OS X Default in March

[MacRumors]

It's taken a lot longer than originally expected... but, according to The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/22993.html):

Phil Schiller, Apple's VP of worldwide marketing, has gone on the record to suggest March as the date when new Macs ship with OS X as default.

This will mark the final step in transition to OS X. Application developers will have even more incentive to push for native OS X support once this step is finally made. I only wish it could come sooner...

[cmku]

does this hint at a possible release date for the g5? or other new hardware(lcd imac)?

[Foocha]

This is fantastic news - and the Register proves once again to be a great source of Mac news.

For me, the point of no return in the transition from OS 9 to OS X was importing my mail into Entourage v.X - I can't access my mail in OS 9 anymore - and it feels good :)

[SPG]

FCP, Photoshop, AfterEffects, and Sonic Fusion running native and I'll stop kicking and screaming.

[SPG]

Originally posted by cmku
does this hint at a possible release date for the g5? or other new hardware(lcd imac)?

I don't think so, software releases don't have to coincide with anything, and this isn't really a new software release per se, more of a standards announcement.

[arn]

I agree... I don't expect March to bring new Hardware.... this just corresponds to Jobs Clock-analogy... where the transition will be complete in March (back to 12 o'clock).

Major hw announcements will likely be expo-related, perusual.

[SPG]

I guess that the real nice thing about this is that all the major apps should be native by that time, and any that aren't will definitely be fealing the heat.

[Buggy]

This must be the time line to get the final networking bugs worked out of OSX and for the major apps like Photoshop/FCP/Quarks/etc. to go fully OSX

[Foocha]

One look at Quark tells you this app is a dogs dinner of code dating back to the Turing machine. I think carbonising it will take longer than a complete rewrite (a Cocoa Quark would be interesting) and I'm not holding my breath to see it on OS X - think about it, they haven't yet been able to make the menus platinum in OS 9.

There will still be plenty of apps not Carbonised by March - I would be suprised to see Photoshop until next Summer.

[Brent Turbo]

I used OS X.1 for about one week. That's as long as I could stand it. Now I'm back in OS9, and applications are launching in zero bounces, my SCSI drive doesn't go to sleep every five minutes regardless of my power settings, and I can use applications that help me work and make money.

I think the transition period to OSX is going to either put Apple out of business, or put them back in their embryonic state of 1995, where they had to come back from the bottom (again). It's no secret that OSX isn't doing what Apple wanted it to, nor is it doing what users wanted it to. Behind all the marketing hype, it's just a shell that lets you run applications. Windows XP will not allow you to fly aroud like in the commercials, and OSX will not revolutionize the world. Both, however, will allow you to click on icons and launch applications.

It's also no secret that certain software companies are seeing OSX as a good way to make a clean break. Even our old pal Adobe had all but gone on the record as saying they were going to be extra-slow putting out OSX applications in the hopes of retarding its proliferation, or maybe even quashing it all together. AOL UK has totally pulled OSX support, and halted development on AOL for OSX eternally.

Add to that the fact that my once zippy G3 is now a slow-poke at every day tasks.... In short, I don't care if the whole OS stops and stands at attention when I have my mouse button down -- OS 9 is the real desktop revolution.

Now had Apple gone with a BeOS core instead of Mach, we wouldn't be here having this discussion.

[Wise]

OS X is the future. There is nothing better than a unix core. BeOS doesn't have the wisdom of unix. Unix will save Apple.

[sweetaction]

Originally posted by Foocha
For me, the point of no return in the transition from OS 9 to OS X was importing my mail into Entourage v.X - I can't access my mail in OS 9 anymore - and it feels good :) [/B]

You said it baby. I hooked up office v.X (heehee while still laying in bed with the powerbook and airport) my girlfriend laughed at how giddy i was about geeky stuff. My powerbook is all X now and I am running photoshop off a firewire drive with 9 on it. When I get photoshop X bye bye 9.

BTW, I love hearing people complain about OSX saying they will stick with 9, I wager they are the same folks who will not move to DVD cause they already learned how to program their VCRs...

[mymemory]

OS X is the end of the world!!!!!!!!!! is the 6th sign!!!!!!!!! If OS 9 have almost aplications imagine Mac people trying to find aplications for an already small market?

OS X is the ennnnnnnnd Noooooooooooooo

AAaaaaaHHHHHhaaahahaaaa!!!!

"and my mymemory run around the stage hiting the wals with his head, bliding and shouting as the inevitable release of the OS X occur."

End of the first act.

[Brent Turbo]

Originally posted by sweetaction
[BTW, I love hearing people complain about OSX saying they will stick with 9, I wager they are the same folks who will not move to DVD cause they already learned how to program their VCRs... [/B]

What kind of analogy is that? Now if there were only a few dozen movies out for DVD, and no support from the the major motion picture companies, then we'd be on the same page. But DVD offers all of the of the latest releases, and bonus features that you can't get on VHS. No comparison.

