OS X 10.6 'Snow Leopard' Seeded to WWDC Developers

[dlopan]

Where do I get a copy?

WWDC 2008. I have both versions and the non server version is pretty solid. I have one problem with it though, no serial number for the server version. Apple got completely screwed up and can't get it from the engineers for some reason.
It will be on the network at some point. Waiting is fullness.
OpenCL will finalize the Windoze vs. Mac contest once and for all. The numbers that should come out of this will be astonishing.
I can still remember the IBM 1620. 4k of ram.

 

[Sky Blue]

WWDC 2008. I have one and it is pretty solid. I have one problem with it though, no serial number for the server version. Apple got completely screwed up and can't get it.
It will be on Usenet or other illegal venues. Waiting is fullness.

It was on Usenet weeks ago.

 

[skierdb526]

any news on if theyve cleared up yje serial situation?

 

[kaiwai]

One of the reasons Apple is doing this because they want to win the "who's OS is better" argument hands down. If you can show that ported apps run 10x quicker on your OS than on the other guy's, you've got something compelling that the other guys would have a hard time countering.

Windows for years has lived off the fact that the OS didn't need to get trimmer, because computers always got faster and faster. In fact, from a Wintel standpoint, windows becoming more of a resource hog was a GOOD THING because it drove hardware sales.

Apple taking the other approach, and actually losing a development cycle worth of opportunity cost in order to position their OS for the next round of hardware, is a gutsy move, but one that I believe will pay off handsomely over the next 2-3 years.

How is it a gutsy move? when I upgrade my OS, I expect either equal or better performance - I certainly don't want to be told, "tough luck sunshine, ugrade your hardware". Its a boom for Apple, not a gamble. Imagine being able to tell your end users, "your 18 month old computer can run this new OS - and it will perform better" - nothing makes an end user happy than knowing he can squeeze more life out of his computer.

 

[aLoC]

What happens if you just type in a 10.5 developer use serial number?

 

[cbrain]

What happens if you just type in a 10.5 developer use serial number?

It probably won't work.

 

[Catfish_Man]

One of the reasons Apple is doing this because they want to win the "who's OS is better" argument hands down. If you can show that ported apps run 10x quicker on your OS than on the other guy's, you've got something compelling that the other guys would have a hard time countering.

Windows for years has lived off the fact that the OS didn't need to get trimmer, because computers always got faster and faster. In fact, from a Wintel standpoint, windows becoming more of a resource hog was a GOOD THING because it drove hardware sales.

Apple taking the other approach, and actually losing a development cycle worth of opportunity cost in order to position their OS for the next round of hardware, is a gutsy move, but one that I believe will pay off handsomely over the next 2-3 years.

Snow Leopard will not make apps run 10x quicker (except in a few isolated situations like if they're a perfect fit for the type of computation OpenCL enables, and the developer knows how to use it effectively). Anyone who knows how can get out Shark and see what takes time in todays apps, and it's quite clear that there isn't room in there for a 10x improvement at the OS level. Most application performance issues are caused by the application, not the OS.

That said, there's definitely room for improvement. I was looking at a perf issue in Adium recently and noting ~20% of time spent in objc_msgSend, so any speed improvements they make to the objective-c runtime should help nicely there.

 

[leftroom]

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?

That's for the MacBook Air I think. I have that on my MacBook Pro with 10.5.4. It is in the folder /Applications/Utilities

 

[Rocketman]

Schools (and server farms) install an image of the OS and apps on dozens of computers over the network and license them accordingly. If we understand the implications of Snow Leopard correctly, not only will an OS instance be able to address N-processors and N-tasks, but a processor or cluster could have N-instances of OSX running.

Rocketman

 

[Erasmus]

From what I see, 10.6 is going to be a major rewrite of the entire operating system. This is a huge project, and definitely warrants a paid upgrade. It's like putting a whole new engine in a car, where 10.5.x would just be getting an oil change.

No. OK, second analogy is good, but first one isn't. Tiger & Leopard were like adding satnav, ABS, DVD & MP3 players, back massaging seats and metallic paint.

Snow Leopard is more like a bigger engine (OpenCL), better suspension and transmission (Grand Central) and a more aerodynamic, carbon fibre body (App slimming). Hopefully we'll get some new styling too (New UI).

 

[Erasmus]

How is it a gutsy move? when I upgrade my OS, I expect either equal or better performance - I certainly don't want to be told, "tough luck sunshine, ugrade your hardware". Its a boom for Apple, not a gamble. Imagine being able to tell your end users, "your 18 month old computer can run this new OS - and it will perform better" - nothing makes an end user happy than knowing he can squeeze more life out of his computer.

