Home > macOS > MacOSX 10.3 Panther Screenshots MacOSX 10.3 Panther Screenshots Guest post by Gsurface 2003-06-21 macOS 89 Comments 4osx has some screenshots of panther. Because there site is down from time to time, they have asked for mirrors. We have mirrored their screenshots and can be found here. 89 Comments 2003-06-21 6:20 pm Anonymous I hope these are from a very very early build. Hopefuly things will actually match when anther is finished. 2003-06-21 6:23 pm Anonymous Strange that System Preferences still contains Classic. Clearly Apple doesn’t say goodbye to Mac OS 9. 2003-06-21 6:24 pm Anonymous OMG, and the G5 had me drooling. Take a look at that user interface… 24 hours ago, I would have laughed if someone had offered me a mac. And now? I guess I’m a convert, without ever having used OSX. I’ll keep FreeBSD on the router though, just for now 2003-06-21 6:49 pm Anonymous These are a very nice example of good UI desgin. Frankly, I wish XP looked more like this. I never thought I’d say this, but I think that I am going to be a switch on Monday… apparently one of many new switchers if things happen the way I think they will. 2003-06-21 6:51 pm Anonymous Brian, sounds to me like you’re just a tad bit jealous… either that or dont have a good idea what good user interface design is supposed to be. You must be one of the few individuals that actually like XP. 2003-06-21 7:00 pm Anonymous slashdot is also reporting a link on deskmod.com http://www.deskmod.com/panther/ can’t wait till monday 2003-06-21 7:04 pm Anonymous Seems link Apple has been putting some effort to make Aqua looks even better than it does right now. Ops! They did it again. And God… That DVD Player is gorgeous! 😀 Cheers, DeadFish Man 2003-06-21 7:06 pm Anonymous Jealous? Did you look at the screenshots? From what I’ve seen of XP, it’s ugly, but at least it’s consistantly ugly. And for the record, I’m running 10.2.6. I have nothing to be jealous of except the OS 9 users with Kaleidoscope installed. 2003-06-21 7:09 pm Anonymous “Jealous? Did you look at the screenshots? Oh, then you must be partially blind or something… if thats the case I’m sorry. Its not right to make fun of the handicapped… (j.k., but you ARE wrong on this one here bud… this user interface is beautiful.)… AND consistent unlike XP 2003-06-21 7:11 pm Anonymous looks like… like OS X — whodathunkit..?!! 2003-06-21 7:17 pm Anonymous At least it is better than prison stripes… 2003-06-21 7:21 pm Anonymous I was amazed at how much I liked the very subtle UI design changes between 10.1 and 10.2. It was just a series of slight tweaks, and yet the whole impression was crisper and cleaner. Now these screenshots seem in much the same character: it’s still Aqua, but more refined, the pinstripes toned down, less contrast between metal and non-metal. Blue Curve on Red Hat 9 was similarly improved over Blue Curve in Red Hat 8, to the point where I think it is probably the nicest theme to look at for long periods of time. Aqua in 10.2 is still a little too extravagant for my taste, so I’m very much looking forward to 10.3. And then there’s Windows. I look at people running the Windows XP Luna style and just gag. It’s almost like a physical assault on the eyes. Please, for the sake of the neighbors, switch to the Classic theme! 2003-06-21 7:23 pm Anonymous I’m shocked, rajan r said something moderately positive about Apple 2003-06-21 7:24 pm Anonymous I really hope Apple will not only focus on eye-candy but also improve stability. From what I’ve heard from half-way objective/rational people (like Eugenia) (OSX fanboys and MS haters just shut up) MacOS X is still less stable than Windows XP. 2003-06-21 7:24 pm Anonymous Whatever Apple says I’m still not convicend to spend $$$ on apple. WinXP does what I want. With cygwin I can do anyting and cheaper then on a mac. 2003-06-21 7:27 pm Anonymous Looks even better. Like apple catching good things of windows world and applying to Aqua. Everything looks more “grey”, with diferent gret tones to make interface visualization even easier. Exposé may be the best! It could work-around the “slow” felling of looking for the right window when several windows of several programs are opened… I’m looking foward for this one. I hope that our machines at work could get the upgrade soon as it’s released… 2003-06-21 7:32 pm Anonymous Mac is evolving and Apple is learning from its past experience. I hope they do the same with their hardware. 2003-06-21 7:36 pm Anonymous “MacOS X is still less stable than Windows XP.” Lets see, I’ve only had 2 crashes in OS X (and that was with the origional release… (no crashes thereafter) and XP crashes on me at least once a month. 2003-06-21 7:42 pm Anonymous >Lets see, I’ve only had 2 crashes in OS X (and that was with the origional release… (no crashes thereafter) and XP crashes on me at least once a month. Funny, XP never crashed on me. 2003-06-21 7:45 pm Anonymous Consider yourself very lucky. 2003-06-21 7:49 pm Anonymous > Funny, XP never crashed on me. Try doing any serious development work with heavily threaded software or try to access one of the drives before the OS is fully loaded. Then you’ll know what I’m talking about. 