hardware options and some great new (completely new) software from Apple.

So would I but I don't think so. The dropping of Computer from the Apple name was more telling than people imagine. Expect to see Apple branch out even further and continue to flesh out their non-computer products even more. I am sure the Macs will get a look-in but the days when they took centre stage are over. :(

PlaceofDis
Oct 22, 2007, 10:23 AM
So would I but I don't think so. The dropping of Computer from the Apple name was more telling than people imagine. Expect to see Apple branch out even further and continue to flesh out their non-computer products even more. I am sure the Macs will get a look-in but the days when they took centre stage are over. :(

don't be so sure about that. they've said that they have four areas: Computers, MP3 players, Phone, and Living room (Apple TV being a hobby project).

i think they've managed to balance all four relatively well this year so far and i expect the same from now on. each getting its own time to shine.

Kwill
Oct 22, 2007, 10:23 AM
Not sure where he's coming from here. I unlock my iphone, and it says "Slide to unlock" on the screen. There's a verb right there, and it also involves doing an action.

Am I missing something here? :confused:

"No verbs" does sound absolute. However, in the context of the article, when Jobs says "there are no verbs" he appears to be referring to operations that occur with no dialogs -- like tapping, rotataing, pinching, flicking, and swiping.

Sometimes in a phone interview it is not possible to think out how your responses will be interpreted or whether what is said is entirely accurate. In retrospect, it may have been better to state: 'We strived to eliminate "verbs" for many actions that previously relied on them.'

Farani
Oct 22, 2007, 10:24 AM
All Macs sold on the 26th will have the DVD in the box.

Is this post 6pm or from the store opening? Because if it's store opening, people who buy new macs before 6pm can run leopard before its officially released.

Cloudane
Oct 22, 2007, 10:25 AM
Let's just hope Leopard gets a better reception than Vista, which went down like a lead balloon :D (Shouldn't be difficult, if they haven't broken compatibility or gone OTT with security prompts)

The release schedule is fine. There were times I would've argued that yes Microsoft may have brought out fewer upgrades but that they're usually mammoth ones like XP and Vista, whilst Apple charge £85(!) every 12-18 months for what is basically a service pack (let's face it, Tiger wasn't much more than Panther+Spotlight). However Leopard seems like quite a big release, and probably worth it. If they keep up the kind of innovation they have been recently, they have a bright future ahead.

I had to pratt about with our chairman's PC this afternoon, trying to get a webcam working. First it took forever finding drivers, then it had all sorts of weird graphical problems relating to the motherboard's chipset, and everything you tried involved rebooting the thing and waiting ages for it to start up. In the end I had to downgrade the graphics performance (turn down the 3D acceleration). I said "you know, it's sad we can't use them here because we rely on Windows-only apps, but at home you'd love a Mac. There would've been none of this messing about - plug in a webcam and it just works... or nowadays has one built in". I think he's convinced :D

Anyway... it's highly reassuring that Macs are doing so well. I think the Vista debacle actually has a good chance of giving Macs a decent market share.

Slip
Oct 22, 2007, 10:34 AM
Id prefer them to air on the side of 18 months rather than 12, like everyone's been saying, it does get rather exspensive and also just as we get a reliable and stable OS the new one rolls along...

ddubbo
Oct 22, 2007, 10:34 AM
The next Windows is code-named Windows 7? I guess Microsoft is getting tired cow jokes...
Indeed, windows 7 it will look like Vista, just they'll place taskbar on the top of the screen instead of the bottom. Also the "close" button will be placed at upper left corner, and not at the left as now. I suppose Explorer 8 will borrow some cool features from FireFox 3 and Safari 4. They'll waste about 10 billion $ on that and 3 years of work.

ChrisA
Oct 22, 2007, 10:38 AM
That must be a lot of manpower to release a new OS every 12-18 months. Keep them coming. We love new features!!

It's not really a "new OS". It is still the same old BSD unix inside and then some "user land" applications on top. They make some changes and additions to those user land applications. The process goes on continuously. The big question for Apple is how often to package it up as a release. I think they have to ask how often they can ask their users to pay up $129. If you hit them up every 12 moths maybe only a third will upgrade, with a longer upgrade interval you can collect up more changes and maybe get a higher fraction of your users to pay for the upgrade. It's all about maximizing the return they get.

Data
Oct 22, 2007, 10:39 AM
[QUOTE= There would've been none of this messing about - plug in a webcam and it just works... or nowadays has one built in". I think he's convinced :D
.[/QUOTE]

You can forget about plug in any webcam and it just works, that's certainly not the case, there is only a certain kind of usb cams that work with the mac os, i forgot the name for those devices but , just any webcam is'nt going to work, the build in ones do work of course ;-).

citi
Oct 22, 2007, 10:41 AM
I'm not sure if this is a good thing or not. While I love the fact Apple is really investing in their future, a major release every year and a half means that I (as a music producer) potentially need to pay for new Protools software, plug-ins, (don't tell me waves isn't going to capitalize on this) potentially new hardware and have to fear that some of my programs will just stop working. And yes, I can of course just not upgrade, but what can I say, Apple makes great products.

Iroganai
Oct 22, 2007, 10:41 AM
OS X 10.6 Next Tuesday !!!!

lazyrighteye
Oct 22, 2007, 10:42 AM
The article makes me think that a touch interface computer is on the horizon for Apple.

You think? :p

I'd say the iPhone is a solid hint of what we can expect over the next decade, with concerns to how users interact with their information.

BWhaler
Oct 22, 2007, 10:42 AM
Every 12-18 months is great news. I suspect 10.6 will be 18 months, but who knows.

I think Apple is slowly moving us towards a new UI experience, with multi-touch leading the way.

Hard Nard
Oct 22, 2007, 10:45 AM
Little wonder it sucks like a Dyson.

you can be sure I'll be using that quote on a regular basis!:p

notjustjay
Oct 22, 2007, 10:47 AM
Why do people still go on about the 'secret features'?

All was revealed in WWDC.. there are NO secret features.

THANK YOU!

I was getting a little tired of the "But what are the secret features?" questions that keep showing up in the Leopard threads. Were people not paying attention to the last few Keynotes?!

flopticalcube
Oct 22, 2007, 10:50 AM
THANK YOU!

I was getting a little tired of the "But what are the secret features?" questions that keep showing up in the Leopard threads. Were people not paying attention to the last few Keynotes?!

Probably because most people (on this forum anyways) knew about the secret features long before the Keynotes, therefore they were not really secret. Expectations had been raised.

Data
Oct 22, 2007, 10:51 AM
THANK YOU!

I was getting a little tired of the "But what are the secret features?" questions that keep showing up in the Leopard threads. Were people not paying attention to the last few Keynotes?!

I think you know the answer to that one ;-) .

clevin
Oct 22, 2007, 10:53 AM
I'm not sure if this is a good thing or not. While I love the fact Apple is really investing in their future, a major release every year and a half means that I (as a music producer) potentially need to pay for new Protools software, plug-ins, (don't tell me waves isn't going to capitalize on this) potentially new hardware and have to fear that some of my programs will just stop working. And yes, I can of course just not upgrade, but what can I say, Apple makes great products.

every major linux distro release 1 or 2 times each year.

the thing is, you don't need to use each release, you can skip whenever you want.

apple just need to make it free. lol

Peace
Oct 22, 2007, 10:53 AM
It's not really a "new OS". It is still the same old BSD unix inside and then some "user land" applications on top. They make some changes and additions to those user land applications. The process goes on continuously. The big question for Apple is how often to package it up as a release. I think they have to ask how often they can ask their users to pay up $129. If you hit them up every 12 moths maybe only a third will upgrade, with a longer upgrade interval you can collect up more changes and maybe get a higher fraction of your users to pay for the upgrade. It's all about maximizing the return they get.

It is not the "same old BSD Unix".Since certification one could call it Apple Unix.

jokarak
Oct 22, 2007, 10:57 AM
THANK YOU!

IRC is just multiplayer notepad

I LOVE that signature!!!

ibwb
Oct 22, 2007, 10:58 AM
It's not really a "new OS". It is still the same old BSD unix inside and then some "user land" applications on top. They make some changes and additions to those user land applications. The process goes on continuously. The big question for Apple is how often to package it up as a release. I think they have to ask how often they can ask their users to pay up $129. If you hit them up every 12 moths maybe only a third will upgrade, with a longer upgrade interval you can collect up more changes and maybe get a higher fraction of your users to pay for the upgrade. It's all about maximizing the return they get.

The BSD Unix underneath is a minority of the software supporting the modern environment. It's a mistake to split the Mac OS into "Unix core" and "user land applications" as you have done; this ignores the substantial layer between the two, the Mac APIs like Cocoa. Major new Mac API features in each release support the end-user banner features like Spotlight or Time Machine.

aristotle
Oct 22, 2007, 10:59 AM
Uh.. what? That was the pace back in 2002-2005. The Tiger-Leopard transition took 30 months. What is he talking about?

The Tiger to leopard transition took place in the middle of the PPC to Intel transition and the lunch of the iPhone/iTouch platform launch. They not only had to polish up Tiger to run right on Intel but also had to launch a new mobile version of OS X.

Shanesan
Oct 22, 2007, 11:01 AM
The only thing I see that may pose a problem is the software you're using, after a certain update (see World of Warcraft) will FORCE you, every 18 months, to spend $120 dollars on an upgraded OS because of the "new features" it can use, etc. etc.

You're pretty much paying $6.66/mo to keep using your apps.

clevin
Oct 22, 2007, 11:02 AM
The Tiger to leopard transition took place in the middle of the PPC to Intel transition and the lunch of the iPhone/iTouch platform launch. They not only had to polish up Tiger to run right on Intel but also had to launch a new mobile version of OS X.

I would like to know how much energy each linux distro developers has spend for PPC version, such that they can actually release twice each year?

The BSD Unix underneath is a minority of the software supporting the modern environment. It's a mistake to split the Mac OS into "Unix core" and "user land applications" as you have done; this ignores the substantial layer between the two, the Mac APIs like Cocoa. Major new Mac API features in each release support the end-user banner features like Spotlight or Time Machine.

lets drop out the Unix part of OSX then, see how much apple has left.
The only thing I see that may pose a problem is the software you're using, after a certain update (see World of Warcraft) will FORCE you, every 18 months, to spend $120 dollars on an upgraded OS because of the "new features" it can use, etc. etc.

You're pretty much paying $6.66/mo to keep using your apps.
This is indeed a shame, "soft" forcing users to upgrade is ugly.

JMax1
Oct 22, 2007, 11:04 AM
I get a lot of spinning wheel when opening and closing simple applications (iPhoto, safari, word). Nothing bad usually happens, it just takes a really long time. Do you think it will get better with Leopard?

lazyrighteye
Oct 22, 2007, 11:06 AM
"...that the next Windows release, code-named Windows 7, may not come until 2010."

We can only imagine what Apple will have out by then...

There was a time when 2010 sounded like the "cars flying" future (still does, actually). But it's only 2 years away...
I don't suspect Apple will be looking that much different then than it does now.

Darkroom
Oct 22, 2007, 11:07 AM
you know... sometimes i miss the good ol' days of MacOS 9... no MP3 player application, no webcam, IE 5 or Netscape 6, Appleworks, Bugdom... sigh...

when Mac OS 10.0 public beta came out it was shocking! everything was different... i remember it freaking me out a little, so i switched back to OS 9...

does anyone remember when 10.1 was released and it was a free upgrade? i went to "the apple reseller" store here (there was no apple stores at the time) and i had to sign some paper for the free Mac OS 10.1 upgrade... why was it a free upgrad again?

clevin
Oct 22, 2007, 11:08 AM
I get a lot of spinning wheel when opening and closing simple applications (iPhoto, safari, word). Nothing bad usually happens, it just takes a really long time. Do you think it will get better with Leopard?

i don't see why, unless you think Tiger is supposed to have so many beachballs.

I suspect its a result of apple's crappy patches.

So if you do a clean installation of leopard, you will probably see a good improvement, but after 3 patches, when you get 10.5.4, it will back to what you have now, as far as beachball is concerned :D

does anyone remember when 10.1 was released and it was a free upgrade? i went to "the apple reseller" store here (there was no apple stores at the time) and i had to sign some paper for the free Mac OS 10.1 upgrade... why was it a free upgrad again?
because 10.0 was intolerably slow.

goodmansvp
Oct 22, 2007, 11:10 AM
Uh.. what? That was the pace back in 2002-2005. The Tiger-Leopard transition took 30 months. What is he talking about?

