Slashdot Mirror

The link in the summary is to Mac Rumors, not to Mac OS Rumors, which is an unrelated site.

Benchmarks here. Leopard is slower than Tiger on all G5 and only the 64 bit version is faster than Tiger on the Intel Macs. I seem to recall that which version is faster 64 biut or 32 bit depends on what kind of benchmark you're doing but pretty much every benchmark I've seen shows that Tiger is faster on PPC chips.

Snow Leopard should fix this in a couple of months. It may or may not support PowerPC when released, but early builds did, and if the final build does too, older computers will benefit from Grand Central, OpenCL, and many of the other improvements.

An ARM would choke emulating an x86 anyway. In fact even if you recompiled the x86 binaries to run on Arm it would still suck because desktop class x86s like Core2 have a higher clock rate, are out of order, have big caches and fast SDRAM.

An iPhone apparently has a ARM1176JZF running at ~400Mhz. The fastest ARM a QCT Snapdragon ARM at 1Ghz will most likely be slower than the slowest netbook class x86, an Intel Atom at 1.6Ghz.

Of course ARM uses much less power, but for single thread integer performance ARM is in a completely different class from x86.

Back in April, the semi-reliable (rumor-wise and server-wise) Mac OS Rumors claimed that 10.5 "Leopard" would have some pretty cool "thread farming" technology. I'll quote the whole page:

A critical component of not only Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard," but also the Cocoa/Carbon for Windows package (more details in linked article above) will be new code co-developed with Intel that helps break up tasks into multiple threads -- therefore achieving considerably better efficiency on the next generation of multi-core Intel processors. The results we've seen on systems with up to 16 cores of Intel's next-generation "Conroe" desktop CPU architecture were amazing....with 10.4.6 as-is, the first core bears the vast majority of the workload particularly when only one or two resource-intensive apps are running.

Even when lots of different applications, many of them efficiently multi-threaded, are run on 10.4.5 or 10.4.6 only the first two CPUs are used efficiently while the third and fourth are getting plenty of work....but aren't quite living up to their full potential. Each added core after four seems to drop off in efficiency....not because OS X doesn't handle lots of processors properly, it does. In fact it's an industry leader in terms of being ready for the next generation of multicore, multiprocessor technology. It has been since day one and Apple has consistently kept it at the leading edge since then.

The problem is, simply, getting all of those core to have the maximum possible positive effect on the performance of each application. When simulating the realistic workloads of almost every kind of user, more than four cores rapidly lost any effect because there just weren't enough threads, efficiently enough balanced, to make good use of more CPU's.

Leopard changes this in every way that Apple and Intel have been able to devise. The techniques employed include tricks that both companies have been holding at ready for years, and some new things that have been developed in the past year or so to specifically address the way the "Core" (Yonah, Merom and Napa-Merom) and Codename 'Conroe' architectures work. Most of it goes beyond our technical competency; we're sure that the folks at Ars Technica will have a lot to say about this in the next few months as more details leak about the hardware and software involved in these enhancements.

Some, but certainly not all, of these techniques will eventually make their way into Intel's optimized in-house compilers. Some will even become part of the GCC compilers that are critical to building OS X and indeed most Xcode applications, eventually. But right now they are by and large highly experimental, being part of an operating system codebase that is not even quite "alpha" in terms of usability.

That said, it's a thing of beauty to see 16 cores used with bizarrely perfect symmetry even when performing relatively simple tasks that have nearly no application-level threading in their collective codebases. 32 cores work nearly as well, and somehow manage to make tasks that would normally only max out one or two cores and be unable to go beyond that point, spread out across nearly all the CPU's with a beautiful cascade effect created for just such a demonstration in the Leopard version of Activity Monitor (just wait until you see all the 3D OpenGL visualizations that have been whippped up....but that's another article entirely and bordering on embargoed territory to boot!).

A critical component of not only Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard," but also the Cocoa/Carbon for Windows package (more details in linked article above) will be new code co-developed with Intel that helps break up tasks into multiple threads -- therefore achieving considerably better efficiency on the next generation of multi-core Intel processors. The results we've seen on systems with up to 16 cores of Intel's next-generation "Conroe" desktop CPU architecture were amazing....with 10.4.6 as-is, the first core bears the vast majority of the workload particularly when only one or two resource-intensive apps are running.

