Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 15th Jun 2015 23:34 UTC
Mac OS X

Looking across the updates in El Capitan, the story is clear: Apple is making life way better for people who live in its ecosystem. But if you don't live in Apple's garden, the benefits are less clear. Yes, it's faster and there are bugfixes all around, but to take advantage of Apple's updates you really need to use Apple's apps.

I just want El Capitan's Metal and Aero Snap. That name is horrible, though.

Order by: Score:
Snow Leopard times...
by sergio on Tue 16th Jun 2015 00:42 UTC
sergio
Member since:
2005-07-06

I just want an OSX realease on par with Snow Leopard in stability and speed. That's all I ask.

I don't care about stupid Windows or iOS features, I want QUALITY. Please Apple, give us back the simple and polished product that OSX was in the past.

Mavericks was a step in the right direction and El Capitan looks good too... but We need 2 or 3 bug fixing releases to get Snow Leopard levels of stability back. Please Apple, please focus on quality again. Quality was the key difference between OSX and all the rest.

Reply Score: 8

RE: Snow Leopard times...
by leos on Tue 16th Jun 2015 03:38 UTC in reply to "Snow Leopard times..."
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Why are you asking for something that they are already specifically doing in OS X and iOS?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Snow Leopard times...
by rleigh on Tue 16th Jun 2015 15:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Snow Leopard times..."
rleigh Member since:
2014-11-15

The quality of MacOS has been quite variable the last few years. There's a reason there were a lot of holdouts using 10.6. I primarily use it for development, so I don't actually use much of the GUI stuff, but the stupid small scrollbars are really annoying. I also went through a phase of getting a "black screen of death" several times a week... selecting text in Emacs(!); tripping over some fundamental bug somewhere. The removal of the maximise button in favour of fullscreen is also massively annoying.

MacOSX 10.8 was a wreck. It came with a hybrid toolchain of clang++ and GNU libstdc++. So much stuff was broken it was untrue; huge chunks of the standard C++ library were unusable. Just creating a std::locale object would segfault your program... This has improved a since they switched to libc++ for later releases. But it's only with 10.10 we have a relatively bug-free clang++. But you have to use lldb which I still don't find half as good as gdb; I find it vastly less useful on the command-line, and it seems to have been written with other uses in mind.

However, they now won't let you run a debugger without it
- being codesigned
- being given special privs
The upshot is that you can't run the debugger over SSH (the priv escalation password prompt is GUI only), and you can't run gdb without faffing around with your own self-signed codesigning cert. When your Mac builds are all on remote build nodes, this doesn't help. In fact, I now do all my clang++/libc++ build debugging on FreeBSD to avoid the pain!!

Honestly, I can't see from a UI point of view much improvement after 10.6 other than maybe Spaces. It's been either pointless bling or regressive changes for the sake of it. The changes inspired by iOS have been poor choices for desktop use, and I can't help but feel that the desktop UI is no longer being developed with real usability in mind (as in being simple, discoverable, functional, and efficient, not just following a fashion trend). Not that Apple are alone in that camp.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Snow Leopard times...
by timby on Tue 16th Jun 2015 09:37 UTC in reply to "Snow Leopard times..."
timby Member since:
2015-06-11

I just want an OSX realease on par with Snow Leopard in stability and speed. That's all I ask.


I think your prayers have been heard.

Been running El Cap' off of a partition for 6 days, and the performance boost is rather impressive. I already thought Yosemite was snappy on my Macbook Pro, but this thing really flies.

I'm one of the few who uses fullscreen all day long (go iTerm2 and splits), and OS X is years ahead of the competition in this area.

So far, El Capitan rocks (!)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Snow Leopard times...
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 16th Jun 2015 14:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Snow Leopard times..."
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Wait... what area are you referring to? The fast on old hardware area or the split terminal app available arena? And what is the competition?

I think its arguable in either case. Although, I haven't tried El Cap yet.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Snow Leopard times...
by leos on Tue 16th Jun 2015 18:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Snow Leopard times..."
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Totally with you on the full screen. OS X did this correctly while Windows screwed it up royally. On the Mac each program can implement a sensible full screen view in the same application. On Windows each application is forced to provide a totally separate and crippled metro app which behaves totally different and doesn't integrate with the desktop version.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Snow Leopard times...
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 16th Jun 2015 19:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Snow Leopard times..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Totally with you on the full screen. OS X did this correctly while Windows screwed it up royally. On the Mac each program can implement a sensible full screen view in the same application. On Windows each application is forced to provide a totally separate and crippled metro app which behaves totally different and doesn't integrate with the desktop version.


