Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Seeds First Version of Mac OS X 10.5.4 to Developers

shervieux said:
I won't argue with you. However I worked in some companies where the mandated practice is to duplicate entire code sets for the same functionaility on the differnt hardware or OS's; rather than just a one line check for that particular command. so the fix has to be implemented twice. I hated doing updates for those companies as it meant double the work, double the testing, and douple the size of a release.

Sometimes you have to do that because of system calls are different. Are you a developer? Do you look at what is under the hood to get to the binary and assembly level (languarge the machine actually understands, not the english-like or code we write in)? I am glad I only had to do that a few times and abandoned that years ago since software companies write apps and OS's to create programming languages that break it down for me, so it looks like I am only clicking a checkbox.

I am done with this argument. non-developers and non-system people do not know what it takes under the hood. I do not care what platform - in the end it all boils down to code to make it work for specific hardware, and code to interpret pretty code (as in the case of Visual studio, Java, etc). you have code in the OS or firmware that breaks down your pretty code to run the hardware. Some do it more efficiently than others.
Click to expand...

You are not the only software developer reading this forum. I have worked in OS development for over 30 years, the last 28 of which was on Unix. And yes, I know what assembly language is. A very, very small percentage of OS X is written in assembly language. And the overwhelming percentage of bugfixes made to OS X - I would guess 99% at least - are made to a common code base. The architecture-specific code (i.e., Intel vs. PPC) in the OS is really fairly small, and most of that code by now will have been debugged considerably. Bugs that are showing up now will overwhelmingly be in architecture-independent code. There will be somewhat more platform-specific code (Macbook vs. iMac vs. Mac Pro, etc.), but even that is sure to be a small percentage of the overall code base.
 
Jonny75 said:
The point being no original code has not needed a re-write.
Click to expand...

I doubt most anything is a rewrite. Most of it is is going to be just minor changes. But as someone else pointed out, a one line change to the code of a 2MB binary still is packaged as 2MB of new binary code. Its not 2MB of new code. And then with Universal Binaries, its 4MB of new code. Actually 16MB because they have to package separate frameworks for:
32-bit PPC
64-bit PPC
32-bit Intel
64-bit Intel
and then since all the frameworks are dual-mode (Garbage Collected)
32-bit PPC Garbage Collected
64-bit PPC Garbage Collected
32-bit Intel Garbage Collected
64-bit Intel Garbage Collected

So a one line change or even 5 pages worth of code change in a 2MB module comes out to be 16MB of changes in the installer for any Apple OS framework. Of course for non-framework items like apps, you're still talking about 2x the size or more.
 
And for the record, Leopard is a really good OS on every machine I've ever seen it on. Yes its had issues, but I've had issues with XP, Vista, Tiger, Panther, Jaguar, and so on. Only 10.4.11 had almost no issues, but it took awhile to get to that point.

I do think Leopard has some immature parts - Spaces being the #1 thing that I love, but hate though I believe that's due to VMWare - but I can turn off Spaces and for me I'm above the 10.4.11 experience.

The only reason Leopard has had more negative feedback on the web is because there are dramatically more Mac users now than were with previous OSs and because the Vista/Leopard competition is well publicized.
 
Jonny75 said:
Of course Apple should work on new versions, but what is clear is that there were huge numbers of problems with 10.5 evidenced by all journalists, the traffic on all Mac sites including Apple and here and feedback from Apple Stores.
Click to expand...

Every major OS release will have bugs (and not just OSX). I don't buy that 10.5 was worse than previous versions, I think people just forget how 10.4.0 and 10.3.0 were.

Any major update that adds new features will introduce new bugs that weren't in the previous version. That's just how it is. The alternative is a never ending development cycle that ships without the latest and greatest features. The fact is, if you wait until software is perfect, it either never ships...or at least it ships so late that it's outdated by the time it's released. Except for the simplest apps, all software ships with bugs, it's just a question of what is acceptable.
 
