Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:05 UTC
Apple Yesterday, Steve Jobs of Apple held his usual keynote speech at the Apple Worldwide Developer Conference at the Moscone Center, San Fransisco. I usually thoroughly enjoy Jobs's keynotes; they are a well-planned piece of theater, complete with drama, comedy, and even action. In between, of course, some new products are announced, and some meaningless figures are given (classic example of spin doctoring: use only the figures of your strongest market, in Apple's case, the US laptop market; ignore the rest). However, this time, the theater part seemed to far outweigh the new-products-part. And that's a shame. Note: The, Tuesday Eve Column.
Order by: Score:
Not just the OS
by peejay on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:24 UTC
peejay
Member since:
2005-06-29

Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers? ...However, this time, the theater part seemed to far outweigh the new-products-part.

Haven't you seen Microsoft's origami and zune stuff? That's pretty theatrical with not much product. ;)

Reply Score: 3

stuff
by REM2000 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:30 UTC
REM2000
Member since:
2006-07-25

yes the time machine system is very close to Volume Shadow Copying (MS), however the interface is a lot better, but yes a copy none the less.

However Steve never said that places was a new idea, he said it was new for the mac. I think everyone, including steve knows that linux with X11 has been doing this for years.

Reply Score: 5

RE: stuff (X11)
by sequethin on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:08 UTC in reply to "stuff"
sequethin Member since:
2005-07-06

...and I've been running fluxbox with virtual desktops via XDarwin since the day my powerbook was delivered..... I guess it's nice to have it with the main WM but still... this is something I've already been doing with mac os x. I would have preferred steve to say something like "we promise to help gimp and gnucash developers create native versions of their wonderful free applications so that sequethin (that's me) wont have to run X on his mac anymore!" ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: stuff
by kaiwai on Wed 9th Aug 2006 04:58 UTC in reply to "stuff"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

However Steve never said that places was a new idea, he said it was new for the mac. I think everyone, including steve knows that linux with X11 has been doing this for years.

How about NeXT Step? you think he ran the company for a couple of years without *knowing* that his flag ship operating system had that feature.

I'd say that a good number of features we see today existed in NeXT years ago, but without a nice consumer and hype friendly interface; Steve can now wheel out these NeXT features to an ignorant public; believe me, there are alot of ignorant programmers who don't actually have a clue what is happening in the IT world, and then pass these 'innovations' off as new features.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that; Steve Jobs is a show man, just like Bill Gates; both get up on stage and give their product the hard sell; its up to you the consumer to look behind the hype and ask yourself, "what does this new product do for me" before being yet another lemming to run off to the store and purchase a copy of the next wizz bang OS or office suite.

Reply Score: 1

Um
by Buck on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:31 UTC
Buck
Member since:
2005-06-29

The keynote's been overdiscussed recently, but I for one fear that these "top secret" features are actually just vapor, much like yesterday's announcement of "new features". Possibly a black-on-black interface, but... what else? People were expecting so much more and only got a few addons that could've been run on Tiger anyway. In fact, everything he demoed was just apps - it didn't relate to the core OS, everything but the pervasive 64-bitness. And new products? They were all totally expected, announced long before WWDC... This is a bit sad and uninspiring.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Um
by kittynipples on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:45 UTC in reply to "Um"
kittynipples Member since:
2006-08-02

Would your prefer the Microsoft approach of promising the world and then not being able to deliver? Apple typically takes the more cautious approach so they can over-deliver in the end.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Um
by TaterSalad on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Um"
TaterSalad Member since:
2005-07-06

Would your prefer the Microsoft approach of promising the world and then not being able to deliver?

To a degree, yes. Even though Microsoft may not deliver all the products, if they announce these products and what they can do they get the ideas out there then others can take the same idea and run with it and make a working copy. Now we can have a promised feature from a third party even if Microsoft couldn't deliver on it. This is all in theory of course, but is plausible.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Um
by lulin on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Um"
lulin Member since:
2006-04-08

Even though Microsoft may not deliver all the products, if they announce these products and what they can do they get the ideas out there then others can take the same idea and run with it and make a working copy. Now we can have a promised feature from a third party even if Microsoft couldn't deliver on it. This is all in theory of course, but is plausible.

This would be nice if Microsoft earned their money by delivering ideas, but they are supposed to deliver an operating system. Their ideas are usually not even new (Faster Search? 3D-Desktop?). Being sure about what will be in a new version of the OS and what's not is valuable, for business and developers.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Um
by Captain N on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:46 UTC in reply to "Um"
Captain N Member since:
2006-02-15

Yeah, I was a bit disappointed with the "new products" announced. But then again, this is a developers conference and I suppose they should only discuss things relating to developers... and a new iPod doesn't really fit into that category.

On the other hand, the "Top Secret" features in Leopard are interesting. Personally, I think they might be something relating to a mobile device. Think about it, Notes in Mail, a To-Do "service", standardized iCal format... they all sound like items finally implemented from the Newton OS.

Perhaps the "Top Secret" items include better handwriting recognition, a pen-based interface, etc.; all prepping for some kind of mobile version of Leopard like the tablet version of Windows XP... only done right.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Um
by steve_s on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:51 UTC in reply to "Um"
steve_s Member since:
2006-01-16

I can understand the fear that things are vapor, however Apple does have a very good track record at delivering on things that they have announced.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Um
by MikeGA on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Um"
MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

Except for "Home on iPod" of course ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Um
by BluenoseJake on Tue 8th Aug 2006 19:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Um"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Seeing as they didn't announce anything, then they can't lose

Reply Score: 1

RE: Um
by parrotjoe on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:27 UTC in reply to "Um"
parrotjoe Member since:
2005-07-06

I suppose a "secret" feature *could* be the long hoped for re-done Finder. I'm not holding my breath, but it sure would be a welcome surprise.

Reply Score: 3

it's called...
by kittynipples on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:32 UTC
kittynipples
Member since:
2006-08-02

wait for it... competative rivalry.

All of this whining about Apple's poking fun at Microsoft is getting old after just a day. Nobody truly believes that everything in Vista is a copy and everything in Leopard will be new (except for being new to the base OS X).

Reply Score: 2

RE: it's called...
by netpython on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:37 UTC in reply to "it's called..."
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

Nobody truly believes that everything in Vista is a copy and everything in Leopard will be new (except for being new to the base OS X).

Not really.I believe to much has been scrapped from Vista and OSX has become more appealing.No postponing just delivered.

Reply Score: 1

RE: it's called...
by subterrific on Tue 8th Aug 2006 17:23 UTC in reply to "it's called..."
subterrific Member since:
2005-07-10

no, the poking fun is getting old. not to mention the people defending it. it isn't funny, it isn't cool, it is tired and sad and really lame.

Reply Score: 2

copiers
by TomB7 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:37 UTC
TomB7
Member since:
2006-01-03

The sad thing (sad for MSFT, that is) is that they have failed to even BEGIN to match OS X's key advantage: It is UNIX. Nor it's SECOND key advantage: it is user friendly.

Reply Score: 5

versioning file system
by stew on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:38 UTC
stew
Member since:
2005-07-06

Supposedly there was already a versioning file system for the PDP-10.

But hey, that's why it's called "Time Machine": It's a 30 years old feature!

Reply Score: 3

RE: versioning file system
by neozeed on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:40 UTC in reply to "versioning file system"
neozeed Member since:
2006-03-03

tops20 is not unix though. Go and find how many UNIX support this?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: versioning file system
by stew on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:54 UTC in reply to "RE: versioning file system"
stew Member since:
2005-07-06

What does this have to do wiht Unix?