...am I missing something? Any application can go fullscreen on Windows, and none of them require Metro for it.

Huh?

Edited 2015-06-16 19:45 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Snow Leopard times...
by leos on Thu 18th Jun 2015 06:02 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Snow Leopard times..."
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Windows doesn't have a full screen mode. Maximized is not full screen.

Reply Score: 2

Metal? Why not Vulkan
by SpyroRyder on Tue 16th Jun 2015 02:34 UTC
SpyroRyder
Member since:
2014-08-25

I would personally rather them throw their weight behind Vulkan as that's the new standard for Graphics from Khronos. I'm not seeing anything from Metal that necessitates it's existence in light of what Vulkan will bring.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by dpJudas on Tue 16th Jun 2015 06:55 UTC in reply to "Metal? Why not Vulkan"
dpJudas Member since:
2009-12-10

I would personally rather them throw their weight behind Vulkan as that's the new standard for Graphics from Khronos. I'm not seeing anything from Metal that necessitates it's existence in light of what Vulkan will bring.

Why any of them? Apple virtually only sell mobile GPU computers. What is the point of reducing API overhead when the CPU is always waiting for the GPU anyway? ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by phoudoin on Tue 16th Jun 2015 08:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

It's more often GPU which is waiting data from CPU than the reverse, in fact.

Hence why Mantle, Metal and now Vulkan were pushed by GPU manufacters. They know where main bottleneck is these days...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by Carewolf on Tue 16th Jun 2015 13:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
Carewolf Member since:
2005-09-08

It's more often GPU which is waiting data from CPU than the reverse, in fact.

Hence why Mantle, Metal and now Vulkan were pushed by GPU manufacters. They know where main bottleneck is these days...

On a desktop with a powerful GPU and a mediocre CPU, yes. It is even better on tablets and mobile phones where the GPUs are even more powerful compared to the CPU. It makes less sense on an iMac and MacBooks where the GPU is shit, but the CPU powerful. I guess it does simplify the numbers of APIs though, and if programmers are using the lower level APIs anyway, nothing is lost by supporting them, they shouldn't be slower anywhere, only more complicated to use.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by moondevil on Tue 16th Jun 2015 07:05 UTC in reply to "Metal? Why not Vulkan"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I'm not seeing anything from Metal that necessitates it's existence in light of what Vulkan will bring.


An OOP API built on top of Objective-C and Swift, with C++11 for shader code, instead of the same old crufty C that Khronos keeps using.

A proper SDK for font handling, shader compilation, texture handling, model files instead of roll your own Khronos attitude. I really would like to earn 0.01 euro for each time a developer re-invents the wheel to display a triangle in OpenGL (Vulkan will be no different).

Apple went to the trouble of re-writing all their graphical and compute desktop Kits on top of Metal.

They aren't going to throw away that work for adding Vulkan support, specially when all AAA game studios that matter already announced Metal support on their engines.

And this is what matters, game engines. Any game developer knows the 3D API it just a tiny bit of the engine, which can be easily handled via a plugin system.

Before anyone mentions that Apple is listed on the Vulkan work group.

1 - So is Sony and they hardly use any OpenGL outside their Android phones and WebGL for the PS 4 dashboard

2 - Apple can have played a Microsoft card and used their presence at Khronos meetings to improve Metal

Apple rescued OpenGL from dying with their decision to use it for their iPhone. Now like don't need it anymore, as developers will just use whatever they propose.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by dpJudas on Tue 16th Jun 2015 08:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
dpJudas Member since:
2009-12-10

A proper SDK for font handling, shader compilation, texture handling, model files instead of roll your own Khronos attitude. I really would like to earn 0.01 euro for each time a developer re-invents the wheel to display a triangle in OpenGL (Vulkan will be no different).

Ever heard about the law of leaky abstractions? There is a good reason why low level GPU abstraction libraries like OpenGL, OpenlCL and Direct3D doesn't do this: the specific needs of what you just listed varies greatly from program to program and any single abstraction cannot support them all. The entire point of a 3D engine is to layer a specific abstraction on top of the low level model.

Apple went to the trouble of re-writing all their graphical and compute desktop Kits on top of Metal.

