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


macrumors 6502
Oct 21, 2007
Could this mean we will be seeing a touchpad employing the same gesture usage as the iphone in the near future, say MB on Friday or MBP in Jan?


macrumors 603
It is always interesting to hear what the "general media" has to say about Apple and what they get right or wrong in the process. The media is so horse race focused, not only in politics but in technology companies. Instead of saying what key features you need that are offered, or what policy stances politicians have, they focus on release dates, poll numbers, earnings reports as an indicator of what OS is better. Blah!

When Leopard went on pre-sale, several sales outlets reported swamped servers (indicating a poor resource allocation model there) and the media I heard said in effect that this indicated the switch from Vista to Leopard. Hmmm. It seems like 100% of Leopard retail package buyers are already Mac owners!


Filter the media.

But Apple is ramping CPU market share rapidly which IS an indication of a flow from Wintel to Mactel. Leopard uptake is about double the speed of Tiger, partly because more people have been pre-sold on features and partly because online buying is much more widely adopted by general consumers and more trusted than 2 years ago or so.



macrumors 68020
Mar 1, 2004
Preview of 10.6 at MW SF?

I wouldn't be happy about that, that'd mean they'd been focusing on the new cat when they should of been readying Leopard for release.

Not sure I'd want to upgrade every 18 months, I've lasted through 30 months of Tiger and I am quite happy with it, if Leopard wasn't on the horizon I wouldn't be worried about Tiger at all, it's rock solid.

I think 24 - 30 months between upgrades would suit me better.

And as for the next cat, 2010 - 2011, but not 2012.

At this rate, maybe we'll hear about Mac OS X 10.6 Lynx next week? :rolleyes: [/wishful thinking]

Surely it's Lion :p


macrumors 68000
Aug 1, 2000
Well, the good news is that Macintosh OSX is remarkable stable and quality.

notwithstanding some problem areas, it does get continually refined. A much better approach than Microsoft's Windows. Which takes the approach of delivering buggy and problematic operating systems.

Vista has been uniformly reviewed as horrible and most software does not take advantage of it properly.


macrumors newbie
Sep 4, 2006
Could someone define what to "anchor a product schedule" means? Sounds iike they're just saying, "we've got great products coming up over the next 10 years, stay tuned." In that case: duh.

Also, for some reason I was thinking 10.5 was the final OSX release. Opinions on OSXI anyone?


macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
New Zealand
I hope Apple keep the OS cycle as long as 18 months.

Anything less is just too much IMO, especially as low as 12 months.
I disagree. I think the pace they've had has been good and an update every year is no problem in my book. Ubuntu gets one every 6 months and it keeps getting better. As long as they don't go through another entire architecture change which causes developers to rewrite their apps, I'm all for updates. Remember, you can always skip a release or two and still upgrade for the same price. All the innovation going into leopard really puts it ahead of Vista and XP. If they keep that up, then they'll really put the vista and xp behind the 8 ball.


macrumors 6502a
Jun 23, 2007
I really don't mind with a later update...
maybe mid 2009 early 2010 for 10.6 (roughly tiger to leopard's time period is great)

One day SR MBP will become with more frequent updates, the less the hardware will support the hardware...

current trend is G3 isn't supported in Leopard
G4 not supported for 10.6 (According to the article in
Intel macs 10.7? (The Core Duo ones and early Core 2 Duo)


macrumors 6502
May 18, 2007
Steve Jobs is a better man than I, taking things slow and slowly pecking away at their mountainous lead. If I were in his place I would have put all those Apple millions to work on a most foul James-Bond-villain-esque scheme to destroy m$ once and for all. Bwah hah hah hah hah hah hah!

That was my evil victory laugh by the way.


macrumors 68020
Aug 6, 2005
I wouldn't be happy about that, that'd mean they'd been focusing on the new cat when they should of been readying Leopard for release.

