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) at WWDC
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
cybermiguel said:DFI, for example, offers overclocking options, as well as temperature warnings and dual-bios in case that you want to go back to your "safe" settings. Also they have a good cooling system and better integrated components (among other more technical stuff).
Seems like nobody read what I said about darwine....:sigh: ....It would be a GREAT feature.
I read it and agree with you 100%. I really don't want to run Windows but I really want to run some Windows-only programs occasionally. Why take up valuable disk space with a whole OS when all you need is the ability to run a different OS dependent program. This would be an absolutely killer feature and one that would certainly steal the thunder from MS. The other advantage is that the developers wouldn't have to change a thing. no longer would the Mac be dependent on developer support. Lastly, it would add one more reason to 'switch'. I know several people who would love to use the iLife suite but have too much invested in their Window's world. Sure Boot Camp offers some advantages but let's face it: Shuting down and rebooting is a pain. not to mention not being able to cut and paste or make use of cross platform programs.
You hit right on the head: This would be THE KILLER feature of Leopard. If if is, indeed, a feature.
There is no panacea. Without licensing Windows technologies (and MS won't, given that Windows can run on Macs now), there's no way to create seamless compatibility. There's also no way to simulate that compatibility without some pretty major volume of code. Windows XP can be trimmed to about 1GB, and modern hard drives are plenty big enough for that not to be significant, especially since an emulation environment or compatibility layer would be a few hundred MB in size with all the necessary Windows library replacements.asphalt-proof said:
Particularly complex applications, especially those relying on DirectX and ones that will be heavily integrated with the Aero UI starting with Vista are beyond the scope of any built-in emulation. Developers of fairly basic programs wouldn't have to change anything, but specialized software and ones using complex and/or proprietary features would still have to write OS X versions. The best option for running applications reliably and at near full speed is with virtualization, and they're working on it.
displaced said:
Yeh Apple would NEVER licence there software. Like they would NEVER go X86, or develop a two button mouse or enable dual booting. The truth is we DON'T know what Apple is going to do. The past is absolutely no help whatsoever because in the last year, they have broken so many of what we devotees have considered, taboos. Everybody states that licensing agreements almost broke Apple. Maybe they did. But that was years ago. Ancient history in internet years. So, unless you are Steve Jobs personal towel boy and he confides in you all his business strategies whilst you are toweling off his buttocks, I would suggest that this line of reasoning is getting less and less valid.
edit: jsut do you know, this subject is particularly galling for me because I remember the GIANT flamewars that would rage jsut a couple of years ago about the chances of mac going to x86 and the ramifications of that switch, the flamewars a year+ ago that raged over whether Apple would ever release a two button mouse and why a one button mouse was better or wasn't. Words were said, feelings were hurt, people were banned. It was a dark time at Macrumors. Yes, back in my day, we only had one button mice AND WE LIKED IT!
Internet years might be relevant for the speed of technology updates, but when it comes to business fundamentals, everyone still uses calendar years, I assure you. The OS X licensing disaster is still pretty fresh in Apple's memory, and it was a spectacular failure, unlike the Intel switch or the two-button mouse, which have no negative history within Apple. The mouse seemed inevitable to me. Back when the choice was one button or two, the companies stuck with their guns, because there was no functional difference. But now that there are 8 and 10 button mice, it made little sense to deny functionality. It was no longer about a "different" way of doing things, it was about Apple not having the functionality of competing products. The right mouse button arguably is the least important feature of the Mighty Mouse. As far as hardware switches, Apple's done it before successfully; the simple fact is that all the competing architectures have pretty much died out.asphalt-proof said:
I'm certainly not suggesting that I know for certain they won't open OS X, but I know that there is no compelling reason to do so that isn't more costly than NOT doing so. And I also know that rational entities would not make that choice. Unless those dynamics change or someone who isn't Steve Jobs makes the decision, Apple won't license OS X again.
Dictionary 2.0
This may sound like a silly thing to say, but it is one function that I use almost everyday. I am an English major studying things from Post Colonial literature to Milton and that function plays such an important part of my studies that merely an upgrade would be cause enough for me to throw down some money for leapard. The fact it is OED, though very abridged is great, if they could somehow get a self-updating version with the ability to produce proper English spelling, I'd be giddy as a schoolgirl.
Stridder44 said:
This may sound like a silly thing to say, but it is one function that I use almost everyday. I am an English major studying things from Post Colonial literature to Milton and that function plays such an important part of my studies that merely an upgrade would be cause enough for me to throw down some money for leapard. The fact it is OED, though very abridged is great, if they could somehow get a self-updating version with the ability to produce proper English spelling, I'd be giddy as a schoolgirl.