We shall see how true this really is. Color me skeptical, but I've just seen so many "oh we rewrote the entire system" stories in this industry that turned be complete BS. I believe it when someone has the final release in their hands and technically confirms this to be the case.

And this is what matters, game engines. Any game developer knows the 3D API it just a tiny bit of the engine, which can be easily handled via a plugin system.

Which brings us back to your original claims of the superiority of Metal. What is the point of all that higher level mesh and texture management stuff when the game engine plugin systems aren't going to use it? The game engines already have their own specifically adjusted and designed to be a 100% perfect fit for their model. Unlike what Metal got to offer (due to the law of leaky abstractions).

Apple rescued OpenGL from dying with their decision to use it for their iPhone. Now like don't need it anymore, as developers will just use whatever they propose.

Okay, now you're just trolling. Apple rescuing OpenGL! Give me a break!

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by moondevil on Tue 16th Jun 2015 08:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

here is a good reason why low level GPU abstraction libraries like OpenGL, OpenlCL and Direct3D doesn't do this:


Wrong, Direct3D comes as part of DirectX, the SDK that OpenGL never had.

I believe it when someone has the final release in their hands and technically confirms this to be the case.


So you didn't went neither to WWDC, not have access to El Capitan it seems.

Unlike what Metal got to offer (due to the law of leaky abstractions).


Metal is as low level as Vulkan.

Using Objective-C, Swift and C++11 instead of C doesn't make it less leaky.

Okay, now you're just trolling. Apple rescuing OpenGL! Give me a break!


Have you ever did graphics programming on mobile platforms before iPhone was born?!?

I did.

The options were between vendor specific hardware accelerated 3D APIs, J2ME M3GS and software rendering of OpenGL ES 1.0.

The N95 was probably the only handset ever offering an usable hardware accelerated OpenGL ES 1.0 implementation.

No sane developer would pick OpenGL ES 1.0 before the iPhone was released.

Edited 2015-06-16 08:44 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by dpJudas on Tue 16th Jun 2015 09:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
dpJudas Member since:
2009-12-10

Wrong, Direct3D comes as part of DirectX, the SDK that OpenGL never had.

What are you trying to say here? That the xbox controller input library or their sound mixer library adds the stuff you listed? Because that is really all there is left of the DirectX SDK besides Direct3D itself.

To my knowledge the last released DirectX SDK is still from June 2010. That effectively makes anything in that SDK dead unless it was moved into the Windows SDK itself (only the case for the things I listed).

So you didn't went neither to WWDC, not have access to El Capitan it seems.

Do you believe anything sales people tell you at face value? Such presentations are always full of half truths. For all I know, this could be one of them. In any case CoreGraphics has always been dog slow (like just try resize a window on OS X). Surely they took this opportunity to fix the speed while "rewriting" it, right?

Metal is as low level as Vulkan.

Now you're just contradicting yourself. You complained about a long list of higher level things that Khronos wouldn't add and how stupid it was.

Using Objective-C, Swift and C++11 instead of C doesn't make it less leaky.

Where did I mention anything about their language choice?

No sane developer would pick OpenGL ES 1.0 before the iPhone was released.

Ah, so because mobile hardware was too slow and limited for OpenGL before the iPhone arrived, Apple "rescued" OpenGL. Never mind the fact that normal OpenGL was supported on Windows, Linux, OS X for decades by the time iPhone arrived. What a rescue! Oh and don't mention this never heard of mobile OS called Android, which also happens to use OpenGL ES. But I guess they would NEVER EVER have picked OpenGL ES if Apple had not done so! No no!

Edited 2015-06-16 09:16 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by moondevil on Tue 16th Jun 2015 10:00 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

What are you trying to say here? That the xbox controller input library or their sound mixer library adds the stuff you listed? Because that is really all there is left of the DirectX SDK besides Direct3D itself.

To my knowledge the last released DirectX SDK is still from June 2010. That effectively makes anything in that SDK dead unless it was moved into the Windows SDK itself (only the case for the things I listed).


So what is the difference if the SDK is available separately or as part of the OS SDK?

Do you believe anything sales people tell you at face value? Such presentations are always full of half truths. For all I know, this could be one of them. In any case CoreGraphics has always been dog slow (like just try resize a window on OS X). Surely they took this opportunity to fix the speed while "rewriting" it, right?


What does technical documentation and preview OS have to do with the presentations?

Now you're just contradicting yourself. You complained about a long list of higher level things that Khronos wouldn't add and how stupid it was.