2003-06-21 7:49 pm Anonymous Yes,You are right, XP does not crashes, but its application does. The most common application to crash in WinXP is ie6. 2003-06-21 7:51 pm Anonymous Most changes are subtle enough to not change the overall look-and-feel of the system too much. But my main gripe with this screenshots is what happened to Finder. This brushed-metal look, while being acceptable for iTunes etc., looks like some cheap late-90s icewm theme on Finder. If that’s really what Panther is going to look like I’m keeping Jaguar on my Mac. 2003-06-21 7:51 pm Anonymous > Yes,You are right, XP does not crashes, but its application > does. The most common application to crash in WinXP is ie6. If that is correct, XP does “actually crash” because according to Microsoft, IE is now an integral part of the OS. Not to mention the MAIN PORTAL TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD. I think that this could be rather serious, don’t you? 2003-06-21 7:52 pm Anonymous it’s an ie shell that supports tabbed browsing, builtin popup blocking, google toolbar support, and is very stable – never crashes for me when ie would usually crash daily. http://www.ruihehang.com/myie2/html_en/home.htm 2003-06-21 7:58 pm Anonymous I don’t think it’s nicer than it was, imHo. Compared to WinXP default blue(the nicest) theme it’s a bit worser overall(too bright pyjama style). Compared to themes I had or I currently have now on WinXP(iTunesB with some nasty icons and all those “YzStuff” like YzToolbar) it’s generation behind. 2003-06-21 8:07 pm Anonymous “I don’t think it’s nicer than it was, imHo. Compared to WinXP default blue(the nicest) theme” XP may have bright and friendly colors, but as far as propery user interface design is concerned for computers, color should be used at a bare minimum… such as for close menus and sliders… everything else should be very neutral in color… like OS X, OS 9 and earlier versions of Windows. (Keep in mind, when I speak of earlier versions of Windows having better interface design… I’m speaking strictly in terms of color-use. Earlier versions of Windows… like the present one have their own UI problems that I wont expand upon right now) 2003-06-21 8:17 pm Anonymous These screen shots are from early alpha-builds of Panther. I can confirm that there are several aspects of the OS which are not being shown here but have since been added. I can’t go into detail because of a NDA 2003-06-21 8:21 pm Anonymous I have used MANY systems (Windows 3.1, 95,98,ME, 2k, XP, AmigaOS 3.1, Syllable/ATheOS, SkyOS, GEOS, SYmbian, Newton, AppleIIgs, NeXTSTEP, OS/2, SOlaris…and the list goes on). I have a mac at home because from using all these systems I found the Mac to be better than windows. Furthermore since the advent of OS X I have NEVER had a crash and I never have to reboot unless I install some critical update on my mac. On the XP machines at work though I crash at least once a day when I am doing serious work on the machine. 2003-06-21 8:27 pm Anonymous -MacOS X is still less stable than Windows XP It’s a joke? I have two computers: a P4 and a G4. Ok, maybe there’s more apps for Windows and Mac computers are more expensive than “standard&simple” computers. But Mac OSX never crashed to me in 2 years, 8 hours per day, plus 1 year at home in free time. In adition, 2 months ago a virus corrupted the XP registry, not to mention WindowsXP lags a lot in “higher” apps like Photoshop, or gets all system resources in another “high” app like Photoimpact, or makes nothing when you insert a “bad-recorded-by-Windows” CDR. You really used a G4 (or a G3) with OSX? -I don’t think it’s nicer than it was, imHo. Compared to WinXP default blue(the nicest) theme it’s a bit worser overall(too bright pyjama style) Maybe you prefer the Luna style. It’s alright for you. But really Aqua interface use grather and better design concepts than WindowsXP. IMO a GUI must be bright to contrast with Windows contents and icons. I only dislike the stripes. In WindowsXP i guess the platinum style is much better than blue. 2003-06-21 9:01 pm Anonymous you must have something with hardware or you don’t really hacked/configured you XP system if it fails once per day. I am doing pretty fuc$ing serious work 16 hours a day and I have crash regularry only once per 3 weeks average(but I have uptimes ranging 7days and more). 2003-06-21 9:11 pm Anonymous In WindowsXP i guess the platinum style is much better than blue. That’s what everyone though(and me also 2 years back) before using it. I switched on XP since beta and after long period you’ll see platinum is actually the worst from the 3. Olive Green comes better for eyes(it’s platinum in different color actually, it’s not new theme like Blue which is really different) and you’ll learn to like it, better background compensate a-bit-lame-colors, e.g.I had dark Wizardy8 background back then and it integrated perfectly. Finnaly after having tried many themes I am allways happy when I change to Blue(at least once per year on reinstall ;-), it’s awesome once you get used to it and it’s only one of three themes I am never bored of(including my current hacked iTunesB theme). All in all, platinum isn’t bad(even Coderminator JohnC uses it) but blue ownz on long run. 2003-06-21 9:15 pm Anonymous not to mention WindowsXP lags a lot in “higher” apps like Photoshop that is actually a lie, dual 1Ghz G4 hardly compare to single P4C 2.6Ghz 800Mhzfsb in photoshop. 