Mac OS X 10.6 to Debut at WWDC 2008?

[kap91]

However, if I'm honest, after five years working on the G4 MDD, it's showing it's age. ...I'm frankly stunned that this PPC Mac has held it's own so long.

The thing that is making me a little mad if this rumor is true is not this though. My iMac Core Duo isn't really showing its age. It's not the fastest computer anymore but it still handles practically everything fine. It's the fact that the late G5's and specifically the Intel Core Duo support would also be dropped. I don't think this is exactly fair. If this rumor is true I would have only had my iMac Core Duo for about 2 1/2 years before I won't be able to update to the new operating system or any software that comes out for it later. I don't think that this is right.

I understand that Apple has to do what is best for Apple but I do not agree with it. Intel support (even if it is only 32 bit) should not be dropped at least until 10.7. I can see support for PPC G4's possibly being dropped but G5's and Intel are still perfectly capable machines that surely could run whatever new features are developed for 10.6. It's not like this will affect Apple's decision but I can hope can't I?

Just my $0.02

 

[TheSpaz]

I don't know if the Airport problem is Apple's fault, perhaps you are getting some interference or something. I have had a Airport network in my home for years and I NEVER drop connections, I really don't understand why people are having trouble, I think the software is solid.

I had interference for a little while, then I switched channels and all is fine now. Also, maybe Belkin and those other companies need to update their drivers for Apple's new OS.

 

[MacsRgr8]

They certainly spent a lot of time getting Tiger for Intel up to scratch, now it may have compiled before on Intel, but it wasn't releasable.

There was nothing non-releasable about the Tiger versions which were made available for the Developer's "Intel-Power Mac" (and some folks made bootable on generic PC's)
The first release was 10.4.1, and ran without any problems. It was not until the first MacBook Pro was in the stores that the Intel version of Tiger was publicly available, of course.
The developer release was purely intended for software developers to test their apps on x86 / Universal.
Nothing "beta" about the OS.

 

[ert3]

i dont know about releasing developer seeds but im thinking that Apple MAY, at the most, show features… way too early to release seeds.

(woohoo! my first page 1 first post!)

They once deleted me for that and I agree.

This seems a bit to convient to be true.

Also it seems a bit out of place that the new version of OSX lack features entirely new and is just some sort of patch.

like 10.6 Lynx.

Well we added linux libs now so guess what you can actually run more linux specific apps like compiz fusion or something

 

[Kwill]

NO WAY. This is so far out there....nope. Sorry.

I heard that. Though I don't encourage bloatware, Apple has already nurtured a self-imposed 300-new-features standard to justify the value of upgrades. A release focussing purely on security and stability is a free update.

 

[milo]

I think it is too soon (and I really doubt this rumor is legit, I guess we'll find out next week), unless it includes some absolutely groundbreaking new features. I'd be perfectly happy to see apple just add things to 10.5 and keep fixing bugs. I don't ever want to see a release like Leopard again, ignore the calendar and don't ship 10.6.0 until it is at least as stable and bug free as 10.5.3 (or .4!).

I remember what Jobs said, and at the time I hoped what he was saying wouldn't actually happen. It takes time to settle into a major upgrade. I'd much rather see 24+ months for the sake of upgrade turmoil and $$$.

And they'll get some ugly backlash if they dump PPC, especially since the quad G5 is still a competitive machine. Same goes for 32 bit intel, that screws all the early adopters (the mini was still 32 bit not that long ago, right?). Not upgrading isn't much of an option when the latest versions of apps require the latest versions of the OS.

I'm also very curious about how much 10.6 will push developers toward cocoa and 64 bit code. I'm skeptical that they will push very hard since most apple apps are still carbon and they don't seem to be in any hurry to update. Just today I read the head of Logic development has said publicly that they NEVER plan to update the whole app to 64 bit, it's not worth the trouble.

Vista has perfectly good security and stability.

That may be...but it sure looks like it has pretty poor performance compared with XP.

 

[guzhogi]

If they indeed make it Intel-only and 64-bit only then that should reduce the size and speed it up quite a bit.

