Mac OS X 10.3 in 2003

arn

macrumors god
Original poster
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
14,500
1,783
eWeek rehashes the prematurely posted Mac OS 10.2.1 articles on Apple's Support site, but also mentions that that Panther is due next year:

Sources have told eWEEK that the next major upgrade to Mac OS X, code-named Panther, is slated to ship in 2003.

Apple's updates have been steady with Mac OS X 10.0 in March 2001, 10.1 in September, 2001, and 10.2 in Aug, 2002.
 

agp

macrumors member
Jan 11, 2002
80
0
Anyone could make that guess.....I bet they have no insider info!
 

reyesmac

macrumors 6502
Jul 17, 2002
373
53
Central Texas
I can't wait for the day when Apple makes an operating system like 8.1 or 8.6 again that you can stick with but still use alot of new applications that come out after it. A stable system that you don't need to upgrade. With OS X, alot of programs are available only for one version of the OS. So, all those Jaguar users will be out of luck when Panther comes out and alot of applications will be updated just for it, like all the iApps.
With all this news about Apple distancing itself from Microsoft, it looks like Apple is trying to get as much money as it can for the upcoming war between the two.
 

Arcady

macrumors 6502
May 24, 2002
402
24
Lexington, KY
duh

10.3 to ship in 2003? Well, gee... I thought they would wait until 2004.

In other news, faster Macs to ship in 2003 also. DUH. :rolleyes:
 

mac15

macrumors 68040
Dec 29, 2001
3,099
0
Re: duh

Originally posted by Arcady
10.3 to ship in 2003? Well, gee... I thought they would wait until 2004.

In other news, faster Macs to ship in 2003 also. DUH. :rolleyes:
2004 thats a bit much to wait, I was expecting a January release in 2003, but I hope it won't cost much
 

Choppaface

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,187
0
SFBA
i will NOT pay $12x.xx for panther :| :| :| :|

if apple keep charging full for point updates, then fine I'll just use my XP box... let's hope that it's a free or $20 upgrade.... it would also be nice if they made a "fluff-less" version that didn't include all the iApps and stuff and just the operating system....
 

Telomar

macrumors 6502
Aug 31, 2002
260
36
Originally posted by Choppaface
i will NOT pay $12x.xx for panther :| :| :| :|

if apple keep charging full for point updates, then fine I'll just use my XP box... let's hope that it's a free or $20 upgrade.... it would also be nice if they made a "fluff-less" version that didn't include all the iApps and stuff and just the operating system....
Ok I'm going to pick on this because...well it's just funny.

Firstly you are refusing to pay for a product when you have absolutely no clue what features it will have. That in my eyes is somewhat foolish on its own.

Secondly if you don't like iApps it is very simple. Just drag them to the trash then empty it. No more iApps. Nothing stops you from tweaking the OS how you want it. I certainly don't see Microsoft making special "fluff-less" OSs and I wouldn't expect Apple to either.

Finally whether they upgrade the version number by 0.1 or by 0.5 is absolutely irrelevent. Jaguar easily could have been made 10.5 or 10.6 or 11.0. You are saying that changing that number is more important to you than features? If only you could sell things to all people that easily...oh wait that's what Microsoft has/had a bad habit of doing. Excuse me if I find that line of thinking somewhat amusing.
 

mac15

macrumors 68040
Dec 29, 2001
3,099
0
yeah they could very well relases OS11 who cares , if it don't run well then whats use of getting it
 

dobbin

macrumors 6502a
Jan 28, 2002
587
5
England
I was just wondering, is there is a technical reason why iCal works with 10.2 but not 10.1.5 or do they just do that to make the upgrade more worthwhile?

I'm fairly happy with 10.1 but I like the look of iCal. I'll probably upgrade sometime so I can take advantage of new apps, but actually I'd be happy to keep the same system for longer if it didn't restrict my choice of apps.

If there is some technical reason for this, then fair enough, but I guess they're just using it to tempt people like me to spend £100 on an upgrade for a lot of speed boosts and features that I don't really need.

Dobbin
 

Nipsy

macrumors 65816
Jan 19, 2002
1,009
0
Originally posted by dobbin
I was just wondering, is there is a technical reason why iCal works with 10.2 but not 10.1.5 or do they just do that to make the upgrade more worthwhile?

