Apple Seeds OS X 10.5.7 Build 9J39 to Developers

[Povilas]

That's way above my head lol. Not quite a programmer. Shoot.

I disagree It's very easy. Just google it if you like.

 

[3282868]

I disagree It's very easy. Just google it if you like.

Ah, thanks, I'll google "Interface Builder". I haven't programmed since my college days (almost a decade ago ). I've been learning Flash on my free time for web design, but nothing since my Javascript and C++ years.

 

[Povilas]

Ah, thanks, I'll google "Interface Builder". I haven't programmed since my college days (almost a decade ago ). I've been learning Flash on my free time for web design, but nothing since my Javascript and C++ years.

If you don't mind : http://macthemes2.net/forum/viewtopic.php?id=16783903

 

[Eric S.]

Then why is the build of 10.5.6 9G2030 in my new 2009 IMac

The "2" usually means it's an Intel-specific build (although I've noticed that Mac Pros use "3" - maybe they increment the number for each architecture-specific build). When you update, for example to 10.5.7, they will have integrated that architecture-specific code into the generic codebase, so you'll be able to run the same build as everyone else.

The reason for this is that Apple doesn't follow its own rules sometimes, I suppose. That's the only explanation I can think of. Anyone with a 2009 Mac Pro report on their Mac OS X build number?

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1159

 

[Eric S.]

. (please remove)

 

[mc.stever]

why does the version code have a J in the middle? do the dev releases usually run a little ahead of the final release:

Version history
Version Build Release date Note
10.5.0 9A581 26 October 2007 Available on first-released retail DVD
10.5.1 9B18 15 November 2007 Apple download page; also available on second-released retail DVD
10.5.2 9C31 11 February 2008 Apple download page
10.5.3 9D34 28 May 2008 Apple download page
10.5.4 9E17 30 June 2008 Apple download page; also available on third-released retail DVD
10.5.5 9F33 15 September 2008 Apple download page
10.5.6 9G55 15 December 2008 Apple download page

All of the 10.5.7 builds that I've seen have been 9Jxx. No clue what happened to H & I.

Heres a list of the various released builds. Not sure I can see a pattern.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1633

 

[Eric S.]

All of the 10.5.7 builds that I've seen have been 9Jxx. No clue what happened to H & I.

Heres a list of the various released builds. Not sure I can see a pattern.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1633

Here's a more complete list, at least through 10.5.3. In the past, missing letter builds in the generic stream were used for machine-specific builds:

http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=33

 

[Peace]

Here's a more complete list, at least through 10.5.3. In the past, missing letter builds in the generic stream were used for machine-specific builds:

http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=33

I believe "H" and "I" are being reserved for the iPhone"s"

 

[vvebsta]

How many numbers has Apple gone up to in the past before releasing the next version of OSX? Have they ever gotten to a .9 (like 10.5.9)?

 

[Eidorian]

How many numbers has Apple gone up to in the past before releasing the next version of OSX? Have they ever gotten to a .9 (like 10.5.9)?

10.4.11

It isn't that hard to find.

 

[3282868]

Cool, you may want to edit the wikipedia entry for OSX 10.5.6 ... mine's a "Build 9G55."

I guess that I should add the caveat that I had to update the machine once I received it from 10.5.4, so that's why I am probably at 9G55. It's not even that old either and I wish that I had the 8GB RAM.

My Octo Mac Pro has 9G55 as well. I suppose that must be the update version for Intel systems?

 

[Cboss]

My Octo Mac Pro has 9G55 as well. I suppose that must be the update version for Intel systems?

Seems like that's the case as my '07 Macbook has 9G55.

 

[goinskiing]

The title says it all, I'm getting more that a bit frustrated with the networking issues on my early 2008 MBP. Sad but I'm begining to think it is time for a class action suit, as my machine has actually gotten worst with each update. I now have the Mac scanning on what where previously reliable hot spots.

I'm not one to normally get wound up over minor defects in a product as nothing is perfect. This has really degenerated into something that doesn't even work properly Since reports are still wide spread on Apples forms I don't think it is a hardware issue.


Dave

Mine has gotten worse too, just a little frustrating. Each update I've been like"Yes! Finally a fix." only to find out that it was worse than before.

 

[Eric S.]

My Octo Mac Pro has 9G55 as well. I suppose that must be the update version for Intel systems?

Seems like that's the case as my '07 Macbook has 9G55.

9G55 is just the 10.5.6 released build. My Power Mac G4 is running 9G55 too.

 

[3282868]

Question

If you were to install the pre-release beta, would you be able to install the final release of 10.5.7 over that beta version?

 

[JavierP]

If you were to install the pre-release beta, would you be able to install the final release of 10.5.7 over that beta version?

Yes, but you will have to install the 10.5.7 final combo update

 

[Cboss]

9G55 is just the 10.5.6 released build. My Power Mac G4 is running 9G55 too.

Ahh... Ok, gotcha.

 

[The Flashing Fi]

The title says it all, I'm getting more that a bit frustrated with the networking issues on my early 2008 MBP. Sad but I'm begining to think it is time for a class action suit, as my machine has actually gotten worst with each update. I now have the Mac scanning on what where previously reliable hot spots.

I'm not one to normally get wound up over minor defects in a product as nothing is perfect. This has really degenerated into something that doesn't even work properly Since reports are still wide spread on Apples forms I don't think it is a hardware issue.


Dave

I agree.

Since Leopard's release, the wallpaper switcher on my MBP hardly works properly. It lags everything, unless I disable the 3D dock and the translucent menubar.

And when I installed 10.5.6, it seemed worse. It seemed like everything loaded slower. Overall, it just seemed crappy. 10.5.5 was MUCH better IMO.

It seems like the only way we'll get better drivers is to get Snow Leopard when it comes out, since they will be using a 64-bit kernel, which will require the drivers to be 64-bit, which will mean that will need to rewrite the drivers.

Tiger seemed so much better, but unfortunately, everything has shifted to Leopard, which pretty much forces me to use it.

 

[ThomasJL]

Any idea if 10.5.7 might be released before this coming Saturday?

 

[Eric S.]

Any idea if 10.5.7 might be released before this coming Saturday?

Anything is possible. I thought we would have seen the release before now, so who knows? Blog sites like Ars Technica, Softpedia, as well as AppleInsider are only saying that it will be sometime in April.

 

[JFreak]

AppleInsider are only saying that it will be sometime in April.

Which means they have no clue. Anybody could have said that, it's no rocket science. If there will not be a 10.5.7 in April, it means Apple's in deep trouble with something.

 

[Inconsequential]

My 2009 Mac Pro build is 9G3553

 

[ThomasJL]

Bump.

Any new news about a release date for 10.5.7?

 

[Tallest Skil]

Bump.

Any new news about a release date for 10.5.7?

It is against the rules to bump threads. Please go read the rules.

We know nothing about 10.5.7.

 

[Eric S.]

Any new news about a release date for 10.5.7?

I haven't seen any news stories more recent than the ones I mentioned above in post #70.