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.
Snow Leopard Screenshots Show Little New
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
im excited, i pray that its a free update tho, like 10.1
also, whats the song on the second video? i believe its from a matrix score, but i looked through all of mine and i cant find it! and its driving me crazy! help please
Yeah its from the Matrix alright, its on the original soundtrack, man I cannot think of the name right now sorry
Hehe, even those are outdated now! Our household just bought a bunch of LED lights that use 1.5 watts!!!!
Yeah its from the Matrix alright, its on the original soundtrack, man I cannot think of the name right now sorry
Clubbed to Death (Kurayamino Mix) by Rob D.
hmm... looks like it was taken down from iTunes along w/ all the other Matrix soundtracks... booo :/
Realize this: XCode 3.0 and 10.5 let you develop 64-bit drivers. The APIs got tweaked to handle writing one set of code for 32/64-bit drivers in 10.5. Apple probably even tested, but didn't ship the 64-bit kernel to make sure developers writing against them would be doing the right thing.
As long as developers have been building a full UB driver since Leopard's launch, moving to a 64-bit kernel will not be nearly as painful as it was for Windows where everyone had to rewrite their drivers for a whole new API that didn't even exist prior to Vista (64-bit Vista drivers had extra requirements that 32-bit Vista drivers, and 64-bit XP drivers never had). Anyone building a 32/64-bit UB driver today for Leopard will be ready for Snow Leopard without doing anything.
32-bit compatibility mode has always been part of Leopard. Safari is built as a 32-bit app, as is System Preferences so that they can still load plugins correctly that haven't been made into a 32/64-bit UB yet. 10.6 will likely still have Safari launch in 32-bit mode, and System Preferences (IMO) should as well until 10.7.
Tinfoil hat much? Blu-ray isn't getting pushed by very many companies outside the ones making the media, the players, and the content. All of which are trying to get a return on their investment in making the format in the first place.
When Steve Jobs said that Blu-ray was a bag of hurt in terms of licensing, he was right. There is no central licensing authority. You have to run around to Sony, TDK, Microsoft, Sun, AACS, and so on to get licenses to all the different patents involved right now. And getting cleared by AACS is a total b*tch right now. You basically have to prove that the disc content remains encrypted from disc to display, and that your software is resistant to cracks and has no known vulnerabilities before they will give you the license and key to operate the software to playback the discs. It... is... a... mess. DVD was never this bad in terms of restrictions, patents, license issues, but even it had problems taking off in manufacturing until a central license authority was setup in the late 90s.
By contrast, Apple jumped on-board MPEG-4 right off the bat because of the dead-simple licensing scheme. X cents per encoder, X cents per decoder, paid to a central licensing authority, with a cap of X million dollars per year. By using it everywhere, Apple just pays the cap price every year.
In all seriousness, this is one decision I agree with: Don't get sucked into the patent hell that Blu-ray currently is. I like the technology, but the reality behind it is one that isn't very friendly to companies wanting to include it into their hardware unless they are already patent owners on it.
As for the rest of it... don't upgrade then. Seriously. Everyone on here is screaming that Apple forces them to upgrade by dragging them along. People on this board are still running Tiger, my family still runs Tiger. If they can do it, so can you.
You are correct these are old pictures from the wwdc build the latest build is 10A222 and was released to us ADC members on Dec 2/ 08 thats all i can tell you...... if you look at the prefpanes there is a new energy saver icon,this build still has the old one......
They'll show some benchmarks that show how much faster Snow Leopard is, maybe some visual demos if there are dramatic differences (like, 2-3x). They'll talk a little bit about 64-bit and how far they are ahead of Microsoft. It'll be short, but the numbers they'll throw at you will make you agree that this was a good move.
I can't wait. My BlackBook is a little under-powered as it is! Anything more I can extract from it is great.
This story isn't particularly newsworthy, apple has told us all along that there will be little if any visible changes.
So is there any new info on whether 10.6 will be intel only or support PPC?
Hasn't this been debunked? The files are smaller not from optimization, but simply because they don't include all the many foreign language versions? And if that's the case, the sizes will go right back up for the release version. Nothing particularly amazing at all once you find out why they are smaller.
Apps like FC and Logic are the ones that most desperately need to move to 64 bit, but the rumors say the Logic team is fighting a 64 bit move tooth and nail. I hope Apple finally forces them to get their act together and make the switch, I'm sick of the lame memory limitations in Logic (and the hacks they've tried to get around the memory limit aren't good enough).
So is there any new info on whether 10.6 will be intel only or support PPC?
