Apple Announces Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther)

[Doctor Q]

Two questions:

1. Will the Panther Family Pack be sold at the Apple Stores October 24? If it is the same Panther box and you just pay extra to have a "Family Pack" sticker put on it, I would assume so, but I don't know if that's how it works. If it is stocked as a separate item, I don't want to wait in line and then be told "sorry, only single copies are being sold tonite".

2. Are there any rumors (or announcements) about what else will be done at the Apple Stores as part of the festivities? I can order online, but if they are having celebrities, music, giveaways, contests, event merchandise, etc., I'll be more tempted to take the time to go in person and join the party.

 

[tychay]

Originally posted by Lord Bodak
Honestly I think this sucks. The up-to-date program should be the same across the board. Why should a user who purchased a G5 receive an upgrade when a user who purchased a new PowerBook does not?

I ran across the same thing the other day. A G5 owner asked me if they should get the student developer license ($100 usually Apple bundles free upgrades) or risk it with their upgrade coupons.

I said that Apple of recent (Jaguar) only honored those upgrade coupons until after they've announced the upgrade. On the other hand, it sounded like her G5 is a little unstable (it kernel panic'd a few times, she never got this before on an iMac or Powerbook) and others have reported similar problems so it sounded like Jaguar and the G5 had issues that would probably be fixed in Panther.

My guess is that the savings in reduced tech support calls if they can expect every G5 owner out there to be using Panther beat out the revenue coming from the former.

Take care,

terry

 

[iGeek]

Error on the site

On the site, there is a menu on the right with the key features. Next to iChat, is says, "iChat AV Send and receive faxes." Who would I report this to? I WANT PANTHER!

 

[cnladd]

Originally posted by gopher
As I've said before, the upgrade price most likely does not include:

Archive and Install feature which is a godsend for troubleshooting preference issues.

Developer Tools.

So whether you qualify for upgrade price or not, be aware, that the upgrade short changes you in one way or another. The retail version is likely a much better release to have.

You don't get "shortchanged" by not having the developer tools included. You can walk into ANY Apple store and request a copy of the latest Developer Tools CD and they'll give it to you. For free.

Otherwise, sign up for a free ADC membership and download the latest Developer Tools release.

Having them in the box is simple convenience, not getting them in the box isn't being "shortchanged".

 

[cnladd]

Re: Re: Re: Re: yeah but,

Originally posted by -hh
That's nothing: try reading Microsoft's Licence for MS-Office. We all know that its a bundle of multiple products, predominantly Word, Excel and Powerpoint....but that's not what the Licence says anymore. MS's licence no longer allows you to install PPT on one PC and everything else on a second PC.

This change was probably ~6 years ago now. We were running a keyserver to share ~150 licences across ~200 PC's, and we ended up having to go suddenly find the money to buy ~50 additional full licences, in order to just maintain our legal status quo. The value-added to our organization was zilch.


-hh

You think that was bad?

One organization I worked at had 180,000 employees spread across the globe. Once upon a time, Microsoft had a follow-the-Sun licensing scheme. The idea went that only a certain percentage of people were working at any one time, due to timezone differences, so only that percentage had to be licensed.

I don't remember the exact figures, but it meant we only had to pay for 40,000 or so seats at a time.

Imagine our surprise when Microsoft sent us a letter telling us that they were dumping that licensing policy in THREE MONTHS, and that we then had to purchase a license for every installed computer. 140,000 new licenses of MS Office, MS Windows, and Exchange seats.

 

[ryan]

Originally posted by pjhornak
thank you....sorry I will try and come up with a simpler one you might understand....two, two of steve and bill's children..ah ha ha ha ha ha...right the count from sesame street

Simplicity has nothing to do with it, the point was/is your analogy is flawed. There is no legal document saying what you can and can't do with sheets. Software on the other hand clearly states quite the oposite. In the case of MacOS it is one OS license per machines. Now that is simple.

 

[cnladd]

Has anyone heard (and been able to confirm, or trust the source) which build numbers the new Panther client and server are?

There was a lot of debate about 7B85 for client and 7B86 for server, and those discussions filled up many of the rumor sites, but now? Not a peep...

