Jobs: Leopard Will Anchor Product Schedule For A Decade

[BrokenChairs]

My view of the 12-18 month cycle is: if it ain't broke don't fix (so to speak).

I'd be happy for something every 20-24 months or even longer, but I don't want to have bought the latest OS and then 12 months later fork out for another OS. Yes I understand that technology advances a hell of a lot within 12-18 months, but seriously, I've had Tiger for about 2 years and have enjoyed it a lot. Leopard is very exciting with its new changes and updates, but I don't want OSes to become something of an overglorified eye-candy for a year, knowing that one year could be a crap OS (because not enough time was used to develop it properly) and then that being shelved off for another upgrade.

Kind of like the iLife series. Once every 2-3 years, with updates (as per usual) along the way.

Argh. Enough already.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

They do. The developers just don't bother after a new release; why should they? What would you like Apple to do to provide extra "support" after an OS is replaced? There's nothing that stops the ability of developers to continue releasing software for Tiger. More to the point, I can still get almost all software I need to work on an old 2001 iBook (upgraded to Panther) to this day.

Legacy support is intentionally poor at Apple. A four year old Mac will easily run Leopard. Six years is a good run for a computer. It will continue to work for many years after that, even if it no longer runs the latest OS, contrary to what you seem to think is a disappearance of software immediately following a new release. The real problem is that developers of new software don't bother to support older OSes, but I wouldn't if I were them, anyway.

and another example of why apple will never and does not want to enter the corporate world Apple seems to really only want to say in the consumer side.
There is intentionally poor and then there is just going to far. Apples is beyond poor.
I love how people argue oh you do not have to upgrade when even you say apple poor on it. The 129 upgrade cost should be figured in. Computer having a 4 years life span have to figure in at least one if not 2 OS upgrades.

 

[La Porta]

I think that was my point. Apple forces its upgrades on people. Apple Backward compatibility is beyond poor. Tiger I think should at least have Devs and Major Support from apple up until at least leopard is replaced by what ever is next and so on but come Christmas getting new stuff for tiger will already start be coming an issue.

Another thing that I think people are forgetting is that much of this "legacy support" was killing Apple before OS X. OS 9 ran almost everything I knew of from System 7...and that spanned a LOT of years. Holding onto that meant that the Mac OS was doomed to stay old. So what happened? Jobs came in and tore it all up. And, as I remember, when the Public Beta came out in 2000, people were whining and complaining about how old software had to be run through Classic. Yes, it was a pain for educational institutions, etc...but that isn't the point. The point is PROGRESS, which is what Jobs is, and always has, paved the way for. If you guys remember, once the Mac was his baby, he wanted to plow the Apple II under for good, regardless of how well it was doing, simply because it was the past.

I'm sorry if all your stuff doesn't work. But, like others have said here, I have a 2000 iBook and 2000 iMac DV SE that work perfectly fine under 10.3...and I know a whole host of programs that I can run on them and my MacBook Pro. It isn't like Apple is crippling your computer: it still works fine. If you want to run all the same stuff, wait for upgraded versions of your software before buying 10.5. The world won't collapse.

 

[gwangung]

and another example of why apple will never and does not want to enter the corporate world Apple seems to really only want to say in the consumer side.
There is intentionally poor and then there is just going to far. Apples is beyond poor.
I love how people argue oh you do not have to upgrade when even you say apple poor on it. The 129 upgrade cost should be figured in. Computer having a 4 years life span have to figure in at least one if not 2 OS upgrades.

Do you have any figures on how long the corporate world keeps their computers? If it's 4-5 years or less, I'm not sure that supports your point...

 

[kresh]

and another example of why apple will never and does not want to enter the corporate world Apple seems to really only want to say in the consumer side.
There is intentionally poor and then there is just going to far. Apples is beyond poor.
I love how people argue oh you do not have to upgrade when even you say apple poor on it. The 129 upgrade cost should be figured in. Computer having a 4 years life span have to figure in at least one if not 2 OS upgrades.