Even when lots of different applications, many of them efficiently multi-threaded, are run on 10.4.5 or 10.4.6 only the first two CPUs are used efficiently while the third and fourth are getting plenty of work....but aren't quite living up to their full potential. Each added core after four seems to drop off in efficiency....not because OS X doesn't handle lots of processors properly, it does. In fact it's an industry leader in terms of being ready for the next generation of multicore, multiprocessor technology. It has been since day one and Apple has consistently kept it at the leading edge since then.

The problem is, simply, getting all of those core to have the maximum possible positive effect on the performance of each application. When simulating the realistic workloads of almost every kind of user, more than four cores rapidly lost any effect because there just weren't enough threads, efficiently enough balanced, to make good use of more CPU's.

Leopard changes this in every way that Apple and Intel have been able to devise. The techniques employed include tricks that both companies have been holding at ready for years, and some new things that have been developed in the past year or so to specifically address the way the "Core" (Yonah, Merom and Napa-Merom) and Codename 'Conroe' architectures work. Most of it goes beyond our technical competency; we're sure that the folks at Ars Technica will have a lot to say about this in the next few months as more details leak about the hardware and software involved in these enhancements.

Some, but certainly not all, of these techniques will eventually make their way into Intel's optimized in-house compilers. Some will even become part of the GCC compilers that are critical to building OS X and indeed most Xcode applications, eventually. But right now they are by and large highly experimental, being part of an operating system codebase that is not even quite "alpha" in terms of usability.

That said, it's a thing of beauty to see 16 cores used with bizarrely perfect symmetry even when performing relatively simple tasks that have nearly no application-level threading in their collective codebases. 32 cores work nearly as well, and somehow manage to make tasks that would normally only max out one or two cores and be unable to go beyond that point, spread out across nearly all the CPU's with a beautiful cascade effect created for just such a demonstration in the Leopard version of Activity Monitor (just wait until you see all the 3D OpenGL visualizations that have been whippped up....but that's another article entirely and bordering on embargoed territory to boot!).

We don't need eight cores, at least in the short-to-medium term, because it would require fundamentally rewriting all our software to be more parallel

[...] it's a thing of beauty to see 16 cores used with bizarrely perfect symmetry even when performing relatively simple tasks that have nearly no application-level threading in their collective codebases. 32 cores work nearly as well, and somehow manage to make tasks that would normally only max out one or two cores and be unable to go beyond that point, spread out across nearly all the CPU's with a beautiful cascade effect created for just such a demonstration in the Leopard version of Activity Monitor [...]

I stand corrected. In my quest to find the link, I found that this is a rumor from an "insider". Apple is expected to make an API to run Mac applications on Windows. There was a lot of discussion about this rumor last week indicating that a lot of people don't believe anything from the macosrumors site anymore... I also found this in my search which indicates that just the opposite may be true. MS might be releasing an API to run Windows applications on multiple platforms. I can see them shifting from an OS vendor to "THE" application vendor as their next plan of attack. Since, at this point OSes are pretty much worthless when you consider how little distinction there is between them anymore for the average user.

.. in this post they reported on a project supposedly aiming at breaking down single threads into multiple threads so as to better utilize core utilization beyond the fourth core.

It supposedly involve Intel. I personally think both rumors are just that, but the timing is curious. Same source behind both? AMD PR people not wanting to lose out in imaginary rumored technology to Intel?

I have to agree with this site that talks about Apple possibly resurrecting "Yellow Box" for Windows which would allow for running Cocoa (and possibly Carbon) apps under Windows after a paltry 150MB install. Sort of a sanctioned WINE for running OS X apps cross platform.

This would allow developers to continue developing Cocoa for Mac and have instant ports to Windows; no dual booting or emulation involved.

And if the release date is false?

Then we relegate Think Secret to the same pile as we do MacOS Rumors. Remember when they were the site - then it turned out they were just making stuff up...

Try complaining. At least one site has already pledged to stop doing it.

I use FireFox as my main browser on WinXP, and many times when I visit Mac OS Rumors I get a pop-under window for an ad. Has anybody else experienced this problem on other sites?

Check it out:

Mac OS X 10.4's new Spotlight search feature will contain "as-yet unannounced internet searching features which are said to be dramatic".

This could be a coincidence. However, it's unlikely.

I'm not sure I'd call this dramatic, but it would be nice to have this integrated with my OS.

Unfortunately, it leaves much to be desired in terms of emulation speed and is missing most of its planned new features. VPC7 is hardly adequate for users with real performance demands. Of course, the emulation story could change in the future.

