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.
Tiger: Not at all exciting.
- Thread starter johnnowak
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
TigerPRO said:
No, but just because Steve Jobs says something is "revolutionary" doesn't mean it is. Take Sherlock, it was one of the top 10 upgrades promoted about Jaguar... has it been mentioned since? No. The majority of the features available in each new release of Mac OS X are gimmicks used to promote that version's coolness factor.
Microsoft improves Windows with each Service Pack release. A lot of the speed, unix, and compatibility improvements could be released as something equivalent to a service pack instead of a new version of the Mac OS X.
I'm going to purchase Tiger, but besides dashboard, automator, spotlight, and .Mac sync what are the other 100 features of Tiger that were announced at WWDC? Apple's website doesn't list them.
joshuawaire said:
The majority of these are under the hood, which matters just as much as the "tangible" part of the software -
I have to agree with you on the part of the ichat video conf.
It more or less just a gimic and kind of useless because less than 3% of all computer out their can even use it or will be able to use it and it will stay that way until iChat or iChat video conf is ported over to windows. Just think about in a numbers game. A lot of people can video chat though AOL flaky interface and other IM programs and that only became more than a gimic when it the big IM programs started carring it and it was on windows.
As bad as it sounds apple needs to get the vidio conf thing over to windows so it gets out of the unless gimic stage since no one can really use it. (This is a pure numbers game and since macs are a drop in the bucket for computers out their you get the idea)
It more or less just a gimic and kind of useless because less than 3% of all computer out their can even use it or will be able to use it and it will stay that way until iChat or iChat video conf is ported over to windows. Just think about in a numbers game. A lot of people can video chat though AOL flaky interface and other IM programs and that only became more than a gimic when it the big IM programs started carring it and it was on windows.
As bad as it sounds apple needs to get the vidio conf thing over to windows so it gets out of the unless gimic stage since no one can really use it. (This is a pure numbers game and since macs are a drop in the bucket for computers out their you get the idea)
Timelessblur said:
iChat videochats with AOL IM 5.5 for Windows. So I don't know what your problem is there. If you have trouble setting it up, there are lots of helping threads on http://discussions.info.apple.com/ 's iChat forum.
gopher said:
Read my post again.
vidoe chat works m I stated that. vidoe chat is you just have two computer involved, Video conf is 3 or more computers involved.
Video conferencing will not work on windows computers. That was the part that that I stated need to be ported over other wise it just a gimic and more or less a useless gimic in Tiger because you will not be able to use it with 97% of the computers out there. Until Video conferencing is can be used with the major IM clients it stays just a gimic.
NaMo4184 said:What are you talking about... speed improvments are introduced through "service packs" in os x. those updates aren't just for show. i guess apple should wait 2 years to release every 10.3.x update for it to matter.
Many mac users will upgrade to Tiger for the expected speed improvements. Those improvements could be provided as a 10.3.X update or service pack update to Mac OS 10.3.
gopher said:
Not a major clinit until a major clinet
and until a major clinet yahoo, MSN, AIM picks it up and until it hits free mode
Also iChat does not tie into that network so that not it.
That program is just a gimic program same as iChat video conf.
Apple never said nore implied that 10.4 is a brand new operating system. believe it or not it is based on panther which was based on jaguar which was based on ect... So really tiger is the same OS but better. There is a line that is drawn when you are introducing some speed improvments and when you are doing a major upgrade.joshuawaire said:
joshuawaire said:
Or they'll wait until they see all the downloadable software for Mac OS X start saying "Mac OS X 10.4 required" or "These features require Mac OS X 10.4." I don't know what changed between 10.2 and 10.3 but Adium X was only able to have nifty graphical message views with 10.3 and Proteus became a 10.3 application. Maybe in 10.4, Adium X will have animated message views that have avatars that move and talk when you type and message, or maybe a theme that mimics the old Centepede arcade game and the centepede marches across the screen and the little gunpod thing shoots it and turns it into letters. And maybe with Core Image, developers will figure out how to create animated program launches that make it look like the desktop was liquid and the applications surfaced up from behind the desktop or were dropped down on top of it and rippled and stuff as they loaded. I doubt it will happen, but you never know what is possible until you find out what you have and how you can push it as far as you can go.
The thing is, I don't think a list of all the under-the-hood improvements can be easily listed and 'sold' to the consumer. And even if they did, it isn't until these under-the-hood improvements are utilized by programers and demonstrated can you really appreciate what it does.
Does anybody know what the exact improvement to the Panther code that allowed Adium X to utilize more graphical message views is called?
joshuawaire said:
That's partially true. But it's not because the features aren't revolutionary, it's only because they are short lived. I think sherlock is just as cool as it had always been. Only it's too bad not that many people are developing for it. That doesn't mean it was a bad idea.
joshuawaire said:
That's up for debate.
joshuawaire said:
Allot of people missunderstand what these features are. There are of course the cornerstone features like dashboard, core image, core video, core data, spotlight, .mac sync, and automator. But they are only the most noticed because they are entirely new things. Most of the other 100 or so features aren't "completely new features", they are "added features". To me these features would include new check boxes and options in system preferences, more useful commands in the menu bars, and other additional functions through various OS X bundled applications.
