Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:03 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Apple conceded that it will be unable to release its next generation operating system in June as previously planned and now says it anticipates launching the software in October. In a statement released after the close of the stock market, Apple said its highly anticipated iPhone has already passed several of its required certification tests and is on schedule to ship in late June as planned. "We can't wait until customers get their hands (and fingers) on it and experience what a revolutionary and magical product it is," Apple said. "However, iPhone contains the most sophisticated software ever shipped on a mobile device, and finishing it on time has not come without a price - we had to borrow some key software engineering and QA resources from our Mac OS X team, and as a result we will not be able to release Leopard at our WWDC in early June as planned." Update: New Leopard screenshots.
Thread beginning with comment 230221
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-22
Member since:2005-12-13
I am sorry to tell you that this actually happened to me, albeit on an old rev.b iMac G3 233 MHz with Mac OS X 10.3.9, 256 MB RAM and iTunes 7.02 ...
It wouldn't load unless I stripped off the Intel bits (after which it has just kept running though the library keeps growing + the RAM usage went down dramatically even on my PB G4 1.5 GHz with 1.25 GB RAM ...
I know it's not supposed to make a difference, but in my case it did, and quite dramatically I might say!
Member since:2006-10-12
um, no. You will not save RAM or CPU by removing the Intel code, since the Intel code is not loaded on a PPC system. The only increase is in the size of the application on disk since it contains 2 binaries.
Even more than that: take a look at anything in /System on Tiger/ppc, you'll find that nothing in there is a Universal binary; it's all PPC-only. Do the same on Tiger/x86 (assuming you haven't run Monolingual on it), and you'll find it's not Intel-only, but all dual-architecture fat binaries.
Quite an odd choice, really.
To those wondering about the stability of Mac OS X on Intel, be aware that Darwin has been available for x86 for as long as it's been available on PPC: it didn't run on very many hardware configurations, but those it does run on work just fine (and really, limited hardware configurations isn't exactly a concern for Mac OS X)
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-12-13
Leopard might very well be an improvement for owners of Intel Macs, since it might very well be more fully adapted to the platform than Tiger is and was...
I somehow fear that PPC Mac users might not get 'as much' from the upgrade in terms of stability and general support of the platform, compared to Intel Mac users, since Tigers code base was probably at least as PPC oriented as it was Intel - but that's probably goin to change...
I.e. if you strip your version of iTunes 7 on a PPC for the Intel specific parts, you'll save up to 50% RAM usage and decrease cpu utilization by up to 40-50% as well... Now take an entire OS acting like that here and there... That's definately not goint to be pretty on a non G5 PPC system...