One of the biggest Mac OS X 10.4 features: Linux? It's that time of year again, folks - last year's big operating system release, Panther, is about to get by far its largest and most mature update yet in the form of 10.3.3 and Safari 1.2 in the next couple of weeks, and Apple's attention is beginning to turn to its next major release.

One of our oldest sources has reported in on the beginning stages of this process, and the first item on his bullet list: Linux. Mac OS X 10.4 will more closely merge the Apple experience with that of Linux in several key ways that will visible to users as well as developers. Panther already implements a number of Linux APIs, but Apple hopes to make 10.4's adoptions higher-profile and therefore mirror (rather than cannibalize, we can hope!) Linux's success in creating an "opening wedge" into the Windows world.

We expect to get more details as Apple fleshes out its concept work and gets coding. Stay tuned....

Apple's 10.4 "Linux initiative" could work both ways. Today's crop of new reports on this topic not only provide considerable confirmation that Apple is indeed pondering a "Linux adoption" move, but hint at an angle we haven't covered yet. It has been suggested that Apple could gain quite a bit of attention and support from the GNU/Linux/OSS communities by porting more of its key pieces of software to Linux: Xcode, Rendezvous, QuickTime, iTunes, and iChat have all been mentioned. More on this later in the week as we continue to analyze this particularly tantalizing line of inquiry....

iTunes 5 to accompany Apple music announcements Thursday?

Several rumor sites have suggested this to be so. We have recently seen test builds of iTunes 5, and it does indeed appear to include WMA audio support -- even with the Mac version. The Windows version still has some outstanding bugs -- not something one would expect only days from release, although the build in question was compiled roughly one week ago -- including sometimes completing MP3 CD burns without giving an error even though the disc in question is damaged and will not play.

There are some features listed in the build notes (self-expiring song downloads to enable free promotional downloads of whole tracks, for one) that are not testable without the corresponding changes being enabled on the server end, and it appeared that under Jaguar there were some problems with the new look-and-feel.

The big question in the minds of the grapevine appears to be this: will iTunes 5 ship as part of the final Panther package, or will Panther users have to upgrade from iTunes 4 via Software Update, even though version 5 was available before Panther's release? There are not yet clear answers, but we suspect this issue will be addressed as part of Thursday's announcements...which are also rumored to include new iPod accessories and possibly even modest modifications (lower entry-level price, possible new high-end model) to the current lineup itself.

I feel so dirty...

Virtual PC for Mac Version 6.1 relies on a feature of the PowerPC G3 and G4 processors called 'pseudo little-endian mode' for increased performance when emulating a Pentium processor. Current versions of Virtual PC require this feature in order to function. Because the new G5 processor does not support this feature, large portions of the VPC for Mac program must be rewritten and carefully tested to work properly on the G5 CPU.

Sorry to burst your bubble but I started the quad processor G5 rumor many months ago!

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Ryan Meader started it three years ago.

Many of my predictions are indeed based on a number of different rumor sites, but not copied directly. Some of the rumors I've read I disagree with, and some I agree with.

For example, I think it was Mac OS Rumors that said the G5 will not be called the G5, and I disagree with them. This issue was also mentioned by As the Apple Turns, who said that according to AppleInsider, it would be called the PowerMac G5. I agree with them. That doesn't mean my prediction is based on theirs, merely that we both made the same prediction.

The nature of the PPC970 chip, and that Apple will use it at all, is based largely on a couple of articles at ArsTechnica, but they didn't say anything about when it would ship.

The 1.4, dual 1.6 and dual 1.8GHz clock speeds are consistent with Mac OS Rumors, although I'm sure I've seen other speeds suggested elsewhere. I believe I've heard 2GHz suggested, and I don't agree with that (not for WWDC). I forgot to mention pricing, but I predict the low-end and mid-range models will be $1499 and $1999 respectively; this is based on Apple's current pricing, not on any rumor site.

USB2 support I heard somewhere, but don't remember where (it had to do with motherboard specs). Bluetooth, FireWire 800 and Airport Extreme are currently shipping features.

I've heard about the 15" Aluminum PowerBook from a few sources I think. The PowerBook G5 has also been mentioned in multiple places including this Slashdot article, but I don't expect to see it until next year, possibly announced at MacWorld San Francisco but probably not.