I've been reading your back and forth's about Apple's upgrade cycle. Are you trolling or are you serious?

Do you really expect Apple to give 2 OS upgrades with a new computer? They are in business for a profit. A profit for everything they do. Their job is to cannibalize their own user base over and over, at a profit. If they don't then another company will.

I think the OSS movement has permanently damaged some peoples views about for profit companies.

edit: One last thing. I agree that fixing bugs should be free for the OS version you own, if a company decides to do this. If they didn't fix bugs, maybe your complaints would be valid. The very first second that a software engineer starts working on a new feature that was not included in a previous release, then someone has to pay for it.

 

[photomaniac]

If the rumors of no PPC support in 10.6 are true, there will be a lot of p****d off G4 and G5 owners in 12-18 months time.

I don't think they should be pissed... it's not like you still can't use Leopard... and by the time that OS is outdated you'll mostly be in the market for a new computer

 

[vansouza]

Agreed

I've been reading your back and forth's about Apple's upgrade cycle. Are you trolling or are you serious?

Do you really expect Apple to give 2 OS upgrades with a new computer? They are in business for a profit. A profit for everything they do. Their job is to cannibalize their own user base over and over, at a profit. If they don't then another company will.

I think the OSS movement has permanently damaged some peoples views about for profit companies.

edit: One last thing. I agree that fixing bugs should be free for the OS version you own, if a company decides to do this. If they didn't fix bugs, maybe your complaints would be valid. The very first second that a software engineer starts working on a new feature that was not included in a previous release, then someone has to pay for it.

That is why God invented the ignore list option.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I've been reading your back and forth's about Apple's upgrade cycle. Are you trolling or are you serious?

Do you really expect Apple to give 2 OS upgrades with a new computer? They are in business for a profit. A profit for everything they do. Their job is to cannibalize their own user base over and over, at a profit. If they don't then another company will.

I think the OSS movement has permanently damaged some peoples views about for profit companies.

edit: One last thing. I agree that fixing bugs should be free for the OS version you own, if a company decides to do this. If they didn't fix bugs, maybe your complaints would be valid. The very first second that a software engineer starts working on a new feature that was not included in a previous release, then someone has to pay for it.

No I never expect apple to give 2 OS upgrades away. I said you need to figure it in to the cost. AKA you the one buying the computer need to figure in and assume you be forking out the cash for OS upgrades

Another thing that I think people are forgetting is that much of this "legacy support" was killing Apple before OS X. OS 9 ran almost everything I knew of from System 7...and that spanned a LOT of years. Holding onto that meant that the Mac OS was doomed to stay old. So what happened? Jobs came in and tore it all up. And, as I remember, when the Public Beta came out in 2000, people were whining and complaining about how old software had to be run through Classic. Yes, it was a pain for educational institutions, etc...but that isn't the point. The point is PROGRESS, which is what Jobs is, and always has, paved the way for. If you guys remember, once the Mac was his baby, he wanted to plow the Apple II under for good, regardless of how well it was doing, simply because it was the past.

I'm sorry if all your stuff doesn't work. But, like others have said here, I have a 2000 iBook and 2000 iMac DV SE that work perfectly fine under 10.3...and I know a whole host of programs that I can run on them and my MacBook Pro. It isn't like Apple is crippling your computer: it still works fine. If you want to run all the same stuff, wait for upgraded versions of your software before buying 10.5. The world won't collapse.

I am not saying going nuts like apple used to do but improve on how long legacy support last up it from next to none to at least though one OS upgrade.

 

[Capt. Obvious]

I remember having some version of OSX in 2000, because I spent all Thanksgiving/Christmas entering all my CDs into iTunes. I think that date is off... I remember Apple already making a huge deal of OSX in 1999 and it was postponed slightly into late 1999 or 2000.

