Slashdot Mirror
Apple to Unveil New Leopard OS in August
Max Fomitchev writes "Looks like Apple is going to reveal its new cool and fast Mac OS code-named 'Leopard' in the upcoming World Developer's Conference in August. Good news for Apple! And terrible news for Microsoft. If 'Leopard' is really what it claims to be, i.e. fast and efficient, in sharp contrast to slow and resource hungry Windows Vista, we certainly would see Apple's remarkable market share gain next year."
Way back in the day, Apple code named their boxes by color. From the aforementioned article: So we can speculate that Leopard might not only be fast but also encourage a partitioned Windows installation using boot camp so that it can reference everything within Windows and run Windows apps flawlessly without having to reboot or (more importantly) reverse engineer Windows.
Again, this is just speculation, I've been expecting them to put 'red box' functionality in a release of OS X soon.
My work here is dung.
Seems like a great time to buy Apple shares right now as they are in a dip at around $57. Peaking at around $85 earlier this month with news of this and the new powermacs expected it will definitely be an easy jump if you are looking for a short term investment.
Business Voyeur
I mean c'mon. A day's worth of submissions, and you can't do any better than information that's been on the street for over a week, rewritten by a fifth-grader?
If "Leopard" is really what it claims to be, i.e. fast and efficient in sharp contrast to slow and resource hungry Windows Vista, we certainly would see Apple's remarkable market share gain next year."
Maybe the reason fewer people are taking Slashdot seriously is because Slashdot doesn't seem to take itself seriously.
Hire a f-ing editor to check out and rewrite the most egregious but still post-worthy submissions. No, a real editor, not one of your friends.
Will that run on both a Leopard I and II?
niche hardware bundled with software market. Nice OS, but expensive hardware = Not much of an increase
I remember Steve Jobs saying "Tiger will be out long before Longhorn".
Now maybe even Leopard will come out before Vista. But, I guess "reveal" is not really the same as "release".
I'm sorry, I don't even know where to begin
Last I checked Windows Vista is in Beta. So just how does anyone know how it's performance is at this time. The last two builds following Beta 2 are already leaps and bounds faster than Beta2 both during the install and standard functions...
And people complain about Microsoft FUD.
Were we not told by the Apple folks that the marketshare was going to boom with the release of 10.0? Then again with 10.2 and so on? And then again when they went to Intel... in fact the market share has decreased since the release of 10.0...
Even if it weren't for the fact that this was announced, what, a week ago, it doesn't take a genius to realise that Apple will talk about their next OS at the forthcoming WWDC. It's what they've always done. Duh, that's what it's FOR. And those who care will know about it, and those who don't will ignore it. Just like THEY'VE always done. Fuck me, Slashdot gets lamer every day with shit "stories" like this. And I speak as a nominal Mac fan.
ie that apple's market share will increase when vista is fully available. But apple does need to work on it's image - currently it has a too much of a trendy image that comes across as all chrome, and not enough guts. If they lost that image, I'd certainly consider a mac of some sort, although maybe the cost would have to fall too.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/jun/26wwdc.ht ml
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
Neither the submission nor the article actually says anything about the OS, yet we're told the Leopard is "cool and fast" without any evidence whatsoever. Yet somehow this magic OS, which we know nothing about, is going to cause "remarkable market share gain next year." Nope, never heard that before.
Can it play ogg vorbis?
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
It seems as if journalists (or Apple proponents in general) have caught whatever afflicted the Linux fan-boys. Every release or change in Apple software/hardware is seen as something that could trigger a whole bunch of Windows users to switch.
Seems a bit out of character..
This is an excellent question, and I'm saying this as a lifetime mac user.
I'm waiting for the release called "Pete Puma"!
Yeeeeeeeeeeee.
"My God...it's full of trolls!"
You are a fucking moron, BSD is dying, not slashdot... the new overhead in IPv6 will mean that ISPs are getting 110% more traffic for the same data
This post was a classic troll, as was the parent who should have ben modded down
Quote: The upcoming "Leopard" OS is expected to be even slicker and faster than its predecessor OS X.