Apple Can't Win

I went ahead an upgraded to 10.5.3 the other night and I haven't had any problems. Really, I have not had any OS problems with 10.5.2 either (but that's just me); I do run into issues with Safari, though.

The problem is that if Apple does not address issues with an update in a timely manner, users complain-problems not being resolved quick enough.

If they seed .n right after .m is released to the public, users complain-it's too soon.

Then there is the rumor or two about 10.6, and users complain-too soon, no support for my Mac.

Either way, Apple can't win. But on the bright side, with Apple, we're a lot better off than the M$ world! It's all about perspective. Maybe we can use our energy to steer Apple toward fixing those specific issues we know are out there-maybe some user driven milestones.
 
milo said:
Except for the simplest apps, all software ships with bugs, it's just a question of what is acceptable.
Click to expand...

Good point and I agree. However I find the problems with wifi across so many machines unacceptable. I find the instability unacceptable. Others upgraded for the features, I just wanted something I could rely on and the features. I think my days of buying a new OS X within the first year are over. Better to let it ruin others' machines than my own. Had I moved from Tiger to 10.5.3, it wouldn't have been quite as frustrating and painful.

As to my references to code, I am writing as a layman. When I write 'code' I really mean features needing rewrites to perform as they are intended. The bare bones of how you achieve that and UNIX coding from the 1970s leaves me, and most Mac users (although admittedly not so much here), cold.

Like TV, I want a good picture and content, I don't care for how the picture is encoded and decoded behind the screen!
 
Phil A. said:
Your original post read as though you were saying developers had twice as much work to do to support PPC and Intel, which is why I said it was overstated. If you're now saying that you really meant that the resulting compiled binaries will be larger, then I would agree with you more (although it's important for people to remember that Universal Binary apps are not twice as large as single architecture apps because most of the size in an application is taken up by resources, etc that are common across all architectures. Similarly, some UB apps actually have 4 architectures in them: 32 bit and 64 bit PPC and 32 bit and 64 bit Intel, but they aren't 4 times as large as single architecture apps).
Having said all that, I'm still confused by your comment about the "if..then..else" statements: This reads as if the created app makes decisions at runtime based on the architecture. In fact, the compiler creates separate executable binaries, one for each architecture, that are then bundled into the app bundle. In effect, you have multiple compilers running on the single source file generating different compiled apps.
Click to expand...

My posts meant to try to do the following things:

1. Explain all the code that goes into trying to combine 2 separate OS's into one OS that runs on two separate architechtures - thus why larger file downloads from Tiger the Leopard.

2. Get people to realize what goes on under the hood and development cycles, what it takes for the compilers to do, and why you can't please everyone. Do you release quickly, and have the drawbacks, or do you take the extra time and get people pissed that it appears nothing is getting done? Unfortunately no matter how hard you try, trying to obtain the middle ground is a losing battle, especially since this Apple Vs. MS race... My dream (and disgree as you might) would be for both companies to merge and have the best of both companies apps running on the best of OS X -using the Apple mentality and hardware to get it done.:p But we know that cannot happen as we are talking about 2 separate architectures, two separate lines of thinking, and we saw what happened when they worked togther in the past (first editions of Windows 95, Apple Menu structure and design running on a buggy operating system - then MS took all the credit).

3. as far as the app making the decisions at runtime or the compiler making the decision thus creating two separate binaries - that is all in the implementation. I have seen both implementations done (see one of my prior posts). I also work with a number of "interpreted" languages (meaning there is no compiler and code changes are executed on the fly - on mainframe legacy platforms. Here, it is the app making the decision at runtime. I had to work with code in applications that said "if version=xxx" or make a system call to have the OS report back a piece of hardware, then say if hardware=xxx.

So in a fact; depending on implementation, it can make for more work for the developer - been there, done that.

One of my problems with MacRumors is there are these wanna-be geeks that really have no clue of really goes on in the I/T world, and what it takes to release applications and OS's. My other complaint is there are those real Geeks (like myself) who try to explain how it works and why we have what we have, only to get shot down by a wanna-be confusing the situation even more.