 

[ryan]

Originally posted by pjhornak
right, you and the riaa call it piracy the rest of the free world calls it fair use... the way you capitialized THE to emphasize your point was brilliant BTW

Piracy is piracy. Just because the technology makes it easier to break the law doesn't mean the law isn't right. If you don't agree with the law, buy yourself a PC and install Linux or make your own music.

 

[ryan]

Originally posted by chazmox
Don't complain! File a class action challenging the license agreement!!!



Wait... installing the same SW on two computers that YOU own is being a pirate??? Wow, now that's a strained metaphor...

"ARRGGHH mateys... lets loot our own doobloons ( sp! ) from ourselves and give it too ourselves... I feelin' especially lucky today!"

You could argue that it was a violation of the SW agreement, but "piracy" is extreme... uh, oh... I have my CD in my CD player and a copy of that same song on my computers and my iPod... I really a rockin pirate!!!!

See my previous reply. You can't compare songs to software. As an individual you can't make much use of having a song playing at the same time in two different locations, like your home and your car.

 

[iPC]

I <sarcasm>love</sarcasm> that Apple charges $129 for a minor version upgrade 😡

(for those of you that understand the *nix version numbering scheme, you know what I mean)

Oh well, I know enough Mac users to get a "copy" for free. Seeming as how my iBook is less than a month old, I will not be paying for a minor version upgrade, thank you very much.

Obstinance is a good thing!

 

[rdowns]

Originally posted by Wonder Boy
They don't care, and neither do I. You all new panther was coming. you should have waited. no excuses.

I agree, sucks to have to wade through all this bitching when all knew it was coming. Those who bought new computers made their choice. I made mine by deciding to wait until Panther was pre-installed, not for the $129 but for less hassle in dealing with an OS upgrade and moving tons of software and data.

For those who think G5 owners don't deserve the gracious almost free upgrade, tough. They bought a state of the art system whose OS was not ready yet.

Now I have to decide, do I go for the G5 and try to find a place to put the beast or the new iMac? Damn, I wish a G5 iMac was available.

 

[daveL]

Originally posted by iPC
I <sarcasm>love</sarcasm> that Apple charges $129 for a minor version upgrade 😡

(for those of you that understand the *nix version numbering scheme, you know what I mean)

Oh well, I know enough Mac users to get a "copy" for free. Seeming as how my iBook is less than a month old, I will not be paying for a minor version upgrade, thank you very much.

Obstinance is a good thing!

What? There's no "stardard" Unix version numbering scheme. You're saying that simply because Panther is a .2 -> .3 upgrade in *Apple's* version numbering scheme, that it's a "minor" upgrade? That's not very informed. So a 20% - 25% performance improvement, coupled with dozens of new or improved features constitues a "minor" upgrade? I guess if the OS changes were the same, but Apple named it OS XI, you'd buy it? Give me a break.

 

[rdowns]

Re: G5 performance

Originally posted by maxterpiece
Not to complain about the performance of my G5 or anything... It's pretty darn fast, but does anyone know what kind of performance boost 10.3 is supposed to give to G5s ? I've heard that it's pretty big time.

Apparently you haven't seen the new Apple TV ads. (I f*****g refuse to insert one of those dumb emoticons here)

 

[xDANx]

Aye...thar be the powermac matey...

Originally posted by The Reaper
people like you who pirate are the reason apple has to charge so much for their computers.

ahhhh...thanks dude. i was having a bad day until your hilariously unsound grasp of economics cheered me up.
maybe if apple had been making computers back when 'pirating' still involved swashbuckling and walking the plank your point would have some kind of worth.

 

[xDANx]

and then there's reality...

Originally posted by BOOMBA
Agreed.

Why not just save 2 days pay from your job working at McDonald's, and quit whining.

$129 isn't so much.

$129 US = $170 CDN

=half my rent
=most of my food for the month
=a couple of credit card payments to help pay off the used powermac i bought

macs are not just for yuppies.

 

[Choppaface]

not the brushed metal!!!!! ug!!!!

 

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by 1adonis1
it is when someone said they were going to load Panther (topic) on 2 computers.

Just because it's brought up, doesn't make it the thread topic.

 

[1adonis1]

If PANTHER is the topic, how isnt it part of the topic....judging by the post from other people,i say many people want to talk about it.

