Tiger: Not at all exciting.

[ksz]

Tiger, like Panther, is about the overall experience -- the sum of the parts. 150 new features taken together will add up, judging from the responses here, to a truly exciting new release.

Having installed Google's Desktop Search Engine on my PC laptop a week ago, all I can say is WOW, what a useful addition this is -- a little thing that means a lot -- when I have a lot of Office files on my PC from customers, colleagues and technical seminars that I do not have the time to read fully and organize properly into well-named subdirectories. There's a lot of very useful information in those documents that I need at unexpected occasions, and this is where the Desktop Search Engine has been quite valuable. Spotlight is even more advanced; I think it can eventually evolve into a new Finder, allowing you to find in detail what you want rather than browse at a high level what files you have -- a paradigm shift from a file-based browser to a content-based lookup.

To keep this short, I'll just add another voice of excitement over the addition of new "CoreTechnologies" at the O/S level.

 

[James Philp]

G3 NOT G4

As I mentioned he is basing his claim off of ignorance. I am basing my claim off of a research study that can be read here: http://www.macnet2.com/more.php?id=571_0_1_0_M

Yeah that's the kind of speed improvement I'm talking about. Twice as fast.

I hate to break it to you, but all that "research" you so lovingly use as some kind of justification for calling people ignorant and saying you know all, is based around a G4 system, NOT a G3! I'm not entirely sure how you are applying from one to another!?

Suffice to say, my main concern is NOT the processor, but the RAM, HD, graphics card (no cube trasitions in sight) et al. You forget the specs of these machines! I got this with OS 8 installed as standard! Every machine on that test probably came with AT LEAST 10.2 if not 10.3! Of course a 1 or 2 year old piece of hardware is still going to be supported, but my machine is last generation, I know this, I'm not bitter, but hopeful.

P.S. I'd still like to know what it is I know, but am ignorant about!?

 

[GodBless]

Dude... XCode is the prime example of everything that is wrong with programming today. Whenever I need a good cry about the state of my profession (I have been a developer for 7 years) I look at XCode.

Poor old Apple. They are totally obsessed with OO, an utterly failed idea. They have frameworks up the wazoo. Oh the humanity!

I suppose the next thing you say is that OS X applications are the worst thing since Windows ME. Since the method of creating them is so bad the outcome must be bad too. Right? Good joke. I've never found better applications on any other platform and now you say that the programming interface is bad?!

Can you please clarify why you think Xcode is so bad? And if Xcode is so bad; wouldn't Xcode 2.0 be a good thing to make it better? By the way what is wrong with frameworks?

 

[ksz]

Dude... XCode is the prime example of everything that is wrong with programming today. Whenever I need a good cry about the state of my profession (I have been a developer for 7 years) I look at XCode.

Poor old Apple. They are totally obsessed with OO, an utterly failed idea. They have frameworks up the wazoo. Oh the humanity!

What is your idea of a good framework and a good programming model?

In my view, C++ has failed to deliver the promises of OO in the real world. Syntax is arcane, you need to read both Effective C++ and More Effective C++ followed by Effective STL followed by long expensive therapy sessions with a good counselor. It is difficult to learn, difficult to master, easy to confuse new developers, etc. From my personal experience managing a commerical application with 1.2 million lines of C++ code, I concluded that the promises of Extensibility, Supportability, Testability, Reusability, Portability, Productivity, and other Ability's and Ivity's have not been fulfilled, and have been over-promised.

We have found Java and C# -- particularly C# -- to be what C++ should have been. And Objective C?? Ouch.

 

[GodBless]

I hate to break it to you buddy, but all that "research" you so lovingly use as some kind of justification for calling people ignorant and saying you know all, is based around a G4 system, NOT a G3! I'm not entirely sure how you are applying from one to another!?