2003-06-21 9:18 pm Anonymous That is the name I have reserved(along with much of the <A HREF=”http://macaddict.com/“>MacAddict staff for the brushed metal appearance. It removes consistency form the OS, and Apple should deprecate it ASAP IMHO. 2003-06-21 9:22 pm Anonymous http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/07_jul/features/cw_macvspc2… just one dirty dig from google before the flame start, notice I used _dirty_, I saw more benches on different start and I _know_ it’s old test but it’s also _old_ P4. 2003-06-21 9:35 pm Anonymous I’m pretty much on the edge of my seat for the WWDC next week. Hopefully they’ll broadcast Jobs’ keynote over apple.com. But these screenshots of panther, as little showing as they are – it’s truly getting me excited for the upgrade! I agree with Max though, they still have a lot of work to do with this operating environment. Looking through, looks like Apple is thinking of making Safari more then just a web browser. Should be interesting when they truly show the baby off. 2003-06-21 9:45 pm Anonymous “I really hope Apple will not only focus on eye-candy but also improve stability. From what I’ve heard from half-way objective/rational people (like Eugenia) (OSX fanboys and MS haters just shut up) MacOS X is still less stable than Windows XP.” I can’t compare OS X to XP, but I can assure you that in my experience, OS X is pretty stable. I’ve been running Jaguar since last Septemer, and in that time I’ve experienced two crashes which forced me to restart. I think that’s reasonably stable. I haven’t heard many people complain about the stability of OS X. Granted, there are exceptions, but I’ve thought the perception was that it was pretty stable. I would hope they are focusing on overall speed improvements, not stability. 2003-06-21 9:49 pm Anonymous I think what we are seeing here is a shift in paradigm. Brushed metal, sidebar on the left, search field on the upper right. They are trying to make the finder more consistent with iTunes, iPhoto and Safari. Use one window to browse and manage your files. The same way you browse the web, your music or your pictures. It seems somewhat bizarre though, how are they going to manage drag&drop? Moving a file in one folder, to a completely different one. In itunes and iphoto it’s pretty easy, there is only one/two levels. But what with a deep tree like filesystem? Maybe that sidebar is going to double as a NexTStep like shelf? Drag a file (couple of files) on the sidebar. Navigate to your destination folder. Drag the files from the sidebar on that folder, and done. I’m a bit disappointed about the color labels though. It should color the folder imo, not the text. I would prefer mini-icons instead of labels even more. (like nautilus does). If I put 5 folders in the dock, I want to quickly see which folder is which instead of hovering my mouse over it. The Aqua gui refinements look excellent. Less stripes, and an small color differentiation between a toolbar and the rest of the window. You very quickly see the 3 main different areas of a program: window bar, toolbar, content. Looks great, very smooth. A sunken style for the window buttons looks pretty nice too. I don’t really like the brushed metal style that much. It nowhere near as refined as aqua style imo. It could be improved allot. Expose looks like a really great feature. Throw your mouse in a corner of your screen and select the window you want. 2003-06-21 9:58 pm Anonymous I really hope Apple will not only focus on eye-candy but also improve stability. From what I’ve heard from half-way objective/rational people (like Eugenia) (OSX fanboys and MS haters just shut up) MacOS X is still less stable than Windows XP. Well, I can only say that Mac OS X is rock stable. I had two kernel panics, related to samba in OS X < 10.2.3, but it has been solved with later updates. Now it just constantly works. I can’t comment on xp though, I don’t use it. With XP it depends alot on the hardware. I know some friends (some=3) who have downgraded from XP to 2000 and even 98, because their hardware wasn’t well supported. XP ended up crashing every day/week. Apple obviously doesn’t have this problem because they have control over the hardware. 