First, someone should probably grab a mirror of this ... NDA'd contents won't last long on the open web ...
That having been said, the healthy list of display parameter updates catches my eye, although the files themselves aren't new (they all exist in 10.3.1). Wonder why all the display overrides settings changed ...
Rincewind42: I agree -- it's things like this that make Apple less and less likely to release sensitive information to small and independent developers - the groups that comprise the majority of the Apple Developer Connection.
Leaks like this, with the brazen inclusion of the NDA and the exact text of Apple's devnote, on undermine the system that ADC members pay for the priviledge of using. I for one don't appreciate it when morons, like this and the ones who post developmental builds to Kazaa and Gnutella, throw away my $3,000 annual investment in ADC.
That said, I don't particularly mind when insiders throw the larger user base bread crumbs of what is to come and what future builds bring...
It is unfortunate that some who are connected make arses of themselves with such blatant flaunting of the "rules". Apple has given ADC users a rather useful insight that makes the software development process much easier and faster, but it is monkeys like this that will mess it all up if given the chance. Apple does devnotes as a favor... they by no means have to do it. Thus, if ADC users become a security problem, Apple will stop giving them such heads ups.
With all due respect to developers--who are vital to the success of OS X and Apple--I would just like to remind the NDA holders that Apple just released two versions of OS X that for many users were effectively trojan horses. Some might argue that we were let down by those who were involved in the beta testing.
Perhaps we would have benefitted from some leaked NDA-sensitive information before being screwed by the original 10.2.8 and "firewire-enhanced" 10.3. Something like "I know this violates the NDA, but avoid this OS update if you depend on the following..."
This kind of "leaked" information could be useful and I can't see what is served by the secrecy--other than making people feel cool for getting the inside scoop. Whether Apple charges a $3000 fee or not is another issue. It's bad enough that we have no idea what Apple is planning for future hardware, we also have to guess what software improvements are on tap. Rumors sites shouldn't be necessary, but they obviously are since Apple values shock and awe over predicability and dependability. 15" Alu white spots anyone? DHCP exploit?
The bugs that are getting though the testers are not trivial, nor is the list short. As developers likely use only the latest hardware, that leaves older HW underrepresented in the testing pool. A broader sample of users in the beta program might not be such a bad thing. Perhaps even some certified mainstream information available from sources other than rumors sites would be nice.