Mac OS X 10.6 Called 'Snow Leopard', All Cocoa?

[skeep5]

I kinda like the ring of 10.6 Battle Cat

Nice He-Man reference. He would've used a mac...

http://www.5150enterprises.net/he-man.jpg

[Small White Car]

That would get confused with Linux, don't you think?

What do you think os x is?

It's Unix, not Linux.

[Rugbee79]

It's NOT GOING TO BE Snow Leopard.

Cougar and Lynx are the only two names unused by Apple that they have trademarked. Cheetah, Puma, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger, Leopard, Lynx, and Cougar. Lynx for 10.6, Cougar for 10.7 or vice versa, then on to OS 11.

For the love of god, stop playing guessing games. It's all common sense.

What about a "Lion" OS X or better still a "Liger" OS X? ;P

[MacFly123]

Didn't Bill and Steve just say at D6 that Windows 7 will be out in January 2009???

This is making me a bit nervous. Chances are Windows 7 will get delayed and be very buggy, but Apple really needs to stay the lead with Multi-Touch so that they can force the industry to standard well thought out implementation.

I think that Microsoft has Multi-Touch all wrong with their implementation. I think Apple will implement it with touch screens on its mobile devices as they have, but with the large touch surface replacing the mouse and keyboard on laptops and desktops, which I think makes more sense for realistic use and benefits.

Either way Apple better not lose the ground they have gained against Vista. This is not the time for them to drop the ball, this is their fighting chance!

[macenforcer]

It's Unix, not Linux.

Unix = RISC
Linux = x86

[randomrazor]

I valet and park steves benz. He told me. :D
I wonder what car he drives... haha off topic :)

[Cromulent]

What do you think os x is?

Unix. Or more specifically BSD Unix with a mach kernel. It has nothing to do with Linux other than sharing the same open source command line tools.

Edit : Bah beaten to it :).

[Quillz]

Difference is OS 9 was said to be "dead" for years. Carbon is not deprecated.
I know this, but what I meant was, Carbon is sort of like a "halfway" API, right? I remember in the very first keynote on Mac OS X back in 2000, Steve was saying how Carbon was designed to help Classic apps get some of the new features of Mac OS X, with the idea being that eventually Carbon apps would evolve into Cocoa.

What I'm asking is, why would someone use Carbon over Cocoa? It seems like Apple has always pushed Cocoa as the preferred API.

[Eraserhead]

Unix = RISC
Linux = x86

Not true, Mac OS X Leopard is a Unix (source (http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html)).

[ahaaja]

No, it will be white with black spots :p

well apparently they mistakenly produced a hell lot of boxes for leopard with inverted colours…*so they'll be saving some money using those boxes come january. :)

[/dev/toaster]

Unix = RISC
Linux = x86

So, x86 Solaris is Linux ... ? Thats news to me

[chuckiej]

Wouldn't a stability and performance release be a point release? I think 10.6 implies new features, APIs, architectures etc. Isn't that how the numbering scheme for most software works?

Unless the new features are actually some way to "clean out" old features that are potential stability/performance issues? :confused:

[daneoni]

I guess thats the difference between Microsoft & Apple as pointed by Ars. Apple can afford to cut old technologies from OS (Carbon/PPC) without blinking but MS is stuck with keeping/maintaining old technology in the name of Backwards compatibility

Victims of their own success

[macenforcer]

I wonder what car he drives... haha off topic :)

Black convertible Benz SL65 AMG

So, x86 Solaris is Linux ... ? Thats news to me

Ok, so I guessed. :p

[steviem]

Its based on BSD, which was based on Unix.

Which BTW is cross platform.

Linux is also cross platform, but hey, we're splitting hairs here.

[Eraserhead]

What I'm asking is, why would someone use Carbon over Cocoa? It seems like Apple has always pushed Cocoa as the preferred API.

True but there were reasons to use Carbon, firstly because they had an existing codebase under Mac OS 9, and secondly because they were writing a cross platform application.

Didn't Bill and Steve just say at D6 that Windows 7 will be out in January 2009???

Its not even in beta yet, it'll be at the end of 2009 or early 2010 when it comes out.

[Small White Car]

I guess thats the difference between Microsoft & Apple as pointed by Ars. Apple can afford to cut old technologies from OS (Carbon/PPC) without blinking but MS is stuck with keeping/maintaining old technology in the name of Backwards compatibility

Victims of their own success

Yup.

I feel bad for them. They CAN'T make a better OS. Apple did it by ditching OS9 and giving people a 'classic mode' to ease the transition. They were ONLY able to do that because their market-share was so much smaller. (And their customers buy higher-end systems by default, so they're more used to spending money on upgrades. It's harder to pitch that to people who buy $299 computers.)

MS would be burned alive by their customers if they tried that, but unfortunately it's the only surefire way they could make a truely kick'n version of Windows.

They're stuck.

[i.mac]

edit: and a lol @ anyone who thinks this would cost $129.

$69.99 for an update
$139.99 for new purchase

[nimbusthegreat]

If apple gave us what we wanted we would have...

3. A macintosh that is not a $5000 mac pro
11. an OS we can install on regular PCs
16. They would give us heads up of new products not this secret crap
20. FREE APPLECARE

did I leave anything out?

yeah, world peace, flying cars and dollar bills falling from the sky like a tickertape parade.

[Eric S.]

It's NOT GOING TO BE Snow Leopard.

Cougar and Lynx are the only two names unused by Apple that they have trademarked. Cheetah, Puma, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger, Leopard, Lynx, and Cougar. Lynx for 10.6, Cougar for 10.7 or vice versa, then on to OS 11.

For the love of god, stop playing guessing games. It's all common sense.

Apple never trademarked Cheetah, Puma, or Jaguar, and Jaguar was even used as the public brandname for 10.2. There's no reason why they couldn't use some name other than Lynx or Cougar.

As for OS 11, that would logically imply a whole new OS base. We're not going to see that for a long time, if ever. That would be a transition much more drastic than the one from Classic Mac OS to OS X, and as others have pointed out OS X took a long time to become stable. I don't know what OS base would even threaten Unix at this time.

[macenforcer]

yeah, world peace, flying cars and dollar bills falling from the sky like a tickertape parade.

You meant Hundred dollar bills right?

[kresh]

Screw Snow Leopard, what about Black Panther, if we are going to pull names from previous versions of the OS?

Black Panther is too violent. I'm hoping they go with Pink Panther to go along with the Mighty Mouse!

[hewcardpacklet]

http://www.tiikoni.net/background/snow-leopard_1024x768.png

[CaryMacGuy]

How long was it before Apple dropped support for 68K when PPC came out?

That might be what we are looking at.

[Jon the Heretic]

Wouldn't it be just as bad a move as 10.5 dropping Classic? Wasn't Carbon always designed to simply be a stepping stone, from Classic to Cocoa?

Dropping Classic was a horrible choice. On that day, 20,000 Mac apps died for no good reason. Millions of long time Mac users were sneered at by Apple and by newcomers.

Saying it wouldn't run under Rosetta was a cynical excuse, as if that was the only way Classic could run on Intel. Shades of "Star Trek", the first Classic Mac environment, which ran on Intel inside of Apple's labs. And clearly, Sheepshaver doesn't require Rosetta...they could have done something similar, without using Rosetta, but keeping the integration more transparent like they were able to achieve with the Classic hooks in the OS.

And virtual environments don't impact overall system stability. But keeping capable with the last supported generation of APIs does impact stability, since they run natively. Virtual = safe & stable; Native = trouble as APIs evolve.

Dropping Carbon now is adding insult to injury, though doing this would improve stability more than dropping the Classic virtual environment, since Carbon needs to be natively supported on the OS X kernel.

[Earendil]

But does it make sense to do a speed and stability upgrade only? That sounds like a 10.5.X, not a 10.6! Has a new version of Mac OS (or Windows or a Linux distribution for that matter) ever been released with nothing new to offer? I think both the strange two words cat name and the lack of new features are both very unlikely...


It does If and only If the the stability comes from ripping out all the Carbon code, and making it Intel only.

This makes sense because:
1. Doing such a thing is a major reworking of the OS, and would take a lot of time.
2. Is not adding features BECAUSE it eliminates a lot of potential costumers.
3. Potential PPC costumers won't feel left out because there would be nothing to gain even if they could run it.
4. Intel users will see a gain as the OS slims down, and all new Intel macs can ship with the new slipped down OS.

What would be silly is to do ALL that work AND add major features, because than you are pissing off the PPC users by alienating them and giving them something they can't have.

Now, I'm also betting that "Snow leopard" will be cheaper, but not free. If they did rip all the cocoa out of it, than this isn't "bug fixes" or "tweaks" to make it faster, this is a major ordeal.

This would also explain the name. It is just a different kind of Leopard, a Snow leopard if you will. It is not the next big cat thing to come along.

[derryquinn]

LOOK AT THIS!!!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=5525967&postcount=203

He says <<1. The timing seems right for 10.6 (Lion? Lynx? Peruvian Snow Leopard? Okay maybe not the third one...) >>

How cool!

[macenforcer]

LOOK AT THIS!!!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=493377&page=9#203

He says <<1. The timing seems right for 10.6 (Lion? Lynx? Peruvian Snow Leopard? Okay maybe not the third one...) >>

How cool!

Looks like an apple employee just got BUSTED!

[easy4lif]

I'm calling it BS.

no one at apple would have come up with the code name snow leopard but i did remember that particular name come up in a poll and I found it.

http://www.tuaw.com/2008/06/03/rumor-mac-os-x-10-6-to-debut-at-wwdc-08/

second, a maintenance and stability update? leopard is pretty dam fast as it is.

third, ditching 32 bit intel chips will piss a lot of early macbook/pro iMac buyers.

and selling it at macworld 09 would just hurt apple in the pocket book. I predict 10.6 release date of either June 09 for the back to school rush, or October 09 for the holidays

[yayaba]

Mac OS X 10.6 "Longcat"

longcat is long

[Me1000]

I can see this happening. How many keynotes has Steve given where everyone was like what? Apple hardly ever gives us what we WANT. Why should that not continue. If apple gave us what we wanted we would have...

2. 2 button trackpads
7. A freakin real mighty mighty mouse
8. Games for macintosh
11. an OS we can install on regular PCs

I hope to God they never put a 2nd button on trackpads, the 2 finger secondary click is just too convenient! I love the mighty mouse, I dont care about gaming on my Mac (not that there is a whole lot apple can do about this). You can install OS X on a PC, and it sucks! It really does, I have done it.

:D

[nimbusthegreat]

You meant Hundred dollar bills right?

no, just dollars...i wouldn't want to ask for too much.

[macenforcer]

I hope to God they never put a 2nd button on trackpads, the 2 finger secondary click is just too convenient! I love the mighty mouse, I dont care about gaming on my Mac (not that there is a whole lot apple can do about this). You can install OS X on a PC, and it sucks! It really does, I have done it.

:D

Well... good for you friend.

[LaDirection]

Speed and stability are really what's needed. I applaud Apple for focusing on the bread and butter of the OS instead of trying to tack on more flashy features to sell the sizzle.

Amen, that and security. 10.5 was a colossal failure on that count.

[Jon the Heretic]

2. Is not adding features BECAUSE it eliminates a lot of potential costumers.
3. Potential PPC costumers won't feel left out because there would be nothing to gain even if they could run it.


You seem to place a value on PPC systems being supported with the latest OS. That is how End Users think; it is not how Apple thinks.

Apple has aggressively pursued a process of planned obsolescence over the past 15 years. It began with the original 68K-based code, but really kicked into high gear with the Second Coming of Jobs, who once complained at MacWorld that a lady who thanked him for having a well supported 10-year old Mac hadn't given Apple a penny in 10 years. Damn that lady!

For those OTHER OSes you may have heard of, generally you can install them if you choose to, and then decide, boy this is damn slow, I'm going to buy a new machine. Apple likes to goose that buying decision by ensuring older Macs are pruned every few years, to create an artificial upgrade cycle.

Continued support of PPC Macs is ANTI-sales, if pro User. By dropping PPC, Apple drives sales of new Intel-based Macs. They make far more money off of new Macs than off of MacOS X upgrades. And the fact is some of the higher end G5s are really powerful machines STILL, especially on Altivec functions. Every little thing they can do to nudge those guys to a new machine, like dropping Classic to get your hands off of legacy software that still runs great, helps bolster the NeXT SALE.

Get used to it. Jobs needs a new summer vacation home. Or two.

[The Killer Fuzz]

i think apple is running out of big cats.....:rolleyes:

[Tosser]

Mac OS X 10.6 "Longcat"

longcat is long

http://www4.vaizdelis.lt/u/f/28/11/28110.jpg

[Saladinos]

This makes a lot of sense. The main problem with Vista is speed and reliability. Apple wants to make the most of this.

Besides, there are only so many features that belong in an operating system. And Apple have stretched it as much as anybody.

Eliminating Carbon will make a lot of people angry, but it means that Apple only have one API to maintain, and that Mac apps can be as consistent underneath as they are on the surface (which is pretty good, if you take a look at windows or linux). Since all application will use the same API, changes to the system can be easily impact tested, and performance and reliability improvements on the Cocoa level can be seen instantly throughout the entire system and all applications (except the Kernel and Darwin).

It also eliminates some attack vectors from times when viruses weren't as big a problem and code security was less relevant.

[asopublic]

There is also a suggestion that Apple may move Mac OS X 10.6 to "Cocoa-only", but the full meaning of this remains vague

Apple is working very hard on clang in llvm. Maybe the 'Cocoa only' refers to the compiler will compile Cocoa only, and not Carbon apps. I don't know enough about compilers, or Carbon, to tell if they are implementing Carbon in clang. The source code is public. One Apple engineer mentioned no problems with a bug when compiling with 10.6 (as opposed to 10.5.3) in a May 2008 post in the clang archives. llvm is platform independent, so that might very well mean PPC would NOT be dropped, just coding in Carbon. Apple has been pushing developers to move away from Carbon.

[DMann]

Mac OS X 10.6 "Longcat"

longcat is long

Longhorn hardly worked for MS..... how 'bout Topcat?

[LondonMacs]

This should be pretty legit. The name is a bit silly though:rolleyes:. It is should be about time to retire PowerPCs by next year. Bye bye Powermac G5

[ArtOfWarfare]

Wouldn't it be just as bad a move as 10.5 dropping Classic? Wasn't Carbon always designed to simply be a stepping stone, from Classic to Cocoa?

...

If they dropped carbon then I wouldn't be able to run StarCraft at all! Geez, first they make it hard as hell to install the game (by removing classic,) and now they're going to make it impossible to run it at all!

I wonder if Blizzard will be changing the game to Cocoa or if they're just going to say "Screw you! The game's already a decade old anyways!"

[Mal]

All Cocoa would mean to me that all OS X components are Cocoa instead of Carbon (isn't the Finder still Carbon, or I am forgetting and they rewrote that in Leopard?), but not a guaranteed end of Carbon for now. However, since Adobe has announced Cocoa rewrites of their apps for CS5 (essentially), Office is the last major holdout, and I don't think Apple would mind sticking it to Microsoft over their poor coding practices by pulling the rug out from under them. Besides, between iWork and OpenOffice, they've got compatibility covered.

jW

[macenforcer]

Ok so the real question is HOW are they going to make it faster and why haven't they done so already?

[boer]

Unix = RISC
Linux = x86
I hope you are not suggesting that is a relevant distinction here? Here's a spoiler: The are Linux versions to RISC processors such as the PowerPC. Here's another spoiler: Every Intel x86 chip since the Pentium Pro is a RISC processor in its core. Even the Core 2 chip.

[Kar98]

I wonder what car he drives... haha off topic :)

This:

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/4612/614906135a2bf6976bfk5.jpg

[/dev/toaster]

Dropping Classic was a horrible choice. On that day, 20,000 Mac apps died for no good reason. Millions of long time Mac users were sneered at by Apple and by newcomers.

Saying it wouldn't run under Rosetta was a cynical excuse, as if that was the only way Classic could run on Intel. Shades of "Star Trek", the first Classic Mac environment, which ran on Intel inside of Apple's labs. And clearly, Sheepshaver doesn't require Rosetta...they could have done something similar, without using Rosetta, but keeping the integration more transparent like they were able to achieve with the Classic hooks in the OS.

And virtual environments don't impact overall system stability. But keeping capable with the last supported generation of APIs does impact stability, since they run natively. Virtual = safe & stable; Native = trouble as APIs evolve.