Having a high level SDK (MetalKit) doesn't mean there isn't a low level API as well (Metal).

No contradiction Apple, just like any other API vendor (Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony) is providing two layers of APIs.

Khronos just has https://www.khronos.org/opengles/sdk/ , which is a pile of library not designed to work together.

Where did I mention anything about their language choice?


That is how I understood your leaky remarks.

Ah, so because mobile hardware was too slow and limited for OpenGL before the iPhone arrived, Apple "rescued" OpenGL. Never mind the fact that normal OpenGL was supported on Windows, Linux, OS X for decades by the time iPhone arrived. What a rescue! Oh and don't mention this never heard of mobile OS called Android, which also happens to use OpenGL ES. But I guess they would NEVER EVER have picked OpenGL ES if Apple had not done so! No no!


If you ever written any OpenGL code you would surely be aware that OpenGL ES != OpenGL, besides some basic common APIs, thus requiring multiple code paths.

Android wasn't a thing when the iPhone hit the streets.

OpenGL on Linux has mostly been a joke for developing serious games unless one uses the proprietary drivers.

Most developers targeting Windows back then, wouldn't exchange the DirectX tooling and support given by all vendors vs OpenGL.

http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/88055

No serious studio ever bothered with PSGL (OpenGL ES 1.0 + Cg for shaders) on the PS3. The only games console to ever offer some form of OpenGL support.

http://sandstormgames.ca/blog/tag/libgcm/

OpenGL on OS X has always lagged behind, with drivers done exclusively by Apple and buggier than the ones provided by the graphics vendors.

El Capitan is still stuck in OpenGL 4.1, with the latest version being 4.5. Apple also is the only vendor not offering the compatibility context.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by dpJudas on Tue 16th Jun 2015 17:10 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
dpJudas Member since:
2009-12-10

So what is the difference if the SDK is available separately or as part of the OS SDK?

That none of this is even remotely related to graphics?

What does technical documentation and preview OS have to do with the presentations?

I accept links to technical documentation (preview or not - I got an apple dev account) that shows they rewrote CoreGraphics or their window manager to use Metal.

Note that adding a completely new API next to the other one is not a rewrite, so please don't give me a link to the MetalKit overview page! If you can provide something like a link showing their driver APIs are all 100% metal or something along the lines of that I'll agree they indeed did rewrite the backend.

Having a high level SDK (MetalKit) doesn't mean there isn't a low level API as well (Metal).

No, except that you were complaining about Khronos' APIs being low level.

Back in the day Direct3D also had one of those high level APIs. They dropped that in Direct3D 10 because nobody was using it. And why not? Because every 3D engine implemented their own - just as they will continue to do with Metal. THAT was my point. 3D engines do not want an OS high level abstraction as they will always be a poor fit.

Why? The law of leaky abstractions dictate that the high level API is simpler because it made decisions on your behalf that the lower level version requires you to directly address. When it comes to meshes, texture formats, cache management and rendering algorithms those choices vary greatly to the extent that no engine will find the higher level API a good fit. And YOU started out saying that the only thing that actually matter are the game engines.

If you ever written any OpenGL code you would surely be aware that OpenGL ES != OpenGL, besides some basic common APIs, thus requiring multiple code paths.

It seems you're the one that know terribly little about the differences. OpenGL ES 2.0 is little more than a subset of OpenGL 3.x where some of the more exotic texture formats and states are not supported. As for OpenGL ES 1.x, you are right but are we talking about 2005 technologies here or 2015 ones?

Android wasn't a thing when the iPhone hit the streets.

Ah, you're one of those types that believe Android could never have happened if Apple hadn't shown them the divine path.

OpenGL on Linux has mostly been a joke for developing serious games unless one uses the proprietary drivers.

Oh no! Proprietary drivers! How will we ever survive that? What's next? Entire OSes that are proprietary?

Most developers targeting Windows back then, wouldn't exchange the DirectX tooling and support given by all vendors vs OpenGL.

Yes, game developers did prefer Direct3D 9 over the OpenGL 1.x and 2.x series. That still doesn't remove the fact that OpenGL was widely supported on all major platforms for decades before iPhone showed up and Apple "rescued" them.

No serious studio ever bothered with PSGL (OpenGL ES 1.0 + Cg for shaders) on the PS3. The only games console to ever offer some form of OpenGL support.