Suffice to say, my main concern is NOT the processor, but the RAM, HD, graphics card (no cube trasitions in sight) et al. You forget the specs of these machines! I got this with OS 8 installed as standard! Every machine on that test probably came with AT LEAST 10.2 if not 10.3! Of course a 1 or 2 year old piece of hardware is still going to be supported, but my machine is last generation, I know this, I'm not bitter, but hopeful.

I never said "I know it all." And I wasn't trying to imply that either. All I was saying is that I know a lot about this topic from day one of being a Mac user. I have seen the system requirements for Tiger and I know that it does support G3s. Also since G4s and G5s have huge speed bumps in Tiger, why not G3s too? Of course not everything is supported with older systems but a lot is. I know people who upgraded to Panther from Jaguar and saw huge speed improvements on machines that had G3 processors and if I remember correctly huge speed improvements on machines that had pre G3 processors. Amazing isn't it. I am glad that you are optimistic about this. I am sorry that I didn't realize it sooner.

 

[broken_keyboard]

I suppose the next thing you say is that OS X applications are the worst thing since Windows ME. Since the method of creating them is so bad the outcome must be bad too. Right? Good joke.

Are you having fun putting words in to my mouth and then answering your own arguments I never made? It's a fallacy of composition to say the whole must have the same properties as its parts. Here is a page on basic logic for you: http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

 

[broken_keyboard]

From my personal experience managing a commerical application with 1.2 million lines of C++ code, I concluded that the promises of Extensibility, Supportability, Testability, Reusability, Portability, Productivity, and other Ability's and Ivity's have not been fulfilled, and have been over-promised.

I agree. I have had the same experience supporting and large commerical Java applications with thousands of classes. Check out SOA - Service Oriented Architecture as a programming model. I have used this on a few recent projects and it is very promising. Not fully proven yet though.

 

[jeremy.king]

I agree. I have had the same experience supporting and large commerical Java applications with thousands of classes. Check out SOA - Service Oriented Architecture as a programming model. I have used this on a few recent projects and it is very promising. Not fully proven yet though.

Care to enlighten me how SOA is going to make for better desktop based applications? Also you can implement an SOA using OO languages so I fail to see your beef with XCode/Obj-C...

 

[Sun Baked]

You left out SMPng...

Of course that only helps if you have a dual, or dual core machine.

 

[klaus]

look beyond your own scope

It's in the nature of man that they tend to not look further than their own scope. An operating system needs to address millions of people, and is for a lot of them their daily task to be able to use it, in any way they need.

The new features may not look very usefull for some, I bet a lot of developers are wishing Tiger existed ten years ago, because of built-in image & video (core image & video), built-in meta searching (Spotlight), and I could go on and on.

These features will be available to use for every application written for the platform, so this can ONLY be a good thing. Cause in the end, you will have to use those programs.

And to be honest, which ground-breaking new features would you add to mac os x, or windows xp, or any recent OS-es? They can't reinvent the wheel.

And like a lot of people mentioned, if you don't see any use of Tiger, you are not obligated to buy it. You can wait for 10.5 as well, without any problems.

Cu guys!

 

[TigerPRO]

• Quicktime. The new technology is nice. Too bad Apple refuses to support Linux.

It is too bad there is no linux version of QuickTime. Apple is kinda being like Microsoft in a way, by ignoring users because they are in the minority. It's too bad, because Apple's marketshare is actually smaller than Linux! Makes no sense to me. If they are going to brag about a supposed "cross platform media player" they better start supporting more operating systems. And it's hypocritical that they are able to develop QuickTime for their lower marketshare OS X boxes and not for linux; even though the OS stinks.

 

[DavidLeblond]

Dude... XCode is the prime example of everything that is wrong with programming today. Whenever I need a good cry about the state of my profession (I have been a developer for 7 years) I look at XCode.

Poor old Apple. They are totally obsessed with OO, an utterly failed idea. They have frameworks up the wazoo. Oh the humanity!