Dropping Carbon now is adding insult to injury, though doing this would improve stability more than dropping the Classic virtual environment, since Carbon needs to be natively supported on the OS X kernel.

Totally disagree here. Keeping around legacy crap is what got Microsoft into trouble. They still have very bad legacy APIs laying around. Developers are lazy, I am a developer so I know how it is trust me.

Once a developer gets used to doing things one way, they tend to stick with it until something or someone forces them to do it another way. Hell, looking back at the code I wrote for PHP3 it was rather comical compared to the code I write now. I was forced to give up some bad habits in PHP4. In the long run, it made PHP more stable and those features had to go.

Lets not forget, why would Apple want to support and maintain grossly outdated code. What worked 8 years ago, doesn't hold true with newer technology. Lets face it, things like thread safe code are rather important for stability :D I am pretty sure very very ancient code won't have it.

I see a lot of people flipping out saying the sky is falling and that Apple is making a big mistake. I don't think they would take these changes lightly, they aren't fools. Yes, its going to require a lot of work from people to convert their applications. No, Microsoft and Adobe aren't going to stop providing their applications on Mac because of it. Thats just silly.

Classic is long dead, get over it. 20k applications died because it was their time. Keeping them in life support doesn't accomplish any forward momentum.

Dropping PPC support will trim down their code base quite a bit. Removing and not maintaining Rosetta in a new OS will not only trim down the code, but reduce the chance of fek ups related to changes in other areas ... creating increased stability.

[bug67]

If the rumour is indeed true then why the hell would you want to buy, buy a G5??

Shouldn't it be "bye, bye G5"?? :rolleyes:

Indeed, you are correct, sir! D'oh!

[Mattjeff]

Osx 10.6 thunder Cat!

[viniciusc]

There you have it. Snow Leopard, so obvious, how couldn't anyone have thought that?

[SWC]

Yep.

Better be FREE or somebody's gonna get sued...


You can't sell a fix. Period.


Microsoft did it with the MS-DOS step up disk.

[heads up]

Because all applications aren't going to be 64 bit for 20 years or more as there is no performance benefit in the vast majority of cases.

I mean Microsoft is still going to be selling a 32 bit OS which can't run ANY 64 bit programs at all for the next 5 years at least.

i doubt that. in the last 20 years we've gone from 16 bit to 64 bit architecture. what makes you think this trend will stop all of a sudden?

i'm not sure about there being no performance benefits in most cases, but if all the Mac's are currently running on 64 bit architecture, doesn't it make sense that Mac developers should start making 64 bit applications. not doing so is like buying a Ferrari and filling it with regular gas instead of premium.

[Silver Fox]

Everyone also seems to have forgotten about ZFS. Remember that Apple implemented a read only version of ZFS (smart and self-healing file system) into their development tools.

I'd be very surprised if we didn't see the next OS built around it. It's perfect for all data types and especially perfect for consumer tools like TimeMachine and pro tools like FCP.

Thoughts?

[shawnce]

There is also a suggestion that Apple may move Mac OS X 10.6 to "Cocoa-only", but the full meaning of this remains vague

Apple is working very hard on clang in llvm. Maybe the 'Cocoa only' refers to the compiler will compile Cocoa only, and not Carbon apps. I don't know enough about compilers, or Carbon, to tell if they are implementing Carbon in clang. The source code is public. clang supports compiling the C language currently which means it could only support Carbon applications (Carbon API is C based). Folks are working on adding Objective-C and C++ to clang but it will be a while before it is ready. ...so no Cocoa.

[mdriftmeyer]

Unix = RISC
Linux = x86

OS X is UNIX 03 certified.
Linux is a Unix-like Operating System that is mostly UNIX 03 compliant.

The Linux Kernel is purely Monolithic.
The OS X Kernel is Micro-Monolithic.

RISC and x86 are Chip Architectures representing two different worlds of Assembly and system designs for basic CPU designs.

As has been pointed out, x86 today is a wrapped hybrid of RISC.

[mdriftmeyer]

And with it they would kill all business support for Macs forever, and probably take the iPhone with it. No sensible business would run business critical software such as CS3 or Office on a depreciated (and therefore unsupported) framework, so they'd switch to Windows.

Baseless observation. iPhone is Cocoa Touch only. The Fortune 500 Industry have all signed on-board and are the reason WWDC is sold out.

Office will soon be faced with OpenOffice 3.0 Cocoa that has ODF 1.2 native, Office2007 OpenXML compliance and much more.

CS3 is a nitch market that has nothing to do with general business systems.

CS3 will continue to run in a Carbon environment but won't continue to get any additions to that environment.

CS3 will be mainly run on Tiger and Leopard systems.

This transition has been known to Adobe and Microsoft for some time.

Third Parties will be given time to transition or be stuck selling on Tiger/Leopard compliant systems only.

[Krevnik]

Getting rid of Carbon would break a hell of a lot of software including most of Apples software. I'm not sure how much I would trust that rumour even if it is only the UI stuff that is removed. Especially seeing as Core Foundation is technically a Carbon API but is part of the Cocoa frameworks as well.

Core Foundation is intentionally shared between Carbon and Cocoa. It forms the basis for both as part of Core Services.

Core Foundation, Core Image, Core Text, etc aren't going anywhere if Carbon dies. What you do get screwed on is that your GUI /must/ go Cocoa (unless some C-based GUI API replaces Carbon's APIs), and you may have to ditch some of the older Carbon APIs still used from the OS 9 -> X transition that were lower level.

[ibwb]

i doubt that. in the last 20 years we've gone from 16 bit to 64 bit architecture. what makes you think this trend will stop all of a sudden?

i'm not sure about there being no performance benefits in most cases, but if all the Mac's are currently running on 64 bit architecture, doesn't it make sense that Mac developers should start making 64 bit applications. not doing so is like buying a Ferrari and filling it with regular gas instead of premium.

The answer to your question is simple. A 16-bit arch allows for a 64KB flat address space. This is far, far less than most programs today need... less than programs needed even back in 1985. There are ways to address more than that (evil "segments") but it still limits the kinds of problems you can easily solve.

32-bit allows for up to a 4GB flat space (in theory, some of this is usually not available to the application). Most programs today do not work with this much information at once. A complex program like Safari may need a virtual space of a gig or so, but not much more than that.

When you double the size of your pointers to 64 bits, your overhead increases, the memory bandwidth you need increases, etc. This is a hit to performance. Now, if you are loading up a 100GB video, it will be much more efficient to work with it in 64 bits, which is why people are so interested in 64-bit nowadays, but nobody wants to use it for every application.

[SkyBell]

Wow, clam down, did you even read what it said?



It makes sense for it to be Intel only. I hope it will be, so that they can remove all of the PPC code. As for the 'no new features' thing, I don't mind, as long as Leopard has Resolution Independence by then.

It makes absolutely no sense to get rid of PPC. Put yourself in the shoes of people who still have PPC. People with G5's suddenly have a powerful computer that can't run the latest OS, simply because there's no code for their processor, even though the processor itself is fully capable of running it. PPC support will continue at least until 10.6, maybe 10.7 for the upper end G5's. I suspect that 10.7 will be the last to support PPC, and Apple will introduce OS XI, with no PPC support.

[nuckinfutz]

It makes absolutely no sense to get rid of PPC. Put yourself in the shoes of people who still have PPC. People with G5's suddenly have a powerful computer that can't run the latest OS, simply because there's no code for their processor, even though the processor itself is fully capable of running it. PPC support will continue at least until 10.6, maybe 10.7 for the upper end G5's. I suspect that 10.7 will be the last to support PPC, and Apple will introduce OS XI, with no PPC support.

How is a G5 running Leopard useless? You are out the park on this one. PPC support will be lucky to survive 10.6 and it's certainly not going to be in 10.7. Apple is not going to jump from 10.7 to 11.0 that's nonsensical.

[tba03]

finally getting rid of PPC code, should be half the size too :)

[Tallest Skil]

Apple is not going to jump from 10.7 to 11.0 that's nonsensical.

Ever heard of OS 9.5? Or .3 and up, for that matter?

[bluedevil14]

come on now guys, snow leopard? there has to be more big cats to name it after than that. it will confuse so many people who just got leopard

[Eric S.]

G4 & G5 are both Power PC, so if they support one, they're supporting both.

Not necessarily. For example, Leopard does not support G3-based systems.

[slffl]

Awesome! Can't wait!

[Krevnik]

Ok so the real question is HOW are they going to make it faster and why haven't they done so already?

It can be described as trying to pick fruit from a tree. Each fruit you pick is an optimization that provides speed. The low-hanging fruit is easy to reach, immediately feeds your hunger, and doesn't require a lot of effort. The stuff at the top is really hard to reach and takes a lot of effort to get at.

All speed optimizations are the same way, some are easy, and take little time to implement, while others take a long time. If I had to choose between 5 easy ones with 5% total improvement, and 1 hard one with 5% total improvement... I take the 5 easy ones every time, because I will still probably have time left over after the 5.

[mjstew33]

Not necessarily. For example, Leopard does not support G3-based systems.

True, but the G4 and G5 have the velocity engine, the G3 does not.

[nuckinfutz]

Ever heard of OS 9.5? Or .3 and up, for that matter?

Nope. But it borders on insanity to think that Apple would move through 8 successive 10.x upgrades and then inexplicably jump to 11.x.

Clearly for branding reasons Apple loves the Roman Numeral "X" "XI" isn't bad but isn't quite as clean IMO.

The stuck mental process for some here is the old world thinking that the bigger the advance in number the more "special" the application is.

[iPoodOverZune]

It looks like Apple wants to match Windows 7 with their own version 7 of OS X i.e., 10.7, from a marketing perspective. So they will get out 10.6 fast to have enough gap in between and time it to Win7 release. So putting 10.6 in Jan 2009 kind of make sense. They can increase speed and reliability with few perks like ZFS, etc. May be they will surprise and make headlines by giving it a free update, or charge few bucks. Finally, I think instead of 10.6 being intel only, it may rather be last OS X version to be PPC also. Next versions will be PPC-free. That will give time to PPC folks to make a switch in a year and a half.

I should stop dreaming now. :D

[iPoodOverZune]

.

Thanks for your extremely valuable input! :rolleyes:

[jaedreth]

I personally can't wait for Snow Leopard.

I'm ready for them to optimize the *fool* out of it.

And I'm waiting for ZFS support.

I want a truly modern UNIX operating system with the easiest to use interface, and I want it to be rock solid and super fast.

[macenforcer]

Microsoft did it with the MS-DOS step up disk.

Umm, I'll have to ask my grandfather about that one.

[Fuzzbear]

But does it make sense to do a speed and stability upgrade only? That sounds like a 10.5.X, not a 10.6! Has a new version of Mac OS (or Windows or a Linux distribution for that matter) ever been released with nothing new to offer? I think both the strange two words cat name and the lack of new features are both very unlikely...


youve never used Windows ME.

god that was a joke.

[macenforcer]

OS X is UNIX 03 certified.
Linux is a Unix-like Operating System that is mostly UNIX 03 compliant.

The Linux Kernel is purely Monolithic.
The OS X Kernel is Micro-Monolithic.

RISC and x86 are Chip Architectures representing two different worlds of Assembly and system designs for basic CPU designs.

As has been pointed out, x86 today is a wrapped hybrid of RISC.


I know. I just googled it also.

[Chef Medeski]

Speed and stability are really what's needed. I applaud Apple for focusing on the bread and butter of the OS instead of trying to tack on more flashy features to sell the sizzle.
I concur, a speedy/stable OS is just as important as those talking points.

But the name and the lack of major feature seems to indiciate it may not be full price which would make sense. $130 for speed and stability no matter how good is kinda steep. I think a half-price update would make more sense. Especially since Snow Leopard doesn't seem like much of a difference form Leopard.

[amac4me]

It makes sense for Apple to drop PowerPC support on Mac OS X eventually. The PowerPC Mac era died the day the transition to Intel was announced (Summer 2005). We're now 2.5 years into the Intel Mac era (since the MacBook Pro announcement at Macworld 2006) so the timetable of dropping PowerPC support on the "next" version of the operating system makes sense to me. By the time it's out we'll be at least 3 years into the Intel era.

[Decrepit]

Nope. But it borders on insanity to think that Apple would move through 8 successive 10.x upgrades and then inexplicably jump to 11.x.

Clearly for branding reasons Apple loves the Roman Numeral "X" "XI" isn't bad but isn't quite as clean IMO.

The stuck mental process for some here is the old world thinking that the bigger the advance in number the more "special" the application is.

Microsoft jumped from 2.0 to 6.0 with Word so they could have a similar versioning number to Word Perfect.

Apple killed the Apple II line which was fantastic and replaced it with a completely incompatible computer line.

Companies do weird things all the time.

[Cabbit]

Personally i welcome a feature frozen 10.6 launch. Give me the full cocoa full Intel 64 bit slim line and fully refined Snow leopard that gives very rapid performance and a simple elegant development platform.

What new features do we really need, we already have everything linux has and more in terms of features just not all of them are user accessible. OSX is the same in linux in a lot of ways.
There big, bloated and 90% of the code is irrelevant. I bet you there is still parallel and serial drivers and all the code related to them lying about somewhere.

I personally feel what we need is a full code cleanup and a little further ui tidy up, such as iTunes scroll bars thought and the buttons and other interface elements to be a little less gum drop looking.

[Loge]

I appreciate that an Intel only release would take up less disk space, but I am not convinced that it would be noticeably faster. If the PPC code is not called, there is no reason why it should be slowing down the OS.

[macFanDave]

Snow Leopard and Mobile Me in the same week?

Does Apple have a Department of Crappy Naming that's been working overtime?

I can hear the PC douchebags hassling us, "Heh-heh, is that Leopard that freezes a lot? <picks nose> Heh-heh. <fart>"

I think Apple ought to reuse the Cougar name for 10.6 but this time around, use Demi Moore as the mascot, gggrrrrrrrwwwwwlllll!

When they get ready to end it with the cat names, I still say they should name that version for the biggest cat of all: GARFIELD!

[sunfast]

Are all the people who've been whining about too much iPhone news happy we're talking about OS X again? :rolleyes:

Still, news of the next release is always interesting. It'll be fascinating to see what WWDC brings.

[Krevnik]

What new features do we really need, we already have everything linux has and more in terms of features just not all of them are user accessible. OSX is the same in linux in a lot of ways.
There big, bloated and 90% of the code is irrelevant. I bet you there is still parallel and serial drivers and all the code related to them lying about somewhere.


There better still be serial driver code floating around. I have RS232 devices that were built in the last couple years that I interface with. Embedded developers still use RS232 to talk to their dev boards (when Ethernet isn't available or not feasible for a console), or server consoles.

While I agree that the RS232 port should die on machines (and it did), the driver stack needs to stick around for those of us still using it for various reasons, so that someone providing me with my next USB->RS232 cable doesn't have to write the whole stack themselves.

I appreciate that an Intel only release would take up less disk space, but I am not convinced that it would be noticeably faster. If the PPC code is not called, there is no reason why it should be slowing down the OS.

With how universal binaries are designed, and Rosetta... PPC code will only slow down the PPC process. Nothing else will be affected (or even /able/ to call PPC code). Plus with how little PPC/Intel specific code there is in the platform (mostly in the HAL, and the vector libraries)... they aren't spending a huge amount of time maintaining cross-platform support.

[Eric S.]

How long was it before Apple dropped support for 68K when PPC came out?

That might be what we are looking at.

How about Leopard, when they abandoned Classic mode?

Under 10.4.11, I could still run my 1987 copy of MacPaint that came with the first Mac I ever bought, a Mac Plus.

[Azurael]

They also dropped Disk Mode. It's not on the Touch (nor the iPhone).

Forgiveable. At least far less annoying than dropping FW support. They're not really iPods really - they're fully functional computers which run a 'proper' version of OS X...

Mind you, Macs have got target disk mode. I would imagine the only reason they didn't implement it is to hinder hackers.

However, it really irks me that I can't just drag 'n drop music to my iPhone like I can to the 'Pods...

[milo]

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=448431

I guess there's a good reason that never made it to page one. I'm surprised anyone believed that.

i'd love to see the adobe developers faces when this is official! lol
say bye bye to ancient code! :eek:

Hell, I'd love to see the faces of the apple teams that develop Logic and FCS. Are there any major apps in cocoa, ones from Apple itself included?

HAHAHA don't get ahead of yourself there buddy. They're awesome, no doubt, but saying they're faster than current machines? Like what? The Mac mini? :p

What makes you think the imacs and laptops are faster? A quick google search found benchmark testing showing the G5 quads beating all but the Mac Pros on a number of benchmarks like cinebench. If you found different results, link them.

