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 Leopard 9A377a Seeded
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ITS NEVER GOING TO WORK...WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!!!!!
Seriously folks. If you push a product out the door, then you will have problems, and reinforce the notion that one should never buy a DOT OHH product ( OSX.5.0 ). This is typical of MS, and other software vendors.
Personally, I would rather wait an extra month or two for the DOT OHH product to be made workable than to wait 6 months for the service pack that does the same thing....
Soooo.....
Hold on, and don't get your Knickers in a twist....
Max.
Seriously folks. If you push a product out the door, then you will have problems, and reinforce the notion that one should never buy a DOT OHH product ( OSX.5.0 ). This is typical of MS, and other software vendors.
Personally, I would rather wait an extra month or two for the DOT OHH product to be made workable than to wait 6 months for the service pack that does the same thing....
Soooo.....
Hold on, and don't get your Knickers in a twist....
Max.
Well you gotta give Microsoft some credit, then, for delaying Vista. Clearly it wasn't ready two or three years ago...
Actually, when I got Tiger it was mostly stable, except for Dashboard widgets, which failed often. It was not much less stable than Panther at all. The only buggy parts, like I said, were the new features.
Going off of that, we may expect Leopard to be pretty stable except for brand-new features. (One might argue that there are a bunch of new underlying technologies in Leopard that could mess a lot of stuff up, however, there were in Tiger as well, I believe - though I am not certain.)
So I probably will not wait very long at all to buy Leopard.
AvSRoCkCO1067 said:
and it still isn't now.
Hi, first time I've posted, in fact I registered today.
I am waiting for the refresh of the Mac Pro so that I can get Leopard, but while I am waiting:
Windows Vista supports up to 128 bit graphics internally. Currently Mac OS X and Windows XP only support 8 bits per channel (24 bit) for video hardware. Vista's high bit rate means that you can now connect for example, a 10 bit monochrome LCD screen without using special drivers. Or in the future, high dynamic range displays.
Right now some HDTVs can support 10 bit per component (RGB) color information, and if you're working in Mac OS X or Windows XP, the video path will be restricted to 8 bits.
So... will Leopard natively support high bit displays? I know on the audio side, Mac OS X is already ahead by supporting 32 bit floating point audio in CoreAudio, which Vista now brings to Windows.
I am waiting for the refresh of the Mac Pro so that I can get Leopard, but while I am waiting:
Windows Vista supports up to 128 bit graphics internally. Currently Mac OS X and Windows XP only support 8 bits per channel (24 bit) for video hardware. Vista's high bit rate means that you can now connect for example, a 10 bit monochrome LCD screen without using special drivers. Or in the future, high dynamic range displays.
Right now some HDTVs can support 10 bit per component (RGB) color information, and if you're working in Mac OS X or Windows XP, the video path will be restricted to 8 bits.
So... will Leopard natively support high bit displays? I know on the audio side, Mac OS X is already ahead by supporting 32 bit floating point audio in CoreAudio, which Vista now brings to Windows.
No, not at all. However, one note of caution: if you plan to go this route, DO NOT BUY until after Apple officially announces Leopard's release date. In their announcement, they will usually include some sort of words to the effect that any computers bought after the announcement date and before the release date will qualify for the cheap upgrade. Make sure the announcement says this.
There's always a lot of misinformation floating around here about the up-to-date program. Many people say you can do it if you bought 30 days before the release of the new OS. That simply is not true. For the last three OS X releases at least (Tiger, Panther, Jaguar), Apple's convention was to offer the up-to-date program only to people who bought new machines after the release date was officially announced. I think the time between announcement and release varied from about 2 to 3 weeks.
Of course, there's no guarantees that Apple will do the same thing this time around, but they probably will!
So should I upgrade to it?
I have a secondary hard drive I run Leopard off of, and skipped the last build. 9a343 I believe. I've been busy, and it didn't seem that substantial. Now I'm not sure about this one either. Again, it's just for testing. I'm running 10.4.9 (8P132) on my main system. So is it worth it? Suppose it couldn't hurt, but if it's as bad as I've heard, maybe I'll just continue to put it off until I have more time. Plus, if they're just going to release an update in a few days, or even weeks, I can wait.
I'm still not expecting 10.5 until June at the current rate, but like I've said, I haven't even seen the latest dev build, let alone the internal, so I don't know. Santa Rosa won't even be out until May, so we may have to wait for June for hardware updates too. I can understand where people are frustrated, I can't wait either.
