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 10.5 Details?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Things I'd like to see in 10.5
-just one theme across the board (nnot classic aqua, brushed metal, & pro)
-drop G3 support and optimize Mac OS X for G4, G5 & Intel
-more hardware acceleration/offloading to sound cards/graphics cards
Wouldn't hurt to have iTunes encode using the soundcard and iMovie/iDVD/FC encode using the graphics card and let the CPU be more free to do other stuff. Check out www.aspex-semi.com
-a deinstaller
-an easier way to build & install Unix source code applications (like gcc, apache, bison, etc.)
-more drivers for hardware (like the Soundblaster X-Fi)
-better speech synthesis (text-to-speech) & recognition
-built-in speech recognition so instead of typing, you can speak what you want to say and better voice commands so that you can navigate w/o a mouse & keyboard
-Apple to take its time & get all the bugs out before adding more eye candy
-just one theme across the board (nnot classic aqua, brushed metal, & pro)
-drop G3 support and optimize Mac OS X for G4, G5 & Intel
-more hardware acceleration/offloading to sound cards/graphics cards
Wouldn't hurt to have iTunes encode using the soundcard and iMovie/iDVD/FC encode using the graphics card and let the CPU be more free to do other stuff. Check out www.aspex-semi.com
-a deinstaller
-an easier way to build & install Unix source code applications (like gcc, apache, bison, etc.)
-more drivers for hardware (like the Soundblaster X-Fi)
-better speech synthesis (text-to-speech) & recognition
-built-in speech recognition so instead of typing, you can speak what you want to say and better voice commands so that you can navigate w/o a mouse & keyboard
-Apple to take its time & get all the bugs out before adding more eye candy
I really hope that Apple wakes up and puts a package installer/uninstaller into OS X 10.5. I mean seriously, it shouldn't be that hard to do. Every other OS on the planet has a central database to add/remove packages and updates. It shouldn't be that inconceivable for "the most advanced operating system in the world" to come with one too. I shouldn't have to
unless I messed something up. Apple should make it easier on the people that don't know how to rummage through the bowels of the OS via command line, removing pieces of applications that they don't want anymore. And you sure as hell shouldn't need to "drag and drop" an application directory into the trash to delete it. That's just wrong.
Code:
rm -rf foo.appRandall said:
Yeah, and how many of those actually work? This subject was covered in the first few pages of this thread, but making an OS-level installer/uninstaller is a lot harder than most people think, and so far nobody has been able to make a good one. Instead, we (users) should start holding developers accountable for creating uninstallers for their apps that are at least as good as their installers. Until then, I'm perfectly happy with having self-contained application bundles that I can just drop in the trash.
The Windows uninstaller is crap
1. Not every program installed shows in the catalogue
2. The uninstaller does not remove everything, reg keys folders and other files are left
3. If a program loses a file or becomes corrupt, the uninstaller fails to uninstall it, leaving you with a program that you can't properly uninstall nor use.
What is wrong with just drag and drop? An Uninstaller would not work then for the apps that I have just dragged and dropped from media as they havent been installed, just copied? It would be interesting, to see how Apple approach this if they do endevour to create and OS based uninstaller.
1. Not every program installed shows in the catalogue
2. The uninstaller does not remove everything, reg keys folders and other files are left
3. If a program loses a file or becomes corrupt, the uninstaller fails to uninstall it, leaving you with a program that you can't properly uninstall nor use.
What is wrong with just drag and drop? An Uninstaller would not work then for the apps that I have just dragged and dropped from media as they havent been installed, just copied? It would be interesting, to see how Apple approach this if they do endevour to create and OS based uninstaller.
pknz said:
You guys can't be serious...
Applications that you just drag and drop to install are one thing, as they were never officially installed to begin with. The fact is that Windows Uninstaller does work, and it does remove registry entries for removed programs. I have seen a resonable package manager in every OS I have ever used. Windows, Solaris, Ubuntu, Fedora Core, AIX, all of them EXCEPT OS X. If you install a package that goes to more then one directory by default, you should be able to uninstall said package just as easily. But according to you guys I guess I am asking for too much functionallity. I appoligize for going high-tech on you. Let me just drag this conversation into the trash.
