Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 15:23 UTC
Mac OS X As you have surely noticed by now, Apple's CEO Steve Jobs held his keynote speech yesterday at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco. So far, the responses have been mixed; I have seen a lot of excitement, but also a lot of disappointment. Personally, I am not really sure where I stand.
Order by: Score:
I liked it...
by sigzero on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:01 UTC
sigzero
Member since:
2006-01-03

I think a lot of the hype came from "fans" more than "Apple". I really like at the things that came out. The unified look (finally!). Better integration with core anything. The new finder, spaces, stacks etc. I like it all and I think it will be a good upgrade.

Reply Score: 3

ZFS
by poundsmack on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:04 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

hate to be teh buz kill but ZFS will not be in Leoprd

http://winbeta.org/comments.php?catid=1&id=7759

i too am sad

Reply Score: 3

RE: ZFS
by sigzero on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:09 UTC in reply to "ZFS"
sigzero Member since:
2006-01-03

That doesn't really bug me...it would have been cool of course. I think that it is a "feature" that definitely should be implemented.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: ZFS
by tryphcycle on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:34 UTC in reply to "ZFS"
tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

well... i guess time will tell, but i am pretty confident that ZFS WILL ultimatly become OSXs files system.

Reply Score: 1

New theme
by remenic on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:10 UTC
remenic
Member since:
2005-07-06

I think this new "consistent" theme will bore the crap out of (looking at) OS X real soon.

Reply Score: 1

RE: New theme
by DittoBox on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:22 UTC in reply to "New theme"
DittoBox Member since:
2005-07-08

The new theme hearkens back to Platinum from OS 8. It's a welcome and well thought out change.

I think Apple hits the nail on the head most of the time when it comes to human interface design. Further I think they're really making strides when it comes to pleasing and functional rendering of data.

I might budget for a new MacBook when Leopard is released. We'll see.

Reply Score: 2

Copied from what ?
by Duffman on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:21 UTC
Duffman
Member since:
2005-11-23

"to be copied almost exactly from Sun's Project Looking Glass"

Copied from what ? Apple created the dock.
They didn't copy anything, it's just the logic evolution of the dock (2D -> 3D).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Copied from what ?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:26 UTC in reply to "Copied from what ?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Apple created the dock.

The dock was not 'created' by Apple. RISC OS already had a dock in 1987, 2 years before NEXT, and I'm sure there have been similar implementations before.

They didn't copy anything, it's just the logic evolution of the dock (2D -> 3D).

When discussing Apple: logical evolution.

When discussing anything other than Apple: copying/stealing.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Copied from what ?
by A.H. on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Copied from what ?"
A.H. Member since:
2005-11-11

When discussing Apple: logical evolution.

When discussing anything other than Apple: copying/stealing.


On the zeroth day Apple created God...

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Copied from what ?
by kamil_chatrnuch on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Copied from what ?"
kamil_chatrnuch Member since:
2005-07-07

i hate it how i can't mod you up ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Copied from what ?
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 13th Jun 2007 12:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Copied from what ?"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

I have always said that you should be able to mod staff up ;)
(Not down, that wouldn't be fair).

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Copied from what ?
by tryphcycle on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Copied from what ?"
tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

"he dock was not 'created' by Apple. RISC OS already had a dock in 1987, 2 years before NEXT, and I'm sure there have been similar implementations before."

Just a note, early previews of NeXTSTEP were out in 86...

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Copied from what ?
by Duffman on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Copied from what ?"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

The dock was not 'created' by Apple. RISC OS already had a dock in 1987, 2 years before NEXT, and I'm sure there have been similar implementations before.

The Risc OS icon bar is not the same thing as shown in the wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dock_%28computing%29
--------
The Dock is a graphical user interface feature first introduced in the NeXTSTEP and OPENSTEP operating systems, and radically changed and refined in Mac OS X, where it behaves more like the Apple Newton's Newton OS Dock.

A similar feature, called the Icon Bar, has been a fundamental part of the RISC OS operating system and its predecessor Arthur since its inception, beginning in 1987, which pre-dated the NeXTSTEP dock (released in 1989). However, upon further examination the differences are quite noticeable.
--------

Now your points as you think for me, I will think for you:
When discussing Linux: logical evolution or "shameless" copy as you said.
When discussing Apple: always copying/stealing never innovating.

Anyway, when you take a look at Mac OS X 10.0 screenshots and then you take a look at the Sun dock in Looking Glass, only a dishonest guy can say that Apple is copying Sun.

They have it since 2001, and they just change in Leopard the way the outline is drawn...

Edited 2007-06-12 16:56

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Copied from what ?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Copied from what ?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

So it is written on Wikipedia, and we all know what's on t3h intern3t is true.

Get real, the dock is a very, very general UI concept, implemented in various different ways by different operating systems. ARTHUR (RISC OS 1) was the first release I could find where it was used, but as I said, there may be other implementations even before Arthur.

