Snow Leopard (10A432) Golden Master ?

[Daveoc64]

Unlike Windows and Linux, Mac OS X binaries can hold code for multiple arch. If a software supports both 32-bit and 64-bit, they simply install a single set of binary files. The OS will decide which binary to load depend on running kernel mode. This actually greatly simplified the deployment.

I have been working on Windows, Linux and Mac. We need different installers for 32-bit and 64-bit for Windows and Linux. But for Mac, we just need one installer.

I don't believe any of that applies for Kernel Extensions.

The relevant (i.e. 32 or 64 bit) extension will be installed when the program/hardware is installed originally.

If the architecture changes, a different kernel extension will be needed.

The other issue is that people might install software/hardware that uses 32-bit extensions (with no 64-bit extension available), then have problems as soon as said theoretical update is installed.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

I don't believe any of that applies for Kernel Extensions.

The relevant (i.e. 32 or 64 bit) extension will be installed when the program/hardware is installed originally.

If the architecture changes, a different kernel extension will be needed.

The other issue is that people might install software/hardware that uses 32-bit extensions (with no 64-bit extension available), then have problems as soon as said theoretical update is installed.

Right on, Kernel Extensions will be a problem. Hence why I've realized that what Apple's done with the kernel is fully deliberate: Enable K64 only on the Xserve, because servers generally don't have additional KEXTs to worry about that aren't 64-bit ready, and leave every other Mac on K32 until 10.7. This, I think, makes the most sense, as it will cause the fewest headaches for end users. Just think about printer drivers for a moment - all of these would need to be 64-bit ready in a 64-bit kernel environment. The vast majority of them still are NOT ready.

 

[rpp3po]

It would be wise to ship SL with 32-bit kernels as default. There are more kexts than you would think, not only drivers. And many could be potentially broken.

Look at it from a PR perspective. Snow Leopard is a small update, thus only a relatively small benefit for the end user. Apple can't afford to make the initial SL experience a compatibility nightmare. A lot of small developers, who have produced a large amount of useful stuff over the years, aren't necessarily ADC Select or Premium members and won't be ready for prime time*. So without groundbreaking advantages over Leopard it is not worth risking hundreds of apps to be broken. This would eat up any advantage of SL over L for the end user. Therefore shipping SL with 32 bit kernels as default is a sane decision. You don't need a 64 bit kernel for running 64 bit apps with most if not all benefits anyway.

*Not even corporate VMware has 64 bit kexts ready, yet.

 

[pcguru83]

How does Snow Leopard work with Microsoft Exchange? I had lots of trouble with the older OS Entourage and Exchange 2007.

I heard that exchange works much better with Snow Leopard. Any experiences?

It's fantastic. The integration into Mail, iCal, and Address Book is incredibly slick. This and the noticeable speed gains in Snow Leopard are the two main reasons I'm so excited about its release.

My wife probably won't be too happy about it though. I suppose this just makes it that much easier for me to get drawn into work stuff at home now.

 

[stormj]

Kernels

I don't find the argument based on which kernels are available on which hardware to be conclusive proof that 10a432 is not the gold master. It may not be, but not for that reason.

Forcing 64-bit kexts on a SL install would break, among other things, Parallels Desktop, which uses 32-bit kexts at present. That's a widely used program. I'm sure there are other reasons.

Personally, I'm quite content to have the 32-bit kernel for now. I can use 64-bit applications. There is no reason this transition can't be made at a later time. They added Intel support mid-10.4 after all.

 

[stormj]

It's fantastic. The integration into Mail, iCal, and Address Book is incredibly slick. This and the noticeable speed gains in Snow Leopard are the two main reasons I'm so excited about its release.

My wife probably won't be too happy about it though. I suppose this just makes it that much easier for me to get drawn into work stuff at home now.

The disappointing part is that it requires Exchange Server 2007.

 

[Daveoc64]

There is no reason this transition can't be made at a later time. They added Intel support mid-10.4 after all.

There certainly IS a reason.

If people have loads of 32-bit Kernel Extensions and suddenly 10.6.3 comes out and switches them to a 64-bit Kernel they'll have loads of problems.

If they change from 10.5 to 10.6 and suddenly these things stop working, that's quite different in the eyes of the user.

It's one thing having an OS upgrade that is incompatible with your software/hardware but it's another thing entirely for a simple update to radically overhaul how your computer operates, leaving software and hardware compatibility in a ditch.

The longer Apple prolongs the situation, the more people will continue to depend on 32-bit Kernel Extensions. Developers have little incentive to release extensions that people are not allowed to use due to Apple's bizarre rules. I think that a new OS really is the best way to manage this transition.

 

[Akitakoi]

Swamp Leopard will be 64 bit only and only available pre installed on new machines,,,,,at first. The only 3rd party aps that will be available at launch time will be a $pecial version of Photoshop and Outlook for Mac 2012.

Oh and there will be no new games.

 

[Headrush69]

the '64 bit handbrake' versions that people have tried to compile for osx have been horrid.

In what sense? I've had no issues using the 64bit svn 2592 version.