It does have proper English spelling, and British spelling, too. If you want to change the pronunciation to British, you can (it's in IPA). If you want to change the spell check language, press command-colon and change it to British (or Canadian) English.shigzeo said:
OED part II
Well, I had the IPA set to British pronunciation, but I have not yet figured out how to press command and colon at the same time. Haha, how is that?
I guess, I have spent some time in library with the beauty of OED which documents when the very first written instance of a word appeared; from there you can basically see in its lineage how the bloody thing has been twisted and or enhanced. Inclusion of OED was clincher for me for Tiger, that and 88$ student price! Alas, soon I will be out of student discount days and off into the real world... more or less. Anyway, I may be a happier young man when I have figured out what you mean by command-colon!
matticus008 said:
Well, I had the IPA set to British pronunciation, but I have not yet figured out how to press command and colon at the same time. Haha, how is that?
I guess, I have spent some time in library with the beauty of OED which documents when the very first written instance of a word appeared; from there you can basically see in its lineage how the bloody thing has been twisted and or enhanced. Inclusion of OED was clincher for me for Tiger, that and 88$ student price! Alas, soon I will be out of student discount days and off into the real world... more or less. Anyway, I may be a happier young man when I have figured out what you mean by command-colon!
JGowan said:
Apple gave us some hints way back in 2003.
My 2¢ : Apple will not go to OS 11 for a very long time, if ever. OS X is a brand of its' own now and fortunately for Apple, 99% of the John Q Public's (i.e., people not on this board) call it OS Ecks anyway (even The Steve has slipped a few times), so there is no need to change the name because they don't think of it as the 10th version of the Mac operating system.
Oops, that's my fault! I guess the shortcut only works in some applications, like TextEdit. The settings hold across applications, though, as far as I know.shigzeo said:Anyway, I may be a happier young man when I have figured out what you mean by command-colon!
asphalt-proof said:
Indeed.
A professor in my University's chemistry department, for example, have some chemistry software (IR Spectrometry) that runs only on Windows. He loves the power of Mac OS, but that spectrometry software came bundled with the IR spectrometer and it only runs on windows and unix. It would be VERY nice to run it like windows....easy, with no hasstle.
Of course, this solution MUST be made "the Apple way", i.e., using the aqua interface when possible, making the configuration something simple, etc. etc. etc. in order to be successful.
Sorry if my post rehashes a tired subsubject, however I feel worth mentioning.
There is a major reason why people dont build their own PC in droves. Its also the main reason for Dells XPC desktop/laptop brand & for Alienware's entire lineup exists (along with Falcon too). Support!
Support of all those PC hand-picked components can be a bad thing when things go horribly wrong. I dont care HOW smart a PC geek you are, or if your ccna/A+ certified; when a component doesnt work there are 3 questions you'll be asked when calling the manufacturer of any 1 of your frankenstein PC.
1> what is the error your getting?
2> What system contains the component your calling about, and did you search our FAQ's site? (you'll be like "I bought retail and built my PC Myself)
3> Did you check that all other components are running at optimimum levels with the other Manufacturers!?
(this last question even if you lied & said Yes, you're answer to question 2 above is reason enough for a smart tech support representative to do 2 things! a> confide in you that your problem resolution is towards the OTHER manufacturer thats causing this issue with their product. b> pointing you to the fact that your repair under warranty may be voided with use of other components or you must pay for shipping receiving but upon arrival of a replacment or repaired device you've got less than a 30% chance of your initial problem being fixed)
Remember young PC component by component frankenstein building padawan's .... "We Dont Support That!"
There is a major reason why people dont build their own PC in droves. Its also the main reason for Dells XPC desktop/laptop brand & for Alienware's entire lineup exists (along with Falcon too). Support!
Support of all those PC hand-picked components can be a bad thing when things go horribly wrong. I dont care HOW smart a PC geek you are, or if your ccna/A+ certified; when a component doesnt work there are 3 questions you'll be asked when calling the manufacturer of any 1 of your frankenstein PC.
1> what is the error your getting?
2> What system contains the component your calling about, and did you search our FAQ's site? (you'll be like "I bought retail and built my PC Myself)
3> Did you check that all other components are running at optimimum levels with the other Manufacturers!?
(this last question even if you lied & said Yes, you're answer to question 2 above is reason enough for a smart tech support representative to do 2 things! a> confide in you that your problem resolution is towards the OTHER manufacturer thats causing this issue with their product. b> pointing you to the fact that your repair under warranty may be voided with use of other components or you must pay for shipping receiving but upon arrival of a replacment or repaired device you've got less than a 30% chance of your initial problem being fixed)
Remember young PC component by component frankenstein building padawan's .... "We Dont Support That!"
shigzeo said:
Funny thing is I use it all the time as well and find your suggestions (self-updating etc.) would be really awesome.