IMO, drag and drop is the better of the two. I like just deleting programs. Installer/Uninstaller programs annoy me.
I personally never experienced any bugs with Tiger. What are they?
I personally never experienced any bugs with Tiger. What are they?
ryanw said:
Software Update reads directly from your Applications folder to determine necessary updates. This is why it is recommended that you don't break your Applications folder down into subfolders, or keep apps (Apple ones anyway) anywhere but there. If you remove an app from the root level of Applications there is no reason that Software Update should continue to see it. And while most elements of most applications are contained within the package which can simply be trashed to "uninstall", it is true that a number of things can be left behind. These are almost always in the Application Support folder and/or in Preferences. Hidden files are often serial number and unlock stuff. It would be nice to be able to remove those things as well. Not really necessary, but nice.
Randall said:
I just told you Windos Unistaller does not work, I have used it, gone thorught the registry and found keys that should have been removed when there program was moved. Also folders and other files are left where they are installed, this is not properly uninstalled as it is still there.
You probably haven't noticed but Mac OSX lacks some other functionality, such as the ability to get virus's, spyware, trojans and the accompanying software to try and prevent these from getting onto your computer in the first place.
Yes, you just go too damn high-tech for us with your uninstaller there, Mac OS X is for ease of use not to be high tech.
PS, as you are not a mod you don't have the privleges to wasteland this topic
Possible Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard screenshots
http://chucker.mystfans.com/2005/10/10/possible-mac-os-x-105-leopard-screenshots.entry here is a link to see some "possible" screenshots from OS X 10.5 Leopard in very early development. As you can see, more and more applications are starting to look like iTunes 6.
It looks real enough for my tastes, but you can judge for yourself.
http://chucker.mystfans.com/2005/10/10/possible-mac-os-x-105-leopard-screenshots.entry here is a link to see some "possible" screenshots from OS X 10.5 Leopard in very early development. As you can see, more and more applications are starting to look like iTunes 6.
It looks real enough for my tastes, but you can judge for yourself.
High-tech?
In my current job and my previous one, one of my primary resposibilities has been to create installs/uninstalls for our applications. At my previous job, I wrote my own install/uninstall engine, as the company didn't want to pay the license for a commercial install engine. I've written installs for pretty much every platform (except OS X). I have a lot of experience with other companies' installers, since we often ship third party software as part of our own applications. I can guarantee you that the majority of developers give little to no thought to their uninstallers, and usually rely only on the automatic uninstall features built into their install engine.
The most widely used install engine is Installshield. It's default uninstall features have a number of shortcomings:
It won't uninstall files created by the application after the install is run
It won't uninstall registry entries created by the application after the install is run
It won't uninstall files or folders that are read-only
It won't uninstall third party applications installed as part of your install
It won't restore environment variables changed by the install, or changed after the fact
etc., etc.
Now the developer is perfectly capable of customizing the uninstall in Installshield to handle all of these situations, but practically none ever do. On the Windows platform, Installshield's uninstall relies on the built-in Windows uninstall. But the built-in Windows uninstaller cannot handle the above situations, for a host of reasons. How do you determine that a file, folder, or registry key created or modified not during an installation should be later included in the uninstall?
It is unreasonable to expect the OS to include a package manager that monitors the computer 24/7 and magically determines which files should be part of uninstalls and which shouldn't.
Instead, the developer should be held responsible for making his uninstall cleanly remove the appropriate files. Microsoft is probably the worst offender. The uninstallers for most of the Microsoft products that I've worked with leave behind files, folders, registry keys, environment variables, etc. For example, the uninstaller for MS SQL Server used to leave behind an empty directory, but if you then tried to reinstall MS SQL Server, it wouldn't install if that directory existed, because it thought that the product was still installed.