Fleur de Sel
...they release OS X Liger.
I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.
Obviously.
I too hate to point out the obvious but...
Thousands of casual computer users are switching. I switched. I know at least 10 people in my age group (20-30) who have swtiched. 10 more who are thinking about it. People looking to buy a new comptuer when they go off to college are looking at Macs more seriously than ever. They do the same things that any casual user is looking for in a Windows computer (email, web, chat, word processing), they look better doing it, and they work flawlessly (and better) with that iPod they got for Christmas.
You're right when it comes to Gamers not switching to Macs, but how many gamers don't have a PS2 or Xbox? You're right when it comes to businesses not switching to Macs, but the home computer market is certainly not worth overlooking.
Mac's marketshare may not be stellar yet, but compare it to their marketshare 5 years ago.
"...we certainly would see Apple's remarkable market share gain next year." Remarkable market share? Ok, I'm a Mac guy - have been for ... too long, but are you kidding? 3-5% is remarkable?
Well, maybe in so much as how small it is given how good it is, but I don't think that's what you meant when you used "remarkable market share..."
This is clearly a large threat to Windows Vista because of how efficient it is.....I mean whenever choose my operating system I base my decision on how efficient it is, not the software it's capable of running. (FYI, I'm being sarcastic)
Yes, it requires a (somewhat) beefy 3d graphics card to make full use of Aero Glass. But that's just the UI. Rarely is the UI a system's bottleneck. I imagine that with the revamped TCP/IP stack and memory manager, Vista should yield performance improvements over XP/2003 for a wide range of apps.
Sure it might have some bearing on upgrade OS sales, but does it really sell computers? I mean if you go into a store and try out a new computer, it's always going to be feel much faster than even a 2 year old computer. No matter how bloated an OS is, a new computer with a fresh OS installed on it will always seem fast. I don't see how it's a differentiating factor.
If "Leopard" is really what it claims to be, i.e. fast and efficient in sharp contrast to slow and resource hungry Windows Vista, we certainly would see Apple's remarkable market share gain next year."
People have been saying that since Jaguar. You're not going to see Apple's share suddenly jump up in the desktop market because it still carries the stigma of not being compatible with anything and being ridiculous to troubleshoot when something breaks.
That's why Apple stuff sppeals to a lot of people. It's something not everybody has. Buying Apple shows you're different. iPods are excluded from this of course. I mean, who doesn't have an iPod :-)
-- Cheers!
If stories without any substance (other than praising Apple) keep getting posted on the front page, Slashdot is going to become an even bigger joke.
In calendar year 2005 (Q2-4 FY2005, Q1 FY2006), Apple unit sales were 4.7 million.
In calendar year 2005, total PC unit sales were 208.6 million.
Apple's selling plenty to survive as a profitable niche product, sure. But they are competition for Microsoft in the same sense mainframes are.
"When Microsoft attributes a bunch of its Vista problems
to backwards compatibility issues Apple would not suffer
the same when expanding to PC platform". *LOL*
"APPLE != backward compatibility(tm)" TEH trademark of apple.
I also hate to point out the obvious, but don't you think it is a bit flawed to extrapolate that the home market is considering moving to Macs based on just your personal experience?
Did the submitter even READ what he wrote?
If "Leopard" is really what it claims to be, i.e. fast and efficient in sharp contrast to slow and resource hungry Windows Vista, we certainly would see Apple's remarkable market share gain next year."
WTF is that? First off, it's wrong. It's very very wrong. Tiger is better than XP now, but did we see 'Apple's remarkable market share gain this year'? No. There is nothing certain about Apple and 'market share gain' no matter how superior their products. Forget 'remarkable'. Second off, it's written so badly I had to go over it three times to make sure it really said what it said.