No it wouldn't. The first few months of development of a new OS will probably be spent on concepts, pre planning etc. The people who are involved at this stage are not the same as those who are bug fixing during crunch time.


macrumors 6502a
Sep 29, 2006
Brighton, UK
Windows versions

Windows 3, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, ME, NT 3.1, NT3.51, NT4, 2000, XP, Vista... now Windows 7.

Just think, a whole bunch of code in their latest and "greatest":D Vista is dedicated to working with MS Dos. Little wonder it sucks like a Dyson.

Not sure it's cheaper with OSX though; there's been 5 versions since 2000 (10.0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and now 10.5).

It sure as hell is a lot better!


macrumors 603
Jun 19, 2003
Chicago, IL
Umm Microsoft has the foundation now. The next OS update will be in 2009-2010. Once again this is no different the the introduction of OS 10. It took them a damn long time to release it. Once released they refined, buffed the crap out of that OS until you have Leopard. MS will do the same thing. The foundation of Vista IS solid. It simply needs fine tuning with 2 or 3 service packs released over a 2 year period.
And the reason MS doesn't update their OS any sooner is because of the IT industry. The enterprise would completely ignore anything released in an 18 month cycle. This is why Apple will never own the enterprise. They are way too fast and loose with new OS's.


macrumors member
Mar 14, 2006
I'd like to get 10.X OS upgrade every 24-36 months with the 10.X.x updates in between. 10.6 is supposed to have a new file system right? I remember reading an Apple article or something about it saying it will open doors to new things.

People buy Macs for OS X so they will definitely have that at the center of their strategy. Especially now since Apple TV, Macintosh, iPhone, iPod Touch, etc. are running OS X. I wouldn't expect them to slow down on releases. Even Linux will have a tough time keeping up. Sorry Linux fans, it's true.


Oct 20, 2003
Washington DC
I'm looking forward to the MacRumors on-line feed of the OS X 10.6 intro at Mac World '17. :)

Ok, I'm sure that's not what Steve meant, but hey -- my latest Vista installation has autoexec.bat and config.sys.


macrumors 68000
Nov 4, 2003
Why does everything have to be presented in such a biased way? Why mention how long between windows releases in a thread about os x releases? When the mods want us to stop the flame wars, but the top of the news feed is asking for one, isn't that perpetuating the issue?

I'll bite: Where is resolution independence that was promised in 10.4? Where is the intelligent, system-wide, user-friendly metadata that Spotlight was supposed to be, that exists in Vista right now? Why does adding Exposé and fixing a bunch of system bugs count as a "new" OS that you have to pay for, when SP1 and SP2 don't count as new versions? Do they not count as new versions because they're free? Because they are still called XP? Because Leopard is still technically called OS X and at this point OS X has cost 649.75 if you're a loyal mac user (10.0, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5 were each 129.95). That's as much as Vista Ultimate and XP Pro (299.99 + 329.99) combined.

It also ignores the 2005 release of Media Center edition and the server/mobile versions that were released.

I'm typing this on a MacPro. I get it. But please stop acting like fanbois on the front page. It makes us all look dumb to the general population.


macrumors 68040
Aug 31, 2003
Wherever my feet take me…
One thing I really wish will happen in the next version of the Mac OS after 10.5 (10.6? XI?) is get rid of Carbon. It's so old and antiquated, it should've been dead and buried in 10.2 or something. Especially the speech recognition/text-to-speech technology. It's pretty much unchanged since OS 7 it seems like. The voices sounded awful back then, and they sound even worse now. Once the Mac OS goes Intel only, that's when Carbon should be out.

One other thing I'd really like to see (but will never happen) is for Apple to open up Mac OS to other hardware. Macs are good, but I'd like to add stuff that Apple doesn't currently supply & there's no easy to get Mac OS X on a generic PC. I'd love to be able to build my own computer & use Mac OS X on it, but oh, well. I know some off you will say "Well, if you're not happy w/ Macs, don't buy them!" I am happy w/ Macs (both the computers & OS), I could by happier.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.