Apple Seeds Rumored Golden Master Mac OS X 10.6 (10A432) to Developers

Ok..To show that this build is not the "Gold Master" I will attach two images. One that I shouldn't and one that is from the MR guide.

OS 10.5.0 was released Oct. 26th 2007 and the ADC site had the file available for Select and Premier members the same day and it was labeled different.

The current build 10A432 says it is a "preview release".

The GM release was seeded the same day it became available to the public. Apple has always done this over the past several years with ADC members.

Please note the grabs : One is the revision and final release of 10.5.0 and the other is the note to devs designating the build as a preview release.
 

Attachments

  • revisions.jpg
    revisions.jpg
    21.7 KB · Views: 1,143
  • osx10.5.jpg
    osx10.5.jpg
    17.8 KB · Views: 109
  • preview_release.jpg
    preview_release.jpg
    20.1 KB · Views: 85
Interesting analysis Peace. I guess we'll see a new build of Snow Leopard (very) soon.

This is what bothered me all the time. There has been no confirmation what so ever about ADC stating it's Gold Master. I think we are close, 10A432 looks pretty good — besides some bugs and things that need to be finished — but we're not yet there.
 
IT-Pro said:
Interesting analysis Peace. I guess we'll see a new build of Snow Leopard (very) soon.

This is what bothered me all the time. There has been no confirmation what so ever about ADC stating it's Gold Master. I think we are close, 10A432 looks pretty good — besides some bugs and things that need to be finished — but we're not yet there.
Click to expand...


Judging by what I've seen on the intertubes and on rumor sites here's what's going to happen :

September 2nd invites will go out to the media for the annual iPod event to be held Sept 9th.. There will NOT be another seed to developers because that seed is the final "Gold Master" and it includes references to the Macbook Touch that will be a "One More Thing" at the Sept. 9th event.

Snow Leopard will be shown off on this new Macbook Touch and will go on sale Sept. 17th. The Macbook Touch will be available sometime in October.


Just an opinion. Take it with a "handful of salt" :)
 
Although Apple is sometimes very unpredictable, I can't recall they announced formal availability of Mac OS X releases on either of their special events in the past.

Just a press release announcing release date and pre-orders. And perhaps some fancy countdown like they did with Mac OS X Leopard.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Sky Blue said:
A continent of salt more like. No way they show a tablet off next month.
Click to expand...

It's not a tablet.

It will be released when Steve Jobs feels well enough to present it to the public. It's his toy and he wants to be the person to introduce it. Just like the iPhone. If he's up to doing the event in September you will see it. If he doesn't do the event you won't see it.

And as for the term used on this website "Golden Master" is incorrect. It is "Gold Master"

For reference please read this :

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2001/mar/07macosx_gm.html
 
Peace said:
It's not a tablet.

It will be released when Steve Jobs feels well enough to present it to the public. It's his toy and he wants to be the person to introduce it. Just like the iPhone. If he's up to doing the event in September you will see it. If he doesn't do the event you won't see it.

And as for the term used on this website "Golden Master" is incorrect. It is "Gold Master"

For reference please read this :

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2001/mar/07macosx_gm.html
Click to expand...
As far as I know, is Gold Master the physical disk used to duplicate all the retails disks and is the term Golden Master used to define the final development stage, like Release to Manufacturing. It only differs two characters, but it makes a hell of a difference.
 
IT-Pro said:
As far as I know, is Gold Master the physical disk used to duplicate all the retails disks and is the term Golden Master used to define the final development stage, like Release to Manufacturing. It only differs two characters, but it makes a hell of a difference.
Click to expand...


Ya got me.All I know is Apple calls it Gold Master.
 
um...

seashellz said:
developers-can anyone say-i know that for the 10.6 upgrade disc you need to have 10.5 already installed-or at least owned;
I would never install a major update ontop of another-I would fully wipe the HD and install;
The question: MUST you lay down 10.5 before you can install 10.6 as an update on top? That can lead to problems on down the line

Or can you do it like this as can be done with Windows: from a wiped clean disc, I install Windows XP Pro UPGRADE disc on the clean HD-after a bit of searching and minor installing we come to a challenge page;
It will ask to see a valid copy of XP Home before it will proceed with install;
So you pop out PRO disc and slip in the HOME disc when this is in, and 'seen' you may proceed to the main screen which gives you all install options;
I then eject the HOME disc and reinsert the pro and click the install button-and it proceeds to install the full XP Pro with no trace of Home-which parts are already integrated into the pro update disc
To me one integrated installer is superior
So ideally I would like to wipe my disc of 10.5 and install nothing but the 10.6 system
will this work?
Click to expand...


Wut?
 
Greenman85 said:
Wut?
Click to expand...


I think he is asking if the 29$ version is a "standalone" version,i.a you can install it on a empty HDD.
Or as many have been saying that it will need the leopard to be "built" on.



The same issue has gotten many people having Tigers concerned that they will have to buy the "boxed set" of SL for 169$ or whatnot,as the 29$ upgrade wont install on their machines. Or worse,to have to allso buy a version of Leopard,install it,upgrade it to .5.8 and install SL on top of that...


