Jobs introduced today Mac OS X Leopard, built-to-order Xeon-based Mac Pros and XServes. We attended the keynote and we just posted some pictures below. We loved these new Mac beasts, plus Time Machine looked really cool. The rest of the OSX features were mostly evolutionary.A couple of negative surprises: Apple made fun of Vista copying OSX, although they represented Spaces (aka Virtual Desktops) as “new” and “this is big”. Additionally, Apple now gives SPEC results for their PPC machines to compare to their new Intel ones, while in their PPC-only past they would avoid doing so. Finally, we expected a quick presentation for Mac OS X Server’s new features, but only the press release included such info. Given the fact that the “oh, one more thing” feature was missing, presenting OSX Server could have been a big plus.
Special thanks to our photographer, Vincent Queru, for the pictures.
I see your point about the um, “misrepresentation” of Spaces.
To describe it as “new,” really is quite silly since virtual desktops have been around for a long time on many OS’s. However, knowing Apple, it will be done in a pretty cool and possibly “new” way.
It’s not quite the same thing as the way Apple’s poking fun at Microsoft though. They’re pointing out how Microsoft is adding features that have been added recently to OS X.
Spaces on the other hand is adding a feature to OS X that has been around for a long time on many OS’s.
Edited 2006-08-07 20:52
Spaces works pretty much the same way as it works with that freeware utility that’s been around. And the ability to move apps from one space to another, that exists on Linux and on BeOS too.
And btw, I don’t agree that there is any reason to poke fun to competitors. Everyone is copying everyone else in the industry not because they are photocopiers but because that’s how the industry works. I have explained this point many times in the past, I won’t get into this again. Creating similar things in technology is _normal_.
Edited 2006-08-07 20:55
All UI is evolutionary.
Did IE copy the back button off of Netscape? Or more acurately, did Netscape copy the back button off of Moasic, which became IE. Oh the paradox.
Edited 2006-08-07 21:00
Spaces works pretty much the same way as it works with that freeware utility that’s been around. And the ability to move apps from one space to another, that exists on Linux and on BeOS too.
Ah, but this is the first time that such functionality has been integrated into a mainstream commercial desktop platform! So, it is “new” to the market from any sort of operating systems sales perspective. And for the record, I don’t own any Apple products or stock
I use virtual desktops on OSX for years now. And I used them on BeOS and X11 too. Mainstream or not, sales perspective or not, the feature has already been used by millions. It is not truly “new” as Apple tried to sale it as. But yes, I do like seeing it on OSX. It means that each time I install OSX or create a new user account I don’t have to setup that freeware utility anymore.
I use virtual desktops on OSX for years now. And I used them on BeOS and X11 too. Mainstream or not, sales perspective or not, the feature has already been used by millions. It is not truly “new” as Apple tried to sale it as. But yes, I do like seeing it on OSX. It means that each time I install OSX or create a new user account I don’t have to setup that freeware utility anymore.
Hence why I qualified my post, and also why I said *integrated*. Just because “millions” (which is a hard figure to prove) have already used this functionality does not mean that it doesn’t qualify as “new” in some sense. “New” as in “no one has done this before”? Certainly not! I only claimed that it was new as an integrated part of a commercial mainstream desktop, which Apple is completely right to claim that (if that’s what they are claiming).
Virtual desktops has been an integrated part of KDE and GNOME for years. Both are used for commercial desktops which millions of people use.
From what we’ve seen so far of Spaces, it is nothing new. Apple is copying the industry and then making fun of others for “copying” them. Their behavior is really lame.
Edited 2006-08-07 23:22
I agree, they need to drop the whole “I need to find ways to give my OS buzz so lets claim you copied me” act. It’s really irritating especially when they go and do the exact same thing.
Virtual desktops has been an integrated part of KDE and GNOME for years. Both are used for commercial desktops which millions of people use.
Hence why I said mainstream commercial desktop. Also, we have no hard proof that “millions” of people are using commercial KDE/GNOME desktops
I say this as a Linux (since 1994) and Solaris user.
Desktop Linux has about 2% of market share worldwide. That’s about 15 million users right there. And then there are the on-off users. Bottomline, it is not a brand new feature in its heart. Why do we still debate about this?
Edited 2006-08-07 23:37
Desktop Linux has about 2% of market share worldwide. That’s about 15 million users right there. And then there are the on-off users. Bottomline, it is not a brand new feature in its heart. Why do we still debate about this?
You’re debating something I didn’t say! I never said it was a “new” feature, I said it was new to the mainstream commercial desktop, which Linux does not yet qualify as.
Besides, no one seems to be able to agree on how many desktop users there are for Linux! It’s much harder to estimate something that we currently have no reliable way of recording.