No wonder Apple users are called a "cult".

Me, I just want the best computing experience for my needs, at the most reasonable cost. thus why I switched from Windows to Apple. Hardware more expensive, but lasts longer. Software less expensive, but very intuitive and less bloated for my needs (and all apps seem to integrate with each other nicely - even if it is a different software company putting it out), plus most apps are simpler to work with (simple also sometimes means more code behind the scenes as we are relying on the app to do things, rather than making the decisions or tweaking ourselves.)

my bottom line:

1. Business sense - get most right the first time as you can. Do not break the majority of what people are currently using, and phase out obsoletes.

2. Do not delay the fixes longer than necessary to try to include more fixes (maybe that is why MS puts out system updates ever couple of days to a week, they have problems and are pushing out what they deemed finished as quickly as possible and include only that - not waiting a few weeks to months to bundle together larger updates also resulting in larger downloads). The smaller push outs, the less you notice something. The larger push outs, the more likely the problems, and also you get people rushing into areas they never likely used and start complaining about that. Plus the larger the push-out, the more chance you will have to fix even larger chunks of code when the bug reports come back (multiple reports in multiple areas).

What I think Apple is trying to accomplish here is to provide a regular update schedule delivering fixes quicker, and also stop the "when are they going to get to..." or this huge update and my xxx is still broken.
 
MacFanBoyMike said:
I went ahead an upgraded to 10.5.3 the other night and I haven't had any problems. Really, I have not had any OS problems with 10.5.2 either (but that's just me); I do run into issues with Safari, though.

The problem is that if Apple does not address issues with an update in a timely manner, users complain-problems not being resolved quick enough.

If they seed .n right after .m is released to the public, users complain-it's too soon.

Then there is the rumor or two about 10.6, and users complain-too soon, no support for my Mac.

Either way, Apple can't win. But on the bright side, with Apple, we're a lot better off than the M$ world! It's all about perspective. Maybe we can use our energy to steer Apple toward fixing those specific issues we know are out there-maybe some user driven milestones.
Click to expand...

Hell yeah! It's a dream compared to Vista! ;o)

And I have been doing my bit reporting any bugs/crashes. Apple do listen and do fix which is superb. I may gripe, but I'm in the position of highly satisfied wanting perfection, rather than anything else!
 
Jonny75 said:
This is reflected in the major rehauling of the updates. It could well be 10.5.9 will feature NONE of the code of 10.5.0 through updates. Admission that there was something seriously wrong with Leopard. With 500MB updates, we are showing huge levels of rewrites.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, this is the stupidest thing I've heard on the internet in a long time.

I can absolutely, 100% guarantee you that 10.5.3 does not contain "huge levels of rewrites". How naive and ignorant of software development are you? Do you even know the word "rewrite" means from a software development perspective?


You do realize that even if Apple changes one single line of code for a program like Finder or iCal, or if they change one line of code in a Framework that it means the entire binary of that code has to be redistributed in a software update? Apple's updates are not binary diffs.

You also realize that each bit of binary code is updated twice? Once for Intel and once for PPC? There's a reason it's called "Universal".

And in fact, I'm not 100% about this, but I don't even believe they are package-level diffs, but I could be wrong. If I'm not, then changing Finder or iCal, etc, also means all of those resources are redistributed even if they had not changed. And those resources take up a non-trivial amount of storage: icon files, help files, various nibs for various languages, etc.


You need to come back to reality.
 
bryanzak said:
With all due respect, this is the stupidest thing I've heard on the internet in a long time.
Click to expand...

You have no respect as you later show. And you don't get on the Net much if that's the stupidest (sic) thing you have read. You also do not read around the subject.
I can absolutely, 100% guarantee you that 10.5.3 does not contain "huge levels of rewrites". How naive and ignorant of software development are you? Blah, blah, blah
Click to expand...

As I have stated many times which everyone else got but you didn't, I was writing metaphorically. Stop being so literal, come out of your computer class and see there is a rich world out there, those who use language to communicate and not code! ;o)
You need to come back to reality.
Click to expand...