XCode is not a framework, please don't confuse it like Microsoft seems to be doing. For a "free" tool, XCode is wonderful. OO being utterly failed is a matter of opinion... it all depends on what you're programming. And as far as frameworks up the wazoo... huh? How are they not like everyone else? And whats so bad about having a lot of frameworks? You do know that frameworks are there to HELP us, right?

I guess I probably like XCode so much because, by profession, I program using Windows frameworks (MFC, .NET, etc) and I can honestly say after coding in Visual Studio .NET (.NET not 6.0... 6.0 was at least stable) working with XCode is a breath of fresh air.

 

[daveL]

And it's hypocritical that they are able to develop QuickTime for their lower marketshare OS X boxes and not for linux; even though the OS stinks.

So, which OS stinks; I couldn't tell, for sure, from your sentence.

 

[ifjake]

it's funny at times i read people complaining that most of the updates are gimmicks, and then that they won't be able to run on their machine.

nevertheless, you have to admit that Tiger is going to see improvements in many aspects (anything that can make my ol' PB seem a little quicker is welcome). nothing is ever going to be perfect for everybody at once. there are power users who'll always say that this program they found can do this feature just as well, or (this made me chuckle) that they could shell script it better. and then there will be the simpler non-computer-programmer folks who will think it's pretty cool to see Dashboard pop up there.

what i like about Tiger is that Apple is trying to make it easier for other people to come up with cool stuff. Dashboard Widgets, Audio and Image Units, straight-up applications, and stuff that i have no clue about. i even remember reading how you could create plugins for spotlight if you wanted to, something about importing new metadata or something. maybe that and other things aren't necessarily all "Apple Firsts," but i really like their initiative in implementing newer ideas and making it more available to others to do the same.

 

[gopher]

It is too bad there is no linux version of QuickTime. Apple is kinda being like Microsoft in a way, by ignoring users because they are in the minority. It's too bad, because Apple's marketshare is actually smaller than Linux! Makes no sense to me. If they are going to brag about a supposed "cross platform media player" they better start supporting more operating systems. And it's hypocritical that they are able to develop QuickTime for their lower marketshare OS X boxes and not for linux; even though the OS stinks.

Actually someone has made it possible to watch Quicktime on Linux:

http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2001/09/06/crossover_partone.html

I suggest you Google a little more. Just plugin Quicktime and Linux and you will get lots of results.

 

[jaw04005]

As OS X matures, it's going to be harder and harder for Apple to convince customers to purchase upgrades.

I remember when Mac users used to laugh at Windows users because a new upgrade was available every few years (Windows 95 (1995), Windows 95b (1996), Windows 98 (1998), Windows 98 SE (1999), Windows ME (2000), Windows XP (2001).

Now look, I've paid $129 for 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and now will for 10.4, just to stay current. $516 for basically the same OS.

10.0 (2001)

10.1 (2001) - First Stable Release of OS X

10.2's (2002) "Features" were:

iChat, Sherlock 3, Mail, Improved Address Book, Rendezvous, QuickTime 6, Inkwell, Updated Finder, Quartz Extreme, Universal Access, UNIX upgrades and Samba Support

10.3 (2003) "Features" were:

Expose, Application Switcher, Mail's Threading Capability, Updated Finder, File Vault, Speed Improvements, UNIX and Windows compatibility upgrades Upgrades, iChat AV

10.4 (2005) "Features" are:

Dashboard, Automator, Updated Mail, Updated iChat, Spotlight, iSync built-in, Updated Finder, Core Image, UNIX and Windows compatibility upgrades

Is Tiger worth it? I don't know. Looking back, I'm not sure if Panther was worth it. But, I'm a mac faithful, so I will probally purchase Tiger the day it's released.

Puma and Jaguar were the only releases I would consider must-haves, mainly because of stability improvements.

 

[Lacero]

Now look, I've paid $129 for 10.1...

I think you got ripped off on that deal.

 

[TigerPRO]

So, which OS stinks; I couldn't tell, for sure, from your sentence.