(It would speed it up because the kernel can be recompiled to use the extra registers of Intel's 64-bit architecture)

Core 2 Duos are 64-bit? I remember hearing they were, but on the other hand, I bought Windows Vista (for games) and tried installing the 64-bit version on my C2D MBP, but it didn't want to. I'm stuck w/ the 32-bit version.

I could see a new OS release sometime in 09. What I can't see is dropping the support for PowerPC, that doesn't really make sense.

Nothing wrong with Universal Binaries, and now that we are Intel (and that they had x86 support for a while), what sense does it make to not openly support PowerPC?

I remember in earlier threads about 10.6 dropping PowerPC support, many people were mad b/c Power Mac G5s are way more powerful than Mac Minis, the first MacBooks, etc. While a valid point, I get the feeling they don't understand the difficulty of supporting both platforms. I know, Apple has had an Intel version of Mac OS X since the beginning, but going to just Intel (and whatever the Iphone/iPod Touch & Apple TV run) would make development a lot easier. Developers wouldn't have to spend so much time optimizing their apps/OS for 2 platforms, they'd just have 1. This means we could see either Apple taking the same amount of time between major OS versions (ie 10.5 & 10.6) and add more features or have the same amount of new features, but deliver it quicker. Plus, a lot less bugs, hopefully!

I heard that. Though I don't encourage bloatware, Apple has already nurtured a self-imposed 300-new-features standard to justify the value of upgrades. A release focussing purely on security and stability is a free update.

I agree. Security/stability should be free upDATES. UpGRADES should be to add features. Plus, the 300 feature thing is kinda stupid. I remember hearing that in 10.4 (or whatever one it was which introduced dashboard widgets), each widget was a "new feature". That's kinda low. If I had my way, Dashboard would be one feature, while the widgets would just be a part of that 1, not additional ones.

 

[Sky Blue]

Snow Leopard?

The next version of Mac OS X is code-named "Snow Leopard," and will indeed be Intel-only, we have learned. This info is hot on the heels of TUAW's original scoop about Mac OS X 10.6 being readied for shipment as soon as Macworld 2009 and being Intel-only.

People familiar with the situation has confirmed to us that TUAW's details are true—Snow Leopard is currently on track to come out during next January's Macworld, and it will not contain major OS changes. Instead, the release is heavily focused on performance and nailing down speed and stability. With Apple's current (and future) focus on smaller, thinner, and more mobile devices, this move makes perfect sense. Things like the MacBook Air, iPhone, iPod touch, and other mysterious devices that have yet to be announced need better performance for better battery life, and that's definitely something Apple wants to excel at in the years to come. Our sources did not note whether Apple planned to discuss Snow Leopard at this year's WWDC.

Something else that may happen is that Apple may eventually wrap everything in Cocoa—things that are currently only Carbon accessible will be no longer. This (which is reportedly not yet in stone) should make many Objective-C programmers happy, although those who are married to Carbon may get a bit bristly at the news. Of course, it seems like 10.6 is all about making graybeards bristly, as PowerPC users will soon be left out in the cold too.

http://arstechnica.com/journals/app...0-6-code-named-snow-leopard-may-be-pure-cocoa

 

[Zygon Gambit]

If the new release is to be called 'Snow Leopard' it's clearly a part-upgrade, rather than a full new release. I would expect it to be priced accordingly.

It won't be a full release price, but neither will it be free. And, of course, it will be optional.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Snow Leopard?



http://arstechnica.com/journals/app...0-6-code-named-snow-leopard-may-be-pure-cocoa

Let me go against my normal penchant for writing things out...

ROFL. Yeah, freakin', right.

 

[SheriffParker]

Bull, all G5s and many later G4s are still quite capable machines. My Dual 1.8 is far from 'outdated' and is still a good performer in Leopard.

Dropping all PPC support would be just plain dumb. I'm not made of money and can't afford to buy a Intel desktop Mac and my needs both professionally and recreationally require a Mac Pro. iMac isn't an option for me.

My G5 as well as others are still perfectly fine at running OS X, especially the higher end ones with high end video cards.