Reply Score: 1

... has been available in $OS since $YEAR
by lulin on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:40 UTC
lulin
Member since:
2006-04-08

Sometimes I think bashing Apple has become cool lately...

While virtual desktops are just a nice addition (and not new at all), time machine IS something big. I am using OS X and Ubuntu and most features are available on both platforms. But they are available on OS X right out of the box. Of course beagle is nice, but everytime I try to install it, something just does not work. Spotlight is just there. I could just save all my files in a SVN repository and would habe pretty much the same as time machine, but there would be no easy interface, I would have to configure it etc.
Too many people seem to believe that a good interface is worth nothing, but it's just not true. It's cool that something like time machine seems to be available to Linux users for a long time, I just never heard of it and it probably requires a lot of configuration and has a nice command line interface... It may be good for linux geeks, but it's not for normal people.

Reply Score: 4

IgorKH Member since:
2005-07-13

Sometimes I think bashing Apple has become cool lately...

It's not because apple's products became worse or better. It's just that Apple's mask of hype is beginning to fall apart, and the company's obsession with secrecy has become ridicules lately (with the whole journalism affair and such).

Edit: spelling correction.

Edited 2006-08-08 14:20

Reply Score: 5

As long as it works
by shadow_x99 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:41 UTC
shadow_x99
Member since:
2006-05-12

As long as the features works without a shadow of a problem I do not care who invented it first...

My 2 cents.

Reply Score: 3

RE: As long as it works
by hobgoblin on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:58 UTC in reply to "As long as it works"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

true. i think just thom shares my itch over the use of "inovation" all the time.

to go a bit over the top its starting to remind me of ballmers chant for developers some years ago...

i guess thats what i like about *nix/open source/free software, there they dont talk "big" about it, they just do it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: As long as it works
by lulin on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:11 UTC in reply to "RE: As long as it works"
lulin Member since:
2006-04-08


i guess thats what i like about *nix/open source/free software, there they dont talk "big" about it, they just do it.


Yeah, like GNU/HURD ;-)

Disclaimer: This was a joke...

Edited 2006-08-08 14:23

Reply Score: 5

GNU choice
by Moulinneuf on Tue 8th Aug 2006 19:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: As long as it works"
Moulinneuf Member since:
2005-07-06

GNU/Linux

http://kernel.org/

So many variants ...

GNU/Mach

http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/gnumach.html

GNU/Hurd

http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html

GNU/OpenSolaris

http://www.gnusolaris.org

GNU/kFreeBSD

http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/

GNU/NetBSD

http://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/

GNU/kFreeBSD

http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/

----------

The Joke is on you ;-) You just dont know IT ;-)

Reply Score: 1

RE
by Kroc on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:47 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

What good is something if you can't use it?
Apple's innovation is sometimes new things, and sometimes taking things that already exist, and then making them a complete non-hassle for regular and power users.

I never used any desktop widget engines before dashboard because they were inpractical. They sat in the way, took up lots of CPU and got boring very quickly. Dashboard however is out of the way and completley forgotten until you need it.

The same will be with Time Machine and Spaces. This technology exists in other systems, but it's all as good as useless to the majority when they can't access it, and even pros barely touch it because of the lack of quick-access.

Reply Score: 5

RE
by Maxi_taxi on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:02 UTC in reply to "RE"
Maxi_taxi Member since:
2006-05-23

What are you talking about? Just about everybody I know who uses linux uses the virtual desktops -- I'm curious to see how will Apple make this feature "more useful".

As for the Time Machine... well, I can imagine a whole lot of ways to get it running under Linux, I am certain if users were interested in such a feature, somebody would have made a fancy UI. To me, trash bin is enough "safety".

I don't see which ordinary users need version control, programmers and power users do, and they already have powerful software for that.

Reply Score: 1

re: RE
by atsureki on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:46 UTC in reply to "RE"
atsureki Member since:
2006-03-12

What are you talking about? Just about everybody I know who uses linux uses the virtual desktops --

Well, when I use Linux, I always plan to use virtual desktops -- even figure out what each one is for -- but I never get around to it. Programs just open wherever I am, and I forget about virtual desktops until I realize my compile terminal disappeared. It's just awkward, really.

I'm curious to see how will Apple make this feature "more useful".

By giving visual, drag-n-drop access to all of the desktops simultaneously so you can rearrange programs and windows and reorder the spaces themselves. In most Linux DEs I've used, you can drag a window to the edge and have it move to the next virtual desktop, but with this, you can expose the whole set and move around as many windows as you like without leaving your current interface.

As for the Time Machine... well, I can imagine a whole lot of ways to get it running under Linux, I am certain if users were interested in such a feature, somebody would have made a fancy UI. To me, trash bin is enough "safety".

I don't see which ordinary users need version control, programmers and power users do, and they already have powerful software for that.


You're ignoring the backuo element. It uses external drives for its data, so you can restore after a failure, to quote the example used right in the keynote. Also, easy is good. (Note to Redmond: shoving a wizard in my face is not "easy" or "good.") Also, there was the accidental "save" instead of "save as" example. Just look at how the guy introduced it in the address. The whole point of Time Machine is that it's for the kind of people who don't already have good backup and versioning habits. 96% of people, according to their survey.

Reply Score: 1

CoreAnimation isn't new..
by Dias on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:50 UTC
Dias
Member since:
2006-02-20

It's called Avalon. ;)

So, that's new in Leopard? Seriously

Reply Score: 5

RE: CoreAnimation isn't new..
by sbenitezb on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:14 UTC in reply to "CoreAnimation isn't new.."
sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

"It's called Avalon. ;)

So, that's new in Leopard? Seriously"

Or will be called Avalon, if Vista is ever released. OS X and Linux keep releasing features and Vista is yet to be delivered. So it doesn't matter what's copied or not, what matters is who implemented and released it.

It's not a "I invented it", but a "I also have it" thing.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: CoreAnimation isn't new..
by tpaws on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:01 UTC in reply to "CoreAnimation isn't new.."
tpaws Member since:
2006-06-02

It's called Avalon. ;)

Quartz.... QuickDraw....

Reply Score: 2

RE: CoreAnimation isn't new..
by MonkeyPie on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:09 UTC in reply to "CoreAnimation isn't new.."
MonkeyPie Member since:
2005-07-06

I am typically impressed with Apple's offerings and I am excited about a lot of these features but in general was a little under-whelmed with the Keynote.

However, to compare the CoreAnimation with Avalon is wrong.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/04/01/Avalon/

The presentation subsystem in the next version of Windows, code-named "Longhorn," offers powerful new capabilities to developers. This subsystem, code-named "Avalon," allows developers to take advantage of its capabilities through a new markup language code-named "XAML." In addition, modern object-oriented programming languages such as C# and Visual Basic .NET can be used to tie everything together. Because most applications written to Avalon will probably be a mix of XAML and programming code, this article discusses XAML tags used to control page layout along with the procedural code written to respond to events.

Not much more than a new markup language for the UI that is tied with other programming languages, mainly Microsofts. That's not really much of a revolution either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_user_interface_markup_la...

Though CoreAnimation seems to be adding something to the table. It is designed specifically to facilitate the use of advanced animations within a developers program.

JRM7

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: CoreAnimation isn't new..
by somebody on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:41 UTC in reply to "RE: CoreAnimation isn't new.."
somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

However, to compare the CoreAnimation with Avalon is wrong.

Yep, right choice to compare with would be WPF not Avalon.