Sorry to confuse you. The context was Apple not making QuickTime for Linux (even though it stinks). So I'm saying Ubuntu stinks.

 

[Chimera]

Is Tiger worth it? I don't know. Looking back, I'm not sure if Panther was worth it. But, I'm a mac faithful, so I will probally purchase Tiger the day it's released.

Puma and Jaguar were the only releases I would consider must-haves, mainly because of stability improvements.

I have thought the same recently but the big things that have changed through all versions is the speed, every update has made os X that much faster and made my mac more productive for me. Aparently this will also be the case with Tiger.

I agree we have been blitzed with updates but it has been necessary to finish this relatively new OS (If only the prices were lower to compensate) and although many interpret the 'slowing' of updates to every 2 years I wouldn't be suprised if it was 2.5 years or more for the next.

Frank

 

[TigerPRO]

Actually someone has made it possible to watch Quicktime on Linux:

http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2001/09/06/crossover_partone.html

I suggest you Google a little more. Just plugin Quicktime and Linux and you will get lots of results.

Yeah that's true, but I wasn't talking about being able to watch QuickTime content on Linux, I was talking about Apple specifically making a version of the QuickTime player for Linux.

 

[TigerPRO]

I remember when Mac users used to laugh at Windows users because a new upgrade was available every few years (Windows 95 (1995), Windows 95b (1996), Windows 98 (1998), Windows 98 SE (1999), Windows ME (2000), Windows XP (2001).

Now look, I've paid $129 for 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and now will for 10.4, just to stay current. $516 for basically the same OS.

Would you somehow feel better if those same feature upgrades had just been spaced out more like most software companies would do? If instead each of those upgrade had come three years apart, would spending the same money for the same product be easier just because the development was slower?

 

[Ja Di ksw]

Finder

I'm sure people will rip on me for this, but I don't see what's so bad about Finder. Everyone (except for the people going on and on about expose) says its horrible and clunky and this and that, but I just don't see it. Everything I have is set into organized folders, which I can view however I want. I have a sidebar, and I can search for everything. Slow and clunky? Its folders opening up. I click on them, and they open up. I'm not sure I could even notice any increase in the speed of a folder opening, it does it pretty much instantly. The only thing that annoys me is when I have it set up as columns and it takes a bit for movie previews to load.

I'm really not trying to build up the finder. I just want to know what people have against it so much, and how they would set it up to be better. I'd love to hear some great ideas. Please don't just say, "it sucks, its clunky, its slow." Please give something actually creative and constructive.

 

[Sun Baked]

RE: Finder

I'm sure people will rip on me for this, but I don't see what's so bad about Finder. Everyone (except for the people going on and on about expose) says its horrible and clunky and this and that, but I just don't see it. Everything I have is set into organized folders, which I can view however I want. I have a sidebar, and I can search for everything. Slow and clunky? Its folders opening up. I click on them, and they open up. I'm not sure I could even notice any increase in the speed of a folder opening, it does it pretty much instantly. The only thing that annoys me is when I have it set up as columns and it takes a bit for movie previews to load.

I'm really not trying to build up the finder. I just want to know what people have against it so much, and how they would set it up to be better. I'd love to hear some great ideas. Please don't just say, "it sucks, its clunky, its slow." Please give something actually creative and constructive.

Please Dont Start That Here...

There is a current thread on it here...

How the Mac OS X Finder could be improved

 

[Maedus]

what i like about Tiger is that Apple is trying to make it easier for other people to come up with cool stuff. Dashboard Widgets, Audio and Image Units, straight-up applications, and stuff that i have no clue about. i even remember reading how you could create plugins for spotlight if you wanted to, something about importing new metadata or something. maybe that and other things aren't necessarily all "Apple Firsts," but i really like their initiative in implementing newer ideas and making it more available to others to do the same.