Steve has counted the Intel transistion as an OS release/development cycle in the past which makes it roughly every 12-15 months.

happydude
Oct 22, 2007, 11:12 AM
i just hope apple focuses on the mac in 2008. 07 for obvious reasons saw a little bit of ignoring of the computer line up. personally, i'd love to see the addition of the 12" macbook/subnotebook. but getting the macpro with the new chips due out soon with a graphics card update to boot. couldn't argue. hopefully macworld will signal in 2008 as the year of the mac!! :apple::apple::apple:

SciTeach
Oct 22, 2007, 11:21 AM
By 2010, I was hoping for a OS XI...:D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven

jellomizer
Oct 22, 2007, 11:22 AM
Come on sub-notebook! my aging 12" powerbook needs a replacement :D

I am sure all the Software Developers working on new hardware

ChrisA
Oct 22, 2007, 11:23 AM
The BSD Unix underneath is a minority of the software supporting the modern environment. It's a mistake to split the Mac OS into "Unix core" and "user land applications" as you have done; this ignores the substantial layer between the two, the Mac APIs like Cocoa. Major new Mac API features in each release support the end-user banner features like Spotlight or Time Machine.

For the point I was making it does not matter how you split it up. What Apple calls "Mac OS X" is a collection of mostly independent parts most of these, as you say some of the parts are common libraries, some are user level application programs, most parts are very lightly "coupled". So they are able to make hundreds of mostly unrelated and independent changes. Because they are mostly uncoupled Apple can decide which to include in any new Mac OS release. This was my main point: Apple can decide. If the changes were tightly coupled then they'd have less choice in what to release. They'd have to finish everything before they could release anything. But it's not that way. They can make the decision based on economics and marketing not so much on technical grounds

BTW
Oct 22, 2007, 11:23 AM
That must be a lot of manpower to release a new OS every 12-18 months. Keep them coming. We love new features!!

Consider that when Jobs said Apple would be slowing down on OS development they were still secretly working on the Intel version. Also consider that during Leopard development they were creating essentially 2 other OSX variants (i.e. one for the AppleTV and one for iPhone and iPod Touch).

Now consider that Apple is freed-up to have one development team work on the current next generation OSX (10.5) while another team works on the next one after that (10.6). When 10.6 hits beta you can bet 10.7 will be in the works. :D

ChrisA
Oct 22, 2007, 11:28 AM
.. you will probably see a good improvement, but after 3 patches, when you get 10.5.4, it will back to what you have now,...

Do you have a theory about why updates to Tiger cause programs to load slower? Would be interesting to hear it.

How is "clean install" different? Seriously. Look at the files on the disk and tell me what's different.

Peace
Oct 22, 2007, 11:29 AM
Here's a prediction for your consideration.

The way Leopard works it will necessitate the production of a better Apple mouse , New Backlit LED displays , 5MP built-in cameras etc.

With the demand for Apple products increasing big broadband companies will need to upgrade the broadband infrastructure to meet demand or go down in flames.

The transition to Intel will also require Apple to update it's O/S to keep up with technology which in turn creates said demand.

If Apple can keep it up it will be the benchmark for high technology.

This is what Leopard will do.

lazyrighteye
Oct 22, 2007, 11:31 AM
So, we will continue to see Mac OS X for 10 years?

Now I'm really curious what OS XI will bring us.

Teleportation.

milo
Oct 22, 2007, 11:32 AM
Uh.. what? That was the pace back in 2002-2005. The Tiger-Leopard transition took 30 months. What is he talking about?

He's talking about the *average* of one a year. Leopard was an exception, he's saying the pace will pick up again.

Annual upgrades are just too expensive, and they are a major shift that takes time to install and has the potential to introduce compatability issues. I'd much rather see them less often but with lots of things added via software update. Personally, I'm OK with 18-24 months for paid upgrades with frequent bugfixes in the meantime.

whatever
Oct 22, 2007, 11:33 AM
OSX is a Unix derived system. Even if apple want to dwell on its current incarnation for a decade. Linux will not stop, and if apple won't follow up (which apparently is true as of now), it won't be happy for apple.

I don't understand your comment/

Who said Apple plans to dwell on it's current incarnation? There is no Linux distribution that comes close to competing in the consumer market with OS X or even Windows Vista.

Is their a version of Linux available today that includes everything a consumer needs (including a DVD player).

I'm just so tired of the Linux argument. I don't see if ever making it in the mainstream.

hadleydb
Oct 22, 2007, 11:35 AM
Teleportation.

Sweet! :D Perhaps this is one of Leopards "Secret Features" :p

Whiskerdreams
Oct 22, 2007, 11:36 AM
Is there any info on when new Macs will come with Leopard pre-installed?

My understanding from an Apple Retail person this weekend was that Leopard would be included with every Mac sold after 6 pm on Friday. It may be a drop in box copy but it will be with the machine. For it to be loaded on the machine I think it needs to be manufactured after the announcement.

teadams
Oct 22, 2007, 11:38 AM
The next Windows is code-named Windows 7? I guess Microsoft is getting tired cow jokes...

I sort of wonder where they came up with Windows 7 as a code name. Does it show that people at MS can't count?
Windows 1, 2, 3 (and 3.11), 95, ME, 98, XP and Vista seem to be 8, and I didn't bother with the NT and 2000 flavors. :)

WestonHarvey1
Oct 22, 2007, 11:39 AM
OSX is a Unix derived system. Even if apple want to dwell on its current incarnation for a decade. Linux will not stop, and if apple won't follow up (which apparently is true as of now), it won't be happy for apple.

Linux is not a threat to OS X in any way whatsoever. Linux is still not and probably never will be a viable desktop operating system for non-geek users. Even the best efforts, like Ubuntu, are really just a few shaky catwalks built for average users to step on, but if they don't watch their steps they will be plunged into the Linux abyss and run screaming back to Microsoft.

BSD is a great foundation for OS X, but OS X has a bullet proof user interface layer on top of it. There is nothing the Linux world is doing that Apple hasn't already done far, far better when it comes to personal computing.

milo
Oct 22, 2007, 11:40 AM
I'm not sure if this is a good thing or not. While I love the fact Apple is really investing in their future, a major release every year and a half means that I (as a music producer) potentially need to pay for new Protools software, plug-ins, (don't tell me waves isn't going to capitalize on this) potentially new hardware and have to fear that some of my programs will just stop working. And yes, I can of course just not upgrade, but what can I say, Apple makes great products.

Or you could find companies that don't bend you over like Waves and Digidesign do. That's one of the biggest reasons I dumped both of those companies years ago.

HawaiiMacAddict
Oct 22, 2007, 11:41 AM
Aloha everyone,

Sorry for being late to the party, but what with being six hours behind y'all East Coast guys and all ..... :D

In January, ironically during "Vista Launch week", Steve Ballmer himself spoke of the next Microsoft OS, codenamed Vienna (http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197001449) (in the fourth paragraph). I wonder where this Windows 7 thing came from? I'm confused, but that's my normal reaction when it comes to Microsoft.

HawaiiMacAddict

lazyrighteye
Oct 22, 2007, 11:42 AM
I just hope Apple spends more time on the Mac in 2008 than the iPod, iPhone and AppleTV. There wasn't enough focus on the Mac in 2007. Now with Leopard ready to be released, they will pay more attention to the Mac. I'd like to see some new hardware options and some great new (completely new) software from Apple.

There will be a refocus on hardware in '08.
And, curious, what completely new software would you like to see from Apple?

compuguy1088
Oct 22, 2007, 11:42 AM
The next Windows is code-named Windows 7? I guess Microsoft is getting tired cow jokes...

I think Vista's codename was based either on a ski resort or a restaurant, though I may be confused with Blackcomb....

Steve Jobs=God
Oct 22, 2007, 11:43 AM
Ok, as cool as new updates are, I don't like shelling out $120+ every year to year and a half. That's even with an education discount! WTF?
While I certainly agree that Microsoft's schedule kinda sucks, it's not like Apple's price scheme is much different. Windows = $400 every 5 years, Mac = $100 every 1-1.5 years. Not much of a difference, unfortunately.
Regular GOOD updates would be good, rather than new versions all the time...

If your not happy with shelling out $120+ every year on a OS update, then don't. Simple really

SJ isn't standing behind you with a magnum pointed into your back forcing you to go into a Apple store and pick up a copy is he?

chr1s60
Oct 22, 2007, 11:44 AM
I personally would rather have a new OS every 18-24 months instead of 12-18 months. I enjoy getting a new OS, but one every 12-18 months seems too close together. I think an extra 6 months or so in between would allow for a better product. I know his quote is just an estimate, but if he were to stick to it, I would prefer there to be a few more months in between releases.

Whiskerdreams
Oct 22, 2007, 11:47 AM
"...that the next Windows release, code-named Windows 7, may not come until 2010."

We can only imagine what Apple will have out by then...

Of course that date is a Microsoft date... Hmmm... Let's calcuate this... Longhorn was supposed to be out in 2003... That actually happened with a bunch less features in 2007... That's 4 years...

That makes Windows 7 out in 2014 or 2015...

compuguy1088
Oct 22, 2007, 11:47 AM
Aloha everyone,

Sorry for being late to the party, but what with being six hours behind y'all East Coast guys and all ..... :D

In January, ironically during "Vista Launch week", Steve Ballmer himself spoke of the next Microsoft OS, codenamed Vienna (http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197001449) (in the fourth paragraph). I wonder where this Windows 7 thing came from? I'm confused, but that's my normal reaction when it comes to Microsoft.

HawaiiMacAddict

Vienna could be the code name for the next windows, but windows 7 is referring to the version number, I.E. Xp is 5.1, and Vista is 6

odedia
Oct 22, 2007, 11:50 AM
I didn't go through all the posts, but Steve also hints that the next releases of Mac OS X would probably offer some sort of interface using the multi-touch technology.

Indeed, many of the new features in the Leopard operating system version are incremental improvements. But Mr. Jobs said he was struck by the success of the multitouch interface that is at the heart of the iPhone version of the OS X. This allows a user to touch the screen at more than one point to zoom in on a portion of a photo, for example.

“People don’t understand that we’ve invented a new class of interface,” he said.

He contrasted it with stylus interfaces, like the approach Microsoft took with its tablet computer. That interface is not so different from what most computers have been using since the mid-1980s.

In contrast, Mr. Jobs said that multitouch drastically simplified the process of controlling a computer.

Project
Oct 22, 2007, 11:55 AM
Let's just hope Leopard gets a better reception than Vista, which went down like a lead balloon :D (Shouldn't be difficult, if they haven't broken compatibility or gone OTT with security prompts)

The release schedule is fine. There were times I would've argued that yes Microsoft may have brought out fewer upgrades but that they're usually mammoth ones like XP and Vista, whilst Apple charge £85(!) every 12-18 months for what is basically a service pack (let's face it, Tiger wasn't much more than Panther+Spotlight). However Leopard seems like quite a big release, and probably worth it. If they keep up the kind of innovation they have been recently, they have a bright future ahead.

I had to pratt about with our chairman's PC this afternoon, trying to get a webcam working. First it took forever finding drivers, then it had all sorts of weird graphical problems relating to the motherboard's chipset, and everything you tried involved rebooting the thing and waiting ages for it to start up. In the end I had to downgrade the graphics performance (turn down the 3D acceleration). I said "you know, it's sad we can't use them here because we rely on Windows-only apps, but at home you'd love a Mac. There would've been none of this messing about - plug in a webcam and it just works... or nowadays has one built in". I think he's convinced :D

Anyway... it's highly reassuring that Macs are doing so well. I think the Vista debacle actually has a good chance of giving Macs a decent market share.

Yeah, I can't figure out those people who are saying that Tiger to Leopard is a 'service pack' and not a big OS update. Or those who are saying Apple is updating too quickly.

Leopard is 2.5 years since Tiger and much more than a service pack. Service Packs by and large bring no new functionality to an OS. The only one that sort of bucked the trend was XP SP2, which was brought on by Microsofts poor project management for Longhorn and a huge issue with security in XP which simply had to be fixed in order to keep some sort of a reputation. And even then it was security and wifi/bluetooth improvements. Certainly not the equivalent of Panther > Tiger or Tiger > Leopard for the end user.