It's still too little. While thousands switch to Mac, there are hundreds switching from Mac, and thousands of new computer users who choose PC instead of Mac, which pretty much wipes out gains. It's pretty easy to see why, at least from the "availability" point of view. Around here, there are several big-box stores that only sell PCs. There's a cool Mac store, but it keeps limited bankers hours, so it ends up if you get that "new computer" itch at 7:00 pm, you'll find several big-box chains to sell you PCs at a time the Mac store has been closed for at least an hour.
Where were you when the voynix came?
I too have noticed a downward trend of the quality of article posted by slashdot. However this debate is just like the linux debate. The actual non-enterprise market will for the foreseable future be Windows. Being a programmer and doing a lot of linux work with a lot of fanboys I enevitably take some ribbing for running Micro$oft. However, I tried the switch to linux - purely on the influence of my co-workers - last time I built a pc. I spent about 25% of my time looking for an application like X where X was something I already used on Windows. I eventually realized it was insane to try and be windows LIKE when I could actually have windows. Mac is going to find this out the same way. The hardcore graphics people will likely always use Mac, but they are likely to lose their recent converts to windows. Why bother paying an extra 30% for hardware/software only to run the SAME as any other computer? Unfortunatly 80%+ of the world is too stupid to really consider switching. It took them 5 years just to learn where their any key was and they aren't going to be switching to go back to knowing less than nothing. The Mac has always been a great Mac. It is now a crappy PC and unfortunatly that's what they are marketing it as. Finally to you fanboys out there talking about efficient Mac development - Mac's are more like consoles than computers - Windows has a billion different pieces of hardware and software it has to deal with - Mac has a few hundred pieces of hardware and a few thousand software titles. It's a bit smaller scope project.
Eat a Chicken, You know you want to.
I dunno I finalized my switch on linux once I got E. I have alot of my friends hooked. And the applications are there for your average everyday user. I had my sister and parents switched for a while. Now that my sister is going off to college in the fall she bought a mac.
I know not everyone is going to switch so you have a point... but presentation has alot to do with it for most people. Even simple stupid stuff.
Gaming on linux isn't bad. I've yet to come across a game that I want to play that doesn't work under cedega or doesn't have a linux client. It turns out that I also happen to be a huge nwn fan (even before I switched) and play alot of unreal tournament and quake. But I have other things that I still play like WoW, starcraft, sim city 2k and they all seem to work just fine. Granted I can't run the cutting edge games but most people get them, play them for a short time and dispose. This saves me money. If I buy 3-4 games a year I'm lucky. But I play them all into the ground.
There exists some positive integer N that you are the Nth person to read this signature.
Now I've heard everything. A Windows supporter on the defensive, having to deny that MS's days are numbered. My how times have changed.
Sure, how about 2001 vs 2005? A quick Google found this from 2002 and this for 2005 (hint: they are basically the same, maybe even lower). The rest of your post hit the nail on the head (though maybe unintentionally) - Mac's are all about perception and appearance. They seem to have a far larger market share than they actually do.
That being said, I'm also considering getting a Macbook :) (why no integrated video, why?!?).
I'm in the process of switching myself. No more Windows. No more DRM nightmares. No more "trusted computing". No more paying over the odds for software and hardware.
I'm switching to Ubuntu.
Once again, the Slashdot editors did a great job, not. This news was released by Apple last month, and the writing quality of this news segment is terrible. Leopard's expected features are built-in virtualization, related with Boot Camp, a new file system (possibly, unsure on this one myself), new finder (hopefully finally not carbon anymore), improved spotlight, dashboard widget editor, improved mail.app, ichat 4.0 with tabbed chatting, safari 3.0, and of course a ton of security fixes, bug fixes, etc. I dont know what exactly will be "new" of course. Will it be cool and fast? We'll have to wait and see...It will obviously crawl around on older Macs (G3s) if they are even supported, but speed along on the new Intel Macs. Market share... With Apple's new Intel Macs, market share is already increasing, but not by much - probably in the range of 0.50 - 1.50% this year. However, through 2007 I expect Apple to gain a few more percent market share, and they might compete more aggressively against Dell and others. Apple will never gain more market share with their software, only with their hardware (unless of course, they license OS X to the PC cloners). Just my take on all this, and my attempt to sort of complete this news post as it should have been done.
