Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac OS X 10.4: Tiger
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
flyfish29 said:
You assume wrong. Many mac programs (non- Apple programs) are built for Panther or Jaguar, and aren't backwards compatible. This is hardly the case with windows... most programs run just fine in Windows 98 still. If you don't upgrade your mac OS, you're left behind.
ZildjianKX said:Apple forces you to update... new software won't run on old OSes
Well that's kinda how it works, can't expect the new photoshop 8 or 9 or whatever to run on system 7.2.
ZildjianKX said:
If it comes down to backwards compatibility or forward migration, I'll opt to pay for the new versions along with forward progress.
It's true that you're not forced to upgrade beyond what currently works for your computer/OS. If you need the features only available in software designed for a more recent OS, there's your answer.
Apple should avoid bloating OS X in order to go out of its way being backwards compatible. Keep it lean and smart.
ZildjianKX said:
Big difference is there's a lot of core advances in each OSX release, not really the case with windows)
OutThere761 said:Apple will come up with a nice look for it. It doesn't look too terrible in my quick and dirty mock up. Please ignore the furry edges - they were a whim and didn't turn out right. Unless you like them.
Looks like a throw rug made from an anorexic tiger
silvergunuk said:Yeah Silicon, like hairs gonna stop a tiger from winning
It will if the animal can't find the juncture to bite down on. Have you ever SEEN a lion's mane?!?
Lion Mane
There's so much fur in there when they are going at it its not like the lion's sitting around waiting for the tiger to find the right spot to bite down on.
ooo - fuuzzyy
I'll go on record - I like the furry edges. I see what you mean about it not working quite right in the ps, but the idea of furry stuff should make a marketer drool. Imagine a box with faux fur on the outside.
(insert alpha males "Furry! But that won't make a G5 Powerbook run!")
(insert sensitive types "Come on, Apple is trying to appeal to women!")
Basically, I just a furry box would make people want to touch it. Making people want to touch your product can't be bad. Think ipod mini.
OutThere761 said:Apple will come up with a nice look for it. It doesn't look too terrible in my quick and dirty mock up. Please ignore the furry edges - they were a whim and didn't turn out right. Unless you like them.
I'll go on record - I like the furry edges. I see what you mean about it not working quite right in the ps, but the idea of furry stuff should make a marketer drool. Imagine a box with faux fur on the outside.
(insert alpha males "Furry! But that won't make a G5 Powerbook run!")
(insert sensitive types "Come on, Apple is trying to appeal to women!")
Basically, I just a furry box would make people want to touch it. Making people want to touch your product can't be bad. Think ipod mini.
I say Apple splits the difference and goes with OS X: SaberTooth. As in SaberTooth Tiger which in reality I believe, I could be wrong, is more closely linked to the Lion family of big cats. In which case we are all happy
Where do people get the idea that Apple upgrades yearly?
Where do people get the idea that Apple upgrades yearly?
Since OS X 10.0 was released in early 2001, there have only been TWO paid upgrades of OS X: 10.2 and 10.3. (10.1 was free.) The time between paid versions was 17 months and 14 months. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/66028/[/url
And when I look around, the VAST majority of new 3rd-party apps do NOT need the newest OS X. If they do, then you can simply keep running an older version of that app until upgrading offers enough benefits to be worth it to you.
Where do people get the idea that Apple upgrades yearly?
Since OS X 10.0 was released in early 2001, there have only been TWO paid upgrades of OS X: 10.2 and 10.3. (10.1 was free.) The time between paid versions was 17 months and 14 months. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/66028/[/url
And when I look around, the VAST majority of new 3rd-party apps do NOT need the newest OS X. If they do, then you can simply keep running an older version of that app until upgrading offers enough benefits to be worth it to you.
End of "faster"?
Actually, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that for most things 10.4 will not be faster than 10.3 on the same hardware. I think all the low-hanging fruit there has been picked, and any further speed increases will be offset by new features that slow the system down, creating no overall speed changes, or a slight slowdown.
10.0, being a brand new system, had lots of opportunity for optimization. But now that we're at 10.4, I think there's a lot less room, and people with a really old system may be forced to upgrade to use the new OS, unlike most past releases which just made them faster. Just my 2 cents.
ccuilla said:
Actually, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that for most things 10.4 will not be faster than 10.3 on the same hardware. I think all the low-hanging fruit there has been picked, and any further speed increases will be offset by new features that slow the system down, creating no overall speed changes, or a slight slowdown.