PS3 also didn't support Direct3D. How did Direct3D ever survive!?!

OpenGL on OS X has always lagged behind, with drivers done exclusively by Apple and buggier than the ones provided by the graphics vendors.

Yes, Apple's GPU support has always been a joke. That much I'll give you.

El Capitan is still stuck in OpenGL 4.1, with the latest version being 4.5. Apple also is the only vendor not offering the compatibility context.

And that is because nothing Apple sells (except maybe the highest end Mac Pro products) is even remotely able to do anything those newer versions can do. My MacBook Pro returns "4.1 INTEL-10.6.20". I'm not even sure the hardware in this laptop can actually DO compute shaders!

Still, how exactly can Apple have been "rescuing" OpenGL when they treat any GPU technology as an unpleasant thing they have to update once every 5 year? Amazing OpenGL survived it!

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by moondevil on Tue 16th Jun 2015 19:09 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

"So what is the difference if the SDK is available separately or as part of the OS SDK?

That none of this is even remotely related to graphics?
"

Now I am learning something.

Texture, font loading, shader compilation, 3D math, geometry meshes aren't even remotely related to graphics.

"What does technical documentation and preview OS have to do with the presentations?

I accept links to technical documentation (preview or not - I got an apple dev account) that shows they rewrote CoreGraphics or their window manager to use Metal.

Note that adding a completely new API next to the other one is not a rewrite, so please don't give me a link to the MetalKit overview page! If you can provide something like a link showing their driver APIs are all 100% metal or something along the lines of that I'll agree they indeed did rewrite the backend.
" [/q]

Ask and thou shall receive.

http://devstreaming.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2015/6037pi9rxl6tfss8w/60...

Pages 31 and 32.


https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/mac/releasenotes/MacO...

Feel free to search for "Metal as its rendering engine", "supported as a rendering path", "Metal rendering support".

"Having a high level SDK (MetalKit) doesn't mean there isn't a low level API as well (Metal).

No, except that you were complaining about Khronos' APIs being low level.

Back in the day Direct3D also had one of those high level APIs. They dropped that in Direct3D 10 because nobody was using it. And why not? Because every 3D engine implemented their own - just as they will continue to do with Metal. THAT was my point. 3D engines do not want an OS high level abstraction as they will always be a poor fit.

Why? The law of leaky abstractions dictate that the high level API is simpler because it made decisions on your behalf that the lower level version requires you to directly address. When it comes to meshes, texture formats, cache management and rendering algorithms those choices vary greatly to the extent that no engine will find the higher level API a good fit. And YOU started out saying that the only thing that actually matter are the game engines.
" [/q]

No, I am complaining that OpenGL doesn't have any support for loading fonts, textures, 3D math, shaders and that every single OpenGL developer (me included) had to write that code at once in his/her life. Sometimes multiple times across several platforms.

"If you ever written any OpenGL code you would surely be aware that OpenGL ES != OpenGL, besides some basic common APIs, thus requiring multiple code paths.


It seems you're the one that know terribly little about the differences. OpenGL ES 2.0 is little more than a subset of OpenGL 3.x where some of the more exotic texture formats and states are not supported. As for OpenGL ES 1.x, you are right but are we talking about 2005 technologies here or 2015 ones?
"

We are talking about OpenGL. So isn't it supposed to be one code path working wonderfully across all platforms?!

Surely you are aware of the GLSL differences between OpenGL ES and desktop OpenGL, also between shader models.

"Android wasn't a thing when the iPhone hit the streets.

Ah, you're one of those types that believe Android could never have happened if Apple hadn't shown them the divine path.
"


No, I am one of those guys that believes DirectX, LibGCM and GX would have killed OpenGL if it wasn't for the success of games in the iPhone app store.

So you are now going to praise the huge market that GNU/Linux games enjoy?!

"OpenGL on Linux has mostly been a joke for developing serious games unless one uses the proprietary drivers.

Oh no! Proprietary drivers! How will we ever survive that? What's next? Entire OSes that are proprietary?
"

I couldn't care less.

"Most developers targeting Windows back then, wouldn't exchange the DirectX tooling and support given by all vendors vs OpenGL.

Yes, game developers did prefer Direct3D 9 over the OpenGL 1.x and 2.x series. That still doesn't remove the fact that OpenGL was widely supported on all major platforms for decades before iPhone showed up and Apple "rescued" them.
"

If you consider major platforms the desktops with shitty drivers.