I appologise for not being in a good mood ok?
But.
If you were an active developer you wouldn't even have asked me that question.
I agree. I think it's also fairly likely that the so-called "Top Secret" features won't be announced/demoed until WWDC. Here's the timeline I see:
- April at NAB: demo FCP 6 and FC Extreme, shipping in June (requires Leopard).
- Late May / Early June: announce Leopard's release date - either during or just after WWDC.
- WWDC keynote: Steve demos completed Leopard
- Release Leopard to WWDC attendees (Steve to audience - "and you're getting it for free today!")
- Release Leopard to the rest of the world, either simultaneously or just after.
June 20th, a Wednesday, is the last day of Spring. Tiger and Panther were both released on a Friday. Jaguar was released on a Saturday. If Apple wants to continue that trend and also make their Spring target, then Leopard can't come later than June 15th or 16th -- also the end of WWDC.
An alternate timeline could have them doing a special event earlier, just for Leopard. But will they do that? I think WWDC is looking likely.
Funny AvSRoCkCO1067, Your Avatar does not look like the Cherry Creek store... Of course, I guess, since there is not one in Golden, you must have to dream of the perfect Apple Store.
Max.
I'm not.
I won't be for a couple of months, and by then it will already be out. But I have a seed account that will be good until August, so I've been testing when I get the time just to get a feel for it. When I get more time, I'll delve more into it. Just wondering it this was worth it, as the last one didn't seem to be.I'm downloading now anyway (slowly), so when I get a chance I guess I'll go ahead and install it. Couldn't hurt right? Right? (he said, making sure even his backup was backed up)
I'm not.
I'm downloading now anyway (slowly), so when I get a chance I guess I'll go ahead and install it. Couldn't hurt right? Right? (he said, making sure even his backup was backed up)
ahh...ok..my appologies
It's worth it if you like to look under the hood of a new car like I do.I live for it..hehe
I would not think this is a priority for 10.5. In fact, I am wondering if it is needed at all. The human eye cannot perceive beyond 24 bit color. Of all the things most basic, I would like to see Finder updated.
That's a scandalous statement. Anyone who works with color and printing knows about the CIE LUV/LAB chart that shows the gamut of average human vision. A typical display only shows about 2/5 of all possible colors that a human eye can see. While a video card can provide 256 shades of color per component, a lot of the viewable colors will be repeated because of the limitations of the display. Also contrast is another issue that needs to be addressed. Our eyes have incredible dynamic range, a monitor doesn't. HDR displays can use the extra bits to encode brightness levels (or more colors that appear brighter or darker).
It is true that our vision is limited to about 2 million colors, but what you see on screen is cut to about 800,000, maybe less, assuming a fixed brightness level.
Physicians would love higher bit depth. In fact when it's required, as in radiology, we're limited to specialized systems, usually running Windows, sometimes something proprietary, but never Mac. Offices and systems are sometimes run on Macs, but never operational equipment. This is also the reason why we still rely so heavily on plain old x-ray films. X-ray films show significantly greater ranges of gray than can be reproduced on most monitors. (I forget the photographic term for this, it's related to stops, dynamic range I think. And because I'm an amateur photographer I think it's interesting to note that average digital cameras encompass about 3 stops, averge film 5 stops, and the human can encompass something like 12 stops in one frame.) Anyway, there are some high dynamic range monitors produced today-they're very expensive-but they're obviously limited by the system driving them. I hate to the crown to MS on this point, but it sounds like they're thinking ahead on this point.
What you're describing is typically called contrast, but as far as f-stops go, its called dynamic range. Our eyes are about 12-15 and a good digital camera can squeeze out about 8 stops of range.
Anyhow, I want to complain: I want high bit support in Leopard, waaaaaaaaaa.
Right, and the human eye can't perceive beyond 30fps either.
In reality, banding is clearly visible with 24 bits for some colors.--Eric
Hmmmm I think there is some odd numbers here. I am an old TV Engineer, and I remember one of the issues with NTSC vs Analog RGB or y/R-Y/B-Y was that NTSC could only display about 4 million colors while component analog could display about 4 times that. I also know that LCD panels were even more limited.