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Just because it's brought up, doesn't make it the thread topic.

ok..i think i get it......Panther will be cool, it's the most kick ass OS ever. It's gonna ROCK! Is that better.

 

[zync]

ummm...

Originally posted by the future
You think Windows – *any* Windows – already has all the features Panther has? You'll be lucky if Longhorn – whenever *that* will come out, last estimation: 2005 – will do a half-clever job ripping off OS X (which will have moved on by then, of course). Just the most obvious example. Exposé. Where is it in Windows? Nowhere.

And yes, updating the OS regularly *is* a selling point – if you add tons of new and exciting features and make it a lot faster every time. As "small" Windows updates are usually busy enough trying to fix security issues # 327.345-329.763, you certainly wouldn't want to pay for them.

I just became a mac user with a new 15" SD PowerBook G4 but I used windows forever before that ever since 3.1....and (keep in mind I hate the UI of windows) but most of the functionality of Exposé is built into windows and can be accessed by ALT-TAB....granted it sucks compared to expose but the basic functionality is pretty much the same....AFAIK that's been in windows since '95...using windows blinds (or was it some other program? i think it was but the point remains the same) you can get screenshots instead of icons as you switch windows....and since Quicklaunch came with (I'm pretty sure) '98 you had the desktop link right there on the start menu....that's one of the few features I've actually missed from windows but now I'll have it! Still, you can't take credit away from MS for having it before Apple...

 

[juancarloz]

NO FREE Update?

AAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Just bought a new 15" PowerBook
why Oct. 8? Apple please roll back the date 1 month

The early bird gets to pay for their OS
That's what I get for buying early

 

[zync]

actually...

Originally posted by jxyama
nope. no fair use for software. it's a license you agree to.

with cds, it's interesting how things work in relation to copyright infringement.

take these two cases:

1) you make a copy of a cd you borrow from a friend for your personal use, you don't own the original cd.

2) you download songs via p2p from a cd you own to play on your ipod for your personal use.

did you know that 1) is legal but 2) is not?

when you make a copy of an original cd, regardless of who owns it, it's legal to use the copy for your own personal use.

downloadable file is a copy of the original cd and it is illegal for anyone but the original copier to use the file. if anyone other than the original cd copier uses the file, the original cd copier is no longer using the file for his own personal use and is violating the fair use principle. so even if you own the cd, you cannot download songs on it from someone else because the other person would then be no longer be using the files for his/her own personal use.

"fair use" is pretty hard to understand. just accept that it's just not legal to a copy of panther on two machines. that doesn't mean you can't do it but shouldn't try to justify it.

I did know that, though how about this logic....you install it on two systems YOU own and you EXCLUSIVELY use both computers. For the sake of this argument take one computer to be a desktop and the other a laptop. It's perfectly legal for you to install it as many times on one computer as you like as well as uninstall it....you could legally install and uninstall it each time you wanted to use the other computer. Installing it on two computers you own and exclusively use means you (under normal circumstances) are only using ONE computer at a time...you COULD uninstall and install for each switch but why do that when you can just install twice and only use one at a time? That makes no sense, sure it's illegal according to the license but there's no reason to do this as you're really only skipping an install/uninstall phase yet only using one computer with the single license. There's no reason to tell these people that they can't justify this, whether for legal reasons or for reasons dealing with their conscience. It's their right just as much as it is yours for asking them not to justify it (and realize I'm not typing only to you but to others who posted the same basic thing).

 

[iJon]

Re: NO FREE Update?

Originally posted by juancarloz
AAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Just bought a new 15" PowerBook
why Oct. 8? Apple please roll back the date 1 month

The early bird gets to pay for their OS
That's what I get for buying early

its how apple has always done it, did you think you would get it free??

iJon

 

[zync]

Re: Pirating v. Fair Use

Originally posted by otter-boy
You can make a legal fair use copy of your software as a backup in case the original gets destroyed (both the physical disk and the program running on the computer). Then you can reinstall the program on the computer or install it on a new computer if you have uninstalled (or destroyed) the copy running on the first computer. In fact, you can make as many fair use backups as you want, but you cannot run copies on multiple machines.
You, as an individual, do not get to chose what is fair use and what is not. The American people, as a society and through our government, decide what fair use is.
When people run multiple copies of software off of one license, it drives up the cost for others.
At least if you're are using software illegally, don't post it on a discussion board. Someday, Apple might decide to prosecute, and its lawyers are going to go after people like you first because you sit around bragging about illegal actions.