Duffman, you capped the Wikipedia article at a really interesting point. did you read on? It made me laugh, you see.

"The main difference with the NeXTSTEP and Mac OS X Dock, is that the Icon Bar only displays icons for active, or loaded, applications. Also, the Mac OS X Dock will scale down accordingly to accommodate expansion, whereas the Icon Bar will simply scroll. Lastly, the Icon Bar itself has a fixed size and position, which is across the bottom of the screen."

Those are not "differences" that are notable in any way. The icon bar in ARTHUR/RISC OS is a dock, no matter the spin Wikipedia tries to put on it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Copied from what ?
by Duffman on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Copied from what ?"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

Ok so when YOU post some articles from the wikipedia, that's ok, that's the truth.
But when someone not thinking like you do the same and post an article that YOU do not agree with, it's wrong, they are lying.

Get real, the dock is a very, very general UI concept

Get real, the dock is NOT only a general UI concept, it's a behaviour, it's the way it works, the way you use it. And that's the point the wikipedia try to reveal but it seems that you do not want to understand.

Now the Sun dock is just working like the Apple's one.

Just take a look at the one in Leopard, nothing change it's still use 2D icons and working the same way (plus stacks).

The day Apple will use high definition and moving wallpapers like in Looking Glass, you will be able to say that Apple copied Sun.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Copied from what ?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 18:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Copied from what ?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Hey look what I just found:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/12/leopard-dock-resembles-suns-proj...

Guess I'm not the only one noticing.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Copied from what ?
by Duffman on Wed 13th Jun 2007 11:41 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Copied from what ?"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

So it is written on Engadget, and we all know what's on t3h intern3t is true.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Copied from what ?
by Dave_K on Tue 12th Jun 2007 18:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Copied from what ?"
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

Get real, the dock is NOT only a general UI concept, it's a behaviour, it's the way it works, the way you use it. And that's the point the wikipedia try to reveal but it seems that you do not want to understand.


Reading this debate about whether the Iconbar is a Dock or not; I find it ironic that the Mac OS X Dock actually shares more in common with the RISC OS Iconbar, than it does with the NeXTSTEP Dock.

The NeXTSTEP Dock only displayed applications that were put in it. It couldn't hold directories or drives, and it didn't automatically display running apps. It had no contextual menus displaying application options, or any way of storing more items than could fit on screen.

Like the Mac OS X Dock, the Iconbar in RISC OS had all those features, it just handled some of them differently.

Note that I'm not claiming that Apple copied RISC OS. I doubt Apple's designers ever actually used that obscure British OS. Most of the features that the Iconbar and OS X Dock share in common are pretty obvious additions really...

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Copied from what ?
by sn0n on Tue 12th Jun 2007 20:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Copied from what ?"
sn0n Member since:
2005-08-09

"The day Apple will use high definition and moving wallpapers like in Looking Glass, you will be able to say that Apple copied Sun."

No, they will discredit sun, and say they are copying Vista.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Copied from what ?
by PowerMacX on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Copied from what ?"
PowerMacX Member since:
2005-11-06

"The main difference with the NeXTSTEP and Mac OS X Dock, is that the Icon Bar only displays icons for active, or loaded, applications"

Those are not "differences" that are notable in any way. The icon bar in ARTHUR/RISC OS is a dock, no matter the spin Wikipedia tries to put on it.


So you never use the dock to launch apps? I think that qualifies as a major difference.

What distinguishes the Dock from a simple process list window OR an app launcher is that it's both, at the same time. It has to do with the fact that unlike other OS systems, the concept of "application instance" doesn't apply to OS X, so a separate launcher/active processes display would be redundant.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Copied from what ?
by tyrione on Wed 13th Jun 2007 00:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Copied from what ?"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

You're patently wrong. You don't like it. Tough crap. Grow a pair of balls and admit your research was flawed.

If you want, go whine to Apple Engineering and ask them to show you an pre 1.0 version of NeXTSTEP with the Dock and how it's functionality plus interaction with the GUI was original.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Copied from what ?
by sbergman27 on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Copied from what ?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
BTW, the reality is that THEY are leading the innovation as every body is always comparing its OS to Mac OS X.
"""

"Innovation" is a four letter word, in my book. Please don't use it. Or, if you do, either put it in quotes or explain that you are *using* the word and not abusing it in this, exceptional, instance.

When I was in school, the printing press and the Jacquard loom were what we thought of as great innovations... not a new closeness setting on our Dads' electric razors.

The sooner we get back to "Doing Cool Stuff" and sharing our triumphs, rather than "Innovating" and issuing press releases about it, the better off we will all be.

Unfortunately, the word "innovation" itself is likely ruined for at least a generation's time.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Copied from what ?
by IanSVT on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Copied from what ?"
IanSVT Member since:
2005-07-06

Unfortunately, the word "innovation" itself is likely ruined for at least a generation's time.