"No serious studio ever bothered with PSGL (OpenGL ES 1.0 + Cg for shaders) on the PS3. The only games console to ever offer some form of OpenGL support.

PS3 also didn't support Direct3D. How did Direct3D ever survive!?!
"

By almost killing OpenGL for AAA studios on the PC and XBox.

First class tools from all graphics vendors. NVidia and AMD developer tools never exposed as much debugging information on the GL drivers as DirectX.

On every GDC there was the Microsoft DirectX evangelists giving support to developers.

Still, how exactly can Apple have been "rescuing" OpenGL when they treat any GPU technology as an unpleasant thing they have to update once every 5 year? Amazing OpenGL survived it!


By creating a lucrative market for games on the App Store, games being the top applications being sold and using OpenGL ES as the 3D API.

Valve only added OpenGL support to their engine for bringing their games to the Mac, back in 2010.

https://www.opengl.org/news/comments/valve-source-engine-overhauled-...

Edited 2015-06-16 19:11 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Wow, what a snark off! Thanks at least for providing some information in between those back bites.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Metal? Why not Vulkan
by phoudoin on Tue 16th Jun 2015 10:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Metal? Why not Vulkan"
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

Using Objective-C, Swift and C++11 instead of C doesn't make it less leaky.

Indeed.
Just limited to lesser platforms and developers set.
I fail to see how non-apple-platforms developers would ever drop their preferred language for Objective C or Swift while they could since years already for the former (but don't) and they could soon for the later (but I bet they won't either)

Have you ever did graphics programming on mobile platforms before iPhone was born?!?
I did.


Nice to you.

But people did graphics programming before mobile platforms were born too, and still do it.
I did and still do.
And OpenGL was and still is the de-facto standard for that kinds of needs, even if its internal design is showing its age indeed.
Hence Vulkan: better, quicker, simpler, moderner, but still open, still crossplatform, still generic.

Which Metal isn't and, according Apple's history, won't be.

I fail to see how a closed-plateform GPU API useable with languages mostly only used on subset of closed-platerfoms could ever become the de-facto cross-plateform language-agnostic GPU API.
But feel free to enlight me.

Please put down your mobile/apple focus lens, GPU landscape is way larger than that.

If OpenGL, an old GPU API, is still often used 25 years later , it's not for the GL API quality, but for its openess, its portability.

Sounds that not depending on one closed platform matters to more developers than you think...

Edited 2015-06-16 10:09 UTC

Reply Score: 4

Comment by sb56637
by sb56637 on Tue 16th Jun 2015 03:18 UTC
sb56637
Member since:
2006-05-11

♫ Para bailar la bamba...
...Yo no soy marinero. Soy capitán. Soy capitán. ♫

Edited 2015-06-16 03:19 UTC

Reply Score: 7

Aero Snap
by Dave_K on Tue 16th Jun 2015 06:58 UTC
Dave_K
Member since:
2005-11-16

I'm surprised that anyone who wants the Aero Snap functionality isn't already using one of the implementations of it available for Mac OS X. Most of them improve on the Windows version, adding extra features and customisation options.

The version in El Capitan has more limitations, forcing you to use the full screen mode, split between two windows. As the article points out, it doesn't even work properly with all the applications that support the current full screen mode, and some software (e.g. Adobe apps) don't support it at all.

Reply Score: 2

Get the Basics Right
by project_2501 on Tue 16th Jun 2015 08:48 UTC
project_2501
Member since:
2006-03-20

If they get the Basics right first....

* WiFi that just works - they control half of he hardware so it should be easier than win/linux

* a GUI that doesn't stutter and lag on ghz cpus (my £250 win7 was smoother and snappier)

* how hard is it to place windows precisely? Snap to edge? For those without gestures the scroll bar is insanely thin...

By after many years of prioritising rmojis and continuity... I don't have high hopes.

Oh and that file explorer... Who likes it?

Reply Score: 4

RE: Get the Basics Right
by laffer1 on Tue 16th Jun 2015 12:00 UTC in reply to "Get the Basics Right"
laffer1 Member since:
2007-11-09

Networking must be stable again. That is the single biggest issue with Mavericks. discoveryd was a huge mistake.

I'm glad apple is taking performance seriously, but you don't optimize a system until it's stable and Yosemite is not that. Apple needs to get some good QA and listen to them.

They need to fix bugs. They need to test in different network environments. Wifi, LAN, bad connections, etc. Not the perfect lab with high end switches and fantasy.

