Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Screenshots of Latest Snow Leopard Seed

Hmm, wierd. I thought 64-bit carbon (User Interface) was removed from OSX... why is the finder 64-bit but its UI is exactly the same?? maybe apple keeping 64-bit carbon to itself...?
 
NT1440 said:
To be fair, those ads will NEVER see any airtime. And apple hasn't exactly launched a new campaign in a looong time when it comes to macs (besides the green ones).

Then again, apples ads are actually effective and don't leave the audience wonder what jerry seinfeld and bill gates shaking his ass has to do with computers.
Click to expand...

Now that you mention it, I think MS should just pull out of ads altogether. All you need to run that company day to day is a cash register. The licensing hog is still the best part of their game. Sure, it stifles innovation, but when a good chunk of your base doesn't know any better to begin with, why bother?

Anyway, I look at those MS ads and I keep wondering who gets paid to think of stupid **** like that. Now if they're this ****ed up when it comes to simple PR, imagine what their products and services are like.
 
What you are missing is..

....There is now outputs for 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p.

Hopefully this means no more mucking around with DisplayConfigX etc to get a working output (overscan issues etc) for MacMini's etc connected to plasma/lcd tvs !

(lives in hope for my mini connected via dvi-hdmi to a 50" 720p PanaPlasma to ditch the silly 1180ish x 682ish resolution I need to run now)
 
Fukui said:
Hmm, wierd. I thought 64-bit carbon (User Interface) was removed from OSX... why is the finder 64-bit but its UI is exactly the same?? maybe apple keeping 64-bit carbon to itself...?
Click to expand...

According to some other sources, the finder hasn't be worked on yet. Just like the Quicktime, it will be wholely replaced at once in later seeds.
 
MikhailT said:
According to some other sources, the finder hasn't be worked on yet. Just like the Quicktime, it will be wholely replaced at once in later seeds.
Click to expand...

AND understanding it's a developer seed...... Photobooth just crashes... and iPhoto eventually crashes. Apple Mail with Exchange has errors.

I am not bashing. I am just mentioning. I was actually surprised. Usually Apples Dev Builds are top notch. Best in the industry. (Roughly) ESPECIALLY with it being just an "update" of Leopard. But, a dev build is a dev build. Can't expect the world.
 
Tense said:
AND understanding it's a developer seed...... Photobooth just crashes... and iPhoto eventually crashes. Apple Mail with Exchange has errors.

I am not bashing. I am just mentioning. I was actually surprised. Usually Apples Dev Builds are top notch. Best in the industry. (Roughly) ESPECIALLY with it being just an "update" of Leopard. But, a dev build is a dev build. Can't expect the world.
Click to expand...
While your right about most of that, it isnt just an "update" of leopard, its basically a complete rewrite of leopard.
 
NT1440 said:
While your right about most of that, it isnt just an "update" of leopard, its basically a complete rewrite of leopard.
Click to expand...

Not from what I have seen. Yes, it's a lot of rewrite. But, they are even toting it as "builds on Leopard’s enormous innovations by delivering a new generation of core software technologies that will streamline Mac OS X". Now, I am not an expert. But, when I write a program. Especially one that works well. I don't do a "complete rewrite". Or else it wouldn't be "Leopard" code. It would be "Snow Leopard" code. Right? :) Just asking.
 
Tense said:
Not from what I have seen. Yes, it's a lot of rewrite. But, they are even toting it as "builds on Leopard’s enormous innovations by delivering a new generation of core software technologies that will streamline Mac OS X". Now, I am not an expert. But, when I write a program. Especially one that works well. I don't do a "complete rewrite". Or else it wouldn't be "Leopard" code. It would be "Snow Leopard" code. Right? :) Just asking.
Click to expand...

I think alot is being rewritten to 64 bit.
 
Mail and Address Book

Maybe, I wish, they will make Mail a power program instead of a kludgy slow running cumbersome mess and maybe, I wish, they will improve address book so that it is easier to export the data in it.

Bells and whistle time is up. Time to make the workhorses of the system better than that MS stuff.
 
NT1440 said:
I think alot is being rewritten to 64 bit.
Click to expand...


Not only that, there are things called regressive bugs. Just rewriting parts of the OS would affect the rest of the system to the point where they would have to rewrite those parts too.. I am sure they are not rewriting the whole OS, just enough to be considered a new version.
 
The new Stacks navigation is the kind of interface I want to touch. As in multi-touch. That and dashboard widgets seem primed for a touch interface. I don't want the entire OS to be multi touch, just some things that seem useful.

Think about it, nearly everything in the Mac product line now features glass displays, the preeminent material for multi touch as demonstrated by the iPhone.

Ever wonder why Apple designed glass displays? It's definitely not easier to manufacture. What is its function (if not to piss off people who hate glossy displays)?
 
rikers_mailbox said:
The new Stacks navigation is the kind of interface I want to touch. As in multi-touch. That and dashboard widgets seem primed for a touch interface. I don't want the entire OS to be multi touch, just some things that seem useful.

Think about it, nearly everything in the Mac product line now features glass displays, the preeminent material for multi touch as demonstrated by the iPhone.

Ever wonder why Apple designed glass displays? It's definitely not easier to manufacture. What is its function (if not to piss off people who hate glossy displays)?
Click to expand...
While I wouldnt mind a multi-touch interface being there as an option, I dont think I'd ever use it. Heck I dont ever want to "talk" to my computer with voice recognition someday. Im very happy with the keyboard/mouse solution.
 
rikers_mailbox said:
The new Stacks navigation is the kind of interface I want to touch. As in multi-touch. That and dashboard widgets seem primed for a touch interface. I don't want the entire OS to be multi touch, just some things that seem useful.

