• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Let's talk about 'Snow Leopard'

C

CKMorpheus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2001
Messages
1,034
Mac OS X 10.6

Scroll down to post 11.


UNFOUNDED RUMORS
From Ars Technica:

The next version of Mac OS X is code-named "Snow Leopard," and will indeed be Intel-only, we have learned. This info is hot on the heels of TUAW's original scoop about Mac OS X 10.6 being readied for shipment as soon as Macworld 2009 and being Intel-only.

People familiar with the situation have confirmed to us that TUAW's details are true—Snow Leopard is currently on track to come out during next January's Macworld, and it will not contain major OS changes. Instead, the release is heavily focused on performance and nailing down speed and stability. With Apple's current (and future) focus on smaller, thinner, and more mobile devices, this move makes perfect sense. Things like the MacBook Air, iPhone, iPod touch, and other mysterious devices that have yet to be announced need better performance for better battery life, and that's definitely something Apple wants to excel at in the years to come. Our sources did not note whether Apple planned to discuss Snow Leopard at this year's WWDC.

Something else that may happen is that Apple may eventually wrap everything in Cocoa—things that are currently only Carbon accessible will be no longer. This (which is reportedly not yet in stone) should make many Objective-C programmers happy, although those who are married to Carbon may get a bit bristly at the news. (Note: There may be some disagreement here as to what exactly "Cocoa-only" means, so take that into account when thinking about this. For example, Apple may only axe Carbon UI stuff.) Of course, it seems like 10.6 is all about making graybeards bristly, as PowerPC users will soon be left out in the cold too.
Click to expand...

So what do we know about Snow Leopard?

- Intel only, leaving Power PC users in the dust (Debunked, not true)
- May be entirely Cocoa-based
- Shipping during the Macworld '09?
- More speed and stability based updates as opposed to major OS changes
UNFOUNDED RUMORS

What else will we learn about it during WWDC? Are you guys looking forward to it? How much will it be? Questions!
 
Actually the Power PC only rumor had been rebuked right after that article. So I wouldn't put much into that.
 
As soon as someone at Apple says it's Intel only, then I'll believe it, and not before then. Too much speculation, too many rumors - it's gotta come from the horse's mouth or forget even hearing it. Sooner or later Apple will have to drop PowerPC support, period - it's just a question of when they'll do that, and I think within one iteration (from .5 to .6) is too soon.

As for dropping Carbon, again, when Apple specifically states it I'll believe it, but the just announced Cocoa Touch thing for the iPhone is definitely a push in that direction.
 
Why wouldn't Apple continue to provide Carbon? It just isn't getting ported to 64-bit. It would be legacy of course, and Apple still needs to have backwards compatibility anyways, with Carbon or not.
 
Meh, Carbon is old junk anyway. I do think that the libraries for running old Carbon software should still be available for another OS iteration, but that developers shouldn't be using it anymore. I don't know of any major software that's still written in Carbon anyway, though. Most developers who were still using it moved to Cocoa at the same time as they started doing Universal Binaries.
 
I don't want to come off as a troll or anything, but doesn't it seem kinda lame how Apple is essentially making some routine bug fixes, adding a few new features, and packaging it like an entirely new OS?

I mean - I'm sure if Microsoft did the same thing all of the people would be crying about how Microsoft is raping and pillaging the lands, but when Apple does it it's somehow ok?

Don't take this as offensive - I just really find it interesting.
 
CEpeep said:
Meh, Carbon is old junk anyway. I do think that the libraries for running old Carbon software should still be available for another OS iteration, but that developers shouldn't be using it anymore. I don't know of any major software that's still written in Carbon anyway, though. Most developers who were still using it moved to Cocoa at the same time as they started doing Universal Binaries.
Click to expand...
Adobe Creative Suite is entirely written in Carbon...all the way up to CS3 and rumored that CS4 will still be mostly Carbon.
 
supergper said:
Adobe Creative Suite is entirely written in Carbon...all the way up to CS3 and rumored that CS4 will still be mostly Carbon.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd forgotten about Adobe. They're in the process of getting away from Carbon though, because there's no 64 bit support and they want more access to memory. They've been sort of slow to react to environment changes though. I remember they put up a bitch fit when Apple announced it was moving to Intel and made up some crap about not having enough time to port the code even though they'd been given like a year.
 
rei1574 said:
I don't want to come off as a troll or anything, but doesn't it seem kinda lame how Apple is essentially making some routine bug fixes, adding a few new features, and packaging it like an entirely new OS?