Whatever, your dual 1.8 Ghz G5 is a snail. Even the slowest iMac would blow it out of the water, and they only cost 1200.

 

[Peace]

I can see Snow Leopard.

We would have Leopard which is for Universal type Mac's ( PPC and Core duo ) then we would have Snow Leopard. Designed for 64-bit Intel only with no carbon. Only Cocoa.

This would please both sides of the aisle.

 

[diamond.g]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070521-ibms-power6-flies-the-coop-at-4-7ghz.html

Ah, okay. Well POWER 6 is not OOE. Wiki claims that IBM claims that not being OOE isn't a problem, but code will have to be rewritten to take advantage of in order execution. At that point Apple could look at Cell instead...

 

[morespce54]

Its not too soon. Sure if 10.6 was to be released this year, but its not. Leopard was talked about at WWDC in 2006 and then 2007 and then released late 2007. So if Apple talks about 10.6 now, that makes sense. Then they can talk about it again in 2009 and release it.

Sure, they're already working on it. And probably on 10.7 as well since a some features won't be ready (technologically speaking) to roll into 10.6. Heck, some are probably already working on OS-post-X...
But there is such a leap between thinking/creating and developing the software that they certainly may show some "rough" features but can't possibly seed it to developers in June 08...

Or that means they already spent more time working on 10.6 then they did on 10.5...

 

[MacsRgr8]

Whatever, your dual 1.8 Ghz G5 is a snail. Even the slowest iMac would blow it out of the water, and they only cost 1200.

Agreed the newest slowest iMac will blow this G5 away... if the app is UB
But a Quad G5 with GeForce 7800 GT is no way a snail. If all 4 cores are used, I bet the Quad G5 blows the newest iMac away.

 

[Eraserhead]

Let me go against my normal penchant for writing things out...

ROFL. Yeah, freakin', right.

Totally, there is no way in a million years it'll be called Snow Leopard.

This is the most implausible of today's Mac OS X rumours.

• Scrapping PPC, OK but not great, pushing the boat out more than I'd like but still.
• Scrapping Intel 32, a poor move, a bit like dropping the floppy disk in 1995.
• Scrapping Carbon completely, Apple's giving up and handing the money back to the shareholders.

And of the names Snow Leopard that's the worst software name ever, especially when they've already got an OS called Leopard.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Totally, there is no way in a million years it'll be called Snow Leopard.

And now it's its own thread... and growing fast... Well, some people didn't think it would be called the "Air"...

 

[Eraserhead]

And now it's its own thread... and growing fast... Well, some people didn't think it would be called the "Air"...

The Air is at least a reasonable name. And it isn't a customer support nightmare.

Q: What OS are you running?
A: Leopard
Q: Just Leopard or Snow Leopard?
A: I dunno...

 

[AndyHogan]

10.6 will be previewed at the WWDC

There is no doubt in my mind that there will be somewhat of a preview of 10.6 at the WWDC. EVERY WWDC in recent history has introduced some aspect of the next OS. At the WWDC 2003 we saw a preview to Panther only 10 months after the Jaguar Release. At the WWDC 2004 we saw a preview of Tiger only 8 months after the Panther Release. And of course at the WWDC 2005 we saw an intro to Leopard A WHOLE 2 MONTHS AFTER THE RELEASE OF TIGER. We WILL see a preview of 10.6 there is no question about that. The question is how much will we see and when will it be released.

 

[seashellz]

10.7......'Hello Kitty'

 

[TheSpaz]

The Air is at least a reasonable name. And it isn't a customer support nightmare.

Q: What OS are you running?
A: Leopard
Q: Just Leopard or Snow Leopard?
A: I dunno...

Hahahahahahahahaha! That made me laugh!

This is what happens to me currently:
Q: What OS are you running?
A: Mac OS Ecks
Q: What version?
A: I dunno...

Actually, it's more like this:
Q: Whatcha got there?
A: iMac
Q: What OS are you running?
A: I dunno...
Q: How fast is it?
A: I dunno...
Q: How much RAM?
A: I dunno...
Q: What video card?
A: 17 Inch?

....oh brother.