I was watching Apple pretty closely during that period, and OS X appeared out of the blue at MWSF 2000. They announced Mac OS 9 and .Mac the same day. 9 was available immediately (went out & bought it right after the keynote), but X wasn't out in the beta until september, I think.

 

[Capt. Obvious]

You might want to bear in mind that Steve Jobs has said before that they released a whole new operating system back last year, 10.4 Intel so he basically considers 10.4 to be two operating systems. 10.4 PPC released 4/29/05, 18 months after 10.3 and 10.4 Intel released 1/10/06, 12 months after 10.4 PPC and 19 months before Leopard. This might explain the 12/18 month thing he said.

Good points!

Consider: finishing the Intel transition released a fair number of programmers to work on other stuff: Leopard, iPhone, and if 10.6 is the last PPC-compatible version in '09, more staff will become available.

Given that extra time has gone into Leopard as well as extra hands, fair to assume that Leopard is a consolidation and completion and culmination of OS X so far. I think we're going to see literally what Apple has learned from thei OS X endeavor.

Don't expect it to be perfect, but I do expect it to raise the bar in user interface & user experience. This is the Big Ta-Da.

They pull this off and in 5 years Windows will be exclusively found in workplaces, but not in homes (except the true hobbyist). Everyone else will use a Mac if they can get one.

 

[JGowan]

Piss Moan Piss Moan

I keep current with all software updates, whether general bug fixes/mantenance or with iLife upgrades and OS upgrades. I equate it to putting gas/oil in my car and changing/rotating the tires. No one forces anyone to upgrade. As the Quarterly results showed today, many more millions of computers will be able to handle upgrading to Leopard than were able to for Tiger. If you want to upgrade, do so. If not then don't.

I do not like apples 12-18 months upgrade cycle along with force obsoleting of any previos OS. They drop all major support (anything but security updates) not long after the release of the next OS. This a long with put out all this nice little apps and making sure they do not work on older vs.
Then they get the Devs in on doing the same thing. One thing I like about M$ is they tend to try to do a 3 year cycle on its major OS releases. 95,98,XP and Vista original planned release date were all 3 years apart.
People complain about what M$ charges for it OS upgrades but when you compare it with apple upgrade cost over the same time span M$ is cheaper. Plus add in the fact that with windows one can true get away with only really upgrading when getting a new computer. With an Mac you can bet on you will need to pay for at least one if not 2 OS upgrades.

M$ continues to support there OS and Devs keep making plenty of software for 3+ years after its been replaced. XP support last threw summer of 09 (extended past the original slated drop date of 07)

 

[boobooq88]

Preview of 10.6 at MW SF?

That's what I was wondeing... I kinda doubt they will show it off as they would have basically just released leopard and wouldn't want to steal the thunder from leopard 2-3 months after it was released.

But what do I know... I am still new to Apple since I just bought my first mac in June. Still... You never know.

All I know for certain at the moment is that I have my Physics midterm tomorrow, there is ash and smoke everywhere from the 8 brush fires going on around where I live (145,000 acres burned by 1 fire alone in San Diego), and I am buying Leopard this Saturday.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

That's what I was wondeing... I kinda doubt they will show it off as they would have basically just released leopard and wouldn't want to steal the thunder from leopard 2-3 months after it was released.

But what do I know... I am still new to Apple since I just bought my first mac in June. Still... You never know.

All I know for certain at the moment is that I have my Physics midterm tomorrow, there is ash and smoke everywhere from the 8 brush fires going on around where I live (145,000 acres burned by 1 fire alone in San Diego), and I am buying Leopard this Saturday.

You wouldn't see the next version in development (10.6) until WWDC '08 in June.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I keep current with all software updates, whether general bug fixes/mantenance or with iLife upgrades and OS upgrades. I equate it to putting gas/oil in my car and changing/rotating the tires. No one forces anyone to upgrade. As the Quarterly results showed today, many more millions of computers will be able to handle upgrading to Leopard than were able to for Tiger. If you want to upgrade, do so. If not then don't.