That is one of the big things I'm looking forward to in Tiger. It is the unseen features of Mac OS X upgrades that are getting me excited. Not only has Mac OS X been getting faster on my 266 MHz G3 Beige w/ 416 MB Ram, but so have the applications. And both have been looking neater and are being more functional too. This machine will not be running 10.4, but that is only because I'm getting a new iMac when they're revised and have Tiger preinstalled.

Also, I wish other programmers would work on improving performance instead of adding thousands of minor features that I not only don't use or don't find functional, but instead work to make my experience less functional and makes the program run a lot slower. *Cough*Microsoft Office*Cough* In fact, if Microsoft Office was programmed to run significantly faster on each release, I probably wouldn't find it as necessary to get a new computer since many of the small freeware apps and the OS itself run fine and are getting better with each revision.

I remember when Mac users used to laugh at Windows users because a new upgrade was available every few years (Windows 95 (1995), Windows 95b (1996), Windows 98 (1998), Windows 98 SE (1999), Windows ME (2000), Windows XP (2001).

I don't remember laughing about that. I remember laughing about them putting the year on their product like cars instead of version numbers. Though now that I think of it, it would be neat if car manufacturers used system numbers. "Now introducing the Mustang 8.1" and on the window sticker are a list of "New and Additional Features" and in the manual was the version history. And a list of known bugs would be sweet too. "Some users experience bugs with fast acceleration after 100,000 miles." But now I'm rambling. But back to point, I remember laughing at the year numbers because they'd release a version of Windows 95 in 1996 and a version of Windows 98 in 1999. And I found it humourous having to rush the OS out before the end of the year or else Windows 95 becomes Windows 96. And plus its a constant reminder of how dated your computer and OS is. Think if XP was instead called Windows 2001. You'd be able to look at the opening splash screen and go "my OS is 4 years old now, how ancient." Oh, and I laughed when I asked what features Windows 98 SE had over Windows 98 from my Windows friends and they replied "assurance of Y2K compatability" and then we all laughed at Windows. I'm never did learn what Windows 98 SE really did have over Windows 98, but if that is the only feature they looked forward too or could remember, then only looking forward to Dashboard or XCode or whatever part of the new OS that an individual likes isn't so pathetic then.

But I do think you're right, joshuawaire, in that as Mac OS X matures, it won't feel so important to upgrade. It will be like Mac OS 8.0 - 9.2. Some people will really find it necessary to upgrade while others would only upgrade if they felt like it. But by the time 10.8 - 10.9.x rolls around, Apple will probably have a Mac OS 11 coming out that will completely rethink the way we think about the OS. And of course, we'll have topics on about how crisp and responsive 10.9 was and how the Finder of 11 will suck.

I think I got kind of rambly on this post (been a jumpy, sleepless weekend) so let me reiterate. Tiger will be good not only for OS improvements, but more importantly for what it will let new applications do. People laugh at Windows because its fun and easy to do (hence why Windows users laught too). And some people are only happy with the "good ol' days" of something.

 

[Soulstorm]

I'm sure people will rip on me for this, but I don't see what's so bad about Finder. Everyone (except for the people going on and on about expose) says its horrible and clunky and this and that, but I just don't see it. Everything I have is set into organized folders, which I can view however I want. I have a sidebar, and I can search for everything. Slow and clunky? Its folders opening up. I click on them, and they open up. I'm not sure I could even notice any increase in the speed of a folder opening, it does it pretty much instantly. The only thing that annoys me is when I have it set up as columns and it takes a bit for movie previews to load.

I'm really not trying to build up the finder. I just want to know what people have against it so much, and how they would set it up to be better. I'd love to hear some great ideas. Please don't just say, "it sucks, its clunky, its slow." Please give something actually creative and constructive.

I love finder. Anyway, this is not the correct topic to start this conversation, but I would like to make notice here... Everyone says that Finder sucks. However, everyone is waiting eagerly for Tiger's release, and 70% of people intend to buy it from the first week of release!

Why?