2003-06-21 10:19 pm Anonymous I really don’t get why the Finder is now brushed metal, especially when the System Prefs and Activity Monitor aren’t. I thought the brushed metal look was just intended for apps that mimic ‘digital peripherals’, although Safari already breaks that rule. If you’re going to make the Finder brushed metal, then why not make it the standard look for all apps and make the UI more consistent? I’m also not sure about the sidebar on the left of the Finder window, presumable it’s just for quick access to drives and folders. IMO something more like the NeXTSTEP Shelf would be more useful and use less space. I hope there’s some way to turn it off, as I use column view and like to have multiple Finder windows side by side. Another nitpick is that the drop down menu on the Finder toolbar seems totally redundant, you can access the same options in the main menubar and contextual menu. According to Fitts’ law they should be faster than a menu at the top of the window, so what’s the point in it? OTOH Expose is a very interesting idea, I like the way you can activate it with active screen corners. I imagine it could be a lot faster than using the Dock menus, especially if you’ve got a large number of windows open in an app. But I wonder how well it will work when 50+ windows are open, how would it fit them all on screen? 2003-06-21 10:50 pm Anonymous Can you tweak the GUI in OSX they way you can with WinXP? Everyone knows that the Luna (blue theme) is ugly, but applications like Style XP and WindowBlinds really make it a non issue. I could run an OS X theme with icons and the dock and such… Just curious if OSX had anything similar 2003-06-21 10:57 pm Anonymous Oh boy I’m looking forward to monday!!! 2003-06-21 11:03 pm Anonymous Everyone knows that the Luna (blue theme) is ugly that I am not among the everyones =) 2003-06-21 11:09 pm Anonymous not to mention WindowsXP lags a lot in “higher” apps like Photoshop Actually, Photoshop on a PC out-performs it’s mac counterpart, and adobe has even admitted this themselves: http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=38445 Don’t get me wrong: I LOVE MacOS X with a passion, but I am not some blind “OS X is better than anything” fan-boy either. I use both WinXP and OS X on a daily basis, and I have to say that both are equally stable operating systems. That being said, I will definately be at the Apple Mall of America store Monday to watch Steve Job’s keynote live… 2003-06-21 11:20 pm Anonymous >> Yes,You are right, XP does not >> crashes, but its application does. Xp does quite frequently here, so I’m guessing it depends on the hardware. Win2003 server (forgive the comparison, but windows is windows is even cleaner and more stable than XP, but it too starts acting funny once you start loading applications on it. On the whole though, microsoft is making great progress with its OS. 2003-06-21 11:29 pm Anonymous win2k = server OS. Can’t compare. 2003-06-21 11:31 pm Anonymous I mean win2k3. 2003-06-21 11:37 pm Anonymous Can it do simple tasks like actually scroll a window _smoothly_ yet? I doubt it. Can anyone answer this? Does the OS still have a slow feeling to it? (like 10.2.x does on an 800mhz g4). 2003-06-21 11:48 pm Anonymous I admit os X is slow (dog slow in some isntances on my 700mhz g3), but for some strange reason I find it’s responsiveness very similar to my athlon desktop running XP. XP is sort of glitchy, and flickers windows often, so yes it draws the apps pretty quickly, but they arent exactly accessible yet. There is still a huge difference in speed however. I think with these new non-memory starved G5s OS X will become incredibly responsive. A pal of mine already says his dual 1.25 g4 tower is as responsive as his 3gighz/1gb dell for his work (photoshop, etc). I wish I could see a difference in usability G3 vs. G4, guess Ill have to wait. 2003-06-22 12:04 am Anonymous Actually, Photoshop on a PC out-performs it’s mac counterpart, and adobe has even admitted this themselves Wrong. The original statement from Adobe, located at http://www.adobe.com/motion/pcpreferred.html (which has since been taken down, by the way) said that PCs were preferred for Adobe Premiere, not Photoshop. Of course, Adobe would obviously want to sell Premiere to a PC makret, as Apple’s Final Cut Pro (which most consider to be an all-around better product than Premiere) was eating up their sales on the Macintosh side. Furthermore, the page wasn’t about software, but about hardware, and argued simply that a 3GHz Pentium 4 will give you the best experience when using Premiere (and showed some performance graphs of Premiere on PCs versus Macs. With the upcoming release of PPC970-based Macs, Premiere performance should once again be on par with PCs, while the AltiVec optimized Final Cut Pro will blow away anything on PC. Besides, the original statement you are responding to was this: not to mention WindowsXP lags a lot in “higher” apps like Photoshop Indicating a GUI responsiveness issue in the Windows port of Photoshop, not an issue with the raw performance of things like filters and transformations. Adobe and Apple have very good relations. The “PC preferred” page was the result of Apple’s software offerings clashing with one of their applications vendors, similar to the Watson/Sherlock incident. 