Oops, first one is actually 2001.
It's Sigfried and Roy OS!
you apparently forgot to type "windw" in the word "windOwS".
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
Microsoft released their Leper OS years ago
People talk about Apple taking MS market share, about OS X getting viruses, about the Steve releasing OS X for generic Intel boxes.
None of those things will EVER happen. Apple has come to understand you can run quite a profitible biz by having 7-10% marketshare. It even helps them because the evil virus authors don't write viruses due to it's market share compared to windows(one of the reasons). The OS runs well (one of the main reasons) because Apple controls the hardware it runs on, as opposed to MS having to deal with generic Asian motherboards and horribly written driver software by 3rd party vendors.
The Steve never wanted to become Bill Gates. Bill Gates and Microsoft has come to accept Apple because it does not effect them. Microsoft could wait another 5 years to release Vista and it would still be bought by 90% of the planet who runs PC's.
I tried using the blasted thing.
The interface annoyed me hugely and I didn't feel it was particularly intuitive.
I shan't be trying again until there's a release with a less quirky GUI, which won't be for some time I suppose.
The article had NO MEANING. It was one of those things you say to your buddies while hanging around. "You know, if Leopard is as fast as Apple says so, MS could be in deep [insert colorful adjective here]." Then you're promptly shot down by your friends, reminding you that the masses have a "Crapple" frame of mind because their last experience with Mac OS was with the pizza-box LC IIs running System 7 from back when they were in high school, and they don't care any more.
Not only does this bode poorly for Slashdot's credibility as having important and accurate information, but what does this say about journalism in general, when this passes for a good article. Oh, wait, it's not even an article! It's a blog posting! Do we even know who this Max Fomitchev is? I've never heard of him. This place is slowly becoming a rumor mill full of dupes.
Come back when you've got an article from a credible source, no less than 500 words, with some real analysis, facts to back it up, and maybe a cool graphic or charts or something. Until then, stop wasting my time.
Rawr
"Microsoft released their Leper OS years ago"
Who can forget the ad blitz that started on St. Patrick's Day, 2002, featuring an Irish midget dressed in green, saying "Leper cahn do many things!"
Where were you when the voynix came?
Windows is used primarly by people who have to let others (salesmen) make their choices for them. This may be due to a lack of familiarity with computer systems, or more commonly total fear. And you're right, I cannot see this type of person disappearing, or Microsoft stopping their main business practice of preying on these vunerable individuals.
What you fail to recognise however, is that Microsoft never have, and never will, deal with advancement of technology (why bother when you've got Sun, IBM, Apple etc. doing it for you, ten years in advance?).
No... Windows will continue to represent the 'world of computing' to people who don't know what a computer is (and presumably think that Macdonald's make the best food in the world!!).
As for Apple having a 'niche' market share, this is really funny. You could equally argue that more than 90% of people who need a stable and robust system that can process huge files, and have more important things to do then 'patch' their operating system every other week, have already ruled windows out. Remember those of us with an interest in the computer industry spent ten years listening to MS fanboys like yourself claiming that Mac's were 'rubbish' with their windows and newfangled mice and would NEVER replace dos.
Oh, and love the gaming bit. Yeah, mac users will never be able to compete with people who spend $1000 to play 'niche' games on a computer. Yeah idiots like Mac users will probably just have to spend $50 dollars on a gamecube and play stuff created by the world greatest games developers... oh dear. Not to worry Vista should be out soon, so you will be able to spend another $100 on making your email program run more slowly. How the world of technology envies you!!!!
You are all too negative about this idiotic little piece. Its value is enormous, not in what it says, but that it appears at all. What it is telling you is: it is too early to buy, and not too late to sell. As long as pieces like this are coming out and being linked to, we know that sentiment is absurdly optimistic. Don't worry, it will change.
