Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger for x86 Leaked?
patr1ck writes "Mac Daily News is reporting that Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger for x86 processors has been leaked to the internet already. Apparently the version running on the development kit machines is easily transfered to run on any x86 machine. Conspiracy theorists unite: an Apple marketing scheme?"
Apple has often put an expiry date into their software so it may only be good for a short period of time? enjoy
There was an unknown error in the submission.
...who has the torrent?
Accidental or not, you can bet that this development has MS in a cold sweat. Seriously, if it wasn't for piracy, MS would never have gained their stranglehold. Now, the sudden possibility of OSX spreading frictionlessly into Windows' marketshare signals a major change in the commercial landscape.
having a large market share is more important then being able to stop piracy...
Wondering why i am doing so strange posts? I am trying to get a "+5,Flamebait" or "-1,Insightful" rating.
Report: Apple Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hits piracy sites
Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 12:14 PM EST
"There is nothing at all that prevents the version of Mac OS X that runs on the developer transition machines from running on any PC with compatible components," Jeff Harrell writes for The Shape of Days. "The Intel-based Power Macintoshes that Apple is showing at their developer conference are based on an Intel motherboard, generic Intel graphics and off-the-shelf Pentium 4 CPUs... I estimate that we're down to a matter of hours before Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hardware is available for download on Internet software piracy sites and peer-to-peer piracy networks. (Update: A reader who for obvious reasons wishes to remain anonymous just demonstrated to me that the software is, in fact, already available on Internet software piracy sites.) If I can think through this stuff, Apple's management can think through this stuff. This is the most awe-inspiring stealth marketing move I've ever seen."
"According to reports, Apple's bundled iLife applications, major selling points for the Mac operating system, are already Intel-native and run at full speed... Given Apple's experiences with software piracy, particularly the rampant software piracy that spread developer builds of Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger all over the Internet this past spring, Apple's management from the top down knows full well that this developer preview will be in the hands of every kid with a cable modem within days of its release. Most of them will be able to install it on their own computers and run it and the full suite of iLife '05 applications at full speed, and run most existing Mac software in translation. As a result, Apple will give thousands, possibly millions, of people a taste of Mac OS X running full speed on their own PCs. Apple's giving their potential future customers a free taste, that's what they're doing. It's a try-before-you-buy deal," Harrell writes.
Also, full article (by Jeff Harrell @ ShapeOfDays.com)...
Mac OS X on Intel: Try before you buy?
Item the first: Apple is not staffed entirely by idiots. This is self-evident, and it's important to what follows. Keep this in mind as we proceed.
Item the second: The Intel-based Power Macintoshes that Apple is showing at their developer conference are based on an Intel motherboard, generic Intel graphics and off-the-shelf Pentium 4 CPUs. This information has just become public in the past few hours. (Comments I made to the contrary yesterday and on Monday were erroneous. The source who fed me that information has been sent to bed without any supper, and says to tell you he's very sorry and that it won't happen again.)
Item the third: It's safe to assume, given the timeframe, that the developer transition kits that Apple will ship within a couple of weeks will be fundamentally similar to, if not outright identical to, the Power Macs on display at the conference.
Item the fourth: The Power Macs on display at the show run a one-off build of Mac OS X 10.4.1 that incorporates the few necessary changes that were required to get the operating system running on the Intel hardware. This build includes Apple's bundled iLife '05 suite of applications.
Item the fifth: Because Intel's LaGrande security technology is not yet incorporated into any shipping products, it's safe to assume that it's not present in these transition-kit computers.
Item the sixth: Given items two through five, apart from the constraints introduced by hardware-software interfaces, there is nothing at all that prevents the version of Mac OS X that runs on the developer transition machines from running on any PC with compatible components.
Item the seventh: Because the Intel version of Mac OS X that's being distributed to developers is a one-off build, future software patches, including all-important security patches, will not install on top of it, making it totally useless to anybody who's not a developer of Mac software.
