On the "About My Mac" dialog box. Like other past versions, Apple uses "OS X 10.6" and "Snow Leopard" somewhat interchangeably.
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.
OS X 10.6 'Snow Leopard' Seeded to WWDC Developers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In the about box listed above, the version is 10.6. I would assume that's what they are targeting.
QuickTime X re: Modern Codecs?
"QuickTime X features optimized support for modern codecs and more efficient media playback"
Wouldn't it be nice if they meant divx/xvid?
I get that Apple wants to sell/rent movies and supporting divx/xvid doesn't align with that goal but reality is there's a ton of content requiring 3rd party software to watch. Adding divx/xvid to QT would likely increase marketshare significantly.
"QuickTime X features optimized support for modern codecs and more efficient media playback"
Wouldn't it be nice if they meant divx/xvid?
I get that Apple wants to sell/rent movies and supporting divx/xvid doesn't align with that goal but reality is there's a ton of content requiring 3rd party software to watch. Adding divx/xvid to QT would likely increase marketshare significantly.
I'll pay
A year of focused development to improve stability and performance... sounds worth $129 to me. The addition of Exchange server support is a nice bonus too. I might even buy Vista if MS took a year to fix it... no wait, that's gonna take 3 years and I bet Exchange server support won't come included, i.e. /wo Outlook.
i'll pay for it, the speed increase is always worth itbut that said, a lot of non-power users won't see the value in a new operating system that doesn't add any 'features'
I'm expecting at least 10-20% speed bump across the board, and that makes it cheap at $129
A year of focused development to improve stability and performance... sounds worth $129 to me. The addition of Exchange server support is a nice bonus too. I might even buy Vista if MS took a year to fix it... no wait, that's gonna take 3 years and I bet Exchange server support won't come included, i.e. /wo Outlook.
*sigh* Yet another release that devs who could not make WWDC don't get on ADC until Apple deems us worthy of being able to download it. Ok, I know it's just a dev preview and not a normal seed, but it would be nice if Apple thought about those of us who could not get to WWDC. It's even more poignant this year as it was sold out, so some people who leave it later before signing up were caught out and couldn't go.
All the apps (including the Exchange preview) are Universal, which is a strong indication of PPC support. If they were dropping it, making the apps intel-only would have been the first thing they'd have done. And the first thing they'd have announced (developers spending time writing for an architecture that gets dropped later on? Apple wouldn't do that. Let's forget about Carbon-64)
Also, it's interesting that iChat has been bumped to version 5.0 - I wonder if MSN/WLM support has been added. This won't be priced at the $129 upgrade price. I'm expecting a $79 price tag.
Would love this to leak...
Also, it's interesting that iChat has been bumped to version 5.0 - I wonder if MSN/WLM support has been added. This won't be priced at the $129 upgrade price. I'm expecting a $79 price tag.
Would love this to leak...
The install DVD looks like 10.5's. Plus, "Snow Leopard"? Sounds like OS X 10.5 v2. Sure, stability & performance are good, but that stuff belongs in free updates, not paid upgrades.
Inconsistent, some are much smaller, some slightly change and some are much larger.
This is where Apple needs to take a page from MS's book - a large service pack, not a new OS entirely (unless Apple plans to release for free or a disc for S&H).
But what I am really interested in is the OpenCL and Grand Central initiatives. Along with Nehalem, Apple is going to start making beasts of machines by almost requiring developers of new apps to utilize multi-core programs, to use programs that take advantage of highly parallel processors (GPU's), and strip away all of the PPC code. Essentially, we could be looking at computers that run Windows at the same speed but all of a sudden all of your OS X programs run twice as fast, and considering how many people are paying to upgrade to an iPhone 3G (which is essentially just data that is 2.8x faster, along with GPS), they could get a fair number of people to pay for it.
But what I am really interested in is the OpenCL and Grand Central initiatives. Along with Nehalem, Apple is going to start making beasts of machines by almost requiring developers of new apps to utilize multi-core programs, to use programs that take advantage of highly parallel processors (GPU's), and strip away all of the PPC code. Essentially, we could be looking at computers that run Windows at the same speed but all of a sudden all of your OS X programs run twice as fast, and considering how many people are paying to upgrade to an iPhone 3G (which is essentially just data that is 2.8x faster, along with GPS), they could get a fair number of people to pay for it.
Thanks, but does it work in Leopard? and are there any known issues with it interfering with Pro Apps?
Bingo!