The G5 shipping with 10.2 was a possibility I had been considering, but was confirmed by ThinkSecret and eWEEK. Same source for gcc 3.3. Pricing is based on Apple's history.

The multiple simultaneous users feature I heard from a few places quite some time ago; I don't remember where. Apple's WWDC material says Panther and WebCore will be demonstrated at WWDC; that's no secret. As for PAC and WPAD, I haven't seen that suggested anywhere.

In any case, a rumor is "A piece of unverified information of uncertain origin usually spread by word of mouth." Many of my predictions are based on rumors. The sites I got the rumors from are mostly just passing on rumors they've heard. I don't feel that not citing sources was inappropriate, since these are MY predictions, BASED ON what many others have said, not simply a copy of someone else's predictions. I would expect others to be able to make similar predictions, based on overlapping sources.

No, they are both providing valuable information (the machines are in production) and they are providing verifiable information (they have a metalicized plastic enclosure and different handles).

Predicting something that everyone knows will happen eventually is not so significant as correctly predicting *when* it will happen.

Obviously. That is why everyone seems to be denying these nonexistant predictions. That doesn't change the fact that they are not making those predictions.

Also, I'll point out that until recently, not everyone knew that these things were happening. For a long time, the only people saying that Apple was within a year of release was MacBidouille, a Portuguese (!) mac rumor website. MacWhispers clearly has a totally separate source, and this is valuable corroboration.

All I'm saying is that MacWhispers is a fantastic addition to the Macintosh Rumors scene, and if people would only pay attention, they'd see the virtues. Every Mac rumors website begins in fan mode, and some of them improve. MacWhispers has improved a *lot*.

Some of them get worse, and worse, and worse, and worse.

those rumors have been floating around for a few weeks, if not months on other sites. For the wannabe-mac fanatics among yuo : here are other rumor adresses :

macrumors (reliable, good forums)
macosrumors (unreliable, bloated, no forums)
looprumors(reliable, low traffic forums)
thinksecret(reliable, low traffic content, low traffic forums)
macwhispers (reliable, mostly hardware info, no forums)
macslash(slashdot for mac, mostly blahblah)
macbidouille(french, rather new, so reliability unconfirmed)
appleturns(100% reliable news by Steve Jobs's alter ego)

In Apple's next-generation systems, there will be a chip called the Apple Processor Interconnect which will allow G4 or 970 processors to be used, probably due to the significant lifespan G4 processors will have in the Powerbook, iMac, eMac, and perhaps also iBook model families for more than a year after the 970 premieres.

[the 970] may show up in Powerbooks a lot sooner than once thought. There's still a chance it might take a little longer than the PowerMacs and Xserves, but the Powerbook will not only move to PowerPC 970 processors very quickly....it may even employ dual PPC 970 processors as well as an impressively updated system architecture in the 17-inch Powerbook as soon as next January.

Not that rumors sites are ever accurate this far in advance, but this site claims to have heard that Apple will be adding video services to its content-on-demand array in two years' time.

One thing that lends this a tiny bit of credibility is that ripping all those DVDs takes time. They've been working for the past year and a half to build up a library of 200,000 songs for the music service they launched Monday, so finding out this far in advance of a similar movie service isn't a totally wild idea.

Rumormongers in the Mac world are so prevalent (me being one of them) that there are at least a dozen rumor sites all groping for attention. eWeek likes to get in on the gig once a month or so. But Stevie runs a tight ship, so most of it is vague, or sometimes just made up (ala MacOSRumors.com). Hard evidence is a real rarity, and sometimes does more harm than good. (There are several examples in the past of rumor sites getting too close for Steve's comfort and suffering a backlash as a result.)

You can't directly blame Apple for any of this. It's just that Apple has often come out with something so new and cool that a lot of us are like kids willing to see their presents before Christmas.

There is currently very little real information on Panther at this point. The only thing we really know for a fact is that it will be called 10.3 (since Jordan Hubbard said so in an interview). Other than this the only information comes from LoopRumors, MacOSRumors (dodgy), Mac Rumors and maybe one or two others. The information from these sites can range from dead on to absolute rubbish.

Another hot rumor on the Web today is that Apple has contracted with its primary iMac manufacturer, Quanta Computers, to produce a wireless flat-panel display unit that would serve as Apple's answer to the tablet computing market.