Face it, the grave for PPC was already being dug when Apple announced the move to Intel. PPC was placed in the grave with Leopards system requirements. It's been a long time, and the time has come to throw the flowers on the grave. Did you really think they were going to be supported forever?

What do the leopard requirements have to do with PPC? And it hasn't been a long time, the intel transition was only announced about three years ago. Generally macs have been supported longer than that. It's not about being supported "forever", it's being supported as long as the hardware can handle the software. In the case of G5s, particularly the quads, they can handle it with no problem - there's a big difference between a machine losing support because it's not fast enough to run the latest and a machine that *could* run the software just fine getting dumped just because the company doesn't feel like supporting it any more.

[blackcrayon]

There better still be serial driver code floating around. I have RS232 devices that were built in the last couple years that I interface with. Embedded developers still use RS232 to talk to their dev boards (when Ethernet isn't available or not feasible for a console), or server consoles.

While I agree that the RS232 port should die on machines (and it did), the driver stack needs to stick around for those of us still using it for various reasons, so that someone providing me with my next USB->RS232 cable doesn't have to write the whole stack themselves.


The serial driver will be around for a while. All Xserves have an rs-232 serial port.

[KindredMAC]

If Apple wants to make a stable and faster version of Leopard just work harder on a 10.5.x update.

This is starting to turn into the old days where people didn't jump from 8.0 to 8.5 but waited for 8.6.

[arkmannj]

Unix = RISC
Linux = x86

Neither Operating System type is tied to an architecture

You have Linux for PPC (RISC), X86 (CISC), and so on...
Yellow Dog Linux, Ubuntu just to name a couple are available for PPC
Ubuntu is also on x86 as is Fedora, and many others.

Unix like Linux has flavors on various architectures, of which Mac OS X (darwin) is just one such unix flavor.

[milo]

I thought leopard was the new full 64 bit re-write? What the heck?

It is.

G4 & G5 are both Power PC, so if they support one, they're supporting both.

Nope. While they are both PPC, G5 has unique features not supported by G4. They could easily drop support for G4, you notice they don't support G3 (also PPC) anymore, right? They can even drop support for various models and configurations when they want to.

[Luzzio]

It looks like Apple wants to match Windows 7 with their own version 7 of OS X i.e., 10.7, from a marketing perspective. So they will get out 10.6 fast to have enough gap in between and time it to Win7 release.

That's a horrible marketing strategy :D

[iPoodOverZune]

Snow Leopard and Mobile Me in the same week?



When they get ready to end it with the cat names, I still say they should name that version for the biggest cat of all: GARFIELD!

I second that. That was in my thoughts too - to take the last version and name it Garfield. :)

[milo]

i think it's about time that Apple gives the axe to carbon. wasn't the purpose of carbon to make the transition from os 9 to os 10 seamless? that was nearly 7 years ago... so why are people still writting carbon applications?

Because carbon allows writing in C++ while cocoa requires Objective C (oversimplification, but that's the general gist of it).

Working in carbon makes it MUCH easier to write code that is portable for both mac and windows. Using cocoa makes the two much less similar, and makes supporting two codebases MUCH more work.

[blackcrayon]

That's a horrible marketing strategy :D

Like when Microsoft named it "XP" after Apple announced "OS X"? :)
"The P means it's even BETTER!"

[babyj]

Neither MS or Adobe can magic out a Cocoa version of their programs in time, they can't just add programmers to the project as it doesn't actually work. See the OS/360 and read the Mythical Man Month (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythical_man_month) for why.

Times have changed since OS/360 was in development. Back then development was performed on dumb terminals connected to computers dumber than your iPhone and the programming languages didn't lend themselves to larger teams each working on smaller chunks of code. Whilst re-usable code meant printing out some old code and manually copying it in to your latest project (no copy and paste back then).

Sure Adobe and MS couldn't produce a completely re-written version of a major application over night, but they could easily throw resources at it to get it done a lot quicker than you might think.

[Krevnik]

Nope. While they are both PPC, G5 has unique features not supported by G4. They could easily drop support for G4, you notice they don't support G3 (also PPC) anymore, right? They can even drop support for various models and configurations when they want to.

The G3 lacked a VMX/Altivec unit. It made sense to drop support for it because vectorized code simply could not run on it at all. The line between the G4/G5 is a lot thinner.

The serial driver will be around for a while. All Xserves have an rs-232 serial port.

Oh yeah, I know. I hinted at that with the 'server consoles' bit in my semi-rant. I just wanted to make the point that because it seems obvious that something is obsolete, it doesn't mean that it is.

[HyperZboy]

Thats exactly what Leopard is like at the moment. The 10.5.3 update was excellent in my opinion. Leopard has been brilliant on my end on 2 different Macs. The recent update just solidified that.

So what are you going on about? You tried using Vista recently. Everyone who has a Mac on here should be thankful and the ones that complain should stop, give Vista a whirl.

While I don't intend to give Vista a whirl anytime soon, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't say what you just said about Leopard or even 10.5.3 if you owned a technically supported Powermac G4 or low end G5 where Leopard is pretty much a disaster in my opinion. 10.5.3 has even pretty much bricked my Quicksilver G4 and its hardly snappy or stable even on my Dual 1.8 G5 and I've got 3GB RAM! Sure, some of these Macs are getting long in the tooth, but they are SUPPORTED MACS for Leopard, so Apple should have done a much better job on these supposedly supported PowerPC Macs than they did with Leopard in my opinion.

Anyone who owns lower end Macs probably bristles every time John Hodgeman lauds how stable Leopard is in those I'm a Mac commercials because stable it is not and snappy, well, we won't even go there! HAha!

Ultimately, Steve Jobs will get whatever he wants and if putting PPC in a coffin at this WWDC is his wish, he'll get it. But he'll also alienate once again some very long-time Mac users like myself.

[volfreak]

Nope. But it borders on insanity to think that Apple would move through 8 successive 10.x upgrades and then inexplicably jump to 11.x.

Clearly for branding reasons Apple loves the Roman Numeral "X" "XI" isn't bad but isn't quite as clean IMO.

The stuck mental process for some here is the old world thinking that the bigger the advance in number the more "special" the application is.

When the major version number changes, it usually means there's a major change in the product. If Apple were to go 64-bit Intel only with a completely new file system (say, ZFS), got rid of Carbon and went solely Cocoa, that's a major revision which would likely get the 11. version number.

There is logic to the numbering system and as it's been noted many times here, the releases don't get a new major number when the digits are x.x.9 (it just goes to x.x.10). First number change, major version differences. Second digit in the string are revisions/updates to the major version. Last digit in the string are updates, patches and things like bug fixes (no new features).

So, it's perfectly logical for there to have a jump from 10 to 11 if the major revision warrants it.

Cheers:cool:

[iZac]

Are all the people who've been whining about too much iPhone news happy we're talking about OS X again? :rolleyes:

Yes, very!

Still, news of the next release is always interesting. It'll be fascinating to see what WWDC brings.

Its quite exciting now that we have lots of varied things to conjecture about, as opposed to a million rumors pointing toward the iPhone getting 2 mm fatter / thinner / wider / more awesome.

Although it sounds a little like the start of a Rhapsody song, i like the name "snow leopard". and who knows, maybe it is just a significant point upgrade like 10.5.5, just with more fanfare?

and as for bad naming schemes, "mighty mouse" is an absolutely ridiculous name, but i still say it with a straight face.

[babyj]

Totally disagree here. Keeping around legacy crap is what got Microsoft into trouble. They still have very bad legacy APIs laying around. Developers are lazy, I am a developer so I know how it is trust me.

<snip>



I think you nailed it spot on there.

Windows was built on top of DOS for a long time and included far too much legacy stuff for far too long. Sure you upset some people by dropping legacy support but it makes for better software for the majority in the long run.

With (I believe) other Apple products (Apple TV, iPhone, maybe some new devices coming soon) sharing at least some of the code base with OS X, having a tidy up and dropping some legacy stuff from OS X makes a lot of sense.

If they do then jumping to 10.6 makes sense as well. Adding a lot of new features on the user side of software is one reason for a new point release, making major internal changes which break compatibility is another. They could easily carry on with updates to 10.5, with 10.6 being for recent hardware and everything else released going forward.

I've got one of the early 32 bit Core Due MacBooks, it will be a few years old by the time 10.6 comes out and if I can't run it then I'm not going to get too upset. ***** happens and it will be time for me to get a new Mac anyway.

[EagerDragon]

Yep 2-3 million ppl will have to spend $1999 to replace their 4 yr old computer instead of $129 for a new OS that it will come with. Seems like good business sense.

If all 10.6 brings to the table is better stability and more speed for 64 bit systems, then there is little incentive for Intel 32 bit systems and PPC systems to be upgraded.

There are a lot of people still on tiger because they do not think that the features of Leopard are worth 129.

People on 64 bit systems will need something compelling in order to switch to "Boring Cat" if all 10.6 brings to the table is better stability and more speed.

People want flash and new features.

I hope 10.6 brings to the table Bootable ZFS and Resolution independence, Apple was working on both but neither came out in Leopard.

[ppc_michael]

What if this OS is intended for a tablet? If I recall, the whole multitouch framework is cocoa, that could be the whole "all cocoa" thing, referring to the interface.

[Eric S.]

While I don't intend to give Vista a whirl anytime soon, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't say what you just said about Leopard or even 10.5.3 if you owned a technically supported Powermac G4 or low end G5 where Leopard is pretty much a disaster in my opinion. 10.5.3 has even pretty much bricked my Quicksilver G4 and its hardly snappy or stable even on my Dual 1.8 G5 and I've got 3GB RAM! Sure, some of these Macs are getting long in the tooth, but they are SUPPORTED MACS for Leopard, so Apple should have done a much better job on these supposedly supported PowerPC Macs than they did with Leopard in my opinion.

Anyone who owns lower end Macs probably bristles every time John Hodgeman lauds how stable Leopard is in those I'm a Mac commercials because stable it is not and snappy, well, we won't even go there!

I own a technically supported Power Mac G4 - a Sawtooth w/ Sonnet 1.0 GHz CPU upgrade - and Leopard runs just fine. I've moved from 10.5.1 to 10.5.2 and now 10.5.3 with no major problems. Performance is comparable to Tiger.

[iJawn108]

Uhh isn't the finder carbon?

[nuckinfutz]

When the major version number changes, it usually means there's a major change in the product. If Apple were to go 64-bit Intel only with a completely new file system (say, ZFS), got rid of Carbon and went solely Cocoa, that's a major revision which would likely get the 11. version number.

There is logic to the numbering system and as it's been noted many times here, the releases don't get a new major number when the digits are x.x.9 (it just goes to x.x.10). First number change, major version differences. Second digit in the string are revisions/updates to the major version. Last digit in the string are updates, patches and things like bug fixes (no new features).

So, it's perfectly logical for there to have a jump from 10 to 11 if the major revision warrants it.

Cheers:cool:

It's logical until you look at the former 6 version of OS X and note the succinct pattern in updates. Apple is well within their right to name any OS X version 11 but I think conventional wisdom is with them riding out 10.6,10.7,10.8,10.9

[MShock]

that makes no sense that Apple would waste an 10.# on a simple stability and speed fix. There would need to be some major enhancements + stability and speed. I could see this as a (I hate to use the term) "service pack" with lots of fixes to 10.5.3, but to move to 10.6, Apple would need to include the following:

latest Flash
Full ZFS support, including boot
Major GUI refinements, reflecting the filesystem change (maybe something that looks more like the iPhone / iPod touch GUI with the black glass and all)
Full application support for ZFS (particular for Time Machine)
Full Finder and ZFS integration (like fixes to spotlight and such)
More touch and 3D feel would also be my guess for new features, even though I like the amount of touch in the current lines and don't want more.
brand spanking new super kernel underdevelopment for speed and stability
new versions of all CORE apis

[FightTheFuture]

because of the lack of a new feature set and only rebuilt code to improve stability and speed while earmarking the future, anyone think that 10.6 may be a free upgrade? seeing as how updating the original os x 10.0 to 10.1 was free - it startled some users that they were expecting to pay for an upgrade to 10.2 Jaguar.

perhaps a free upgrade would be Apple's way of saying "thanks for the support guys, this ones on us" ;)

and who says that it has to have new features to be worthy of an upgrade? they could just revamp the features currently in leopard. ie... page rendering speeds in safari, location awareness in address book or multi-touch interaction with finder?

[bobertoq]

I honestly think this is a great idea, but it will be like the switch from OS 9 to OS X, just not nearly as strong.

Mac OS 10.5 is already filled with great features that would attract any computer user. Although Mac OS 10.5 is already extremely secure and stable, there is (always) room for improvement. Surely a few new features would be added. Maybe you could adjust the opacity of the menus, have a color wheel for the close, minimize and zoom buttons, and an option for a 'glass' 2D dock :D Maybe a slightly different UI? Such as no more Aqua elements (all replaced with iTunes 7 elements) and tabs in finder :)

Also the name 'Slow Leopard' makes plenty sense if it is not a major feature update.

[Abstract]

If Snow Leopard isn't a big change, why the hell are they going to charge us for it by making it a .6 release?

Can't wait until Mac OS X "Thundercats" is released.

[GeeYouEye]

Credibility of this rumor:

1. I'm pretty sure that it was reported last year that 10.6 would be the last OS to support PPC. -

2. Snow leopards are not actually leopards. +

3. Apple does not have Snow Leopard trademarked. -

4. Carbon was never meant to be a legacy technology, and makes porting to OS X easier than having to use Cocoa. Furthermore parts of Cocoa are implemented in Carbon. Menus until Leopard, the Dock, AppleScript support, etc. -

5. "All Cocoa" or "Cocoa everything" is meaningless. Optimistically it means all APIs will be accessible from Cocoa. This would be a HUGE increase in size of the Cocoa frameworks; 80% of all the frameworks are currently only in C. Pessimistically, it means that Cocoa will be the only desktop API going forward. This is stupid, as it would eliminate the other 90%. Apple's made some bad decisions before, but that would take the cake. ---

6. The end of UI Carbon is plausible. +

That's ++ to ------. I'm going with a "totally ********" rating on this one.

[bigwig]

Thanks for your extremely valuable input! :rolleyes:
I'm glad you like it! I wanted to delete the post for redundancy, but the forum software wouldn't let me, nor would it let me edit the post to be zero characters.

[w0ngbr4d]

I doubt it would be free. They'll probably have to charge something for "accounting purposes" like the iPod touch and the Wireless N update. (I'm unsure of how they account for OS X sales, maybe they wouldn't have to charge for it.)

If they dump PPC support, like previously mentioned it will cut the size of the OS roughly in half. On a MacBook Air, or any other device where space is limited, it makes sense. I'd rather have a 2 GB Leopard install instead of a 5-6 GB install when the hard drive olds less than 80 after formatting. (The Dock executable is 2.3 MB by itself in Leopard, 680KB in Tiger on a PB G4) Lean device platforms (Air, touch) require lean software.

Universal apps are great. They facilitated the transition to Intel/x86. The hardware transition is complete. The software transition needs to be completed.

Just because something new comes out doesn't hurt the productivity of old technology. While the new technology might be faster at a task such as video encoding, a business isn't going to just go upgrade. They'll compare the costs (new hardware, software, etc.) to the benefits (more productivity) and see if it'll be worth it. If not, they'll wait a while. Its not like the old machines will stop encoding video or creating Word documents when the new OS is released.

Snow Leopard makes sense. Its still Leopard, just different.

This will be interesting.

[Foxglove9]

What if this OS is intended for a tablet? If I recall, the whole multitouch framework is cocoa, that could be the whole "all cocoa" thing, referring to the interface.

I was thinking the same thing.

I wouldn't mind a faster and more stable OS X release. Though I find Leopard pretty fast and stable already I can't imagine it being better. But I say that with every OS release.

[madmax_2069]

i wont buy a new computer just to get a semi updated version of leopard. i think that is why i bought a PC insted of waisting my money playing Apples games.

[Play4keeps]

I cant see the name (Snow Leopard) at all.
But thats just me:confused:

[maxrobertson]

Ok, if this is really true, then Steve Jobs has gonna crazy...
This type of release used to be called Mac OS X 10.5.4.

I don't think they are going to waste a release on "bug fixes"

I think 10.6 is going to be a Windows 7 killer.