Reply Score: 2

MonkeyPie Member since:
2005-07-06

Avalon is WPF. Avalon was the code name for WPF. (Windows Presentation Foundation)

JRM7

Reply Score: 1

RE: CoreAnimation isn't new..
by bytore on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:35 UTC in reply to "CoreAnimation isn't new.."
bytore Member since:
2006-03-25

Believe me, animation was around 100 years before Microsoft.

http://www.cartoonnetwork.com/tv_shows/boomerang/content/howto/

Reply Score: 2

stinky
by Cookie Monster on Tue 8th Aug 2006 13:55 UTC
Cookie Monster
Member since:
2006-06-27

Guys, if you were the ones coding OS X and watching as features, even down to graphics and color schemes, were being incorporated into your main rival's OS you wouldn't announce new features in advance either.

With the release dates of OS X and Vista so close together it would be suicide to give Microsoft the chance to slip in Leopard features. Also, keeping features secret saves buzz for later, when it's actually needed.

I'm sick of this double standard, the WWDC was chalk full of important announcements. There are only two groups of people who are dissapointed:

1) The people who expect to be completely surprised (shareholders). They need to realize that the days of Apple doing whatever it wants and flauting it in advance are over, they have a rising market share to protect so they're not going to announce killer features months in advance when they have a strong interest in waiting until the last minute.

2) Windows trolls. If you don't like people pointing out Microsoft's complete lack of innovation, don't watch Mac or Linux conferences. Most of Vista's features are stolen straight from OS X and Linux. Regardless of who came up when them first, Microsoft is dead last in the chain and they couldn't even get their own killer feature (WinFS) to work.

Reply Score: 5

RE: stinky
by ipartola on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:29 UTC in reply to "stinky"
ipartola Member since:
2006-05-24

I'm sorry but nobody wants to copy OS X. First off it's "innovation" is rediculously slow. Second off it's interface is very arguable. I for one work with Macs on almost daily basis, and to tell you truth it interface is obtrusive and IS in the way. Couple that with the slow hardware and software (no I'm not talking about IntelMacs, but what the hell, my Dell laptop is older than the Macs I work with and it processes graphics and video faster, and the interface jumps instead of crawling) and you get something to laugh at or loath depending on your mood.

Apple is too careful to include anything trully inovative into their products because they have a tiny fraction of the market and if something goes wrong they'll be gone.

<offtopic>Their customer support sucks. I called them and talked to an utter idiot. I've worked with IBM and Dell before and neither had such a bad support as Apple. And what's the deal with only being able to call once about an iPod? It's under a frigging warranty! Yea the hidden costs of being a company under Steve Jobs.</offtopic>

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: stinky
by protagonist on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:31 UTC in reply to "RE: stinky"
protagonist Member since:
2005-07-06

Point one: "Couple that with the slow hardware and software (no I'm not talking about IntelMacs, but what the hell, my Dell laptop is older than the Macs I work with and it processes graphics and video faster, and the interface jumps instead of crawling) and you get something to laugh at or loath depending on your mood. "

Actually, I work with a lot of PC's and they are slower than molasses in January. I find myself constantly clicking because it is taking forever for Windows to complete the task. My Mac does video and audio much faster than the PC's I help people with.

Point two: "<offtopic>Their customer support sucks. I called them and talked to an utter idiot. I've worked with IBM and Dell before and neither had such a bad support as Apple."

I have dealt with customer support from IBM, Dell and Apple and Dell's support completely sucks. It used to be very good a few years ago, but no more. IBM's support, what can I say. I worked on their mainframes many years ago and they have always provided outstanding support. I would rate Apple about on a par as I have never had a problem with their support either. Consumer Reports does not back up your assertions on either Dell or Apple.

And yes, I have OS X, Linux, and XP Pro here in my home office. I use OS X to get work done, Linux to have fun with and XP Pro only when I have to. Usually in conjunction with helping someone out with a problem over the phone.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: stinky
by ipartola on Tue 8th Aug 2006 22:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: stinky"
ipartola Member since:
2006-05-24

<quote>Actually, I work with a lot of PC's and they are slower than molasses in January. I find myself constantly clicking because it is taking forever for Windows to complete the task. My Mac does video and audio much faster than the PC's I help people with.</quote>

Shall we bring out the benchmarks, the theoretical discussion, or just the user experiences. Yes Windows isn't a very fast OS, but guess what? You don't need to have this or last years model to run it. It'll run on 5 year old hardware, but OS X will choke, cough and then come to a screeching halt. And for video rendering how about support for professional video cards? One of the all time weak points of Macs BTW. In either case I've not seen a single benchmark or study to date that shows that Mac OS would be faster at something. In addition to date I haven't seen a Mac that is faster than my 2 year old PC laptop. Working with Macs on daily basis for the past two years should be enough proof for this. Our university is in fact replacing all of our video edition machines with PCs because they are more cost effective and a whole lot faster since the hardware and the software is of supperior quality.

As for cusmoter support, I think everyone has had different experiences with the same company. The second time I talked to them after hanging up on the first guy, the woman was great. It's just this guy was an idiot and I'm not exagerating. From minute 1 I knew that before we even got to my completely non-technical problem. To date I still don't know why he tried to transfer me to tech support when all it was was that my order was messed up (bought an iPod from them. The one decent product, minus the really poor quality of the case).

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: stinky
by mungas on Tue 8th Aug 2006 23:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: stinky"
mungas Member since:
2006-05-08

"In addition to date I haven't seen a Mac that is faster than my 2 year old PC laptop. Working with Macs on daily basis for the past two years should be enough proof for this."

So you work with... Macs?

CLUE:

I have never seen a Computer faster than my Amiga 4000, and I work with PCs all day long (IBM PS/2 286/16MHz).


If you want to see a fast Mac, look at this:

http://www.apple.com/macpro/

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: stinky
by ipartola on Wed 9th Aug 2006 03:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: stinky"
ipartola Member since:
2006-05-24

I was talking about speed of video processing (vs dual proc G5), and the speed of the interface. Guess what, my Xfce desktop has all the features I need and the configurability Jobs sees in him nightmares (oh no users controling something!), and it flies.

>If you want to see a fast Mac, look at this:

>http://www.apple.com/macpro/

And how many months would an average joe have to work for this "dream machine"? How about buying a PC for a fraction of the cost for the same computing power, spending the rest on a decent OS and software, or depending on your needs setup a free system.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: stinky
by mungas on Wed 9th Aug 2006 07:34 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: stinky"
mungas Member since:
2006-05-08

1, "my Xfce desktop"

2, "And how many months would an average joe have to work for this "dream machine"? How about buying a PC for a fraction of the cost for the same computing power, spending the rest on a decent OS and software, or depending on your needs setup a free system."

3, "superior AMD processors/MOBO combinations"


The rambling in your posts might be a sign of serious mental issues, but I will try to reason with you one last time.

1, I have never heard of the Xfce video apps, but generally Linux lacks good programs that can match Final Cut and Shake. Personally i think it's hard to find something free that is better than iMovie.

2, You can not buy a faster PC for the fraction of the price of a MacPro, but please try. And the price is high compared to a web surfing PC, but not for a video workstation.

3, AMD lost the performance crown to Intel.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: stinky
by ipartola on Wed 9th Aug 2006 18:41 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: stinky"
ipartola Member since:
2006-05-24

>The rambling in your posts might be a sign of serious mental issues, but I will try to reason with you one last time.

R-r-r-right...

1. Cinelerra, Kino, etc. If you are really desperate use wine+Vegas

2. First thing I found: http://www.portatech.com/catalog/viewitem.asp?ID=13486 I put together basically the same system for around $1,700. It will of course need a memory upgrade to 16 Gb but that should be maybe $200 more. That's a significant saving as compared to $2,500. I'm also pretty sure that if i spent more than 2 minutes looking I'd find a cheaper, more powerful system and save money on the hard drives, video card etc. Plainly you are wrong.