We have heard similar rumors, but serious technical concerns about either of the two major scenarios this would entail make it difficult for us to build a reasonable picture of what such a machine might be like. The first scenario sources have typically outlined is a pen-input display with its brains housed in a fixed desktop unit with only display data transmitted over a wireless connection. The second is a self-contained unit with only the keyboard, mouse, and other desktop niceties connected wirelessly. In either case, there are serious questions about balance of functionality with the technical concerns of what wireless technologies would be used, and whether their bandwidths and latencies would be sufficient to make the whole package live up to Apple's standards.

Better submit that one to Mac OS Rumors.

"Apple to buy Chili's restaurant chain".

Heh... depends on where you look. (Scroll down to Thursday, November 7 and Thursday, October 31.)

This supposed "internal document" was all over the Internet for a while and contained lots of likely additions and improvements, but I'm not sure who has it available for download currently.

Will comment on this at 4:30, if you care. This is according to the following message left on MOSR's site:

update projected at 4:30.

The MOSR head claims to have some new info to back this up.

Unless I'm moderating I usually just skim the top with highest scores first although I regularly work my way to the first posts at the bottom. Not to join on the bandwagon but moderation has gotten terrible so I've set all the negative moderations to have a 1+ value in my preferences. This in effect negates them so an article has as fair a chance of reaching me as any other not moderated. I haven't decided that all negative moderations are evil so I also haven't come to the conclusion that any moderation is worth my attention. I'll set my preferences to 2+ if that ever happens.

I follow up slashdot with a somethingawful.com chaser to set my mind at ease and to be reassured that getting aggrevated is futile since the internet makes you stupid.

After reading the day's feature, I then check their Awful Link of the Day. Unless it belongs to a very original freak or a freak ailed by something an acquaintance suffers from, I pass. If it can't give me ammo to tease friends I always opt for my own nomination, macosrumors.com

In the rare case of an update I'll read it for laughs unless it's a processor based update. I don't have a comedy chaser ready for those instances so there's no point in winding myself up into a murderous rage.

A quick stop afterwards at maccentral.com usually satisfies the need for real Mac news although I'm thinking of solely switching to macdevcenter.com since they have Mac Central updates on a sidebar.

The subject says "5 daily reads" and for now that's macdevcenter.com which I got into by following slashdot articles. This slot is always being contested and it's a good thing I only read The Filthy Critic on Monday. --- and then I got tired of proofreading my post

The rumor mills seem to think this'll be available in a future version of OS X.

See macosrumors.com

the multiple user GUI Aqua interface rumor has been running around for a while. most recently Mac OS Rumors has been reporting that it is something Apple is working on. MOSR recommends those who want to be able to use Aqua as if it were X-windows should contact Apple and make the request.

but to answer your question, there is NO way to do what you want short of taking over the desktop machine's screen. (or buying a new faster *book...)

As for Apple's anti-DRM stance, there's an interesting piece right now on macosrumors.com suggesting that DRM-type features may be built-in to OS X soon, at the system level. Considering the source, you may want to apply a great deal of NaCl, but it's something to have on your radar.

Hi everybody,
Probably the BSD version was changed to be suitable for Motorola processors, that's why you can't use mac os x with an Intel or similar. Anyway, rumors say that Apple is planning to switch to Intel processors (saw this info on http://www.macosrumors.com).

Well. MOSR is the only site that's both constantly incorrect and constantly paid attention to. There are other sites that are just as full of crap, but MOSR gets attention... well... because they act like they get attention.

The frustrating thing with MOSR is that they seem to never fucking learn. They might always have well placed sources for their info, but... those sources are so overly optimistic that they consistently make MOSR look like idiots.

ThinkSecret and MacRumors are both much better rumor sites, and I don't believe that they detract from Apple's sales in the slightest. Nick DePlume of Thinksecret seems to care enough about accuracy that he doesn't make many long-distance predictions. I've never seen him be very incorrect. His steadfast accuracy has made me reconsider purchase of a PC desktop, lately, because he says ATI is working on an all-in-wonder card for the mac. I believe him completely.

MacRumors has a much higher volume of information, so sometimes they come up with crap, but they never make it sound more authoritative than it is. They don't act like you can bet the farm on their information.

At this point, MOSR needs to curl up and die. Back in the day, they had enough viewers and sources that they could have been the premier rumor site indefinitely. Even with Jobs' crackdown on leaks. But their BS predictions (and crappy management) probably alienated as many sources as it did readers. So now those sources go to Thinksecret.