10.4 was already a Windows 7 killer. Apple is so far ahead they have no reason at all to cram in more features. They can focus on refining if they want to. We'll see if they do.

[Quillz]

How is a G5 running Leopard useless? You are out the park on this one. PPC support will be lucky to survive 10.6 and it's certainly not going to be in 10.7. Apple is not going to jump from 10.7 to 11.0 that's nonsensical.
How is it any more/less nonsensical than Apple jumping from 7.6 to OS 8 or Apple jumping from OS 8.6 to OS 9?

[Quillz]

10.4 was already a Windows 7 killer. Apple is so far ahead they have no reason at all to cram in more features. They can focus on refining if they want to. We'll see if they do.
Completely baseless, borderline trolling comment, since you, or nearly anyone else, has seen a fraction of what is going to be in Windows 7. And for being such a killer release, you'd think Mac OS X would have a halfway decent Windows Explorer killer.

[nuckinfutz]

How is it any more/less nonsensical than Apple jumping from 7.6 to OS 8 or Apple jumping from OS 8.6 to OS 9?

Because 7.1, 7.2, 7.3,7.4,7.5 didn't represent paid upgrades same for 8.0-8.6.

10.1 was the only free OS X update. Each successive version implemented new core technology. Your comparison is certainly not Apple to Apples here (no pun) when taken in the context of paid upgrades for point release.

Without the historical context both 7.x, 8.x and 10.x evolutionary paths would appear equally sensible

[bobertoq]

People want flash and new features.I think 10.5 is already filled with enough 'flash and features'. Now, they need to focus on stability, security, speed and performance (SSSP). If they continue to just pack OS X with features without focusing on the SSSP, before you know it, OS X will be very cluttered, unstable, slow, and complicated. Like Vista.

Some have labeled Leopard as 'Apple's Vista'. Even though I strongly disagree, I'd like this to change.

[Eric S.]

1. I'm pretty sure that it was reported last year that 10.6 would be the last OS to support PPC.

I would certainly be interested to see a reference for that.

[Jon the Heretic]

I think you nailed it spot on there.

Windows was built on top of DOS for a long time and included far too much legacy stuff for far too long. Sure you upset some people by dropping legacy support but it makes for better software for the majority in the long run.


As with the original post, this just isn't so.

DOS was the foundation for Windows until NT came along...Win2000, XP are all derived from an all new code base. But MS kept the APIs supported from the first versions of Windows (Win16s) on the new codebase. Through virtualization, DOS apps also run, even though XP and Vista have no DOS code.

Backwards compatibility through virtualization hurts nothing. It doesn't impact stability one bit. Windows is a mess because of things it chose NOT to virtualize but run natively on the NT base, like older variants of the Win APIs. Those do nasty things.

Retaining Classic in a virtual environment would have made lots of old timer Mac users happy without affecting stability at all, just like DOS virtualization under NT variants. Virtual is safe, and stable. Killing Classic was just an arrogant move without no good reason behind it. MacOS X gained absolutely nothing from it, though slavish Apple defenders like to pretend otherwise.

In contrast, backwards compatibility with older natively supported APIs (which not a single Classic app was) can be precarious. While dropping PowerPC and Carbon support probably will improve MacOS X on Intel (unlike the move to drop Classic, which helped nothing at all at a technical level), it will piss a lot of people off.

But Apple is on a roll and is selling computer hands over fists. Methinks they will take that risk, since planned obsolescence is after all their plan of record for the last several years anyway. And while heartless and a very bad idea from an user support point of view, at least this time there really is a technical advantage to doing so, unlike the pointless dropping of Classic which achieved absolutely nothing given it was virtualized to begin with.

[Nermal]

Because 7.1, 7.2, 7.3,7.4,7.5 didn't represent paid upgrades same for 8.0-8.6.

I'm pretty sure that 8.5 was a retail, paid upgrade. However, 8.6 was a free upgrade for 8.5 users.

[ReanimationLP]

Thats exactly what Leopard is like at the moment. The 10.5.3 update was excellent in my opinion. Leopard has been brilliant on my end on 2 different Macs. The recent update just solidified that.

So what are you going on about? You tried using Vista recently. Everyone who has a Mac on here should be thankful and the ones that complain should stop, give Vista a whirl.

Funny, I'm running Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 on a Pentium4 based PC, and it runs faster and smoother than Windows XP, and as stable as XP ever did.

[CWallace]

If they dump PPC support, like previously mentioned it will cut the size of the OS roughly in half. On a MacBook Air, or any other device where space is limited, it makes sense. I'd rather have a 2 GB Leopard install instead of a 5-6 GB install when the hard drive olds less than 80 after formatting.

You can use Monolingual now to remove much of the PPC support which will free up space.

[seashellz]

No more new features please-unless they are absolutely needed.
Speed and stability.
Adding frills just to sell a new version is BLOATWARE;
MS's problem

Maybe just selling a solid, fast and stable OS is what they should strive for.
Does HOSTESS update their cupcakes every year?

[shawnce]

Because carbon allows writing in C++ while cocoa requires Objective C (oversimplification, but that's the general gist of it).

Working in carbon makes it MUCH easier to write code that is portable for both mac and windows. Using cocoa makes the two much less similar, and makes supporting two codebases MUCH more work. No not really. I work on a few decently large applications that are mostly C++ based with a native Cocoa UI on the Mac and Win32/etc on Windows. It is IMHO easy to integrate C++ and Objective-C thanks to Objective-C++ even more so when using the 64b Objective-C runtime on Mac OS X 10.5 and later.

In general our native Mac UI was simpler to implement and more feature rich thanks to what Cocoa provides and how we have to limit ourselves on the Windows side to support Windows 98, etc. (in some situations). ...and I yes I spent many years working on Mac OS (with Carbon and PowerPlant).

[GenericUsername]

..."Lep-you-ard" (similar to how Steve pronounced Jaguar)

You mean the original, correct way to pronounce the word?

That's pretty outrageous of Steve to do that. :mad: I mean what is he? Some kind of accuracy prone guy who cares about proper word pronunciation or something?

;)

Are you a limey bastard or were you just being cheeky? The word jaguar didn't originate in Britain, but in South America, and then made its way into Portuguese and Spanish (in which it's pronounced as just two syllables) before entering English (see this (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jaguar), for example).

I think 10.6 ought to be named ceiling cat personally.

OS X Kitteh :)

[fireball360]

OS X 10.6 will be called "House Cat" and that is final. :D
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/2002181591103321863_rs.jpg

[tony-in-japan]

Seems like an apt name for a Leopard+.

Or maybe they should have named the current Leopard: Leopard Cub.

Anyway, to mention that the 10.6 version will focus on speed and reliability issues is just a statement to say, in other words: Leopard is kinda slow and unreliable.

When are companies going to stop using the public who pay for a product as beta testers on uncooked 1.0 releases? From what I have learnt through buying Leopard (still use speedy and reliable Tiger by the way) is that it will take 5-6 updates (10.5.5–10.5.6) before I will feel confident in using it with all my applications.

I wonder if there will be a back-lash/slow sales with Snow Leopard from what users have experienced with Leopard?

[Quillz]

Funny, I'm running Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 on a Pentium4 based PC, and it runs faster and smoother than Windows XP, and as stable as XP ever did.Vista Ultimate runs better on my PC hardware than Leopard does on my iMac.

[28monkeys]

Frankly, does the name really matter to EXISTING consumers (Mac-owners)?

Since the rumors said the updates will focus for speed and stability, without major new features installment...i guess the next version isn't about attracting new potential Mac buyers but to strengthen the existing OS X as a foundation for future updates.

so..name doesn't matter..really:apple: Just bring it on Apple!

[nuckinfutz]

Seems like an apt name for a Leopard+.

Or maybe they should have named the current Leopard: Leopard Cub.

Anyway, to mention that the 10.6 version will focus on speed and reliability issues is just a statement to say, in other words: Leopard is kinda slow and unreliable.

When are companies going to stop using the public who pay for a product as beta testers on uncooked 1.0 releases? From what I have learnt through buying Leopard (still use speedy and reliable Tiger by the way) is that it will take 5-6 updates (10.5.5–10.5.6) before I will feel confident in using it with all my applications.

I wonder if there will be a back-lash/slow sales with Snow Leopard from what users have experienced with Leopard?

What do you think is causing the poor stability? Dollars to donuts its the lack of resources. Apple has some crack developers but few teams could deliver OS X on two new platforms and deliver a bug free product.

If we want a stellar performer we have to reign in the frameworks and devote more resources to optimizing for Intel hardware.

We'll know more next week but it appears that Apple has made the tough decision and next week these boards could be on fire with disgruntled Mac fans.

[HelixEdge64]

Well i just got this macbook back in February and now in less than a year later, they are already coming out with a new OS? Well this really shouldn't be a bad thing, but i will need to spend about another...$200-$300 depending on how much Steve decides to sell this baby. If all of this is true, i'm just looking forward on seeing what kind of new features this baby will have. Not to mention that iMovie 09 needs to be seriously worked on. :rolleyes:

[Trip.Tucker]

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/06/04/mac-os-x-10-6-called-snow-leopard-all-cocoa/)

...once again, for the slow... The next version of OS X is code named Lynx. Not Snow or any other Flakey name.

[fuziwuzi]

in this day and age, sif not name it

10.6 lolcat: i can has OS


edit: only read first page, think i've been beaten to the punch

[w0ngbr4d]

You can use Monolingual now to remove much of the PPC support which will free up space.

I've read nothing but bad things and warnings about using that program which has kept me from trying it. The average user might see it as a way to get hard drive space back and run it not knowing the side effects until something quits working. I'd rather have the OS come lean and not have to use a third party app to do it for me. Although I'll reserve final judgement until after I've used it.

I just listened to the WWDC 2005 keynote and Steve said "We want to support these (PowerPC and Intel) for a long time." How long is a long time? How long does the average person keep their computer before considering an upgrade? I would think 3-5 years, which is an eternity in the tech world. If the last PowerPC was sold in 2006, by the time this would ship, would ~3 years be enough?

[chickenninja]

I guess it really is time to start thinking about retiring the ol' G5 :(
make sure you recycle it, or give it to someone who knows how to recycle it after theyre done using it. Or make it into a little server for yourself.

[Akzel]

I've read nothing but bad things and warnings about using that program which has kept me from trying it. The average user might see it as a way to get hard drive space back and run it not knowing the side effects until something quits working. I'd rather have the OS come lean and not have to use a third party app to do it for me. Although I'll reserve final judgement until after I've used it.

I just listened to the WWDC 2005 keynote and Steve said "We want to support these (PowerPC and Intel) for a long time." How long is a long time? How long does the average person keep their computer before considering an upgrade? I would think 3-5 years, which is an eternity in the tech world. If the last PowerPC was sold in 2006, by the time this would ship, would ~3 years be enough?

Like someone else already said, they also said they wouldn't use integrated GPU or drop features from iPods, etc. But even considering they're crazy enough to go x64-only (and I think they'll probably do it in a couple of years), why would they release an OS killing both Office and Photoshop at the same strike?! Wouldn't make sense if they want to expand their bases.

Well, I'd rather take this rumour with a grain of salt. Can you imagine Steve Jobs doing a presentation about their new OS "no new features, but wait, it's fast and reliable! Oh, btw, no more PPC, sorry." I can't... :P

[jmadlena]

What do you think os x is?

Not Linux.

[maxrobertson]

And with it they would kill all business support for Macs forever, and probably take the iPhone with it. No sensible business would run business critical software such as CS3 or Office on a depreciated (and therefore unsupported) framework, so they'd switch to Windows.

The iPhone doesn't even ****ing include carbon. Why would they care? Also, Apple doesn't care about the business market. Let me rephrase that, they will not shape themselves for the business market. They want the business market to be the ones who reshape.

[Saladinos]

Well i just got this macbook back in February and now in less than a year later, they are already coming out with a new OS? Well this really shouldn't be a bad thing, but i will need to spend about another...$200-$300 depending on how much Steve decides to sell this baby. If all of this is true, i'm just looking forward on seeing what kind of new features this baby will have. Not to mention that iMovie 09 needs to be seriously worked on. :rolleyes:

Or pay $99 dollars for the ADC Student Membership. Even if you're not a student, I'm sure you can think up some way to get it for some part of the $100-200 you're saving.

[SafariKC]

So here is what I think we are about to see at the Keynote: (Maybe i missed them, but... I'm surprised not to see any comments such as these yet in any other threads about Snow)

Me service to be OS X Only (with a yearly sub fee to use it)

Application Store for OS X (with apple getting a kick back on every app sold for OSX)


One More Thing . . .

We've ported a few of our major applications over to Windows.. and as it turns out, while people really enjoy having iTunes and now Safari to use while in Windows... what people really want is to use these great apps in OS X.

Folks are really not happy about Vista.. Folks are even more unhappy about Vista Certified machines that can't run the full Vista Experience, and the fractured and confusing experience of Ultimate, Business, Home, 64, etc.

Hell has frozen over yet again...

Introducing Snow Leopard: Generic X86 version of Leopard to become available that will run on ANY Intel powered Vista Compatible Intel Machine... $129.. Available on Machines THIS holiday season from Dell, HP, Asus, etc. Available Retail for everyone with Vista Compatible certified systems in January.

We've partnered with ALL major Intel partners to give full driver support in 10.6 Snow Leopard for all Vista Compatible systems ever sold with the MS Vista Logo Program. All of these users will have the same user experience, the same great pre-bundled applications that Mac users have grown to love... right out of the box.

Steve will bring out Michael Dell... and show that all of the demo's he showed during the keynote were done using a Dell desktop. Dell will talk about the opportunity users now have. Steve will thank Michael and then review the keynote notes.

People will be loving iPhone all over the world, now they can love OS X all over the world much faster than Apple alone currently has the ability to get out there.

With Me services and the OS X App Store the migration will be profitable, a revenue stream will be there for Apple even though they didn't sell the hardware. They will remind that iLife/iWork can be bought and will run on the 10.6 Snow Leopard just as wonderfully as they do today on 10.5.

Apple won't exit the hardware business. The Apple store is a great model the industrial design that core Apple customers love, and the industry as a whole admires. Mac Pro, iMac and MacBook/MacBook Pro line will stay. Mac Mini will go away, instead of bringing your own Keyboard, Monitor, and Mouse ... you can bring any vista compatible machine along for the ride :-)

Bootcamp will be useable on these machines as well to help with the install and migration. Rosetta will be the only missing piece for the Snow Leopard build. No PPC applications will run on the Snow Mac. (Which isn't an issue for most folks with all major applications now being ported to Intel)

Checkmate!

I think with this move, Apple could more than double their worldwide market share in 1 year. 10.5 Leopard will stay up to day and have feature parity with 10.6 Snow Leopard (with the exception of features that require new hardware), although Snow will no longer support installs on PPC machines.

10.5 Leopard users can upgrade to 10.6 Snow on their existing hardware for $50. (for most users there will be no need for it).

Together the parallel development of 10.5 Leopard and 10.6 Snow Leopard will mark the end of Apples support for the PPC line of computers.


Thoughts?

[smfinlay]

Well, I'd rather take this rumour with a grain of salt. Can you imagine Steve Jobs doing a presentation about their new OS "no new features, but wait, it's fast and reliable! Oh, btw, no more PPC, sorry." I can't... :P

This is my thoughts exactly, I just can't get past it. A lot of people still use PPC and I don't see him cutting them all off. And I would think that they would include at least one or two new features, just to make it more attractive to someone who will be shelling out $130.

[Eric S.]

When are companies going to stop using the public who pay for a product as beta testers on uncooked 1.0 releases? From what I have learnt through buying Leopard (still use speedy and reliable Tiger by the way) is that it will take 5-6 updates (10.5.5–10.5.6) before I will feel confident in using it with all my applications.

Hmm, crazy thought - maybe like with any purchase, the consumer should research before buying, read reviews, blogs etc., read other users' experiences, get compatibility issue information, and never ever buy the first version of any product.

Nah, who am I kidding? :D

[valdore]

Thoughts?


I really don't believe Apple would ever do that. Their business strategy relies a great deal on hardware sales, and having the OS on any cheap PC would cannibalize Apple hardware.

[macFanDave]

Side note, that article has me really pumped about starting to learn Objective-C. Although it looks ugly as crap for a language, I appericate its power.

I thought so, too, when I first started ObjC (coming from a C background), but you will find it beautiful pretty soon. The code is practically self-documenting and that makes it very easy to read other people's code and your own old code.

You're gonna learn to love square brackets!