I mean - I'm sure if Microsoft did the same thing all of the people would be crying about how Microsoft is raping and pillaging the lands, but when Apple does it it's somehow ok?

Don't take this as offensive - I just really find it interesting.
Click to expand...

I think there's a whole lot more to it than that...besides, lets compare Windows to OS X. Windows retails for $200-$320 depending on version, OS X retails for $129...hell you can do a five pack of OS X for $199. That's a lot easier to swallow. I'm sure you'll hear complaining about OS X not getting a full makeover, BUT I find it reassuring that a company is willing to take a smaller step forward for the sake of speed and stability. This is why OS X is far superior, the company actually handles their business.
 
CEpeep said:
Yeah, I'd forgotten about Adobe. They're in the process of getting away from Carbon though, because there's no 64 bit support and they want more access to memory. They've been sort of slow to react to environment changes though. I remember they put up a bitch fit when Apple announced it was moving to Intel and made up some crap about not having enough time to port the code even though they'd been given like a year.
Click to expand...
Yep, Adobe has been dragging their feet for sure.
 
Straight from the horses mouth:

Apple Previews Mac OS X Snow Leopard to Developers

SAN FRANCISCO—June 9, 2008—Apple® today previewed Mac OS® X Snow Leopard, which builds on the incredible success of OS X Leopard and is the next major version of the world’s most advanced operating system. Rather than focusing primarily on new features, Snow Leopard will enhance the performance of OS X, set a new standard for quality and lay the foundation for future OS X innovation. Snow Leopard is optimized for multi-core processors, taps into the vast computing power of graphic processing units (GPUs), enables breakthrough amounts of RAM and features a new, modern media platform with QuickTime® X. Snow Leopard includes out-of-the-box support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 and is scheduled to ship in about a year.

“We have delivered more than a thousand new features to OS X in just seven years and Snow Leopard lays the foundation for thousands more,” said Bertrand Serlet, Apple’s senior vice president of Software Engineering. “In our continued effort to deliver the best user experience, we hit the pause button on new features to focus on perfecting the world’s most advanced operating system.”

Snow Leopard delivers unrivaled support for multi-core processors with a new technology code-named “Grand Central,” making it easy for developers to create programs that take full advantage of the power of multi-core Macs. Snow Leopard further extends support for modern hardware with Open Computing Language (OpenCL), which lets any application tap into the vast gigaflops of GPU computing power previously available only to graphics applications. OpenCL is based on the C programming language and has been proposed as an open standard. Furthering OS X’s lead in 64-bit technology, Snow Leopard raises the software limit on system memory up to a theoretical 16TB of RAM.

Using media technology pioneered in OS X iPhone™, Snow Leopard introduces QuickTime X, which optimizes support for modern audio and video formats resulting in extremely efficient media playback. Snow Leopard also includes Safari® with the fastest implementation of JavaScript ever, increasing performance by 53 percent, making Web 2.0 applications feel more responsive.*

For the first time, OS X includes native support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 in OS X applications Mail, iCal® and Address Book, making it even easier to integrate Macs into organizations of any size.

*Performance will vary based on system configuration, network connection and other factors. Benchmark based on the SunSpider JavaScript Performance test on an iMac® 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo system running Mac OS X Snow Leopard, with 2GB of RAM.

Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s with the Apple II and reinvented the personal computer in the 1980s with the Macintosh. Today, Apple continues to lead the industry in innovation with its award-winning computers, OS X operating system and iLife and professional applications. Apple is also spearheading the digital media revolution with its iPod portable music and video players and iTunes online store, and has entered the mobile phone market with its revolutionary iPhone.
Click to expand...

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/06/09snowleopard.html

So it looks like we're getting:

- Optimization for multi-core CPUs, as well as GPUs
- "Grand Central:" an easy-to-use developers platform for taking advantage of multi-core CPUs
- New OpenGL extensions which allow applications to tap into unused GPU resources
- Extending their reach into 64-bit with the support of up to 16TB of RAM
- Quicktime X, increasing Quicktime performance by 53 percent!
- Native support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 in OS X applications Mail, iCal and Address Book
- Available within a year.

Sweet!
 
All I see are a bunch of things that should have been done with 10.5 from the start. We've had multicore processors for over 3 years, 64 bit OSes for a helluvalot longer, QuickTime not using GPU/hardware-assist has been ridiculous for what, 8 years now? Should have done it from the start like most.

Adobe isn't the only one dragging its feet here, not by a long shot.