Agreed. Same with the acronym "FUD". If there's a term or phrase that can compete with "innovation" as far as its overuse in IT, it's "FUD".

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Copied from what ?
by Tuishimi on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Copied from what ?"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Stop spreading FUD! Oh, wait...

Reply Score: 3

slick desktop
by netpython on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:22 UTC
netpython
Member since:
2005-07-06

I must admit leopard has a slick desktop. Arguably more appealing than Vista.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/features/desktop.html

Reply Score: 3

ZFS
by poundsmack on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:38 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

I bet anything it was gona be but Jobs didnt like that Schwartz made it public. so to keep Schwartz in line Jobs pulled it. "this is my OS, learn your place" (whip sound) LOL

Reply Score: 5

RE: ZFS
by exigentsky on Tue 12th Jun 2007 22:37 UTC in reply to "ZFS"
exigentsky Member since:
2005-07-09

That's likely as Apple has been known to ostracize those who cross them. Surely Schwartz had an NDA he "forgot."

From Slashdot by Raindance:

"

Jonathan *had* to know he might get burned for spilling the beans before Steve. Jobs has a track record of being harsh, almost vindictive in his dealings with companies which betray his trust.

Exhibit A [insanely-great.com]: Samsung runs their mouth about being selected to supply software to drive the next-gen iPod Nano. Apple turns around and drops them.

Exhibit B [geek.com]: ATI runs their mouth about some specs for new macs before Macworld. Apple removes ATI boards from their computers and refuses to offer them as a build-to-order.

Simply put, don't try to scoop The Steve.
"

BTW: Steve never said Apple was the first with 64bits. He only said that Leopard is going to be the first MAINSTREAM OS with 64bits. For Windows, 64bits is not standard. Even Vista Business which came with my brother's ThinkPad was not 64bit. When he contacted them, they said that despite not having mentioned it was 32bit, he should have known because it was default and 64bit had driver problems. I think Jobs got this right.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: ZFS
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 23:14 UTC in reply to "RE: ZFS"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Steve never said Apple was the first with 64bits.

He said Leopard was the first OS to run 32bit and 64 bit apps side by side. This is what I was talking about.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: ZFS
by sn0n on Wed 13th Jun 2007 15:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: ZFS"
sn0n Member since:
2005-08-09

i think noone listened to his words, and not what they wanted to not hear...

http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=18074&comment_id=247299

Reply Score: 1

RE:
by Yomama on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:40 UTC
Yomama
Member since:
2005-07-21

I was impressed with Look of the update. I'm happy they re-fined it not re-designed and I'm very pleased that they finally have a unified look. I'm not sure how useful the stack feature will be. Time will tell.

Reply Score: 2

The way it should be IMO
by jaylaa on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:41 UTC
jaylaa
Member since:
2006-01-17

I don't use a Mac, but talk about it's incremental progress remind me of the similar complaints about each Gnome release.

But I think this is a good way to be. Big changes all at once break things and upset people. Frequent small changes get just as much done without as much trauma. Only problem I see is that you actually have to pay for the incremental OSX updates.

Reply Score: 2

RE: The way it should be IMO
by spikeb on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:51 UTC in reply to "The way it should be IMO"
spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18

agreed

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: The way it should be IMO
by tryphcycle on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:05 UTC in reply to "The way it should be IMO"
tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

"I don't use a Mac"

then... maybe your opinion is sort-a mute? Right?

Reply Score: 2

jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06

"then... maybe your opinion is sort-a mute? Right?"

Absolutely not. Some of the best kinds of testers for an application are people who have never used it before, or who don't use it on a regular basis...especially for usability studies. More often than not they'll reveal flaws that other folks would have overlooked due to the different ways they use an app.

The first thing I do with any personal projects I release is park my technical-as-a-rock girlfriend in front of it and watch her click around...it's amazing how much more I learn about non-geek usability that way.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: The way it should be IMO
by Tuishimi on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: The way it should be IMO"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

That would be "moot".

Reply Score: 3

Gimmicks rather than features
by Simon Gray on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:43 UTC
Simon Gray
Member since:
2006-06-04

The new desktop features are all gimmicks, except Stacks which is just polishing an existing feature (and quite remniscent of Drawers in Gnome too).

Cover flow is just a gimmick. Quick view is pretty much just a gimmick as well, it just launches an application without showing the title bar - BOOM! I'm amazed...

Spaces is taken from X, but it's always been a gimmick to me....

iChat has a lot of gimmick features: fake backgrounds, "funny" effects. The only useful feature is the conferencing feature (which is cool, though).