And those people who are moaning about the upgrade cycle compared to Windows do not need to upgrade. A lot of people upgrade every other version for the $129. Myself personally, would rather update every 18-24 months and keep on the cutting edge, using the latest features as soon as possible. But you have the choice to stay with whatever version you are currently running. With Windows you had no choice but to stick with an antiquated XP for 5 1/2 years.

Lesser Evets
Oct 22, 2007, 11:56 AM
Personally, I would push 10.6 back to around 20-24 months and take the time to fix the few things that OSX does not well.

I agree with that. And second it. And etc.

OSX should be a 2 year thing, because most upgrades they gave so far haven't been staggeringly brilliant. This OS might be the first awesome upgrade since OSX came along. Dashboard- yawn; I think 99.9% of us could live without that. The rest of it was alright. I have lamented everything since 10.2 because it all became fluffy excuses to get cash from folks.

Apple should update features and add features in the ol' OS updates as much as possible. It isn't like we will go buy anything else when the pay upgrades come along.

If Apple doesn't have serious, new, hardware upgrades that change the function of the OS, a full new version is sad.

24 - 30 months. Unless the OS makes an amazingly super wonderous leap. 2010 sounds good for 10.6.

PS- Predicting 10 years with technology is kind of ridiculous, Jobs. You know that. 7 years and everything is different. Heck, 5 years and stuff is well progressed. Anyone remember cell phones 5 years ago? or Apples 5 years ago? CRTs? Or VHS? 5 years has changed the shape and technology drastically, though it was all technology that began coming into the market about 7 years ago. Now think back to 1997!... I purchased a Power Mac that year, and had a cell phone, and CRTs and VCRs and etc. It is totally different stuff these days. Put yourself in 2017 and everything will be quite different- DVDs dead, mega-super-home computers making head spin, cell phones will probably have everything we have now in the $10 models and the cell phone-organizer-home entertainment identity device will carry and manipulate everything you are and want to be, etc etc, and everything will begin to hook up together I suspect. How can Jobs predict the operating system? Some geek makes potatoes function as super computers and the current OS goes to hell.

lazyrighteye
Oct 22, 2007, 11:59 AM
So would I but I don't think so. The dropping of Computer from the Apple name was more telling than people imagine. Expect to see Apple branch out even further and continue to flesh out their non-computer products even more. I am sure the Macs will get a look-in but the days when they took centre stage are over. :(

For better, or worse (and I support the 'better' camp), AGREED.

For those that have yet to pick up on/accept this, the days of (say) the tower being the center of the Apple universe are long gone.
We, as consumers, have to start rethinking what a computer experience looks like, feels like - because Apple already is (thank goodness).
The concept of having one, designated desktop computing environment is not much different than having one, designated telephone environment - dead. Even after using an iPhone for 3 months, laptops even begin to seem near pointless. Not quite yet, but the end of life on that concept seems closer than not.

Fact is, iPhones, tablets and the like all represent where personal computing is headed. Lighter, more mobile, more personal devices will be Apple's focus the next decade. And it should be.

No sense fighting it. Adapt or die or go buy a Dell. :p

milo
Oct 22, 2007, 11:59 AM
OSX should be a 2 year thing, because most upgrades they gave so far haven't been staggeringly brilliant.

Which upgrade to any OS, ever, would you describe as "staggeringly brilliant"?

miloblithe
Oct 22, 2007, 12:00 PM
The pace of OSX updates has consistently slowed:

10.0 3/24/01
10.1 9/25/01 (6 months)
10.2 8/23/02 (11 months)
10.3 10/24/03 (14 months)
10.4 4/29/05 (18 months)
10.5 10/26/07 (30 months)

I'm with the people who don't think we'll see 10.6 until 2010, which is 26 months away. Although the end of 2009 seems possible. I also think we'll see 10.6 either well before the next Windows release, or soon afterwards (for marketing reasons).

iPhil
Oct 22, 2007, 12:04 PM
Dashboard- yawn; I think 99.9% of us could live without that.

if you don't want dashboard to be active then 'kill' it aka turn it off via Dashboard killer (http://www.bresink.com/osx/TinkerTool.html)

LoganT
Oct 22, 2007, 12:04 PM
what does "P" stand for (Steven P Jobs)?

Penis.

Lesser Evets
Oct 22, 2007, 12:05 PM
Which upgrade to any OS, ever, would you describe as "staggeringly brilliant"?

OSX was STAGGERING brilliant, and 10.2 was totally awesome. Everything since was sort of fluff.
if you don't want dashboard to be active then 'kill' it aka turn it off via Dashboard killer (http://www.bresink.com/osx/TinkerTool.html)

Thanks for that. But, it is here, and I will use it, but it isn't like it does stuff any faster or better than paths I chose before. It's a minor organizational tool that is good enough to stay.

citi
Oct 22, 2007, 12:08 PM
I agree with you...I just started working with Logic 8 and I gotta tell you...i'm pretty impressed. Plus I know it will work with the upgrade. I am so sick of Digidesign taking like 3-6 months to "qualify" an OS. Don't they get the SDKs? The only problem is of course, most major studios in LA use protools and that omf importer that Digi sells is expensive.

Or you could find companies that don't bend you over like Waves and Digidesign do. That's one of the biggest reasons I dumped both of those companies years ago.

lazyrighteye
Oct 22, 2007, 12:08 PM
don't be so sure about that. they've said that they have four areas: Computers, MP3 players, Phone, and Living room (Apple TV being a hobby project).

i think they've managed to balance all four relatively well this year so far and i expect the same from now on. each getting its own time to shine.

Apple says a lot of stuff. To take what they say at face value is silly (not saying you did, just saying "in general").
What they've said about 4 areas of focus represent today (or even yesterday). I suspect those lines will blur over the next decade.

Again, rethink what it means to develop, manufacture, market, sell and use personal computing tools. It is changing at an exponential rate.

2014 will be nothing like 1984. ;)

joeshell383
Oct 22, 2007, 12:11 PM
people want to say about Vista, this article is definitely a "hit-piece". If this article was this biased in favor of Windows, everyone would be up in arms.

Example 1: "On Friday, Apple will start selling the new Leopard version of its OS X operating system, which has a range of features that in some cases match those in Windows Vista and in others surpass them."

This makes it appear that there are no features of Vista that aren't in Mac OS X, which simply isn't true.

Example 2: "That pace suggests that Apple will continue to move more quickly than Microsoft, which took almost seven years between the release of its Windows XP and Windows Vista operating systems."

XP Release: Oct 2001
Vista Business Release: Nov 2006
General Release: Jan 2007

Sure it's a long time, but that's not even close to SIX years, so how could it be "almost seven". Plus, there were free service packs that added functionality in between, not just bug fixes. For a respected news outlet like the NY Times, this kind of biased and untrue reporting is unacceptable.

There is also an overall failure to realize that steady updates just means more money. If Z operating system meets your needs now, why does it matter what the developer is doing to add new features (other than bug/security updates).

Lesser Evets
Oct 22, 2007, 12:11 PM
Apple says a lot of stuff. To take what they say at face value is silly.

2014 will be nothing like 1984. ;)

I still hope we have hoverboards, and flying cars, flexible tv screens, aeroponic fruit gardens in the kitchen, no dust covers, and have outlawed lawyers in 2015... like Zemeckis predicted. Anything less is disappointment.

Project
Oct 22, 2007, 12:11 PM
The pace of OSX updates has consistently slowed:

10.0 3/24/01
10.1 9/25/01 (6 months)
10.2 8/23/02 (11 months)
10.3 10/24/03 (14 months)
10.4 4/29/05 (18 months)
10.5 10/26/07 (30 months)

I'm with the people who don't think we'll see 10.6 until 2010, which is 26 months away. Although the end of 2009 seems possible. I also think we'll see 10.6 either well before the next Windows release, or soon afterwards (for marketing reasons).

I think it will be 18-24 months and less time than Leopard.

A lot of the hard stuff that underpins OSX has been completed or near completed.

-64 bit
-resolution independence
-security (ASLR, sandboxing)
-File system (ZFS integration coming on strong)
-AutoFS, much better multicore support, UNIX cert etc)

With all this stuff in place you have a relatively future proof OS that enables Apple to really go to town on features and end user improvements. ZFS could be a revelation with Apples grubby mits on the GUI for instance.

I also think we will see PowerPC support dropped. I hope they do so anyway, though the 3 years since the last G5 to 10.6 might be too much of a bitter pill to swallow. I just feel that the sooner Apple drops that platform the better. Easier for support, frees up development resources etc.

Avatar74
Oct 22, 2007, 12:15 PM
I didn't go through all the posts, but Steve also hints that the next releases of Mac OS X would probably offer some sort of interface using the multi-touch technology.

Indeed, many of the new features in the Leopard operating system version are incremental improvements. But Mr. Jobs said he was struck by the success of the multitouch interface that is at the heart of the iPhone version of the OS X.

This is something they've been planning for quite some time if you follow not only the patent filings but the product evolution. They have been experimenting with capacitance-sensing input devices for a while... the Mighty Mouse, the new MacBook trackpad with two-fingered scrolling, etc. The iPhone is just their first "toe in the water" with a full blown interface being controlled via multitouch input.

There have also been systematic enhancements coming gradually, like Coverflow, which hint at a definite strategy to migrate to a multitouch input. This of course would not entirely eliminate other input options, just as the mouse did not eliminate the keyboard, but it would offer users a new dimension of input and physics-based feedback (i.e. an interface that "reacts" to your multitouch input the way you would expect real objects to... elastic lists, scroll-flick momentum, etc.) to provide the user with many layers of information during your interaction with the technology.

Apple's goal has always been to make transparent the technology in between the user and the application/function. This facilitates the most productive, most comfortable, user experience when you are interacting with a machine in a way that is most familiar to you, rather than having to conform to input standards that are most familiar to and convenient for the machine but not intuitive or instinctive to us.

Be on the lookout in the next three years for many other types of multitouch devices from Apple. EvangeList founder and Apple Fellow Guy Kawasaki's statement about Apple's success holds true... they succeed simply because they know how to make "cool stuff that people want". Multitouch is in the fold as a technology so intuitive, organic and elegant that, unlike many other technologies at work today, makes us feel like we really, truly are living in the 21st century.

Check out this demonstration by Perceptive Pixel (http://www.perceptivepixel.com) to see what larger-scale multitouch surfaces can do. The first thing that came to my mind was the Pre-Crime computer in "Minority Report." The technology in this demo is fundamentally the same and as real as the technology in the iPhone interface. We'll see everything from gaming simulation to medical diagnostics taking advantage of these types of interfaces over the next 3-5 years.

It's what we call a game-changer... it redefines the industry in a way that there's no turning back from. This will become the standard interface of the future against which others will be measured, just like the desktop interface as Macintosh defined it twenty years ago.

Lesser Evets
Oct 22, 2007, 12:17 PM
10.0 3/24/01


I remember having some version of OSX in 2000, because I spent all Thanksgiving/Christmas entering all my CDs into iTunes. I think that date is off... I remember Apple already making a huge deal of OSX in 1999 and it was postponed slightly into late 1999 or 2000.

miloblithe
Oct 22, 2007, 12:21 PM
I remember having some version of OSX in 2000, because I spent all Thanksgiving/Christmas entering all my CDs into iTunes. I think that date is off... I remember Apple already making a huge deal of OSX in 1999 and it was postponed slightly into late 1999 or 2000.

Was that a public beta? The Beta was released in Sept 2000, and OS X Server 1.0 in 1999.

joeshell383
Oct 22, 2007, 12:23 PM
I remember having some version of OSX in 2000, because I spent all Thanksgiving/Christmas entering all my CDs into iTunes. I think that date is off... I remember Apple already making a huge deal of OSX in 1999 and it was postponed slightly into late 1999 or 2000.

The official public release was on said date.

Lesser Evets
Oct 22, 2007, 12:23 PM
Was that a public beta?

It might have been. I just can't remember the specifics of how it became available. Thought I got it with a Mac Tower i purchased that year.

OSX was hell to get used to at first. Since I used OS 7,8,9 for a decade OSX seemed totally alien. About 2 weeks later I was so enthralled by the function and style that I couldn't stand to look at OS9 any more.

Staggering Brilliant OS.