I think you are missing the point the force obsolete makes that a difficult choice. It is one thing apple releases new OSX every 1-1.5 years but very soon after the replacement the prevois verson is forces obsolete and if some one really wants to update much of their software they are forces to update the OS.

Now if I had at least the choice to lets say run tiger and skip leopard and not suffer the force obsolete it would be fine but I do not get that choice. I would like to see an OS from apple at least get a 3 year useful life out of it compared to the 1-1.5 they get now.

 

[GfPQqmcRKUvP]

^^

You're boring people. Constant development and innovation > stagnant OS's with unchanging software/hardware compatibilities.

As much as you might not be aware, the reason software becomes better, faster, and more able to do the things we want is because all of these OS and hardware updates happen.

 

[Cloudane]

Yes and no....

If I'm paying £85 for an operating system, I expect to still be useful in 3-4 years time, even if it's been surpassed by a better version. That's just sensible value for money. Thankfully they *don't* break things or force you to upgrade every time. In a way, developers do sometimes (e.g. you get a lot of software that requires >=10.3) but this only seems to happen when there's a major change of API or whatever... which appears to be once every few releases.

However it's great that they're innovating all the time and bringing out new versions fairly frequently, so long as every odd one can be treated as optional. Thankfully it can.

For an example of how NOT to do it, check out Vista They've broken so many things, and put up so many barriers for developers, that nobody will consider using it.

 

[Lumeswell]

And you completely missed the point. Apple forces the upgrades on you. If you want to really update any of the other software you have to buy a new OS. That is how apple forces it on you.

Why dont you complain about the software developers forcing you to upgrade their software as well? Oh thats right, they dont force you.

They provide new features in their software, usually built on new features that have been provided by the underlying operating system (or made possible by increases in processing power). These features are of value to you, so you are willing to fork out for the application software update, but dont want to pay for the underlying architecture that made those features possible in the first place?

 

[Lesser Evets]

I think that's where the difference lies between Apple and other leaders in industry. Apple's whole model seems more about making technology more and more transparent for the end user, so everything from the iPhone, iPod, iMac, etc... will be more like a Microwave than a traditional computer.

You don't have to know about electromagnetics if you want to make popcorn in a microwave, and you shouldn't have to know what a driver is and what version you need for your specific computer, etc... just so you can listen to music or type an email. Somebody obviously has to worry about that kind of thing, but not the end user.

That's really my view on what Apple is doing and where they are going.

Yeah, that's a good summary, but you can really break it down simply thus:

The key to successful technology is to cater to non-sedentary lifestyles; people who don't have time, aptitude, or desire to sit around for hours and days figuring out how to use a device in order to achieve simple tasks.

I was thinking of this since the late 90's when i HAD to get back into computers and figure them out: why is there so much hoop jumping and esoteric nonsense involved in what should be simple function?

The answer- computers are made BY tech geeks FOR tech geeks. Business wise that is idiotic, and time wise it is ridiculous. Jobs is simplifying our understanding and use of computers so they aren't 'computers' but communication and entertainment devices.

Some of the Mac and internet stuff is still so oddly archaic and baroque, but I get the feeling Jobs is trimming off a lot more grizzle from the tech turkey this Thanksgiving.

 

[0007776]

I am not saying going nuts like apple used to do but improve on how long legacy support last up it from next to none to at least though one OS upgrade.

Isn't legacy support when they let older software still run on the newer OS, and not going back and adding new features to previous OS so that apps that other developers decided to code for the new OS will run on the old one. I have not yet found any programs that were origionally written for OS X that will not run on Tiger, and I'm guessing the same will be for Leopard.

 

[Capt. Obvious]

And you completely missed the point. Apple forces the upgrades on you. If you want to really update any of the other software you have to buy a new OS. That is how apple forces it on you.