In my opinion, the interesting features in Leopard are Time Machine, web clips and , erh, well I don't use AIM so the conferencing feature in iChat is useless to me. Hopefully, the open source movement will pick up the role as the innovater now that Apple is gearing down :-)

Edited 2007-06-12 16:59

Reply Score: 3

RE: Gimmicks rather than features
by mlouka on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:00 UTC in reply to "Gimmicks rather than features"
mlouka Member since:
2005-11-16

This is wwdc -- the big news is really that all of these "gimmicks" are easily accessible to developers via the Core Animation, Core Video, and other Core APIs. The keynote is a show, so the gimmicks are what are in focus, and that is to be expected, but the most exciting stuff in Leopard is in the APIs for developers and how this all comes together. It's all in the integration and execution, and, for developers, the ease with which really powerful new features can be added to applications. Having said that, I thought Exposé looked like a gimmick when Tiger was first shown but in daily use it has proven to be much more than just a fancy toy, and I suspect that some of the features of Leopard that have been quickly demoed are more significant than first impressions. We'll see.

Reply Score: 5

Gaming is it
by fretinator on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:44 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

The gaming announcement to me IS the big announcement. The only reason I or my kids (teens) keep Windows around is to play games. If that reason were to go away (which I doubt), there would be no reason to run Windows. We already use OpenOffice, Firefox, etc. It is only for the sake of games that we put up with the mess of spyware, viruses, etc. However, I think it will be a long time before all (or most) games are released for Mac and Windows. For me personally, I would also like to see Linux in that same mix, but I'm probably dreaming. Closed-source games wouldn't do well on Linux because of the Free Software Philosophy. Open-source games couldn't generate the money (in my opinion) to pay for the amount of developers, artists, musicians needed to make modern games. As soon as one copy of the game is sold, it would immediately be on someone FTP site and there would not be a lot more copies sold. This is why Mac is still an attractive platform for Game Devs. It's stil closed for the most part.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Gaming is it
by Slapo on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:27 UTC in reply to "Gaming is it"
Slapo Member since:
2005-07-06

If they were in OpenGL on a Mac, then it shouldn't be that much of a problem to make a release for Linux, we've seen that.
Closed-source games could do very well on Linux, because it isn't only Free Software zealots who happen to use Linux, and most of those people would welcome decent games for Linux wholeheartedly. It would probably be the same with binary drivers, we see that nVidia's are quite popular and in demand, I'd say most people seem to use them for better acceleration (I have no stats to support that, but just having a look at forums of your favourite distribution says it's not just 2 people using those).
Besides, games for Windows get pirated usually the same week they are available. And I do think people might not get them cracked on Linux that fast, if they have some brains left anyway.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Gaming is it
by fretinator on Tue 12th Jun 2007 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Gaming is it"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

Closed-source games could do very well on Linux, because it isn't only Free Software zealots who happen to use Linux, and most of those people would welcome decent games for Linux wholeheartedly.


The problem is that Closed-source games go against the very foundation on which the OS resides - Free Software. This will never go away unless Linux goes away. Mac was able to absorb some of the BSD "love" because of the BSD license. You cannot do that with GPL code. Thus, binary-only drivers and binary-only software will always be second class - an evil that is [sometimes] endured until Free replacements are available.

My dream is for there to someday be a way to create a multi-million-dollar game and release it as Free Software, and still make money - and not because you charge for "services" or "servers". I believe the reimbursement element needs to be built into the system, but I don't see how.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Gaming is it
by Slapo on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Gaming is it"
Slapo Member since:
2005-07-06

You've said it yourself:
"Open-source games couldn't generate the money (in my opinion) to pay for the amount of developers, artists, musicians needed to make modern games."
There's no arguing about that, a multi-million-dollar game released as Free Software and making money probably won't happen ;)

The thing with proprietary binaries is that they usually do what people need them to do, without waiting for someone to write an open clone, which will take a long time to get near the original in many aspects.
So while it may go against the Free Software as a foundation for Linux license wise (or is it?), they'll probably have to switch to a license that allows it without just being tolerated, but accepted.
I couldn't care less if e.g. Fifa 2004, of which I own an original CD, would run on Linux and be just a bunch of binaries if it ran. Frankly, most people don't use open source apps because they are open source, but because they get them for free (and pre-compiled).
Besides, Free Software doesn't necessarily have to be in conflict with non-free software.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Gaming is it
by elsewhere on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Gaming is it"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

The problem is that Closed-source games go against the very foundation on which the OS resides - Free Software. This will never go away unless Linux goes away. Mac was able to absorb some of the BSD "love" because of the BSD license. You cannot do that with GPL code. Thus, binary-only drivers and binary-only software will always be second class - an evil that is [sometimes] endured until Free replacements are available.


Free software philosophy has nothing to do with it, there are companies making millions upon millions selling closed software that runs on linux. Problem is with the market; the companies making money selling linux software are generally targeting the datacenter, where linux is a proven commodity and market.