But from an economic standpoint, Apple would be doing far better if instead of buying SL for your 3 year old Intel Mac, and using it for another year, you were forced to buy a new computer (*cough* Vista *cough*) to run OSX 10.6 "Now with another 300+ new features [290+ of which you will never use] !". In this sense, it is a small gamble, but I'll admit a pretty safe one, in that sure, people will hang on to their old hardware a bit longer, but they will hopefully both rope in Windows users, disillusioned with bloated and resource hogging software, and convince potential Apple abandoners to stay, with the sheer unWindowsishness (© Erasmus, 2008) of the release.

 

[CWallace]

But from an economic standpoint, Apple would be doing far better if instead of buying SL for your 3 year old Intel Mac, and using it for another year, you were forced to buy a new computer (*cough* Vista *cough*) to run OSX 10.6 "Now with another 300+ new features [290+ of which you will never use] !".

It would be if Apple made their money from licensing OS X on hundreds of millions of new PC sales every year like Microsoft does with Windows. With such volumes, the installed base that bothers to upgrade is relatively minuscule, which is why Microsoft charges what they do for both upgrades and retail copies to maximize what profits they can from each sale. Most users just wait until they replace their Windows PC in 3-4 years and get the new OS then.

Apple, on the other hand, pushes out around ten million Macs a year. And most Mac users hold on to their machines longer then 3-4 years, which means that Apples sales remain "low" since the majority of sales go to either new customers or customers who have owned their previous Mac for a number of years. So Apple needs to sell every version they can to their installed base and they need to make it worthwhile for them.

 

[Erasmus]

It would be if Apple made their money from licensing OS X on hundreds of millions of new PC sales every year like Microsoft does with Windows. With such volumes, the installed base that bothers to upgrade is relatively minuscule, which is why Microsoft charges what they do for both upgrades and retail copies to maximize what profits they can from each sale. Most users just wait until they replace their Windows PC in 3-4 years and get the new OS then.

Apple, on the other hand, pushes out around ten million Macs a year. And most Mac users hold on to their machines longer then 3-4 years, which means that Apples sales remain "low" since the majority of sales go to either new customers or customers who have owned their previous Mac for a number of years. So Apple needs to sell every version they can to their installed base and they need to make it worthwhile for them.

Then how come Apple don't use DRM to make sure they get as many people as possible buying their new system software? I don't think Apple really cares all that much if you either don't upgrade, or borrow a friend's upgrade DVD. I guess Apple, and most people like me, treat new OSes like "service packs" worth paying for. We pay not so much to profit Apple, but to cover the costs of the development of the software.

 

[CWallace]

Then how come Apple don't use DRM to make sure they get as many people as possible buying their new system software? I don't think Apple really cares all that much if you either don't upgrade, or borrow a friend's upgrade DVD.

Because with such a small "sales base", if they made it as much a pain-in-the-arse to install and use as Microsoft does with Windows, they wouldn't get the sales they do now. Apple could arguably give major OS X point updates away for free, but by making it relatively inexpensive, not offering a half-dozen versions with various feature-crippling, and not imposing onerous DRM they encourage people to buy it, even if they are not convinced they need it.

OS X sales are a very small part of Apple's revenue stream whereas Windows is a very large part of Microsoft's. So Apple can be more...beneficent...with OS X then Microsoft can with Windows. Apple makes the majority of their money on hardware sales, which is why they are very careful in their model line-up and won't make the Mac Mini an iMac without a monitor (lest it cannibalize iMac sales) nor will they release the Mac (Not So) Pro mini-tower because folks will buy it instead of the more expensive Mac Pro.

But even a few million sales of Leopard retail discs at $164 a pop (averaging the family and single pack prices) is over a half-billion in revenue...

 

[dlopan]

What happens if you just type in a 10.5 developer use serial number?

I tried. It failed. It needs a 10.6 serial number which evidently, Apple is unwilling to provide.

"Update:" I found it,, it's in the apple developer connection web site. So if you have an account you can get it.