For example, Nat Friedman of Novell estimates that there are five to six million Linux desktops (in late 2004?):
http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=2066_0_1_0_C
Linux does not yet qualify as mainstream since it is not “something that is familiar to the masses.”
i.e. most of my family and friends probably haven’t even heard the word Linux, and I know for certain many of them don’t know what it is.
Current IDC numbers seem to be much closer to the “2%” figure you mentioned — at last check they were 3-4% estimated market share.
What’s interesting is this prediction post from 2004:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/index.php?id=P723
“Market researcher IDC expects to announce within weeks that Linux PC market share in 2003 hit 3.2%, overtaking Apple Computer Inc.’s MacOS. And the researcher expects Linux to capture 6% of this market by 2007. That’s still tiny compared with Microsoft’s 94% share.”
Considering I’ve been using Linux since 1994, I am well aware that KDE, GNOME and others have had a virtual desktop for a *long* time. I just don’t think they qualify as being “mainstream”…
Edited 2006-08-08 00:04
Did they pretend to have invented it ? Or that no one had ever seen that before ? Or did they just say “we have that new feature” ?
I have very often seen in software release notes :
NEW :
Added support for Bligtz 0.0.2
Added support fot Schtrumpflit 2.4
Added Glumpflock functionnality (at last)
etc.
when other software already have all that. It doesn’t make it less new in the software under consideration.
(and no, you won’t find Bligtz, Schtrumpflit or Glumpflock anywhere)
Ah, but this is the first time that such functionality has been integrated into a mainstream commercial desktop platform! So, it is “new” to the market from any sort of operating systems sales perspective. And for the record, I don’t own any Apple products or stock
Define integrated. The APIs have shipped in Windows for years. Exposed to the end-user by default, yes, integrated, no.
Spaces is not the same like virtual desktops in Linux!
It’s pretty similar but not the same! I had never the possibility to sort my virtual desktops by drag’n’dorp them around. Or to see all 4 desktops at the same time.
Look. It is never the same. Implementation details differ on all systems. But the MAIN principle of the app is the exact same one: virtual desktops.
As for dragging and dropping apps from one desktop to another was possible in the same way on BeOS (just not as flashy), and on the latest incarnations of some X11 DEs/WMs (not all). Re-arranging desktops, that’s new AFAIK. But it’s hardly a mainstream feature that’s going to be used all the time. People usually don’t do that. They simply assign functions to each desktop (e.g. mail, browsing etc) and they stay put with it because they learn it that way.
Look. It is never the same. Implementation details differ on all systems. But the MAIN principle of the app is the exact same one: virtual desktops.
That I can agree with. I remember using this functionality on the first desktop (known) to implement it. Amiga OS.
So what. The basic concept is still the same.
Spaces are a nice evolution of the virtual desktop concept, but they are not revolutionary like Apple claims.
So what. The basic concept is still the same.
Spaces are a nice evolution of the virtual desktop concept, but they are not revolutionary like Apple claims.
Actually, Apple is right. One of the dictionary definitions for “revolutionary” is:
markedly new or introducing radical change
For Mac OS X or for any mainstream commercial desktop, this is a “radical change.” Something doesn’t have to be “markedly new” to be revolutionary. So, this is “revolutionary,” at the very minimum, in the context of OS X since it is a “radical change” to the operating system as shipped by Apple.
Something doesn’t have to be “markedly new” to be revolutionary. So, this is “revolutionary,” at the very minimum, in the context of OS X since it is a “radical change” to the operating system as shipped by Apple.
Using your criteras, MS Vista must be a real revolución…
You know, that wouldn’t be bad if they weren’t making fun of “photocopiers”. They do the same, but no, it’s revolutionary!
Love the OS, hate the PR & marketing dept.
Using your criteras, MS Vista must be a real revolución…
I wouldn’t say that, but I would say that Vista has “revolutionary” features in the context of Windows. Of course, many of the features it has Mac OS X had first, so…
In the keynote I only heard him say it was new to OS X. Of course he speaks ambiguously, but I didn’t hear the word revolutionary. Did he say that?
I love how people hang on these words and bicker about it – it’s marketing people. A new razor with an extra blade is called revolutionary by the company that makes it.
Define integrated. The APIs have shipped in Windows for years. Exposed to the end-user by default, yes, integrated, no.
Now who’s splitting hairs?
I would define integrated as useable “out-of-the-box” by the enduser without any extra work on their part. A random API library provided by a company doesn’t count as an integrated desktop feature.
“And btw, I don’t agree that there is any reason to poke fun to competitors.”
I really don’t understand this sentiment. I actually see it all over. All these morality-based assumptions for business.