Hasn't this been debunked? The files are smaller not from optimization, but simply because they don't include all the many foreign language versions? And if that's the case, the sizes will go right back up for the release version. Nothing particularly amazing at all once you find out why they are smaller.
Apps like FC and Logic are the ones that most desperately need to move to 64 bit, but the rumors say the Logic team is fighting a 64 bit move tooth and nail. I hope Apple finally forces them to get their act together and make the switch, I'm sick of the lame memory limitations in Logic (and the hacks they've tried to get around the memory limit aren't good enough).
Exactly! I see NO reason to upgrade to Snow Leopard, ESPECIALLY if it costs $130 like other updates.
I understand that Snow Leopard will be great for computer programmers. However I'm not a computer programmer.
Sorry, but so far I haven't seen even remotely something in SL that I would want to buy. Leopard works just fine for me!
What? When Apple gives something to programmers, it's not just FOR the programmers. It allows the "programmers" to write better Apps and optimize their apps to run faster and more efficient... the "user" would need to have Snow Leopard installed to use these new updated apps (most likely). So, go ahead... don't upgrade, but you'll miss out on the cool stuff that follows Snow Leopard. There's already a ton of apps that ONLY work on Leopard and not Tiger.
Highly doubtful!
At the most you can expect that apps that aren't currently Cocao will be. This is actually a major update in and of itself but for some will be required. Here I'm thinking finder (all ready rumored) and things like iTunes. These apps will transition to the new 64 bit libraries and features but may not have a lot of new capabilities beyound that.
From what I know right now this should be looked at as a transitional release. That is a platform upon which Apple and the other developers can deliver next generation software on. If everything comes together as it appears that Apple wants, SL will be a very interesting platform for developers. In a very true sense a next generation platform.
Dave
I'm sure there might be a surprise or two but nothing really major. The problem is this, while being undersold by Apple the changes coming in Snow Leopard are rather major. Apple will want to minimize the changes visible to the users to stabilize the release. In other words expect SL to be a bit buggy and needing a service release or two to firm up. You would not want to make major changes to your apps when the whole OS and the libraries those apps are built against are going through a major change.
At the most you can expect that apps that aren't currently Cocao will be. This is actually a major update in and of itself but for some will be required. Here I'm thinking finder (all ready rumored) and things like iTunes. These apps will transition to the new 64 bit libraries and features but may not have a lot of new capabilities beyound that.
From what I know right now this should be looked at as a transitional release. That is a platform upon which Apple and the other developers can deliver next generation software on. If everything comes together as it appears that Apple wants, SL will be a very interesting platform for developers. In a very true sense a next generation platform.
Dave
Let's get back on thread... after this.
I, too, am looking forward to the under-the-hood changes as well as Exchange support. While I like Entourage, I don't like it nearly as much as Mail or iCal. Having the ability to have a nice UI to talk to the Exchange Server at work will be much better. And I can't wait to see the performance on my 1-month old MBP.
I, too, am looking forward to the under-the-hood changes as well as Exchange support. While I like Entourage, I don't like it nearly as much as Mail or iCal. Having the ability to have a nice UI to talk to the Exchange Server at work will be much better. And I can't wait to see the performance on my 1-month old MBP.
Yeah it is for programmers, but they deliver apps you will use!
SL will provide for more interesting and potentially faster apps. This in a nut schell is the reason for the common user to update. There is also talk about SL itself being a faster OS. Now all of this is great but I don't expect all these benefits to arrive for the user right a way. Rather I would expect updated apps to arrive continously over the months and weeks after SL is first released. So for the common user a instantaneous jump to SL isn't required and may not even be a good idea, especially if stable performance is wanted. Hopefully by 10.6.2 SL will be stable enough that you and most users will want to have it installed.
What I'm saying is that SL could/will be very attractive to users once it is stable and has the right selection of user apps. Some things ought to run a lot faster on modern hardware.
Which brings up the final consideration. There is a huge open question as to what hardware will actually benefit from SL. For many it might never be worthwhile to update. It will pay to wait for and understand the details.
Which is fine. Think of SL as an enabler for new apps, new performance levels and new library features. How soon all those features get delivered into software you actually use is an open question. All I reccomend is keeping an open mind.
Dave
Well we don't know how much it will cost. Apple could very well lower the cost for any number of reasons.
I'm not all that certain it will be great for programmers, many will have to work a lot harder to benefit from it. In any event it is the wrong attitude to have as a user.
SL will provide for more interesting and potentially faster apps. This in a nut schell is the reason for the common user to update. There is also talk about SL itself being a faster OS. Now all of this is great but I don't expect all these benefits to arrive for the user right a way. Rather I would expect updated apps to arrive continously over the months and weeks after SL is first released. So for the common user a instantaneous jump to SL isn't required and may not even be a good idea, especially if stable performance is wanted. Hopefully by 10.6.2 SL will be stable enough that you and most users will want to have it installed.
What I'm saying is that SL could/will be very attractive to users once it is stable and has the right selection of user apps. Some things ought to run a lot faster on modern hardware.
Which brings up the final consideration. There is a huge open question as to what hardware will actually benefit from SL. For many it might never be worthwhile to update. It will pay to wait for and understand the details.
Which is fine. Think of SL as an enabler for new apps, new performance levels and new library features. How soon all those features get delivered into software you actually use is an open question. All I reccomend is keeping an open mind.
Dave
SL looks ok - I wish the desktop and finder would resemble the iPhone interface a little more, with the black glass look and all. With the Finder rewrite, I hope to see options in system preferences to make it more functional like Path Finder. Clearly, a ZFS update would be nice! I don't think they will deploy that with the GUI until 10.7 or 10.8. That's server only from the command line until then...
Indeed, apart from the technical aspects of the 64 bit OS, there are still a lot of rough edges left in Leopard that are in need of being cleaned up. My experience with Leopard has yet to match that of Tiger as far as stability and trouble free operation is concerned. Leopard has gotten better in the last few dot x updates, but I would much rather see Snow Leopard be polished up from the start that get a little more eye candy.
If you are a developer you should know better!
The problem is this, not all apps translate well to highly parallel environments. More importantly not all programmers have the required skills. Apple is providing tools for the programmer to leverage but like a hammer many will end up with sore thumbs coming to grips with it's usage. SO might actually force some programmers into early retirement, a rubber room or a trip to the south seas.
Yes it does but to the best of my knowledge it is not OpenCL compliant. In any event the important thing with Mobile OS is that it continues to expand to better support a new generation of devices. The most important thing here is solid support for background apps / multitasking, hopefully in a way that doesn't impact foreground app usability.
Right now that is one of iPhone's greatest weaknesses. I understand why background apps are not there but that doesn't mean I like it. Further I'm not sure that OpenCL would improve performance enough to provide for good multitasking. It looks like a whole new generation of iPhone is required.
Dave
That is so misleading as to be disgusting. For a GPU to work with OpenCL it has to be compatible. Even at that for a compatible GPU to help significantly it needs to have enough execution units free to accelerate an app. So even if an older GPU is OpenCSl compatible it may not significantly accelerate specific apps.
For the right sort of app sure, you will get what was once supercomputer performance, but not on all apps.
The problem is this, not all apps translate well to highly parallel environments. More importantly not all programmers have the required skills. Apple is providing tools for the programmer to leverage but like a hammer many will end up with sore thumbs coming to grips with it's usage. SO might actually force some programmers into early retirement, a rubber room or a trip to the south seas.
I'm sure it will as some of what is going into SL is coming back from the iPhone. Most of the advantages of SL though will require a new generation of ARM hardware with OpenCL compliant GPUs and hopefully multiple CPUs. IPhone certainly needs upgrades and true multitasking, unfortunately the current platform can't handle that.
Yes it does but to the best of my knowledge it is not OpenCL compliant. In any event the important thing with Mobile OS is that it continues to expand to better support a new generation of devices. The most important thing here is solid support for background apps / multitasking, hopefully in a way that doesn't impact foreground app usability.
Right now that is one of iPhone's greatest weaknesses. I understand why background apps are not there but that doesn't mean I like it. Further I'm not sure that OpenCL would improve performance enough to provide for good multitasking. It looks like a whole new generation of iPhone is required.
Dave
I think you have this backwards. As I see it, the idea is to enable the OS to take advantage of the performance capability of the hardware so that application developers don't have to code to a particular HW configuration.
It probably is the case that the real benefits from Snow Leopard's new OS technologies will not be seen until a future generation of multi- (i.e., more than 2) processor systems.
Required reading below!
Thanks for putting this info out there. People need to know whatbsort of sleaze balls they are dealing with each time they buy a BluRay disk! In the past I've tried to highlight some of the issues but you have put a far better twist on it! For that I thank you.
People who go about buy BluRay movies should be seen as traitors and treated as such. I know some will whine that that is an excessive characterization but think about it folks you are burning up your long standing rights for the ability to view a movie a couple of times.
Right now the only solution I see open to Apple would be a hardware pipeline that can't be seen by the OS. Even then you have problems supporting normal OS features on your system windows. I just don't see an option available to Apple that doesn't involve hardware, maybe that is what PA Semi is up to.
