Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
ok you man up and buy a ADC membership witch cosy $499 US and you post pic's of snow leopard and get you ADC account canceled.

thats if you such a "big man"

Oh, he would be more than cancelled. Apple would sue his chicken ear and most likely place a lien against his house and other possessions until they had reclaimed any damages.

If you really care about Apple, or have any ethics, you would at least try to keep the terms of the NDA. That's not being chicken. That's called being a man (or woman) of your word.

I'm still amazed that MacRumors allows such information to be posted. Speculate all day, but don't give away privileged information that doesn't belong to you!
 
4GB and 64bit

For those who were wondering about the benefits of 64bit on macbooks with max 4GB RAM, it's simple - virtual memory.
With 5 tabs open, Safari has > 1.2GB virtual memory. Apache has 2.6GB on my macbook pro, but that's 64bit already.

Cheers.
 
And why is the 30" Cinema still hanging around? Because Apple still wants to sell monitors bigger than 24", but they want (a) mini DisplayPort and (b) LED backlighting. Until then, the June 2004 30" Cinema Display stays. When the new one comes, it will have iSight and speakers and be able to charge a MacBook Pro.

If they want to never sell another 30" to a research lab or government institution, putting an iSight into it is a great way to accomplish that. Same reason (or one of them at least) the Mac Pro doesn't have an Airport card by default.

Then again, Apple doesn't give a cold crap about Pro users anymore it seems like, so maybe the new 30" will have the iSight and a piece of glass over it just like the rest of the trendhumping consumer toys.
 
Oh, he would be more than cancelled. Apple would sue his chicken ear and most likely place a lien against his house and other possessions until they had reclaimed any damages.

If you really care about Apple, or have any ethics, you would at least try to keep the terms of the NDA. That's not being chicken. That's called being a man (or woman) of your word.

I'm still amazed that MacRumors allows such information to be posted. Speculate all day, but don't give away privileged information that doesn't belong to you!

You don't think Apple does the same thing...

Apple is all over the internet looking for tips, tricks and high secret stuff which they can benefit from
Its a company making millions of dollar and every year they make more profit
It buys his way out of lawsuits as for us normal users can never do that
Thats the way it works in real life

Big companies rule it all and resistance against NDA and leaking stuff from time to time isn't always a bad thing even Apple could be leaking stuff to get us on the wrong track

Again nobody want's to destroy Apple but just a little more depth in the hole process would be nice
Maybe that could have saved firewire on the uni macbook or stopped the 17 inch for having no battery replacement which only last 8 hours

Apple makes one of the best products on this planet but sometimes they screw things up :apple:
 
You don't think Apple does the same thing...

Apple is all over the internet looking for tips, tricks and high secret stuff which they can benefit from
Its a company making millions of dollar and every year they make more profit
It buys his way out of lawsuits as for us normal users can never do that
Thats the way it works in real life

Big companies rule it all and resistance against NDA and leaking stuff from time to time isn't always a bad thing even Apple could be leaking stuff to get us on the wrong track

Again nobody want's to destroy Apple but just a little more depth in the hole process would be nice
Maybe that could have saved firewire on the uni macbook or stopped the 17 inch for having no battery replacement which only last 8 hours

Apple makes one of the best products on this planet but sometimes they screw things up :apple:

Are you on crack? Do you really think Apple has any significant amount of staff trolling for information on the Internet?

...another Unabomber/conspiracy theorist...
 
Are you on crack? Do you really think Apple has any significant amount of staff trolling for information on the Internet?

...another Unabomber/conspiracy theorist...

I'll have an order of what he's smoking... Apple clearly watch MS's every move.

You know, so they can run in the opposite direction.
 
I'll have an order of what he's smoking... Apple clearly watch MS's every move.

You know, so they can run in the opposite direction.

Then you're both crack babies. Apple's competitive analysis group watches the industry, but I assure you there are better places to get information than trolling rumor mill sites where you get a few grains of truth along with a whole lot of lies and idle speculation.