3. Benchmarks? On the laptop market yes, but not the desktop. And the prices are lower too.

So please next time either say something meaningful or don't say anything at all.

Reply Score: 0

RE[8]: stinky
by Kancept on Wed 9th Aug 2006 19:31 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: stinky"
Kancept Member since:
2006-01-09

16 GB of RAM for $200? Where is this magical place of RAM pricing, as I'd love to get 16GB for that.

Reply Score: 2

RE: stinky
by RMac on Tue 8th Aug 2006 19:14 UTC in reply to "stinky"
RMac Member since:
2006-08-08

Cookie Monster opined:
"it would be suicide to give Microsoft the chance to slip in Leopard features"

Hah! They haven't got what it takes.
Microsoft can't even slip in Longhorn features.

Reply Score: 2

RE: stinky
by sappyvcv on Tue 8th Aug 2006 21:15 UTC in reply to "stinky"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

2) Windows trolls. If you don't like people pointing out Microsoft's complete lack of innovation, don't watch Mac or Linux conferences.

Ok, then what has Mac or Linux innovated? By your definition, apparently, it's only innovation if no one else has had anything remotely like it before.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: stinky
by ipartola on Tue 8th Aug 2006 22:22 UTC in reply to "RE: stinky"
ipartola Member since:
2006-05-24

:) I'll answer for him. At least on the Linux part since Apple hasn't had a single innovation (and no NextStep doesn't count, wasn't Apple).

1. Fast File systems. Very fast and a variety.
2. Fast OS. Linux isn't a microkernel, so it is many times faster on current hardware (and until everyone has about 128 processors it will remain so).
3. Native Java binary execution.
4. Support for nearly any kind of hardware. I don't think you could have a Mac box for <$300. You can have a feature for feature Linux box for that much money if you put a weekend into it.
5. Linux attracts many developing technologies. For example XGL was developed for Linux, and is the trully innovative technology, not just a little toy (akhm Mac) or a resource hungry monster (Avalon).
6. Open Source. Where else can you get a FREE (as in speach), OS that is always more stable and better than the commercial competitors?

The list goes on, and Apple should be ashamed of letting that monkey named Jobs scream words like "revolutionary" about 20 year old technologies. I sometimes get a feeling that he's so obcessed with his Mac that he's never seen another computer in his life.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: stinky
by sappyvcv on Tue 8th Aug 2006 22:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: stinky"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Are you f--king serious? You have to be joking.

Your post doesn't even need to be rebutted because it's so bad on it's own.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: stinky
by ipartola on Wed 9th Aug 2006 03:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: stinky"
ipartola Member since:
2006-05-24

>Are you f--king serious? You have to be joking.

>Your post doesn't even need to be rebutted because it's so bad on it's own.

Do I smell a Mac fanboy? ;) I know it's kind of hard to admit that OS X has 1 crappy file system, is based on a microkernel, does not support native java binary execution (Linux is the only OS that does. Everyone else uses the VM to run the bytecode), does not support a whole lot of hardware (superior AMD processors/MOBO combinations), does not have an equivalent of XGL, and isn't open source, but please try.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: stinky
by sappyvcv on Wed 9th Aug 2006 14:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: stinky"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

I've never used OS X outside of a computer store.

Try again ;)

Reply Score: 1

My take on it
by kaiwai on Wed 9th Aug 2006 05:15 UTC in reply to "stinky"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

2) Windows trolls. If you don't like people pointing out Microsoft's complete lack of innovation, don't watch Mac or Linux conferences. Most of Vista's features are stolen straight from OS X and Linux. Regardless of who came up when them first, Microsoft is dead last in the chain and they couldn't even get their own killer feature (WinFS) to work.

I think the problem is this; why can't the winfanboys just be happy with what they've got? I mean, ultimately they have marketshare, third party software vendors and hardware vendors on their side; it isn't as though they should feel the need to flood the forums with their crap.

As for this presentation, it was, quite frankly, very unimpressive; sorry, I don't need 'time machine' and the other features are quite frankly, a waste of perfectly good rotating glass and magnetic reside.

If they came out with a iChat 4 that included full MSN feature support, I'd go for it, if they released an improved finder that didn't lock up the whole f*cking desktop when a SMB share goes off line, I'd be impressed, if they improved the performance of the overall operating system INCLUDING that on a PowerPC, again, I'd be impressed.

The simple fact is, MacOS X is getting to the point that there isn't anything there to keep me; I look over at the new Novell Desktop Linux, and I ask myself, 'why should I pay a NZ$1000 premium when purchasing a iMac and MacBook together, when for NZ$1000 less I can get a top notch Dell laptop and desktop?' - Given the improvement in the quality of UNIX based desktops (including Linux), what is the point of spending the premium?

Reply Score: 2

RE: My take on it
by Bringbackanonposting on Wed 9th Aug 2006 06:08 UTC in reply to "My take on it"
Bringbackanonposting Member since:
2005-11-16

AMEN

Reply Score: 1

RE: My take on it
by netpython on Wed 9th Aug 2006 10:09 UTC in reply to "My take on it"
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

if they improved the performance of the overall operating system INCLUDING that on a PowerPC, again, I'd be impressed.

Maybe they did.after all its not even released in the final form now is it?:-)

Reply Score: 2

It is not innovation....
by TownDrunk on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:12 UTC
TownDrunk
Member since:
2005-11-28

It is not innovation we are seeing here from Apple this timr but implementation. Yes, serveral of these new features have been around for a while in other OS's. However, Apple seems to have a knack for implementing them so they are user friendly and out of the way until needed. Apple adds a layer of polish that I just don't see in Window's or Linux.

Reply Score: 5

Who cares?
by Captain N on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:36 UTC
Captain N
Member since:
2006-02-15

Why are people so pissed that Apple gets it right?

Yeah, automatic backup has been around since the beginning of computers. Which product makes it easy enough for a common user to WANT to use it? The same deal with MP3 players, user interfaces, accessibility, etc. Hell, Apple's kernel panic screen is more user-friendly than the BSOD.

I'm not saying they have everything right (making that assumption about any company is just stupid), but in a comparison with Microsoft - Apple seems to be on the right track. If who did it first is really that important to you when it comes to picking a product, then you really shouldn't complain when your system crashes or frustrates you to no end. But if you can find a product that just works for you... then who cares who thought of it first (aside from the patent office)?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Who cares?
by nathbeadle on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:42 UTC in reply to "Who cares? "
nathbeadle Member since:
2006-08-08

I couldn't agree more (you actually beat me to the post!). Sure some of these things have been around for quite some time, but it won't be until now that the masses will use them. Why do you think so few actually back up? Because it's a seperate program you have to pay for and have to ensure the computer is on at times and on and on and on....Apple turns it from being a chore into just a part of life!!

And spaces, yes we all know virtual desktops have been around for some time. The difference is in how you use them. Virtual desktops is the same as getting up from your desk at home and walking to another desk to do work. Spaces though is just one large desktop, just different views of that one desktop. Once again Apple has taken something that's been around but ignored by the average user and turned it into something 'fun and useable'.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Who cares?
by Rayz on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:43 UTC in reply to "Who cares? "
Rayz Member since:
2006-06-24

I don't think that's why people are pissed to be honest. I think it's probably the hypocrisy and double standards that they've been seeing from a small vocal sections of the Mac community since the keynote.

Who cares?