Of course nobody would want a DVD player if they had to wait until next summer to watch Planet of the Apes...

[j763]

Why are you all complaining about OS X it's an awesome OS. Newayz, consider your options:

- go to osx and wait a bit for all your appz to come out

- stay with 9 and get no new appz whatsoever

- Join the Super-Nintendo-Operating-System revolution over at M$



Support OS X

[sweetaction]

Originally posted by Brent Turbo
Originally posted by sweetaction
[BTW, I love hearing people complain about OSX saying they will stick with 9, I wager they are the same folks who will not move to DVD cause they already learned how to program their VCRs...

What kind of analogy is that? Now if there were only a few dozen movies out for DVD, and no support from the the major motion picture companies, then we'd be on the same page. But DVD offers all of the of the latest releases, and bonus features that you can't get on VHS. No comparison.

Of course nobody would want a DVD player if they had to wait until next summer to watch Planet of the Apes... [/B]


The analogy was only that if you bought a DVD player the day they came out you didnt have much to play with. In time you were stoked, you had all the movies and all the features you wanted. Or you could chill with your VHS and find yourself eventually supporting the old medium and then reluctantly moving on when you find blockbuster dont rent VHS anymore.

People will stop making apps for 9. You know this.

[Anonymous]

has macos 9 suddenly stopped working or something? if you can't use your apps in mac os 10's classic mode then boot back into 9 ... DUH!

[jefhatfield]

one of my clients, when i was a tech intern, said they would take four or five years to migrate to os x last year when the first betas found their way into some techies' hands...if they migrated, that would be 300 to 350 machines

in mid-2000, this big company had just moved over to NT 4.0 and only now are they in a limited migration to windows 2000 which won't be done until 2002

so os 9 may be around for some large businesses due to cost

my original mentor's company he works for still does the majority of their work on second generation powermacs (603s and 604s and they are doing just fine)

for the individual home user, it is easier to buy a new mac at circuit city on your credit card and be up and running on os x the next day

[Buggy]

Jef, you are completly correct. At my work we have approx 300 windows machines and 40 Macs, running off of 2 NT 4 servers. I spent a frustrating 2 weeks trying to get OSX working with Adobe products in classic over an NT network. I shouldn't have wasted my time. I should have done what your collleagues are doing....slow adaptation. At home I use OSX. Much easier to deal with on only one machine...actually I love it. But I have to use OS9 at work. No other choice....well I could get dave and instal that. But I would gain nothing by using OSX. OS9 currently does everything I need.

Its not just a slow uptake on Apple stuff, we have just started to slowly move to Win 2000. We should be completely win 2000 in a year. So I suspect we will be OSX in a year or two.

[Foocha]

It's very true to say that larger enterprises have more innertia and take longer to adopt new technologies - in a corporate environment OS X will take a long time to catch on. However, there are very few Mac based corporate environments.

One of the Mac's largest vertical sectors is design for print and publishing, and the huge obstacle to OS X adoption there is the lack of a Carbonised Quark & Photoshop. When these apps come out, I think OS X adoption will accelerate rapidly.

In the kind of mixed Windows/Mac environment that Buggy describes, OS X has the potential to come out a real winner since its supports Mac and Windows file sharing. Workplaces that also use a lot of UNIX are likely to find it particuarly appealing.

[Foocha]

Face facts - OS 9 is officially dead since Microsoft is no longer developing for it. If you're not going to move on to OS X then you might as well start reading Windows Rumors instead!

[yandfeng]

I have used Mac OS X since 23 August 2001 and apart from two kernel panics have found it to be working great. Less nightmares than I thought at first.

[greenplasticcup]

quark 5 does have platinum pallets. I have the beta on my machine here.

[Foocha]

Nice one Quark. The platiunum interface has only been around for four years now! Does this mean we can expect Quark for OS X in 2005? ;)

Does the Quark beta look any good?

[gorgonz]

These things take time. I tried out the Public Beta, 10.0, 10.0.4, and a 10.1 beta. 10.0.4 and earlier were SLOW and the 10.1 beta I tried wasn't stable with Classic.

As soon as I installed 10.1 final, though, I made the switch. 10.1 is usably fast, perfectly stable, most of the apps that I use are carbonized, the few others run fine in classic, all my peripherals mostly work, and I'm starting to discover the wonders of running a UNIX box. (Apache, PHP, MySQL, little CGI scripts, SSH, cc, perl, a built-in FTP server, etc., etc.)

I'll admit that I did sacrifice a little speed for the power and stability, but it's more than worth it. The machines out there will get faster, more apps and peripherals will be native, and everybody will be happy.