[SafariKC]

I really don't believe Apple would ever do that. Their business strategy relies a great deal on hardware sales, and having the OS on any cheap PC would cannibalize Apple hardware.

I really don't think it would. They are still the most beautiful machines out there. People who will buy for pretty, will still do so. Most current apple customers will do so as well.

They most likely have a line of Touch Products that will be specific to them anyways.. and basic commodity desktop machines, just aren't worth making anymore for Apple. Notice they haven't bothered to update the Mini. No one can even tough the iMac. And the TON of folks out there with Vista Certified machines which can't run Vista is huge. Get 10M of them to play with Snow this year and apple just took in $1.3B just in OS X licenses. If each of them gets a few apps from the OS X App Store, and some of them subscribe the Me. There is quite a compelling case for a new business model for apple.

I think there's plenty of new models where they could make up the cash. It's growing in Scale - making less per machine they power up front but pulling in more over time.

This is the year of any they can really squash MS's lead in the OS market. Vista wavering, Windows 7 starting to get out there in the news... Apple has a great market built by the iPhone that's only going to grow with 3G. They can't open enough stores in all the locations where iPhones are sold, the easiest way to hit them with OSX distribution deals is through partners such as Intel and hardware manufactures.

If they keep the Dev tools and delivery methods flowing.. i suspect the app store can bring in quite a bit of revenue for Apple... not only on the iPhone side, but also on the OS X side as well.

[nimbuscloud]

So here is what I think we are about to see at the Keynote: (Maybe i missed them, but... I'm surprised not to see any comments such as these yet in any other threads about Snow)

Me service to be OS X Only (with a yearly sub fee to use it)

Application Store for OS X (with apple getting a kick back on every app sold for OSX)


One More Thing . . .

We've ported a few of our major applications over to Windows.. and as it turns out, while people really enjoy having iTunes and now Safari to use while in Windows... what people really want is to use these great apps in OS X.

Folks are really not happy about Vista.. Folks are even more unhappy about Vista Certified machines that can't run the full Vista Experience, and the fractured and confusing experience of Ultimate, Business, Home, 64, etc.

Hell has frozen over yet again...

Introducing Snow Leopard: Generic X86 version of Leopard to become available that will run on ANY Intel powered Vista Compatible Intel Machine... $129.. Available on Machines THIS holiday season from Dell, HP, Asus, etc. Available Retail for everyone with Vista Compatible certified systems in January.

We've partnered with ALL major Intel partners to give full driver support in 10.6 Snow Leopard for all Vista Compatible systems ever sold with the MS Vista Logo Program. All of these users will have the same user experience, the same great pre-bundled applications that Mac users have grown to love... right out of the box.

Steve will bring out Michael Dell... and show that all of the demo's he showed during the keynote were done using a Dell desktop. Dell will talk about the opportunity users now have. Steve will thank Michael and then review the keynote notes.

People will be loving iPhone all over the world, now they can love OS X all over the world much faster than Apple alone currently has the ability to get out there.

With Me services and the OS X App Store the migration will be profitable, a revenue stream will be there for Apple even though they didn't sell the hardware. They will remind that iLife/iWork can be bought and will run on the 10.6 Snow Leopard just as wonderfully as they do today on 10.5.

Apple won't exit the hardware business. The Apple store is a great model the industrial design that core Apple customers love, and the industry as a whole admires. Mac Pro, iMac and MacBook/MacBook Pro line will stay. Mac Mini will go away, instead of bringing your own Keyboard, Monitor, and Mouse ... you can bring any vista compatible machine along for the ride :-)

Bootcamp will be useable on these machines as well to help with the install and migration. Rosetta will be the only missing piece for the Snow Leopard build. No PPC applications will run on the Snow Mac. (Which isn't an issue for most folks with all major applications now being ported to Intel)

Checkmate!

I think with this move, Apple could more than double their worldwide market share in 1 year. 10.5 Leopard will stay up to day and have feature parity with 10.6 Snow Leopard (with the exception of features that require new hardware), although Snow will no longer support installs on PPC machines.

10.5 Leopard users can upgrade to 10.6 Snow on their existing hardware for $50. (for most users there will be no need for it).

Together the parallel development of 10.5 Leopard and 10.6 Snow Leopard will mark the end of Apples support for the PPC line of computers.


Thoughts?

That sounds pretty cool, but what happens to the "Mac market"? Why buy a Mac when you can get a cheap PC and put Snow Leopard on it?

I honestly don't want it to happen, but it sounds so crazy that it's almost believable. I want OS X to stay on beautiful machines! lol

:apple:

[jlewis2k1]

If apple were to drop carbon from the system, theres nothing stopping them from creating a plugin to help those apps that still use carbon. kind of how they had rosetta.

[SafariKC]

That sounds pretty cool, but what happens to the "Mac market"? Why buy a Mac when you can get a cheap PC and put Snow Leopard on it?

I honestly don't want it to happen, but it sounds so crazy that it's almost believable. I want OS X to stay on beautiful machines! lol

:apple:

I think the Mac Market will still thrive. There are enough people (such as you and I) who love beautiful machines, can afford them, and will buy them, that there's still quite a large market for the Apple machines.

[tony-in-japan]

Hmm, crazy thought - maybe like with any purchase, the consumer should research before buying, read reviews, blogs etc., read other users' experiences, get compatibility issue information, and never ever buy the first version of any product.

Nah, who am I kidding? :D

I couldn’t do any research, as I had to...

...get my free Leopard t-shirt on the day of release! :)

(sorry, yes, my brain was contaminated with Jobbo’s RDF)

[Tosser]

Forgiveable. At least far less annoying than dropping FW support. They're not really iPods really - they're fully functional computers which run a 'proper' version of OS X...

And as such, they should be able to store, say, a document without the need to run it through iTunes. It's not even close to forgiveable.


Mind you, Macs have got target disk mode.
We're talking about a semi-capable music player based on flash memory. THey deliberately crippled it, so one couldn't do it without going through iTunes. Hell, even the crappiest taiwanese usbstickplayer can do it. It doesn't matter if Macs have target disk mode: It's not likely I will pocket my MBP, now is it?


I would imagine the only reason they didn't implement it is to hinder hackers.
Ah, yes. That would explain why our Macs have Target disk mode …
Seriously, even a cheap ass phone can be used as a mass storage device. PDA's, many times more capable than the iPhone - ALL of them can be used in disk mode. It's not about security and what have you. It's about getting people tied into iTunes.


However, it really irks me that I can't just drag 'n drop music to my iPhone like I can to the 'Pods...

Yes amongst other things.

However, even such a basic feature, they purposely removed it, all in order to tie people into a _business scheme_, nothing more, nothing less.

But the real point is, that unlike someone (can't remember who) said, they have indeed crippled their devices over time, removing features, even if they did add other "features".

[commander.data]

I haven't read the previous 17 pages so I don't know if someone already mentioned this but:

Do you think that rumors of 10.6 being 64-bit Intel only could be because the kernel is going to be 64-bit? If they were moving the current 32-bit kernel to 64-bit, it would make sense to focus only on the Intel implementation and devote more time to optimization. Still a 64-bit kernel would require new device drivers, and it seems kind of cruel to spring this on device manufactures at WWDC giving them only 6 months if 10.6 is launching in January.

[nuckinfutz]

I haven't read the previous 17 pages so I don't know if someone already mentioned this but:

Do you think that rumors of 10.6 being 64-bit Intel only could be because the kernel is going to be 64-bit? If they were moving the current 32-bit kernel to 64-bit, it would make sense to focus only on the Intel implementation and devote more time to optimization. Still a 64-bit kernel would require new device drivers, and it seems kind of cruel to spring this on device manufactures at WWDC giving them only 6 months if 10.6 is launching in January.

The whole 64-bit only thing is probably the weakest part of the rumor. It just doesn't make sense to expend so much effort when only the heavier applications need more RAM addressing.

The PPC thing is more plausible given that Apple said this wouldn't be a feature laden release so many on PPC would probably just stay on Leopard and skip 10.6.

[stephenli]

I guess it really is time to start thinking about retiring the ol' G5 :(

nooooo
my G5 quad just work fine right now...
but i will retire my powermac G4, Mac Mini G4 and ibook G4...sad...very sad indeed.

[aLoC]

Cocoa wrappers for everything? One thing I like about OS X is that they use a given technology where it works best, instead of trying to it everywhere like some kind of "golden hammer."

For example OO is exceptionally good for GUI, collection and device driver libraries, due to the natural inheritence hierarchy in these. But for other things, such an simple opening and reading of files, procedural style APIs are just fine. OO wrappers just for the sake of OO wrappers is being purist instead of practical. Reminds me of Java where even your main() function has to be a method of an object!

[Quillz]

People who buy pretty machines that are extremely overpriced will continue to do so.
Mac OS X is never going to be available on non-Apple hardware. Any sane person would never pay more for an iMac when they could get a cheap PC for a thousand dollars cheaper that also runs a fully supported version of Mac OS X.

Apple killed the clone market 11 years ago for a reason.

[heisetax]

Pretty sure Apple promised they wouldn't be dropping support for PPC in 10.6.

Then again, they also promised they'd never use integrated GPUs... Or drop features from the iPod. :D

Just remember that Steve Jobs is more like a used car salesman that anything else I can think of. He may be a good used car salesman, but a used ar salesman by any count. That means that he can do anything he wants to to make the sale. Keeping his word is just one of those things that he doesn't need to do in his opinion.

Bill the TaxMan
Mac User since the first Mac 128 in 1984

[mrwheet]

Apple machines aren't "extremely overpriced", by any means. A hand-built equivalent to the current Mac Pro would have cost about the same in parts, at the time of the Mac Pro's release. When I bought my Mac Pro I priced out the alternative of building a PC, since I was already running a hackintosh while waiting for the release of the Penryns. The only machines that are probably overpriced are the Macbook Pro and Macbook Air. The Macbook, and iMac (for which there isn't really a vanilla PC alternative) are very reasonably priced, and as I pointed out above, the Mac Pro is about on par. Now, obviously, the PC equivalents will drop in price quickly, as the parts become more widely available. But still...

This whole *super exclusive, super expensive* thing with Macs has long passed. Maybe 5 years ago, but not today.

--------------------

As for the all Cocoa thing, I'd LOVE to see Cocoa wrappers around the Core Audio stuff. I'd finally get into writing fully native Mac software if that happened!

w.

[heisetax]

Mac OS X is never going to be available on non-Apple hardware. Any sane person would never pay more for an iMac when they could get a cheap PC for a thousand dollars cheaper that also runs a fully supported version of Mac OS X.

Apple killed the clone market 11 years ago for a reason.

Steve Jobs killed the Clones because the Clone makers produced a better computer at a lower price at a faster schedule. One excuse was because the Clones took away the high end Mac market. But remember what Steve Jobs did. He introduced the iMac (the low end) & killed the PowerMac 9500/9600 high end replacement. So for some of us he is still operating things with only giving out what he wants you to know at that time. When things change he rewrites history as he sees fit.

Bill the TaxMan

[tbohlsennswssrg]

Sorry to hijack the thread :p but

Linux is a Unix - Like System it uses similar commands to Mac OS X

[Quillz]

Sorry to hijack the thread :p but

Linux is a Unix - Like System it uses similar commands to Mac OS X
Mac OS X is an officially certified Unix operating system, similar to Solaris. Linux is Unix-like, yes. They are similar but not the same.

[DiamondMac]

Macs can continue being "over-priced" as long as they continue being as stable as a rock with incredible performance years after purchase

I couldnt get either out of my "cheap" PC's for years

[kryszrich]

I really hope they don't drop PPC support just yet. I have too many programs that need the support. Eventually i will be upgrading those programs but money doesn't grow on trees. So if they do, I will stick to Leopard. Or else I will need to find at least $2,000 to buy new software. Bummer. It may be for the better in the long run. But this is all too soon.

[jacobj]

Speed and stability are really what's needed. I applaud Apple for focusing on the bread and butter of the OS instead of trying to tack on more flashy features to sell the sizzle.

Only they should not charge their users for it: we expect that from our OS and not as an optional upgrade. Come on, I'd rather wait for 10.6 and get all the way up to 10.5.20 than be charged for that. If microsoft charged for Service Packs that aim to do much of the same, we'd all be screaming about the outrage. Christ, what are we to Apple|: customers or an investment capital resource?

Board meeting:

CFO: We need more capital Steve.
Jobs: How's OSX 10.5.5 doing?
COO: Pretty much there.
Jobs: Well strip out all the really good stuff, and I'll market it next week as 10.6 and we'll release in Jan. CFO, how's that for you?
CFO: Our liquidity is good until at least then.
Jobs: Done deal then.

[Squid7085]

So here is what I think we are about to see at the Keynote: (Maybe i missed them, but... I'm surprised not to see any comments such as these yet in any other threads about Snow)

Me service to be OS X Only (with a yearly sub fee to use it)

Application Store for OS X (with apple getting a kick back on every app sold for OSX)


One More Thing . . .

We've ported a few of our major applications over to Windows.. and as it turns out, while people really enjoy having iTunes and now Safari to use while in Windows... what people really want is to use these great apps in OS X.

Folks are really not happy about Vista.. Folks are even more unhappy about Vista Certified machines that can't run the full Vista Experience, and the fractured and confusing experience of Ultimate, Business, Home, 64, etc.

Hell has frozen over yet again...

Introducing Snow Leopard: Generic X86 version of Leopard to become available that will run on ANY Intel powered Vista Compatible Intel Machine... $129.. Available on Machines THIS holiday season from Dell, HP, Asus, etc. Available Retail for everyone with Vista Compatible certified systems in January.

We've partnered with ALL major Intel partners to give full driver support in 10.6 Snow Leopard for all Vista Compatible systems ever sold with the MS Vista Logo Program. All of these users will have the same user experience, the same great pre-bundled applications that Mac users have grown to love... right out of the box.

Steve will bring out Michael Dell... and show that all of the demo's he showed during the keynote were done using a Dell desktop. Dell will talk about the opportunity users now have. Steve will thank Michael and then review the keynote notes.

People will be loving iPhone all over the world, now they can love OS X all over the world much faster than Apple alone currently has the ability to get out there.

With Me services and the OS X App Store the migration will be profitable, a revenue stream will be there for Apple even though they didn't sell the hardware. They will remind that iLife/iWork can be bought and will run on the 10.6 Snow Leopard just as wonderfully as they do today on 10.5.

Apple won't exit the hardware business. The Apple store is a great model the industrial design that core Apple customers love, and the industry as a whole admires. Mac Pro, iMac and MacBook/MacBook Pro line will stay. Mac Mini will go away, instead of bringing your own Keyboard, Monitor, and Mouse ... you can bring any vista compatible machine along for the ride :-)

Bootcamp will be useable on these machines as well to help with the install and migration. Rosetta will be the only missing piece for the Snow Leopard build. No PPC applications will run on the Snow Mac. (Which isn't an issue for most folks with all major applications now being ported to Intel)

Checkmate!

I think with this move, Apple could more than double their worldwide market share in 1 year. 10.5 Leopard will stay up to day and have feature parity with 10.6 Snow Leopard (with the exception of features that require new hardware), although Snow will no longer support installs on PPC machines.

10.5 Leopard users can upgrade to 10.6 Snow on their existing hardware for $50. (for most users there will be no need for it).

Together the parallel development of 10.5 Leopard and 10.6 Snow Leopard will mark the end of Apples support for the PPC line of computers.


Thoughts?

I had a nightmare similar to that one time.

[DMann]

So here is what I think we are about to see at the Keynote: (Maybe i missed them, but... I'm surprised not to see any comments such as these yet in any other threads about Snow)

Me service to be OS X Only (with a yearly sub fee to use it)

Application Store for OS X (with apple getting a kick back on every app sold for OSX)


One More Thing . . .

We've ported a few of our major applications over to Windows.. and as it turns out, while people really enjoy having iTunes and now Safari to use while in Windows... what people really want is to use these great apps in OS X.

Folks are really not happy about Vista.. Folks are even more unhappy about Vista Certified machines that can't run the full Vista Experience, and the fractured and confusing experience of Ultimate, Business, Home, 64, etc.

Hell has frozen over yet again...

Introducing Snow Leopard: Generic X86 version of Leopard to become available that will run on ANY Intel powered Vista Compatible Intel Machine... $129.. Available on Machines THIS holiday season from Dell, HP, Asus, etc. Available Retail for everyone with Vista Compatible certified systems in January.