It still kills me they dare call it "The most advanced computer operating system," though. Always gives me a good laugh. 3 service pack-level updates since release ~8 months ago, announcing the 4th update within a week of the release of the 3rd, now more forward looking to take the pressure off the here-and-now aspects of the bloated OS and they also dare say "We're working on optimizing the OS for performance."

If Microsoft came out with such a press release people would bitch from here to the moon and back. It would be nice if Apple and Mac fanatics would just call 'em BUG FIXES and be done with it, then we'd be on relatively even turf. But when the Apple marketing spinsters always try to say "BUG FIX" it comes out "Performance enhancements." That Reality Distortion Field is some powerful stuff.

I hope the Kool-Aid is good... I'm actually drinking Tropical Punch right this second, all jokes aside. ;)
 
Joe Average said:
All I see are a bunch of things that should have been done with 10.5 from the start. We've had multicore processors for over 3 years, 64 bit OSes for a helluvalot longer, QuickTime not using GPU/hardware-assist has been ridiculous for what, 8 years now? Should have done it from the start like most.

Adobe isn't the only one dragging its feet here, not by a long shot.

It still kills me they dare call it "The most advanced computer operating system," though. Always gives me a good laugh. 3 service pack-level updates since release ~8 months ago, announcing the 4th update within a week of the release of the 3rd, now more forward looking to take the pressure off the here-and-now aspects of the bloated OS and they also dare say "We're working on optimizing the OS for performance."

If Microsoft came out with such a press release people would bitch from here to the moon and back. It would be nice if Apple and Mac fanatics would just call 'em BUG FIXES and be done with it, then we'd be on relatively even turf. But when the Apple marketing spinsters always try to say "BUG FIX" it comes out "Performance enhancements." That Reality Distortion Field is some powerful stuff.

I hope the Kool-Aid is good... I'm actually drinking Tropical Punch right this second, all jokes aside. ;)
Click to expand...
I don;t quite understand what you're saying. So if Microsoft came out and said, we are releasing this next OS to concentrate more on speed and stability, people would bitch??? I think the only complaints you'd hear would be if it's true or not and how long the delays will be. Seriously, as a package deal OS X is the most advanced operating system. What I mean by that is out-of-the-box OS X can do what most people want and need. Windows doesn't have a chance of even being in the neighborhood of OS X...even after being heavily tweaked and modified with third party software. Linux can easily hold it's own, but not out-of-the-box. Also, you can put nearly anyone that's willing to try something new in front of OS X and they can pick it up pretty quick, can't say that for Linux. However, with it's Unix base, OS X can be made to do ANYTHING Linux can do as well. Yes, OS X is the most advanced OS out there.

Also, OS X was 100% re-written for 10.5. To say it's not 100% of what it should be is fine and understandable, but comparing it to the competition, (if that's what you call it) Vista, that took how many years to come out and is a complete pile of crap, and even after multiple updates, a service pack, etc it's still utterly worthless.

So, in your opinion, what OS is more advanced than OS X?
 
There's a thread in the Operating System subforum where someone just asked "What's the most sophisticated OS available today" so I'll just point you there for my comments:

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1032595723#post1032595723

People bitch at Microsoft regardless of what they do; with Apple it's a bit different. People look at almost everything they do as world-changing and "a good thing." Ok, let's look at something that isn't such "a good thing" which was today's introduction of the iPhone 3G:

Could they have made the 1st generation iPhone support 3G? Sure, piece of cake.

Does the "new" iPhone 3G really have anything going on that couldn't have been done last year with the 1st gen iPhone? No, not really, not even the addition of GPS, especially not the flush headphone jack, and the extra battery life isn't that big of a deal at this point.

Could they have introduced the 1st generation iPhone at a substantially lower cost? Of course, but by reaming the early adopters (drink that Kool-Aid, fellas...) on pricing and then almost immediately undercutting their own prices - oh yeah, people loved that - and now they're coming in at half the cost from last year's 8GB model after the price cut well, I can assure you after reading a few hundred posts from current 1st generation iPhone users, they're not happy campers.

It's progress, I know this, we all do. But still, Apple just has this way of basically coming out with "new" stuff that's not really that "new" and making it sound like it's the 2nd coming of whatever higher power you believe in, and it's all smoke and mirrors in the end.

As for the making OSX do anything Linux can do, my post in the other thread covers that: all current OSes on the market today (even the free ones) all end up doing the same stuff, so where's your advancement now? If they all do the same basic things, how can any one be more advanced than the rest?