Val-kyrie
Oct 22, 2007, 12:27 PM
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that while OS X 10.6 may or may not wow us with new user features, I think it will have drastic "under the hood changes":

(1) no more PPC support. The Intel transition was completed on Aug. 7, 2006. Allowing for additional time to eliminate overstock or refurbed PPC Macs, There should be no further Apple Care support required for PPC Macs by the end of 2009. This would justify (from a corporate perspective), dropping PPC support in the OS. Besides, even the last shipping PPC Macs will be able to run one more OS (10.5) than the last one with which they shipped (10.4). This eliminates any argument about inability to upgrade after purchase.

(2) no more or at most minimalistic support for running Carbon Apps. Although I do not claim any expertise in this field, from my general understanding of OS X, I think this will be completely gone by OS X 10.7 (or whatever it will be named) and perhaps as early as 10.6.

(3) no more Rosetta emulation. I think Apple will eliminate Rosetta support at the same time it eliminates support for Carbon apps.

(4) new zfs filesystem, including boot partition. I anticipate Apple may migrate to zfs during a minor update to Leopard (Apple filed a patent concerning transitioning from one file system to another--ZFS, I think--a while back), but I expect full support in 10.6.

Obviously, this is just speculation, but based on Apple's past track record, I think this is probable.

Also, Apple upgrading every 18-24 months seems very realistic in light of Intel's Tick-Tock model of architecture upgrades every 24 months.

Apple is in the same boat with keeping PPC and Carbon apps running natively on the MacOS X kernel, but that hasn't gotten out of hand yet. Last gen software compatibility always involves some tradeoffs, even for Apple. But running DOS/Win3.1 compatibility is more like Classic for Apple; removing this type of backwards compatibility doesn't make the core OS even a whit more stable, because the individual applications aren't running natively on the kernel anyway. They can't even talk directly to the hardware. Very safe.

For MS, there is no good reason to drop compatibility with these really old apps, and for newer apps, which do give them problems, well they feel like they can't drop compatibility with them. Apple's dropping Classic is really just out of meanness and disdain for their traditional base of Mac users and for the old OS. There is no technical advantage to having done so, not even a monetary one (cost almost nothing to keep it around). Dropping Rosetta support and Carbon however might actually help the core OS in lots of ways, but like MS, I am sure Apple doesn't feel like they could get away with that.

ddubbo
Oct 22, 2007, 12:28 PM
Vienna could be the code name for the next windows, but windows 7 is referring to the version number, I.E. Xp is 5.1, and Vista is 6
Somewhere on 2005 someone from Micorosft said that it works on OS named BlackBomb, that could be launched somewhere about 2008 and will expose "completely different approach to user interface". I heard this sentence a lot of times since 95 was released. I heard it about 98, some ghost OS between 98 and 2000, I heard it about 2000 and about Vista. Logically and visually XP and Vista is a good old 95.
So, they said that Vista will be a short-live transition OS between XP and blackbomb. After it they called BlackBomb Vienna, and now it's called Windows 7. Looking at 5 OSes and recent 12 years of MS history, I suppose that windows 7 it'll be a slightly improved Vista.
There are countless rumors about new MS operation systems, secret laboratories working on a completely new interfaces, etc.. MS wastes about 6B$ annually on R&D.
So, I have only one question. Where all that amazing stuff???

dukeblue91
Oct 22, 2007, 12:28 PM
I gladly pay my $129 every 12-18 month as long as Apple keeps innovating as they do.
I have been happy with each upgrade since 10.2 came out.
Can't wait to have my official copy of 10.5

miloblithe
Oct 22, 2007, 12:30 PM
I may be in the minority here, but my first impression of OS X was that it was gaudy and goofy looking, and almost unusable (lacking in features and extremely buggy). 10.1 was the first version I thought was acceptable as a main OS, and 10.2 was the first version I'd say was good (and it was great).

Rodimus Prime
Oct 22, 2007, 12:34 PM
If your not happy with shelling out $120+ every year on a OS update, then don't. Simple really

SJ isn't standing behind you with a magnum pointed into your back forcing you to go into a Apple store and pick up a copy is he?


Oh problem is apple does force obsolet on its older OS. They drop all major support for it very quickly, and you will noticed how quickly software devs stop providing support for it. Windows on the other had still it is easy to get new software all the way back to windows 2000. (windows 9.x on new stuff has thank god almost died off) Plus M$ supports its OS longer. XP has major support though summer of 09. Traditionally M$ supports its OS 3 or so years after it been replaced. XP was not a true replacement for 2000.

Also with apple very fast releases of OS it never stand a chance in IT and on those system. IT guys are paid to be paranoid about the computer network. They move slowly because they have to. They do not like change and I can not say I blame them. I would be the same way if I was maintain a huge network of computers. It took them a very long time just to move to windows 2000 and also up to XP. Also it takes them a while to install new SP because they want to make sure it will not break anything and they know how to deal with it.

Due to M$ raw size they can not move as fast as Apple. They have to be slower and they are force to legacy support. It hurts. Also I like M$ slower pace on new OS's. Mind you the 6 years between XP and Vista was way to long. XP was really showing it age and was being force to do things it was never designed to handle. I like a 3 year cycle. It gives a 1-1.5 years to be adopted. Then 1.5-2 years of it it being in use and allowing things to just be made better. And on top of that new software is comes out that will work on the older OS during that 1-1.5 adoption time span. Compare that with apple. By the time the adaption time is over the next OS is already out and then of course the drop of support happens in the first 6months hurts as well.

I think it is very clear apple does not and never intends to try to move in to the business side and does not intend to be a major player.

oceanmonster
Oct 22, 2007, 12:35 PM
So, we will continue to see Mac OS X for 10 years?

Now I'm really curious what OS XI will bring us.

what if the keep going with os x 10.10, 10.11....

BornAgainMac
Oct 22, 2007, 12:37 PM
$129 isn't bad for what you get. I own a Mac because I want the bleeding edge and not yesterday's technology like Vista/XP or some Linux distribution that copies Windows 95.

notjustjay
Oct 22, 2007, 12:40 PM
I still hope we have hoverboards, and flying cars, flexible tv screens, aeroponic fruit gardens in the kitchen, no dust covers, and have outlawed lawyers in 2015... like Zemeckis predicted. Anything less is disappointment.

Don't forget the most important thing: Mr. Fusion!

snberk103
Oct 22, 2007, 12:44 PM
For better, or worse (and I support the 'better' camp), AGREED.

[...edited...]

Fact is, iPhones, tablets and the like all represent where personal computing is headed. Lighter, more mobile, more personal devices will be Apple's focus the next decade. And it should be.

I think the next big Mac hardware advance is going to be small multi-touch tablets - that is an 12" iBook sized notebook with no keyboard. Apple, with the iPhone and the new iPod Touch are training legions of users to use this new interface on a relatively simple device (simple compared to a full sized computer).

When there is enough of a user-base of people who are comfortable using the multi-touch, they will introduce the tablets. Anyone using the iPhone and iPod Touch will find the transition easy, and will be the early adopters to iron out the GUI bugs. They will also be the ones who will convince and teach those of use who might find moving from a keyboard/mouse notebook to a multi-touch tablet too much.

Apple introduced the iTunes interface for a simple task, and have now expanded it to more areas after people got used to the change.

This prediction and $1.00 will get you a cup of coffee, somewhere I'm sure.

Thomas2006
Oct 22, 2007, 12:46 PM
That must be a lot of manpower to release a new OS every 12-18 months. Keep them coming. We love new features!!
It has been 30 months since Tiger was released so I wonder how they can take it down to 12-18 months. 18-24 months sounds reasonable, and now with OS X being UNIX, not UNIX based, I am guessing their focus will be less on visual effects and more on developing/improving frameworks. The two items I see getting the most attention are ZFS and Clang.

lazyrighteye
Oct 22, 2007, 12:48 PM
Which upgrade to any OS, ever, would you describe as "staggeringly brilliant"?

It appears Leopard represents the most significant OS upgrade since 9 to X.
Seriously, I have seen little (save Exposé) in OS X upgrades that have proven revolutionary or significant. Leopard appears the exception.

thejadedmonkey
Oct 22, 2007, 12:53 PM
I really can't wait for Windows: codename 7. The little that's known about it is a new or redefined GUI (whatever), but also that it's not going to be holding on to the Windows legacy. This means, it could actually be built off of a Linux kernel with NT6 virtualized for compatibility. This means.. better memory management, better security, and better..well, just about everything. and then who knows what you can do? IF MS can pull it off, then Apple will have something to watch out for.. and I really hope they can, I HATE the dock!

I so rt of wonder where they came up with Windows 7 as a code name. Does it show that people at MS can't count?
Windows 1, 2, 3 (and 3.11), 95, ME, 98, XP and Vista seem to be 8, and I didn't bother with the NT and 2000 flavors. :)
No, it just shows that you're completely clueless :p

Mr. Dee
Oct 22, 2007, 01:00 PM
12 to 18 month development cycle?

Can anyone say Mac OS X 10.6 - March 2009?

megfilmworks
Oct 22, 2007, 01:02 PM
I sort of wonder where they came up with Windows 7 as a code name. Does it show that people at MS can't count?
Windows 1, 2, 3 (and 3.11), 95, ME, 98, XP and Vista seem to be 8, and I didn't bother with the NT and 2000 flavors. :)I think Vista has been such a flop that they don't want to count it! :eek:

aLoC
Oct 22, 2007, 01:04 PM
It has been 30 months since Tiger was released so I wonder how they can take it down to 12-18 months.

Probably they consider Tiger for Intel to be a major release also. Steve has mentioned this in (I think) 2 of his keynotes.

Orng
Oct 22, 2007, 01:05 PM
I sort of wonder where they came up with Windows 7 as a code name. Does it show that people at MS can't count?
Windows 1, 2, 3 (and 3.11), 95, ME, 98, XP and Vista seem to be 8, and I didn't bother with the NT and 2000 flavors. :)

I'm no expert in Windows history, I went from Amiga 1000 to Mac System 7, to Win95/98, to Mac OS9/X, so I'm surely no expert on Windows. But I'm pretty sure if you look at the underlying tech, you see where that 7 comes from:
Win95 was essentially 3.11 gussied up. 98, 2000 and ME are basically the same core. XP was built on NT. I could be wrong but this gives us:
Windows 1; 2; 3 (3.x and 95); 4 (98, ME, 2000); 5 (NT and XP); 6 (Vista); and 7 which I believe will be built on Microsoft's top-secret "MS-Darwin" project



Vienna could be the code name for the next windows, ...

Vienna? They should call it Venice, because they're both sinking!
Ba-dum kshh!

Honestly, if I were Microsoft, I would do a half-ass job porting the "Windows aesthetic" to a Linux distro, then put my marketing gurus to work selling the world on the familiarity of Windows combined with the geek-couture, rock-solid(?) otherworldly Linux that they've heard of but know nothing about other than its something that the computer experts in their Frito towers and secret labs use a lot for something.

Oh, it would suck. it would suck harder than a mis-aimed vacuum attachment (yow!) but I think that Average Joe would snap that scat up. They'd be like, "Whoa! It's got Linux in it! it must be all... awesome!"

Spanky Deluxe
Oct 22, 2007, 01:09 PM
The pace of OSX updates has consistently slowed:

10.0 3/24/01
10.1 9/25/01 (6 months)
10.2 8/23/02 (11 months)
10.3 10/24/03 (14 months)
10.4 4/29/05 (18 months)
10.5 10/26/07 (30 months)

I'm with the people who don't think we'll see 10.6 until 2010, which is 26 months away. Although the end of 2009 seems possible. I also think we'll see 10.6 either well before the next Windows release, or soon afterwards (for marketing reasons).

You might want to bear in mind that Steve Jobs has said before that they released a whole new operating system back last year, 10.4 Intel so he basically considers 10.4 to be two operating systems. 10.4 PPC released 4/29/05, 18 months after 10.3 and 10.4 Intel released 1/10/06, 12 months after 10.4 PPC and 19 months before Leopard. This might explain the 12/18 month thing he said.

bogg
Oct 22, 2007, 01:09 PM
Aloha everyone,

Sorry for being late to the party, but what with being six hours behind y'all East Coast guys and all ..... :D

In January, ironically during "Vista Launch week", Steve Ballmer himself spoke of the next Microsoft OS, codenamed Vienna (http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197001449) (in the fourth paragraph). I wonder where this Windows 7 thing came from? I'm confused, but that's my normal reaction when it comes to Microsoft.

HawaiiMacAddict


My guess is that Windows 7 is the Code name for the Core-system/Kernel. And Vienna is the code name for the release itself.

Like Windows XP was Whistler but internally Windows 5.1.

