Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS X "Tiger" Enters Final Candidate Stage
Orangez writes "Apppleinsider.com reports that 'Tiger' reaches the final candidate stage. 'With massive software projects such as Tiger, Apple will sometimes seed several final candidate builds before one is declared gold master...'" The final release has widely been speculated to be in the next month or two.
The fact that it's a a point release is basically just semantics. Apple sort of painted themselves into a corner with the name OSX. It's sort of the 10th version of the Mac OS, but the X was to make it sound cooler and sort of clever, but what comes after? OS XI? That looks weird. And a little too close to XP. So they've gone with 10.whatever, and used 10.x.x for what'd normally be considered a point release. 10.4 has been a long time coming, and it's got plenty of big changes over 10.3, such that a bigger name change wouldn't be that surprising, if apple could come up with a better name for it. That's probably why they've been making the big cat code names more official. Jaguar, Panther, Tiger...
If you want, you can complain that Apple's devaluing the normal versioning numbering system, but I don't think they'll care much if you do.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
No, this is nothing new.
Yes, the version number seems to indicate it's not a new version but only an update. You have to simply ignore the leading "10.". It ain't that hard.
Yes, this is actually like Microsoft charging you for XP (NT5.1) after you already bought Win2000 (NT5.0) or NT4.0 or NT3.51 - the leading "10." is like the leading "NT" from Microsoft.
Yes, this is old news, but the issue comes up every time Apple releases a new version of OS X.
You're clearly being facetious, but not everyone will pick up on that. Thus, a point of explanation:
It's a mere point release, but that's an artifact of marketing. The number and magnitude of changes under the hood is incredible, with huge advances in developer productivity through tools like CoreData, CoreImage, and CoreVideo. The rendering subsystem has been worked over to the point where some operations are hundreds or thousands of times faster than they used to be, and the system takes advantage of modern GPUs to offload even more processing (formerly it was just compositing, not it's a whole lot more). Add to that new versions of Safari, Quicktime that's build on CoreAudio, and a ton of other neat stuff (Automator). You get a lot for your $140.
And remember, the 2.6 kernel was just a point release!
Looks like there will be a 10.3.9 update soon, interestingly enough.
I worked as a Mac Genius when Jaguar came out, and there was an official cut-off date about 5 weeks before the official release. If you purchased a mac between then and the release date, you got the free upgrade. Not the stand-alone OS install, mind you, but the "drop in" upgrade discs that they toss in the boxes of new macs at the store that don't have the OS preloaded. They do have a little give around these dates if you whine enough (hope I'm not violating my NDA...=)
You CAN install the OS from scratch (you aren't forced to do one of those nasty upgrades), but you MUST have the previous OS installed for the discs to work. Which you do, so don't worry. It just means if you ever need to reinstall your OS in the event of a disaster, you'll have to install 10.3 first, then do the format-(or archive)-and-install with 10.4.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
In fact, Apple provides build configurations such that you can specificallly target, say 10.2 or 10.1 from 10.3, and be confident that you'll have the correct API & ABI versioning.
That said, with each version of OS X, shareware developers salivate to use the new features, since they often make the dirty work easier, or negligible ( for exampe, Cocoa Bindings for 10.3 ).
Obviously, the big development houses, Adobe, Quark, etc will not generally use these new features.
lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
I don't know about 10.4 (and if I did know I wouldn't be allowed to say) but I'm guessing that it's not that much different to the way iSync works now in 10.3.
You can sync between one Mac, your phones, iPods, Palms, etc. without requiring a .Mac subscription. However for Mac to Mac syncing you do need .Mac
However, if you have access to your own server somewhere, it is possible to fake it to look like .Mac Here are some instructions on how to do that.
Note: I haven't actually tried it myself (yet)
- It's sad that this has to be said in every single Tiger thread, but Core Image/Video will not refuse to work on older Macs. It has an AltiVec fallback path that is slower than the GPU path but produces the same results.
- The real importance of CI/V is not how cool it looks applying Photoshop filters to movie trailers; it's having an advanced image and video transformation infrastructure built into the OS and available to all developers. Apple is clearly planning for the future here, and the real benefits of CI/V will not be felt until months after Tiger ships and apps start appearing that were designed taking blur/distortion/etc for granted. That 10-20% is only going to grow in the future.
"If I don't want it, it's utterly worthless" is one of the most persistent and insidious memes on Slashdot. Please don't succumb to it.