Mac OS X 10.4 Info?

[johnnyjibbs]

The point SeaFox was trying to make was that Panther for $129 (or 10.4 for that matter, if it is also $129) is much better value for someone like him who only has OS 9 than someone who has Jaguar (i.e. the previous version). They currently don't run Mac OS X (OS 9 has more similarities with Win 3.1 than OS X IMO) so they are not really 'upgrading' in the true sense.

Also, an upgarde path may help sell more copies of the previous version prior to the next one's release. Yes, Apple doesn't announce when the next version will ship until a month or so before, but there's a lot of users who would stay clear of paying $129 for Panther when they know that 10.4 is imminent (e.g. from MacRumors, other rumours sites, Apple's own sneak previews). (Remember, all the clueless switchers, of which I am one, would have bought their new Mac and had Panther for free, so it's only the people who were established Mac users who would be in the market for buying Panther/10.4 retail).

Regarding metadata, so it sounds like it's just a faster way of searching for files

 

[ifjake]

Re: Windows 2009?

Originally posted by nagromme
I don't think beating Longhorn is going to be much of a race for 10.4 2008 or 2009 would NOT surprise me:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/34500.html

"Longhorn in 2005 seems definitely off the agenda, and while it might ship in 2006, it could be delayed until 2008 or 2009, according to Gartner."

Even 2006 sounds like a long shot--so any OS X in early 2005 has a VERY safe lead.

i think the release of Longhorn depends really on when apple releases a new OS anyway. that's where MS get's all it's ideas. like the new user interface renderer "Avalon" being based on 3D technology. i suspect it's merely a Direct3D version of the OpenGL Quartz Extreme. all this time that it takes MS to finally deliver is because they have to find some way around the copyrights and such.

 

[whooleytoo]

Originally posted by nagromme
You misunderstand me. You truly CAN'T use Mac OS X unless you already own a version of Mac OS. I aready said what you did--that this is not artificially enforced. You can install on a blank drive. But that blank drive is ALWAYS in a Mac that came with Mac OS.

That is a little misleading, since you can install OSX on a machine that previously only had OS9; and they are completely different operating systems.

 

[Spades]

I have an even better idea. Let's create a standard for defining and accessing metadata, and then let the implementation specifics be OS specific. Supporting WINFS in OS X would be an awful mess, if only because it probably wouldn't work right all the time. Interoperability and Microsoft simply don't belong in the same sentence, or at least it doesn't as long as Microsoft is the one defining everything. Just look at the problems people have with Samba and Windows systems.

If metadata is really such a big deal, the first thing to do should be to create a standard for it. Once there's a standard way that allows anybody to access anybody else's metadata, then people can start implementing it. Given Microsoft's history the odds are their design is half baked, and, as has been mentioned, WINFS seems a lot more marketing driven than technically driven.

Incidentally, if your hypothetical insurance agency wasn't already storing such things in a database I'd fire the CTO and trim IT a little.

Originally posted by SiliconAddict
I pray that Apple works on direct integration of WINFS with either 10.4 or 10.5 to allow searches from Longhorn systems to be expanded to Mac systems.

 

[Fukui]

Originally posted by Spades
Incidentally, if your hypothetical insurance agency wasn't already storing such things in a database I'd fire the CTO and trim IT a little.

Well, now that SQL server is integrated into windows (will be) you could say those database companies are as good as netscaped...

 

[bernardb]

Metadata

Don't yell at me, but WHAT THE HECK IS METADATA?

thanx

 

[Spades]

Re: Metadata

Metadata literally means "data about data." It's basically extra information about whatever you're looking at. The metadata for a document might have the name of the person that created it and the software it was written with. Whether you knew it or not, you've already been using metadata. If you take a picture with a digital camera, it probably includes metadata that describes the settings the picture was taken with. If you use iTunes then you've seen the metadata first hand. Song name, artist, playcount; that's all metadata.