So I'd say Vienna is more of a code name for the whole system, with GUI improvements and everything, while Windows 7 is just the kernel-version.

SeanMcg
Oct 22, 2007, 01:21 PM
...
Win95 was essentially 3.11 gussied up. 98, 2000 and ME are basically the same core. XP was built on NT. I could be wrong but this gives us:
Windows 1; 2; 3 (3.x and 95); 4 (98, ME, 2000); 5 (NT and XP); 6 (Vista); and 7 which I believe will be built on Microsoft's top-secret "MS-Darwin"

The Windows versioning is all based on the NT versions
NT 3.51
NT 4
2000 (NT 5.0)
XP (NT 5.1)
Server 2003 (5.2)
Vista (6.?)
Server 2008 (6.?)
Windows 7

Windows 3.11> Windows 95 > Windows 98 > Windows ME > Grave

While NT 4 and 2000 might have adopted the Windows 95/98 interface, and the registry, of course, the underpinnings were still NT. Windows ME should never have seen the light of day.

Peace
Oct 22, 2007, 01:23 PM
The Windows versioning is all based on the NT versions
NT 3.51
NT 4
2000 (NT 5.0)
XP (NT 5.1)
Server 2003 (5.2)
Vista (6.?)
Server 2008 (6.?)
Windows 7

Windows 3.11> Windows 95 > Windows 98 > Windows ME > Grave

While NT 4 and 2000 might have adopted the Windows 95/98 interface, and the registry, of course, the underpinnings were still NT. Windows ME should never have seen the light of day.


Windows 2000 was probably the best O/S Microsoft ever came out with.

Orng
Oct 22, 2007, 01:31 PM
The Windows versioning is all based on the NT versions
NT 3.51
NT 4
2000 (NT 5.0)
XP (NT 5.1)
Server 2003 (5.2)
Vista (6.?)
Server 2008 (6.?)
Windows 7

Windows 3.11> Windows 95 > Windows 98 > Windows ME > Grave

While NT 4 and 2000 might have adopted the Windows 95/98 interface, and the registry, of course, the underpinnings were still NT. Windows ME should never have seen the light of day.

Yeah, I got this habit of talking as if I know what I'm talking about from my Dad. I just can't help it. But it was a pretty good guess, right? it sounded like a reasonable answer.

I did know about ME though. it took me five years to convince my mom that the problem with her computer was Windows ME.

Of course, now when people have trouble with their computer I get to look at it and say, oh, i see the problem... some joker has put Vista on your machine!

Evangelion
Oct 22, 2007, 01:31 PM
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that while OS X 10.6 may or may not wow us with new user features, I think it will have drastic "under the hood changes":

(1) no more PPC support.

I bet that 10.6 will have PPC-support. Maybe limited to just G5, but it will be there. 11.0 will be the version that will drop PPC.

(4) new zfs filesystem, including boot partition.

I think this is another 11.0-feature Change like that would be pretty major undertaking.

I think that after 10.6 Apple will focus on 11.0. That OS will support Intel-only, ZFS and will feature a new kernel, maybe Solaris-kernel...

jwdsail
Oct 22, 2007, 01:35 PM
Could someone define what to "anchor a product schedule" means? Sounds iike they're just saying, "we've got great products coming up over the next 10 years, stay tuned." In that case: duh.

Also, for some reason I was thinking 10.5 was the final OSX release. Opinions on OSXI anyone?

I would take it to mean that things will stabilize in the coming years, with more focus on feature upgrades and Apple hardware (More Macs)... The foundation/architecture is stable...

Lets look at the time since 10.4 -

Microsoft has it's own Copeland...
Apple sees iPod/iTunes become dominant
Apple move away from PPC, makes Intel transition (and yes, I'd see this as an OS release - 10.4 Intel)
Apple develops 10.5, now UNIX, not derived UNIX, seems to be moving towards ZFS and other goodies at the core of the OS.. Core Animation, resolution independence, etc..
Apple moves MacOS X, nee, OS X into becoming more of a platform... AppleTV, iPhone, iPods... (And these seemed to include some features of 10.5 before 10.5's release)

So, now with this latest cat out of the bag, Jobs is saying that 10.5 and the technology behind it will be the anchor, or foundation for everything else... The foundation is stable, the transitions are over, now we can have more fun...

I think we'll see 10.5 become the starting point for all future releases of OS X. From MacOS X 10.5 you not only go to MacOS X 10.6, but future releases of OS X iPhone, OS X iPod, OS X AppleTV, OS X VW.... 10.5 is the stable, post-transition point where all the other versions will branch out from.

Not saying if this is good or bad... But thats my take on it so far.


jwd

TPALTony
Oct 22, 2007, 01:36 PM
"No verbs" does sound absolute. However, in the context of the article, when Jobs says "there are no verbs" he appears to be referring to operations that occur with no dialogs -- like tapping, rotataing, pinching, flicking, and swiping.

Sometimes in a phone interview it is not possible to think out how your responses will be interpreted or whether what is said is entirely accurate. In retrospect, it may have been better to state: 'We strived to eliminate "verbs" for many actions that previously relied on them.'

I think he was referring to the fact that you "just do" with an iPhone.

For example. On a computer, in mail, to delete a message, you select it and then press Delete, or use the delete menu. On an iPhone just swipe your finger over the message. You have effectively selected and acted upon it in the same act. OK, so you have to confirm that you want to delete it (which I wish they'd let me turn off!) but you get the point.

The resize of an image is the best example, as you say. On a computer, you would select it and then drag it. On an iPhone you just "pinch" in one motion. There's no real notion of "selecting" things on an iPhone (which is why they haven't gotten cut and paste working, something that has irked me on a few occaisons. For example when I wanted to email someone an address from google maps and couldn't find any way to do it!)

There are dialogs in the iPhone OS, but they are confirmation and choices. There is a definite usage paradigm shift. Not sure how well it translates to a larger device like a computer yet, but if I had to pick anyone to figure it out, I'd pick Apple. :-)

be well

t

TPALTony
Oct 22, 2007, 01:41 PM
The Windows versioning is all based on the NT versions
NT 3.51
NT 4
2000 (NT 5.0)
XP (NT 5.1)
Server 2003 (5.2)
Vista (6.?)
Server 2008 (6.?)
Windows 7

Windows 3.11> Windows 95 > Windows 98 > Windows ME > Grave

While NT 4 and 2000 might have adopted the Windows 95/98 interface, and the registry, of course, the underpinnings were still NT. Windows ME should never have seen the light of day.

Don't forget Windows CE, which then lets you combine the best of three releases (CE, ME and NT)

As in this graphic, which is a timeless classic in my opinion!

http://www.tburke.net/fun_stuff/pictures/computers/windows-cement.htm

be well

t

BigTRQ
Oct 22, 2007, 01:43 PM
Is there any info on when new Macs will come with Leopard pre-installed?
My understanding from an Apple Retail person this weekend was that Leopard would be included with every Mac sold after 6 pm on Friday. It may be a drop in box copy but it will be with the machine. For it to be loaded on the machine I think it needs to be manufactured after the announcement.

So will this "Leopard-In-The-Box" copy be only at Apple Stores on the 26th, or will their resellers (i.e.-Best Buy) be doing the same thing?

matticus008
Oct 22, 2007, 01:47 PM
Oh problem is apple does force obsolet on its older OS. They drop all major support for it very quickly, and you will noticed how quickly software devs stop providing support for it.
I have not found that to be true. With the exception of system utilities, most Mac software works as far back as Panther. After moving on, the systems continue to work just as effectively. Developers will take advantage of the new OS. That has nothing to do with forced obsolescence. Developers could easily continue to develop for older OSes with no trouble at all--they choose not to in many cases.
The Windows versioning is all based on the NT versions
Which is in turn based on the classical Windows versions (you skipped NT 3.1, which was named for Windows 3.1). NT 4 was in turn named for Windows 95 (Version 4.0), the first part of the Windows 4 family, which did and does include all the 9x releases.

So Orng is right about the version-setting releases (the consumer OSes, not the early NT releases), and you are right that the current lineage can be traced along the NT line (whose version numbers are modeled after the DOS-based line and not, as you claim, "based on the NT versions").
I think that after 10.6 Apple will focus on 11.0.
What is the functional difference of calling it "11.0" as opposed to "10.7"? It will remain OS X for the foreseeable future, regardless of the version numbers. They're not going to ditch the brand because they hit 10.9. It's highly likely that there will never be an OS11 branded as such.

offwidafairies
Oct 22, 2007, 02:02 PM
i havent even got leopard and now it already feels out of date

Spanky Deluxe
Oct 22, 2007, 02:04 PM
Which is in turn based on the classical Windows versions (you skipped NT 3.1, which was named for Windows 3.1). NT 4 was in turn named for Windows 95 (Version 4.0), the first part of the Windows 4 family, which did and does include all the 9x releases.

Not quite.

First there was Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and then 3.1. At this point Microsoft rewrote a whole new OS, NT 3.1 and labelled it to match the current consumer line. The consumer line then had a major rewrite to become Windows 95. The Windows 95 code was the basis for Windows 95, 98 and Millenium. NT 3.1's code was the basis for NT 3.5, NT 3.51, NT 4.0 (at which point NT's gui was redesigned to match the consumer line), 2000, XP, Vista etc.

Vista is far more based upon NT 3.1 code than it is Windows 95 code and Windows CE is a complete different code base with a different kernel.

See here:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Windows_Family_Tree.png

And for what its worth, I agree with everyone else, Windows 2000 was the best Microsoft OS ever. :)

desimus
Oct 22, 2007, 02:05 PM
Teleportation.

This amazing secret feature will come with OSX "Lygar".

Rocketman
Oct 22, 2007, 02:06 PM
Ok, as cool as new updates are, I don't like shelling out $120+ every year to year and a half. That's even with an education discount! WTF?
While I certainly agree that Microsoft's schedule kinda sucks, it's not like Apple's price scheme is much different. Windows = $400 every 5 years, Mac = $100 every 1-1.5 years. Not much of a difference, unfortunately.
Regular GOOD updates would be good, rather than new versions all the time...

You seem to disregard several obvious facts.

Apple does 10.X.x updates for free by software update that not only squashes bugs but adds some random features.

Apple does offer FREE software such as iTunes and updates for that free too.

Apple offers low cost consumer applications like iLife, $79 retail and free with a computer purchase. Free updates between major releases.

Now if your primary complaint is the approximately $8 a month it costs you IF you want the latest greatest OS at every moment in time, without skipping any, then you are really going to hate it when MacBooks start offering EDGE and Wimax wireless internet access for $20 a month.

Rocketman

farmboy
Oct 22, 2007, 02:06 PM
Oh problem is apple does force obsolet on its older OS. They drop all major support for it very quickly, and you will noticed how quickly software devs stop providing support for it. ....

Don't upgrade, and everything you do now will work perfectly the next morning and will keep working perfectly years into the future.

Every upgrade for every OS requires the user to determine whether the new or enhanced features are worth *whatever* the cost in hardware or software upgrades that go along with it. Not worth it to you---don't do it. It IS that simple, as the poster said. Do you still use floppy disks, and should they still be supported? Why, and where do you draw the line?

How much "support" do you need from Apple? I just install the OS and use it, periodically installing upgrades (IF I think they are worth it). I use the software that works with it. No problems. I keep the computers I use until I'm impressed enough with a new one to switch, usually five years or more. What support do you need years after the release? How long should incompatible hardware be supported? Would you rather Apple create software work-arounds so you can continue using OS 9 and an Apple LaserWriter II? How about OS 7?

In the Windows world they REALLY needs those Service Packs because (unlike some here) I've never seen a useful "regular user" new feature in those releases, just bug fixes and security updates (I use a couple of PCs with XP and one with 3.1). I really don't care if they issue yet another upgrade to Bluetooth functionality or network configuration.

Just because other companies making software for sale to Mac users quit developing endlessly backward-compatible versions at some point, that's not Apple's fault. If HP decides that they no longer want to issue/support new printer drivers for use with OS 9, why is that Apple's fault? It's a market-driven decision, pure and simple.

I DO agree that sometimes Apple should help out some companies with support on their drivers for things like scanners and other devices. But just look at the list of devices that don't work with Vista and you see it's not a unique situation.

