Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by bosrs1, Apr 6, 2005.
Now that it's looking like Longhorn won't bow until 2007 do you think 10.5 will beat it to market?
I think Apple said after Tiger they were slowing down their releases, so it's hard to say... If Apple is slowing down, maybe it'll be XI or 11 and not 10.5. I wonder if the G5 will be up to 3 GHz by then
That's right. I remember Apple saying around WWDC 2004 that they are going to slow 'er down a bit.
Maybe that is why are getting "over 200 features" this time instead of just "over 150 features"
By the way, is the list of all the new features out yet? Or will we not get that list until the release?
Eh, probably not
Let's look at the release schedule of the various OS X releases, shall we?
10.0: March, 2001
10.1: September 29, 2001
10.2: August 24, 2002
10.3: October 24, 2003
10.4: April 15, 2005 (?)
This shows the time between each release as getting longer and longer. In particular,
10.0 -> 10.1: 6 months.
10.1 -> 10.2: 11 months.
10.2 -> 10.3: 14 months.
10.3 -> 10.4: 16 months.
Assuming the trend continues, that puts the release of 10.5 about 18 months from now, or October 2007. I'm willing to bet Microsoft launches Longhorn before then.
Assuming you're right 10.5 will just be beat by Longhorn at this rate. And that's assuming they don't maintain a 16 month release schedule.
I think Apple might give it an extra push to get it out before Micro$oft (who, after Tiger is released, will probably push their new "OS" back even further as they will have fallen farther behind).
Apple said that Tiger is their final update to OS X for a while and they will be slowing down with upgrades.
Users of build 8A428 (supposedly the GM) claim that it feels like a stable, solid, final, and polished OS.
I think it's more likely that there will be a 24 months before we see 10.5.
You mean October 2006, right?
I understand your logic, but Apple has said in the past that it will slow down how fast they update their OS, so the usual interval between updates (about 14 months, excluding the time it took Apple to update 10.0) will probably extend to two years (my bet). I'd put money on Longhorn's release coming around six months before the next Mac OS. luckily, Longhorn will still suck
But its a bit more than a time line that creates the new releases. There will be hardware and software upgrades in a year from now that might require a new OS. Its hard to predict when it will happen and having MS say its going for 2007 now really doesn't mean much either since that's a long time from now. Plenty of things can go wrong...
Considering Fall 05 was their original target I don't think there is too much more that can go wrong.
I kind of like the idea of coming out after, but not by much--maybe a couple of months.
Sort of a "We see your Longhorn, and raise you an Elephant. OS Eleven: Introducing the next generation of Macintosh--Microsoft won't be here for another 7 years"
At the rate M$ is going, OS XI or 11 or whatever will be out before Longhorn is...
that is the most flawed logic i have ever seen...basically you are saying since 10.4 had a 2 month longer development time than 10.3, 10.5 will be 2 months longer than 10.4.
following your time line though, the total time between released is shrinking (first it was 5 months, then 3, then 2) so i don't understand where you get 2 from, according to your logic it should be < 1 month.
suffice to say, 10.5 will probably NOT beat longhorn.
I don't think 10.5 will be out by then, but it will deifnately be under development and info about it will be leaking out.
Would you be so kind to READ CmdrDghboy's post ? it seems like you didn't even read the first line.
Besides, Long-on-the-horn won't even compare against Tiger, it's basically a XP2 with more eye-candy since most promised enhancements have been pushed further... I know someday M$ lusers (pun intended) will refuse to pay to be M$ beta-testing guinea pigs (most of them have been doing just that for the last 14 years) hopefully most of them will switch to Linux and only the most intelligent or tech-savvy will engross the ranks of Mac.
Or maybe even 24 months. But I think from a profit view 18 months seems right.
As to Longhorn, it is anyones guess as to when decent code will be available. MS needs to bring to market an OS that does not need a SP to make it worth the consumers time.
Apple may do well in looking at OS XI to answer Longhorn after the Longhorn release IMO. Come out with something that will rock everyones boat!
You know what would be amusing? If Apple decided to release an x86 version of Tiger a week before Longhorn. Talking about taking a wind out of Msoft's sales. There would be so much press buzz around X on x86; you wouldn't hear the end of it for months. What would be even cooler is if Apple decided to give out Tiger on x86 for nothing. Free OS X!!! Then a month later, boom, release 10.5 for Macs to keep the Mac users happy. Six months later Apple can release 10.5 for x86 at the same price. Apple would get 9 months to year of continuous buzz. There'd be a fair number of converts to OS X for sure, especially after everyone discovers how disappointing Longhorn is.
In any event, Longhorn should make it in before 10.5. The last I heard, Msoft will release a beta this summer/fall with the aim of going final in the spring 2006. Tiger has a lot of fun toys to keep us busy for a while; I imagine Apple will take its time for the next one.
Puma really should have been labeled 10.0.5, since it was a maintenance upgrade to a dreadfully slow Cheetah. To have even called it Cheetah, when it was just painfully slow, was and still is a slap in the face to all cheetahs out there.
Where does it say longhorn is not coming until 2007. Everythign I been reading is 2006 and Microsoft seems pretty set on that.
Lornhorn SP1 will be in 2007
It's not from the horse's (MS) mouth, but apparently the tech industry is abuzz with the notions that it's going to be delayed.
Check out this article
Again, I'm not saying that the article is accurate, but at least it's probably the reason for this thread at any rate.
Depends on how you mean "beat out" Longhorn.
If you mean, will 10.5 be on the market before Longhorn--maybe not.
But as many others have already stated here, in one form or another---10.3 beats out Longhorn (or any other Microshaft OS) in terms of usability, stability, security...........and so on.
It's a nice thought and I hope it's true... But let's be fair and actually wait for Longhorn to be made before we decide what it is and isn't better than.
To be honest, I'm hoping that Microsoft does a reasonable job with Longhorn (unlikely, given the news during its development) since I am undoubtedly going to have to use it at work. While I hold out a small degree of hope that the Mac will make some inroads into the corporate market, my organisation has standardised on Microsoft and PCs, so it is unlikely that they would contemplate a move away in the short-/medium-term. As such, if I have to use Longhorn and it really is a turgid piece of crap then I won't be happy, even if the Mac looks better in comparison. I love using my Mac as much as possible but the corporate prison means that I have to use a PC for 8-hours a day, and I'd rather life wasn't a complete misery. Call me a selfish bastard...
Seems unlikely that Apple would manage to get another OS out the door before the next revision to Windows. I'm pretty sure that Microsoft must be highly aware of the growing discontent from the major manufacturers/resellers of PCs but this probably means that more features would be stripped in order to make a reasonable shipping date (i.e. late summer in time for the Christmas buying period). Ultimately, what will Longhorn actually deliver?
I mostly just read in thier if it was delayed again. I really dont think MS will delay it again. They are more than likely going to do what apple does for its OS now. Get it the best they can by that date. Then worry about patching it. XP is really at the end of an OS life cycle right now. It fine since it release but after 3 years a replacement needs to be out. XP will be 5 years old when it is replaces and that is really old for an OS. XP is alreayd starting to show its age in a lot of areas. SP2 gave XP enough life to make it to long horn but I dont think it can go much past thier. RIght now XP can not install on a SATA drive with out drivers loaded from a floppy on the install. (SATA did not existed when XP was released) A lot of stuff was patch and add to make it work better.
All in all XP will be really showing it age in 2006 and it will be in despart need of a replacement.