Mac OS X 10.6 to Debut at WWDC 2008?

[MattInOz]

No guesses here on the name for OS X.6

But would put money on the successor for OS X being...
Apple OS C and the big change will be that the GPU will be the main processor.

Oh Yep all 3D interface and space names does sound like a chance.
Although Apple have had problems BHA

 

[72930]

Yes, UB is also very important for the ARM chips. But, I still maintain, that UB is there for use as a bridge to go back to PPC. if apple really wanted to they could use an intel chip in the iphone/ipod touch. ARM is just an excuse to keep UB alive so apple can go back to PPC without much of a hassle.

Don

I think Apple have realised (with Boot Camp and virtualisation) that the Intel switch has more to offer than faster releases and lower power uses.

 

[Eric S.]

I thought the dropping PowerPC support was confirmed back when Leopard was released.

No, but it wouldn't be surprising. Abandoning Classic mode and dropping support for anything under G4/867 MHz in Leopard was a clear indicator that all PPCs would be put out to pasture soon.

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?

It's called marketing - force your customers onto new hardware. Now I wouldn't mind moving to an Intel system except that there's nothing between the underpowered Mini and the overpowered (for me) Mac Pro. Well, there's the iMac but the integrated monitor makes that a nonstarter.

I think 10.6 will drop most G4 support, perhaps allowing the high end PowerBooks. G5's will be supported through 10.7, perhaps 10.8, if OS X goes that far.

I don't see how that makes sense. 95% of the overhead of supporting PPC has to be just making any PPC release. IMO they're a lot more likely to drop PPC support altogether than restricting it a little further.

 

[Dmac77]

I think Apple have realised (with Boot Camp and virtualisation) that the Intel switch has more to offer than faster releases and lower power uses.

Yes, boot camp/virtualization is great, but in my opinion the PPC macs were much more stable and reliable. the ability is the one thing that intel chips have over PPC chips. But, the forthcoming PPC chips will be much more powerful than the forthcoming Intel chips. IF you really need to use windows, go get a beige box and run windows off of that. When apple switched to Intel, it became the very thing it had fought against since 1976. Now nothing would be stopping apple from making PPC and Intel machines. IMHO. The buyer could chose between x86 and PPC?

Don

 

[damacus]

I doubt they are going to release a paid version that is mostly security and stability. Thats what the free updates are for.

On the dot. Like others have said, they REALLY need to polish Leopard to a shine. I've personally not had many problems with it, especially after 10.5.2, but in Open Directory environments, there's still a good deal left to be done before we even contemplate another version.

Also, a lot of people have only recently upgraded to Leopard. As far as institutions, most are also now getting around to rolling out Leopard. Throwing another release at them possibly 6 - 12 months from now is just going to make techs cry.

By this point the API has got to be more stable such that more can be maintained in a single major release without bumping to a new cat.

Please, Apple, 2 year cycles minimum.

 

[Fukui]

Dmac77, thats 99.99999% likely NOT to happen. IMO anyways...........
To do so would negate any market share gains apple has made BECAUSE of the switch to intel............ to support two architectures requires almost double the support cost..... thats one reason why carbon is on its way out as well.....

 

[jacobj]

If this is yet another thing we see at WWDC, we are really in store for a treat, just look at the potential:

(1) iPhone 2.0 Software Release
(2) App Store up and Running ahead of schedule
(3) 3g iPhone & maybe an iPhone Nano given recent rumors
(4) OSX 10.6 - LION!
(5) me.com replaces .mac

This is not to say that the older rumors aren't happening either:
(5) Macbook/Macbook Pro case re-design
(6) Mac Mini Case redesign
(7) New Cinema Displays

All of these are not going to happen, but there is potential for a really great WWDC presentation...thank goodness too considering the past two years haven't been all that exciting.

There is lies the disappointment: we're all thinking there's this and that; a dozen candidates for us to get excited about and even if only 4 or 5 of them happen that will be awesome. In my experience I get disappointed when I think like that and then watch it. So being a pragmatist I am going for 3G iphone without 32GB or GPS or upgraded camera. I am not expecting 10.6, or any new case re-designs.

I am also expecting some time dedicated to what developers have achieved with the iPhone SDK and maybe even 10 minutes on .mac (.me), but it will not be revolutionary, as it was not revolutionary last time these rumours circulated.

So, 3G iPhone (simple option), iPhone Apps, and .mac.

God I hope I'm wrong.... damn... stop it jacob... get over it... keep your expectations low and be happy.....GPS, woo hoo.... can't wait and I can finally upgrade my crappy R1 MacBook Pro that shuts off every 30 seconds.....