OK so I cribbed the header from the movie "Gladiator"...it just seemed to fit...

slackpacker
Oct 22, 2007, 02:07 PM
One thing I really wish will happen in the next version of the Mac OS after 10.5 (10.6? XI?) is get rid of Carbon. It's so old and antiquated, it should've been dead and buried in 10.2 or something. Especially the speech recognition/text-to-speech technology. It's pretty much unchanged since OS 7 it seems like. The voices sounded awful back then, and they sound even worse now. Once the Mac OS goes Intel only, that's when Carbon should be out.

One other thing I'd really like to see (but will never happen) is for Apple to open up Mac OS to other hardware. Macs are good, but I'd like to add stuff that Apple doesn't currently supply & there's no easy to get Mac OS X on a generic PC. I'd love to be able to build my own computer & use Mac OS X on it, but oh, well. I know some off you will say "Well, if you're not happy w/ Macs, don't buy them!" I am happy w/ Macs (both the computers & OS), I could by happier.

It looks as if the speech part of Leopard will make you happy.... as far as hardware I used to think having all the PC options under the sun would be a great thing... But I have grown and I have grown to love not having to worry about Drivers and compatability issue ever. My Mind is at ease now and that is much better...

skeep5
Oct 22, 2007, 02:08 PM
I do not like apples 12-18 months upgrade cycle along with force obsoleting of any previos OS. They drop all major support (anything but security updates) not long after the release of the next OS. This a long with put out all this nice little apps and making sure they do not work on older vs.
Then they get the Devs in on doing the same thing. One thing I like about M$ is they tend to try to do a 3 year cycle on its major OS releases. 95,98,XP and Vista original planned release date were all 3 years apart.
People complain about what M$ charges for it OS upgrades but when you compare it with apple upgrade cost over the same time span M$ is cheaper. Plus add in the fact that with windows one can true get away with only really upgrading when getting a new computer. With an Mac you can bet on you will need to pay for at least one if not 2 OS upgrades.

M$ continues to support there OS and Devs keep making plenty of software for 3+ years after its been replaced. XP support last threw summer of 09 (extended past the original slated drop date of 07)

Microsoft Windows is a joke. You get what you pay for!

skellener
Oct 22, 2007, 02:09 PM
So would I but I don't think so. The dropping of Computer from the Apple name was more telling than people imagine. Expect to see Apple branch out even further and continue to flesh out their non-computer products even more. I am sure the Macs will get a look-in but the days when they took centre stage are over. :(

Hope you are wrong. With market share of the Mac rising, now is the time to pay more attention to it!

Orng
Oct 22, 2007, 02:12 PM
I think I see what you're getting at...

Not quite.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Windows_Family_Tree.png



So Lavender evolved from Salmon after they mixed in the Blue? I guess that makes a lot of sense really.

Avatar74
Oct 22, 2007, 02:17 PM
I think he was referring to the fact that you "just do" with an iPhone.

For example. On a computer, in mail, to delete a message, you select it and then press Delete, or use the delete menu. On an iPhone just swipe your finger over the message. You have effectively selected and acted upon it in the same act. OK, so you have to confirm that you want to delete it (which I wish they'd let me turn off!) but you get the point.

The resize of an image is the best example, as you say. On a computer, you would select it and then drag it. On an iPhone you just "pinch" in one motion. There's no real notion of "selecting" things on an iPhone (which is why they haven't gotten cut and paste working, something that has irked me on a few occaisons. For example when I wanted to email someone an address from google maps and couldn't find any way to do it!)

There are dialogs in the iPhone OS, but they are confirmation and choices. There is a definite usage paradigm shift. Not sure how well it translates to a larger device like a computer yet, but if I had to pick anyone to figure it out, I'd pick Apple. :-)

be well

t


I think you hit the nail... The challenge with copy-paste is that iPhone's implementation of it MUST fit within the fold of their own usability standards. It can't be as clunky as it is on iPhone's contemporaries. It has to be something much easier... as easy as pinching/stretching in concept and execution.

There could be a few different approaches in testing right now.

One could be a two finger swipe to highlight but that presents visibility problems... which could be overcome with a magnifier above the selected text... but already you can see this needing a few workarounds just to make it work.

Another could be a copy-paste button that when pressed switches the functionality of dragging to highlight text.... but again we're moving away from ease of use here.

Designing a device to be idiotically easy doesn't mean making it easy for idiots. It means making the technology transparent so the user can focus on creating and executing (doing) rather than configuring, selecting, copying, pasting, etc. Making things easier to do increases one's productivity... getting more things accomplished in the same span of time.

So what about a time-delay that works like the time-delay double-click sensitivity on a mouse.... I know this sounds convoluted but the concept is simpler than the explanation, bear with me: You know on a mouse you click twice fast and it has a separate function from clicking twice slowly which registers as two single-clicks. Now, iPhone already uses double-tap to zoom in/out.... but what if a copy function sensed double-tap in two different places. i.e. you tap once at the beginning of the text you want to copy, and tap again at the end of it. You could set the threshold for double-tap speed to your liking, AND, lets say, if you need some accuracy you hold the button down on the second tap and the magnifier appears, allowing better precision of the end of your highlight. Again, the trick to this is making the execution minimal and fluid. Tap ......... tap.

Ok now what? We've highlighted... but what about copy. I like the idea of a contextual pull-down menu but it still is wasting the potential of multitouch. What about a gesture for copy... gesturing a "c" on the screen. And then maybe a gesture like a "v" for paste. And "x" for cut. Two reasons this might work...

1. Everyone is already familiar with Control or Command "c" and "v" whether you use Windows or Mac, the letters are the same.

2. "c" looks like a circle.. like you're saying "this is what I want to copy. "v" looks like the insert character you write when proofreading a paper and marking where you want to insert text... which is probably why "v" was picked as the universal paste shortcut key in the first place.

Simplicity isn't just about being dopey enough that a moron can use it... It's also about mnemonics... being simple enough to remember by relating to things you already know how to do.

With some intelligent software filtering, as iPhone already has to limit unintended gestures and recognize intended ones within the context of what you're doing (e.g. "c" and "v" should do nothing when text isn't selected), you could have some really cool gesturing capabilities that extend your productivity well past what you can do with a clunky stylus and mediocre handwriting recognition.

Speech recognition is another possibility but you have to have an option when talking aloud to your PDA or phone isn't possible (e.g. a meeting).

syriana
Oct 22, 2007, 02:18 PM
Consider that when Jobs said Apple would be slowing down on OS development they were still secretly working on the Intel version.



This is so true, and leads me to believe Steve was already seriously considering the big switch back in 2004... He was giving Apple some time to polish Tiger on intel when he said that..

Alloye
Oct 22, 2007, 02:20 PM
The next Windows is code-named Windows 7? I guess Microsoft is getting tired cow jokes...

In January, ironically during "Vista Launch week", Steve Ballmer himself spoke of the next Microsoft OS, codenamed Vienna (http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197001449) (in the fourth paragraph). I wonder where this Windows 7 thing came from?

I can clear this up.

Steven Sinofsky (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/ssinofsky/default.mspx), the new Senior VP of the Windows Engineering Group, does not believe in code names. I know because I spent four years under his reign in Office where we used the following internal designations:

Office 9 = Office 2000
Office 10 = Office XP
Office 11 = Office 2003
Office 12 = Office 2007

True to form, one of Sinofsky's first mandates when he took over Windows was to kill Vienna as a code name and replace it with Windows 7.

Also, don't assume these numbers track major versions on a 1:1 basis. For example, the code name for the successor to Office 2007 is Office 14.

MacsRgr8
Oct 22, 2007, 02:22 PM
Sadly, I'm thinking Virtual PC 7 won't be compatible with Leopard.

Luckily... it is.... (with build 9A559) ;)

mwxiao
Oct 22, 2007, 02:24 PM
One other thing I'd really like to see (but will never happen) is for Apple to open up Mac OS to other hardware.

Well, one of the main reasons that makes MAC OSX more stable and easier to use than Windows (and other OS) is that Mac OSX is hardware dependent.

HLdan
Oct 22, 2007, 02:29 PM
If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.

Well, the G4 and G5 owners shouldn't be. Applications are getting more complex whereas they cannot be run on certain hardware, given the new iMovie for example. G4 Macs especially are limited and G5 is becoming that way as well. You have to remember for Apple, Microsoft and others it's a business and they cannot and will not keep babysitting the customers that refuse to upgrade by making the new OS's support legacy hardware.

jettredmont
Oct 22, 2007, 02:30 PM
If its 10.6, then it seems as if Apple already has it in planning. And know, I don't believe they have parallel development teams since they had to take folks off Leopards development to help with the iPhone effort.

In a typical software development model, you have people working on a release well before the previous version is put out. Remember that the guy coding something isn't generally the guy figuring out how it will work, which isn't the guy figuring out which problems need to be solved. Software development is often a pipelined approach.

The downside to this approach is that you don't see reaction to what your 'n' release is until you've gone well down the path of designing the 'n+1' release. "Agile" development addresses this somewhat, but has its own set of drawbacks (and, still, you have people thinking "big picture" of the next several releases down the road before you put out "this" release).

The Leopard/iPhone conflict is that the same teams (low-level engineers for various OS areas) were needed on both projects at the same time. This (planning two major OS releases at the same time) is the opposite of a pipelined approach, and for fairly obvious reasons didn't work out as well as someone had hoped.

Basically: Apple doesn't necessarily have parallel development teams (an approach I've never seen work well with a complex product, btw), but that doesn't mean they haven't gone significantly far down the path of designing and even coding OS X 10.6 at this point.

Orng
Oct 22, 2007, 02:30 PM
I can clear this up.

Steven Sinofsky (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/ssinofsky/default.mspx), the new Senior VP of the Windows Engineering Group, does not believe in code names. I know because I spent four years under his reign in Office where we used the following internal designations:

Office 9 = Office 2000
Office 10 = Office XP
Office 11 = Office 2003
Office 12 = Office 2007

True to form, one of Sinofsky's first mandates when he took over Windows was to kill Vienna as a code name and replace it with Windows 7.

Also, don't assume these numbers track major versions on a 1:1 basis. For example, the code name for the successor to Office 2007 is Office 14.

Sooo.... do you happen to know what he named his kids?

"Dad! Sib 2 is poking me!"

La Porta
Oct 22, 2007, 02:31 PM
Hope you are wrong. With market share of the Mac rising, now is the time to pay more attention to it!

All the things that Apple has been working have been, in my opinion, catalysts to further Mac development. Yes, iPods, etc. bring in huge amounts of revenue. But sometimes people make it like everything was bright and shiny, and then all these little gadgets came in and crashed the Mac party. In my opinion, it actually happened like this:

1. Macs were selling like crap.
2. Macs were redesigned to look cool. They still sold like crap. OS 9 in a colored box still was too old school.
3. OS X released. Slow as anything, but the future was born. Only thing is: it's only for Mac users.
4. iPod was introduced. Made the world say "hmmmm....interesting!"
5. iPod catches on mainstream. PC users buy them. Many think "Why can't my computer look this cool and work this well too?"
6. Apple is waiting for them with Apple Stores where they can check out iPods and computers that now are as innovative as the iPods they use: Macs with OS X.
7. Apple introduces all the other devices that people complain is taking the company away from the Mac. Ironically, this causes more Mac sales.


Just what I think...

jbstew32
Oct 22, 2007, 02:31 PM
Simplicity isn't just about being dopey enough that a moron can use it... It's also about mnemonics... being simple enough to remember by relating to things you already know how to do.



I think you really hit on it with your post as well. People talk about 'verbless' iPhones, not having to worry about driver issues on their computers, etc...

I think that's where the difference lies between Apple and other leaders in industry. Apple's whole model seems more about making technology more and more transparent for the end user, so everything from the iPhone, iPod, iMac, etc... will be more like a Microwave than a traditional computer.

You don't have to know about electromagnetics if you want to make popcorn in a microwave, and you shouldn't have to know what a driver is and what version you need for your specific computer, etc... just so you can listen to music or type an email. Somebody obviously has to worry about that kind of thing, but not the end user.

That's really my view on what Apple is doing and where they are going.


Apple isn't perfect either, not by a longshot. I think they have the right idea though in terms of what people want and expect from future technology products.

mwxiao
Oct 22, 2007, 02:34 PM
I can clear this up.

Steven Sinofsky (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/ssinofsky/default.mspx), the new Senior VP of the Windows Engineering Group, does not believe in code names. I know because I spent four years under his reign in Office where we used the following internal designations:

Office 9 = Office 2000
Office 10 = Office XP
Office 11 = Office 2003
Office 12 = Office 2007

True to form, one of Sinofsky's first mandates when he took over Windows was to kill Vienna as a code name and replace it with Windows 7.