The readme still isn't available, but Mac OS Rumors has the KB article that was previously available :

Enhancements Delivered with this update

Disc Burning Enhancements

* Improves compatibility of burned CDs with Microsoft Windows.
* Addresses a situation that could result in a failure when burning a disc using iTunes 3 and a high burn speed.
* Addresses an issue in which Disk Utility could inaccurately report "problems" when scanning a disc that was burned with iTunes or in the Finder.
* Adds support for various third-party disc burners, including: TDK VeloCD 241032FP and 241040F, MCE Technologies Lucid-24 24x10x24x Portable FireWire CDRW Drive, LaCie PocketCDRW 24x10x24 U&I, EZQuest Boa CDR/w 48x12x48 FireWire, Formac cdrw 40x10x40 and cdrw 48x10x40.

Digital Hub and Peripheral Device Enhancements

* Decreases the amount of time Final Cut Pro takes to open, and improves iMovie compatibility when a Sony DVMC-DA1 media converter is connected to the computer.
* Improves iMovie compatibility with Canopus ADVC-100 media converter. * Improves compatibility with certain (SCSI-based) scanners.
* Improves compatibility of Image Capture with Epson DS (TWAIN).
* Improves results when scanning in grayscale or black-and-white with Image Capture and Epson UI.
* Enhances reliability when hot-swapping a FireWire-based camera on certain iMacs using Final Cut Pro.
* Addresses a potential issue in which a USB keyboard or mouse is not recognized or able to wake the computer after having been connected to or disconnected from an external USB hub while the computer is in sleep.

Networking and Mail Enhancements

* Addresses a situation in which certain Internet service providers (ISPs) may not accept outgoing email (SMTP) from computers using NAT and a ".local" hostname (which may be assigned by Rendezvous).
* Addresses a situation in which, if the connection fails when transferring email to your computer via your network or an Internet connection, all mail not transferred is lost.
* Improves Mac OS X Server performance in heavy AFP client load situations.
* Improves Mac OS X Server reliability when a Mac OS 9 client attempts a scheduled AFP connection.
* Resolves a potential issue in which Mail could fail to import mail messages from Eudora as expected.

Printing Enhancements

* Addresses a potential situation in which Print Center would unexpectedly quit when using St. Claire Software's Default Folder X.
* Improves compatibility with HP LaserJet 4V and HP LaserJet 4MV printers.
* Reduces occurrences of a potential "busy; source EIO (ATALK)" alert message when printing using AppleTalk via CUPS.
* Addresses an issue when printing via CUPS in which the second queued print job would automatically start if the first print job was stopped.
* Addresses a potential "error -1" message in Print Center when adding a third-party USB printer.
* Includes various other CUPS-related printing enhancements.

Other Enhancements

* Improves potential situations in which a Web page's graphics could take an unexpectedly long time to appear in a browser window.
* Improves compatibility with Microsoft Entourage.
* Reduces likelihood of a potential "ticking hard drive" symptom that could be caused by IOAudio errors regularly being written to the system.log file.
* Addresses a potential issue in which Mac Help may not be available following an erase-installation.
* Improves compatibility of the Universal Access Zoom feature with some iBook computers.
* Addresses a potential situation in which no video may appear after waking certain iBook computers that are connected to an external display or presentation device.
* Addresses a situation in which a Classic application may fail to produce sound after waking from sleep.
* Addresses a potential situation in which AppleTalk may not be available in the Classic environment after waking from sleep.
* Addresses various potential kernel panic situations.

Replying to my own comment... MacOSRumors is reporting that:

"According to Apple sources, the company is hard at work on an update to both OS X 10.1 and 10.2 (10.0.x will not be supported by this update) to prevent possible damage to SuperDrives when burning to high-speed DVD-R disks, and expects to release it via Software Update around the end of the first week of October."

However MOSR is not the most reliable source so take this with however large a pinch of salt you feel is necessary.

being shipped out in the past few days have begun arriving to their new owners with OS X 10.2 CDs included -- clearly indicating that Apple has completed development on Jaguar and that build 6C115 is indeed the final version of the new OS.

The only thing macosrumors didn't immediately predict was the flat-panel iMac, but they didn't have to. They mentioned it almost a year before its release (along with a couple schematics of its design) and then left the rumor alone.

Rumor sites are fun but should not be trusted. Mainstream sites reporting off those rumors should not be trusted either. Think Secret in particular has no credibility, but they often publish tantalizing screen shots prior to releases so they are worth watching for that only.