10.0, being a brand new system, had lots of opportunity for optimization. But now that we're at 10.4, I think there's a lot less room, and people with a really old system may be forced to upgrade to use the new OS, unlike most past releases which just made them faster. Just my 2 cents.
Tiger info...
Large mammal populations theoretically are best conserved in landscapes where large protected areas are surrounded by buffer zones, connected by corridors, and integrated into a greater ecosystem. Multi-use buffer zones, including those containing complex agroforestry systems, are promoted as one strategy to provide both economic benefits to people and conservation benefits to wildlife.
hmmm...relatively useless information. Like this rumor.
Large mammal populations theoretically are best conserved in landscapes where large protected areas are surrounded by buffer zones, connected by corridors, and integrated into a greater ecosystem. Multi-use buffer zones, including those containing complex agroforestry systems, are promoted as one strategy to provide both economic benefits to people and conservation benefits to wildlife.
hmmm...relatively useless information. Like this rumor.
its really kind of weird that only male ligers cant reproduce maybe theres some kind of point mutation in the testes determinig factor gene because thats what makes a male ne ways tiger would be a good name for 10.4
i can see it now its insanely grrrrreeeaat
i can see it now its insanely grrrrreeeaat
SiliconAddict said:I say Apple splits the difference and goes with OS X: SaberTooth. As in SaberTooth Tiger which in reality I believe, I could be wrong, is more closely linked to the Lion family of big cats. In which case we are all happy
Hmm, might not be good karma to name your latest OS after anything EXTINCT
Probably not "tiger".
People who are calling the name Tiger "unimaginative" are probably just relating to it's overuse. Apple has had in the past a tendancy towards the simple or even corny option for names, but in general they follow more conventional naming-industry strategies, which place as much emphasis on pronounciation as they do on meaning: PowerBook is a great name not just because it is a combination of two good attributes but because it has two strong consonants. It's used a lot as an example of the success of the naming industry.
Maybe in the portugese reporting there was a translation difficulty as well.
I would expect Apple to name 10.4, "Bengal", for it's stronger pronounciation. (And Bengal is more familiar to most Americans than "sumatran" or "amur". "Indochinese" is just too non-specific)
Another possibility is that they're not named not just after felines but after football teams with feline names, hence 10.5 will be, of course, Lion.
People who are calling the name Tiger "unimaginative" are probably just relating to it's overuse. Apple has had in the past a tendancy towards the simple or even corny option for names, but in general they follow more conventional naming-industry strategies, which place as much emphasis on pronounciation as they do on meaning: PowerBook is a great name not just because it is a combination of two good attributes but because it has two strong consonants. It's used a lot as an example of the success of the naming industry.
Maybe in the portugese reporting there was a translation difficulty as well.
I would expect Apple to name 10.4, "Bengal", for it's stronger pronounciation. (And Bengal is more familiar to most Americans than "sumatran" or "amur". "Indochinese" is just too non-specific)
Another possibility is that they're not named not just after felines but after football teams with feline names, hence 10.5 will be, of course, Lion.
ZildjianKX said:
That's because Windows core technologies change very little from release to release. Even the new .Net Framework relies on the older win32 API which is just a superset of Win32s/16 all the way from Windows 3.1 days. On the other hand, Panther was a major revision from Jaguar and a lot changed, including the core way the basic instruction sequence is handled in the ABI.
So if you want the latest and best OS X with very little compromises from release to release, than you will encourage Apple to stay the path. If you want Windows styled compatibility and be stuck with 25 year old OS technology and one woe after another, you can demand free upgrades and 100% compatibility.
Tiauguinho said:As I've already told Arn, there is a little bit more info on that article, not a lot, but still:
.The Internal build of Tiger is 8A85(the "A" means its still on Alpha)
. And that it uses Safari v133 as oposed to v125.1 that 10.3.3 uses
And that's all
A doesn't mean alpha. Apple's build numbering system is as follows (from past history, anyway):
8: Major version (10.3 was 7, 10.2 was 6, etc...)
A: Code fork (slightly complicated concept, but it's sure not beta, since there have been ones with 'D' here)
85: Build 85 of version 8 fork A
I'm not totally sure about the code fork thing, but it makes a good deal of sense, since you often get situations where the release of 10.x.x is, say, B, and you already have C builds of 10.x.y floating around at the same time.