Also, don't assume these numbers track major versions on a 1:1 basis. For example, the code name for the successor to Office 2007 is Office 14.

I don't see why people are getting confused by code name and version name.

Just like iLife '08, if you look at version number of iPhoto, it's actually iPhoto 7. That's all. Windows XP is windows 6. Windows 7 is the next one.

Rodimus Prime
Oct 22, 2007, 02:40 PM
Don't upgrade, and everything you do now will work perfectly the next morning and will keep working perfectly years into the future.

Every upgrade for every OS requires the user to determine whether the new or enhanced features are worth *whatever* the cost in hardware or software upgrades that go along with it. Not worth it to you---don't do it. It IS that simple, as the poster said. Do you still use floppy disks, and should they still be supported? Why, and where do you draw the line?

How much "support" do you need from Apple? I just install the OS and use it, periodically installing upgrades (IF I think they are worth it). I use the software that works with it. No problems. I keep the computers I use until I'm impressed enough with a new one to switch, usually five years or more. What support do you need years after the release? How long should incompatible hardware be supported? Would you rather Apple create software work-arounds so you can continue using OS 9 and an Apple LaserWriter II? How about OS 7?

In the Windows world they REALLY needs those Service Packs because (unlike some here) I've never seen a useful "regular user" new feature in those releases, just bug fixes and security updates (I use a couple of PCs with XP and one with 3.1). I really don't care if they issue yet another upgrade to Bluetooth functionality or network configuration.

Just because other companies making software for sale to Mac users quit developing endlessly backward-compatible versions at some point, that's not Apple's fault. If HP decides that they no longer want to issue/support new printer drivers for use with OS 9, why is that Apple's fault? It's a market-driven decision, pure and simple.

I DO agree that sometimes Apple should help out some companies with support on their drivers for things like scanners and other devices. But just look at the list of devices that don't work with Vista and you see it's not a unique situation.

OK so I cribbed the header from the movie "Gladiator"...it just seemed to fit...


And you completely missed the point. Apple forces the upgrades on you. If you want to really update any of the other software you have to buy a new OS. That is how apple forces it on you.

Apple dropping major support for an OS means Devs normally follow shortly afterwards. As for supporting an older OS I think 3 years after the replacement is in is a good round number. That way some one is not force to update there computer during the time it hardware is still useful.

Avatar74
Oct 22, 2007, 02:40 PM
One other thing I'd really like to see (but will never happen) is for Apple to open up Mac OS to other hardware.

You're right... it isn't going to happen. The clone program was one of the very first projects that Steve Jobs axed when he came on board as CEO. It was a stupid move on Spindler's part because Apple's bread and butter is all in the hardware. Steve Jobs is very fond of Alan Kay's philosophy that "People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware."

Granted, I won't say "never"... because Jobs has been known to change his mind as time changes the rules of the game... He killed Newton and then resurrected several of the ideas surrounding Newton, the latest being "Stacks" which was resurrected from the "Piles" patent that was filed in conjunction with developing software for the Newton/e-Mate (also note the ARMv6 processor architecture in the iPhone, a descendant of the ARM6 Newton processor, co-developed by Apple and Acorn, forming ARM Limited as a joint venture). It's all about timing.

The thing is, though, is that multiple platform support is not Apple's forte.... they're perfectly profitable without having the added headache of supporting their software on umpteen different hardware platforms. And they do the hardware for OS X better than anyone else could. That's the difference... Microsoft never really got serious about hardware. Apple has always been about hardware and I think that is something that Spindler and others did not really appreciate. They thought Apple should be about brand dominance by breadth of portfolio. Jobs always understood that the way you make people like you is by making them want you, not by making them need you... that is what separates him from Bill Gates, the latter ostensibly lacking style in every sense of the word.

kingtj
Oct 22, 2007, 02:44 PM
Sure there will. Just like a bunch of people got mad when the iPhone price dropped.... or when Apple first moved to USB and got rid of the legacy ADB connector, or .....

The thing people need to come to grips with is, the ONLY thing you're guaranteed to get with your product is exactly what shipped with it. Buying a new Mac never enters you into some sort of mythical "upgrade agreement" with Apple, guaranteeing you compatibility with future software releases.

A few years ago, my Mac collection consisted of a G4 Powerbook notebook and a Dual 2.0Ghz G5 tower, plus an older "Quicksilver" G4 PowerMac I upgraded with 3rd. party enhancements. Today? I have all Intel-based Macs, including a Mac Pro tower, a Macbook Pro notebook, and a 20" Intel-based iMac. That's because I take computers seriously (I do this stuff for a living, plus it's been my primary "hobby" for 15+ years.). Even if I was MUCH slower about selling my old systems and upgrading them -- I'd *still* be able to run the latest and greatest Apple offerings for at LEAST the next year down the road.

If you think your Mac purchase should last you a good 6 or 7 years before ever having to upgrade it, fine. But that mentality means you're the type who can get by just fine on the OS you've already got on it. Apple shouldn't punish people (like me) who do shell out the $'s for their new stuff, just to retain "backwards compatibility" for years and years. That's what made Windows products big and bloated.


If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.

Capt. Obvious
Oct 22, 2007, 02:45 PM
On the other hand, if 10.6 has a separate development team/track from 10.5, then in may come in on time 12-18 months from now and be much more polished than your typical new OS, because it will have had more time to mature.
...not the way these things work *at ALL*

ebouwman
Oct 22, 2007, 02:46 PM
Personally, I would push 10.6 back to around 20-24 months and take the time to fix the few things that OSX does not well. How about sending some software engineers to help get the third party drivers up to snuff with the windows drivers. Apple is great with the spectacular, but they have a tendency to get bored and slack off when it comes to the more mundane tasks. Spaces is going to be a great tool, but I would also like the scanner on my AIO to work right.

What? and vista was compatible with all drivers? Somehow i think that Leopard will have just fine support for drivers, at least compared to the Vista release :rolleyes:

I have to agree though, it can be a pain to get drivers.

Much Ado
Oct 22, 2007, 02:46 PM
...not the way these things work *at ALL*

Don't be so hasty.

Full native ZFS support, for example, could have been a long-term research project intended ultimately for 10.6 when it's been worked on since before 10.5

kingtj
Oct 22, 2007, 02:51 PM
How is this different than Windows? Try installing the latest (or even the 2003 version!) of Microsoft Office on an older PC running Windows '98. All you get is a dialog box telling you it only works on a newer operating system, and it cancels the install!

You can't run the current version of Windows Media Player on a Windows '98 or ME machine either.

And most recently, you can't make any use of the latest version of "Direct-X" video extensions in any OS older than Windows Vista.


And you completely missed the point. Apple forces the upgrades on you. If you want to really update any of the other software you have to buy a new OS. That is how apple forces it on you.

Apple dropping major support for an OS means Devs normally follow shortly afterwards. As for supporting an older OS I think 3 years after the replacement is in is a good round number. That way some one is not force to update there computer during the time it hardware is still useful.

Phobophobia
Oct 22, 2007, 02:54 PM
Personally, I think Apple will continue to focus on its computers and deliver great products in all of its businesses. People are complaining because they don't like change. It has nothing to do with how much attention Apple is putting on its computers.

aussie_geek
Oct 22, 2007, 02:55 PM
If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.

I think the G4's will be rules out of the next release. There are too many G5's out there in the industry atm. Considering the quality of apple hardware, there will be plenty of G5's still there chugging away in 12 - 18 months.

aussie_geek

hayesk
Oct 22, 2007, 02:57 PM
And you completely missed the point. Apple forces the upgrades on you. If you want to really update any of the other software you have to buy a new OS. That is how apple forces it on you.

That is bull. The "fault" is with the market and with third party software developers. There's nothing stopping a developer from releasing software that runs on 10.2 today.

The reason many don't is because they want to take advantages of new features of the newer OS, and they weigh the work involved to make a special version for 10.2 with the number of customers still using 10.2 that would buy the product.

But Apple isn't forcing any of this. The industry and customers just moved on without you.

Apple dropping major support for an OS means Devs normally follow shortly afterwards. As for supporting an older OS I think 3 years after the replacement is in is a good round number. That way some one is not force to update there computer during the time it hardware is still useful.

3 years sounds good to you, but for developers, the number of customers still running the older version is what matters.

rockosmodurnlif
Oct 22, 2007, 03:02 PM
A new OS every 12 - 18 months? Sounds like a way of trying to guarantee a revenue stream. In other words, money from my pockets to the shareholders.

Not that there's anything wrong with making money but how long before the OS releases aren't worth it? People talk about the XP to Vista upgrade cycle but MS aimed for the stars, shot towards the moon and barely got out of the stratosphere. They'll do better next time.

Much Ado
Oct 22, 2007, 03:04 PM
A new OS every 12 - 18 months? Sounds like a way of trying to guarantee a revenue stream. In other words, money from my pockets to the shareholders.

No-one is forcing you to upgrade.

HLdan
Oct 22, 2007, 03:09 PM
I think the G4's will be rules out of the next release. There are too many G5's out there in the industry atm. Considering the quality of apple hardware, there will be plenty of G5's still there chugging away in 12 - 18 months.

aussie_geek

Aussie that's a scary little thing thing you have crawling under your forum name. Where did you get that? I thought there was a bug crawling on my new iMac screen.:D

Rodimus Prime
Oct 22, 2007, 03:34 PM
How is this different than Windows? Try installing the latest (or even the 2003 version!) of Microsoft Office on an older PC running Windows '98. All you get is a dialog box telling you it only works on a newer operating system, and it cancels the install!

You can't run the current version of Windows Media Player on a Windows '98 or ME machine either.

And most recently, you can't make any use of the latest version of "Direct-X" video extensions in any OS older than Windows Vista.


lets see Office 2003. Isnt that 3 years after Windows 2000..... Also office 03 came out after M$ drop major support for the entire windows 9.x line.

My problem with apple is on Oct 25 all major support for Tiger will be dropped. Hell I bet they already have dropped it. I think you are missing the point apple force obsoleteness is the problem. If apple did not shove that on people then Devs would still support the older OS.

Hell it would be nice to see one of apple OS make it to 3 years before the Obsolete kicks in.

cohibadad
Oct 22, 2007, 03:44 PM
Oh problem is apple does force obsolet on its older OS. They drop all major support for it very quickly, and you will noticed how quickly software devs stop providing support for it. Windows on the other had still it is easy to get new software all the way back to windows 2000. (windows 9.x on new stuff has thank god almost died off) Plus M$ supports its OS longer. XP has major support though summer of 09. Traditionally M$ supports its OS 3 or so years after it been replaced. XP was not a true replacement for 2000.


Microsoft doesn't even fully support their own software compatibility on their own OS versions. I bought Microsoft Office 2000 with Photodraw which worked with Windows 2000 and was never made compatible with XP and dropped from future Office versions. One year? What a waste. Little did I know when I upgraded to XP a year later my photo editing application would become obsolete.

cohibadad
Oct 22, 2007, 03:48 PM
I really can't wait for Windows: codename 7. The little that's known about it is a new or redefined GUI (whatever), but also that it's not going to be holding on to the Windows legacy. This means, it could actually be built off of a Linux kernel with NT6 virtualized for compatibility. This means.. better memory management, better security, and better..well, just about everything. and then who knows what you can do? IF MS can pull it off, then Apple will have something to watch out for.. and I really hope they can, I HATE the dock!


No, it just shows that you're completely clueless :p

I had to laugh reading this. After waiting for everything Microsoft has promised for the past 20 years I've learned that they simply lie. No other way to describe it. Wait for what we have coming it is super duper great! Then nothing, nothing, nothing. And do you know how Linux licensing works? Can't be used in Microsoft OS unless they go the free route and charge for support. Seems a radical change from the uber licensing strategy they have built :rolleyes:

cohibadad
Oct 22, 2007, 03:52 PM
Probably they consider Tiger for Intel to be a major release also. Steve has mentioned this in (I think) 2 of his keynotes.

yes. I think the time span between 10.4 and 10.5 is making some think that upgrades will take longer with each release. If you include the port to Intel as a version as Apple does and take into account SJ comments it would suggest 2009 for 10.6.

aLoC
Oct 22, 2007, 03:53 PM
A new OS every 12 - 18 months? Sounds like a way of trying to guarantee a revenue stream. In other words, money from my pockets to the shareholders.