Item the eighth: Given it
Bill Gates said to be muttering something about "Tiger Tiger. burning bright, In the forests of the night; What immortal hand or eye. Could frame thy fearful symmetry?" Who knew he was a Blake fan?
"It's difficult to meditate on amphetamines." - Joe Walsh
It's most likely not "any" x86 machine, but rather those that Darwin already runs on. Whether it's a intentional or not, it's still good marketing though.
Against the grain
As for Apple becoming another Microsoft, I'm sure their shareholders would be delighted to see that happen.
For a second when I read this story I thought the same thing......And then I realized that I have a Powerbook and am typing this on Tiger 10.4.
I am such a kleptomaniac.
---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
Not to mention that their $999 lease is not much of an obstacle for serious developers. Apple does not need new Killer apps to seed the desire to purchase new apples. So such a broad based seeding of the OS does them little good in that respect.
Now to answer cringley's question. "Why would they pre-announce the swtich a year ahead if it is so easy to port apps". People fret they will "osbourne" themselves when current apple users hold off purchasing a new apple waiting for the intel ones.
I suspect that an equally large effect may work the opposite direction. There 10 times as many high-end PC people out there that are about to upgrade their machines and may start to think. Hmmmm this new apple hardware might run windows, maybe I'll put off buying my next Dell-shitbox machine and see what apple rolls out. So this way by pre-announcing they cant get that meme going for a year. Thought's like that lead over the course of a year to the thought of maybe trying out OSX while they are at it.
And of course there's the developers that need to be stroked. gotta give them a year's notice. and apple has the cash reserves to suck-up the osbourne effect.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I would be surprised if there wasn't a hidden serial number in the OS on each PC they distributed. I bet Apple, and their lawyers, will know exactly who leaked this very soon.
OS X doesn't use the FreeBSD kernel. And, more importantly, FreeBSD doesn't have a 'modprobe' (that's a sign of a Linux user who has never used a BSD if I've ever seen one). 'kldload' is probably the closest equivalent and OS X doesn't have it (just checked).
"The purpose of argument is to change the nature of truth." -- Bene Gesserit Precept
Of course, the only way that this would make sense is if the developer release is time-limited. Let's face it, Apple is not ready to take on Microsoft head-to-head right now; it would be suicide for Apple to allow an easily-hacked version of Mac OS X that could run on cheap-ass hardware out the door.
Now, assuming that the dev kit *will* time-bomb, this would be a brilliant move. Of course, it might still be hacked, but the fact of the matter is that only a very, very small subset of the potential market will bother will figuring out the hack to keep it running.
As I've said before, the only negative impacts I see of Apple moving to Intel are:
1. (Temporarily) Increased costs for current Apple hardware/software owners.
2. Decreased competition in the desktop CPU marketplace.
Other than these two items, this whole thing is a net plus for the entire world, even Microsoft, who will surely benefit from direct competition with Apple in the future. Dell could possibly turn out to suffer some losses from this, eventually, but Michael Dell is an arrogant ass who deserves being taken down a notch.
Which of course, is not to say that Steve Jobs isn't arrogant at times, as well, but at least Steve is a consistently proven innovator who constantly (and relentlessly) pushes the technology industry forward, whereas Dell is, and always will be, just a cloner.
So, by all means, grab a copy, check it out. If you haven't developed for Apple hw/sw before, I think you might be pleasantly surprised enough to switch.
I don't think it'll be much of a problem. First off, they've had this in development alongside the PPC version for years, so it's not like it's an ugly hack to get it working. It should be reasonably sound and stable.
Second, it'll be compared to Windows, which, despite massive improvements in stability, still has a reputation for crashing, not to mention malware problems. Simply stated, it's easier to look good when you're standing next to someone ugly. Windows is really ugly in a lot of ways. You don't have to be at the top of your game to look better than it.