Have to say,apple has been a bit vague on the pricing but perhaps we´ll be a bit wiser after the unveiling...
 
Macinposh said:
I think he is asking if the 29$ version is a "standalone" version,i.a you can install it on a empty HDD.
Or as many have been saying that it will need the leopard to be "built" on.



The same issue has gotten many people having Tigers concerned that they will have to buy the "boxed set" of SL for 169$ or whatnot,as the 29$ upgrade wont install on their machines. Or worse,to have to allso buy a version of Leopard,install it,upgrade it to .5.8 and install SL on top of that...


Have to say,apple has been a bit vague on the pricing but perhaps we´ll be a bit wiser after the unveiling...
Click to expand...

http://www.apple.com/macosx/specs.html

Right column, last section:

Upgrading from Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger.
If your Intel-based Mac is running Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger, purchase the Mac Box Set (when available), which is a single, affordable package that includes Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard; iLife ’09, with the latest versions of iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iWeb, and iDVD; and iWork ’09, Apple’s productivity suite for home and office including Pages, Numbers, and Keynote.
Click to expand...

I don't think Apple could be any clearer than that.
 
matt3224 said:
The 64-bit kernel can be tested on the following configurations:

Machine
Model name
K64 status



Early 2008 Mac Pro

MacPro3,1
Capable

Early 2008 Xserve

Xserve2,1
Default

MacBook Pro 15/17

MacBookPro4,1
Capable

iMac

iMac8,1
Capable

UniBody MacBook Pro 15

MacBookPro5,1
Capable

UniBody MacBook Pro 17

MacBookPro5,2
Capable

Mac Pro

MacPro4,1
Capable

iMac

iMac9,1
Capable

Early 2009 Xserve

Xserve3,1
Default

Using this seed*and one of the K64-capable machines listed above, simply boot the Mac with the '6' and '4' keys held down to use the 64-bit kernel. Observe that*uname -v*reports*RELEASE_X86_64. *Machines listed as "Default" and all Server installs will run K64 automatically when loaded with*10A402.

You can also set*arch=x86_64*in your*boot-args*NVRAM variable, using*nvram(8). When you're done, you can remove the boot-arg, or if you can no longer boot into an OS to unset it, hold command-option-P-R to zap NVRAM.

If you just want one partition to boot x86_64, edit the file /Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/com.apple.Boot.plist and add*arch=x86_64*to the kernel flags.

If some functionality is not working and you must revert to using the 32-bit kernel, you can either reboot with the '3' and '2' keys held down or set*arch=i386*in your boot-args.


http://imattic.co.uk/
Click to expand...

No iMac 7,1 64bits kernel support?? Why is that, as it it Core 2 Duo??
Any hardware limitation?
 
neo25 said:
No iMac 7,1 64bits kernel support?? Why is that, as it it Core 2 Duo??
Any hardware limitation?
Click to expand...

There is no requirement to have a 64bit kernel to run 64bit applications - you can run 64bit applications on a 32bit kernel, the application can access more 4GB and you get the security benefits of 64bit binaries. The only machine to boot by default using the 64bit kernel is the XServe - everything else is using the 32bit kernel.
 
I wish Microsoft would come up with a way to run 64 bit applications on their 32 bit kernel. Or maybe they just don't see a need for it yet.
 
CQd44 said:
I wish Microsoft would come up with a way to run 64 bit applications on their 32 bit kernel. Or maybe they just don't see a need for it yet.
Click to expand...

I would say that Apple realised that they would first have to get their user space to 64bit and then 10.7 will probably be when they'll move their kernel across. Although companies are testing their KEXT against the 64bit KEXT API - I have a feeling that Apple doesn't want to inhibit end users from people migrating because certain vendors haven't updated their drivers yet. Microsoft on the other hand is a lot bigger and the transition to 64bit at the kernel level occurred before Apple and the requirement of Vista certification was to deliver 64bit and 32bit drivers at the same time.

Someone raised the issue of it being referred to as 'pre-release' in the notes - it is released as a pre-release, they wait till they get feed back about any possible show stoppers. If no feedback regarding show stoppers comes in - it then turns into GM. A GM isn't mean to be perfect - there will be bugs and the update will most likely come out before the end of October.
 
CQd44 said:
I wish Microsoft would come up with a way to run 64 bit applications on their 32 bit kernel. Or maybe they just don't see a need for it yet.
Click to expand...

Why? What would be the benefit? Especially since Apple is moving in the direction of Microsoft (full 64-bit system). I run Vista x64 and Win7 x64, and hardly ever have any issues due to the x64 kernel.

By the way, there is at least one 64-bit application that runs on 32-bit Windows.
 
macintoshtoffy said:
There is no requirement to have a 64bit kernel to run 64bit applications - you can run 64bit applications on a 32bit kernel, the application can access more 4GB and you get the security benefits of 64bit binaries. The only machine to boot by default using the 64bit kernel is the XServe - everything else is using the 32bit kernel.
Click to expand...

Got it. Thanks.
 
Word is (on Twitter) that in fact 10A435 is the real GM. That would mean 10A432 was just a GM candidate.

Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger. I'm trying to verify this, but for now you should take it with a grain of salt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top