Well Mac users for a start. If MS dares implement a feature that has the slightest resemblence to the Mac, then that small vocal section of the Mac community will be wailing and gnashing their collective teeth all over the internet.

Now we have features in the MacosX that have been in other operating systems for years, it's a completely different story. Now we're hearing a lot of rubbish like:

"Ah .. it'll be better now that Apple is doing it!"

No, it would have been better if Apple had included a backup app with the OS from day 1, instead of gouging folk $99 a year for the privilege.

Reply Score: 1

Another fine Apple Innovation
by ronaldst on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:42 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

They implemented Microsoft's Open Dialog Window as a finder window. Jobs won't tell you that bit though.

Reply Score: 4

So what ?
by hypnosys on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:52 UTC
hypnosys
Member since:
2006-08-08

First of all Steve Jobs or any of the people in keynote mentioned the word revolutionary. Now all the features presented on Leopard are new for the Macs and the Mac user-base. As far as TimeLine goes, I would say it is revolutionary because it comes build in to the OS and ordinary people can use it. Besides the useless updates on iChat you can share desktops and do presentations while you are on voice or video conference. About stationaries in Mail.App, I personally do not use them but my wife and my mom does, because it looks good. Virtual desktops are not a new thing to a Linux users, and worked on the Mac as a hack, but now it is built into the system. So yes for the Mac user base Leopard is revolutionizing the way we do things. And thats only the stuff we are allowed to see, and they are working now, unlike Vista who has been in beta for 5 years.

Reply Score: 1

Time machine
by Ronald Vos on Tue 8th Aug 2006 14:58 UTC
Ronald Vos
Member since:
2005-07-06

BTW...anyone linking Time Machine to a sudden interest by Apple developpers in ZFS?
ZFS would make something like Time Machine incredibly simple to implement, without much space-overhead and without having to 'invent' their own implementations. Then again I can't imagine Apple making so much headway into ZFS this fast.

Reply Score: 2

What worries me...
by ronaldst on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:04 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

When Jobs dies. The industry is gonna come to a screeching halt. Microsoft isn't known for "innovating" much. And when Jobs wasn't at Apple, well the "crew" was mostly doing in-fighting. And Linux... Well I expect less from them than Microsoft. The scraps that Microsoft is gonna deliver is going to be copied overnight by the Linux folks. Linux has zero creative on it's belt.

It's gonna be a dark day.

Reply Score: 0

WW*D*C
by PowerMacX on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:11 UTC
PowerMacX
Member since:
2005-11-06

WWDC: Worldwide Developers Conference

They announced new APIs (for Time Machine, "To Do" service, Core Animation, improved Universal Access), full 64 bit support in Carbon & Cocoa, Xcode 3, Dashcode, their implementation of virtual desktops & improvements in Spotlight.

Not bad for the target audience. Among the "Not shown, Top Secret features" is probably the new Finder, which would make sense to announce later, at a consumer conference.

Reply Score: 5

RE: WW*D*C
by zetsurin on Thu 10th Aug 2006 17:48 UTC in reply to "WW*D*C"
zetsurin Member since:
2006-06-13

"Not bad for the target audience. Among the "Not shown, Top Secret features" is probably the new Finder, which would make sense to announce later, at a consumer conference."

Touche.

Reply Score: 1

Redmond Photocopiers
by PlatformAgnostic on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:14 UTC
PlatformAgnostic
Member since:
2006-01-02

Redmond photocopiers move at a pretty glacial speed. If Vista is to be released in January (all indications are positive on this), then there is no way to add new features to it. From a perusal of Larry Ostermann's blog, the escrow process takes a long time and after a Microsoft product is code-complete it doesn't change too drastically on its way to shipment.

And trust me, CoreAnimation is undoubtedly a huge copy of Avalon/WPF.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Redmond Photocopiers
by sappyvcv on Tue 8th Aug 2006 21:26 UTC in reply to "Redmond Photocopiers"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

To be more specific, it's a copy of a subset of WPF, not WPF as a whole.

Reply Score: 1

the most important part of leopard for me
by kloty on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:15 UTC
kloty
Member since:
2005-07-07

is iChat, where you finally can see the screen of your chatting partner and help him. How often peopled called me and asked how to do this and this and I had to imagine what they have on their screen and how they got there. Of course there are such things like Citrix or VNC, but people who need help with sending email are certainly not able to setup a VNC client.

So my only problem that remains in that area is, that people, who need help use Windows. So please Apple, release iChat for Windows. By the way is anyone aware of a similiar solution (IM with windows sharing)?

Thanks and regards,

Anton

Reply Score: 2

sequethin Member since:
2005-07-06

IM for windows with desktop sharing? where've you been? msn messenger has allowed that for a few years now ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE: Time machine
by anevilyak on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:18 UTC
anevilyak
Member since:
2005-09-14

That was actually my first thought as well, though at least at the moment it doesn't appear to be ZFS-based, unless that's one of the killer features Apple aren't announcing, which doesn't seem likely.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Redmond Photocopiers
by anevilyak on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:22 UTC
anevilyak
Member since:
2005-09-14

How is CoreAnimation a copy of Avalon/WPF? They're entirely different things from what I can see. Avalon/WPF seems largely designed to simplify the fundamentals of setting up and laying out your UI, and generally making an updated win32 API that doesn't make you want to tear your hair out while using it (win32 C calls with 10-15 parameters anyone?). I don't see anything in Avalon/WPF discussed so far that makes it possible to easily add fancy transition/animation effects to apps, unless you'd like to point out the relevant APIs that I missed?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Redmond Photocopiers
by Jemm on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Redmond Photocopiers"
Jemm Member since:
2005-07-25

"I don't see anything in Avalon/WPF discussed so far that makes it possible to easily add fancy transition/animation effects to apps, unless you'd like to point out the relevant APIs that I missed?"

Those effects have been one of the selling points of the WPF from the beginning. In addition of being available, they are very easy to use (either with XAML or code).

Here is a link to the SDK:
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms742562.aspx

Specifically in the graphics section:

"Transformations. Use the Transform classes to rotate, translate, scale, and apply other 2-D effects to geometries, visuals, brushes, framework elements, and controls. The transform classes are located in the System.Windows.Media namespace. For more information and examples, see Shapes and Basic Drawing in Windows Presentation Foundation.

Animations. Use the animation and timing APIs to make objects change color, move, spin, grow, shrink, and more. For more information, see Animation Overview. The animation and timing APIs belong to the System.Windows.Media.Animation namespace.

3-D Graphics. The System.Windows.Media.Media3D namespace defines 3-D graphics primitives, transformations, and animations that can be used to create 3-D controls and graphics."

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Redmond Photocopiers
by johnnytomatoe on Tue 8th Aug 2006 21:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Redmond Photocopiers"
johnnytomatoe Member since:
2006-06-14

Most of what WPF does can already be done in CoreImage and CoreVideo, CoreAnimation just seems like a natural progression. And seems to simplify things with being there to do one thing instead of many... complex animations.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Redmond Photocopiers
by n4cer on Wed 9th Aug 2006 00:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Redmond Photocopiers"
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

Most of what WPF does can already be done in CoreImage and CoreVideo, CoreAnimation just seems like a natural progression. And seems to simplify things with being there to do one thing instead of many... complex animations.

And all of what CoreImage and CoreVideo can do has been doable for years in DirectX. WPF (and subsequent versions of DX) are likewise simplifications and progressions of existing technologies.

Reply Score: 1

Evolutionary forces
by helio9000 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:37 UTC
helio9000
Member since:
2006-05-24

It is hilarious that the reason Apple is supposedly keeping things secret is so that MS "won't have time to slip them into Vista". I'm not sure how anybody could get more clueless - MS is barely going to get the cool-feature-stripped version of vista out let alone worry about adding brand new features. Thatís just silly and it is funny to watch Apple simple buzz building technique work so well on the simpleminded fanbois picking up the apple approved meme.