We've partnered with ALL major Intel partners to give full driver support in 10.6 Snow Leopard for all Vista Compatible systems ever sold with the MS Vista Logo Program. All of these users will have the same user experience, the same great pre-bundled applications that Mac users have grown to love... right out of the box.

Steve will bring out Michael Dell... and show that all of the demo's he showed during the keynote were done using a Dell desktop. Dell will talk about the opportunity users now have. Steve will thank Michael and then review the keynote notes.

People will be loving iPhone all over the world, now they can love OS X all over the world much faster than Apple alone currently has the ability to get out there.

With Me services and the OS X App Store the migration will be profitable, a revenue stream will be there for Apple even though they didn't sell the hardware. They will remind that iLife/iWork can be bought and will run on the 10.6 Snow Leopard just as wonderfully as they do today on 10.5.

Apple won't exit the hardware business. The Apple store is a great model the industrial design that core Apple customers love, and the industry as a whole admires. Mac Pro, iMac and MacBook/MacBook Pro line will stay. Mac Mini will go away, instead of bringing your own Keyboard, Monitor, and Mouse ... you can bring any vista compatible machine along for the ride :-)

Bootcamp will be useable on these machines as well to help with the install and migration. Rosetta will be the only missing piece for the Snow Leopard build. No PPC applications will run on the Snow Mac. (Which isn't an issue for most folks with all major applications now being ported to Intel)

Checkmate!

I think with this move, Apple could more than double their worldwide market share in 1 year. 10.5 Leopard will stay up to day and have feature parity with 10.6 Snow Leopard (with the exception of features that require new hardware), although Snow will no longer support installs on PPC machines.

10.5 Leopard users can upgrade to 10.6 Snow on their existing hardware for $50. (for most users there will be no need for it).

Together the parallel development of 10.5 Leopard and 10.6 Snow Leopard will mark the end of Apples support for the PPC line of computers.


Thoughts?

User experience suffers when running on substandard/mismatched components - this would create a path toward world domination for OS X though.

[djellison]

I had a nightmare similar to that one time.

Why do you consider more OSX users a nightmare?

[MattInOz]

Board meeting:

CFO: We need more capital Steve.
Jobs: How's OSX 10.5.5 doing?
COO: Pretty much there.
Jobs: Well strip out all the really good stuff, and I'll market it next week as 10.6 and we'll release in Jan. CFO, how's that for you?
CFO: Our liquidity is good until at least then.
Jobs: Done deal then.

With Apple's cash reserves i can't see Liquidity being an issue any time soon.

[Squid7085]

Why do you consider more OSX users a nightmare?

In all honesty, I want Apple to grow, but not that big. I like the idea of staying in the minority. With more people, as seen with the iPod, being a Mac user really loses its flare. Even now, I am no longer the only person in the coffee shop with a Mac. I once paraded around my PowerBook with pride. Either way, letting Mac OS X boot on every machine ruins any "mac community" Then we will start needing things like serials and activation. The whole "Only runs on a Mac" is really built in serials and activation. Apple makes their money on hardware, while I doubt it will hurt the hardware sales much. Its just something I rather not see. Hell, even owning a Mac anymore doesn't mean you are a "Mac User" I once went up to a guy who had a MacBook and asked how he liked OS X, he had never used OS X in his life, the machine came pre-installed with only Windows. *Sigh*

[3247]

Mac OS X is an officially certified Unix operating system, similar to Solaris. Linux is Unix-like, yes. They are similar but not the same.Well, the biggest difference is not the certification but the fact that Linux is derived from System V with a lot of GNU (GNU's not Unix, i.e. not officially) whereas Mac OS X is derived from BSD (mostly NetBSD).
The other big difference is that Mac OS X's UI is completly proprietary (i.e. NOT Unix) whereas Linux has different UI choices (GNOME, KDE, …), which are built on the standard X-Window protocol.

But now back to something completly different…

"Snow Leopard" would make sense for a free or cheap update that adds a lot of small improvements but no completly new features, i.e. just a "polished" Leopard. However, it might include features originally planned for Leopard - such as running a bootcamp installation while MacOS sleeps.

[bed]

In all honesty, I want Apple to grow, but not that big. I like the idea of staying in the minority. With more people, as seen with the iPod, being a Mac user really loses its flare. Even now, I am no longer the only person in the coffee shop with a Mac. I once paraded around my PowerBook with pride. Either way, letting Mac OS X boot on every machine ruins any "mac community" Then we will start needing things like serials and activation. The whole "Only runs on a Mac" is really built in serials and activation. Apple makes their money on hardware, while I doubt it will hurt the hardware sales much. Its just something I rather not see. Hell, even owning a Mac anymore doesn't mean you are a "Mac User" I once went up to a guy who had a MacBook and asked how he liked OS X, he had never used OS X in his life, the machine came pre-installed with only Windows. *Sigh*

So you just want to be an elitist?

[jacobj]

With Apple's cash reserves i can't see Liquidity being an issue any time soon.


That wasn't the point. But fair comment!

[Loge]

The whole 64-bit only thing is probably the weakest part of the rumor. It just doesn't make sense to expend so much effort when only the heavier applications need more RAM addressing.


Agreed, and I don't see them dropping support at this stage for the first generation Intel Macs which use the 32 bit processors.

[odedia]

Wow, calm down, did you even read what the article said?



It makes sense for it to be Intel only. I hope it will be, so that they can remove all of the PPC code. As for the 'no new features' thing, I don't mind, as long as Leopard has Resolution Independence by then.

This actually makes sense. During WWDC 07', they requested from developers to be ready in so many months for the resolution independence enhancement.

[HyperZboy]

I own a technically supported Power Mac G4 - a Sawtooth w/ Sonnet 1.0 GHz CPU upgrade - and Leopard runs just fine. I've moved from 10.5.1 to 10.5.2 and now 10.5.3 with no major problems. Performance is comparable to Tiger.

And I'm guessing you have an original graphics card in the Sawtooth that does not attempt Core Image effects? Original hard drive too? Try adding additional hard drives and see how Leopard reacts. You won't be happy, trust me.

And, I'm sorry, but the "Performance is comparable to Tiger" comment on PowerPC Macs, especially G4s is unbelievably laughable and I own lots of Macs, some Leopard supported, some not but nonetheless with Leopard installed. From my experience, I just find that too hard to believe. Sorry.

[Lastaria]

I think it is getting time to drop the cat theme. If you are having to start using Snow Leopard you know you are exhausting the possible names.

How about ending on Lion? One of the most recognised and prestigious of all the cats.

[Krevnik]

One More Thing . . .

We've ported a few of our major applications over to Windows.. and as it turns out, while people really enjoy having iTunes and now Safari to use while in Windows... what people really want is to use these great apps in OS X.

Folks are really not happy about Vista.. Folks are even more unhappy about Vista Certified machines that can't run the full Vista Experience, and the fractured and confusing experience of Ultimate, Business, Home, 64, etc.

Hell has frozen over yet again...

Introducing Snow Leopard: Generic X86 version of Leopard to become available that will run on ANY Intel powered Vista Compatible Intel Machine... $129.. Available on Machines THIS holiday season from Dell, HP, Asus, etc. Available Retail for everyone with Vista Compatible certified systems in January.

We've partnered with ALL major Intel partners to give full driver support in 10.6 Snow Leopard for all Vista Compatible systems ever sold with the MS Vista Logo Program. All of these users will have the same user experience, the same great pre-bundled applications that Mac users have grown to love... right out of the box.

Steve will bring out Michael Dell... and show that all of the demo's he showed during the keynote were done using a Dell desktop. Dell will talk about the opportunity users now have. Steve will thank Michael and then review the keynote notes.

People will be loving iPhone all over the world, now they can love OS X all over the world much faster than Apple alone currently has the ability to get out there.

With Me services and the OS X App Store the migration will be profitable, a revenue stream will be there for Apple even though they didn't sell the hardware. They will remind that iLife/iWork can be bought and will run on the 10.6 Snow Leopard just as wonderfully as they do today on 10.5.

Apple won't exit the hardware business. The Apple store is a great model the industrial design that core Apple customers love, and the industry as a whole admires. Mac Pro, iMac and MacBook/MacBook Pro line will stay. Mac Mini will go away, instead of bringing your own Keyboard, Monitor, and Mouse ... you can bring any vista compatible machine along for the ride :-)

Bootcamp will be useable on these machines as well to help with the install and migration. Rosetta will be the only missing piece for the Snow Leopard build. No PPC applications will run on the Snow Mac. (Which isn't an issue for most folks with all major applications now being ported to Intel)

Checkmate!

I think with this move, Apple could more than double their worldwide market share in 1 year. 10.5 Leopard will stay up to day and have feature parity with 10.6 Snow Leopard (with the exception of features that require new hardware), although Snow will no longer support installs on PPC machines.

10.5 Leopard users can upgrade to 10.6 Snow on their existing hardware for $50. (for most users there will be no need for it).

Together the parallel development of 10.5 Leopard and 10.6 Snow Leopard will mark the end of Apples support for the PPC line of computers.


Thoughts?

While Apple will have to do this at one point if they want to replace Microsoft as the de facto OS... I don't think the time is now.

To make clones work, it is most effective if you have a critical mass of demand and users. Because once Apple starts selling software on generic hardware, the software will have to be able to support itself through sales. Otherwise your revenue shrinks as the market grows through cannibalization. Even if Apple can survive this cannibalization, they will take hell from shareholders for throwing away money.

So two things have to happen:
1) They reach a certain level in marketshare. Enough that the growth in software sales will at least balance out the loss in hardware sales. So they can't do this too early, or too late for it to make business sense.
2) They need to see Mac hardware sales reaching a plateau. They have no reason to make the OS generic if sales growth of their hardware continues to outpace the market in general.

[Zwhaler]

Interesting, nobody thought it would be named Snow Leopard. Regardless, I wont be buying this one. Im waiting for Lynx or whatever comes next.

[Squid7085]

I think it is getting time to drop the cat theme. If you are having to start using Snow Leopard you know you are exhausting the possible names.

How about ending on Lion? One of the most recognised and prestigious of all the cats.

I am sure Steve has a a team put together to make the decision on which species of animals to exploit next. I can't even come up with an idea. The cats, at least to me, have yet to get old. There are still some pretty good cat names out there.

[queshy]

I predict OS X 10.6 Cougar. Snow leopard is too weird....

Edit: Although snow leopard sounds weird, it could very well be true. Remember the day before MWSF we were all like MacBook Air? WTF? What a dumb name! Now it sort of works after hearing it so much!
I'm not saying that I think Snow Leopard is a good name or anything, but we have to acknowledge it's a possibility.

Also, we need to think about the Apple homepage for WWDC...there won't be two HUGE things. Remember last year after WWDC the new Leopard page they made? That was designed to steal the thunder. Apple won't give MANY details about its upcoming OS while at the same time trying to show off the new iPhone. Both of these things will be huge, and so 10.6 most surely won't be thoroughly discussed about on Monday. Just my thoughts...take w/ grain of salt.
/edit

[johnnyjibbs]

I've only just seen this and it seems mad to me. It's WAY too early to ditch PPC (although I've now upgraded) and, if they get rid of Carbon altogether, most of the major programs will not run at all (including iTunes :D;) ).

This would be mad and severely limit the number of people upgrading, therefore creating far more of a two-tier system of users than as of current (for those that don't pay for Tiger, Leopard, etc).

Not to mention that the new Windows is slowly progressing and looks like it could actually be quite good (although I know it won't) - which means that Apple needs to add loads of 'cool' features to keep up. Nobody notices the 'under the hood' improvements - it's simply not a good enough incentive for the average person to upgrade. And speed/stability is something that should be there in Leopard (it's almost there with each 10.5.X release).

Unless the upgrade is free, which is a possibility.

Totally nuts. And too early. Way to early. :eek:

[boer]

Here's the real scoop: Remember the invite with the split Golden Gate? It means Mac OS X will be split into 2 distinct lines. The current Leopard will not be immediately discontinued or replaced. Instead, a Snow Leopard, lighter version of Leopard, will be introduced. This lighter version of OS X will be aimed to consume less power, take a smaller footprint, support mobility in best ways possible, and be optimized for touch interfacing. Apple will use the Snow Leopard in mobile devices such as phones and iPods, tablets and perhaps even some sub-pro laptops. Leopard will continue to be the desktop OS X standard.

You read it here first.

[psychofreak]

What if its the Apple version of Ubuntu Netbook Remix, and needs Cocoa touch for a touch operating system?

[MacSimoPark]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Ars can also confirm the expected release target of January 2009 as well as a focus on speed and stability:

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/06/04/mac-os-x-10-6-called-snow-leopard-all-cocoa/)

Great. There are issues with expose and the interface in general. I can't wait for a proper re-design of the proverbial wheel.

[nick9191]

I don't get this, surely if Apple keep changing the way for developers to write their applications (think 64bit Carbon and Photoshop), why should they keep developing them for such a small platform?

[psychofreak]

I don't get this, surely if Apple keep changing the way for developers to write their applications (think 64bit Carbon and Photoshop), why should they keep developing them for such a small platform?

Because its no longer a small platform.

[entropi]

Mac OS X will be split into 2 distinct lines
now, that makes sense - light as a snowflake!

(first post! after ages of lurking :) )

[belovedmonster]

The fact that Ars Technica who never usually get in on the Mac rumors game are saying they have details about this I think it's simply gotta be true. Some new sources just only print the truth.

I really like the idea of calling it Snow Leopard. It clearly stating in the name that this is just an enhanced new version of Leopard rather than a new OS. I dont think they will charge full price for it because of this.

[nuckinfutz]

I don't get this, surely if Apple keep changing the way for developers to write their applications (think 64bit Carbon and Photoshop), why should they keep developing them for such a small platform?


Hahahahahahahahahahahfhahahahahahahhaa

Apple's Market Cap as of June 5th 2008 163 Billion

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahhahah

Folks we have a new definition of small

[nick9191]

Macs marketshare <10%
Windows marketshare >90%

That is small.

And unless these professionals need Mac only applications as well such as Final Cut, surely the majority will be running Windows, due to the ability to build a small, upgradeable, powerful computer, for peanuts.

I ask again, why keep developing for a platform if they keep changing the requirements every few years.

[nuckinfutz]

The fact that Ars Technica who never usually get in on the Mac rumors game are saying they have details about this I think it's simply gotta be true. Some new sources just only print the truth.

I really like the idea of calling it Snow Leopard. It clearly stating in the name that this is just an enhanced new version of Leopard rather than a new OS. I dont think they will charge full price for it because of this.

I've long since learned to avoid outright denial when reading a rumor regarding Macs. Most people tend to think that Apple will simply following the path set by another company when in truth a Hallmark of Apple is doing things that other companies didn't have the foresight to do.

When the iMac first shipped people couldn't believe Apple shipped a computer without a floppy drive.

Being a smaller market than Wintel Apple's able to move in directions that Microsoft cannot follow. PPC support may indeed be axed in 10.6 or it could remain but what's clear is that time is running out for PPC and Carbon is all but in stasis.

I think Apple's on the right path. End the confusion...move the platform to Intel for safe haven and devote the resources towards leveraging Cocoa and improvements in compiler technology. In above all remember you cannot please all the people all of the time.

Macs marketshare <10%
Windows marketshare >90%

That is small.

And unless these professionals need Mac only applications as well such as Final Cut, surely the majority will be running Windows, due to the ability to build a small, upgradeable, powerful computer, for peanuts.

I ask again, why keep developing for a platform if they keep changing the requirements every few years.

Where are you getting your numbers from?

Can you tell me what comprises the Windows marketshare? I.E how are White Boxes, and DiY parts accounted for? If a Server runs in a virtualized environment how is that accounted for since it could be running a plethora of OS including Redhat, Suse or more. What percentage of Windows boxes are used for server duty versus consumer or business level?

Thanks

[nimbuscloud]

Here's the real scoop: Remember the invite with the split Golden Gate? It means Mac OS X will be split into 2 distinct lines. The current Leopard will not be immediately discontinued or replaced. Instead, a Snow Leopard, lighter version of Leopard, will be introduced. This lighter version of OS X will be aimed to consume less power, take a smaller footprint, support mobility in best ways possible, and be optimized for touch interfacing. Apple will use the Snow Leopard in mobile devices such as phones and iPods, tablets and perhaps even some sub-pro laptops. Leopard will continue to be the desktop OS X standard.

You read it here first.

I believe this. Great post.