So, Editors, pay not attention, keep linking to them as long as there are any to be found. When there are none, that's the interesting time. The rest of us will await with interest the arrival of the cluster of really negative ones. There was one swallow recently, Herb Greenberg's postings on his CBS blog. But it was only one. We need to see a whole flock....
"I'm waiting for the release called "Pete Puma"!"
Looking forward to "Ornery Ocelot" OS in 2008, followed by "Citified Cerval" in 2011.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Maybe they can't afford a real editor. :)
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
"Unfortunately, most users associate Carbon with all those ported ("carbonized") OS 9 C++ applications written on top of Metrowerks' PowerPlant"
Or they think of the Han Solo-shaped hatrack leaning against the wall in Jabba's palace.
Where were you when the voynix came?
...that said XP was slow and bloated. and 2000 was slow and bloated. and NT was slow and bloated.
I never had a problem with any of those.... now 9x/ME were a steaming pile, that much I'll grant.
I have a few concerns regarding Vista, but size and speed really aren't among them.
Just another flamebait story, without any meat in the article.
Well played on the research. Still, why are you considering buying a Mac now, and not in 2001? Clearly something has changed. Is it just intel? Has that made enough difference alone?
I don't remember seeing Mac commercials on TV 5 years ago. I don't remember even CONSIDERING a Mac as a viable platform five years ago. Again, something clearly has changed. Is it only in my head? I suppose that's possible.
Macs are all about perception and appearance, but I know very few people who felt let down when that perception faded, and they were left with a new Mac. I know that I've been very pleased with my Mac. I've heard some customer support horror stories, but I've had nothing but good experiences (2 of them to be precise).
Simply put, I think Macs are a better option for non-tech-heads and I think more people realize this now than they have in years.
First it was 'come out of the closet', then it was 'unveiling', now I'm supposed to not only be fast but encourage Windows AND run WinApps flawlessly? just what do you expect of me anyway?
Boolean logic: True, False, and File not found.
to gain marketshare for OS/X and their position becomes more difficult.
//mac owners// can see the writing on the wall. Move to the new platform or else.
While we don't know the contracts they have with their suppliers a number of things work against OS/X gaining any considerable amount of the market.
1. Apple is the only company that sells hardware legally capable of running OS/X. This limits the number of sales for OS/X more than anything.
2. Apple's suppliers may not be able to keep up with a huge spike of sales. Apple is probably required to place orders in large multiples and with their sales, even improving, probably is adverse to ordering a larger number as their "niche" market does not guarantee that they will sell.
3. Most consumers don't care. Most look at price and continue to do so and that price is of the machine.
4. Most consumers will never see a Mac in the store. The rollout through BestBuy may do more for Mac Sales than any change to the OS.
5. Kind of a repeat, but how many companies sell PCs with Windows installed versus OS/X installed?
6. Geeks are not a major market factor, and there are more geeks concerned with staying up with the newest hardware on the Windows side than Mac side.
7. Most of the new Intel-Mac interest is sales to existing Mac owners. They
I think shelf space is the real key. Get a big-box popular retailer like BestBuys into the mix and they can move more machines than by themselves. To me the "apple experience" at Apple stores is one of indifference. I did not get the impression they really wanted to sell me one. It just didn't seem important to them. Now iPods and such were still high on their "buy this version because".
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Wow is it 1999???
I reall don't suffer foos lightly and you are a fool!
1. Gamers use gaming consoles. Repeat after me gaming consoles.
2. Gramdma ain't going to run out and buy a new computer because of Vista. And if Grandma had so much trouble learning to send email on XP why the hell would she run out and buy Vista? IT's not the same interface moron. So there's a learning curve and the Mac is easier to learn than Windows.
3. You have no grasp of the Business market. Wordprocessing, Spreadsheets, Email oh my. In a word,OpenOffice. I've used it on Windows and it runs fine. Hell their presentation software runs a powerpoint presentation better than powerpoint!