 

[Dmac77]

Dmac77, thats 99.99999% likely NOT to happen. IMO anyways...........
To do so would negate any market share gains apple has made BECAUSE of the switch to intel............ to support two architectures requires almost double the support cost..... thats one reason why carbon is on its way out as well.....

It was just a thought that they could support two architectures (they are doing it now), I would still prefer that they go back to PPC only. Yes, I'll be the first to admit that the switch to intel helped with market share, a lot. But, you have to admit that, many of the switchers, don't have a clue about computers. I really don't think that apple would stop gaining market share if they switched back to PPC, i think it would help, because PPC chips are far superior to x86 chips. IMO anyway.

Don

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

 

[Eraserhead]

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

AutoCAD. But other than that it'll be harder to find other applications.

I'd be disappointed to see them drop PowerPC just yet as it keeps them on their toes from a performance perspective, especially with the G4. Additionally people will be Intel Macs soon enough, there's no need for any other persuasion.

 

[Zwhaler]

If 10.6 doesnt have any groundbreaking features, I think I will sit that one out. 10.5 was great in terms of new features, but perhaps Apple is running out of ideas for the future

 

[Eraserhead]

If 10.6 doesnt have any groundbreaking features, I think I will sit that one out. 10.5 was great in terms of new features, but perhaps Apple is running out of ideas for the future

Exchange Support and built in App-Store come to mind, but I'm sure there are others.

i think it would help, because PPC chips are far superior to x86 chips. IMO anyway.

There is no opinion here, its a fact that Intel chips are faster, so I'm afraid you're wrong.

 

[aLoC]

Microsoft are improving a lot lately in their development practices. If Apple wants to stay ahead they have to be nimble. Which means small. Which means dropping PPC, Carbon, and even some of the deprecated Cocoa stuff.

 

[zioxide]

In response to the two main things in this thread:

Dropping PowerPC

Seems like a good idea to me. They can code it more efficiently if they're only working on it for Intel. PowerPC is old, outdated, and obsolete. By the time 10.6 comes out next year, it will have been 3 years since the Intel transition. This seems like a decent amount of time. Developing OS X for two platforms requires more resources and more money which could better be spent working on new features, security, etc for the new OS.

Remember, your PowerPC Macs won't stop working just because Apple doesn't support them in the new OS. You'll still be able to run Leopard fine on them (just like Tiger on G3s).

"It's too soon!!!!"

No it's not. You people act like 10.6 is going to be released next week. It's just going to be a preview. They're probably targeting a April 2009 release for 10.6, which would be 18 months after the release of Leopard. This fits right in with all of their releases so far (except for delayed Leopard).

Let's look at the release dates for all of the OS X releases:

10.0 Cheetah - March 2001
10.1 Puma - September 2001
10.2 Jaguar - August 2002
10.3 Panther - October 2003
10.4 Tiger - April 2005
10.4 Tiger/Intel - January 2006
10.5 Leopard - October 2007 (delayed from April 2007)

So, looking at that, April 2009 or so looks to be about the right timing for 10.6.

 

[Dmac77]

Exchange Support and built in App-Store come to mind, but I'm sure there are others.



There is no opinion here, its a fact that Intel chips are faster, so I'm afraid you're wrong.

They maybe faster but they aren't as stable, and with the upcoming PPC 6 & 7 chips intel chips are going to be inferior.

 

[Stridder44]

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)

That would be freaking amazing! 64-bit all the way!

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.

You ≠ everyone.

 

[Eraserhead]

If Apple wants to stay ahead they have to be nimble. Which means small.

The reason they are nimble is because Cocoa (and frankly Carbon) are better than Microsoft's equivalent API's (.NET and Win32).

Which means dropping PPC, Carbon, and even some of the deprecated Cocoa stuff.

Dropping existing code doesn't make writing new code easier, it just pisses off developers. There is no way they'd drop Carbon completely as then MS Office and Photoshop wouldn't run at all. PPC hopefully won't be dropped as I've described above.

 

[Mykbibby]

The landmark event in two ways is the intro of multi-touch on all macs. Perhaps the Mighty Mouse will be trumped by a new way to control a mac in Leopard.

Bingo! We have a winner!!!

That's exactly what is going to come out. Remember: You heard it here first.

 

[Eraserhead]

That would be freaking amazing! 64-bit all the way!

No it wouldn't as they'd piss of 32 bit Mac owners some of who have Macs less than a year old, and that would reduce adoption significantly. Apple have already handled the 64 bit transition pretty well (minus dropping Carbon 64 bit), so they don't need to do anything else.