I've had enough....I've been talking to my friend about this subject (not this exact one but the one I'm about to talk about) and no one even realizes anything about this software do you? I believe that OS X (which runs of the mach kernel of FreeBSD) is subject to the GNU GPL license which states that the software itself must remain free except for costs of production and shipping (i.e. CDs, packaging, and shipping itself). You're also allowed to have multiple copies and able to distribute it to anyone you wish. Also, I know some of you will say that what Apple has developed merits being charged but under the GNU GPL it states that all software bundled or packaged with software subject to the GNU CPL becomes subject to the GNU GPL. Their operating system, as my friend has put it for so long and I have not agreed until I see my foolishness exemplified in others, is FREE sans S/H. So technically you are allowed to run multiple copies and do whatever you want with it. Also technically Apple also has to distribute or offer for download all of their source when distributing their OS and software. Basically using a BSD as the base converts everything packaged with it to the GNU GPL. They shouldn't even be allowed to charge $20 for shipping and then another $4-$12 for shipping....

just my $28.....

 

[zync]

actually...

Originally posted by jxyama
if you make a copy from an original CD and use it for your own personal use, it's perfectly legal regardless of the origin of the CD. (yes, if you steal a CD from a store and make a copy of it, you are a thief but not a "pirate." 😀 )

mp3 (or otherwise) files on p2p is a copy from original CDs. let's say A rips a cd borrowed from B (which B owns) and C downloads it from A's computer. C also owns the CD.

since mp3 file is a copy of the original CD, A can use it for his own use, even if he doesn't own the CD. however, sharing it on p2p is not A's personal use. so A would be in violation of copyright if he puts the file on p2p. C is also violating the copyright by downloading A's file because it's a file intended for A's own personal use. this is regardless of C's ownership of the CD.

clearer?

arn - i am fairly certain i got this right. however, i'm now a lawyer so i can't be 100% certain. regardless, i'll stop discussing this further because it's off topic. I just get peeved when some people try to come up with justifications for running two instances of a single purchased software. that's all.

This is actually not correct because it's not an exact copy preserving the content of the original....MP3s are not copies ripped off a CD....they are a pseudo-copy and actually a completely different file....they're not the same format and they're compressed....

 

[nalfein]

Re: Re: Pirating v. Fair Use

Originally posted by zync
I've had enough....I've been talking to my friend about this subject (not this exact one but the one I'm about to talk about) and no one even realizes anything about this software do you? I believe that OS X (which runs of the mach kernel of FreeBSD) is subject to the GNU GPL license which states that the software itself must remain free except for costs of production and shipping (i.e. CDs, packaging, and shipping itself). You're also allowed to have multiple copies and able to distribute it to anyone you wish. Also, I know some of you will say that what Apple has developed merits being charged but under the GNU GPL it states that all software bundled or packaged with software subject to the GNU CPL becomes subject to the GNU GPL. Their operating system, as my friend has put it for so long and I have not agreed until I see my foolishness exemplified in others, is FREE sans S/H. So technically you are allowed to run multiple copies and do whatever you want with it. Also technically Apple also has to distribute or offer for download all of their source when distributing their OS and software. Basically using a BSD as the base converts everything packaged with it to the GNU GPL. They shouldn't even be allowed to charge $20 for shipping and then another $4-$12 for shipping....

just my $28.....

That is just partially true. Apple OS X is based on bsd base system (call Darwin). This and only THIS part of the system which is release under GNU-GPL/bsd license. Actualy, you can develop software under every os and sell it as you want. BSD license Grand the right to SELL every software based on bsd licensed code without put your name on it(you dont need to distribute source code). GPL is little more invasive : if you base any software on GPL code you have to publish source code. You can use every GPL/BSD software to interract with and not modified the source code ans sell your application bundle with the GNU/BSD software. You know apple distribute source code for his open source part look at this.

http://developer.apple.com/darwin/
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/gpl-license.php
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php

and you know they charge 20$ because you need to pay for book/box/dvd(s)/labor(to put book and dvd in the box) i think it's a fair price