Gaming though, implies home/consumer use, and that's a much more difficult market to measure in terms of viability, particularly considering the vast majority of gamers using linux already have Windows for gaming anyways. Linux needs market viability with numbers to back it up in order to encourage developers to target it as a platform, until then it's a case of falling back to Windows or using wine-esque workarounds.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Gaming is it
by Fergy on Wed 13th Jun 2007 06:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Gaming is it"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

My dream is for there to someday be a way to create a multi-million-dollar game and release it as Free Software, and still make money - and not because you charge for "services" or "servers". I believe the reimbursement element needs to be built into the system, but I don't see how.

You could make a deal like the gpl does where everybody wins. You keep the game closed source for an amount of time(to make money) where people both pay for the game but also for the fact that it will be opensourced after 2 to 3 years.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Gaming is it
by fretinator on Wed 13th Jun 2007 14:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Gaming is it"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

Like WineX/Cedega?

p.s., I know they contribute code back, just like Codeweavers does. But in general, I haven't seen the "HostageWare" concept play out well.

Reply Score: 2

v LOL
by tryphcycle on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:49 UTC
RE: LOL
by BluenoseJake on Tue 12th Jun 2007 23:56 UTC in reply to "LOL"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

I see no innovation being done in any OS, except for maybe Solaris, ZFS is a major advancement in FS technology, and even that is an extension of existing tech. Apple copies MS and Open Source, MS copies Apple, Open Source copies MS and Apple, come on, take off the apple coloured glasses and see the truth, Leopard is built off of exisiting concepts, with stylish and very well designed applications and GUI, but none of them are groundbreaking, just like nothing in Vista or Gnome is groundbreaking.

Reply Score: 3

developers conf.?
by netdur on Tue 12th Jun 2007 16:56 UTC
netdur
Member since:
2005-07-07

it looks like marketing session than developers conf.

Reply Score: 1

Perfected with Windows XP 64 bit?
by vondur on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:03 UTC
vondur
Member since:
2005-07-07

I take it you have never used 64 bit windows xp pro? Very unstable with poor driver support.

Reply Score: 2

jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06

"I take it you have never used 64 bit windows xp pro? Very unstable with poor driver support."

Eh? I've been using it for a couple of years now...extremely stable with good driver support. Of course YMMV, but I've had zero issues.

Reply Score: 4

Defending XpPro 64 bit!?!?!
by MikeekiM on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:09 UTC
MikeekiM
Member since:
2005-11-16

XPPro 64bit is Very Stable under Fusion.
Must be your drivers.

Reply Score: 2

Don't care what anyone
by rjpotts on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:18 UTC
rjpotts
Member since:
2005-07-06

else thinks. I like its looks and functionality. I can see uses for many of the features they have added on a day-to-day bases. I don't think that it needs to be revolutionary to have added value to the product. I wouldn't have an issue shelling out the money for a family pack license. Much more reasonable than the cost of Vista, for what you get out of the box.

Reply Score: 2

hm
by SK8T on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:25 UTC
SK8T
Member since:
2006-06-01

please notice that was online TEN of 300 features he showed!

And just think of the possibilities that these 10 features offer.

And of course there is no Revolution, the Revolution will come with Mac OS 11…

Reply Score: 1

RE: hm
by aent on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:32 UTC in reply to "hm"
aent Member since:
2006-01-25

Yes, but clearly when any company showcases TEN of 300 features, they're going to be showcasing the TEN BEST or most significant features (completed at that point in time). The remaining 290 could all be "add right click menu on X item" and simple bug fixes labeled as new features (safari support for ajax, a fix for some safari autocomplete handling, etc)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: hm
by godawful on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:28 UTC in reply to "RE: hm"
godawful Member since:
2005-06-29

there are a few more mentioned on the website that i think are more than "add right click menu on X item"..

some i've noticed (granted i haven't gone through everything)

1. new dvd player, this one looks pretty snazzy
2. you can choose to "reboot into windows" from the finder, but rather than "shutting down" the OS, writes the ram contents to the drive, it's more of a safe sleep. that way when you boot back into OS X, everything is exactly like you left it.. very nice if you ask me

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: hm
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

2. you can choose to "reboot into windows" from the finder, but rather than "shutting down" the OS, writes the ram contents to the drive, it's more of a safe sleep. that way when you boot back into OS X, everything is exactly like you left it.. very nice if you ask me

It's called hibernation and Macs can already do this.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: hm
by dreamlax on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: hm"
dreamlax Member since:
2007-01-04

They can indeed, but it's still quite new to them; it was only every publicly released late in 2005. Before then, it was partially implemented but never used. Even then, I think it only hibernated when power was low; it couldn't be forced (and was therefore only a iBook/PowerBook feature).