On your second comment, Apple is running double time in the SAME direction as Microsoft. Apple recognizes that its architecture is not up to large scale use and is pulling many ideas from Windows NT into Snow Leopard. That's not a bad thing. Apple has a great set of API for the user interface and a great set of application development tools, but Windows NT has a lot of wisdom packed into it from mainframe architecture. VMS + 111 = WNT, remember? Since both Darwin and Windows NT have roots in Mach, they have much more in common than Darwin has with Linux at this point. Snow Leopard is so that Apple can take time to align with those high-performance principles and sprint BEYOND what Microsoft has done.

Another one of those cases where people who know about as much as Jim Cramer does about predicting the stock market, insist on spewing crap about X being better than Y because of something they misheard from a friend of a friend who read something somewhere.
 
- Well the text definitely does look different.

- Apps open up faster

- UI is relatively the same, with the exception of the Quicktime X changes.

- Still a relatively buggy release. I anticipate a no earlier than June release date. However, still significantly more stable over prior builds.

- As with prior builds, it has an extremely quick install time. 20 minutes from the second I hit install.

- There are no tabs in finder, and it generally looks the same as Leopard.

- I'm a big fan of the new "Stacks". Much bigger icons, more organized with scrolling.

- Generally, things are just cleaner, more organized, and quicker.

- Test replace works great, and just like the iPhone. I can't seem to get it working in Safari, but in Pages/Textedit, it'll just replace mistakes as you type and it's a remarkable feature.

Quicktime X will play your video as if it is simply floating on your desktop. No borders/buttons AT ALL. Once you hover your mouse over the video, then you see play/pause, volume, forward/previous, and the title. It's very iPhone-esque.
 
Does Quicktime X support any new formats like mkv/mka (mastroska) containers?
Does it support ogg, flac on the audio front?

Any changes to front row?
 
Does Quicktime X support any new formats like mkv/mka (mastroska) containers?
Does it support ogg, flac on the audio front?

Any changes to front row?

Don't have any other videos to try(just AVI) so I can't tell comment on that, but I haven't noticed a single change in Front Row. Did a basic glance around, browsed music, TV, and movies and don't see any visible changes.
 
- Well the text definitely does look different.

- Apps open up faster

- UI is relatively the same, with the exception of the Quicktime X changes.

- Still a relatively buggy release. I anticipate a no earlier than June release date. However, still significantly more stable over prior builds.

- As with prior builds, it has an extremely quick install time. 20 minutes from the second I hit install.

- There are no tabs in finder, and it generally looks the same as Leopard.

- I'm a big fan of the new "Stacks". Much bigger icons, more organized with scrolling.

- Generally, things are just cleaner, more organized, and quicker.

- Test replace works great, and just like the iPhone. I can't seem to get it working in Safari, but in Pages/Textedit, it'll just replace mistakes as you type and it's a remarkable feature.

Quicktime X will play your video as if it is simply floating on your desktop. No borders/buttons AT ALL. Once you hover your mouse over the video, then you see play/pause, volume, forward/previous, and the title. It's very iPhone-esque.

Excuse me, but isn't all that supposed to be under NDA? How do we know you're telling the truth?
 
Then you're both crack babies. Apple's competitive analysis group watches the industry, but I assure you there are better places to get information than trolling rumor mill sites where you get a few grains of truth along with a whole lot of lies and idle speculation.

On your second comment, Apple is running double time in the SAME direction as Microsoft. Apple recognizes that its architecture is not up to large scale use and is pulling many ideas from Windows NT into Snow Leopard. That's not a bad thing. Apple has a great set of API for the user interface and a great set of application development tools, but Windows NT has a lot of wisdom packed into it from mainframe architecture. VMS + 111 = WNT, remember? Since both Darwin and Windows NT have roots in Mach, they have much more in common than Darwin has with Linux at this point. Snow Leopard is so that Apple can take time to align with those high-performance principles and sprint BEYOND what Microsoft has done.

Another one of those cases where people who know about as much as Jim Cramer does about predicting the stock market, insist on spewing crap about X being better than Y because of something they misheard from a friend of a friend who read something somewhere.