The point is most businesses do not need to run Windows because they do not use software that runs on Windows only. Alot of businesses to simplify deployment are turning to Terminal Server or Citrix. You can run either client in the Mac. Thus if you need access to some Windows software you can easily access it using Terminal Server or Citrix.
4. Hundreds of thousands of virsues. Home users might not mind being infected but businesses sure do. That's forcing alot of IT departments to look at alternatives. Consider you can dualboot Windows with a Mac and soon run it in Virtualization - that makes a Mac look more attractive.
Here's the deal, to run Vista you need new hardware and new software. Alot of your programs will not run under Vista, which means replacing them. Consider you can run your existing software under the Mac, why not try the Mac? It might not work for everyone but then again it will work for alot of organizations.
Yeah, funny how these people 'who have absolutely no clue about computing' were all using cd-rom, multimedia, usb, firewire, multitasking, GUI, mice etc, etc. a long long time before you!!!
My personal experience sounds quite similar. Perhaps the grandparent is local to me it's a local phenomenon? Or, perhaps it's a sign of a larger trend?
we certainly would see Apple's remarkable market share gain next year
No you won't....because no one will buy an Apple computer JUST for the OS. The smartest thing Apple could ever do would be to sell their OS to allow anyone to run it on any Intel/AMD-based PC - the people who are currently buying Apple computers are buying them for their own reasons....and Apple isn't gaining much in the way of market share (nothing of significance at least). A new version of the OS will not change that trend.
I actually have been considering a mac for the past couple years - the 12" iBooks and powerbooks were rather tempting. However, at the time I could not justify the extra money for something with less raw power. I actually ended up getting a dell laptop.
At present, the price points are actually a bit different. The macbook is actually very competetively priced, which I think will help their marketshare quite a bit. Of course, what I think will happen and what you think will happen is fairly moot - so far it hasn't helped their market share, which is still very low. Macs may give a lot of people that warm, fuzy feeling, but not many more people are buying them.
What is the author even basing these claims on?
Was any tests released that show e.g Vista Beta 2 is *slow* compared to OS X that I missed?
Or is it just FUD that once again managed to creep into a news submission?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
This has little to do with Apple. GUI's existed and were used even before Apple Lisa. The PC started with USB and CD-ROM at the same time Apple did (and few PC makers made the blunder of getting rid of standard serial ports in favor of USB at a time when few devices used USB: they just shipped standard AND USB at the same time). Multimedia dates back to the late 1970s. Firewire? Yes, Apple was ahead on that one.
Where were you when the voynix came?
I wasn't aware that "cool and fast" was an OS feature.
This "red box" functionality sounds an awful lot like Win-OS/2 and we all know how that turned out. I probably am going to be moderated as a troll, but I am not trying to take a cheap shot at Apple. I actually liked OS/2 back in the day, but I was eventually forced back into the windows world due to lack of applications.
If apple turns OS X into a "better windows than windows" (remember that phrase?) expecting a massive migration of users, they might get it in the short term. However, in the long term, they need the developers to port their software to OS X. If this "red box" functionality works as well as you claim, to the point of making Windows apps look like OS X apps, there is zero need to port them.
I was having misgivings about "boot camp" from the start. This "red box" functionality sounds like apple is making a huge tactical mistake.
It's telling of the new slashdot community when droll like this is listed as insightful.
Owning and using both daily, I have no idea what you're on about but I'm fairly certain I'd need to be uninformed and possibly mentally handicapped to arrive at the same opinions as you.
Presently here, but not there.
Unfortunately, I think you're correct. Apple made a smart move when they started speaking of the whole "halo effect" to investors and potential investors. (Basically, Apple claimed that people would buy iPods as their introduction to Apple products, and it would then lead them down the path to buying their first Mac.) That helped tie stock price increases to the new Mac announcements, whether or not they directly generated enough sales to justify it. (Hey, it's "good news" because it potentially gives all these iPod buyers another new possibility to buy next, right!?)