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: hm
by aesiamun on Wed 13th Jun 2007 05:54 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: hm"
aesiamun Member since:
2005-06-29

Check out Midnight

It's a dashboard widget that can actually put your mac into hibernation.

http://www.tekuris.com/products/midnight

Edited 2007-06-13 05:55 UTC

Reply Score: 2

It's all speculation at this point
by Ralf. on Tue 12th Jun 2007 17:37 UTC
Ralf.
Member since:
2005-08-13

The french website MacBidouille has an other opinion:

Here is the english translation on HardMac.com:
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2007-06-12/#6882

I think you can only tell about the inside of Leopard when you attend WWDC. But than you even can not because of the NDA.

Reply Score: 1

_yc_
Member since:
2007-04-03

1. We have only seen 3% of the *New* features of Leopard, so how can we determine that it is evolution and not revolution from that?

2. Under promise & over deliver... Jobs does not want Leopard to take thunder away from the iPhone, so he only mentioned 10 out of 300 new features and they looked pretty impressive.

3. Jobs announced a lot of great features in for iPhone and before we knew it, a bunch clueless clowns claimed to have cloned it's features in their substandard phones. Why repeat that with Leopard?

4. The final Leopard is still 5 months away, so why give the copy cats a headstart on all it's features?

Evolution and not Revolution?

Time will tell...

Reply Score: 3

nothing new
by milles21 on Tue 12th Jun 2007 18:09 UTC
milles21
Member since:
2006-11-08

So we have Safari 3 beta and still no fix for using safari on Mac with citrix same certificate issue that is on safari 2. How do you explain advance when firefox and camino work fine using citrix.

Reply Score: 1

RE: nothing new
by Gryzor on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:09 UTC in reply to "nothing new"
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

How do you explain advance when firefox and camino work fine using citrix.

Because there has been an advance, and very few people uses Safari on Macintosh with Citrix, thus they don't care?

Your "little" problem is not "THE" problem.

Reply Score: 1

RE: nothing new
by dreamlax on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:09 UTC in reply to "nothing new"
dreamlax Member since:
2007-01-04

That's really strange how you think just because one thing doesn't work for you, that the entire product is not an advancement for anyone else. What a way to think.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: nothing new
by milles21 on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:59 UTC in reply to "RE: nothing new"
milles21 Member since:
2006-11-08

the issue is one that they have admitted to and one the Citrix acknowledges maybe you should read. Also it is not such a little problem if you are running Macs in a Windows enterprise which many people do that is an issue. Yes there is a work around but a issue all the same.

Reply Score: 1

Apple to save OpenGL gaming
by REMF on Tue 12th Jun 2007 18:28 UTC
REMF
Member since:
2006-02-05

Hooray i say.

DirectX 10 is without doubt an excellent framework to run games on, far in advance of where OpenGL is now.

OpenGL is going to get DX10 style hardware capabilities in Sept/Oct, but the question is whether anyone would care by that point.........?

Hopefully, the Apple gaming push will persuade games developers to care, and thus ensure the survival of OpenGL as a framework that is actually used by games developers rather than just the professional modeling/visualisation crowd.

Apple switching to x86 was an important step in this hoped for process, and of course, what is good for Apple certainly won't hinder the linux gaming scene!

Edited 2007-06-12 18:28

Reply Score: 1

Common sense?
by bthylafh on Tue 12th Jun 2007 18:30 UTC
bthylafh
Member since:
2006-09-21

How about confirmation that Leopard will be 64-bit yet magically run on 32-bit CPUs? Smart money says that Leopard will be for C2D-based Macs only and the non-upgraders will maybe get an extra-long support period for Tiger.

Apple's got a history of dropping platforms and migrating to the Next Big Thing, and I doubt this will be any different.

Personally I think the idea that you can upgrade your Cube to Leopard is wishful thinking at best.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Common sense?
by henrikmk on Tue 12th Jun 2007 20:28 UTC in reply to "Common sense?"
henrikmk Member since:
2005-07-10

Apple's got a history of dropping platforms and migrating to the Next Big Thing, and I doubt this will be any different.


In that case, they would have to continue selling Tiger with current Mac Minis as they are not yet 64 bit. I can't remember if the Macbook is 64 bit now.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Common sense?
by bthylafh on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Common sense?"
bthylafh Member since:
2006-09-21

It is. The Mini is the only 32-bit Mac currently sold.

My theory on that is the price of C2D processors and the fact that the Mini must use laptop-spec components. If Intel can get the price of C2Ds lower, or maybe Apple could use the Core-derived "Pentium" chips instead, then Mini could go 64-bit and keep its price point.