:apple:

[Manic Mouse]

Maybe Apple are taking a leaf out of Intel with their "tick tock" approach. One release of an OS (ie: Leopard) will introduce a pile of new features while the next will be a code clean-up with possible minor features added in (like resolution independence or ZFS).

I'm sure the OS could do with a big clean-up, after the PPC to Intel transition and all that. They'll probably also be laying the foundation for multitouch in the OS.

And the name "snow leopard" is a perfect name for a cleaned up version of Leopard.

[w0ngbr4d]

If apple were to drop carbon from the system, theres nothing stopping them from creating a plugin to help those apps that still use carbon. kind of how they had rosetta.

Makes perfect sense to me. They had Rosetta to handle the transition from PowerPC to Intel. Why not have something to help out while transitioning from Carbon to Cocoa?

If this rumor is true, who's to say that they haven't talked to Microsoft and Adobe about this? Considering they would be under NDA, they couldn't make any public statements about it. Giving them a Rosetta for Carbon would allow them to make a new version while users would be able to the existing version. (I don't know the tech details of Cocoa v. Carbon, so please excuse my ignorance if this wouldn't be possible.)

[xbjllb]

Then there's always "Cocaine Kitty"... can run commercials with a Smirnoff ad playboy bunny circa 1968 in a white fur thong bikini cozying up to the "Hi, I'm a Mac" guy while the PC Bill Gates clone is acosted by Ruth Buzzi reprising her "Gladys Ormphby" character and hitting him over the head with her purse.

Steve, you know where to send the check... better yet, just send a MacPro that can author, burn, and play GD blu-ray video discs and an upgraded cinema display WITHOUT a glossy screen...:apple:

[Sweetfeld28]

I have not read up a lot on the 10.6 rumors but i don't see it likely that they will be dropping PPC entirely. I can see them dropping the G4 but not the G5. I mean really, there are Quad core G5 still out there that should still be able to run the next major release of the OS. I see 10.6 being PPC and Intel but 10.7 moving to Intel only..



My thoughts exactly. I could see Apple saying something like: Any G5, or Intel based Mac with Firewire. I couldn't see them doing away with the G5's just yet, they at least have a 64 bit architecture which could handle a more advanced OS X.

[GroundLoop]

I cant see the name (Snow Leopard) at all.
But thats just me:confused:

I kind of like the name in the context of what the rumor says will happen with this "update".

Snow = clean, fresh, natural
Leopard = what we currently have on our machines

So we are getting a clean version of 10.5 without all of the overhead that comes with legacy platform support. It's not for everyone, but the ones that can take advantage of it will get a much better version of Leopard.

I just hope that it is a free upgrade (like 10.0 to 10.1 was).

Hickman

[kallur]

Sorry for not reading the thread completely before posting, but don't you think that "snow" might refer to updated user interface, to new theme. Smt like the curret system is Aqua Leopard and forthcoming is Snow Leopard.

[Kar98]

Ultimately, Steve Jobs will get whatever he wants and if putting PPC in a coffin at this WWDC is his wish, he'll get it. But he'll also alienate once again some very long-time Mac users like myself.

Well, let's put it this way: you haven't bought a new Mac since...when? So why would he care about hurting your feelings now?

[Kar98]

Here's the real scoop: Remember the invite with the split Golden Gate? It means Mac OS X will be split into 2 distinct lines.

Actually...it means Steve Jobs needs some bridgework done, so there'll be an extra hitherto unplanned for version of OSX to pay for that.

[SPUY767]

But does it make sense to do a speed and stability upgrade only? That sounds like a 10.5.X, not a 10.6! Has a new version of Mac OS (or Windows or a Linux distribution for that matter) ever been released with nothing new to offer? I think both the strange two words cat name and the lack of new features are both very unlikely...
::cough::Vista::cough::

[milo]

The G3 lacked a VMX/Altivec unit. It made sense to drop support for it because vectorized code simply could not run on it at all. The line between the G4/G5 is a lot thinner.

Of course. I was just saying that apple could easily drop support for G4 but keep G5 if they want, the notion that they couldn't do that since they're both PPC simply isn't true.

When the major version number changes, it usually means there's a major change in the product. If Apple were to go 64-bit Intel only with a completely new file system (say, ZFS), got rid of Carbon and went solely Cocoa, that's a major revision which would likely get the 11. version number.

Nah. They've already released an intel version, which is arguably just as big a change. The first digit of 10.x.x is more a branding thing at this point. We won't see 11 until they run out of numbers or do an absolutely radical rewrite of the OS, and this isn't either.

If all 10.6 brings to the table is better stability and more speed for 64 bit systems, then there is little incentive for Intel 32 bit systems and PPC systems to be upgraded.

I'd agree with that. What I worry is that we'll see apps that are 10.6 only - if apple dumps PPC and 32 bit for the OS, it will encourage app developers to do the same.

[louden]

I agree Apple has a history of defining new platforms, then abandoning them over time at the drop of a hat. While this is/should be concerning to third party developers, I think the general focus on cocoa and objective c is a pretty good move for the long run. I think it will enable Apple to do a better job of componentizing the OS.

Interestingly, isn't Microsoft doing the same thing with Windows 7? Trying to do a better job at componentizing the OS for potential new hardware platforms? Kind of like what they did with Windows Server 2008.

If I owned a third party dev shop, I'd feel much better about investing in Apple's OS for consumer apps as their market share will grow pretty quickly. From an enterprise perspective, they just can't knock off MS yet.

[milo]

No not really. I work on a few decently large applications that are mostly C++ based with a native Cocoa UI on the Mac and Win32/etc on Windows. It is IMHO easy to integrate C++ and Objective-C thanks to Objective-C++ even more so when using the 64b Objective-C runtime on Mac OS X 10.5 and later.

Well, you might consider it easy, but many devs don't. As I said, it was an oversimplification, but even with Objective C++, developers have to deal with new things where they simply had C++ before.

Apple machines aren't "extremely overpriced", by any means. A hand-built equivalent to the current Mac Pro would have cost about the same in parts, at the time of the Mac Pro's release. When I bought my Mac Pro I priced out the alternative of building a PC, since I was already running a hackintosh while waiting for the release of the Penryns. The only machines that are probably overpriced are the Macbook Pro and Macbook Air. The Macbook, and iMac (for which there isn't really a vanilla PC alternative) are very reasonably priced, and as I pointed out above, the Mac Pro is about on par. Now, obviously, the PC equivalents will drop in price quickly, as the parts become more widely available. But still...

The mini is overpriced as well, and I'd argue that you can get decent alternatives to the macbook and imac for cheaper. The MB and iMac aren't bad, but I'd say the only model that is really competitive right now is the Mac Pro.

Of course, some of the comments about macs being overpriced stem from Apple not having good budget and BTO options - you have to compare cheap PCs to pricier macs because apple just doesn't offer more frugal options.

Why do you consider more OSX users a nightmare?

The scary part isn't more OSX users, it's the huge drop in hardware sales that isn't offset by the increase in software sales. Especially when such a release would mean that not only could people buy a PC, they could easily pirate the OS, meaning apple makes nothing in those cases. I don't like it as a customer or a stockholder. And with market share rising every quarter, I don't think it's necessary - apple would be better served by a cautious expansion of their product line instead.

[petvas]

I think that this time the rumour sites have overdone it. Today we are reading that 10.5.4 will be ready by June 12th...
It's getting ridiculous...
I dont believe that Mac OS X 10.6 will be ready by January 2009. It will be by the end of the year. Leopard is still new, let's not forget that...
Power PC support won't go away so simple...
I don't know which idiots bring such rumours but they are definitely fake.

[Merriadok]

leopard seem like about being fast. but still, better to see..:cool:

[Canuckistan]

Hello,

I know next to nothing about operating systems, but I'm wondering if the talk of a version to stabilze the current version means that the current OS is unstable / unreliable??

Also,is installation of a new OS on an exisitng OS an easy porocedure... does it demand a lot of drive space and set up conflicts>

Thanks

[milo]

Interesting, nobody thought it would be named Snow Leopard.

For the record, some of us STILL don't think it will be called that.

Hahahahahahahahahahahfhahahahahahahhaa

Apple's Market Cap as of June 5th 2008 163 Billion

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahhahah

Folks we have a new definition of small

It is small in terms of the 5-7 percent market share.

My thoughts exactly. I could see Apple saying something like: Any G5, or Intel based Mac with Firewire. I couldn't see them doing away with the G5's just yet, they at least have a 64 bit architecture which could handle a more advanced OS X.

Except that wouldn't include the macbook air. ;)

Well, let's put it this way: you haven't bought a new Mac since...when? So why would he care about hurting your feelings now?

The intel transition was announced about three years ago. He should care about keeping people who bought before that happy since they're likely to keep buying a new mac every 4-6 years. You piss off customers, you lose them, and apple's not in a position to tell everyone who waits more than 3 years to upgrade to get lost.

[bluefido]

I think this is a fake rumour, do you think Apple would really drop Carbon and PowerPC support? Also I don't want to shell out another $130 for a new operating system.

I can see Apple dropping PowerPC support. It's bound to happen sooner or later. My gut says Carbon will continue to be supported for a bit longer, but I'm usually wrong about this kind of stuff. So we are all doomed.

[psychofreak]

My thoughts exactly. I could see Apple saying something like: Any G5, or Intel based Mac with Firewire. I couldn't see them doing away with the G5's just yet, they at least have a 64 bit architecture which could handle a more advanced OS X.
The problem with that is that it involves all the extra effort of making the OS UB, and only owners of iMac G5s and PM G5s will benefit.

[soLoredd]

I think that this time the rumour sites have overdone it. Today we are reading that 10.5.4 will be ready by June 12th...
It's getting ridiculous...
I dont believe that Mac OS X 10.6 will be ready by January 2009. It will be by the end of the year. Leopard is still new, let's not forget that...
Power PC support won't go away so simple...
I don't know which idiots bring such rumours but they are definitely fake.

I've been feeling that way for the past couple of weeks. Granted, I understand this is a Mac rumors site but, personally, I think a few people take these rumors as gospel.

[knightlie]

Hello,

I know next to nothing about operating systems, but I'm wondering if the talk of a version to stabilze the current version means that the current OS is unstable / unreliable??

Not really, no.

Also,is installation of a new OS on an exisitng OS an easy porocedure... does it demand a lot of drive space and set up conflicts

The OSX install is very straightforward.



Assuming any part of this rumour is true, I suspect Snow Leopard - if it exists - might be a codename for a future 10.5.x release. I can't see them trying to sell a new version with no new notable features - even Microsoft had to put some bells and whistles into Vista to make it look as if the consumer - rather than just the developer or media producers - was getting something new.

[commander.data]

The problem with that is that it involves all the extra effort of making the OS UB, and only owners of iMac G5s and PM G5s will benefit.
I thought the OS is already a Universal Binary so most of the hard work is done. It's just a matter if they want to maintain it as such.

Since we are on the matter of controversial ideas, how about them making 10.6 running on 64-bit computers only. So G5s and x64, still UB just no 32-bit. That would certainly put the emphasis on 64-bit Cocoa, while Carbon will still run in 32-bit compatibility mode as it always has on 64-bit processors but won't be further developed. Of course, that would put 32-bit Intel users in a lurch, although there are probably fewer of those than 64-bit Intel and G5 owners.

[benpatient]

so wait....are they finally admitting that Leopard needs major optimization and some serious rethinking in critical under-the-hood areas?

I bet they're going to roll the Adobe CS3 critical fixes for Acrobat and InDesign into 10.6 and make me buy it.

Sounds like a service pack to me. One that isn't a free download. Lame.

[milo]

so wait....are they finally admitting that Leopard needs major optimization and some serious rethinking in critical under-the-hood areas?

What do you mean finally? Pretty much EVERY OS (and major app) needs major optimization. It's an ongoing thing.

[BenRoethig]

They're going to charge people for "speed and stability"?

If and how much is still to be determined. Still, I think this is a very good idea. With all the new advances, Apple never really took the time to work on optimizing everything and work on some inefficiencies they never got around to fixing. Snow Leopard will be able to be able to provide a solid base to the presumably touch screen capable OSX 10.7

[DMann]

If and how much is still to be determined. Still, I think this is a very good idea. With all the new advances, Apple never really took the time to work on optimizing everything and work on some inefficiencies they never got around to fixing. Snow Leopard will be able to be able to provide a solid base to the presumably touch screen capable OSX 10.7

Hence the quantum numerical leap to 10.6

[TheSpaz]

I already use Leopard as a multi-touch platform all the time. I use my iPod touch to VNC into my computer and then I can move things around, click, type, zoom... do everything with touch... pretty cool! I can't wait for there to be an official VNC App on the iPhone App Store.

[Eric S.]

And I'm guessing you have an original graphics card in the Sawtooth that does not attempt Core Image effects? Original hard drive too? Try adding additional hard drives and see how Leopard reacts. You won't be happy, trust me.

I do not have the original graphics card; I got a Radeon 9800 Pro specifically so I could use functionality like Time Machine. As far as disk, I added a SATA drive and controller, primarily to overcome the 128 GB PATA limitation.

And, I'm sorry, but the "Performance is comparable to Tiger" comment on PowerPC Macs, especially G4s is unbelievably laughable and I own lots of Macs, some Leopard supported, some not but nonetheless with Leopard installed. From my experience, I just find that too hard to believe. Sorry.

Sorry to disappoint your lowered expectations, but as I have already stated Leopard runs fine and the performance is comparable to Tiger. As numerous user comments on lowendmac.com attest, this is a common experience even on G4s at CPU speeds as low as 450 MHz. I am not a serious gamer and do not do graphics-intensive stuff, but even under Tiger my system was not set up for that.

[Aranince]

If this is true...I like it! Gj Apple. I absolutely love the name!

[wrldwzrd89]

I already use Leopard as a multi-touch platform all the time. I use my iPod touch to VNC into my computer and then I can move things around, click, type, zoom... do everything with touch... pretty cool! I can't wait for there to be an official VNC App on the iPhone App Store.
Oh wow... maybe I should get an iPod touch. ;)

I hope 10.6 (or 10.7) makes multi-touch a mainstream Mac feature. That would be REALLY cool, and, for me at least, would make the new OS worth buying (yes, even if my current Mac doesn't support it, at least my new iDevices will).

As for the Intel-only speculation... I say not out of the question, but who knows? I wouldn't place a bet one way or the other - let me put it that way.

The dropping of Carbon? That's blatantly false. The original post has been updated to reflect this, in case everyone hasn't already noticed.

[BenRoethig]

As for the Intel-only speculation... I say not out of the question, but who knows? I wouldn't place a bet one way or the other - let me put it that way.

I would say very likely. Not having to worry about the myriad of G4/5 chipsets would be very good for optimizing the OS.

[Quillz]

::cough::Vista::cough::
Unless you're a blind troll, Vista did have many new features. The point still stands... There has yet to be a major OS upgrade that didn't feature something new. So I doubt that 10.6 will be nothing more than security/stability improvements. There needs to be something new to make it marketable and appealing to consumers.

[nuckinfutz]

It is small in terms of the 5-7 percent market share...


The intel transition was announced about three years ago. He should care about keeping people who bought before that happy since they're likely to keep buying a new mac every 4-6 years. You piss off customers, you lose them, and apple's not in a position to tell everyone who waits more than 3 years to upgrade to get lost.

Apple's share of desktop computing is most likely higher as browsing characteristics put Macs running Safari in higher numbers. I think people are constantly mislead by marketshare numbers and rarely do these numbers come with decent disclosure about how the numbers were tabulated.

Apple should certainly care about PPC owners but let's be honest. If 10.6 is indeed primarily stability and security improvements then PPC users aren't missing out on much. Yet ...we'll still hear the whines and moans from those who love being perpetually outraged.

[TheSpaz]

What does this mean for Rosetta? Does Rosetta stay and PPC machines are left out, or is Rosetta disappearing like Classic disappeared in Leopard?

[Slip]

For the love of god, stop playing guessing games. It's all common sense.

I'm fairly certain that's what this entire website's about. Just a hunch. :rolleyes:

But back on topic, I'm fairly content with what's rumoured, reliability and stability are always good and ditching all of the PPC code can't hurt, let's just hope it's not a full blown £85 update...

[karenflower]

Oh wow. My first ever Digg Front Page!!!!!!! :D *is so proud*

I think Snow Leopard is a beautiful name for 10.6. There seems to be a weather theme going on here. . snow, air. . what next, iPod sunshine? ;)

[TheSpaz]

Oh wow. My first ever Digg Front Page!!!!!!! :D *is so proud*

I think Snow Leopard is a beautiful name for 10.6. There seems to be a weather theme going on here. . snow, air. . what next, iPod sunshine? ;)

They called it "Air" because it's almost as light as air and the fact that it's based almost entirely of wireless connectivity.