 

[Stridder44]

Some companies "can" walk and chew gum at the same time

I'm sure the 10.6 team is cranking away and the 10.5 team is as well.

It does "feel" early but that's because Leopard was 4 months late. Clearly Apple had to shift some engineers from some depts and that likely caused the delay. Let us not forget that OS X shipped on two new platforms last year. The Apple TV and the iPhone. Now that those two products have seen a maiden voyage I expect that updates for all OS X versions to commence rather quickly

A Spring launch of 10.6 is in line with Jobs comments about OS refreshes. PPC support may be dropped and that would suck for some people but it sure would speed up testing and development not having to worry about legacy support. Leopard is a fine OS for PPC.

Quoted for truth. I'm excited about the potential 10.6! And yes, dropping PPC support would suck for some, but it's been...what, how many years? 10.5 is a fine OS for PPC. I find it funny that those who are saying 10.5 is fine the way it is are also running PPC machines. You can't deny the support/development would benefit greatly from being Intel/64-bit only.

I mean the Leopard requirements should have been a given, as it pretty much only supported the higher end G5's. Besides, no one is forcing you to upgrade. Stop throwing tantrums.

god i hope so, because leopard is FUGLY! I love the features, but, transparent menu bar. REFLECTIVE dock!? what the HELL were they thinkin! I do think reflectiveness has a place in a beautiful interface, but NOT how apple implemented it in leopard. About the only visual element of leopard I like better is the nice unified theme for the windows, along with the plainly obvious front window, it is very nice looking and useful. But the menu bar and dock look retched.
If I were to add some nice pretty reflectiveness to the interface it would be windows in the background reflecting, subtly, the windows in front of them, just in the area's where the window frame or whatever you want to call it is, and slightly warp it around the edges to give the windows a curved look. Basically make the mettle more realistic. Some other subtle reflectiveness could be added to buttons, etc, things that look good, and are not obtrusive or gaudy.

Totally agree. That gray look is getting very boring.

 

[richard.mac]

If 10.0 was the first version, then 10.5 is the sixth version.

ya your right, sorry!… i was in a hurry to go to uni.

you knew i meant the sixth anyway as i said 10.0 was the first.

 

[PMR]

No, it is slowly becoming outdated. In case you hadn't noticed, CPU speeds maxed out a few years ago. The fastest G5 was 2.7Ghz, and the fastest Mac today still only does 3.2Ghz.

I hope you know freq. has nothing to do with work done in a clock cycle... thus making your answer senseless.

IBM G5 cpus still fast, but they are a dead technology as they are incapable to cope with sets of instructions that latest software needs

 

[Eraserhead]

You can't deny the support/development would benefit greatly from being Intel/64-bit only.

Intel maybe, but they have Universal binaries so its not an issue outside of the framework development team, and if you want to make an Intel only application you can right now.

Going 64 bit only won't benefit anyone as so few applications are even 64 bit at the moment, and writing 64 bit clean code still runs/compiles on 32 bit hardware at the moment so there is no benefit there.

but they are a dead technology as they are incapable to cope with sets of instructions that latest software needs

I'm sorry but that doesn't make sense.

 

[Stridder44]

Intel maybe, but they have Universal binaries so its not an issue outside of the framework development team, and if you want to make an Intel only application you can right now.

Going 64 bit only won't benefit anyone as so few applications are even 64 bit at the moment, and writing 64 bit clean code still runs/compiles on 32 bit hardware at the moment so there is no benefit there.

Doesn't change the fact that PPC is dead to the Mac (READ: not in general, just for Apple). It has been for a while. Again, Leopard's PPC requirements should have been a huge giant sign from Apple saying "Last call". They've been nice about it so far (Universal Binary, etc.), but it's time to let it go. Do you want OS X to become Windows and support legacy hardware forever?

This is how Apple works. This is how they've always worked. They were the first to kill off the floppy. They were the first to kill off CRTs.

 

[JG271]

They'd be some pretty angry Powermac G5 owners i think...
To introduce 10.6 in just a year, would just make so many people who bought leopard pay for a security update, if this rumor is to be believed.
Not only that, but pro tools users still don't have leopard plugins. It would'nt make sense to bring out a new OS so soon!

I guess apple can do what they like, because its not like they're going to lose mac users to windows!

Unless it's a free update, i can't really see this happening for at least another year.

 

[Eraserhead]

Do you want OS X to become Windows and support legacy hardware forever?

No, I expect them to support it for around 3-6 years as they normally do.