I find the application bundle on OS X the best and cleanest solution I've ever seen. Drop the application bundle in the trash, then drop the plist file in the trash. For most applications on OS X, that's all you need to do. For any application that wants to do something more complex, the developer should provide a well-written install/uninstall.
Installshield and InstallAnywhere are both very good install engines that are available for Windows, Mac and Linux. They both handle upgrades and versions and are highly customizable. There are probably others as well. Developers should take responsibility to make an install/uninstall that works, and make sure that the uninstall is at least as good as the install.
Randall said:You guys can't be serious...
Applications that you just drag and drop to install are one thing, as they were never officially installed to begin with. The fact is that Windows Uninstaller does work, and it does remove registry entries for removed programs. I have seen a resonable package manager in every OS I have ever used. Windows, Solaris, Ubuntu, Fedora Core, AIX, all of them EXCEPT OS X. If you install a package that goes to more then one directory by default, you should be able to uninstall said package just as easily. But according to you guys I guess I am asking for too much functionallity. I appoligize for going high-tech on you. Let me just drag this conversation into the trash.
In my current job and my previous one, one of my primary resposibilities has been to create installs/uninstalls for our applications. At my previous job, I wrote my own install/uninstall engine, as the company didn't want to pay the license for a commercial install engine. I've written installs for pretty much every platform (except OS X). I have a lot of experience with other companies' installers, since we often ship third party software as part of our own applications. I can guarantee you that the majority of developers give little to no thought to their uninstallers, and usually rely only on the automatic uninstall features built into their install engine.
The most widely used install engine is Installshield. It's default uninstall features have a number of shortcomings:
It won't uninstall files created by the application after the install is run
It won't uninstall registry entries created by the application after the install is run
It won't uninstall files or folders that are read-only
It won't uninstall third party applications installed as part of your install
It won't restore environment variables changed by the install, or changed after the fact
etc., etc.
Now the developer is perfectly capable of customizing the uninstall in Installshield to handle all of these situations, but practically none ever do. On the Windows platform, Installshield's uninstall relies on the built-in Windows uninstall. But the built-in Windows uninstaller cannot handle the above situations, for a host of reasons. How do you determine that a file, folder, or registry key created or modified not during an installation should be later included in the uninstall?
It is unreasonable to expect the OS to include a package manager that monitors the computer 24/7 and magically determines which files should be part of uninstalls and which shouldn't.
Instead, the developer should be held responsible for making his uninstall cleanly remove the appropriate files. Microsoft is probably the worst offender. The uninstallers for most of the Microsoft products that I've worked with leave behind files, folders, registry keys, environment variables, etc. For example, the uninstaller for MS SQL Server used to leave behind an empty directory, but if you then tried to reinstall MS SQL Server, it wouldn't install if that directory existed, because it thought that the product was still installed.
I find the application bundle on OS X the best and cleanest solution I've ever seen. Drop the application bundle in the trash, then drop the plist file in the trash. For most applications on OS X, that's all you need to do. For any application that wants to do something more complex, the developer should provide a well-written install/uninstall.
Installshield and InstallAnywhere are both very good install engines that are available for Windows, Mac and Linux. They both handle upgrades and versions and are highly customizable. There are probably others as well. Developers should take responsibility to make an install/uninstall that works, and make sure that the uninstall is at least as good as the install.
I am willing to bet that the majority of users fail to do the latter, and wonder why they didn't get a clean uninstall. That was all my point was, that the .app bundle is ideal, but unfortunately there is just a little bit more to it.aranhamo said:
Me too... I especially love the look of the new finder. Very sharpzakatov said:
Randall said:
But unlike files and registry keys leftover from a bad uninstall on Windows, a leftover plist file is harmless and takes up very little disk space. Most of them are only a couple of KB and it doesn't hurt anything to leave them there. It's also nice sometimes to be able put in a new copy of an application without losing all your settings.
crapsandwich said:
I agree on a few things, but I differ on these:
Uninstaller- Mentioned above, they don't work. Plus, drag-n'-drop simplicity is bliss.
Fink takes care of Unix source applications, or you can just compile them yourself without modifications sometimes.