Now that you know what metadata is, feel free to forget about it. Metadata can be useful for humans, but its real purpose is to help programs. SiliconAddict's example shows this perfectly. A document can have the IM number of the person that made it, and when you open the document it could show if that person is online. Just like Mail.app already does...ahem. Anyways, you don't care that it was the metadata that allowed that. As the user, you just know it works. Smarter interaction between programs is the real power of metadata, not searching. Searching is just the best (and pretty much only) application for metadata that's human usable.

That's why I find it so strange that Microsoft is marketing WINFS so strongly. The average person has nothing to gain from WINFS. It's developers that have something to gain. Consumers will get the benefits from the programs developers write for WINFS.

Originally posted by bernardb
Don't yell at me, but WHAT THE HECK IS METADATA?

thanx

Yeah. If I was a DBA, I'd start looking for a new job before metadata caught on.

Originally posted by Fukui
Well, now that SQL server is integrated into windows (will be) you could say those database companies are as good as netscaped...

 

[SeaFox]

Re: Re: 10.4 this year? Look at the pattern

Originally posted by GregA
By your logic, Windows also just comes with a PC, you'd view it as being free. Microsoft couldn't survive if Windows was given away.

Because as we all know, Microsoft doesn't make any money off the Windows upgrades people are buying to upgrade what came on their box.

Plus, it's just as easy sell MS Office to Linux users, who can't run it at all, as it is people who got Windows on their machine to start with. The Windows bundling isn't about selling Windows copies, it's about 1) making the PC for sellable for consumers to the vendor, and for Microsoft 2) about getting your foot in the door and locking people into proprietary formats like WMA.

Arguably, the bundled copies of Windows are free, since according to the licence they can only be used on the hardware they were sold with. They are a part of the PC hardware, not a software program that came with it in licencing terms.

Apple gives you no choice but to buy MacOS with the computer. And as a side effect - when you upgrade to OS 10.3, as long as you're installing on Apple hardware the installer is GUARANTEED that you are upgrading. No need to check prior OS - after all, how is it possible you don't have a previous Mac OS version if you own Mac Hardware?

If you built the Mac yourself out of parts. All that is really required is the motherboard and processor.

 

[Snowy_River]

Re: Re: Re: 10.4 this year? Look at the pattern

Originally posted by SeaFox
...If you built the Mac yourself out of parts. All that is really required is the motherboard and processor.

Well, technically, you'd be breaking the law, then. Part of the license agreement with Mac OS X states that you can only install it on Apple hardware.

 

[Jonathan Amend]

Re: Re: Re: 10.4 this year? Look at the pattern

Originally posted by Fukui
Well, now that SQL server is integrated into windows (will be) you could say those database companies are as good as netscaped...

There has always been a free version of SQL Server called the Desktop Engine and it's what WinFS will use. It just has severely limited licensing compared to SQL Server and it can only serve up to 25 users at a time, so Oracle, Postgre, etc have nothing to worry about.

Originally posted by SeaFox

If you built the Mac yourself out of parts. All that is really required is the motherboard and processor. [/B]

Well, you could theoretically do it, but the price of an upgrade/replacement motherboard itself will set you back by quite a bit. PC PCI devices will also not work in Macs so you'd have to buy the "special" versions (for example, the Mac Radeon 9800 Pro costs $100 USD more than the PC version). Alternatively there are companies that sell PowerPC-based computers (http://www.pegasosppc.com/) but they don't have the Mac roms and therefore they can't run the Mac OS.

 

[MacBandit]

Re: Re: Re: Re: 10.4 this year? Look at the pattern

Originally posted by Snowy_River
Well, technically, you'd be breaking the law, then. Part of the license agreement with Mac OS X states that you can only install it on Apple hardware.

It would be Apple hardware and no he wouldn't be breaking the law. It's only illegal to commercially resell Apples motherboards for use in building Mac boxes for sale by other then Apple.