Reply Score: 1

So what?
by godzillavsxuxo on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:01 UTC
godzillavsxuxo
Member since:
2007-06-12

I work my whole day in command line, AIX 5.3L to be specific. There is nothing better at the end of the day to go home and use a Desktop that I have nothing to worry about...Apple provides me that...not only the slickest, always-ready GUI on UNIX, but the fact that I really haven't restarted my box in months. I cannot afford the time of hunting for elusive rpms, dependencies and other crap associated with some open-source OS. If people don't find the new items 'good enough' or 'disappointing'...then, spend hours of 'enjoyable' time hacking around setting up KDE, XFCE, fluxbox and then installing all the gimmicks and shiny things and by the end of the weekend you can say 'hey, where did my girlfriend go?'...she might be hanging out the dude with the MacBook at Starbucks!..after all, the mani goal is to get the chick!
=)

Reply Score: 1

ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

of Leopard. There's nothing to break me away from Windows Vista.

Macs are really taking a back seat at Apple. There wasn't anything worth talking about at WWDC'07. In previous shows, people would drool over things like overhyped Apple branded mouse. Nothing. Absolutely nothing...

At least they didn't bring up the stupid Mail app stationary as a top 10 feature...

Reply Score: 2

Same as Tiger
by siraf72 on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:03 UTC
siraf72
Member since:
2006-02-22

in a good way. Apple hyped Tiger, then only drip fed actual features. Once Users got their hands on it, they raved about it.

Apple is good at exploiting viral marketing and in order to do that you have to leave alot of the subtle (yet valuable) improvements unanounced. I suspect Leopard will be at last as good an upgrade as Tiger was if not more.

Reply Score: 3

Transparent menubar
by Dave_K on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:25 UTC
Dave_K
Member since:
2005-11-16

I've just been browsing the screenshots over at Apple.com and I'm surprised at just how transparent the new menubar actually is.

I thought if anything Apple had toned down the use of transparency, compared with the initial versions of Mac OS X. Transparency effects can provide some nice eye candy, I'm sure there are even circumstances where they offer a usability benefit, but they can also add visual clutter and reduce the legibility of text.

Even in the official Apple screenshots with a green desktop background, the menu text looks significantly less clear and readable. I know the same level of transparency isn't used when menus are pulled down, but this does seem like a case of form over function, hopefully it's an isolated example...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Transparent menubar
by Tuishimi on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:48 UTC in reply to "Transparent menubar"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Guessing that it will be adjustable, somehow.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Transparent menubar
by Kroc on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Transparent menubar"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Replace "somehow" with "some lame piece of shareware going at MacZot"

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Transparent menubar
by Tuishimi on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Transparent menubar"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Lame shmame. I use Onyx to do a lot of customization and maintenance. It is a nice piece of software.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Transparent menubar
by Kroc on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Transparent menubar"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

I know, I was just poking MacZot, and stupid shareware that does stuff that's already in the system, or can be done on the command line (1: taking screenshots of DVD Player, and 2: Screensaver as wallpaper)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Transparent menubar
by Alex Forster on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:55 UTC in reply to "Transparent menubar"
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

Did you notice in the keynote that, when Steve Jobs changed the slide after announcing a "new desktop" and revealed the ridiculous transparency and the looking-glass dock, people laughed? It's very clearly heard. People in the audience thought he was joking. I would have thought he was joking if I hadn't seen it on the Apple website first.

Edited 2007-06-12 19:57

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Transparent menubar
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Transparent menubar"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

People in the audience thought he was joking.

Indeed, Alex, I thought I was crazy for thinking that ;) . Good to read I'm not alone on this one.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Transparent menubar
by Alex Forster on Tue 12th Jun 2007 20:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Transparent menubar"
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

http://images.appleinsider.com/07leopardscreen.jpg

Ihateit Ihateit Ihateit. I came here looking to bond with others who hated it as well, but the general response seems positive. In my opinion, the menu bar looks like something I used to make dabbling in Ulead Photoimpact. Amateurish is an understatement--it's unusable (for so many reasons). If someone were to tell me it was from a "fake Leopard screenshot contest," I wouldn't bat an eyelash.

Ironically, when it came out, I thought Tiger's aqua-fying of the menu bar was as bad as it could get. They sure showed me.

Edited 2007-06-12 20:37

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Transparent menubar
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 20:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Transparent menubar"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Well, transparency per se isn't bad, but transparency in one of the most important (if not the most important) UI elements of your graphical environment is just... Well, stupid. The text labels are quite hard to read in the shots. I sincerely hope this can be adjusted with a slider.

Reply Score: 1

"Evolution"
by Worldbuilder on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:43 UTC
Worldbuilder
Member since:
2006-04-12

I don´t like the codenames of Apple releases. I am just playing "Company of Heroes" and noticed that the Wehrmacht used to call their Panzerz all the same as Apple do it now.

Reply Score: 1

I still think...
by Tuishimi on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:50 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

...some of the more important changes will be with the threaded TCP stack, new scheduler algorithm, etc. I expect to see fewer beach balls under certain circumstances. It will be interesting to see how teh snappy the UI and many other apps will become.