I think there's some truth to the "halo effect" concept, too. iPods did give a big boost to the respect/credibility of Apple's name - and some people surely did see how well the whole iTunes/iPod thing worked together, and thought "If all the Mac stuff is this easy to use, maybe I should buy one of those computers next time?"
But I think just as often, a die-hard Windows user saw an iPod purchase as their token way to acknowledge Apple products while still shunning everything else they made. (What better a way to prove you're not just a "mindless Mac hater" than to whip out your new iPod, right? "See, I give everything a chance! But I'm telling you, Macs still suck right now!")
And now, with iPod competition heating up (as the market is about saturated anyway), it's time for Apple to push in other directions.
Every time Apple have released a version of OSX - through from 10.1 to the current 10.4, we have had no end of problems with all the little "under the bonnet" changes they keep making; IP stacks, security updates, SMB compatibility. That plus the £80-a-pop update price each year just makes supporting Macs on a corporate network annoying.
Don't get me wrong, I await 10.5 for my home Mac with a great deal of enthusiasm, I just wish they'd realise that businesses need version stability, rather than version surprises when selecting and using an OS.
Do you have some evidence that a minority of the savvy tech types use Windows PC's? In my experience, hardly any of these have Mac's, either.
Where were you when the voynix came?
This has everything to do whith the people you call 'idiots' seeinbg the trends the computer industry is following. As for your other errors: Lisa brought GUI to the marketplace. IMac brought usb to marketplace. MacintoshII (1986)... same year as dos4! brought CD-ROM/Multimedia to the marketplace. deal with it. Sure, these ideas were being developed decades before, but there is a HUGE difference between a working Xerox PARC prototype, and a consumer computer. As for firewire, yes, you are right, that I am right!
With Windows, I know that the step from 2000 to XP is significant because the names are way different. Similar with XP and Vista. But seriously, how can I expect something significant going from Tiger to Leopard?
BTW, I guess I can blame my ignorance, because as a long-time Linux user, I only view Windows and MacOS/X from afar.
Yesterday was the time to do it right. Are we having a REVOLUTION yet?
...that Apple moved to Intel to take advantage of Intel's new virtualization support in hardware. In nearly every case when using a hypervisor on top of such hardware (where there is a ring -1 for the hypervisor) the performance has beat native performance. Or put another way; using a hypervisor for virtualization provides you with virtualization with NO performance hit at all. If anything you get a performance boost. Apple, typically being quite a few steps ahead of the reast of the industry, is very likely going to use this so that you can run Mac OS X Leopard, Windows Vista, and any Linux distro simultaneously with the full performance of running natively. This is the first time in history when you really CAN get something for nothing!!! Not to mention they will likely make it so that you can set up ways to exchange data in a live fashion between VMs. No more incompatibility between OSes ever again. Leave it to Apple to come up with something like this.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Intel invented USB. It was available long before the iMac even hit the market. There's something to be said about the iMac ditching legacy serial interfaces, but I'd wager the correct statement would be "iMac brought USB to Apple users."
That's a nice theory, but it's all wrong. The Mac II had a small hard drive and a couple of floppy drives -- and not even 1.4MB drives, but the old 800k models.
What? Your absolute ignorance? Or the fact that the only actual Apple advance here -- firewire -- isn't even available on some of their computers any more?
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
"Lisa brought GUI to the marketplace"
Lisa did not bring anything to the marketplace. Why? It wasn't really present in the marketplace. It was a demo of ideas, that was hardly for sale at all. It ended up being the computer world's equivalent of those "concept cars" shown at January auto shows. What brought these ideas to the marketplace? The first Mac, which was the Lisa "brought to market".
"IMac brought usb to marketplace"
I had a PC with from a major maker that came shipped with internal USB in 1997. Unless I'm wrong, didn't the first iMac come out in 1998, one year later?
Where were you when the voynix came?