Face it, businesses are designed to make money. A competitor is by definition a threat to a business’s money making ability.
Why should one business NOT be able to poke fun of another? It’s not “nice”? It’s not “nice” for a business to charge more than what it requires to make a product/provide a service either. That is a business’s ENTIRE point, however.
It’s actually quite funny to see companies jabbing each other in the eye from time to time. It’s gotten so dull lately with these huge oligopolies. All the businesses in almost every industry are in cahoots, they never fight/make fun of/etc each other, they just gouge, all together at once! It’s funny how Shell, Texaco, Chevron, Mobile, and most of the other gas companies charge the same, almost to the penny, for a gallon of gas even though you *know* that they all have different operating costs. It’s VERY obviously price fixing, and it’s because the companies don’t compete with each other anymore. There is no poking fun of each other, undercutting ech other, etc. They all just attend secret meetings to discuss the next price hike, so that it’s uniform and people don’t have a choice. Maybe you blame this on oil prices – why is Costco’s gas SO much cheaper then? Yeah, gasoline is pretty expensive nowadays, but the price you pay at most pumps is ARTIFICALLY INFLATED due to lack of competition.
Same for your phone service. Why does ONE landline here in Hawaii, cost me 30-someodd bucks a month with NO features, no long distance, no caller id, etc. About 5-10$ is tax, so I’m paying 20$ (or was when I had one) a month for a line that’s been in the ground since the 50s, when this home was built. It makes no sense, but there is NO COMPETITION. Why does my business line with NO FEATURES, same as my home line, cost me 80$ a month?? It’s the SAME SERVICE. I just pay 3x more for it because it’s paid with a business account. Again, NO COMPETITION.
So, in summary, I *like* eye poking, fun-making, etc. The problem is there isn’t enough of it anymore, and people get all touchy feely when their beloved (who are we kidding, does anybody love MS anymore??) companies get made fun of by the big ole’ mean bully companies. Give me a break!
“It’s gotten so dull lately with these huge oligopolies”
Holy market share, batman!
There really is nothing “new” in the OS world. :/
how about ZFS?
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/
And btw, I don’t agree that there is any reason to poke fun to competitors.
I don’t think that sort hyperbole (from Apple) is really designed to appeal to the intellects of geeks, but rather to the hearts-n-minds of the “faithful.” A lot of non-technical Mac users eat that stuff up (and have a habit of parrotting it online). Nothing quite says “A teacher who wants to be hip, cool, and ‘with-it'” like a middle school art classroom plastered with “Think Different” posters.
A legion of people who have warm-fuzzies about their Macs – and are ready to tell the world! – are probably more effective than ad campaigns that focus solely on the practical merits of the product. And I’m certain they’re more effective than paid guerrilla advertising.
In some ways, it seems that a large portion of the Mac userbase act as volunteer guerrilla advertisers for Apple. Of course, there’s the argument that rabid Apple evangelists (for instance, do a search for “Derek Currie” on google groups) drive away more than they convert, but that’s another discussion.
You must be right: its designed to appeal to the faithful. It has a complex function.
First, it gives the faithful the feeling of being different. Second, it provokes hostility on the part of the outsiders. Third, this hostility in turn reinforces the committment of the faithful.
Its a marketing tactic you only employ if determined to stay in a niche, and determined to hang on to your converts by fostering a sense of being a beleagered and misunderstood minority.
Its profoundly unattractive to anyone not on the inside, but then, its meant to be, couldn’t work otherwise.
Edited 2006-08-08 08:19
———However, knowing Apple, it will be done in a pretty cool and possibly “new” way.———-
While I agree with you that Apple might come up with a better way than say… the KDE way.
But Apple isn’t gonna top multiple desktops as it’s presented by XGL.
Apple’s been the defacto innovator in computers for many years now(theres exceptions to that rule) but now that’s changing. Linux and linux based technologies are already starting to show their clear leadership ways.
Are they the same? I’ve always took as a granted such a nice feature is implemented at least on Macs. But since even Linux has it nobody talks about it.
Silly me…
OSX is becoming more and more gimmicky. These features are good, well implemented, and useful, but things are starting to borderline tacky.
If they announced massive replumbing, leading to more speed increases, and F’dTFF, then I’d buy it straight away, fancy time travelling effects or not.
I’m waiting for the forward time traveling in 10.5.1 where you can save ourself huge amounts of effort by simply jumping forward in time to when you’ve finished that huge document you’ve been working on (coursework/thesis/business plan/review/keynote etc.) or simply get next weeks lottery numbers
That will be “Time Machine 2.0″…
Or jump ahead to grab the next release of OS X
no point, as Apple will already have the Time Machine 2.0 feature before it is released they will have already got all of the updates from the future and so OS X will become perfect and development will cease
Anyone had success viewing the stream under linux? If so, please tell me how.