It's good stuff. I understand if you're not ready to make the transition yet, but you'll want to before long. :)

Alex

[greenplasticcup]

Quark 5 beta looks great. It's got pretty much all I wanted, the only thing is that it's not too stable now. It's a fun program, it just seems to have a ram leak or something.

It's got layers and tables, big pluses.

I dont' really care one way or the other about platinum. I guess it's nice looking. I just want the functionality.

[SPG]

Quark will have to go to OSX eventually, especially if Photoshop and all the other major apps go that way. Quark is a great program and they have always been battling on some level against Pagemaker, so it's in their own best interest to go OSX.
BTW, greenplasticcup I like the handle! No pun intended, just a good screen name.
___________________
Waiting for FCP OSX.

[greenplasticcup]

here's a quark 5 screenshot. 88k or so. Had to munch it down, so the colors are pretty off, but you get the idea.

http://www.watchtan.com/blue/quark5.gif

I remember at the expo, they showed quark5 for X as a work in process. It looked great. You guys talk like it won't happen!

Brian

SPG- thanks!

[Reality Cheque]

OS X runs fine for me - even on an older G3. And the idea of Classic makes great sense to fill the void while we wait for OS X apps to come out. But no one I know can scan or print from Classic. This makes no sense: it's the same periferals connected to the same port; why can't Apple make OS X interpret the existing OS 9 drivers?

Until they get that part of Classic working, no one who needs to print or scan (or use older CD burners or external hard drives etc.) can use OS X exclusively. And that's a lot of people (who don't necessarily feel like upgrading all their peripherals along with all their software the same year, just to update their OS, no matter how great it looks.)

[Foocha]

Thanks for the screen shot, greenplasticcup. It looks really good.

I understand what you mean about Platinum - it's just aesthetics after all. But if an app does not look Platinum, then the odds are it's a long way off Carbon, either because they're using the old APIs or they're doing it the wrong way, which is Quark all over.

I also remember the OS X demo of Quark at MWNY, and I really hope we'll see it soon, but on past experience, I won't hold my breath for Quark to get their act together. They used to make a big thing out of taking ages to release upgrade because they would only release stable software. But Quark 4.0 rather undermined that arguement, right? ;)

[GPTurismo]

First, Quark 5 is suppose to be Carbonized on release. Remember the expo?

As for adobe, they are taking a long time because A) they are building things from the ground up to run nativiely in cocoa, because they want to do things right, and not just port it over. B) They are very understaffed right now since they are having financial problems, C) GoLive 5, Indesign 2, Illustrator 10, and After Effects 5.5 are all OS X Native. The reason photoshop is taking so long is because it's a TON of code. Probably their biggest application, and re-wrting it from the ground up is going to take a while, especially being understaffed.

My old machine, an original iMac DV SE ran OS X.0.4 fine with 256 megs of ram, and it ran amazingly smooth with X.1 and even smoother with 10.1.1. I went ahead and got a Dual G4 800, and it runs great. I even run UT in classic and get at least 45+ frames a second with an occasional burp or two.

At work I run a 350 B&W G3 as my work machine, and a Beige 300 G3 as a test server running Filemaker and Apache full force using 10.1.1. I have had no real problems.

Also, a lot of my Unix and Linux friends love OS X. A few of them have bought older machines to play with it.

Where I work, which is predominately mac, we are still on 8.6. Why? Because we have an ancient 4D database and it won't run on anything higher. When we finally upgrade, I have the duties to upgrading all the machines to OS X, which runs good on the 400+ powerbooks.

I really don't know what all the fuss is about. Mainly people that don't want to change, don't want to learn something new, or just grinches.

My two cents.

[GPTurismo]

Oops, GoLive 6. ;)

[Foocha]

Firstly, Quark 5 is not going to be Carbon on release - here's a quote from the Quark Web site:

"a native version of QuarkXPress is currently under development and will be available after we release QuarkXPress 5.0, which is scheduled to ship later this year."

Secondly, Adobe are not building Cocoa apps, and are certainly not rewriting from scratch. The whole point of OS X and the difference between it and Rhapsody is that the Carbon framework exists to enable developers to easily port Mac OS apps to OS X - something like 75% of the APIs used in the old OS are available in OS X. These are described as Carbon APIs, together with some new ones they've added. APIs are the standard tools that application developers use to build apps on a particular OS. No one in their right mind would rebuild something like Photoshop in Cocoa when it's already 75% there in Carbon.

There's nothing wrong with a Carbon app if it's done well, and it can be considered native - Office v.X is also Carbon. If you want an example of a great Cocoa app, take a look at OmniWeb.

Here's an article on the subject from Think Secret:
http://www.thinksecret.com/features/photoshopx.html

[McFreggle]

Hey, what about this one?