I got a $60 CPU and mobo sitting here with $30 worth of RAM and a spare SATA hard drive. I've got and a power supply, case, mobo, onboard video and audio, a Plextor DVD drive and a few other goodies that I can put together and install OSX on right now inside of an hour's time and it'll perform as well if not better than any "real" Mac on the market today, with effectively the same components (Intel chipset, Intel processor, Intel onboard graphics, etc). Does that mean my Hackintosh is as advanced? No? I would disagree there but that's another thread.

People love touting that "most advanced operating system" and I don't see it. I can do with most any version of Windows what most any Linux user can do with most any version of Linux just like any OSX user can do with OSX.

Why do OSX users think that makes their OS "advanced" when they're all doing the same things?

As for comparing the time of development for these OSes, Vista and Leopard (not just Windows and OSX) have been in development about equally, actually, stretching back to around 2001 or so, so that simply isn't a valid point of contention. Leopard didn't fucking appear out of thin air, and it's not 100% rewritten, far from it. You're gonna have to do better than that...
 
Joe Average said:
All I see are a bunch of things that should have been done with 10.5 from the start.
Click to expand...

A little thing called the iPhone got in the way. Furthermore, it's not like Leopard is inherently buggy or unusable. Let's not succumb to the Internet Bitching Amplification Effect, especially since I highly doubt Snow Leopard will fix long-standing complaints. (All you FTFF people can go back to hoping 10.7 does something for your cause. You green button people and ZFS fans might have some hope, though.)

Don't know about you, but I'm excited for Snow Leopard, especially since Apple always adds improvements and features they never advertise or announce.

CEpeep said:
Yeah, I'd forgotten about Adobe. They're in the process of getting away from Carbon though, because there's no 64 bit support and they want more access to memory. They've been sort of slow to react to environment changes though. I remember they put up a bitch fit when Apple announced it was moving to Intel and made up some crap about not having enough time to port the code even though they'd been given like a year.
Click to expand...

Adobe is an absolute dinosaur. I bet their internal situation is much like Microsoft's; a bunch of programmers trying to deal with a codebase few if any of them contributed to without any comments or documentation to guide them.

If I work at Adobe in a position of even remote influence, I'm raising a stink about a total Creative Suite rewrite. Hell, Flash, too. Even though they're successful products, if you have to work around them to keep up with the market, you need to go back to the drawing board. Flash should be lean and mean, CS should be the very model of a modular program with a very small and efficient core process. Hack them in the interim if you need to, but set a firm goal on the completion of a rewrite and GET TO IT.
 
Don't know what you're talking about up there Mr. Joe but what Apple is talking about is better taking advantage of multi-core 64-bit processors. Something Microsoft has yet to really do either.

Improving performance where an error wasn't there is not a bug fix. It's improving performance.

Most advanced computer operating system - in my book, they're very much correct. Except for a few corporation level environments.

You're making yourself look just as bad as your so called "fanatics."

As you find many things about Apple a joke, I laugh rather loudly when people try to use the term service pack when it comes to OS X updates. They're not even close. It's just another example of fanaticism on the opposite level.

BTW, I doubt anybody would bitch if Microsoft finally decided to work on making Windows perform better rather than copying (then slightly changing) OS X and now even iPhone features. It'd be a lot longer coming than OS X. The good thing for all of us, we'll get to bitch about how the next version of Windows screws us all over just as much as Vista did. Anybody know of any major corporation or even small business that has moved over to Vista? Yea... 'nuff said.

Damnit, got me all caught up in this stupid mac vs windows crap. Actually I'm not even sure you are talking about Windows. If it's anything else I might not be able to respond - I'll be laughing too hard.
 
The worst thing anyone can possibly do in a discussion of Apple vs Microsoft or Windows vs <insert whatever Mac OS you wish here> is the ridiculous "Don't get me started on how Windows copies <insert whatever Mac OS you wish here>"

And I'm the fanatic, eh?
 
Joe Average said:
People love touting that "most advanced operating system" and I don't see it. I can do with most any version of Windows what most any Linux user can do with most any version of Linux just like any OSX user can do with OSX.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of your points but I had to chime in on this one. At this point I believe that OS X has the best window, application, and workspace management out there. Work processes are more streamlined, it is easier to keep a tidier workspace (Spaces makes Final Cut Studio completely manageable now), and I can share or move assets between different applications much faster and more easily in OS X than I can in Windows. Maybe it is the OS X features, maybe it is the common UI guidelines that applications have to follow, maybe its a combination of both, I dunno, but the end result is me being able to perform and manage my work more quickly and easily in OS X than I can in Windows.