--Rick

i understand that both these sites are protesting apple's labelling them as "rumor" sites.

If you have a rumor fix, the site RumorTracker acts as a sort of rumor portal including rumors from seven different sites including MacOSRumors, ThinkSecret and SpyMac.

There are rumours that Apple's next digital device will, in fact, be some sort of home theatre device:

http://www.macosrumors.com

You can choose to believe what you want (and these rumours sites are notoriously unreliable), but it has been pretty well documented that Apple is working on something along these lines.

This would not be the company's first foray into the market. Apple history buffs out there will remember the ill-fated MacTV:
http://www.lowendmac.com/500/mactv.shtml

MacOSrumors talks out of it's ass...

MacRumors seems pretty on target...

Different beasts altogether.

Apple in particular has ordered Quanta not to discuss its work on the updated iMac, a stylish desktop PC with a white domed base and a flat panel monitor attached by a telescopic arm.

If I were them, I'd be glad I wasn't getting blamed for mistakes like this:

http://macosrumors.com/i/offsetapple.jpg

• Macfixit
• AFP548
• Maccentral
• MacNN
• MacMinute
• As The Apple Turns
• MOSR
• Mac OS X Hints
• Versiontracker
• MacSlash

So letting a (related) site give out some of the info online isn't so terrible really.

macosrumors also figure that given the iMac is a G4, G5s may be announced tomorrow. I'd say that they'll just make all the higher end machines dual processor, and announce some quad processor configurations.

We'll see.

Ralf

I don't own an iMac, but I've really come to appreciate its cuteness over the years. Don't laugh -- sure, a computer's chassis may not have much to do with its speed or utility, but in the modern office, computers are more than machines, they're pieces of furniture. I like the old iMac because, as a piece of furniture, it gives any room a modern, happy-go-lucky feel that makes me smile. Anyway, I was going to by a new iMac this summer, and I was very excited to hear the LCD iMac rumors. But now, I'll probably buy from the stocks of current iMacs, which I except to be deeply discounted.

Yeah, yeah, I know -- the new iMacs don't just feature a new chassis, they have G4s as well. But they start at $1200, and if I'm going to spend that kind of cash, why not spend an extra few hundred dollars and get a PowerMac? This works in reverse, too... not only will Apple scare off first-time computer buyers and educational customers with the higher price tag, but they risk cutting into their low-end PowerMac market too.

Have you seen the concept art recently posted on MacOSRumors? Now that is cool, and is much closer to what I expected Apple to release. It's simple, cute, and takes stylistic hints from both the older iMac and the new PowerBook. The design seen in Time Canada, though, bears little resemblance to other Apple hardware, except of course the silver color. (The silver is cool, but I wish they had kept the fun colors. Why can't they have two color options: silver for a professional look, and colors for fun?) The new design looks like a bicycle helmet with a dentist's mirror protruding from the crown.

I feel that, for once, Apple will have aesthetics going against them. The G4 Cube, old iMac, PowerMac G4, PowerBook G4, and new iBook look so amazing that even the most staunch PC bigot has to admit that they look nice. But the new iMac? Eh... I live in DC, just a few minutes away from the Tyson's Corner Apple Store, and I can easily imagine the uninterested mallgoer's reaction. "Wow, look at that thing... it's interesting, like a piece of modern art, and I might go inside for a closer look. But do I want to bring the new iMac inside my home? No, of course not." In Apple's effort to stand out, they have finally overstepped their stylistic bounds and will now pay the price.

One thing is certain: Time, in Canada or elsewhere, will never again be given such "exclusives" by Apple. I simply cannot believe how amazingly stupid that was, releasing the pics early. From a strict financial standpoint it may have seemed like a good idea... I mean, yesterday I didn't even know that Time Candada had a website, and today they have ten of my page hits for their advertisement impression revenue. But Apple will never again give Time such courtesy, and might possibly even take legal action. Of course, ATI fucked up, and their chips can still be found in new Macs today, but journalists are easier to blacklist than industry partners.

A more interesting comparison will be to pit the P4 against the comming G5. According to the Register, Apple has begun seeding early G5's at up to 1.6GHz to key devlopers. Other sources are claiming limited yeilds in the 2.4GHz range already.

There's still bugs to be worked out before production ramps up for release early next year, and supposedly AltiVec will not be as strong on the G5 as it is in the G4. But at 2.4GHz on an already-superior FPU, who needs it?