The reason people are bashing Apple over this presentation is that when you make fun MS over copying and then ring off a slew of features that are, in some cases, 20 years old on other platforms it just doesnít look good which is the point of the original article. They seem to have excellent implementations of some things Ė I canít wait to use them Ė but they need to quit defining themselves in opposition to windows all the time. The best you can do is be better than Microsoft? Big whup.

The fact is no one has blown open the box regarding OS engineering in a long time. It is stunning to me that Expose is considered incredible innovation - everything that we are seeing from just about everybody is evolutionary not revolutionary and sadly, I think we just have to get used to it.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Evolutionary forces
by Jesuspower on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:09 UTC in reply to "Evolutionary forces"
Jesuspower Member since:
2006-01-28

Havd you played with Vista yet? The media center is a complete rip off of Front row: sound effects included. Except for the blue background and vertical main menu and the slow shiny animation that looks like E17.
It looked like someone just copied everything over from frontrow, and started building the new media center around it.
Even the start sound is exactly the same as frontrows now.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Evolutionary forces
by helio9000 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Evolutionary forces"
helio9000 Member since:
2006-05-24

Hmmm....I'm not sure how this is even a response to my original post but okay. First of all I don't really know why the two are compared because in truth, Media Center and MythTV for that matter, are far more powerful solutions when implemented correctly. Front Row is great for a dorm room solution but IMHO it should be more accurately described as a Front End as it doesn't really add any new capabilities.

I would actually go so far as to say that Front Row is a better solution for a "sometime media pc" precisely because it doesn't try to do too much. MCE isnít worth firing up to just watch a DVD or a slideshow Ė it is pretty terrible for that actually - it sorta has to be dedicated completely or nothing.

Aside from all that however - Vista Media Center in the Beta seems very much like the Media Center that shipped in the October 2005 CTP which, I think, is around the same time Front made its debut.

Media Center is years old and the Vista version has been in the shop, in its present form, for a long time, to say that MS "copied everything" and just "started building" the new media center around front row is somewhere between absurd and simply misguided. The fact is, if MCE didn't exist I don't think Front Row would either.

Edited for grammer

Edited 2006-08-08 22:30

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Evolutionary forces
by Jesuspower on Wed 9th Aug 2006 00:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Evolutionary forces"
Jesuspower Member since:
2006-01-28

Media center in its current state is actually different than the Vista version. We just installed Vista where I work, and aside from it using the same sousds as front row, some parts were designed in a terrible way. The navigation of music, for example, is weird.

But there are sections of it that will have the exact bubble look of front row rather than the standard media center look it used to have.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Evolutionary forces
by helio9000 on Wed 9th Aug 2006 06:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Evolutionary forces"
helio9000 Member since:
2006-05-24

I know that Vista MCE is different than the current MCE. The look and feel of Vista MCE that you are seeing in Beta 2 goes back to *at least* the Vista October 2005 CTP (52xx something) which was released before Front Row 1.0. The "bubble look" you seem to be claiming they stole from Front Row was already there last October.

Reply Score: 1

Hold onto your horses now
by dr_gonzo on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:42 UTC
dr_gonzo
Member since:
2005-07-06

Is there really anything in Mac OS X that has truly never been done before? All I can think of is Expose. Apple just do things really well.

From looking at the video, Spaces seems to be a really great and useful implementation of virtual desktops. It's flashy but the flashiness is also really useful and makes managing multiple desktops to be really simple.

Sure, versioning has been done before but Apple has implemented it really elegantly. Plus, adding it at the filesystem level would have taken quite some effort.

They added garbage collection into Objective-C and they added DTrace to Leopard. That must have taken a hell of a lot of work to accomplish.

I must admit, that at first, I wasn't very impressed but when you sit back and look at it all, it is quite an amount of work they've put in.

There's a long time between now and Spring as far as Apple's concerned. I'm sure they have some more surprises up their sleeves ;)

But I do agree that it's silly of Apple to bash MS. It makes them look immature but I suppose geeks love a bit of MS bashing...

Reply Score: 2

Am I the only one?
by bolomkxxviii on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:44 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

Am I the only one who wonders why everyone keeps adding more "stuff" to their OS? Isn't the OS just the software you have to run to get your applications working? One thing I haven't seen mentioned is how much more space will be required for install and what will be the performance hit compared to the current OS. In another 10 years you won't need any applications. The OS will do everything.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Am I the only one?
by TomB7 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:51 UTC in reply to "Am I the only one?"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

I kind of agree. "Spotlight" has been out a year--much touted as a killer feature-- and I NEVER use it. I use Devon's free Easy Find.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Redmond Photocopiers
by anevilyak on Tue 8th Aug 2006 15:59 UTC
anevilyak
Member since:
2005-09-14

Ah, I stand corrected, thanks.

Reply Score: 1

What you forgot...
by twenex on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:01 UTC
twenex
Member since:
2006-04-21

...Thom, is that Apple has been passing off imitation as "innovation" for about as long as Microsoft. Jobs got the idea for the LISA from Xerox (Smalltalk), and then copied it AGAIN to make the Mac. That's probably not the only example.

Copying isn't all bad; but the kind of lies and damn lies that pass for "marketing" all too often these days, is.

Reply Score: 4

RE: What you forgot...
by TomB7 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:53 UTC in reply to "What you forgot..."
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

There are very few TRUE innovations with a capitol T in any endeavor. For that reason, having an implementation that's way better than anything else on the market should count for something. Look at MP3 players. There were plenty when the iPod came out. The iPod was WAY better and stole the market. Remarkably, it still is, something like 4 years later. The GUI. Apple LICENSED it from PARC. They took it way beyond it's original scope. Wifi. Wifi was not INVENTED by Apple (though they helped). But their Airport was the first cheap, consumer-friendly system on the market.

Reply Score: 1

RE: What you forgot...
by Nezumi on Tue 8th Aug 2006 17:20 UTC in reply to "What you forgot..."
Nezumi Member since:
2006-04-02

The kind of lies and damn lies that happen when a Mac with an entry level graphics card is compared to a Dell with a Quadro? (i.e. expensive workstation class graphics card) BTW, I would rather have the Mac!

What makes the kind of 'spin' sad, is that IMHO Apple have a very nice product range at the moment. Personally, If I have the money when I buy my first laptop and my next desktop they'll both be Apple.

Turn off the RDF and sell your products on their merits, not FUD. Oh, BTW can we please have a Conroe based Mac tower? Considering Conroe will be quad-core within the next 6 months this could make a nice entry level tower...

Reply Score: 2

you are all cluless!
by tryphcycle on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:19 UTC
tryphcycle
Member since:
2006-02-16

dont you have ANY thing better to do?

it blows my mind how long things get drug out.... like the whole "apple stole Xerox interface" ..... bla bla bla... it has already been discussed... about 361893872093842034023423412 times!

the discussion is OFFICIAL over!!!!

Reply Score: 0

Superficial
by rx182 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:40 UTC
rx182
Member since:
2005-07-08

Steve Jobs is by far the most egocentric person I know. If something comes to the Mac, it's revolutionary. If sometimes comes to another platform, it's just copying.

The truth is that Windows AND Linux are 150x bigger than the Mac. If the Mac was so good (from a developer perspective) I'm sure I would have seen Mac entries in the Dr. Dobbs Journal in the past 10 years.