On top of those, you also have "features" such as enhanced speed, stability, and compadability with new and old technologies. So when you see "Tiger has 200 new features", you can't be looking for 200 news features on the same caliber as dashboard and spotlight. But it's the combination of all these minor enhancements that makes Tiger so revolutionary; not the individual tweaks themselves.
Hey all.
Some good points here and there. Quicktime IS going to be very cool, but as a few of us have pointed out, Linux users won't be enjoying the new technology. I work with a lot of artists who use Linux, and because Apple refuses to support the platform, I cannot make use of the new features either.
Yes, I realize Dashboard lets you do things via HTML/CSS/Javascript. My point is, I have yet to see good widgets that would make it useful to me. Yes, I can have a calculator on my screen in 1 second. However, I can use Quicksilver and have a fully-fledged graphing calculator on my screen in 2 seconds. It is the same for most other things.
I was unaware that Safari is twice as fast... although somehow I doubt that. There is no way that everything is twice as fast as some people here are claiming. I do not think I will now be able to render twice as many frames of video per second. Most likely, I will not notice any difference at all. Yes, they may make OpenGL faster... but that's only because it is so non-optimal to begin with. Yes, the OS may become more responsive... but only because it can be so slow currently. I can run something like Gnome now and everything is very snappy without any hardware acceleration (although you can use it with Gnome as well if your hardware supports it). It is nice that iChat will work with other systems, but it is still lacking many important features.
Xcode 2.0 ... I have to agree with an earlier post that it highlights everything that is wrong with contemporary computer programming. As someone who mainly uses Scheme and dataflow languages, it is no real use to me anyway. Besides, I do not want to write code that will only be useful to a fraction of the people I'd like to share my work with. I need a fully cross-platform solution.
As for those who say Linux sucks... try upgrading your entire system, every single application, library, etc, all with one command. Try getting just about any program you'd ever need for free with one command. Try never having to pay for any software again. You'll soon see, that while Gnome/KDE/etc aren't quite up to par yet, it is a brilliant concept. Within two years, open source desktop environments will likely be right up there with OS X, and they'll have all the advantages I mentioned above to boot. Unless you are in a special circumstance (which I am unfortunately, although I'm working on the transition), or you really love to run commercial games (Fallout 3 please!), there will be little reason not to switch to Linux. Actually, in that last case, you're far better off with Windows anyway. Most 3D games run faster, and there is a much larger variety of software. Yes, I know we get probably more than half of the major titles (a year late), but if you love games that are a bit off the beaten path, such as some of the great turn based RPGs available for Windows (RIP Troika), it can be annoying...
Some good points here and there. Quicktime IS going to be very cool, but as a few of us have pointed out, Linux users won't be enjoying the new technology. I work with a lot of artists who use Linux, and because Apple refuses to support the platform, I cannot make use of the new features either.
Yes, I realize Dashboard lets you do things via HTML/CSS/Javascript. My point is, I have yet to see good widgets that would make it useful to me. Yes, I can have a calculator on my screen in 1 second. However, I can use Quicksilver and have a fully-fledged graphing calculator on my screen in 2 seconds. It is the same for most other things.
I was unaware that Safari is twice as fast... although somehow I doubt that. There is no way that everything is twice as fast as some people here are claiming. I do not think I will now be able to render twice as many frames of video per second. Most likely, I will not notice any difference at all. Yes, they may make OpenGL faster... but that's only because it is so non-optimal to begin with. Yes, the OS may become more responsive... but only because it can be so slow currently. I can run something like Gnome now and everything is very snappy without any hardware acceleration (although you can use it with Gnome as well if your hardware supports it). It is nice that iChat will work with other systems, but it is still lacking many important features.
Xcode 2.0 ... I have to agree with an earlier post that it highlights everything that is wrong with contemporary computer programming. As someone who mainly uses Scheme and dataflow languages, it is no real use to me anyway. Besides, I do not want to write code that will only be useful to a fraction of the people I'd like to share my work with. I need a fully cross-platform solution.