There is no way they can go from charging $129 for 300+ new features to $129 for 10+ new features.
Personally, after defending the $129 for 300 "features" I am not sure I can defend "stability" for $129.
BZ
Once again, people are inventing prices and other "facts." Apple has said absolutely nothing about pricing at this point. Therefore, don't assume it will be $129. It may be, it may not be. For all we know, this could be a free update, or maybe it will cost $79.
The first install DVDs for Leopard looked a lot like Tiger's. At this point, Snow Leopard uses the exact UI from Leopard with only minor changes. There won't be any major, visible UI changes (if at all) until much later. With Leopard, it wasn't until WWDC that we saw major UI changes (about three months before Leopard shipped), and even then there were some last minute changes.
Web Services is, I believe, what's used for OWA. So if you use that, you should be almost ready.
Yeah I remember seeing preview shots of Leopard on Apple's site with none of the trademark Leopard feature, ie. the 3D Dock and translucent Menu Bar, still only a couple of weeks before they were announced at WWDC.
I hope it's a gentle evolution, I'm quite fond of how it looks at this point in time.
FWIW, there is also a page of information about Snow Leopard Server:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/snowleopard/
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/snowleopard/
I'm very happy with what Apple seem to be doing with their OS. Instead of focusing on gimmicks they appear to be concentrating on getting the OS right and stable.
Of course, the implicit assumption is that the current OS isn't right or stable, but it's better to admit that, and change it than pretend everything is perfect when it isn't.
I'm impressed with their approach so far, though I wonder if they'll add gimmicks at the end in so as to up the price a bit. That's usually their way, but as we don't know what's to happen there, it can't really be commented on yet.
Of course, the implicit assumption is that the current OS isn't right or stable, but it's better to admit that, and change it than pretend everything is perfect when it isn't.
I'm impressed with their approach so far, though I wonder if they'll add gimmicks at the end in so as to up the price a bit. That's usually their way, but as we don't know what's to happen there, it can't really be commented on yet.
A couple of comments have been interesting. There is currently a delay in software catching up to released hardware. This simplification will reduce that time delay, perhaps to half a processor release cycle. Given Intel's 2 year tic-toc, that could make processors fully usable around a year after release and then for 2 years out.
The future emphasis on GPU's alongside CPU's and the eventual transition of that to an on-chip item is going to require an OS that for a particular box is not only multi-processor aware but heterogeneous processor adept.
OSX is already that, one processor type at a time (PPC-32, PPC-64, Core-32, Core-64, Xeon, ARM, etc), this will just add multiple simultaneous different processor support.
This in some way reminds me of Amiga with its task specific processors.
As for upgrade paths, if Snow Leopard is actually a Leopard branch (two bridges diverging) rather than a full replacement for 10.5 swiss army knife version, then those folks with hardware optimized for it will simply get it preinstalled. It seems unlikely older machines could appreciably get a large benefit as opposed to simply a traditional minimal OSX install.
There could be a marginal speed benefit on older machines. Hobby level.
But what this does portend directly is large server and cluster farms, or many processor CPU's for consumers to drive media outlets through an entire house.
We finally got to the point where CPU speed keeps up with user input and interaction, and believe me that took a long time. Now we can just barely start to do some cool things with processor capacity.
Soon the machines will learn how crazy people are and "fix them".
Rocketman
yeah, i actually agree with you. with very few new features other than making the OS more efficient... it is hard to justify the price.
To most of us it feels like a maintenance release. if it really is to "fix" and make speedy, the price ought to be pretty low for it, and not the $130 apple has been charging
You're not getting it. The changes aren't "features". Features are things like Spaces or Time Machine or iChat.
These are fundamental under the hood changes. Not something taken lightly. A lot of hard work is going into this.
As far as Universal vs. Intel only folks should notice on the screen grabs for the Core Duo machine yesterday they said Universal. On the screen grabs in this thread they were for a Core 2 Duo and were seen as Intel-64.
Like I've said before. There's two versions. One has Universal binaries for Core Duo ( non 64-bit ) and PPC. Which in essence leaves in the universal binaries and more importantly Rosetta while the non-Universal takes out PPC and Rosetta. This is a logical step since almost all apps are now Intel or will be by January next year and there is no longer a need for Rosetta.
I personally am glad they are stripping the binaries and removing Rosetta from at least one of these builds.
Hey guys, check this out:
What do you suppose "Remote Install OS X" is? Or is this something having to do with being a build?
Apple adding some thing that windows has had for a long time? Network based OS installing.