Reply Score: 2

32-bit / 64-bit
by AdamW on Tue 12th Jun 2007 20:08 UTC
AdamW
Member since:
2005-07-06

"Steve's claim that Leopard will be the first 64bit operating system capable of running 32bit and 64bit applications side-by-side is of course completely bonkers. Windows' 64bit versions have had this capability since Windows XP 64bit Edition (for the Itanium, 2001), which was later perfected in Windows XP Professional x64 Edition in 2005."

Not to mention that it's been possible in Mandriva Linux since, I believe, release 9.2.

Reply Score: 3

64bit debate...
by sn0n on Tue 12th Jun 2007 20:15 UTC
sn0n
Member since:
2005-08-09

i'm sorry, but correct me if im wrong, but i believe that hes stating that any 64 bit compiled app will run in 32 bit mode if 64bit is not available. (aka : backwards compatible)

http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/64bit/
----
Write Chameleon Code
Tiger simplifies software distribution with support for fat binaries, applications that contain both 32-bit and 64-bit binaries within a single file. Using fat binaries, network administrators distribute a single version of an application to all users regardless of their system capabilities. Once installed on a user’s system, the fat binary automatically selects the appropriate code for the system without user intervention. This greatly simplifies administration, installation and distribution of applications.

Edited 2007-06-12 20:22

Reply Score: 1

RE
by Kroc on Tue 12th Jun 2007 20:39 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

I can't think of any system, anywhere, anytime, that has made backup, and especially restore so easy and practical as Time Machine. You can do advanced searches throughout the entire timeline and restore is a few clicks. There is no doubt in my mind that this is more than a revolutionary feature.

Reply Score: 2

On the zeroth day Apple created God...
by Sabon on Tue 12th Jun 2007 23:33 UTC
Sabon
Member since:
2005-07-06

When discussing Apple: logical evolution.

When discussing anything other than Apple: copying/stealing.

On the zeroth day Apple created God...

Well at least we can admit that Apple was mention in the Bible before Windows, Risc OS, PARC, etc., LOL

Reply Score: 2

stacks and docks
by axel on Wed 13th Jun 2007 02:15 UTC
axel
Member since:
2006-02-04

From Apple's website
"Files you download in Safari or save from an email are automatically directed to a Stack in the Dock, and when the download is complete, the Stack signals that a new item has arrived."

and won't users be surprised when they go to drag their downloaded file onto the desktop and it disappears in a puff of smoke.

Reply Score: 1

exciting new stuff
by richmassena on Wed 13th Jun 2007 02:39 UTC
richmassena
Member since:
2006-11-26

I was a bit let down myself. I truly expected some revolutionary steps. There are a lot of need additions that I'm sure we'll grow used to. Time Machine and versioning filesystems in general are pretty cool, so I can't wait to use that.

Besides the addition of ZFS, the thing I would truly like to see is non-blocking I/O in the Finder. If a mounted volume is offline, or the network is down, the Finder should not hang, or beach ball so badly force quit (or kill -9!) won't do anything, and I have to reboot the machine. This is the only flaw on OSX that I have no patience for (not that I have huge list of 'flaws').

Please fix this Apple, it's a showstopper.

Reply Score: 1

RE: exciting new stuff
by dreamlax on Wed 13th Jun 2007 04:44 UTC in reply to "exciting new stuff"
dreamlax Member since:
2007-01-04

Amen.

There's nothing worse that accidentally clicking on an offline network share and staring at that spinning ball.

But similar things happen on other operating systems. Ever mounted an NFS share and lost the connection, and then tried to browse the folder in Gnome (or with a GTK app)? kill -9 fixes that one, though.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: exciting new stuff
by netpython on Wed 13th Jun 2007 05:52 UTC in reply to "RE: exciting new stuff"
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

I have never witnesses kill -9 fail on linux.

Reply Score: 2

File recoveries
by Prometheus on Wed 13th Jun 2007 09:04 UTC
Prometheus
Member since:
2007-01-10

1. If I remember correctly you can recover files From The Same Hard Drive using disk utility. It might help doing some research Tom before you start ranting.
2. Yes you're right about stacks. It's nothing new since Apple patended this as Piles around 4 years ago and was rumored to come into 10.3 but never showed up.
3. It's funny how you mock Wikipedia in your comments later on yet you link one about Windows XP 64-bit Edition and probably fail to read it yourself as well.
However if you would read that article you would notice it says that Windows XP 64-bit Edition "lacked most media applications" and numerous old technologies. Running 32 bit apps was done using an "emulation layer" and it also mentions that they were Significantly slow.
Not giving the right picture are you?
This could have been available in 2001 but its nothing compared to what Leopard will do.
Then of course there is the improved version that came in 2005, Windows XP Professional x64 Edition.
Yet again if you read the WIKIPEDIA article it's clearly not the same thing as Leopard, is it???!!!

Edited 2007-06-13 09:19

Reply Score: 1