Drivers are up to the company... Apple can't make drivers for hardware they don't make. Granted, video drivers they should improve but those are different in some cases. ATi cards work with the ATi drivers. Apple can be responsible for hardware they ship, but if it is off the way stuff... it is up to the manufacturer.
Text-to-speech is very good already; try different voices. Some of them are better than others at pronunciation. But going the other way, OS X should have a basic speech recognition program. Not for commands but for writing; the speech commands are there already. Work great too... just a bit awkward sometimes if you aren't used to it.
I always hear of people complaining about bugs. I think Apple gets out 95% of the bugs, but to get the remaining 5% it would take the same amount of energy and time and effort to find the initial 95% and thus Apple shouldn't worry too much... they do the best they can.
A few words on the windows installer (creating windows installers is a big part of my job, and i've had too much experience of it). Almost all windows software uses microsoft's installer (MSI), which would be a great piece of software if it wasn't so badly flawed and full of bugs.
The number one problem with it is if something goes wrong with the installer itself - suddenly you can't install or uninstall anything (possibly including whatever killed the installer!) and all kinds of wierd things start happening, like word will load, but you can't add clip art. Why? Because the installer loads every time any component of an MSI installed application is loaded, and if the installer has a problem, everything else has a problem too.
Personally, I think self-contained apps are the way forwards. If they need to install frameworks and stuff that are hard to uninstall, that's a small price to pay compared to what you have to deal with in windows.
The number one problem with it is if something goes wrong with the installer itself - suddenly you can't install or uninstall anything (possibly including whatever killed the installer!) and all kinds of wierd things start happening, like word will load, but you can't add clip art. Why? Because the installer loads every time any component of an MSI installed application is loaded, and if the installer has a problem, everything else has a problem too.
Personally, I think self-contained apps are the way forwards. If they need to install frameworks and stuff that are hard to uninstall, that's a small price to pay compared to what you have to deal with in windows.
i also have (unfortunately) had to write windows installers as part of my day job...
msi, is a good idea, but as someone has already stated, its v. buggy ... but it does have the right ideas, it can clean the registry, dll's, com object etc.
BUT... it, as all installers, has potential issues which are hard to solve:
i. shared dlls, com objects ... only if you force every app to register interested in shared resources can u know its safe to delete - and many apps simply dont bother.
ii. versioning of shared resouces... nightmare, having to keep old versions around.
iii. user folders, msi wont delete a folder if user has modified it, common one here is log files being left on disk even though app is uninstalled.
as for those saying drag n drop to trash can works, sorry guys, but no
i like the idea, but
a) how does it address shared libraries between apps... e.g. stuff in /Library, ~/Library
b) as stated, doesnt cope with updates, or apps being in user defined folders... i would really like to tidy up my Applications folder (i know i can create new folder, with links, but i shouldnt have to... this is a pain)
personally, id prefer RPM/gentoo approaches... as i think m$ is really lacks the dependancy and upgrade... fortunately apple dont have some of the probs m$ does (e.g registry, com/.net)
surely apple could do this...
think its also going to be impertive, soon we will all buy, install, upgrade s/ware online... and not just apple software.... using something similar to gentoo, would perhaps mean software update could work for all apps
msi, is a good idea, but as someone has already stated, its v. buggy ... but it does have the right ideas, it can clean the registry, dll's, com object etc.
BUT... it, as all installers, has potential issues which are hard to solve:
i. shared dlls, com objects ... only if you force every app to register interested in shared resources can u know its safe to delete - and many apps simply dont bother.
ii. versioning of shared resouces... nightmare, having to keep old versions around.
iii. user folders, msi wont delete a folder if user has modified it, common one here is log files being left on disk even though app is uninstalled.
as for those saying drag n drop to trash can works, sorry guys, but no
i like the idea, but
a) how does it address shared libraries between apps... e.g. stuff in /Library, ~/Library
b) as stated, doesnt cope with updates, or apps being in user defined folders... i would really like to tidy up my Applications folder (i know i can create new folder, with links, but i shouldnt have to... this is a pain)
personally, id prefer RPM/gentoo approaches... as i think m$ is really lacks the dependancy and upgrade... fortunately apple dont have some of the probs m$ does (e.g registry, com/.net)
surely apple could do this...