You need to read more of my posts before making assumptions, as well as understand that a little humerous banter does not suggest ignorance, but simply a sense of fun.

At no point have I suggested Apple don't track the market. Your general point about Snow Leopard has already been made in this thread, by myself and others. However, your understanding of some of the core architectural principles behind NT and Leopard are flawed. In the development of WinNT Microsoft aggressively developed components (such as the virtual memory paging system) which at the time were way ahead of what current hardware was capable of. It was a brave move, and this in particular was just one of the components of the architect of NT that was designed in that way. The very nature of what we consider to be part of an operating system has now changed, as has the hardware operating systems run on.

UN*X moved in its own directions, and in true hare and tortoise style, the lead NT built has not been maintained. This is not an attack at Microsoft, they sprinted ahead, and have been deservedly banking that investment for 15 years. However, times have changed and although both operating systems have common ancestors... just as we don't breath through gills, its not particularly meaningful to point at a shared history and claim that makes the descendants the same.

As a developer who has worked on many architectures over many years, and was teaching operating systems theory and practice to Masters students, I'm very comfortable in this area and certainly not depending on half understood water cooler conversations.

In particular, the changes being made in Snow Leopard are not a back-port or reverse engineered from Microsoft developments (although of course many features are being "borrowed", and rightly so. I welcome exchange integration, and wish they would lift the Windows 7 desktop layout management features). However, the performance improvements coming from two distinct areas:

- Improved Frameworks such as OpenCL and Grand Central. These are the long term investments that will pay dividends as developers adopt them. They won't magically start improving matters, there will be conscious effort required to use and exploit them (in the same way Core Animation didn't suddenly make everything start tweening between states).
- Architectural performance improvements derived of lessons learned from porting OS-X to a mobile platform. These range from changes to Quicktime movie playback, to more fundamental changes in the kernel (including memory management and scheduling).

Of course there will be other things gleaned from general and publicized research, and of course Apple keeps up with, and contributes to, thinking in these areas and will chose which and when should be applied to OS-X.

One thing I think we both agree on is what Apple is doing with Snow Leopard; positing their operating system to continue to deliver competitive advantage over the next 3-5 years.
 
Excuse me, but isn't all that supposed to be under NDA? How do we know you're telling the truth?

You are right, it is under an NDA. He's made a personal decision to post. Personally (without violating the NDA) I find his claims believable simply because of the largely unremarkable nature of them. They tie in with everything Apple has said publicly on the matter, yet do not feel sensationalized. I find them very easy to believe.
 
I miss the ability to call numbers through my cell phone from within OSX. With all the added data detectors it we be sure great if they would bring that back (esp with the iPhone now).

I agree here - I think that Data Detectors should be a system-wide service, so you could easily click on an address in Safari and add it to your address book or show a Google Map (or do something using CoreLocation). Safari on the iPhone is crying out for this (I know it works with phone numbers right now), but needs more functionality.

And then, also work on the Bonjour integration between the iPhone and your Mac - ie.... pause a song on your Mac and display the caller on screen when your iPhone is ringing. This is what I thought they might have done sooner! There is a lot that could be done here!
 
You need to read more of my posts before making assumptions, as well as understand that a little humerous banter does not suggest ignorance, but simply a sense of fun.

At no point have I suggested Apple don't track the market. Your general point about Snow Leopard has already been made in this thread, by myself and others. However, your understanding of some of the core architectural principles behind NT and Leopard are flawed. In the development of WinNT Microsoft aggressively developed components (such as the virtual memory paging system) which at the time were way ahead of what current hardware was capable of. It was a brave move, and this in particular was just one of the components of the architect of NT that was designed in that way. The very nature of what we consider to be part of an operating system has now changed, as has the hardware operating systems run on.

UN*X moved in its own directions, and in true hare and tortoise style, the lead NT built has not been maintained. This is not an attack at Microsoft, they sprinted ahead, and have been deservedly banking that investment for 15 years. However, times have changed and although both operating systems have common ancestors... just as we don't breath through gills, its not particularly meaningful to point at a shared history and claim that makes the descendants the same.