I think that since we have gone digital, we have gotten used to far fewer colors. This was made possible since the human eye is reeeeeaaaaalllllyyyy adaptable to adjusting to color and not telling the brain about it.
I could see the need for component 10-bit digital and it truly surprises me that with such technologies and the draw of FCP, that the Mac does not natively support this without special drivers.
In my opinion, this locks OS X into being a good platform for DV ( 4:1:0 ) and not native D1 or better ( 4:2:2:2 )
I hope Apple fixes this in Leopard or better.
Max.
I purchased my first Mac when Tiger was released and I had 10.4.0
It was pretty stable to me, with minor annoyances with items on the dock staying "blown up" after being clicked on (I had magnification enabled).
I would love to get my hands on Leopard as soon as it comes out - I can deal with a few bugs, but I would rather wait a few more weeks or months and get a stable(r) version, instead of having a rushed version to meet their spring deadline.
I don't think Apple would have a problem meeting their spring deadline, but if they did I don't think it would be a big deal to push it a week or two more, or whatever it takes. I mean, look at the
TV.
I know nothing about the development or anything like that, so that last paragraph is just my honest opinion and speculation.
It was pretty stable to me, with minor annoyances with items on the dock staying "blown up" after being clicked on (I had magnification enabled).
I would love to get my hands on Leopard as soon as it comes out - I can deal with a few bugs, but I would rather wait a few more weeks or months and get a stable(r) version, instead of having a rushed version to meet their spring deadline.
I don't think Apple would have a problem meeting their spring deadline, but if they did I don't think it would be a big deal to push it a week or two more, or whatever it takes. I mean, look at the
TV.I know nothing about the development or anything like that, so that last paragraph is just my honest opinion and speculation.
ive tried them and i dont like them, i really hope apple's spaces is a lot better then what is out there already
I purchased my first Mac when Tiger was released and I had 10.4.0
It was pretty stable to me, with minor annoyances with items on the dock staying "blown up" after being clicked on (I had magnification enabled).
I would love to get my hands on Leopard as soon as it comes out - I can deal with a few bugs, but I would rather wait a few more weeks or months and get a stable(r) version, instead of having a rushed version to meet their spring deadline.
I don't think Apple would have a problem meeting their spring deadline, but if they did I don't think it would be a big deal to push it a week or two more, or whatever it takes. I mean, look at the
I know nothing about the development or anything like that, so that last paragraph is just my honest opinion and speculation.
i would guess that apple is more sensible then to just push a release of leopard just so its "on time," they will push it back if they need to because they have the sense to do so. They wont release anything with a ton of bugs, so you dont have to worry about that, theyll get it on time, and if they dont, so be it.
I have not heard anything about any improvements in color management in Leopard. However, I am not sure Leopard actually needs much improvement in the operating system itself; Tiger (and I think Panther as well) supports many color spaces (including Lab) for use in programs through Quartz. I am also pretty sure that floating-point values are used to describe these, so I am pretty sure that the possible detail level is much higher than 8 bits per component. In addition, ColorSync allows 16 bit per component information. So, there may be no lacking at all in Mac's color management innards, but instead in the software that uses it.
It should be noted, actually, that color management is still much better on Mac, I believe, than it is on Windows. Correct me if I'm wrong (been awhile since I've worked with Windows color stuff) but doesn't windows only natively support 24-bit and sometimes 32-bit per pixel RGB (meaning 8 bit per component)? So therefore it is not Mac which is inferior to Windows, it is the software written for it.
It should be noted, actually, that color management is still much better on Mac, I believe, than it is on Windows. Correct me if I'm wrong (been awhile since I've worked with Windows color stuff) but doesn't windows only natively support 24-bit and sometimes 32-bit per pixel RGB (meaning 8 bit per component)? So therefore it is not Mac which is inferior to Windows, it is the software written for it.
haha, Peace owns.
cz
They are not focusing on Leopard at NAB thought.
I Need To Know!
Ok people here's what I want to know. When Leopard gets to the very final stages, won't the developers that get the seeds see the secret things? or does Apple hide them some how? or are the developers sworn to secrecy or what? Can someone please answer this question for me??
Thanks alot guys
Ok people here's what I want to know. When Leopard gets to the very final stages, won't the developers that get the seeds see the secret things? or does Apple hide them some how? or are the developers sworn to secrecy or what? Can someone please answer this question for me??
Thanks alot guys