think its also going to be impertive, soon we will all buy, install, upgrade s/ware online... and not just apple software.... using something similar to gentoo, would perhaps mean software update could work for all apps
RPMs
RPMs have the same problems I mentioned above with default uninstallers (wrt to files, folders and env vars created by the app at runtime, for example). I still say the developer is responsible for installing/uninstalling his own app. I know from experience it is possible to make bullet-proof installers that aware of versions, can be rolled-back, etc. on Windows and Linux. I've never made installers for OS X, but all the commercial install engines I've ever used are available for OS X. So I know there is no reason that developers cannot make uninstallers for their OS X apps that actually work.
Why try to solve the problem in the OS, where the solution is extremely complicated, when the developer can do it much more simply and reliably? Then if some Adobe app has a dirty uninstaller, consumers complain to Adobe, not to Apple or Microsoft.
Developers have this bad attitude of "Why should I worry about an uninstaller? No one would ever want to uninstall my application." Or else they figure "Microsoft has Add/Remove programs, so I don't need to worry about uninstalling my application." As developers, we need to be held responsible for the whole life cycle of our applications; we can't shove it off onto the OS vendors. It's like camping: you have to leave the customer's system just the way you found it, or pack out your trash.
There's been serious research into this. People have proposed things as far as a process that monitors the system 24/7 and makes a record of every file and folder and system setting made or changed by every process, so that it can back any of those changes out at any time. Imagine the resources that would take? It's like having your whole computer monitored by ClearCase 24/7; version control systems like ClearCase are problematic enough as it is. And even then, you may not want to back out everything that the app has changed, so how do you decide?
kodiak said:
RPMs have the same problems I mentioned above with default uninstallers (wrt to files, folders and env vars created by the app at runtime, for example). I still say the developer is responsible for installing/uninstalling his own app. I know from experience it is possible to make bullet-proof installers that aware of versions, can be rolled-back, etc. on Windows and Linux. I've never made installers for OS X, but all the commercial install engines I've ever used are available for OS X. So I know there is no reason that developers cannot make uninstallers for their OS X apps that actually work.
Why try to solve the problem in the OS, where the solution is extremely complicated, when the developer can do it much more simply and reliably? Then if some Adobe app has a dirty uninstaller, consumers complain to Adobe, not to Apple or Microsoft.
Developers have this bad attitude of "Why should I worry about an uninstaller? No one would ever want to uninstall my application." Or else they figure "Microsoft has Add/Remove programs, so I don't need to worry about uninstalling my application." As developers, we need to be held responsible for the whole life cycle of our applications; we can't shove it off onto the OS vendors. It's like camping: you have to leave the customer's system just the way you found it, or pack out your trash.
There's been serious research into this. People have proposed things as far as a process that monitors the system 24/7 and makes a record of every file and folder and system setting made or changed by every process, so that it can back any of those changes out at any time. Imagine the resources that would take? It's like having your whole computer monitored by ClearCase 24/7; version control systems like ClearCase are problematic enough as it is. And even then, you may not want to back out everything that the app has changed, so how do you decide?
zakatov said:
Thats it exactly, that screenshot simply looks like someone layered on a theme. I see nothing there to make me believe it is genuinely some future 10.5 build. If someone is gonna leak a screenshot, how about showing some nifty new feature or something.
The biggest indicator is the borderless Finder. A theme (http://icespectre.ambitiouslemon.com/2005/09/12/it5/) has been made to mimic that in Tiger, but with rather sad consequences:aranhamo said:
Finder in iT5:
Finder in the screenshot:
In addition, with iT5 theme, the variant that has the borderless finder, also makes Safari look weird:
safari in screenshot:
Even when another variant of iT5 is used (the one without borderless finder), Safari still looks different from the one in the screenshot:
