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

Snow Leopard to Get Cocoa Finder and ImageBoot

As long as Snow Leopard keeps backward compatibility to all the apps I just bought or downloaded this year (and not like how Vista is not backward compatible), I will be happy.. I bought a macbook in april, a mini in August, and all new apps to get rid of what I was doing in MS (well, except where MS had better, or the app did not have an OSX version - which is why I still have 5 software packages running on XP in parallels).

So, I am out about $3,500 or so for my entire platform conversion.

I can't afford to replace everything if I want to speed up my systems using Snow Leopard.
 
synth3tik said:
All this take about the Mac OS finder really makes me miss OS 9.2.2:(

Sadly I disagree that Apple will get it right. 10.6 will almost certainly be broken.
Click to expand...

See, I'm not the only one that misses it. I've always thought that they went backwards with OS X Finder. So bring it back with the new look and feel of Cocoa. :(

It's hard to improve perfection and OS 9 finder was the ultimate finder and perfect in every way.
 
illegallydead said:
iMovie is (and was) very much designed for amateurs.
Click to expand...
I agree. If they had made it a stand-alone application and called it iTube and taken care of a few bugs in iMovie, that would have been fine. But you missed my point regarding screwing Plugin companies and those that invested heavily in these plugins.

I myself have no problem with FinalCut, since I have it. However, it has a steep learning curve and iMovie was fantastic for a quick edit or the average Prosumer.

In regard to your edit, yes, you can still download iMovie HD, but that is like downloading OS9. Without improvement and abandoned by Apple, what's the use? It's a dead application that just happens to still work.
 
shervieux said:
I like virtual machines better as all I have to do it trash a virtual machine hard disk and reload it with an image, should something mess up, yet my main OS installation stays clean - that is great for development.
Click to expand...
Virtual machines are great, but they conflict with Blu-ray support. The movie studios don't like VMs because they're worried you can use VMs to break their DRM.
 
bigwig said:
Virtual machines are great, but they conflict with Blu-ray support. The movie studios don't like VMs because they're worried you can use VMs to break their DRM.
Click to expand...
Eh? That seems odd to me. I fail to understand how virtual machines and optical disc DRM are at all related. :confused:
 
superted666 said:
Finder has seen little changes since its inception and is still likely based upon the code written when OSX wasnt apples main OS.
Carbon has since proved its self and become much more widely used, i suspect apple is using the knowledge it has built up to bring finder up to speed. The fact it has 64 bit support will mean it is faster on Intel 64bit processors.

Different frameworks can perform better when doing the same task i have found but i cant prove this.
Click to expand...

Yes, one framework can preform better but generally the effect is negligible.

Carbon is a framework based about C and C++ that exists solely for a company with a code for the Classic Mac OS who want to port to OS X.
It allows them to do so without a complete rewrite. Carbons days have always been numbered. It is to Apples credit that they carried on with it for so long. I find they usually throw an old technology out of the window and force Application producers to change with them. It should NOT be used by people who are writing an application from scratch as apple could pull the plug on carbon support at anytime leaving you with code that needs to be written again from the ground up if they wish to maintain the app.

The important part of this is the 64 bit support (which is what will bring the most speed increases) and possible low-level bugs fixes and additions not the fact that they are just changing the framework.
 
Would there be any performance advantage to a cocoa finder, or would it be aesthetic only?
 
The main advantage of a Cocoa Finder is plugins. Plugins for the Finder now are complicated beasts that have to be written in Carbon. But with a Cocoa Finder plugins will be easy to write and add nifty new features.
 
I think it should be free to existing leopard users, but a paid for release for earlier OS users. Its mostly a stability/performance thing, quite quickly released after leopard, with not too many new features. Certainly won't be the big seller that leopard was.

Almost what leopard shoudl have been in the first place, no?

I don't mind paying a small amount for it, but not full price and not 'slightly less' than full price.
 
I see apple gong down 2 roads of extremes here.

1. Give everyone an easy out-of-the-box system that most consumers can use at day 1, and would probably not add anything too...

2. Have expensive complex applications and computer designs for those needing a professional system.

So you are either a newb/end consumer or an ultra professional. No more in between, not quite professional but a serious hobbyist who is not quite a newb that needs something with a just a little more kick.

Maybe that is what the new laptop line is narrowed down. I think the only reason Steve kept the 17' mbp and the white plastic macbook is so the inbetween types will have machine to hold them over until the 2 extremes are complete.

Look at it this way - the new macbooks, more definately not a professional machine.

the new macbook pros - very expensive and still has FW.
 
How about if they incorporated Apple Remote Desktop into the new Cocoa Finder and make it FREE!!!. :eek:
 
mrklaw said:
I think it should be free to existing leopard users, but a paid for release for earlier OS users. Its mostly a stability/performance thing, quite quickly released after leopard, with not too many new features. Certainly won't be the big seller that leopard was.

Almost what leopard shoudl have been in the first place, no?

I don't mind paying a small amount for it, but not full price and not 'slightly less' than full price.
Click to expand...

really? you wouldn't pay for an OS that could potentially more than double your computers performance. Features are not always everything. What good is a feature if it is on a system so unstable and slow it crashes half the time?
 
Run windows vista, linux, and solaris all on a Mac OS X with VirtualBox for free :D
Then you can compare everyone's FINDERS!

http://www.virtualbox.org/
 

Attachments

  • VirtualBox_OSX_beta_3.png
    VirtualBox_OSX_beta_3.png
    342.1 KB · Views: 217
mrklaw said:
I think it should be free to existing leopard users, but a paid for release for earlier OS users. Its mostly a stability/performance thing, quite quickly released after leopard, with not too many new features. Certainly won't be the big seller that leopard was.

Almost what leopard shoudl have been in the first place, no?

I don't mind paying a small amount for it, but not full price and not 'slightly less' than full price.
Click to expand...

it depends, because i think they say it is a update from leopard, but if they add in alot of features then i can see it being a paid next update OS
 
jlamb0 said:
Would there be any performance advantage to a cocoa finder, or would it be aesthetic only?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't really be aesthetic - the APIs use the same UI - there may be a few new whizzy Core Animation actions added though.

There will be a performance increase if you have a 64-bit processor but this will be because they can use the 64-bit support in the framework to access the new power and not specifically because they are using the newer API
 
illegallydead said:
$89 sure would be nice, seeing as it doesn't introduce loads of new features.

However, :apple: knows people will pay $129 happily (especially if it does what all it claims in terms of stability and streamlining), so, knowing :apple:, they will not miss out on that $40 of profit if they can help it.

Here's hoping they do make it cheaper though :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Yeah, Yeah...but will it support Firewire???:D
 
chaosconan said:
Run windows vista, linux, and solaris all on a Mac OS X with VirtualBox for free :D
Then you can compare everyone's FINDERS!

http://www.virtualbox.org/
Click to expand...

How well does it handle USB? my problem is my livescribe pen does not work under parallels and the OSX version is still 2+ months away. also, Parallel, VMS, and Crossover collide with each other, can I have vitual box with one of those?
 
shervieux said:
How well does it handle USB? my problem is my livescribe pen does not work under parallels and the OSX version is still 2+ months away. also, Parallel, VMS, and Crossover collide with each other, can I have vitual box with one of those?
Click to expand...

Good question. It does support USB but I have not tested it. Whether it works with other virtual software. I dont know. Again no testing on my part.
I just found it and started playing with it. It's working so far.

Why don't you try it. I will try to test my western digital Passport 320 GB :D and see if the virtual vista recognizes it.
 
I hope Snow Leopard is completely, fully 64-bit Cocoa :D Also hope the re-written apps will get some new features... Like Finder tabs. And a new(ish) UI. No aqua! I like aqua, it looks nice, but it's too distracting.
 
xVeinx said:
There are major advances coming in Snow Leopard. First, it's becoming 64bit, which is a fairly large jump from it's 32bit origins. Secondly, it's being designed to be more multithreaded, meaning the entire kernel has to be rebuilt to allow for better performance of not only the OS, but other apps. Support for GPU acceleration is also in the works, along with new disk formats, better support for SSDs, etc. So, there is a lot under the hood being re-coded, re-designed, etc. While there will be performance enhancements, what Snow Leopard does is give Apple a new and improved foundation to build off of. I'm not sure how much time is being put into the GUI and related changes, but the under girding has the potential of being truly impressive.

For the person who mentioned opensolaris, I still maintain my stance the Apple is gaining a lot of advice and help from Sun Microsystems regarding OS X. From ZFS and multithreading support, etc. Solaris really is a great OS, and I wouldn't be surprised to see more and more overlap of features and functionality between the two. This is NOT to say that Apple is stealing code, etc. but just to say that I think the feature set and vision that Sun has for solaris bears much similarity to that which Apple has for OS X.
Click to expand...

OSX is still 32bit? OMG...
 
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