Mac Leopard on ADC Select on Wednesday

jstad

macrumors regular
Jun 13, 2007
119
0
is this really a topic? Is this confirmed or just a rumor?! Now you got me all excited.
 
Comment

Alloye

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2007
657
0
Rocklin, CA
Didn't happen.

What really sucks is that while ADC is being denied legitimate access to the final build, the pirates are already enjoying it. :mad:
 
Comment

jstad

macrumors regular
Jun 13, 2007
119
0
You still have over two hours. Apple is PST :)
I have a feeling it will not be released on ADC until just before the official launch @ 6pm. Kind of sucks since you guys are still under NDA so there is really no point in delaying the release build to those members. :rolleyes:
 
Comment

Alloye

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2007
657
0
Rocklin, CA
And this sucks more than us who have bought it as well?
Yes it does. ADC Select/Premier members pay for early access. One of the reasons for doing so is to enable advance testing of applications on OS updates prior to release. Yet as of this morning, only the pirates, a select group of journalists, and a few customers who received their pre-orders early have Leopard. Developers don't. I think it's a disgrace considering how much we helped Apple refine and debug this cat.
 
Comment

Krevnik

macrumors 68040
Sep 8, 2003
3,437
742
And this sucks more than us who have bought it as well?
Depends, Select members are paying 500$/year for access, which includes GM builds. In some ways it is kinda frustrating not to know what bugs may have been fixed going into the GM from 559 until our customers have the GM in their hands and have installed it before us. :/
 
Comment

Mebsat

macrumors regular
May 19, 2003
176
44
Florida
ADC Select question

I am planning to join ADC Select. The website lists access to the current copy of OSX Server, via download. I presume this will be updated at latest by next week and the Leopard Beta will be replaced by a final build CD.

Can any current ADC members fill me in on the restrictions placed on Server by the ADC program? Is it limited to 10 users? How is "for testing purposes" defined?

Thanks
 
Comment

milo

macrumors 604
Sep 23, 2003
6,887
511
What really sucks is that while ADC is being denied legitimate access to the final build, the pirates are already enjoying it. :mad:
The situation is way overblown. ADC folks had the previous build, which was virtually identical, anything tested on that should work fine.

This time around, it leaked way later than it ever did in the past. So it looks like apple made the right call, if they had released it earlier to ADC, an ADC person would have just got it to the pirates sooner.
 
Comment

Krevnik

macrumors 68040
Sep 8, 2003
3,437
742
I am planning to join ADC Select. The website lists access to the current copy of OSX Server, via download. I presume this will be updated at latest by next week and the Leopard Beta will be replaced by a final build CD.

Can any current ADC members fill me in on the restrictions placed on Server by the ADC program? Is it limited to 10 users? How is "for testing purposes" defined?

Thanks
"For Testing Purposes" means: If we find out you are using your seed keys to host corporate/public servers instead of licensing them correctly... you get to meet Apple's legal team, in person if you are really lucky.
 
Comment

Mebsat

macrumors regular
May 19, 2003
176
44
Florida
"For Testing Purposes" means: If we find out you are using your seed keys to host corporate/public servers instead of licensing them correctly... you get to meet Apple's legal team, in person if you are really lucky.
Ha!

Well, that seems fair enough. I was just wondering if there were any limitations compared to the shipping product, for testing purposes, like stress-testing a web app, etc.

I'm still wading through the ADC site, sometimes things aren't that clear.
 
Comment

w0ngbr4d

macrumors regular
Jan 10, 2006
217
1
Findlay, OH
And you know that how exactly?
Where I work, while we don't create operating systems, the differences between a release candidate and our "GM" is only bug fixes. I would be amazed if they changed something in the underlying frameworks from a functionality perspective that would break an app that late in the development cycle.

I remember reading that the last developer seed only had 2 known issues. I don't remember if those were underlying issues or issues with different applications. I just don't see how that would cause any issues to developers who have access to the last seed.
 
Comment

rpp3po

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 16, 2003
172
0
Germany
Trust me....
I apologize.

A collegue got this info informally from an Apple developer support technican, who speculated that they may give up their strict policy, if the GM would appear on P2P networks. Seems that that was wrong...
 
Comment

Catfish_Man

macrumors 68030
Sep 13, 2001
2,579
1
Portland, OR
Where I work, while we don't create operating systems, the differences between a release candidate and our "GM" is only bug fixes. I would be amazed if they changed something in the underlying frameworks from a functionality perspective that would break an app that late in the development cycle.

I remember reading that the last developer seed only had 2 known issues. I don't remember if those were underlying issues or issues with different applications. I just don't see how that would cause any issues to developers who have access to the last seed.
Two known issues they bothered to list. Hundreds and hundreds of actual known issues. Heck, the WebKit list alone has over 80 priority 1 bugs left.

In Adium's case I know of one bug that hit us on 559 that was fixed at some point between then and 581.
 
Comment

Alloye

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2007
657
0
Rocklin, CA
The situation is way overblown. ADC folks had the previous build, which was virtually identical, anything tested on that should work fine.
Sorry. I've been in this business far too long to accept that statement as absolute. And besides, how do you know 9A559 and 9A581 are virtually identical? There were a full 22 builds and more than three weeks of time between them.

This time around, it leaked way later than it ever did in the past. So it looks like apple made the right call, if they had released it earlier to ADC, an ADC person would have just got it to the pirates sooner.
C'mon! You can't know that someone from ADC would have leaked the build any sooner than it did. It is just as likely that some disgruntled engineer at 1 Infinite Loop uploaded the thing the day it was announced.

In any case, it doesn't matter. The fact that Leopard has been available via torrents for the past few days yet still hasn't been posted to the ADC download site is an insult to each and every one of us who paid good money to participate in the Leopard product cycle.
 
Comment

Fukui

macrumors 68000
Jul 19, 2002
1,617
6
Sorry. I've been in this business far too long to accept that statement as absolute. And besides, how do you know 9A559 and 9A581 are virtually identical? There were a full 22 builds and more than three weeks of time between them.



C'mon! You can't know that someone from ADC would have leaked the build any sooner than it did. It is just as likely that some disgruntled engineer at 1 Infinite Loop uploaded the thing the day it was announced.

In any case, it doesn't matter. The fact that Leopard has been available via torrents for the past few days yet still hasn't been posted to the ADC download site is an insult to each and every one of us who paid good money to participate in the Leopard product cycle.
I agree. And to the other poster who said the latest dev build is virtually identical...... do you work at apple or something???

Because, bugs in the frameworks are exactly what prevents us from doing anything new with the os, or even getting older apps running. Since devs can't test, they can't do anything really. Thats one reason why vista's driver support was so bad!!
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.