As a developer who has worked on many architectures over many years, and was teaching operating systems theory and practice to Masters students, I'm very comfortable in this area and certainly not depending on half understood water cooler conversations.

In particular, the changes being made in Snow Leopard are not a back-port or reverse engineered from Microsoft developments (although of course many features are being "borrowed", and rightly so. I welcome exchange integration, and wish they would lift the Windows 7 desktop layout management features). However, the performance improvements coming from two distinct areas:

- Improved Frameworks such as OpenCL and Grand Central. These are the long term investments that will pay dividends as developers adopt them. They won't magically start improving matters, there will be conscious effort required to use and exploit them (in the same way Core Animation didn't suddenly make everything start tweening between states).
- Architectural performance improvements derived of lessons learned from porting OS-X to a mobile platform. These range from changes to Quicktime movie playback, to more fundamental changes in the kernel (including memory management and scheduling).

Of course there will be other things gleaned from general and publicized research, and of course Apple keeps up with, and contributes to, thinking in these areas and will chose which and when should be applied to OS-X.

One thing I think we both agree on is what Apple is doing with Snow Leopard; positing their operating system to continue to deliver competitive advantage over the next 3-5 years.

I disagree about Windows NT being behind most Unix. Consider the following:

1. WNT does not suffer from thread deadlock in its networking and driver cores. How often do you get a near global beach ball while using Safari? Have you noticed that any application can do a DoS just by making many networking calls? Or have you seen what happens when Finder can't complete an FTP call through the NSUrl API's?
2. WNT still performs better than all *nix at the limit of memory under low disk space conditions. It gets slow, but applications don't randomly fail.
3. WNT manages concurrent I/O far better. WinSock *****FAR****** exceeds the capabilities of BSD sockets. Writing a 10Gb Ethernet driver for OS X is almost pointless. The OS can't get out of its own way. I write driver stacks for very high-performance devices and am constantly disappointed that the low-level richness is simply not there. z/OS and WNT are incredible for getting maximum performance with minimal CPU usage.
4. OS X still uses a "swap" file instead of paging as appropriate. That should give you an idea of how far behind Darwin is.

On mid-level API, development tool richness and wealth of UI-facing API and integration, OS X is, hands-down, the best out there. But even BSD is a decade behind WNT for all the low-level stuff, not even in the same ballpark.

My dream OS would be OS X built on top of the WNT kernel. Too bad Microsoft doesn't focus on its core competency instead of churning out nonsense like Vista. I'm not convinced that Apple has what it takes to evolve Darwin into an industrial-strength low-level OS, but it's not as if that's Apple's focus. Apple's strength is the UI; whatever they manage toward the kernel side of things is just gravy. But I still want it all.

Grand Central is Apple's attempt to implement Microsoft's completion ports at a level where developers don't need to know the details. If they extend it to networking, storage and other I/O, it will be quite interesting.

...looking forward to your future posts...
 
I disagree about Windows NT being behind most Unix. Consider the following:

1. WNT does not suffer from thread deadlock in its networking and driver cores. How often do you get a near global beach ball while using Safari? Have you noticed that any application can do a DoS just by making many networking calls? Or have you seen what happens when Finder can't complete an FTP call through the NSUrl API's?
2. WNT still performs better than all *nix at the limit of memory under low disk space conditions. It gets slow, but applications don't randomly fail.
3. WNT manages concurrent I/O far better. WinSock *****FAR****** exceeds the capabilities of BSD sockets. Writing a 10Gb Ethernet driver for OS X is almost pointless. The OS can't get out of its own way. I write driver stacks for very high-performance devices and am constantly disappointed that the low-level richness is simply not there. z/OS and WNT are incredible for getting maximum performance with minimal CPU usage.
4. OS X still uses a "swap" file instead of paging as appropriate. That should give you an idea of how far behind Darwin is.

On mid-level API, development tool richness and wealth of UI-facing API and integration, OS X is, hands-down, the best out there. But even BSD is a decade behind WNT for all the low-level stuff, not even in the same ballpark.