2003-06-22 12:04 am Anonymous Can it do simple tasks like actually scroll a window _smoothly_ yet? I doubt it. Can anyone answer this? Not for me (10.2.6, 800MHz G3). QuartzGL is accelerating a couple of things (which should never have been slow in the first place…), but it’s still nowhere near X11/Linux or MacOS 9 on the same machine or BeOS on a 300MHz Celeron… OS X should be pronounced as “slow ass X” IMO. 2003-06-22 12:26 am Anonymous Can it do simple tasks like actually scroll a window _smoothly_ yet? I doubt it. Can anyone answer this? Depends what is being scrolled, and what toolkit is being used. Native widgets like NSTextView, NSTableView, NSBrowser, and NSOutlineView have no performance issues when scrolling. If the program is written with Carbon, or uses a Custom View with Cocoa, there may be problems. This is most visible trying to scroll or resize in an application like OmniWeb. Clearly these problems are not Apple’s fault, but the application implementer’s fault. Safari, for example, has no issues with the speed of page scrolling. Considering GUI performance issues are near nonexistant on modern day G4s, I think it’s safe to assume they’ll be completely gone on PPC970 systems. 2003-06-22 12:36 am Anonymous I don’t care if XP is more stable than OS X, or how fast it is faster (or slower). This is about panther, ok? Posted from a linux box… 2003-06-22 12:40 am Anonymous Just something about the consistency comments that have been made. A couple of months ago there were some links posted on OSNews to articles regarding Apple’s failure to follow their own guidelines. Using metal for example in a web browser. Creating their own custom widgets instead of using the ones provided on Cocoa is another I remember So anyway it seems that Apple is at least not perfect in the consistency department and also somewhat hypocritical when they fail to follow their own advice. Anyway I really hope that Apple gains some market share in the near future. 2003-06-22 12:44 am Anonymous > From what I’ve heard from half-way objective/rational people (like Eugenia) MacOS X is still less stable than Windows XP. For me, XP had a single crash so far and it was due to bad hardware and not due to the OS itself. I had 3-4 crashes with OSX since Jaguar came out. But I never said that OSX is unstable, because I regard OSX, overall, stable for the things I use it for at least. So, please don’t use my name “just like that” just to pass your opinion up. Besides, I never tried Panther. So even if I might have said in the past that Jaguar might have crashed here and there (it has happened), I haven’t tried Panther yet. So you can’t quote me just like that to pass a point that I never did. 2003-06-22 2:12 am Anonymous Classic isn’t going away for a long time. It’s not strange at all. 2003-06-22 3:22 am Anonymous >For me, XP had a single crash so far and it was due to bad hardware and not due to the OS itself. I had 3-4 crashes with OSX since Jaguar came out. So OSX (at least Jaguar) is less stable than XP. I never claimed that it crashes every second minute. Just that it is less stable than XP which seem to be your experience, too. Given the fact that bad drivers / hardware is one of the most critical threats to OS stability and unlike MS Apple has much control over these parts it is pretty unexcusable that Jaguar is less stable than XP. 2003-06-22 3:34 am Anonymous Lets see, from yesturday, looks like one of the best desktop machines ever will be unvailed, OSX’s UI is by far more eligent then anything I have ever. They seem to have made some great strides, it looks like truely great times for Apple zeolots. Thing is though, the UI *still* doesn’t look unified, noone has actually seen Panther run on the G5 either. I personally think this is premature hype. If history repeats itself, we will simply see another adequit release of OSX, praised by its lemming followers, but that doesn’t take advantage of the sub-par hardware available to it. I like OSX on paper, but every time I take a look at it, it makes me sick. The 1.42Mhz G4 felt like it was slower then my 633Mhz P3. I am currently wondering what they have done with X11 mainly, is it now part of Panther like was promised? And why was Classic *still* included? Most apps have been ported already to OSX, and those that haven’t, they aren’t worth supporting still. Last I heard, a default install of OSX is more then 3GB, thats a joke. XP, for which most – including myself – think is bloated, takes up less then half that harddrive space. Apple seems to be trying to attract both Unix and Windows people to their OS, and also drag along its old following. IMO this puts them in the worst place of anyone in the business, and they aren’t helping themselves either. They support open source, just not the most popular open source license, they feature apps that people have just ported to OSX cuz people bitch to much if they didn’t. Apple is a cheap excuse for SGI, OSX is a cheap excuse for Irix. Apple wants to attract Windows users, but charge far to much for a desktop machine. And as for the Open Source crowd, well we aren’t even forced to pay for our OS, so the price needed to acquire OSX is entirely to much for most of us. Seems to me, Apple has no niche, and thats why they will never be respected, and they will never be the powers they once were untill they figure out what they want their OS to do exactly, and get rid of all the useless bloat included in OSX! Think about it, its missing most of the little things that makes a Windows machine easy, and most of the usefull things from the Unix crowd isn’t included by default. Yet is still manages to occupy 3gigs? How? I don’t see that many programs by default, curtainly not enough to justify the space taken up by them. I would love to get a Mac, but I never will till I figure out what exactly their audience is, untill I can see its exact merits. Right now, nothing I see validates almost $3,000 out of my pocket. 