The reason I even mentioned it as a joke is because I have a shortcut of it on my desktop.
AidenShaw said:
Sorry, no. Apple make much more money from the sale of a computer than Microsoft do from the sale of a copy of Windows.
Personally, I'd find some kind of migration assistant handy. One that'd take an existing Windows system and auto-migrate email, bookmarks, etc to the Mac. Then, it could offer suggestions for Mac software based on the Windows software owned, and finally offer to install Windows (from the user's Windows CD) for the remaining software.
I agree.... makes me remember back in the system 7 and Mac os 8 days... sweet memoriesStridder44 said:
AidenShaw said:
I wouldn't be so sure. Apple has always been proud of its products, and offering full true 64bit operation for current (PPC) hardware is just what we have grown to expect from the company.
XCode for Windows?
What will be the unexpected announcement this year? The agenda describes 'Build modern, platform-differentiated products with powerful new and existing frameworks', Bootcamp recently released, will we now see XCode for Windows XP/Vista? (NSWindowsXPView)
What will be the unexpected announcement this year? The agenda describes 'Build modern, platform-differentiated products with powerful new and existing frameworks', Bootcamp recently released, will we now see XCode for Windows XP/Vista? (NSWindowsXPView)
asphalt-proof said:
Ok -- let me add a caveat: judging by what apparently is Apple's business model, including references to their SEC filings, I do not believe they will license their operating system. It has been done before, we have seen the result: many people stopped buying their computers in favour of cheaper, faster clones. Their bottom-line suffered enough to threaten the survival of the company, and the programme was killed. The simple fact is they do and would make less money from software alone than hardware.
Completely different. The CPU inside their machines or the number of buttons on their mice has absolutely no impact on their business model or profitability. They saw a market for a 2-button mouse, developed technology for one which met their criteria and produced it. Likewise, they saw the x86 platform as being better for the long-term development of their chief moneymaker: computer hardware. Personally, I never ruled out an x86 switch or multi-button mouse. Such arguments were based on an esoteric notion of Apple's "spirit". I say again: Apple is not as dogmatic as many of its users. It's a business which will not (or should not) make moves which will fundamentally harm its profitability.
See my point above: there's a world of difference between Apple fans' dogma and pure business sense.
So what's changed in the intervening years to make licensing work?
Ok... ignoring the borderline ad hominem comment, in what way is the reasoning faulty? I don't pretend to have insider information, I'm just basing an opinion on what fundamentals I can observe about Apple's business model based on their publicised financial statements. If you can read them some other way, please, let's discuss it!
Again: Apple fans' dogmatic opinions ("x86 Sucks! One-button mice are superior!") has next to no impact on their business model. The business case for the switch makes perfect sense. It safeguards the future of the hardware platform which is Apple's key moneymaker. Licensing the OS would (IMO) irrevocably harm their hardware sales.
Hey um...I thought Steve said that OS 10.5 is gonna be the last of OSX right? So there can't be 10.6, 10.7 etc.
If 10.5 isn't really groundbreaking and all that, I don't think I'm gonna be liking Apple anymore...
If 10.5 isn't really groundbreaking and all that, I don't think I'm gonna be liking Apple anymore...
asphalt-proof said:
This is the feature I want! But, it wouldn't be a good thing for Apple. Remember OS/2? It ran Windows apps, even better than Windows. It left no incentive for people to port their Apps to OS/2. OS/2 died!
The only hope for OSX is increasing Market share, to drive developer incentive. A slightly PITA to use Dualboot, or VM is a better approach for Apple. Licensing a second hardware source would help too.
Resolution independent UI
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding regarding the resolution independent UI. Think of it this way, most of the time somebody will turn down their resolution so that they can see things better. Now, instead of turning down the resolution, they will turn down the DPI, and the OS will still drive the monitor at the native resolution so that they can see better without the monitor looking all scaled and icky. The days of fixed sized icons and graphics are coming to an end, and this will just be the better way of embracing it. With CRT monitors, simply scaling the resolution wasn't that bad of a thing, but on LCD's, it is.
edit: It would be pretty cool if you could adjust the DPI in real time.
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding regarding the resolution independent UI. Think of it this way, most of the time somebody will turn down their resolution so that they can see things better. Now, instead of turning down the resolution, they will turn down the DPI, and the OS will still drive the monitor at the native resolution so that they can see better without the monitor looking all scaled and icky. The days of fixed sized icons and graphics are coming to an end, and this will just be the better way of embracing it. With CRT monitors, simply scaling the resolution wasn't that bad of a thing, but on LCD's, it is.
edit: It would be pretty cool if you could adjust the DPI in real time.