The reality is Leopard had problems. Apple's profits were driven by Mac sales, not iPods/iPhones:

https://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/22/apple-1q-2008-results-record-1-58-billion-profit/

https://www.macrumors.com/2008/04/23/apple-2q-2008-results-conference-call-highlights-profit/

http://www.macworld.com/article/133145/2008/04/profit.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/technology/24apple.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Macs are being bought by people who have never used Apple products which is great. This is the time to get Apple aps and OS up to scratch. Past achievements are nothing if Apple can't get a great OS there to keep converts and bring more into the fold.

You may know code, but you know nothing of business, finances and how the stock market works. You may be a Wozniak but you're no Jobs. Get a grip.

Your manner also suggests some insecurity and dysfunction, so don't blow it all over here if you have some problems to tackle.
 
Why Bash Leopard?

I'm reading some negative stuff about Leopard. My experience with the OS has been great! I've had it since the day it came out and I haven't ever had a crash, or any of the "bugs" that people speak of. I guess I'm just lucky? I also have a recent Macbook ( as of Fall 2007) that I'm sure was built for the OS requirements. All this inferior stuff, I just don't understand. I edit video heavily and use basically all the Mac Adobe programs. I will agree that iMovie and the like aren't that great (thus why I use Adobe), but this OS is awesome! I only shut my Macbook off once a week, and that is only so I'm sure that certain "clean up" functions operated, so I'm told anyway. Long Live Leopard!
:D
 
Saying good bye....

time to say good-bye:(

Because of the way macrumors is turning into Mac-Whiners, and the fact that my job is now taking me to supporting .NET on an MS-SQL server database at 120 hospitals and growing, I am now working 10-12 hr days 9on top of my family time and my Christian ministry). I really have no time to contribute to these posts anymore.

yes, on MS platform, I now have to go to working 12 hr works days and am now at almost working 7-days a week (thank God I am paid hourly).

I will remain a mac user for 95% of my needs. I am a happy switcher to the mac way of life, still will continue the long process of switching my docs from propriatary formats on the MS platform to a more supported format for both mac and my few friends who still use windows, and I will still be convincing more and more people to switch to mac.

I also understand from what I read that Apple owns and monitors this forum frequently, so I hope they continue to hear our concerns. However, I think more progress would be made bringing issues to apple directly; through their preferred technical submissions (get support from the source, and also who wants to read through 30+ pages of whining). :eek:

I know from contacting Apple in the past directly, I got a better response and more help than when I tried to contact MS in the past about their issues. MS always come back and say "one question per incident report", I will only answer X - and also the fact that they are starting to charge for support and questions. I love the fact that Apple has genius bars at their stores and their staff is always friendly and ready to assist you (unlike my recent experiences trying to get a friends and also a clients laptops repaired).

I will always look to Macrumors to see what is coming out, but I am dropping out of the speculations.

good luck to you all, there is more to my life than this forum. I am concentrating more on my work, my family, and my Christian ministry rather than following these trends. I will also continue the best tool for the job in my needs (so no screwups please - I just got to my happy place with owning a mac). And hopefully someday in the future, I can bow out of I/T all together and settle down my life a little more - an also concentrate on my passion which is Christian ministry.

if you think I am this passionate about I/T, apple, etc - you should see my passion about leading people to a relationship with Jesus Christ and seeing them change their lives.:)
 
Jonny75 said:
The reality is Leopard had problems.
Click to expand...

Guess what?

Tiger had problems. Lots of them. So did 10.3. And Mac OS 9. And Mac OS 7.5 (omg remember 7.5.1?), etc. etc.

You somehow think bugs in OS software is new?

Mac OS X is at least one, if not two, orders of magnitude larger and more complex than the Mac OS delivered ten years ago. Yet the number of problems and severity hasn't really changed. All software has bugs. Bugs get fixed. New features get add, new bugs appear, new updates come out with fixes.