2003-06-22 3:49 am Anonymous > I would love to get a Mac, but I never will till I figure out > what exactly their audience is, untill I can see its exact > merits. Right now, nothing I see validates almost $3,000 > out of my pocket. shit do any non-mac owner have a job? $3000 is still a small price to pay for a computer considering it’s usefulness. compared to a car, it’s really cheap, and probably more useful. 2003-06-22 4:14 am Anonymous I’m a bit disappointed about the color labels though. It should color the folder imo, not the text. I would prefer mini-icons instead of labels even more. (like nautilus does). If I put 5 folders in the dock, I want to quickly see which folder is which instead of hovering my mouse over it. The answer to both of these problems is that you can change the icon of a folder. Since a folder icon can be changed to look like something other than a folder it wouldn’t make sense fot the color labels to change the color of the folder. It has to change the icon. Now, someone might come along and make a labelling program that changes the icon for the folder to the color you choose (in fact I think there is one already out there that does this). And if you have 5 folders in your dock you can just given them other icons. Goto iconfactory or macmonkies and download some icons!!! To change the icon just Get Info on the icon, click on the icon in the get info window, and do a cmd-c to copy it. Them do the same for the folder you want to change and do a cmd-v to paste it. Five seconds and you have a pretty folder that looks different fromthe other ones. 2003-06-22 4:16 am Anonymous Can you tweak the GUI in OSX they way you can with WinXP? Everyone knows that the Luna (blue theme) is ugly, but applications like Style XP and WindowBlinds really make it a non issue. I could run an OS X theme with icons and the dock and such… Just curious if OSX had anything similar it’s not officially supported but this is a place to start…. http://www.resexcellence.com/themes/ 2003-06-22 4:19 am Anonymous not to mention WindowsXP lags a lot in “higher” apps like Photoshop I know alot of people are disagreeing with this but I wanted to toss a comment in… “laggy” != “slow” Laggy isn’t slow render times, it involves hiccups. All your performance tests are irrelevant to the issue. Having said that, I can’t comment on its truthfulness since I haven’t used Photoshop on XP (only Win2K and OS X). 2003-06-22 4:24 am Anonymous So OSX (at least Jaguar) is less stable than XP. given your sample size of….2 lol Everyone has different experiences. My experience with 2000 and XP has been less than satisfactory but I don’t go around calling them “unstable”. 2003-06-22 4:29 am Anonymous If history repeats itself, we will simply see another adequit release of OSX, praised by its lemming followers, but that doesn’t take advantage of the sub-par hardware available to it. You’re calling a dual 2GHz system with an AltiVec unit, a 1GHz front side bus, HyperTransport interconnect, and PCI-X “sub-par”? What’s your idea of par, a dual 3.2GHz Xeon system? Oh wait, that doesn’t exist… I’m afraid Apple will have, for the time being, the fastest personal computer available. Next horrible troll, please? I like OSX on paper, but every time I take a look at it, it makes me sick. The 1.42Mhz G4 felt like it was slower then my 633Mhz P3. *cough* troll *cough* And why was Classic *still* included? The Classic runtime is available per default, but you will need to install OS 9 if you actually want to use it. Many applications still have installers/components that require OS 9 (as for some reason the applications have been Carbonized, but not the installers) You can call it bloat if you want, but without an OS 9 base system Classic itself isn’t that large… Last I heard, a default install of OSX is more then 3GB, thats a joke. XP, for which most – including myself – think is bloated, takes up less then half that harddrive space. A default install will include all of the iApps, including ones like iMovie. Windows Movie Maker does not come with XP per default. If you don’t want the base install to be so large, simply uncheck some of the iApps that you don’t think you’ll use when you’re installing. They support open source, just not the most popular open source license What, because they didn’t release Darwin under the