I can understand both sides of this argument. For one yes the OS and the Mac can not be separated they are one and the same so yes every os is an upgrade. On the other hand Apple does also offer upgrades to the the upgrades at reduced prices for those that purchased a new Apple without the latest OS. What would be nice is if Apple offered those sorts of discounts to people that have the newly replaced OS. For instance I own 10.3 it would be nice if Apple offered me a discount when they come out with 10.4.

On the other hand I have purchased nearly every version of the Mac OS since system 7. Either through a direct purchase of the software or by buying a new Mac. That includes every version of OSX including the preview version. It would be doubly cool if Apple offered addicts such as me a lifetime subscription for say $1,000.

 

[SeaFox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: 10.4 this year? Look at the pattern

Originally posted by Snowy_River
Well, technically, you'd be breaking the law, then. Part of the license agreement with Mac OS X states that you can only install it on Apple hardware.

Yeah, the motherboard and processor are all that should count for a hardware requirement, otherwise you legally could not run MacOSX on your computer after replacing the HD or upgrading the RAM.

But I meant buying parts from junked Macs on eBay. The original owners are gonna keep the restore disc if they can use it (or sell it separately) so if you used parts from lots of differnt sources you would have technically not bought an entire machine in a way that would count as purchasing an OS license.

Considering that MacOSX is a completely different OS from the Classic MacOS, buying Panther to run on a machine currently running OS9 could not be considered an "upgrade" from any standpoint.

 

[Flickta]

Re: Re: Windows 2009?

Originally posted by ifjake
like the new user interface renderer "Avalon" being based on 3D technology. i suspect it's merely a Direct3D version of the OpenGL Quartz Extreme.

Will it be the samesituation like there is with games? Will direct 3d version be faster?

 

[thajeztah]

Berkeley XML DB as a database?

Using a database for storing Metadata sounds -very- interesting! (Hope we won't need to rebuild the desktop-database as often as in the old days )

Regarding 'SiliconAddict's example;

"With a metadatabase, esp WINFS, you can actually do searches beyond simple file names and paths."

Apple should use an XML database, not a 'SQL' variant like MySQL or Postgresql

I've read an very article in this month's Linux Magazine (http://www.linux-mag.com/). The article describes the Berkeley XML DB (http://www.sleepycat.com/products/xml.shtml), which is a database that uses XML as the native format. In other words; XML-documents are stored just as they are.. as an XML document.

So -why- is this interesting?

The Berkeley XML DB is designed for the ever increasing 'not-so-structured' data; It would be impossible to design a database for every kind of data that's on your computer (how much sense will it make to search for the 'size in pixels' of a plain text document? the 'fax number' of a picture?, Why create space for data that's not there, or, don't create space that should have been there?).

The Berkeley XML DB makes it possible to search -inside- the document; And a lot smarter than currently with OS X 'file indexing'; With this database it would, for example, be possible to search things like:

• Documents with 'first name is' and 'last name is' (Contacts? Word Documents? Pictures?)
• Documents which 'Resolution is 72 dpi', 'ColorSync Profile is kodak.icc' and 'Camera Manufacturer is 'Fuji'
• Possibilities are endless!

Adding extra information to a document will not be very difficult (Wouldn't it be nice to Search for documents that were 'last back-upped 1 week ago', documents that are on 'Backup-disk 1' (mm I like that one!), Or even 'Show me on what disks I have a backup of this file!', Documents that were 'based on this document' (wow!), 'The website where I copied this text from').

Many of these things are possible -right now!- for example, Both Photoshop CS and Apple store extra properties -inside- your (jpeg) files -using- XML! (to check this, open a picture that was saved by Photoshop CS in a text-editor (like BBedit). If the file has been saved with a preview and printersettings, you will see XML-data inside the file)

But.... XML? why XML?

More and more programs start to use XML for their file-formats. PDF, MS Word, HTML, OpenOffice documents basically -are- XML documents. Other, Non-xml, files can easily be 'wrapped' inside a XML document. I think it will be very easy to have the filesystem automatically 'wrap' a document inside XML and add it to the database when it's created or modified.