As for those who say Linux sucks... try upgrading your entire system, every single application, library, etc, all with one command. Try getting just about any program you'd ever need for free with one command. Try never having to pay for any software again. You'll soon see, that while Gnome/KDE/etc aren't quite up to par yet, it is a brilliant concept. Within two years, open source desktop environments will likely be right up there with OS X, and they'll have all the advantages I mentioned above to boot. Unless you are in a special circumstance (which I am unfortunately, although I'm working on the transition), or you really love to run commercial games (Fallout 3 please!), there will be little reason not to switch to Linux. Actually, in that last case, you're far better off with Windows anyway. Most 3D games run faster, and there is a much larger variety of software. Yes, I know we get probably more than half of the major titles (a year late), but if you love games that are a bit off the beaten path, such as some of the great turn based RPGs available for Windows (RIP Troika), it can be annoying...
johnnowak said:
In two years it will have been five years since OS X has had an OpenGL accelerated interface. Five years is a very long time in the technology industry; I'm sure you know that. Linux is farther behind than you realize. After another two years when Linux is boasting about finally implementing this, it will just be something else. The power and innovative steam engine of comercial software (under proper management) just can't be matched by hobbiest open source hackers. This isn't true in all areas, but the fact of the matter is, the open source communuty will never never produce something to match Final Cut Pro, Lightwave, or Photoshop. They come close, but the sheer strength and weight just isn't always there.
On one hand though, Linux and Apple aren't even in the same ball game. Because Apple fully develops their hardware, software, and OS. The advantage of that kind of seemless integration is a gem not to be found elsewhere. Linux will always plagged with device driver problems, hardware support, and software compadabilty simply because it's not commerical.
But hey, I agree with you about all the free applications. I was impressed with all the high quality programs that came bundled with this one distro I tried out on a wintel box. I also find linux to be much more flexible and customizable. But part of the trade off is the OS is very cluttered. At the same time though, it's nice having features there, even though only 5% of the user base will be taking advantage of them.
johnnowak said:
I'll take that bet. You say in two years Linux desktop would have caught up with OS X. I say it will be even further behind. If we are still both on this forum in two years, I will say "I told you so."
In two years it will have been five years since OS X has had an OpenGL accelerated interface. Five years is a very long time in the technology industry; I'm sure you know that. Linux is farther behind than you realize. After another two years when Linux is boasting about finally implementing this, it will just be something else.
And Linux will likely have a vector-based accelerated GUI before OS X does. What's your point? Gnome still feels faster than OS X as it is anyway... and the difference was much larger five years ago. You know as well as I do that OS X's interface was so slow as to be almost painful five years ago. This comparison isn't valid.
The power and innovative steam engine of comercial software (under proper management) just can't be matched by hobbiest open source hackers.
Ah, the good old "Capitalism is the way to innovation" argument. You can just as easily argue the other way you know...
Linux will always plagged with device driver problems, hardware support, and software compadabilty simply because it's not commerical.
Funny, I've never had these issues, even when using much less popular, PPC versions of Linux.
I also find linux to be much more flexible and customizable. But part of the trade off is the OS is very cluttered.
How so?
At the same time though, it's nice having features there, even though only 5% of the user base will be taking advantage of them.
Same way only 5% of the people are taking advantage of Final Cut Pro, Lightwave, etc... You do know Maya is out for Linux, yes?
And Linux will likely have a vector-based accelerated GUI before OS X does. What's your point? Gnome still feels faster than OS X as it is anyway... and the difference was much larger five years ago. You know as well as I do that OS X's interface was so slow as to be almost painful five years ago. This comparison isn't valid.
The power and innovative steam engine of comercial software (under proper management) just can't be matched by hobbiest open source hackers.
Ah, the good old "Capitalism is the way to innovation" argument. You can just as easily argue the other way you know...
Linux will always plagged with device driver problems, hardware support, and software compadabilty simply because it's not commerical.
Funny, I've never had these issues, even when using much less popular, PPC versions of Linux.
I also find linux to be much more flexible and customizable. But part of the trade off is the OS is very cluttered.
How so?
At the same time though, it's nice having features there, even though only 5% of the user base will be taking advantage of them.
Same way only 5% of the people are taking advantage of Final Cut Pro, Lightwave, etc... You do know Maya is out for Linux, yes?
broken_keyboard said:I'll take that bet. You say in two years Linux desktop would have caught up with OS X. I say it will be even further behind. If we are still both on this forum in two years, I will say "I told you so."
You'll probably forget to do that. You better add an event notification to iCal for 2007 so you remember. lol.
johnnowak said:
My point is just that Apple will have been pioneering this technology for over half a decade before Linux even gets started. I wasn't around for those early days of Mac OS X, but I can believe you about the slowness factor. I'm not sure quite what causes the choppy window resizing for example. At least moving windows is as smooth as glass. It's my tendency though to believe that the resizing problem isn't related to the OpenGL accelerated interface factor.
johnnowak said:
Well do keep in mind I provided you with three stellar, irrebukable examples of this: Photoshop, Lightwave, and Final Cut Pro. Gimp is good, blender is good, and I don't think there is even anything like those for video, but they'll never replace these real tools in Hollywood.
Well I'm glad none of these haven't affected you, but I'm sure you've heard of all the issues with ATI video cards and Wi-Fi adapters for example.
Ok longhorn will have vector base tech in it just FYI
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_4051_03_presentation.asp
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_4051_03_presentation.asp
Does Tiger gives us better firewall control and anything like LittleSnitch to control out going programs?