I'm fairly happy with 10.1 but I like the look of iCal. I'll probably upgrade sometime so I can take advantage of new apps, but actually I'd be happy to keep the same system for longer if it didn't restrict my choice of apps.

If there is some technical reason for this, then fair enough, but I guess they're just using it to tempt people like me to spend £100 on an upgrade for a lot of speed boosts and features that I don't really need.

Dobbin
There are new low level tools that make certain things only available in 10.2. The whole linking structure has changed in C, as has the C compiler. The UNIX binaries that control many facets of the OS have been changed. Each of these changes is something which a programmer can call in 10.2, but will call a failure in 10.1. Rendezvous is an entirely new tool, which is probably integrated in some way into iCal. WebDAV is a tool which iCal publishing relies on, and may (or may not) have been revised in 10.2.

There are many many tools which new programs take advantage of, and in10.1 these tools were not included, or too old of a version.
 

dorsal

macrumors regular
Aug 20, 2002
116
68
10.1 came out 6 months after 10.0 and was basically bug fixes and tweaks. -- 10.3 will come out 6 months after 10.2 and be bug fixes and tweaks for the 64 bit IBM chip. That puts the new PowerMacs out in Feb 2003.
 

peterjhill

macrumors 65816
Apr 25, 2002
1,095
0
Seattle, WA
Originally posted by Telomar
Ok I'm going to pick on this because...well it's just funny.

Firstly you are refusing to pay for a product when you have absolutely no clue what features it will have. That in my eyes is somewhat foolish on its own.
<snip>

Go Newbie! Go Newbie! Go Newbie

That post was right on target. It is exactly the way that I feel. You would think that people felt that Apple was holding a gun to their heads telling them to upgrade. Heck, right now you can still buy a computer that runs an ancient OS (9) from Apple. Eventually the old stuff (OS or computer) won't support the newest things, but hey, thats the price to be paid, literally.
 

Blackcat

macrumors regular
Jun 10, 2002
187
0
Cirencester, UK
version numbering

I'm amazed people still don't get the new numbering.

Before X new releases were MacOS n.0 (full paid), n.5 (paid upgrade) and n.n (free update). Eg, 8.0, 8.5, 8.1.

Now with X we have 10.x (full paid) and 10.x.x (free update).

In short, point releases - 10.0, 10.1, 10.2 etc - are full versions, that's why Jaguar isn't MacOS XII!
 

joelseph

macrumors newbie
Jul 24, 2002
1
0
San Francisco Bay Area
Oh thank heaven for OS XI?

Originally posted by Blackcat
I'm amazed people still don't get the new numbering.

Before X new releases were MacOS n.0 (full paid), n.5 (paid upgrade) and n.n (free update). Eg, 8.0, 8.5, 8.1.

Now with X we have 10.x (full paid) and 10.x.x (free update).

In short, point releases - 10.0, 10.1, 10.2 etc - are full versions, that's why Jaguar isn't MacOS XII!
I've been saying the same thing. The only thing that doesn't quite fit is how the upgrade path from 10.1 to 10.1.5 was free. So we get x.x.5 upgrades for free now, but have no upgrade price for a full version upgrade. I think the version numbering is still correct.
 

dobbin

macrumors 6502a
Jan 28, 2002
587
5
England
Re: version numbering

Originally posted by Blackcat
I'm amazed people still don't get the new numbering.

Before X new releases were MacOS n.0 (full paid), n.5 (paid upgrade) and n.n (free update). Eg, 8.0, 8.5, 8.1.

Now with X we have 10.x (full paid) and 10.x.x (free update).

In short, point releases - 10.0, 10.1, 10.2 etc - are full versions, that's why Jaguar isn't MacOS XII!

I don't think its quite as simple as that :confused:

10.1 was free (or there was a small charge for postage if you couldn't collect your own copy).

Dobbin
 

big

macrumors 65816
Feb 20, 2002
1,074
0
man, think if we were with Microscum...you'd be paying monthly fee to use your applications (online) then what if the internet went down...you couldn't type that report?

Man I hope Microsoft goes through with that!
 

Blackcat

macrumors regular
Jun 10, 2002
187
0
Cirencester, UK
Re: Oh thank heaven for OS XI?