Add in the fact that anyone tech savvy enough to track down a copy and install it, (ok, it probably won't be terribly hard, but there will be a knowledge barrier to stop my grandmother from doing it), anyone who can figure that out will understand that it's just a development version, that a lot of software is running slower through Rosetta, and that this is just a taste, not the total package Apple will be selling in a year or two.
I think Apple will come out looking pretty good after this. Sure, there will be some who criticize, but there always are. Sure, I'm an Apple fanboy, but truly believe that there are plenty of compelling reasons to use OSX over Windows, that most people who get the chance to try it out will want to switch. Anything that gives people a good opportunity to try (moreso than dicking around on the machines in the Apple Store for a half hour), is a good thing.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
That question has already been answered. This development version obviously doesn't have any kind of protections on it yet to make it only run on Apple hardware. Phil Shiller has already said that the final version will only run on Apple hardware and not any x86 computer.
This version will no doubt expire at the end of 2006 when you have to return the development machines to Apple.
"The Intel build of Mac OS X only runs on the chipset supplied in the development machines, so it won't run on *any* x86 machine."
The development machine uses an Intel chipset, an Intel CPU, a Phoenix BIOS, an Intel GPU. This, btw, is largely different from the actual 2006+ Intel-based Macintoshes, which I'm almost positive will use an Apple chipset, an Intel CPU, an ATI or nVidia GPU, an Apple motherboard, and some custom form of BIOS, EFI (most likely) or Open Firmware. But either way: Mac OS X obviously runs on a machine that's pretty much a typical vanilla x86 machine.
"Furthermore, outside of Adobe and a few other companies none of the other developers would have receieved their Intel Dev Kits yet."
Jobs said two weeks. That was Monday, so it's been almost a week. Furthermore, of the thosuands of WWDC attendees, all were allowed to use development machines on site. There's no reason to believe that it was hard for them to just do a straight copy of the entire hard drive and burn it on DVD, then look into it further at home and try and make an installable OS out of it.
"Lastly, all builds would have had digital fingerprints inserted on the CD and in vital binaries to trace any leaks (If not then Apple are stupid)."
Because we all know that Apple uses serial numbers, copy protection and fingerprinting all over their place in Mac OS X. Not. While the server versions have a serial number, the client versions have *no* protection against piracy whatsoever. They never did, and there's no reason to believe they will now.
"This would mean any company stupid enough to let their employees leak it would be in dire trouble."
Why do you assume large companies, when small shareware houses like Panic are at WWDC as well?
Best Buy can have you arrested
no hint of it on the big trackers, nobody on IRC has seen it... looks like a fake to me.
Quothe Bill Gates "longhorn draws the noose tighter"
Who smiled as he rode on a Tiger
They returned from the ride
with intel inside
and the smile on the face of the Tiger.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I've extracted the serial number from the version I downloaded, and it's SJOBS_000001. Whatever could it mean?
Slashdot - Mutual Assured Discussion
... it definitely feels snappier.
Based upon the specs and pictures of the box the Intel PowerMac it is most likely an Intel Desktop Board D915GUX. This has the GMA900 onboard graphics adapter and DDR-2 memory that xlr8yourmac.commentioned. It also has the same layout as the photos of the PowerMac board.
I don't buy this. I think virus makers are an egotistical lot and hearing Apple claim for the last few years how virus free they are compared to virus-prone windows that someone would have done a few things just to 'shut them up'
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
I'm sorry, but you've been duped.
Now all we need is a dupe of this story tomorrow.
It was entertaining to hear that every release of OS X was built for PPC and x86. Something a lot of people thought but couldn't confirm.
And do you really think Windows has security issues because it runs on an x86 chip?
Sorry for being offtopic, but I think the next slashdot poll should be "What sort of scripted and automated action should we take against posts containg the phrase 'Soviet Russia'?"
Options should range from "Instant permaban" and "Slashdot their servers" to "Order nasty russian hitmen to do what's necessary".
Seriously though. There should be a slashdot poll on that exact topic.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.