Yes it is good from a revenue perspective, but also from a software development perspective. With big, complicated systems (such as OSes) small frequent releases are a recipe for success whereas big multi-year changes are a recipe for problems.

jstad
Oct 22, 2007, 04:02 PM
Not only is this good to hear from the user's point of view, since we get bored easily and demand something new, but it is also a great business model for Apple. It also inspires developers to keep developing their software products for customers since there is always something new to add/learn. :apple:

Capt. Obvious
Oct 22, 2007, 04:03 PM
Preview of 10.6 at MW SF?

MWSF '09, perhaps....

VaDor
Oct 22, 2007, 04:07 PM
Well, the good news is that Macintosh OSX is remarkable stable and quality.

notwithstanding some problem areas, it does get continually refined. A much better approach than Microsoft's Windows. Which takes the approach of delivering buggy and problematic operating systems.

Vista has been uniformly reviewed as horrible and most software does not take advantage of it properly.

Well Print System I think is the worst part of Mac OS X , I have a canon mp530 shared in network.. and I have to use printfab drivers.... that sucks :mad:

Everything else I love it!! But please Printers,scanners this type of things came on... especially when they are shared.. with windows or something...

cohibadad
Oct 22, 2007, 04:09 PM
I don't see why people are getting confused by code name and version name.

Just like iLife '08, if you look at version number of iPhoto, it's actually iPhoto 7. That's all. Windows XP is windows 6. Windows 7 is the next one.

Microsoft numbers Windows 2000 as NT 5 and XP as 5.1 (for enterprise versions they consider them the same and will send you either install CD or both). Vista is NT 6.0.

Virgil-TB2
Oct 22, 2007, 04:39 PM
If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.This would be true, but I think you are reading things wrong here a bit.

The "10.6 not supporting PPC" is more open (wild?), speculation than a rumour. It also was originally phrased as "The next OS version might not support PPC" not 10.6 specifically.

The announcement today from Steve is more about saying that 10.5 is the foundation for the next ten years. 10.6 therefore might not come in 18 months but in ten years time.

The way I read it, the interim is going to be filled by 10.5.1, 2, 3, etc. every 18 months and 10.6 is actually a long way off. I would expect PPC support to be dropped when the machines are too far behind to expect any decent performance out of them. More like a few years than 18 months.

matticus008
Oct 22, 2007, 04:45 PM
Not quite.
Right, you proceeded to say almost exactly the same thing. The version numbers are based on the Windows family lineage, which informed the NT versioning scheme, from which we get to Windows 7.

Vista, however, is not based on NT 3.1 code OR Win9x code. Very little of NT3 survived even as far as NT 4.0. From the GUI right down to the kernel, 4.0 was a thorough rebuilding, which accounts for the relatively anemic release of NT 3.51 as a stopgap measure.

For what it's worth, no one was even talking about code lineage.

TurboSC
Oct 22, 2007, 04:58 PM
people at microsoft have to be kicking themselves right now... especially with the lack-luster release of Vista... sucks to be them.

Badandy
Oct 22, 2007, 05:00 PM
So guys (and gals), wern am I going to see a viable replacement for my 12 inch powerbook? When would you all speculate that a slim MBP or MB or tablet/multitouch will come out based on this interview with jobs?

Counter
Oct 22, 2007, 05:16 PM
I think 10.6 will have PPC support but it will certainly be the last.

Cloudane
Oct 22, 2007, 05:24 PM
I sort of wonder where they came up with Windows 7 as a code name. Does it show that people at MS can't count?
Windows 1, 2, 3 (and 3.11), 95, ME, 98, XP and Vista seem to be 8, and I didn't bother with the NT and 2000 flavors. :)

It's kind of confusing, and it looks like plenty of people have it covered already, but here goes.

First you have to remember that up until XP, there were 2 different versions, Windows x.x (DOS based) and Windows NT x.x (NT kernel based). Generally the version numbers were based off the UI revision, but up until XP they were technically different.

95 = 4.0
NT4 = NT 4.0
98 = 4.1
ME = 4.9
2000 = NT 5.0
XP = 5.1 (now they merged the versions, and since it's based on the NT kernel it took the next NT version number)
Server 2003 = 5.2
XP x64 = 5.2
Vista = 6.0
Ergo, the next is Windows 7.0. (I'd love to see them actually call it that instead of all those silly dates and other weird names!)

ME was actually a stopgap (ahem... downgrade) that came after 2000 and was based on DOS even though it tried its best to hide it.


Leopard is 2.5 years since Tiger and much more than a service pack. Service Packs by and large bring no new functionality to an OS. The only one that sort of bucked the trend was XP SP2, which was brought on by Microsofts poor project management for Longhorn

True. I was thinking of Windows 95 OSR2 and Windows 98 Second Edition, which were both similar scale upgrades to those that OS X goes through. But actually, IIRC, OSR2 was only available through OEM (new PC) and 98SE was a full purchase only.

And those people who are moaning about the upgrade cycle compared to Windows do not need to upgrade. A lot of people upgrade every other version for the $129. Myself personally, would rather update every 18-24 months and keep on the cutting edge, using the latest features as soon as possible. But you have the choice to stay with whatever version you are currently running. With Windows you had no choice but to stick with an antiquated XP for 5 1/2 years.

Mm, also true. Panther has been pretty functional for those who wished to stick with it, and anyone making the leap from Panther to Leopard is getting quite a major upgrade!

2014 will be nothing like 1984. ;)

Oh it will in Britain, and it'll be double plus ungood, but that's for another thread ;)

rockosmodurnlif
Oct 22, 2007, 05:24 PM
No-one is forcing you to upgrade.

Yes they are. They keep adding features I will use.

reallynotnick
Oct 22, 2007, 05:25 PM
So what about OS 11? I mean is it going to go all the way up to 10.9? Is Apple going to be doing "episodic" OS's like Valve? Maybe by 10.9 we will hit the glass wall as far as OS's go, or 11 will be like an organic every growing OS.

I guess the numbers aren't a huge deal, as long as my computer keeps getting faster and my OS keeps getting juicier.

Multimedia
Oct 22, 2007, 05:30 PM
Forget what a country. What a Company! I love this platform so much I could cry. :eek: ;)

Cloudane
Oct 22, 2007, 05:31 PM
I guess they'll keep OS X going until there's something completely revolutionary behind the scenes. The Unix based OS X has got a hell of a lot of life left in it yet.

Don't be surprised to see an OS X 10.16 or something (who says it has to count up in decimal?) but I'm really wondering how many cat names they can come up with. We'll have done Moggy, Meowth and Felix and everything by then.

gwangung
Oct 22, 2007, 05:49 PM
Actually, I'm wondering if this announcement means that there will be fewer under-the-hood tinkering with OS X than in the past. From what I read, there were substantial, but not visible, changes in the core of the operating system, with each subsequent release..

MattInOz
Oct 22, 2007, 05:54 PM
Well Print System I think is the worst part of Mac OS X , I have a canon mp530 shared in network.. and I have to use printfab drivers.... that sucks :mad:

Everything else I love it!! But please Printers,scanners this type of things came on... especially when they are shared.. with windows or something...

I hear apple have hired a new guy who's a real gun with printer drivers.
So with any luck Printers will get the overhaul it needs.

Wolf Am I
Oct 22, 2007, 06:14 PM
people at microsoft have to be kicking themselves right now... especially with the lack-luster release of Vista... sucks to be them.


Wait a tick... say you're playing poker and you've got 5% of the chips. And you just win another 3% from the pot... the other player who happens to have 93% of the chips left isn't going 'damn, it sucks to be me'. I'd say they'd be like... GOT SO MANY CHIPS... DAMN, THIS IS GOOD.

give it several more years of the tide changing and market shares shifting, then they might be kicking themselves.

crazybrit
Oct 22, 2007, 06:28 PM
Do you think that if the boys at Redmond were confronted with a need to port Windows to a new processor, they would be able to do it quickly, and in such a way that ALL the applications would run seamlessly. Without a hitch?

I am blown away by the fact that here I am almost 8 months after the release of Vista, and I still can't upgrade because my engineering apps will not run on it.

Oh, and now I have a Pro with 8GB of RAM, so I need 64-bit. Do you think it is an easy transition to get a 64-bit Vista? NOTHING runs on THAT! I mean, isn't it ironic that Windows supports backwards compatibility when nothing will run on their new OS except their own rewritten software?

So I am looking forward to Friday. I get to open a box with a brand-new leading edge 64 bit operating system, and I know that I can install it with confidence, and everything will run. Not only that, but my system will probably run a lot faster, thanks to the 64 bits, and the multi-threading.

I guess I can't understand why the "Industry Leader" with all its resources cannot do that too.

MaskedPhantom
Oct 22, 2007, 06:42 PM
10.6 therefore might not come in 18 months but in ten years time.

Are you on drugs? I mean... seriously?

MLeepson
Oct 22, 2007, 07:21 PM
The article makes me think that a touch interface computer is on the horizon for Apple.

On the Apple Job's web site. Under Hardware (http://www.apple.com/jobs/us/pro/hardware/): "Multi-touch Engineering"

mrkramer
Oct 22, 2007, 07:35 PM
MWSF '09, perhaps....that may not give enough time for testing, I think leopard would have had almost 10 months if it had been released on schedule. I'm guessing that we have an august WWDC and see it then if it is really only going to be 18 months or less.

VaDor
Oct 22, 2007, 07:37 PM
I hear apple have hired a new guy who's a real gun with printer drivers.
So with any luck Printers will get the overhaul it needs.

Yeah, the cups (http://www.cups.org/) guy.. let's hope Leopard print system is better than Tiger :)

Thinking in that I really haven't read or listen anything about the Leopard printing system :(

Stella
Oct 22, 2007, 07:44 PM
Yes, exactly. microsoft do far far better job on backwards compatibility than Apple. Saying that they have got better...but not good enough.


And you completely missed the point. Apple forces the upgrades on you. If you want to really update any of the other software you have to buy a new OS. That is how apple forces it on you.



Its a lot different. Hell, you can't even run the final release of Java 6 on OSX 10.4!!

Erm, you do realise windows 98 was released last decade, right? Apple doesn't support its latest .Mac iSync on OSX10.3 any more! You can't run iLife 08 on a machine from 2002 - a 5 year difference also.

Don't even try to compare Apple and microsoft with backwards compatibility - microsoft wins the vast majority of the time. Apple do a very poor job.


How is this different than Windows? Try installing the latest (or even the 2003 version!) of Microsoft Office on an older PC running Windows '98. All you get is a dialog box telling you it only works on a newer operating system, and it cancels the install!

You can't run the current version of Windows Media Player on a Windows '98 or ME machine either.

And most recently, you can't make any use of the latest version of "Direct-X" video extensions in any OS older than Windows Vista.

Rodimus Prime
Oct 22, 2007, 07:51 PM
Yes, exactly. microsoft do far far better job on backwards compatibility than Apple. Saying that they have got better...but not good enough.
Its a lot different. Hell, you can't even run the final release of Java 6 on OSX 10.4!!

Erm, you do realise windows 98 was released last decade, right? Apple doesn't support its latest .Mac iSync on OSX10.3 any more! You can't run iLife 08 on a machine from 2002 - a 5 year difference also.

Don't even try to compare Apple and microsoft with backwards compatibility - microsoft wins the vast majority of the time. Apple do a very poor job.


I think that was my point. Apple forces its upgrades on people. Apple Backward compatibility is beyond poor. Tiger I think should at least have Devs and Major Support from apple up until at least leopard is replaced by what ever is next and so on but come Christmas getting new stuff for tiger will already start be coming an issue.

matticus008
Oct 22, 2007, 08:14 PM
Tiger I think should at least have Devs and Major Support from apple up until at least leopard is replaced by what ever is next and so on
They do. The developers just don't bother after a new release; why should they? What would you like Apple to do to provide extra "support" after an OS is replaced? There's nothing that stops the ability of developers to continue releasing software for Tiger. More to the point, I can still get almost all software I need to work on an old 2001 iBook (upgraded to Panther) to this day.

Legacy support is intentionally poor at Apple. A four year old Mac will easily run Leopard. Six years is a good run for a computer. It will continue to work for many years after that, even if it no longer runs the latest OS, contrary to what you seem to think is a disappearance of software immediately following a new release. The real problem is that developers of new software don't bother to support older OSes, but I wouldn't if I were them, anyway.