Yesterday I was with a friend. He has recently bought a PC, and installed Windows XP on it. He was very excited about Windows XP.
When I arrived with my lovely 600 MHz Combo iBook, he started to drool at the looks of it, but he thought: "Hey, it's just another OS in a nice wrapping"

But as I showed him more apps and features, he started to realize that all the cool stuff from WinXP was just a poor copy of the cool features a Mac has. He realized MovieMaker wasn't revolotionary software (he asked me if iMovie and iTunes were available for PC) and at the end of the evening he was really dissapointed he just bought a brand new PC. He wanted a Mac so badly!

So... He also asked me what the future of Mac and OS X was going to be.

I answered him OS X is starting to rock (starting with 10.1). I think OS X 10.2 will be THE operating system. When will it be released? What about March? When new computers start to ship with it...

Everybody knows OS X is the only opportunity left for Apple. But I think they will make it. First of all they have to stop users making the move from Mac to Windows. And then Windows-users can start making the move to Mac OS X.

Hey, I'm a converted user.

[digiyoto]

Originally posted by McFreggle

Everybody knows OS X is the only opportunity left for Apple. But I think they will make it. First of all they have to stop users making the move from Mac to Windows. And then Windows-users can start making the move to Mac OS X.

Hey, I'm a converted user.


thats funny. i'm not quite sure what "only opportunity left" means. more importantly - i have never known any mac users that switch to pc... i do know many poor souls who have to switch to the dark side for work. i work with both. we may have to work with them, but at the end of the day we all come home to our loving macs.
peaceout

[jefhatfield]

our core five percent of the market would stay with apple no matter what but a lot of the late adopters of the mac with the imac in 98 were certainly fickle because all those users, or many of them seemed to have gone somewhere

but where?

to the pc world?

or did a lot of people just stop, en masse, buying computers because they finally felt happy with what they had and bought cheap pcs for second computers to go with their macs?

i would then not call that moving from mac to windows

i got a pc after my ibook and maybe will get another cheap pc for my work as a pc tech...but under no circumstance will i consider myself a traitor, even if pcdata and industry bean counters would consider me a fence jumper

if i could do my job with vitual pc, i would

all the above speculation is just a theory though!

what do you guys think happened with the apple share of the market?

[Foocha]

I love Macs - but I can't survive without a PC as well.

My company develops Web applications, and the front end of our apps will never be as good on Mac as on PC, because IE for Mac simply does not offer as much funtionality as IE for Windows.

We always make our apps Mac compatible of course ;) but without Microsoft's IE for Mac team getting their act together, I'll always need a PC laptop for new business meetings.

[jefhatfield]

now that you mentioned what really happens in the real world, you better hide out in a deep network of desert caves to hide out from the mac zealots

when i go out on IT calls, i wear either my microsoft jacket, which gets me attacked; or my apple jacket, which got stolen by a client who thought he was pablo escobar but still may well be very armed and ready to fill me with bullet holes if i try to get it back

aren't you brits happy that guns are not as easy to buy as condoms...guns are easy enough to buy legally, but illegally, anything goes in the major american cities among the youth culture (that is why i am a social worker volunteer every friday afternoon for heroin users...and not because i saw trainspotting)

i guess i better get another apple jacket, it beats getting shot

mymemory, are things this bad in big venezuela cities like they are in the US cities? or do all big cities of the world have an unwritten charter that says all boys with too much testosterone are to buy small, concealable semi-automatic handguns

[Edited by jefhatfield on 11-28-2001 at 12:05 PM]

[SPG]

Whoa, where is this thread going? Yes South America has a lot of rampant street crime and in some countries the police are worse than the criminals themselves. But what about OSX?

[atlascott]

Hope this doesnt mean that there are doing away witht he clasic environment--i still have non OSX games and such that I dont want to lose! Anyone know?

[SPG]

I doubt that classic would or could get dropped at this point. Even if it did, you could always partition your drive and run OS9 after a restart.

[mikehay]

Can anyone find a Webcam that works on OS X? I can use a Logitech Quickcam VC with Classic and iVisit, but without sound (since Classic doesn't support sound input).

[Mike Ball]

I'm a teacher but a little bit of an observer too.
If Apple's main market id DTP then if Quark and photoshop aren't ready then who's kidding who?
Freehand 10 can't print to the current Epson printer driver for their top of the range 1290 inkjets. A macromedia rep at a recent UK show said " OSX can't talk to anything. Certainly my experience.
I've had complete OS X hang twice in two days just because I was trying to run IE in both native and classic environments. Couldn't get it force quit or anything. Just like the usual Mac crash. Turn it off at the mains and restart.
Internet Connect on OS X won't recognise a a second connect click. If you are disconnected you have to quit and restart the app. The only good thing is that the dialogue box for clicking to stay connected has made a welcome return from system about 8.5?
All in all even for a low end user it ain't safe to switch.
So professional people must still be very doubtful.