There's nothing new going on here. It's always been this way and always will be.
 
Jonny75 said:
As to my references to code, I am writing as a layman. When I write 'code' I really mean features needing rewrites to perform as they are intended. The bare bones of how you achieve that and UNIX coding from the 1970s leaves me, and most Mac users (although admittedly not so much here), cold.
Click to expand...

Well OK, but "code" has a specific meaning, especially to us coders. And some of us were around in the 1970s, and even before that, so that kinda has a special meaning too. :)

This is like the old joke about the definition of "recession" and "depression" - you know, it's a recession when your neighbor is out of work but it's a depression when you're out of work. In this case, Leopard bugs are minor when other users are experiencing them but they're major when you're affected. Maybe I'm just lucky, but Leopard has always run fine on my old G4 tower. Other people report lots of problems but for me Tiger was great and Leopard is also great.

But I can well believe that every new feature that Leopard introduced will show up with some bug somewhere that eventually will be fixed. The amount of code that these fixes change however will be small, especially in comparison to the overall (massive) amount of code in the entire OS X release.
 
>>As far as I'm concerned, faster releases just mean they're getting better at getting fixes done fast and getting them out the door. To be honest, I'd love to see more quick releases using a 10.5.3.1 model (and that goes for all apps and OSs)...but then the accusations would really fly...how dare apple improve their OS so often?
------
MAYBE...
But would you like to have to take your car to your mechanic once a week or once every six months?

If once a week id either fire my mechanic or else my GM/Toyota/Maserati vehicle, rather than congratulate him on your at least being able to make it back to the garage each time for fixes.

My thought is if they do it right, we should see fewer updates, not more-excepting security patches
-------
After 3 tries with Leo-Im back to rock solid stable 10.4.11...maybe by 10.5.5 they will get it right
 
milo said:
People don't expect support forever, they just expect it for a reasonable length of time, and 3 years is on the short side.
Click to expand...

I don't know what's funnier; the people who are debating the name of 10.6 (who cares!!?), or the PPC users who are so surprised by the "abandoning" of their G5's. I wouldn't be surprised if you guys were also pissed they removed classic support too. :rolleyes:

Full of Win said:
10.5 = proof of having too many irons in the fire is a bad thing
Click to expand...

Which is why removing PPC is a good thing. It's dead. It's been dead for a while. Get over it!
 
Stridder44 said:
I don't know what's funnier; the people who are debating the name of 10.6 (who cares!!?), or the PPC users who are so surprised by the "abandoning" of their G5's.
Click to expand...

I don't think any of us are surprised, just disappointed. And I don't see what's particularly funny about that. Whatever machine you own now, I assume you have an expectation of how long Apple will support it - if that turns out to be a year or two shorter than what you expected when you bought the machine, are you going to be laughing about it?
 
Stridder44 said:
I don't know what's funnier; the people who are debating the name of 10.6 (who cares!!?), or the PPC users who are so surprised by the "abandoning" of their G5's. I wouldn't be surprised if you guys were also pissed they removed classic support too. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Absolutely. And it really isn't a joke.

Which is why removing PPC is a good thing. It's dead. It's been dead for a while. Get over it!
Click to expand...

The pisser is that this is only being done for marketing reasons, not technical ones. As others have said, it's one thing to end OS support for hardware incapable of running the latest technology. That is expected. But this is only being done for the sake of Apple profits. Why should I "get over" that?
 
missing the big picture

Users are no more likely to experience problems with leopard than they were with tiger. The only differences are:

1. WAY more users of Leopard than Tiger. Apple has been blowing up--havent you noticed? If 1% of users had issues with Tiger and .75% had issues with Leopard, since the install base is so much larger at the X.X.3 mark, there are a larger total number of users with problems.

2. Different type of users. As apple goes more and more mainstream, the general level of computer nerdishness among users will go down, and people will be unable to fix problems themselves, instead coming to forums to complain about why their never-updated firmware netgear router from 2003 doesn't work with the wifi in leopard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back