All of the other under-the-hood stuff is solid across the board at this point, especially in Vista ever since SP1 (people can shit talk XP all they want, no way I'd go back), so for me the difference is in the GUI guidelines and features. I use them both but for now OS X has the advantage as far as a working environment goes (for me at least).
 
Joe Average said:
There's a thread in the Operating System subforum where someone just asked "What's the most sophisticated OS available today" so I'll just point you there for my comments:

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1032595723#post1032595723

People bitch at Microsoft regardless of what they do; with Apple it's a bit different. People look at almost everything they do as world-changing and "a good thing." Ok, let's look at something that isn't such "a good thing" which was today's introduction of the iPhone 3G:

Could they have made the 1st generation iPhone support 3G? Sure, piece of cake.

Does the "new" iPhone 3G really have anything going on that couldn't have been done last year with the 1st gen iPhone? No, not really, not even the addition of GPS, especially not the flush headphone jack, and the extra battery life isn't that big of a deal at this point.

Could they have introduced the 1st generation iPhone at a substantially lower cost? Of course, but by reaming the early adopters (drink that Kool-Aid, fellas...) on pricing and then almost immediately undercutting their own prices - oh yeah, people loved that - and now they're coming in at half the cost from last year's 8GB model after the price cut well, I can assure you after reading a few hundred posts from current 1st generation iPhone users, they're not happy campers.

It's progress, I know this, we all do. But still, Apple just has this way of basically coming out with "new" stuff that's not really that "new" and making it sound like it's the 2nd coming of whatever higher power you believe in, and it's all smoke and mirrors in the end.

As for the making OSX do anything Linux can do, my post in the other thread covers that: all current OSes on the market today (even the free ones) all end up doing the same stuff, so where's your advancement now? If they all do the same basic things, how can any one be more advanced than the rest?

I got a $60 CPU and mobo sitting here with $30 worth of RAM and a spare SATA hard drive. I've got and a power supply, case, mobo, onboard video and audio, a Plextor DVD drive and a few other goodies that I can put together and install OSX on right now inside of an hour's time and it'll perform as well if not better than any "real" Mac on the market today, with effectively the same components (Intel chipset, Intel processor, Intel onboard graphics, etc). Does that mean my Hackintosh is as advanced? No? I would disagree there but that's another thread.

People love touting that "most advanced operating system" and I don't see it. I can do with most any version of Windows what most any Linux user can do with most any version of Linux just like any OSX user can do with OSX.

Why do OSX users think that makes their OS "advanced" when they're all doing the same things?

As for comparing the time of development for these OSes, Vista and Leopard (not just Windows and OSX) have been in development about equally, actually, stretching back to around 2001 or so, so that simply isn't a valid point of contention. Leopard didn't fucking appear out of thin air, and it's not 100% rewritten, far from it. You're gonna have to do better than that...
Click to expand...

notrolls2.gif
 
Why do OSX users think that makes their OS "advanced" when they're all doing the same things?
Click to expand...

I don't like Windows Mail, I don't like Windows Calendar, I don't like WIndows Contacts, I don't like MSN Messenger, I don't like Windows Media Player, I don't like Windows Defender.

iCal, Mail, Address Book are all easier to use and intergreat better then Windows (whatever).

IMHO.
 
EQTakeOffense said:
I don't like Windows Mail, I don't like Windows Calendar, I don't like WIndows Contacts, I don't like MSN Messenger, I don't like Windows Media Player, I don't like Windows Defender.

iCal, Mail, Address Book are all easier to use and intergreat better then Windows (whatever).
Click to expand...
Many of the built in Windows apps are very crummy. If MS were to replace them with better versions, or even integrate a basic package like MS Works, they would be hauled back to court.

In a way it's kind of pointless to complain about the apps because MS has its hands tied. You can replace any of those apps with free or commercial alternatives. And it's kind of hard to take your criticism seriously when you just "don't like" everything.

I wouldn't be so quick to praise every OS X included app. Some are pretty barebones compared to non-bundled programs. Outlook is much better intergrated than your examples IMO.
 
pxc said:
I wouldn't be so quick to praise every OS X included app. Some are pretty barebones compared to non-bundled programs. Outlook is much better intergrated than your examples IMO.
Click to expand...

I use both Outlook and the comparable bundled apps for OS X, and I much prefer using Mail, iCal, etc. Something like searching specific terms or names in a massive mailbox or address book is much much faster in those bundled apps than it is in Outlook.

All personal preference, of course, but in my experience I like it better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top