According to Sleepycat, Apple currently uses Berkeley DB 'for mission-critical applications'. So the companies are 'aware' of each other :

'Our customers rely on Berkeley DB (..) for their mission-critical applications:
Apple, Hitachi, HP, Sun ....'

Can't wait for more information on this!

 

[thajeztah]

Interesting article on the Berkeley XML DB

Sorry to bother you all again, but I think this article will be interesting to some;

This articles describes some details of the Berkeley XML DB (in an early stage)

http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/05/07/bdb.html

Some quotes:

An XML database has several advantages over key-value, relational, and object-oriented databases:

1. XML data is dropped straight into the database; it does not need to be manipulated or extracted from a document in order to be stored.
2. When inserted into the database, most (in Berkeley DB XML, all) aspects of an XML document, including white space, are maintained exactly.
3. Queries return XML documents or fragments, which means that the hierarchical structure of (XML) information is maintained.[/list=1]

1. 
   
   

   (...) to process very large documents will run into this problem; a 100 megabyte file may require as much as 1.2 gigs of available memory. Berkeley DB XML can easily hold gigabytes of (XML) data..

   
   

   Metadata can be associated with individual documents inside of a container, which allows you to store information about a document without having to alter the content of the document itself.....

   
   
   And... from the Sleepycat documentation:
   

   • DBXML is officially supported on Apple MacOS X, Linux, Solaris, and Microsoft Windows 2000
     and XP...
   • Supports both XML and non-XML data
   • .. up to 256 Terabytes for containers and 4 Gigabytes for each document

   
   
   
   That's it for now enjoy reading!

 

[ph8te]

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
Hope it's not called OS 10.5, that would be illogical. I'm sure it will be referred to mainly by a big cat name - which of the remaining felines has the most radical nature?

Well we've had "Jaguar" and "Panther" that leaves a few...

Leopard - it's about time an african cat got used
Cheetah - which will be reserved for the fastest OS ever ... ;-)
Linx - a bit too similar to Linux
Tiger - naw.. too much like a cerial

and "Lion" won't work since there is a dispute if a Lion is really a feline, and then there are the smaller cats as well.

 

[ph8te]

Re: Re: Re: 10.4 this year? Look at the pattern

Originally posted by SeaFox


Arguably, the bundled copies of Windows are free, since according to the licence they can only be used on the hardware they were sold with. They are a part of the PC hardware, not a software program that came with it in licencing terms.

[/B]

Not really - at least here in germany it is not - there are some PC vendors out there who will sell you the hardware alone, a complete system without the OS, and if you want Windows on in you pay an extra 100 to 150 euros for it, so the OS is not for free. It's the same a buying a new car with a 20 % discount, but they don't give you a key for it. In essence it is useless without the key.

 

[DaveGee]

Originally posted by ph8te
Well we've had "Jaguar" and "Panther" that leaves a few...

Leopard - it's about time an african cat got used
Cheetah - which will be reserved for the fastest OS ever ... ;-)

Huh?!? Cheetah was already used (as was Puma).

Cheetah 10.0
Puma 10.1
Jaguar 10.2
Panther 10.3 (was Pinot if I remember correctly)

It appears that Apple filed a number of new trademarks in early July (2003). Apple has added:

- Lynx
- Cougar
- Leopard
- Tiger

To their collection of trademarks, under the common category of "computers; computer software; computer operating system software".

Source: https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33151

That list should give us some idea what to expect for 10.4 (I'd assume)

Dave

 

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by DaveGee
Huh?!? Cheetah was already used (as was Puma).

Cheetah 10.0
Puma 10.1
Jaguar 10.2
Panther 10.3 (was Pinot if I remember correctly)



That list should give us some idea what to expect for 10.4 (I'd assume)

Dave

Well I'm pretty positive that prior to 10.3 Panther being released we found out the code name to the next version and it was Lynx.