GPL? Darwin includes components like CoreFoundation, which has been partially released as open source (as “CoreFoundation lite”). Were they using the GPL, they could not build their own version of CoreFoundation without releasing the full source to it. The same goes for XNU, OS X’s kernel, and all other components of the system which are released under the APSL. Apple has repeatedly tried to accomidate the virulent zealotry of the fanatics in the open source community, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.html Unfortunately, GNU still deems the APSL “unacceptable” This is why all the software I develop is BSD licensed… Apple has no niche, and thats why they will never be respected, and they will never be the powers they once were untill they figure out what they want their OS to do exactly, and get rid of all the useless bloat included in OSX! Yes, I can see how trolling open source zealots like yourself may never respect Apple, but I believe they have a great deal of respect from the general public… All that “bloat,” as you call it, is what makes OS X a usable desktop operating system, something the open source community hasn’t been able to produce (although they’ve certainly created a great deal of bloat themselves) Let me know when you can copy an image to the clipboard from Mozilla and paste it into the Gimp… Think about it, its missing most of the little things that makes a Windows machine easy Perhaps if you gave some examples your argument would be more compelling Yet is still manages to occupy 3gigs? How? I don’t see that many programs by default, curtainly not enough to justify the space taken up by them. iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, iChat, iSync… and it sounds like you probably installed a number of language localizations as well… 2003-06-22 4:35 am Anonymous If history repeats itself, we will simply see another adequit release of OSX, praised by its lemming followers, but that doesn’t take advantage of the sub-par hardware available to it. Wow, what a great way to start…especially given the hardware announcement we’ll be getting money And why was Classic *still* included? Most apps have been ported already to OSX, and those that haven’t, they aren’t worth supporting still. Last I heard, a default install of OSX is more then 3GB, thats a joke. XP, for which most – including myself – think is bloated, takes up less then half that harddrive space. If you’re really hard up for hard disk space then why not click on the OS 9 System Folder and drag it to the Trash? That will free up 300MB and you won’t have to look at the repulsive thing! As for the rest of the space: well, OS X just comes with alot of stuff. iDVD comes to 1.18 GB. So if we drop iDVD and classic we’re down to the size of XP. Congratulations! By the way, does XP include DVD authoring software? And Classic is going to be sticking around. There’s no reason for Apple to drop support for it for quite some time. Some people will still want it. Why make them mad when you can sell them a fast new computer that can still run their apps? I would love to get a Mac, but I never will till I figure out what exactly their audience is, untill I can see its exact merits. Right now, nothing I see validates almost $3,000 out of my pocket. Hopefully on monday you’ll be able to get a nice 1.6GHz 970 loaded up for under $2000. 2003-06-22 4:55 am Anonymous Doesn’t “The Macintosh Experience” or whatever seem rather fake? Why didn’t any of the ‘shots demonstrate piles? I smell something fishy… 2003-06-22 5:15 am Anonymous Anyone know what this is? http://22.214.171.124/Forum/uploads/post-12-1055907447.jpg If it’s real I’m betting there’s s ‘970 in it D. 2003-06-22 6:07 am Anonymous Improve stability? I’m the IS Manager for my company. I run RH9 Linux on one of my desktops and XP Pro on the other, and I’m nearly finished converting my NT servers to RH9. At home, I’m running OS X 10.2.6 on a 12″ PB G4 (my present to myself this year). Most used apps are Mail, Camino, Safari, Lotus Notes R6, Photoshop Elements 2.0, Fugu, Fire, Acquisition, iTunes, Konfabulator, my Distributed.net client, and several small utilities including command-line SSH and SCP for web site updates. I’m connected wirelessly to a Netgear 802.11b router, and print (via GimpPrint) to my DeskJet 970Cxi. I’ve had it since March and, not counting system updates, have only had to reboot it twice due to not waking properly from sleep. I keep it running 24/7…plugged in at home and on battery power at work…and I just don’t have any problems with it. Every bit as reliable as my Linux installs and ten times easier to use. I have never, ever, had that kind of stability out of Win98, WinME, NT Workstation, or XP Home or Pro (never ran 2000). Am I just lucky? 