 

[surferfromuk]

Why is everyone with a PPC freaking out like there computers are suddenly useless ? - do they not currently run Leopard nicely ? Are they not as great today as they were yesterday....so you may not be able to run ALL the operating systems in the future that are ever released - that's hardly a surprise is it ?

If Apple announced that my current Macbook Pro not to be able to run OSX 10.8 in 2012 I'd be thinking that it's definitely time to be getting a new mac...

 

[tirerim]

EDIT: What MAJOR app that is available on Windows, isn't available on OS X?

Internet Explorer.

(Actually, I'm serious. As a web developer, it's a pain to have to start up my crappy Dell everytime I need to check how something looks in IE. I tried VirtualPC on my G5, and it was slow as molasses. Having an Intel Mac will be very handy when I finally get one... which may still not be for a while yet, since for every other purpose my existing machines work fine.)

There are also probably a bunch of popular games, though I don't play them.

The main thing, though, is that Apple is getting a lot of switchers because they've heard that they can run Windows on their Macs, so they know that they can keep using their old software if they need to. With Apple's marketing philosophy, there's no way they would make their product lineup more complicated than they had to by forcing people to choose between two different architectures, only one of which could also run Windows.

As for dropping PowerPC support, I don't think it will happen until 10.7. When Apple switched from 68k to PPC, it was over four and a half years from the first PPC-supporting OS (7.1.2 in March 1994) to the first non-68k-supporting OS (8.5 in October 1998). The first Intel-supporting OS was only 10.4.4 in January 2006, so assuming they stick to Jobs' putative release schedule, 10.7 would come out sometime mid-2010, and it would be reasonable to drop PPC support then.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a preview of 10.6 at WWDC. Again, if they stick to the schedule the actual release would be first half of 2009, and they generally offer previews of major features long in advance of actual releases (and I guarantee that there will be major features -- that is, after all, how Apple sells people new OSes). Not sure how far in advance they start handing out developer betas, though.

 

[TheSpaz]

Internet Explorer.

(Actually, I'm serious. As a web developer, it's a pain to have to start up my crappy Dell everytime I need to check how something looks in IE. I tried VirtualPC on my G5, and it was slow as molasses. Having an Intel Mac will be very handy when I finally get one... which may still not be for a while yet, since for every other purpose my existing machines work fine.)

There are also probably a bunch of popular games, though I don't play them.

The main thing, though, is that Apple is getting a lot of switchers because they've heard that they can run Windows on their Macs, so they know that they can keep using their old software if they need to. With Apple's marketing philosophy, there's no way they would make their product lineup more complicated than they had to by forcing people to choose between two different architectures, only one of which could also run Windows.

As for dropping PowerPC support, I don't think it will happen until 10.7. When Apple switched from 68k to PPC, it was over four and a half years from the first PPC-supporting OS (7.1.2 in March 1994) to the first non-68k-supporting OS (8.5 in October 1998). The first Intel-supporting OS was only 10.4.4 in January 2006, so assuming they stick to Jobs' putative release schedule, 10.7 would come out sometime mid-2010, and it would be reasonable to drop PPC support then.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a preview of 10.6 at WWDC. Again, if they stick to the schedule the actual release would be first half of 2009, and they generally offer previews of major features long in advance of actual releases (and I guarantee that there will be major features -- that is, after all, how Apple sells people new OSes). Not sure how far in advance they start handing out developer betas, though.

Safari has a mode called "Developer Mode" and you can render your site in a variety of browser engines and I believe there are a few IE options (IE 7, IE 6, IE 5.5, IE 5.2.3). So why do you have to boot up your Dell? I could be wrong though... I mean, I'm not perfect

 

[milo]

Why is everyone with a PPC freaking out like there computers are suddenly useless ? - do they not currently run Leopard nicely ? Are they not as great today as they were yesterday....so you may not be able to run ALL the operating systems in the future that are ever released - that's hardly a surprise is it ?

They will keep running leopard, but app updates will require the latest OS. Part of the issue is that if they drop PPC support this soon, it means a much shorter cycle of support for those machines than apple historically does. Everybody expects their machine to be obsolete eventually - it usually isn't this fast for a mac.