The Mac is just a minimalist OS oriented to non technical people. Nothing more. Developers dont have much to do on the Mac. OSX is just ObjC + Cocoa. Nothing more. They even discontinued the Java bindings. Now, why do you think there are zillions of applications for Windows AND Linux and just a few for the Mac? You got your answer.

For a developer, the Mac is uninspiriring. All the greatest apps of the last 10 years didn't come to the Mac. Brilliant developers don't want to follow the rules of Mr. Jobs and his NEXT thing. But Mr. Jobs forgot about freedom.

Windows got win32, MFC, .NET, really good Java support from Sun, Delphi/C++ Builder from Borland, etc etc. Linux got the whole GCC stack, lisp, scheme, perl, python, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Now, Mr. Jobs, tell us what you have to offer to your developers.

PS: Windows 95 was revolutionary compared to the Mac when it was released. It didn't look like a Mac at all. And as far as I know, Vista still have the Win95 heritage and all I see is new functionalities.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Superficial
by TomB7 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:58 UTC in reply to "Superficial"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

Mac has python, perl, tcl built in. C++ Objective C. Java

And you know what? Xcode which allows much faster app development than you can do on Windows.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Superficial
by eMagius on Tue 8th Aug 2006 19:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Superficial"
eMagius Member since:
2005-07-06

And you know what? Xcode which allows much faster app development than you can do on Windows.

Look -- I like XCode as much as the next guy, but it doesn't come anywhere close to Visual Studio. (Office and VS keep me firing up Windows instead of sticking entirely with OS X.)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Superficial
by sappyvcv on Tue 8th Aug 2006 21:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Superficial"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Really? Apparently you've never used Visual Studio.

Reply Score: 2

LOL
by cchance on Tue 8th Aug 2006 16:50 UTC
cchance
Member since:
2006-02-24

HAHA lol Core Technology = WPF written in Xaml give me a break

This entire WWDC was a laughing stock only a true macboy fan would stick up for it... no new big announcements, no iphone no new ipod no nano video, nothing, just a bunch of comparisons to dell...

as for leopard that kitty needs to go back to sleep, they showed off windows features with a nice coat of paint over them, but the fact is they arent new...

As for Spaces being new to OSX since its not new to linux or windows, i have to detest this is NOT NEW TO OSX in fact once again Apple has killed off a group just like konfabulator... but this time stole the name as well...

http://space.sourceforge.net/

Reply Score: 2

RE: LOL
by ronaldst on Tue 8th Aug 2006 17:05 UTC in reply to "LOL "
ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

Actually it was just a calm WWDC. I loved how they bypassed Merom and went straight to Woodcrest.

Reply Score: 1

Bad Journalism here: This is the shame.
by r2d2 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 17:01 UTC
r2d2
Member since:
2006-08-08

What I'm seeing here - and this is going on for months - is only bad articles on Apple. I'm not of that kind that needs to see Apple always praised. Not at all. There are many negative things that can be said about the fruit. But what is happening here is pure politics. That's far away from anything that one could call journalism, even less technically competent journalism. Sometimes I even suspect there's money involved in it. I'm disappointed, and will check back to osnews less often than I used. My advice to osnews is: Get rid of incompetent silly "journalists". You used to be a very informative, and still are one of the most pleasant to read in terms of layout.

Reply Score: 0

not true
by SK8T on Tue 8th Aug 2006 17:02 UTC
SK8T
Member since:
2006-06-01

I think this article is trash,

the writer wrote steves jobs said this is "revolutionary", but Steve Jobs never said so. We are fools if we misunderstand him. He doesn't meant that this is completely new and revolutionary, he meant that this is a revolutionary way to access this features.

So may there was Volume Shadow copy in XP, but I never used it, because there never was an interface, option or dialog to use this.

Reply Score: 1

lol
by cchance on Tue 8th Aug 2006 17:20 UTC
cchance
Member since:
2006-02-24

ya but the Previous Versions in vista has been in since the first beta and its very easy to use its in every explorer window...

The fact is steve shouldnt be doing this big "start your photocopiers" crap and then release 7 features that are either copies from linux or windows or just plane useless... stop trying to protect apple... the fact is they had a stupid conference that failed miserably to impress...

The fact is they are mudslinging which is a very childish thing ive never seen a banner at a Microsoft Conference dissing apple or mudslinging... but i guess when you're currently on the loosing end of the desktop race theirs nothing to do but mudsling.

Reply Score: 2

Macworld Boston 1997 - The Microsoft Deal
by rx182 on Tue 8th Aug 2006 17:24 UTC
rx182
Member since:
2005-07-08

Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

I think Steve should watch this again everytime he's about to speak.

Reply Score: 2

...
by Mitarai on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:18 UTC
Mitarai
Member since:
2005-07-28

This comment was not accurated.

Edited 2006-08-08 18:31

Reply Score: 0

RE: ...
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:20 UTC in reply to "..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

It is me or OSNEWS is slow on news?

What are you talking about? This story was posted on 15:05 CET today-- it is now 20:19 CET; that's 5 hours, not 24. OSNews will be updated again by me in the coming hours-- as happens every other day.

Edited 2006-08-08 18:21

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: ...
by Mitarai on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:30 UTC in reply to "RE: ..."
Mitarai Member since:
2005-07-28

Wasn't here since yesterday?

Then I take my comment back.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: ...
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 8th Aug 2006 18:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Wasn't here since yesterday?

No, it was not, as I've only written it between 14:00 and 15:00 CET, today. You can check an article's date by looking right underneath the header.

Between now and 24 hours ago, we have posted 10 new stories; I'm amazed at how you missed all those. Within the next few hours, another ten (+/-) will appear.

Reply Score: 1

RE: copiers
by Tuishimi on Tue 8th Aug 2006 19:51 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

I can't believe there weren't 50 followups to this post shouting "OS X IS NOT UNIX!" ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: versioning file system
by Tuishimi on Tue 8th Aug 2006 19:54 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

I doubt it is as simple as file versioning. I would guess it might even be more like CVS, some sort of diff'ing utility that minimizes the amount of space it takes to keep all this stuff around.

RMS used actual copies of files sitting right in the same directory...

my.txt;1 my.txt;2, etc.

Reply Score: 1

Calm down
by mungas on Tue 8th Aug 2006 19:57 UTC
mungas
Member since:
2006-05-08

It's a developer conference, not a political debate. The attending people like to be entertained. I suppose that the humor is best suited for the paying crowt, i.e. OS X developers. Personally I thought the "PC-guy" was quite funny.

We all know MS developers prefers a unique kind of slapstick humor that includes the release of "Monkey Boy" Ballmer.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Who cares?
by Tuishimi on Tue 8th Aug 2006 20:03 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

:Who cares?

:Well Mac users for a start. If MS dares implement a feature that has the
:slightest resemblence to the Mac, then that small vocal section of the
:Mac community will be wailing and gnashing their collective teeth all
:over the internet.

I am so glad you clarified this statement with "small vocal section". I really don't care who implements what as long as it is useful and useable for me.

"Ah .. it'll be better now that Apple is doing it!"

But it IS better. Well, maybe not Spaces... but the Time Machine is so simplisticly brilliant that even I will use it. The notes stuff too, and the ease of drag and drop email templating - tied into iPhoto, etc.

It IS better.

:No, it would have been better if Apple had included a backup app with
:the OS from day 1, instead of gouging folk $99 a year for the privilege.

Yeah... no argument there.