 

[jpenguin]

A FEW COMENTS--(IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER)
---------------------------------------------------------------
1. Didn't Apple say the would support PPC untill the end of '09

2. Maybe Apple will switch to ZFS as default, doesn't ZFS has on-the-fly compression

3. I've never bought MacOS X, I just use what comes with my mac

3. Now that apple is rebuilding their OS, they should expand their hardware line. the mythical Mini-Tower?

A FEW QUESTIONS (IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER
----------------------------------------------------------------

1. Is it just me, or did apple announce 10.6 rather shortly after 10.5 came out

2. Is this their response to PYSTAR and EFIX

3. will certain features (OPEN CL) be intel only

4. Why is apple naming 10.6 "snow leopard". "snow leopard" sound like a minor update.

5. Apple has also registered "Lynx" and "Cougar" as trademarks. Why don't they use COUGAR?

6. Will we finally see a built in theme manager?

7. Will apple do something stupid?

 

[Eric S.]

1. Didn't Apple say the would support PPC untill the end of '09

No, originally when they announced the Intel switch they said they would support both architectures "for a long time."

3. Now that apple is rebuilding their OS, they should expand their hardware line. the mythical Mini-Tower?

Yes, they should.

1. Is it just me, or did apple announce 10.6 rather shortly after 10.5 came out

Not really. When 10.5 was released Apple said they planned new OS versions every 12 to 18 months, rather than the 30 months between Tiger and Leopard.

2. Is this their response to PYSTAR and EFIX

No, that's the lawsuit.

3. will certain features (OPEN CL) be intel only

It appears that the whole shebang will be Intel-only.

4. Why is apple naming 10.6 "snow leopard". "snow leopard" sound like a minor update.

5. Apple has also registered "Lynx" and "Cougar" as trademarks. Why don't they use COUGAR?

Guess you'll have to ask Apple marketing about that.

7. Will apple do something stupid?

Apple?

 

[jpenguin]

Apple?

There's a first for everything...

 

[McBeats]

the early/mid 90s

 

[preston03]

cant wait for a free copy ftw

 

[joby866]

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?

Remote Install OS X is for the MacBook Air, or to install OS X through another DVD drive. It comes as standard, with leopard.

 

[kaiwai]

No, originally when they announced the Intel switch they said they would support both architectures "for a long time."

True - I think they worked on a 'worse case scenario' but today I think they're actually surprised just how quickly the user based has switched across from PowerPC to Intel.

I think PowerPC is at the end of its life. Its too bad that those who bought massive G5 monsters didn't wait - they were warned numerous times.

Not really. When 10.5 was released Apple said they planned new OS versions every 12 to 18 months, rather than the 30 months between Tiger and Leopard.

There were alot of foundation work done in 10.5 as well - like a stable interface for kernel (KPI).

For me, I'd sooner see refinement and better use of the existing foundations rather than just new features being thrown at the metaphorical wall in a hope that they might stick.

 

[BileGhost]

4. Why is apple naming 10.6 "snow leopard". "snow leopard" sound like a minor update.

300 new features for 10.5, and a speed increase and some support for a couple of things in 10.6? Sounds like a minor update to me.

 

[gonenutsbrb]

Minor Update?

300 new features for 10.5, and a speed increase and some support for a couple of things in 10.6? Sounds like a minor update to me.

...a speed increase...

The use of OpenCL will make computer speeds as we know it basically obsolete. Consumer computers will go from double digit gigaflops to teraflops. This my friend is more than just a little "speed increase."

...some support for a couple things in 10.6...

Grand Central will even further increase speeds through the use of multi core processors and any further improvements to the 64-bit architecture is always a big deal.

Enormous increases in speed and ram capabilites are a huge thing here. And even furthering the great stability of OS X is always appreciated. An update shouldn't be judged just by how many "new things" it can do. Heck, look what happened with Vista lol.

 

[iMacmatician]

The use of OpenCL will make computer speeds as we know it basically obsolete. Consumer computers will go from double digit gigaflops to teraflops. This my friend is more than just a little "speed increase."

Grand Central will even further increase speeds through the use of multi core processors and any further improvements to the 64-bit architecture is always a big deal.

Enormous increases in speed and ram capabilites are a huge thing here. And even furthering the great stability of OS X is always appreciated. An update shouldn't be judged just by how many "new things" it can do. Heck, look what happened with Vista lol.

I completely agree with you here except that "teraflops" is a little too much. Several hundred gigaFLOPS are more realistic with midrange cards (which are used in many Macs), even by 2009. And don't forget integrated graphics. But I do believe we will see at least an order of magnitude performance increase in GPU-using applications.

And things like improved multi-core performance, stability, and security are important. (Isn't the lack of those what people keep whining about?) I think Snow Leopard is much more significant that what people are giving credit about.