Pretty sure their post was a jab at the previous poster pointing out the sarcastic comment about SL being the Leopard service pack.
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 10.6 Snow Leopard Shipping in September: $29 for Leopard Users
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Pretty sure their post was a jab at the previous poster pointing out the sarcastic comment about SL being the Leopard service pack.
Not true. The system apps have indeed dropped PPC code, that's one of the reasons they're much slimmer. Rosetta and certain libraries will certainly hang around, but there's a big difference between (1) supporting emulation of PPC binaries, and (2) supporting native installation on PPC-based hardware. Apple fought for PowerPC for years, and the hard truth is that PPC just couldn't scale like x86, and didn't have a powerful company like Intel behind it. Despite being arguably superior in several ways, PowerPC was a dead-end for consumer PC's. With Intel Macs now in the overwhelming majority, and PPC Macs being slower as they are, it makes real sense to move forward supporting the future, not the past. It won't satisfy everyone, but if Apple tried to do that, it would be in the same mire as Microsoft, compelled to endlessly support ancient cruft of yesteryear. No thanks!
What I'd like to see when Snow Leopard ships is for Apple to make Leopard available at a steep discount to users of previous systems. If you can't run Snow Leopard, at least get as close as you can, and by all means get people off Tiger and (shudder) Panther if at all possible. This would make life much easier both for Apple and for developers.
Are you seriously going to infer that two people who bought a Mac and a PC 6 or more years ago are likely to be using the same computer, and have paid for every upgrade since they bought their machines? On the contrary — if someone is holding onto an old machine, they're much less likely to upgrade. I'd like to see a customer running Vista on a 2003 machine who feels the experience is comparable to that of yesteryear.
Further, claiming that it's "very possible" to see 10.7 by the end of 2010 is pretty outlandish. When 10.6 was announced at WWDC last year, Leopard was already ~9 months old, and Snow Leopard was well under way, but it will have taken another ~15 months to ship it. The next version will return to being a more significant upgrade — it was made very clear that 10.6 is the exception, not the new rule.
Isn't it ironic how easy it is to knock down straw men?
After thinking about it, the $29 makes sense since they'd have to break a lot of compatibility issues meaning that if ur running a slightly older Mac, you're going to have to get a new Mac to take advantage of the new features so that's where they'll be making their money mostly from.
This is the type of comment that makes Windows and Linux users scoff at Mac users. "I just want a pretty interface, but instead they did a major internal overhaul, boosted performance, and set the stage for massive multicore support. What a gyp!" A new UI is not worth $129 to most sane people; it's something I could see people legitimately calling a service pack. Can you imagine what the response to such a release would be? Yes, a truly consistent UI could be quite nice, but claiming that would be a major OS will get you laughed to scorn in most places on the web.
Disclaimer: I know there are plenty of graphic designers whose eyes burn when they look at Aqua. The ones I know tend to deal with it by going to the Appearance pref pane and changing from Blue to Graphite. I'm a CS guy, and "lickable" buttons are still fine by me. YMMV.
Good points:
1. Price! I never would have guessed it, but I'm glad to be wrong.
2. Improvements look great to me. Less bloat is always good. Sorry to PPC guys (I have one too), but it's for the best in the long run.
Bad Points:
1. BR would have been nice.
2. I wanted a new interface too. I really hate the 3d dock. I know I can hack it, but the tiger dock was much more elegant in my opinion. The 3d just looks cheap and out of place to me.
To all who think Microsoft loose customers over this are living in a dream world. They won this war 20 years ago and nothing is going to change that. Windows 7 looks like its much improved over Vista and that will be good enough. Everyone I know that has tried it says it's great.
Most people want the hardware choices that are possible in a Windows world and that's cool with me. Both companies can and will co-exist and we can all hold hands and sing folk songs.
1. Price! I never would have guessed it, but I'm glad to be wrong.
2. Improvements look great to me. Less bloat is always good. Sorry to PPC guys (I have one too), but it's for the best in the long run.
Bad Points:
1. BR would have been nice.
2. I wanted a new interface too. I really hate the 3d dock. I know I can hack it, but the tiger dock was much more elegant in my opinion. The 3d just looks cheap and out of place to me.
To all who think Microsoft loose customers over this are living in a dream world. They won this war 20 years ago and nothing is going to change that. Windows 7 looks like its much improved over Vista and that will be good enough. Everyone I know that has tried it says it's great.
Most people want the hardware choices that are possible in a Windows world and that's cool with me. Both companies can and will co-exist and we can all hold hands and sing folk songs.
Well, it really seems more like a half OS advance over Leopard rather than a full one, so I really think that $129 would have been a hard sell for most people, based on the features I've seen. Kudos to Apple for recognizing that, at $29 it's a no-guilt no-brainer.
Actually, it's not that ridiculous. Although the G5 is 64-bit, any PowerPC CPU also has a lot more general-purpose registers (32) than any Intel chip (8 or 16). If you think about it, switching PowerPC code from 32-bit to 64-bit actually gains very little speed, but adds the overhead of dealing with pointers that are twice as large, which dramatically increases the memory footprint of the program.