Reply Score: 2

Shadow Copies
by Adam S on Tue 8th Aug 2006 20:07 UTC
Adam S
Member since:
2005-04-01

Shadow copies, at least in the current VSC implementation, are most definitely NOT "exactly" the same thing as Time Machine. While VSC is very similar, it's design to do snapshots at certain times. This is fine for most restores, but in general, if you modify a document several times, you only have the version at the time of the snapshot. As I understand Time Machine, it does a snapshot at modification time, so you have each modification.

This might seem like a marginal difference, but in reality, it's anything but trivial. This is a world of difference and nothing like this currently exists in a usable form in the base install of ANY consumer OS today. So while it may not be a new idea, it certainly IS innovation.

Reply Score: 1

Did you watch the WWDC keynote?
by binarycrusader on Tue 8th Aug 2006 22:06 UTC
binarycrusader
Member since:
2005-07-06

Thom, normally your articles are great, but if you're going to start nitpicking Apple, then you should expect to be nitpicked as well.

1) I never heard Jobs or any of the presenters use the word "revolutionary" to describe any of the new features in OS X Leopard.

2) You stretched the truth a bit regarding spaces, Jobs only claimed it was a new way to work on the Mac, not that it was a new or innovative feature.

3) Dismissing Time Machine simply because it's functionality exists in *server* operating systems already is questionable, considering Apple is showing off a consumer *desktop* operating system. Apple never claimed that no one else had similar functionality.

Really Thom, feel free to bash Apple, but at least be truthful.

Reply Score: 2

Wow nearly 100 comments
by Bringbackanonposting on Wed 9th Aug 2006 02:44 UTC
Bringbackanonposting
Member since:
2005-11-16

What a waste of typing. Well done on the article. It should have said in a disclaimer "For non Apple fans/users only" so we could all read about 20 intelligent comments and discussions on what the article was about. Not the usual Mac fan stab in the dark dribble, crying and moaning.

Reply Score: 0

Just few things!
by Hakime on Wed 9th Aug 2006 06:24 UTC
Hakime
Member since:
2005-11-16

- Thom you disapoint me, your article is a collection of lies about the keynote, you don't like the keynote, right, but please don't try to change the reality of what has been discussed and how it has been discussed during the keynote in order to attract the foolish reaction of some readers in OS News. Since your post in OS News i noticed that the quality of the articles has just gone down. Eugenia, where are you?

- DirectX has nothing to do with Core image and Core video. Direct X is an API for mostly 3d games developpement. You could compare it to another 3D API that is Open Gl. CoreImage/video are different beast because they leaverage the power of the graphical hardarware for 2D processing and video processing, that is for non-3D tasks. They are APIs that leaverage high demanding computation for real time 2D and video effects in the GPU. DirectX does not do that, and Avalon does not do it eitheir. Avalon is more for eye candy, Core Image/video is a technology for real high performance graphical application.

-Avalon provides an abtraction for rich interface developpement allowing 3D effetcs, animation, etc.... using whatever Microsoft wants developper to use. CoreAnimation does the same thing, right, but it does not restrict itself to the interface, you could use it for the need for the application itself besides the interface. Also CoreAnimation allows you to do things that was already posisble with OS X but in a easier and faster way.

- XGL is what OS X has been doing for years, that is composition and hardware accelerated composition, with Quartz and Quartz Extrem. There is nothing new with XGl, this a catching up feature for Linux, nothing else. And so far XGL is just eye candy, nothing really usefull. Novell just came up with a total rip off Expose (but less powerful) and the Cube effect of OS X. Linux is taking a lot of features or ideas from Apple, so why people are so ubset that Apple use virtual desktops which Linux steals anyway from Unix. The point is that Apple implementation of this Unix feature is the best one, much more elegant and usefull. And anyway OS X is a Unix it deserves to have it too.

- Who hell told you that OS X does not support java binary execution, of course it does. If you do not code on OS X an dif you don't know whatr you are talking about, well maybe i can forgive to say such nonsense.

http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Java/Conceptual/Java14Deve...

- As mentionned by someone else, Time Machine backs up files as your modifed them, the whatever thing in windows uses periodic snapshots of the entire volume, its a hell different, Time machine is just more powerful. VSS requires the user to set the periodicity, and if you have modified a file which has not been "snapshoted" by VSS, your file is gone. Time Machine backs up file as they are modified, this is true a back up.

In general the implementation in Windows 2003 is rather ugly and unefficient as you are anyway limited by the number of possible snapshot (512 in one volume). Winxp is even worse as it can only create non-persistent snapshots.

In general Volume Shadow Copy Service in Win2003 is quite limited.

"The Volume Shadow Copy Service is more of a convenience feature rather than an alternative to backups. The reason for this is that shadow copy data resides on the same volume as the original data. Therefore, if the volume became corrupt then there would be no way or restoring shadow copy backups. You would have to rely on a traditional tape backup instead.

Another limitation to shadow copy backups is that they only work if Windows is functional. For example, if Windows crashed due to a corrupt registry then Windows would not be functional. You would therefore have to restore Windows from a traditional backup rather than from a shadow copy backup.

Still another limitation is that shadow copy backups are designed to restore one file at a time. Because of this, shadow copy backups are not suitable for restoring large numbers of files."

http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/Windows-Server-...

In comparison Time Machine backs up everything, the OS Too.

And look at the way the user restore a file (figure c), which is similar in Vista, how can people even think to compare this to Time Machine.

And Thom, i can not believe that you are stupid enough to compare it to Dervish and Wayback, those are simply unsuable for the end user and way behing the inplementation of Time Machine. You are kidding me?

I mean Thom, the way you are baching Apple just make you foolish, because the arguments that you bring are simply troll-like, irrelevant and they show that you do not have a good understanding of what you are talking about.

Eugenia, please come back!!!!!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Just few things!
by ipartola on Wed 9th Aug 2006 07:03 UTC in reply to "Just few things!"
ipartola Member since:
2006-05-24

- Who hell told you that OS X does not support java binary execution, of course it does. If you do not code on OS X an dif you don't know whatr you are talking about, well maybe i can forgive to say such nonsense.

I'm sorry but what is java binary execution exactly? What I'm talking about is natively executing bytecode inside the Linux kenrel. Not running a userspace virtual machine that then interprets this code, but running the bytecode directly. Now I'm aware that Mac OS X has a Java port, but Linux is still the only kernel that supports running the Java bytecode natively.

And just so you know people aren't upset with Apple introducing virtual desktops. Stealing other people's technologies is good. Marketing is good too. What is bad is taking something blatantly stolen and then introducing it as though it was just invented by your developers. I mean how come Jobs couldn't come out and say "Well you know UNIX has had virtual desktops for a few decades now, so we decided that OS X could use it too. Now we brushed up the interface a bit so you will hopefully enjoy this feature a lot more on OS X than you did back in your UNIX days, but the credit still goes to *such-n-such* for developing this great idea." Jobs just really reminds me of the guy in My Big Fat Greek Wedding - if it ain't his idea it's a bad idea. He is yet to realize that to be great one needs to be humble. And this is what people are mad about.

Reply Score: 1

!!!
by Hakime on Wed 9th Aug 2006 06:29 UTC
Hakime
Member since:
2005-11-16

"If they came out with a iChat 4 that included full MSN feature support, I'd go for it, if they released an improved finder that didn't lock up the whole f*cking desktop when a SMB share goes off line, I'd be impressed, if they improved the performance of the overall operating system INCLUDING that on a PowerPC, again, I'd be impressed. "

Do you have any build of Leopard with you? What do you know about the performance, the improvment of SMB, about any other new features in Leopard. Did you test it?

Because i don't think that you fullfill the conditions to say any thing about Leopard, and that you basically do not know anything about the OS, please just keep silent, your post is simly irrelevent.

Reply Score: 1