As I stated previously I don't think 10.3 was Pinot I think that was 10.2 as 10.0 and 10.1 both had wine names internally but they later leaked the cat names. When 10.2 came out it was the first on they actually marketed by the developing name and 10.3 started from the beginning using the cat name internally.

 

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by ph8te
Well we've had "Jaguar" and "Panther" that leaves a few...

Leopard - it's about time an african cat got used
Cheetah - which will be reserved for the fastest OS ever ... ;-)
Linx - a bit too similar to Linux
Tiger - naw.. too much like a cerial

and "Lion" won't work since there is a dispute if a Lion is really a feline, and then there are the smaller cats as well.

It's Lynx not Linx so it's not that similar to Linux afterall.

 

[DaveGee]

Originally posted by MacBandit
As I stated previously I don't think 10.3 was Pinot....

Yes it was...

Linky: https://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/08/20020802113210.shtml

And 10.4 internally is/was Merlot (least that's what it was being called last year by the OS engineers) Unfortunately how I came to know this last year will not help me present day since ... Well lets just say people change jobs all the time and what was once a really good friend and contact is now just a really good friend.

Dave

 

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by DaveGee
Yes it was...

Linky: https://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/08/20020802113210.shtml

And 10.4 internally is/was Merlot (least that's what it was being called last year by the OS engineers) Unfortunately how I came to know this last year will not help me present day since ... Well lets just say people change jobs all the time and what was once a really good friend and contact is now just a really good friend.

Dave

Thanks for the info. I think they dropped Pinot pretty early on and maybe changed Merlot at the same time. On the other hand they could still be using these wine names on all the updates in house for the early builds.

 

[SeaFox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: 10.4 this year? Look at the pattern

Originally posted by ph8te
Not really - at least here in germany it is not - there are some PC vendors out there who will sell you the hardware alone, a complete system without the OS, and if you want Windows on in you pay an extra 100 to 150 euros for it, so the OS is not for free. It's the same a buying a new car with a 20 % discount, but they don't give you a key for it. In essence it is useless without the key.

Well, the only problem with that car anaolgy is I can buy an igition switch for twenty buck and the car can be driven just like I did pay the extra 20% for it. But I can't go buy an OS other than Windows and get a PC that can run all the same programs.

You can certainly buy a new PC in the U.S. without the OS, or a get the PC and a standard install disc. But most people buying Dells or HP's or whathaveyou that come with Windows are getting "restore" discs and the Windows licence they're buying says the OS is part of the hardware in effect. If they build a new PC later on and take Windows off the store bought, they can't put it on their new home built box legally, or technically either since the restore disc will only work on their old PC.

 

[DaveGee]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Thanks for the info. I think they dropped Pinot pretty early on and maybe changed Merlot at the same time. On the other hand they could still be using these wine names on all the updates in house for the early builds.

Engineer code names and 'external' code names aren't the same... Last year (year before?) it would seem marketing was given authority over 'official' code names... I'd be willing to bet marketing was 'late' in choosing a formal name for 10.3 and hence the internal (Pinot) name finally got around to enough people at Apple that that name stuck (for a little while) till 'Panther' was blessed...

Fact is at Apple a single project could have quite a few different name depending on what group you were talking to.

OS X to the software developers (who actually write the code) start out referring to a new version with a wine designation. Pinot, Merlot etc etc etc... until marketing decides on an 'official code name' (cat name)...

Also each 10.X.y build at one time got a named designation too... In 10.1 (I think) or was it 10.2 I think they referred to those releases with different colors as their names.

Who'da thunk code names could be so mired in red tape and politics...

Dave

 

[encro]

Re: Re: Re: Hope not ...

Originally posted by SiliconAddict
-“MICROSOFT: Where do you want to go today? APPLE: Where do you want to go tomorrow? LINUX: Are you coming or what?”

I've always wanted to change this back to the original BSD tag and add a bit

-“MICROSOFT: Where do you want to go today? LINUX: Where do you want to go tomorrow? BSD: Are you coming or what?” APPLE: **** you ****s are slow!