The biggest problem I've seen with Apples approach is that you still have to store those files someplace. Depending on the conversion quality and length they can be large. The answer here seems to be the downward spiral in flash prices. A Compact Flash or SDHC card can now easily handle backups.
Dave
Thanks for putting this info out there. People need to know whatbsort of sleaze balls they are dealing with each time they buy a BluRay disk! In the past I've tried to highlight some of the issues but you have put a far better twist on it! For that I thank you.
I would extend that to say that they are trying to get a return in a very un American way. In effect they are trying to wipe out rights that we as Americans have had, under copyright law, for more than 200 years.
People who go about buy BluRay movies should be seen as traitors and treated as such. I know some will whine that that is an excessive characterization but think about it folks you are burning up your long standing rights for the ability to view a movie a couple of times.
People need to digest the above. Having such a hamstrung system would not be good for Apple especially if the are in the content creation business. Further some of the crap in the latest MS operating systems is there because of the requirements alluded to above. Signing up for BluRay, at this point, just means Apple would have to crap up it's OS too.
Right now the only solution I see open to Apple would be a hardware pipeline that can't be seen by the OS. Even then you have problems supporting normal OS features on your system windows. I just don't see an option available to Apple that doesn't involve hardware, maybe that is what PA Semi is up to.
More importantly the technology is very competitive with BluRay.
The biggest problem I've seen with Apples approach is that you still have to store those files someplace. Depending on the conversion quality and length they can be large. The answer here seems to be the downward spiral in flash prices. A Compact Flash or SDHC card can now easily handle backups.
More importantly it is not at all friendly for the consumer. The attitude of Sony seems to be the worst of the bunch with respect to the consumer, they really blew it with the restrictions put on PlayStation 3 which got locked down so tight that even Linux wasn't as usable as it could have been.
This is also good advice. More so to really benefit from SL you would need to have newer hardware that supports OpenCL and has at least dual processors. For a lot of people SL will be the start of their hardware becoming obsolete. Mostly due to not being able to effectively run a new generation of software. The good news is that it could be years before we see something dramatic enough that people will feel compelled to buy new hardware.As for the rest of it... don't upgrade then. Seriously. Everyone on here is screaming that Apple forces them to upgrade by dragging them along. People on this board are still running Tiger, my family still runs Tiger. If they can do it, so can you.
Dave
A new generation of SOFTWARE!
The only problem here is your performance metric. Just because you have this nice dual core machine with an OpenCL compatible GPU does not imply that you will have an acceptable level of performance. It will be interesting to see how Apple and the software companies address this. Specifing the GPU itself might not work anymore due to the interaction of the GPU and CPU that OpenCL enables.
You won't see a huge benefit until a new generation of software is built for SL. SL won't benefit an app that has never been designed for parallel processing. The only exception here being if it can benefit from libraries that are optimized. SL will benefit multithreaded apps but again how much over the current environment is an open question. I still maintain that for apps to truly leverage SL they will have to be rewriten.
Given that that is done and the app is one of those that can really benefit from parallelbl execution of threads or the special characteristics of a GPU we might see a speed up on more advance hardware. The thing is a lot of current hardware can provide this sort of speed up too.
Dave
That is the way many are hoping it works out. Ideally the need to specify a specific GPU goes out the window.
The only problem here is your performance metric. Just because you have this nice dual core machine with an OpenCL compatible GPU does not imply that you will have an acceptable level of performance. It will be interesting to see how Apple and the software companies address this. Specifing the GPU itself might not work anymore due to the interaction of the GPU and CPU that OpenCL enables.
You won't see a huge benefit until a new generation of software is built for SL. SL won't benefit an app that has never been designed for parallel processing. The only exception here being if it can benefit from libraries that are optimized. SL will benefit multithreaded apps but again how much over the current environment is an open question. I still maintain that for apps to truly leverage SL they will have to be rewriten.
Given that that is done and the app is one of those that can really benefit from parallelbl execution of threads or the special characteristics of a GPU we might see a speed up on more advance hardware. The thing is a lot of current hardware can provide this sort of speed up too.
Dave
Sigh.
There's the dividing line between the personality cult Mac users and those of us who are just in it for the cool new things Apple will unveil. I don't care who does it. I'm not that interested in the presenter--although personally, I don't see Phil's stage presence as any particular detriment with it comes to showing off Apple's new stuff. In fact, it will be nice to see the buzz afterward without having to hear the anti-Apple crowd blather on about how it's all just Steve Jobs and his skill with winning over crowds.