2003-06-22 6:16 am Anonymous Anyone know what this is? 2003-06-22 8:26 am Anonymous Well, be thankful cause I have to cleanse myself after praising Apple 😛 2003-06-22 8:43 am Anonymous Why does stability have to do with how the user interface looks? Personally, yeah, I think this new one as well as previous versions of Aqua sucks – I’m the Photon/BeOS kinda guy. Windows XP is at least a wee bit better in that regard. But what does stability have to do with anything? I personally feel XP is stable enough on the desktop and most workstations, but some guys here using XP (or used XP) are just not in Microsoft’s target market. So yeah, it crashes. Most of the time, it is the hardware problem. So out of many, a marginal few have stability problems with XP, and Microsoft having little control on the hardware as oppose to Apple, this is rather good. Apple on the other hand – in every Mac-related message board I go to, there are posts about kernel panics etc. And you surely can’t blame it on unsupported hardware – Apple controls, makes and assembles the hardware. So if Microsoft were to adopt Apple’s approach, I’m sure instability would be an isolated problem. 2003-06-22 9:40 am Anonymous …could we have a descrip of the S/Shot content or a link to some that are still up? 2003-06-22 9:52 am Anonymous This probably won’t be up for long so make the most of it: http://www.pstheme.com/cgi-bin/think/ikonboard.cgi?;act=ST;f=15;t=7… These are smooth 🙂 2003-06-22 10:13 am Anonymous Looks a lot like the stuff at http://www.applele.com 2003-06-22 11:07 am Anonymous Does this site even have an editor? “Their” not “there”. The amount of tech sites whose editing ranges from appalling to non-existent is really quite sad. 2003-06-22 11:09 am Anonymous Oh, that picture looks rather like an external power supply I saw a picture of in another forum – I think it’s an Apple external power supply for a laptop or something. 2003-06-22 11:24 am Anonymous Anyone know what this is? http://126.96.36.199/Forum/uploads/post-12-1055907447.jpg If it’s real I’m betting there’s s ‘970 in it Hope you didn’t put any money down… that fake design has been around a while: http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=9788&papass=&sort… Look around the site, people have come up with some good designs. 2003-06-22 1:08 pm Anonymous Looks incredibly sexy, although I hate slot-loading optical drives (i have many bad experience with it), plus teh fact that you are stuck with one factory-installed internal optical drives doesn’t appeal much too me (I would mind that when I’m duplicating CDs for backups)… 2003-06-22 2:13 pm Anonymous This one would be sweet: http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=35763&papass=&sor… Or maybe one of these: http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=29101&papass=&sor… http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1532&papass=&sort… 2003-06-22 2:38 pm Anonymous Well Apple whined and now the screenshots are gone on both sites. 2003-06-22 2:57 pm Anonymous I agree with rajan, here we are looking at screenshots and people are arguing about what system is more stable or has more bloat. I use both XP and OS X and they are both wonderful OSes. XP is, by far, the gratest Microsoft has achieved and OS X, although young, is obviously dynamite. And they are both very stable. What’s the problem here? 2003-06-22 5:47 pm Anonymous damn straight!!! responded from a x86 linux box. 2003-06-22 10:30 pm Anonymous I wonder how it works. If you check screenshots you can see that menubar is larger than all window bars, that probably means that those windows are just a smaller versions of the original sized windows. You can probably just click on the window and it comes back to front in full size. That would be the best window management system I could think of. It’s very similar to Linux desktop pagers, only instead of a pager it uses desktop space to do the similar. And little OT: Stability. I had more crashes with OSX than XP, and I can blame only one thing for that: Uptime. I can’t keep my XP running more than 2 days in a row, I have to restart because it becomes almost unusable. I can’t even remember when I have shut down my iBook last time, and probably after 10-15 days some things go wrong and the system crashes. I can live with that easily. How many of you guys with PC laptops had them running for at least 2 days straight? 2003-06-22 11:42 pm Anonymous The screenshots have found their way on to the eDonkey filesharing service, with a hash of: ed2k://|file|Panther-Screenshots.zip|1096112|711c396f19782d8aeda230b12 5ac3ad1|/ As for my opinion on the ui, it doesn’t look significantly different to me. I just wish they’d realize that brushed metal was an interesting look for about six months, five years ago. 2003-06-22 11:44 pm Anonymous Remove the space between 12 and 5a in that hash; it was added by the line wrap. 2003-06-23 12:24 am Anonymous Damn, i didn’t see it. Can anybody send it to my email? Please, please, please….? It’s email@example.com Thanks, Victor. 2003-06-23 12:56 am Anonymous Take a quick peep. (Don’t worry, I’m a PC user too). I’m just not afraid of admitting we may have a problem….. http://www.macbidouille.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2003-05-05#5440 2003-06-23 5:18 pm Anonymous IPv6 and a new finder also…. WWDC 10:18 2003-06-23 5:28 pm Anonymous cool.