Kenneth
I keep getting server busy errors on OS X so that could be the cause of any probs. you’re having
The Leopard Server sites are now up as well!
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/
So objective-C got garbage collection?
“Objective-C 2.0
So compelling, Apple wrote Xcode 3.0 itself in it. Enjoy modern garbage collection, …”
Whenever I reflect on the complexity of C++, I remind myself that at least the syntax isn’t as bad as Objective C. I hope that one day application developers will have a lightweight managed language with garbage collection, expressive semantics, natural syntax, and an optimizing JIT. In this sense I find Python very compelling, especially since it now has a dynamic JIT (for optimizing a dynamic language):
http://psyco.sourceforge.net/introduction.html
I guess the next step would be an X11 desktop and development platform written in Python. It could just as well be for Quartz, but Apple would never do that, and they don’t dictate industry-wide trends in application development anyway.
Io is a nice language on the rise…
yeap, which would fall into line of their employment of the guy who developed LLVM; apparently he has been there since the around the second half of 2005; so it’ll be integrating GCC and LLVM together, I’d say that they’ve only done Objective-C so far, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see C++ supported as well.
Keynote is up.
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/aug_2006/event/index.html
Is it just me or he’s lost some weight?
EDIT: trying to find a DL URL…
Edited 2006-08-08 00:26
He’s lost lots of weight. I blogged about it too.
And his weight loss doesn’t look good. He now really looks healthy like a vegetarian or a smoker. Looks very weak.
Meh, maybe he’s gone for that freaky alternative diet they use on that Japanese Island where they only eat till they’re 80% full, apparently they live an extra couple of years; side not, I’d rather live it up, and die two years early, than being a misserable old bastard and gaining an extra 4 years.
Oh, as for that beard; what is it with guys who get in the media spotlight, going for this ‘old grogy bastard’ look with the out of control, messy beard; are they trying to makeselves look educated, with the glasses?!
Im still using BeOS as my first os (silly me, running BeOS on a Quad opteron.. 2×275), but i cant help thinking that jean louis gasse was completley right. Apple isnt going to go forward the way i wanted. So im selling my macs and i think i wont go back.(thats what he did before he left apple to start be.inc) For all the apps n stuff i need there will still be ubuntu when BeOS fails (almost never does for my needs) I will ofcourse buy apple mp3 players and other needed devices but i dont think ill ever buy an apple computer again. Hope you dont find this negative, but there is too much i dont like about apple at the moment if you know what i mean.
Ok this might have been a litle bit of topic, but maybe it is good for something. Dear mr.jobs i wish ou the best of luck, but i think mr gasse should have been the ceo of apple instead, and next not the base of osx but the base from Be.
Hmmm I’m still not sure it was JLG’s ‘vision’ that made BeOS the OS it was, or simply the insights of the individual developers that worked at Be, Inc….
Maybe Eugenia would care to comment on that?
Give it a rest already! I don’t know how many times I’ve seen posts about users wishing Mac OS X had virtual desktops. Now that Apple’s added them to OS X, people still find something to bitch about. Pathetic!
So what if they’re calling it “new” or “revolutionary”? That’s marketing, folks. And you know, without doubt, that Apple’s implementation is going to blow everybody else’s away!!!
So you are saying Jean Louis Gasse should have been CEO of Apple and bankrupt Apple the way he bankrupt Be Inc. right ?
Now as far as to how Apple has revolutionized the operating systems, just take a look at Tiger. Tiger is available now and works pretty well. Vista its still in development with uncertain future release. As Steve Jobs put said “money can not buy everything”. After five billions of spending in R&D Microsoft still can not ship a final version of its new operating system…And these are just the facts.
–hypnosys
BeOS was great operating system for its time, however it died when it was sold to Palm. Yes there are attempts to revive it but they are nowhere near complete. Unlike the NeXT operating system which was also great for its time and now as Mac OS X is even more great and with features far ahead of its competitors. So in terms of what is available Steve Jobs vision looks like its working, producing more Macintosh market share and money for the company and Jean Louis Gasse vision failed (in terms of what is currently available) and ended up collecting dust in some Palm office closet.
According to the Xcode 3 page they have integrated OpenSolaris Dtrace into Leopard, too. I wonder if that is a side-effect of updating their FreeBSD substrate, or if they did their own port?
There is still an obvious gap in the Apple PC line up. Where is the affordable Apple PC like Dell has with it’s Dimension 5150 ($789 CAD)? That would be in a “decent” pricing range around the 1200$.
I guess that’d be the iMac Line?
Nope. I don’t want a “Cube” system. Can’t upgrade the video card when needed.