My dream OS would be OS X built on top of the WNT kernel. Too bad Microsoft doesn't focus on its core competency instead of churning out nonsense like Vista. I'm not convinced that Apple has what it takes to evolve Darwin into an industrial-strength low-level OS, but it's not as if that's Apple's focus. Apple's strength is the UI; whatever they manage toward the kernel side of things is just gravy. But I still want it all.

Grand Central is Apple's attempt to implement Microsoft's completion ports at a level where developers don't need to know the details. If they extend it to networking, storage and other I/O, it will be quite interesting.

...looking forward to your future posts...

You're Bill Gates in disguise. Go away, liar.
 
I disagree about Windows NT being behind most Unix. Consider the following:

1. WNT does not suffer from thread deadlock in its networking and driver cores. How often do you get a near global beach ball while using Safari? Have you noticed that any application can do a DoS just by making many networking calls? Or have you seen what happens when Finder can't complete an FTP call through the NSUrl API's?
2. WNT still performs better than all *nix at the limit of memory under low disk space conditions. It gets slow, but applications don't randomly fail.
3. WNT manages concurrent I/O far better. WinSock *****FAR****** exceeds the capabilities of BSD sockets. Writing a 10Gb Ethernet driver for OS X is almost pointless. The OS can't get out of its own way. I write driver stacks for very high-performance devices and am constantly disappointed that the low-level richness is simply not there. z/OS and WNT are incredible for getting maximum performance with minimal CPU usage.
4. OS X still uses a "swap" file instead of paging as appropriate. That should give you an idea of how far behind Darwin is.

On mid-level API, development tool richness and wealth of UI-facing API and integration, OS X is, hands-down, the best out there. But even BSD is a decade behind WNT for all the low-level stuff, not even in the same ballpark.

My dream OS would be OS X built on top of the WNT kernel. Too bad Microsoft doesn't focus on its core competency instead of churning out nonsense like Vista. I'm not convinced that Apple has what it takes to evolve Darwin into an industrial-strength low-level OS, but it's not as if that's Apple's focus. Apple's strength is the UI; whatever they manage toward the kernel side of things is just gravy. But I still want it all.

Grand Central is Apple's attempt to implement Microsoft's completion ports at a level where developers don't need to know the details. If they extend it to networking, storage and other I/O, it will be quite interesting.

...looking forward to your future posts...

good post...

it doesn't happen often that you see somebody here who doesn't blindly follow hype or religion but has some real knowledge and an own opinion...
 
One feature I'm really missing in the current OS X is the ability to turn down the volume using the volume slider in the menu bar when using the digital audio output.

I hope that going to be in Snow Leopard...
 
ZFS will probably be in 10.7. In a perfect world, Microsoft would ship Windows 7 with ZFS as the default file system and Apple would use ZFS and no more problems with sharing portable drives without having to use the limiting FAT32 filesystem. It would be nice if ZFS has no issues and easy to including with any operating system. Because it wasn't included with Leopard makes me feel like it has issues.

ZFS has been in all of the 10.6 builds. Up until now it was the same version apple pubically releases on zfs.macosforge.org, as of 10a286 it is a much newer version (zfs version 11) which integrates much better with finder and the os.

I've even noticed some changes they have made, for example the root pool doesn't mount anywhere by default and doesn't even show up in zfs list.

Filesystems created in the pool no longer show up as individual disks (though they are mounted in /Volumes by default) in Finder.

Finder seems to be way less confused when working in a zfs dataset.

Also, since it's ZFS version 11 the casesensitivity dataset property is now supported. So you can have case sensitive and case insensitive filesystems sharing the same amount of total space.
 
Also, since it's ZFS version 11 the casesensitivity dataset property is now supported. So you can have case sensitive and case insensitive filesystems sharing the same amount of total space.

What do you mean by sharing the same amount of total space?

As I understand it, the big problem with case-sensitive HFS+ (HFSX) is that many applications don't handle it very well. I assume that ZFS has the same issue?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.