Think about it, nearly everything in the Mac product line now features glass displays, the preeminent material for multi touch as demonstrated by the iPhone.

Ever wonder why Apple designed glass displays? It's definitely not easier to manufacture. What is its function (if not to piss off people who hate glossy displays)?
Click to expand...

I could see that for very limited uses, I still do not think it is worth the extra cost for those very limited use. I could see the trackpad in laptops being replaced with the iphone kind of thing but for desktops, users are not going to constantly use their arms in the air for something. they'll get tired rapidly and they usually stick to one method of controlling their systems.

As for tablets, that might be worth it for sure. but have you seen the costs and the specs? Not worth it for most people.
 
Snow Leopard memory usage

After reading this article, I felt a little disappointed on MacOS Snow Leopard. I already knew it wasn't about new features, but about core changes. I wish they could put up some new features, but it's OK to "just" have a speed boost. I also knew the size of the software would be dramatically reduced, and I think this alone is just great news (and even better than another 300+ features).

However, I was hoping to see some news on memory (RAM) usage on MacOS 10.6. I own a MacBook with 2 GB RAM. Memory is something scarce. Right now, MS Word 2008 is using 182 MB, Firefox is using 118 MB and iTunes, 110 MB. A lot, right? I wish Snow Leopard could use memory in a more efficient way. But, when I looked at the picture that showed the activity monitor of MacOS 10.6 and compared it to my own activity monitor (on MacOS 10.5), I felt disappointed. Memory usage seems higher on Snow Leopard. Here's examples of what I found out:

Activity Monitor - uses 17.65 MB on MacOS 10.5 (Leopard) and 35.5 MB on MacOS 10.6 (Snow Leopard);

Finder - uses 45.57 MB on Leopard and 66.1 MB on Snow Leopard;

System UI Server - uses 8.91 MB on Leopard and 39.8 MB on Snow Leopard.

MacOS 10.6 seems to use far more memory than MacOS 10.5, although the size of applications was greatly reduced. Why? Is it because of 64-bit? Or am I just missing something?
 
boring

i have to say that i am a bit disapointed: why is stacks still looking like that? apple once used to be good in inventing a consistant user interface through all their programs, but i get the feeling that they are now stuck in some sort of barrier infront of their head:

- stacks should look similar to the icons-menu on the iphone/touch
- stacks uses a different way of navigation compared to the navigation in the finder. this is confusing.
 
skaertus said:
After reading this article, I felt a little disappointed on MacOS Snow Leopard. I already knew it wasn't about new features, but about core changes. I wish they could put up some new features, but it's OK to "just" have a speed boost. I also knew the size of the software would be dramatically reduced, and I think this alone is just great news (and even better than another 300+ features).

However, I was hoping to see some news on memory (RAM) usage on MacOS 10.6. I own a MacBook with 2 GB RAM. Memory is something scarce. Right now, MS Word 2008 is using 182 MB, Firefox is using 118 MB and iTunes, 110 MB. A lot, right? I wish Snow Leopard could use memory in a more efficient way. But, when I looked at the picture that showed the activity monitor of MacOS 10.6 and compared it to my own activity monitor (on MacOS 10.5), I felt disappointed. Memory usage seems higher on Snow Leopard. Here's examples of what I found out:

Activity Monitor - uses 17.65 MB on MacOS 10.5 (Leopard) and 35.5 MB on MacOS 10.6 (Snow Leopard);

Finder - uses 45.57 MB on Leopard and 66.1 MB on Snow Leopard;

System UI Server - uses 8.91 MB on Leopard and 39.8 MB on Snow Leopard.

MacOS 10.6 seems to use far more memory than MacOS 10.5, although the size of applications was greatly reduced. Why? Is it because of 64-bit? Or am I just missing something?
Click to expand...

In some ways, 64bit apps does use more memory than 32bit apps. I don't think you should even think about comparing anything right now, Apple hasn't really start optimizing their code yet. They still have months to go if they intend to release in June.
 
Most of the apps reported on this site and others don't seem to take into account that SL has a lot of debug code in it. Some apps will show higher memory usage.

People really need to wait until it's shown in all it's snowy glory at WWDC.
 
I'll have to wait and see what SL's features will be. As of the info I have now, I have no plans to buy it. Especially as I expect it to be $129.
 
In some ways, 64bit apps does use more memory than 32bit apps. I don't think you should even think about comparing anything right now, Apple hasn't really start optimizing their code yet. They still have months to go if they intend to release in June.
Click to expand...

Most of the apps reported on this site and others don't seem to take into account that SL has a lot of debug code in it. Some apps will show higher memory usage.

People really need to wait until it's shown in all it's snowy glory at WWDC.
Click to expand...

I hope you are both right. In fact, I expected to see a dramatic drop also in memory usage in Snow Leopard apps, due to its greatly reduced size. Probably that's not going to happen.
 
RTiii320 said:
looks like a lot of progress, I am really interested in the "put away" feature... With the thousands of songs on my itunes sometimes i place wrong songs in the trash and it would be MUCH easier to have a simple button to click to put it exactly where it was...

Nice progress :apple:
Click to expand...

Progress?? That feature existed in System 9 and I believe it even existed in System 7 too.
 
gsxrboy said:
....There is now outputs for 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p.

Hopefully this means no more mucking around with DisplayConfigX etc to get a working output (overscan issues etc) for MacMini's etc connected to plasma/lcd tvs !

(lives in hope for my mini connected via dvi-hdmi to a 50" 720p PanaPlasma to ditch the silly 1180ish x 682ish resolution I need to run now)
Click to expand...

hopefully apple will allow 24hz output in the final build
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back