Apple dropping major support for an OS means Devs normally follow shortly afterwards. As for supporting an older OS I think 3 years after the replacement is in is a good round number. That way some one is not force to update there computer during the time it hardware is still useful.

Your "point" is "missed" because it's nonsense - you're looking thru the wrong end of the telescope: Apple provides developers with tools and facilities on a progressive basis, developers adopt those frameworks, APIs, etc. to improve their vision of their software. The trade-off is that when new programmatic capabilities are integrated into a program, it now needs the new OS that povided the new abilities.

It is *developers* that lead the march into the future - and away from the last OS upgrade you bought. Apple maintains the viability of its OS releases far longer than most, IMO, but it outgrows incompatible machines the same way you outgrow clothes: gradually and inevitably.

No one forces you to upgrade your OS any more than you're forced to upgrade your wardrobe. Frankly, if you set aside 10% of your monthly beer budget toward the next OS, you'd easily save the money...and maybe still fit your clothes

 

[Capt. Obvious]

Don't be so hasty.

Full native ZFS support, for example, could have been a long-term research project intended ultimately for 10.6 when it's been worked on since before 10.5

I have no crystal ball that lets me spy on Apple's OS development plans,
but "haste" is a non-sequiteur, and your comments on ZFS have little-to-nothing to do with the post I was commenting on.

 

[Capt. Obvious]

There's nothing stopping a developer from releasing software that runs on 10.2 today.

The reason many don't is because they want to take advantages of new features of the newer OS, and they weigh the work involved to make a special version for 10.2 with the number of customers still using 10.2 that would buy the product.

But Apple isn't forcing any of this. The industry and customers just moved on without you.

Well said!

Users firmly rooted in Jaguar (or any other deprecated release) are the users *least* likely to spend, whether it's for hardware or software. Developers will not abandon paying customers - but there's a limit to what they're willing to do for those who are no longer *active* customers.

 

[Capt. Obvious]

This would be true, but I think you are reading things wrong here a bit.

The "10.6 not supporting PPC" is more open (wild?), speculation than a rumour. It also was originally phrased as "The next OS version might not support PPC" not 10.6 specifically.

Thank you for making that point - speculation about *when* Apple *might* end PPC support in the OS is entirely different from the present hyperventilation.

The announcement today from Steve is more about saying that 10.5 is the foundation for the next ten years. 10.6 therefore might not come in 18 months but in ten years time.

The way I read it, the interim is going to be filled by 10.5.1, 2, 3, etc. every 18 months and 10.6 is actually a long way off.

I fundamentally disagree with this: I strongly suspect Apple already has OS XI roughed out, knows what sorts of capabilities they intend to present, and are planning .6 - .xx not merely as upgrades to X but as technological stepping-stones to XI.

Assuming 10 goes to .10, at ~18 months per, that would be 7.5 - 8 years from now, followed by a ~2-year push to get XI and the new hardware base to support it ready for release, not unlike the gap between Tiger & Leopard.

In short, I think we'll see "normal" undates and preiod upgrades for the next ten years, followed by the Next Big Thing(tm).

 

[Rocketman]

Does the way this is presented indicate 10.5 and 10.6 might both be called Leopard?

Rocketman

 

[Confidemus]

More for 10.6

(4) new zfs filesystem, including boot partition. I anticipate Apple may migrate to zfs during a minor update to Leopard (Apple filed a patent concerning transitioning from one file system to another--ZFS, I think--a while back), but I expect full support in 10.6.

And more:
(5) Multisystem support. Install on one system at home or in your lab and it will discover and distribute over all compatible systems. Apple may offer different boxes like raid arrays or just processors or even the AppleTV and it will have the look and feel as one system. This "system" will allocate computing power where it can find it.

(6) Support of holographic displays / input system. Just another little box in the network (see No 5), which will be placed on the table.

(7) This will be the last system Apple distributes openly. Users will be charged a monthly fee and will get monthly updates of the system without notice. It will just work and when there is a new feature it will tell you if necessary.


Best, Confidemus