It's a totally different story for Intel chips. The 32-bit x86 has 8 registers, while 64-bit x86_64 has 16 registers. This makes a lot more difference than anything else. The big 64-bit advantage is being able to address more memory it just so happens that there are other incidental differences on the Intel side that make 64-bit perform significantly better. People running in 64-bit will notice larger memory footprint (if the developer is worth his salt, it will be much, much less that 200%, perhaps 115-150%), but performance increases will be a net win overall. Intel 64-bit FTW!
A list of one?
*struggles to hold back laugh*
Wow.. lame effort.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_43029.html
This is the type of comment that makes Windows and Linux users scoff at Mac users. "I just want a pretty interface, but instead they did a major internal overhaul, boosted performance, and set the stage for massive multicore support. What a gyp!" A new UI is not worth $129 to most sane people; it's something I could see people legitimately calling a service pack. Can you imagine what the response to such a release would be? Yes, a truly consistent UI could be quite nice, but claiming that would be a major OS will get you laughed to scorn in most places on the web.
Disclaimer: I know there are plenty of graphic designers whose eyes burn when they look at Aqua. The ones I know tend to deal with it by going to the Appearance pref pane and changing from Blue to Graphite. I'm a CS guy, and "lickable" buttons are still fine by me. YMMV.
LOL
PC users = Wal*Mart
Linux users - Geeky Do It Yourselfer
I like being scoffed at because Windows and Linux users are irelevant and invisible to me. I care so little...I don't even notice them. Though it does make me feel happy and even superior when they scoff at me. Arrogance has its privileges.
No, that is not the reason they are much slimmer. Dropping language support is why they are slimmer.
Yes, there is a big difference, except that if you can do #1, you're 90% of the way to #2.
Yeah, but PowerPC is in every video game console system today, a huge consumer endorsement. The switch was about two things: Being able to run Windows, being able to use PC hardware for cheaper engineering, and quickly getting some better laptop CPUs. The switch to Intel was far more about the defeat of Apple as a computer maker than a problem with PowerPC. PowerPC platform is selling more chips in high performance apps than ever before, and doing it without Apple.
Excuse me? You may not have noticed, but CPU speeds hit a wall about 5 years ago, and things are not moving quite as fast as you seem to think. Explain to me how a quad core 2.5Ghz G5 is slow. The new Windows system I just put together last summer was a quad core 2.5Ghz system, and they both(vs Quad G5) do comparable jobs running Handbrake.
Yeah, so I've heard, death to yesterday, long live tomorrowland!
Only Appletards can call a 64-bit system platform that was top of the line 2.5 years ago "ancient cruft." You do realize that the 32-bit Intel Macs are older than that? In fact, 32-bit Intel architecture is older than PowerPC itself!
This, you are absolutely correct. G5 would see very little benefit from 64-bit.. In fact, it is interesting that Apple is spinning 64-bit as being 'faster,' when in fact it is usually 'slower.' It's only faster on Intel because (as Apple told us for years) Intel x86 ISA sucks that bad. In fact, I guess the 32-bit Intel Mac owners ought to be warned: It won't be that much faster for you!
as a heart attack.
What a PC or Linux user thinks of my computing platform is irelevant. Though I do jest about the Wal*Mart and DIY commentary. Windows and Linux have plenty of intelligent users but I compute on the best platform for "me" and don't need affirmation from anyone.
Are you switching to the Finder (click on the finder icon in the dock ) and then invoking FQ or are you trying to invoke FQ when the screwed up app still have primary control over the menus/display?
If you app completely dies there may be no process for FQ to kill off. I suppose if that leaves some attached devices in some voodoo state then a reboot is all you have. Or power off that device and then turn it on again.
You mean I can have the Top Hits by filetype like Tiger did? Why did you get rid of it in Leopard!
I don't think Apple wants to muddle with the message of crowing about ZFS to loudly too soon. It may be there just not advertised in the messages about "what's new". If most of the mac specific aps work off of HFS+ it is going to be hard for ZFS to replace it. There are a few aspects of ZFS that are different from HFS+ (case sensitivity and ACLs ).
Java shouldn't be released on the same schedule as the OS anyway, IMHO. Java should be released on the java schedule with the other platforms. ;-) Holding back or rejiggering for Mac OS X features is what I think has hiccuped the development significantly anyway. Again this is another one of those features Apple really doesn't want to advertise too heavily even if they get it done. ( more clapping and dancing over Cocoa 64bit and other stuff they have that Java apps aren't necessarily coupled to. )
Another post listed Oracle acquiring Sun as perhaps a block for ZFS. Then it would be one for Java too. I don't think Oracle is going to kill off either one at this point though. ZFS is a core element of Sun's Unified Data servers (would be asinine to throw one of the fastest growing products in a portfolio you picked up) and Java is also critical to too many other projects.