I'm tired of my apple TV not streaming right or my Mac renaming itself every 2 hours. I'm tired of my airport extreme needing a reboot every day so my nest can stay online. (2.4 ghz band is unstable)

Paying a premium for apple products was OK when they worked well. Now, it makes me very angry. It's bad enough I can't find a new mac to upgrade to because I have to spend 2000 dollars to replace a 2012 mac mini to get the same CPU power.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Get the Basics Right
by dnebdal on Tue 16th Jun 2015 13:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Get the Basics Right"
dnebdal Member since:
2008-08-27

IIRC they dropped discoveryd and went back to mDNSresponder, which probably helps a bit.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Get the Basics Right
by cropr on Wed 17th Jun 2015 22:21 UTC in reply to "Get the Basics Right"
cropr Member since:
2006-02-14

Finder is indeed a real PITA. 5 essential features missing in Finder: sort with folders first, (temporarely) show hidden files, 2 column view (a la Norton Commander), refresh button for remote file systems, empty trash for USB sticks.
It is the main reason I am mostly using my Dell XPS13 preloaded with Ubuntu iso my MBP.

Reply Score: 1

That name....
by PieterGen on Tue 16th Jun 2015 09:04 UTC
PieterGen
Member since:
2012-01-13

That name... sounds like an 80s porn star. And it's spelled wrong, the captain is in spanish el capitán. So basically Apple is now selling an operating system named after an 80s porn star, spelled wrong? Eh.....let me think about it, OK?

Edited 2015-06-16 09:07 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE: That name....
by mkone on Tue 16th Jun 2015 09:16 UTC in reply to "That name...."
mkone Member since:
2006-03-14

That name... sounds like an 80s porn star. And it's spelled wrong, the captain is in spanish el capitán. So basically Apple is now selling an operating system named after an 80s porn star, spelled wrong? Eh.....let me think about it, OK?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Capitan

Blimey!

Reply Score: 3

RE: That name....
by timby on Tue 16th Jun 2015 09:38 UTC in reply to "That name...."
timby Member since:
2015-06-11

That name... sounds like an 80s porn star. And it's spelled wrong, the captain is in spanish el capitán. So basically Apple is now selling an operating system named after an 80s porn star, spelled wrong? Eh.....let me think about it, OK?


No need to think about it, since you're wrong.

Reply Score: 2

RE: That name....
by Soulbender on Wed 17th Jun 2015 12:45 UTC in reply to "That name...."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I'm leaning more towards Latin American dictator or drug lord.

Reply Score: 2

Rootless
by darknexus on Tue 16th Jun 2015 12:06 UTC
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

Can I turn it off? If not, Yosemite will be my last version of OS X. I like the OS, but I can only tolerate so much vendor lock-out.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Rootless
by Nelson on Tue 16th Jun 2015 12:11 UTC in reply to "Rootless"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You can turn it off.

Reply Score: 2

So,exiting?
by netpython on Tue 16th Jun 2015 17:09 UTC
netpython
Member since:
2005-07-06

According to Ars Technica:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/06/preview-os-x-el-capitans-first...

"Almost all of El Capitan's updates are aimed at detail-oriented power users who are intimately familiar with the platform and its apps. I'm sure that not all OS X users even make use of the window management features present in Yosemite, so they're not really in a position to appreciate the improvements in El Capitan. You'd miss pretty much all of Mail's improvements if you don't use trackpad gestures or Full Screen mode."

"So, exciting? No, not really, not unless you're a window management enthusiast who is excited to dance on Helvetica Neue's grave (hi)."

So i think the article is somewhat contradicting or a bit too premature.But what's to complain about a free upgrade.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Wed 17th Jun 2015 05:00 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

No OpenGL 4.5? They must be sleeping.

Edited 2015-06-17 05:02 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Impressive
by judgen on Wed 17th Jun 2015 13:03 UTC
judgen
Member since:
2006-07-12

I am really impressed on how they manage to make every single version of OSX uglier than the last since 10.4 onwards.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by krreagan
by krreagan on Wed 17th Jun 2015 18:44 UTC
krreagan
Member since:
2008-04-08

Compared to Kit Kat, Ice Cream... El Capitan is a stellar name.

I have never been able to take Android seriously with the names it gives it releases... Sorry, maybe my own biases but they are just completely freak'n stupid.

Reply Score: 2