Originally posted by joelseph


I've been saying the same thing. The only thing that doesn't quite fit is how the upgrade path from 10.1 to 10.1.5 was free. So we get x.x.5 upgrades for free now, but have no upgrade price for a full version upgrade. I think the version numbering is still correct.
I think all updates (10.x.y) will be free. The .5ness of it is just because it was the 5th update to 10.1, in future updates we might see 10.x.17 or 10.x.75 :) but they'll all be free.

I reckon we'll see MacOS X 10.12 etc too, rather than MacOS XI 11.2, but that might depend more on Windows naming scheme - If they get Win XQ 15.0, we'll get (or had before) MacOS XV.

It's all marketing crap really!
 

clonenode

macrumors regular
Feb 12, 2002
113
0
Re: Re: version numbering

Originally posted by dobbin



I don't think its quite as simple as that :confused:

10.1 was free (or there was a small charge for postage if you couldn't collect your own copy).

Dobbin
That's because 10.0 was the public beta, right? 10.1 was really the first true full version, totally optimized, ready for primetime.... (uh oh, can open - worms every where).
 

Blackcat

macrumors regular
Jun 10, 2002
187
0
Cirencester, UK
Re: Re: version numbering

Originally posted by dobbin



I don't think its quite as simple as that :confused:

10.1 was free (or there was a small charge for postage if you couldn't collect your own copy).

Dobbin
I think that was because until 10.1 X wasn't very good! :D
 

eric_n_dfw

macrumors 68000
Jan 2, 2002
1,507
55
DFW, TX, USA
Originally posted by Choppaface
i will NOT pay $12x.xx for panther :| :| :| :|

if apple keep charging full for point updates, then fine I'll just use my XP box... let's hope that it's a free or $20 upgrade.... it would also be nice if they made a "fluff-less" version that didn't include all the iApps and stuff and just the operating system....
Oh - so you'll just pay $199 for the next version of XP? Like someone else said, you have no idea what 10.3 will have in it or what/if Apple will charge for it. 10.2 for $129 is not too much - the argument is getting old. (If you don't think 10.2 has a ton of stuff in it, go read http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/macosx-10.2/macosx-10.2-1.html )

I haven't installed 10.2 yet (it arrives today by FedEx but I'm still waiting on HP OfficeJet D drivers), but the above link indicates that the iApps can be de-selected in the custom install window so, apparently, you can install "just the os" today.
 

drastik

macrumors 6502a
Apr 10, 2002
978
0
Nashvegas
From the day I switched to X 10.0, it was good. It was solid state non-crashing fun. The only bitch I had was that Limewire would occasionaly crap out my DSL, and there wasn't support for some of my 9 Apps in Classic. They eventually got support for the Apps, and now I am X only. All of my apps, pro design work and video included are native now and they are all greatly impoved as a result.

Choppaface is just acting like what I think Mischef called a "weak willed moron" in his "I'm going to switch to XP" AND PAY A MONTHLY TRIBUTE TO MICROSUCK.
 

SilvorX

macrumors 68000
May 24, 2002
1,701
0
'Toba, Canada
i think 10.3 should be a free upgrade concidering most of the users upgraded to 10.2, its not like m$ where a new os comes in every 2-3 years, theres a .x upgrade every half year - year for osx...so paying $300 CDN for 10.2 and 10.3 would be overboard, ms got in the whole even more than they ever did with windows me, charged $60 CDN - $200 CDN for the darn piece of crud when it turns out it bsods more than win 3x/95...ppl were furious of paying good money when they couldve spent their money that was used to buy a computer on a mac and spent the win me money on osx half a year later...

the only way idd pay money for 10.3 is if theres lots of nice features included that arent available on the apple website (ie a new version of appleworks/imovie 3) and more compatibility with windows users, ie: able to run office extensions without office (on appleworks), and a "theme manager" so you can customize the look even more with themes (ie: like on resexcellence.com) without a 3rd party app...and of course more compatibility with 3-rd party optical drives (for the powermac or replacing an optical drive of an imac/emac with a 3-rd party optical drive) and on powermacs a feature to convert a drive thats ntfs/fat/fat32 to the osx readable (without removing any files unless u want to) if there isnt something for that yet...