[Manic Mouse]

What does this mean for Rosetta? Does Rosetta stay and PPC machines are left out, or is Rosetta disappearing like Classic disappeared in Leopard?

Well Rosetta has served it's purpose, I see no reason to keep it around. The more I think about this "OS spring clean" that 10.6 is supposed to be the better an idea it sounds. Stability, performance and the removal of obsolete code all sounds good to me.

[Mousse]

Here's the real scoop: Remember the invite with the split Golden Gate? It means Mac OS X will be split into 2 distinct lines. The current Leopard will not be immediately discontinued or replaced. Instead, a Snow Leopard, lighter version of Leopard, will be introduced.

That's possible, since the only remaining true big cats are Clouded Leopard, Bornean Clouded Leopard, Cougar (although technically Apple already used it twice with Puma 10.1 and Panther 10.3) and Lion. The two leopards would be the lite varient, while cougar and lion the full featured version. After that, they'll have to switch to small cat (Ocelot:cool: or Lynx:rolleyes:) or some other animal. Okay, I doubt Apple's going to fragment OSX the way MS did with Windows.:rolleyes: I highly doubt an OSX Lite for desktop computers.

On a different topic, I don't see why some people upgrade to the latest OS when they don't have to. I'm still running Tiger on my MacBook. All the programs I need runs fine on Tiger and the latest Leopard only programs doesn't have enough must have features to warrant an upgrade. Upgrade only if you have to and you'll be happy.:)

[milo]

Apple should certainly care about PPC owners but let's be honest. If 10.6 is indeed primarily stability and security improvements then PPC users aren't missing out on much. Yet ...we'll still hear the whines and moans from those who love being perpetually outraged.

To me it mainly depends on whether apps will start requiring 10.6. I'm fine with staying on Leopard if there are no new features, but not on missing out on app updates.

Well Rosetta has served it's purpose, I see no reason to keep it around.

People will want it if they still have apps that haven't been updated. Believe it or not, there are still a few things that haven't been updated yet.

[emulator]

People will want it if they still have apps that haven't been updated. Believe it or not, there are still a few things that haven't been updated yet.
well, then people should stay with 10.4 or 10.5

I just don't get it why people panic for Intel only OS. if you don't want to upgrade hw, just stay with 10.5. and in reality, point releases should have been minor updates anyway, apple feed everyone with their major release point versioning while it should not have been like that.

[milo]

well, then people should stay with 10.4 or 10.5


Not the best option when some apps aren't universal but others require the latest OS. Hopefully by the time 10.6 ships, everything I need will be universal.

But this is getting off topic, the rumor doesn't say they're dropping rosetta, does it?

[nxtort]

No point in getting worked up until an official release from Apple, but I would hate to see Quad G5's not running the latest OS.


well, then people should stay with 10.4 or 10.5

I just don't get it why people panic for Intel only OS. if you don't want to upgrade hw, just stay with 10.5. and in reality, point releases should have been minor updates anyway, apple feed everyone with their major release point versioning while it should not have been like that.

[bobertoq]

Yep.

Better be FREE or somebody's gonna get sued...


You can't sell a fix. Period.And who will be suing apple?

A fix can be sold, and this rumor is not a 'fix' it's an 'improvement'. big difference.

[Eric S.]

Funny, I'm running Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 on a Pentium4 based PC, and it runs faster and smoother than Windows XP, and as stable as XP ever did.

But it still sucks.
;)

[SkyBell]

How is a G5 running Leopard useless? You are out the park on this one. PPC support will be lucky to survive 10.6 and it's certainly not going to be in 10.7. Apple is not going to jump from 10.7 to 11.0 that's nonsensical.

Where did I say it was useless? iMac G3's running OS 8 aren't useless, they're capable in many ways, just like a G5 running Leopard would be. I'm saying it makes no sense to drop support for such a powerful machine. Like I said, put yourself in their shoes. You have a 2.5 GHz computer, extremely powerful and capable, and yet, you can't run the latest OS, even though you know your machine could do it with ease. Wouldn't you be more then a little ticked off? Apple is NOT going to drop PPC until at least 10.7.

Oh, and Apple jumping from 10.7 to 11.0? Totally possible. They jumped from 8.6 to 9.0, and no one thought that was "nonsensical".

[nuckinfutz]

Where did I say it was useless? iMac G3's running OS 8 aren't useless, they're capable in many ways, just like a G5 running Leopard would be. I'm saying it makes no sense to drop support for such a powerful machine. Like I said, put yourself in their shoes. You have a 2.5 GHz computer, extremely powerful and capable, and yet, you can't run the latest OS, even though you know your machine could do it with ease. Wouldn't you be more then a little ticked off? Apple is NOT going to drop PPC until at least 10.7.

Oh, and Apple jumping from 10.7 to 11.0? Totally possible. They jumped from 8.6 to 9.0, and no one thought that was "nonsensical".

You may be right Cassie. However if Apple keeps PPC support into 2010 they are fools. People that purchased G5 in mid 2006 knew they were buying a Lame Duck computer as Apple had announced the transition to intel. If Apple delivers a 10.6 yet includes few new technologies then there's really no reason for PPC to get overly upset because any optimizations done today will be for Intel anyways. Universal Binary is a cool bridge feature for apps but it does create more work for developers and as Intel Macs start to dominate PPC in numbers developers will have less and less incentive to go UB.

You are correct about the OS jump. Apple could announce OS X 31 tomorrow. However what is nonsensical is to think they'll jump to XI when they've charged for every point release (including a nominal fee for 10.1).

We'll pick this up again next week and see where things fall regarding PPC support. I'm giving you 60% odds that PPC survives if 10.6 is previewed.

[Manic Mouse]

Where did I say it was useless? iMac G3's running OS 8 aren't useless, they're capable in many ways, just like a G5 running Leopard would be. I'm saying it makes no sense to drop support for such a powerful machine. Like I said, put yourself in their shoes. You have a 2.5 GHz computer, extremely powerful and capable, and yet, you can't run the latest OS, even though you know your machine could do it with ease. Wouldn't you be more then a little ticked off? Apple is NOT going to drop PPC until at least 10.7.

Of course it does. Why spend time and effort developing for a dead platform and architecture just for the few that might buy the OS? Apple improve their OS to sell computers primarily, and to make people upgrade secondarily.

"Snow Leopard" is supposedly going to be about cleaning up the code and optimising it, providing a firm base for future versions of the OS (ie: 10.7). Why bother doing that for a dead architecture that will be dropped for future OS iterations anyway.

Snow Leopard will be about making the OS run like lightning on INTEL machines (for the future). There's no point releasing such an OS on PPC or spending the time developing it for PPC. You might want Apple to develop 10.6 for PPC, but that's irrelevant to Apple.

And if they don't release 10.6 in PPC form how will it make your current computer any less capable than it is now? If it suits your needs now the fact that a newer OS is out will not change that.

[milo]

Of course it does. Why spend time and effort developing for a dead platform and architecture just for the few that might buy the OS? Apple improve their OS to sell computers primarily, and to make people upgrade secondarily.

Why? Because of the people who might buy the OS. And because that group may not be as "few" as you suspect, and because that group probably includes a decent number of people who are using the "pro" machines and don't want to piss them off. To take your philosophy to an extreme, why support any machines beyond the ones currently for sale? After all, the other ones are all "dead", right?

It makes sense only if people actually upgrade their machines.

It doesn't make sense if it annoys a big enough portion of the current user base and they go with another option instead of upgrading.

Without knowing more details it's hard to say which would be greater. There's something to be said for keeping customers happy, but I guess that's more long term thinking instead of going for the quickest buck.

To be honest, I have been looking at buying a new mac fairly soon, but if they're dropping support for machines this quickly, it makes me more inclined to put it off as long as I can, to see what ends up happening with their support.

[Manic Mouse]

Why? Because of the people who might buy the OS. And because that group may not be as "few" as you suspect, and because that group probably includes a decent number of people who are using the "pro" machines and don't want to piss them off. To take your philosophy to an extreme, why support any machines beyond the ones currently for sale? After all, the other ones are all "dead", right?

It makes sense only if people actually upgrade their machines.

It doesn't make sense if it annoys a big enough portion of the current user base and they go with another option instead of upgrading.

Without knowing more details it's hard to say which would be greater. There's something to be said for keeping customers happy, but I guess that's more long term thinking instead of going for the quickest buck.

To be honest, I have been looking at buying a new mac fairly soon, but if they're dropping support for machines this quickly, it makes me more inclined to put it off as long as I can, to see what ends up happening with their support.

And how would a release designed to improve Intel performance and clean up the code-base for those machines be of any use to PPC owners? If 10.6 isn't going to introduce any new features, you're not going to be missing out on anything (that would reasonably affect you).

And your comparison is a strawman as current macs aren't like PPC, which is a dead architecture (at least as far as Macs go). Optimising the OS for Intel and cleaning out legacy (ie: PPC) code will have benefits for the future. Doing this for PPC will not.

Your current PPC machine will run just as well regardless of whether a new OS is out or not, and you won't be missing out on any new features. The entire point of 10.6 (if these rumours are true) is to clean up the OS for the future, I fail to see how this would be helpful (or a wise use of resources) on an architecture that has no future.

[Eric S.]

And how would a release designed to improve Intel performance and clean up the code-base for those machines be of any use to PPC owners? If 10.6 isn't going to introduce any new features, you're not going to be missing out on anything (that would reasonably affect you).

And this is exactly the argument that Apple will use - "well you PPC guys don't need this anyway." Then when 10.7 comes out they'll say, "everyone knows we already dropped PPC support." It ties it up in a nice little bow for them - minimum of user complaint.

And your comparison is a strawman as current macs aren't like PPC, which is a dead architecture (at least as far as Macs go).

It will only be "dead" because Apple marketing says so, not for any actual technical reason. The OS will still run if they would just compile it. Yes, that would involve testing overhead, but there's something to be said for doing the right thing for your customers. We're seeing that attitude exponentially decreasing from Apple lately.

Optimising the OS for Intel and cleaning out legacy (ie: PPC) code will have benefits for the future. Doing this for PPC will not.

What optimizations? What benefits?

Your current PPC machine will run just as well regardless of whether a new OS is out or not, and you won't be missing out on any new features.

Until 10.7 comes out.

The entire point of 10.6 (if these rumours are true) is to clean up the OS for the future, I fail to see how this would be helpful (or a wise use of resources) on an architecture that has no future.

Obviously since it doesn't adversely affect you, you fail to see how it would be helpful.

[BenRoethig]

"Snow Leopard" is supposedly going to be about cleaning up the code and optimising it, providing a firm base for future versions of the OS (ie: 10.7). Why bother doing that for a dead architecture that will be dropped for future OS iterations anyway.

Contrary to what you may believe, we're not doing an OS9-OSX type overhaul any time soon. More flash and features will be added, but underneath a lot of things don't change.

[SkyBell]

Of course it does. Why spend time and effort developing for a dead platform and architecture just for the few that might buy the OS? Apple improve their OS to sell computers primarily, and to make people upgrade secondarily.
Sure, they're a hardware company first, a software company second. No one's debating that.

"Snow Leopard" is supposedly going to be about cleaning up the code and optimising it, providing a firm base for future versions of the OS (ie: 10.7). Why bother doing that for a dead architecture that will be dropped for future OS iterations anyway.
Even though PPC is basically, yes, dead, there are more then a few people who still use a PPC machine as their main, including me. I have no intentions to get 10.6, as my machine probably won't be supported anyway, but those who run upper-end G4's and G5's will be royally tcked off if they're not supported. I think Apple isn't greedy enough to make people buy a new machine just because they think PPC is on its way out.

Snow Leopard will be about making the OS run like lightning on INTEL machines (for the future). There's no point releasing such an OS on PPC or spending the time developing it for PPC. You might want Apple to develop 10.6 for PPC, but that's irrelevant to Apple.

And if they don't release 10.6 in PPC form how will it make your current computer any less capable than it is now? If it suits your needs now the fact that a newer OS is out will not change that.
Like I said, I personally don't care about 10.6, or even 10.5 for that matter. Also like I said, there are hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of people out there who still use PPC on a daily basis.

Let me ask you a question. Do you need 10.6? No. Do you need 10.5? No. Nobody needs any of this stuff. Heck, do we need a GUI? No, but it makes our lives a lot easier, right? Features that let us do things faster and better right? But we don't actually need this stuff. But as long as these things are being developed, people are going to want it. People who are on PPC, at least a few of them, are going to want it. Their machines are good enough to run 10.6, so why not let them have it?

[jf8]

Yep.

Better be FREE or somebody's gonna get sued...


You can't sell a fix. Period.

Yes they can. Apple and Microsoft usually don't charge for major bugfix packs (point releases, service packs), but they could if they wanted to. This move wouldn't be very popular with their customers, though.

Some vendors will require a support contract beyond a certain amount of time for any updates at all, while others choose to release free fixes for major security issues only. For example, enterprise versions of Red Hat and SuSe require a subscription for bugfixes.

[Little Endian]

Well it's been almost 2.5 years since apple started introducing intel based machines and almost 2 years since they stopped producing PowerPC based machines. I wonder how much of the Mac user base is on Intel after 2.5 years? If anyone knows please let us know.

I reckon though that intel based machines still make up less than 50% of the mac user base. I think Power PC still makes up more than half of Mac users and 6 months from now in Jan 2009 Power PC will still make up about half the mac users out there. If PowerPC is dropped in the next revision of OSX it will be sad indeed. I still use classic applications from time to time on my G5 and I still rely on Rosetta on my Core 2 Duo imac and MacBook Pro.

BTW even after 2.5 years since Apple's switch to Intel my nearly three year old quad core 2.5Ghz G5 still thrashes my 2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo intel machines as if they were rag dolls. PowerPC is far from dead performance wise especially the late model PowerMac G5s. The only machines that Apple currently offers that can beat my G5 is the Mac Pro line and even then my G5 still holds it's own when running non UB apps.

[SkyBell]

Well it's been almost 2.5 years since apple started introducing intel based machines and almost 2 years since they stopped producing PowerPC based machines. I wonder how much of the Mac user base is on Intel after 2.5 years? If anyone knows please let us know.

I reckon though that intel based machines still make up less than 50% of the mac user base. I think Power PC still makes up more than half of Mac users and 6 months from now in Jan 2009 Power PC will still make up about half the mac users out there. If PowerPC is dropped in the next revision of OSX it will be sad indeed. I still use classic applications from time to time on my G5 and I still rely on Rosetta on my Core 2 Duo imac and PowerBook.

BTW even after 2.5 years since Apple's switch to Intel my nearly three year old quad core 2.5Ghz G5 still thrashes my 2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo intel machines as if they were rag dolls. PowerPC is far from dead performance wise especially the late model PowerMac G5s. The only machines that Apple currently offers that can beat my G5 is the Mac Pro line and even then my G5 still holds it's own when running non UB apps.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. This guy still loves his PPC machine, has zero reason to replace it. And he shouldn't have to repplace it just to run 10.6 Apple, us PPC users will upgrade eventually, just give us a little time. You need to support us for just a little while longer!

[unwinded]

I don’t see why anybody would be upset with this.

Honestly, think about it how lean and stable it could be. No more fat binaries compiled for PPC 32-bit, G5 64-bit, x86, and x64. Everything could be one happy x64 binary. They could make the OS better utilize multiple cores since all Core 2 Duos have at least two cores too. No more worrying about legacy hardware either. It would be the best Mac OS ever.

Leopard would be supported and maintained for some time anyways the same way that Tiger is. Tiger isn’t useless either, my wife still runs it just fine on her first-generation Macbook with a non-x64 Core Duo processor. She isn’t going to care when a new OS comes out that won’t even run on her computer. In my opinion, two years is the useful lifespan for ANY computer regardless of how powerful it was when you bought it. Apple probably even sold more non-x64 Intel Macs than G5s anyways. During the G5 era is when consumers shifted to buying more laptops than desktops, one of the main reasons they switched to Intel in the first place (since there was no way G5 was going in a laptop). G4 probably outsold G5, and I’ve seen Leopard on a high-end G4 Powerbook. Not entirely comfortable, even if it is only a little over two years old.

[BenRoethig]

Sure, they're a hardware company first, a software company second. No one's debating that.

The sooner they learn that the second lead directly to the first, they better off they are.