Software for X86 computers should be compatible despite the OS. The end. It is 100% possible. If the future is "buy OSX and Windows" then count me out. Wine on Linux is much cheaper
The UI is irrelevant. Too many people believe windows users would switch to something else if only they were able to run windows applications. Some people actually like the windows UI. I don't. But then, I don't like the UI for OSX. I run X over the top of both (actually xdmcp to a Linux box when confronted with windows).
If Linux (unix) software can be run natively on OSX then so can Windows. OSX users told that to Microsoft with their $. That is why Office and IE are available for OSX.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Since when did anybody consider Slashdot anything more than a highly biased news scraper?
"MacintoshII (1986)... same year as dos4! brought CD-ROM/Multimedia to the marketplace. deal with it"
According to a Mac "Zealot" page, nzmac.com, Apple first shipped a computer with built-in CD Rom in 1992. External CD-Rom drives were available for PC back in 1986, the year you mention. I remember seeing these, the ones with the caddies for the CDs.
Where were you when the voynix came?
You'd prefer I used someone else's personal experience to form my opinions? Fine then, I will begin taking applications immediately.
1. Three words: World of Warcraft. The idea that 'gamers use consoles!!!!!!111111111' is so utterly laughable, I don't know where to begin. Kids interested in Pokemon and casual folks who enjoy a little GTA on the weekends restrict themselves to consoles. The actual market of gamers, however, will most definately have a top of the line PC sitting next to their collection of consoles.
Tell me, what drives graphics cards? It isn't the office market. There's a vast market out there, buying ridiculously overpriced, bleeding edge hardware - and they're not buying it for consoles.
2. You prove my point, thank you, sir. Grandma ain't buying Vista. Grandma also isn't going to rush out and buy a Mac.
3. Here you descend into the foolishness you accuse me of. "The point is most businesses do not need to run Windows" True. And yet they do, which is the point. Quite frankly, MS Office beats the living shit out of Open Office. If there's a single piece of software Microsoft got right, Office is it. Tell me, why will businesses switch to mediocre software, when they have the champ? Why will they switch, when they haven't yet, and could have for several years now?
To be trendy?
The majority of businesses don't make money by being trendy. Everyone(tm) uses MS Office. Everyone(tm) will continue to use MS Office, if only because everyone else does.
4. It should be forcing IT departments to be looking at alternatives to their staff. The idea that Mac is virus free is a myth. They have existed, they exist, they will continue to exist. As its marketshare grows, so will the marketshare of viruses on the Mac.
A competent admin can keep a Windows box perfectly secure. A competent admin can keep any box, no matter the OS, secure.
You have an idiot, you have spyware galore on Windows.
You have an idiot, you have root exploits galore on Linux.
Wanna guess what you get when you have an idiot with a Mac?
You can dual boot Linux and Windows. There was no mass exodus. So why's the Mac special, that it's going to cause an exodus?
And I don't know if anybody's told you yet, but virtualization sucks. It can fill a critical role in a very few, niche places. For everyone else, it's a mere toy. If Apple makes virtualization run without a hitch, I'll eat crow, sure. However, I'm sure I'll be enjoying my normal diet.
And as for software not running... Hello, 2001 called, they want their enthusiasm back. There are plenty of applications from the 95-98 era that would not run on 2k/XP. No mass exodus to an alternative operating system occured.
the sign reads: beware of the leopard!!
This is my sig.
There are, IMHO, three 'growth-paths' into computers for lay people. The first one is work (front-office), the second one advertising, and the third one is a geek relative (and general hype among the soldering-iron crowd). It may be controversial, but I think they have roughly the same kind of influence on buying decisions of commodity hardware.
MS have the first one nailed fast as a brick on a concrete floor. Apple's upgrade path doesn't help here, either, and neither does OSS's lack of commercial options (anyone care to invest a couple of million in my new-to-be-formed 1000 people on-site OSS support consultancy company ? I didn't think so either).
Advertising. Here Apple and MS go neck-and-neck. MS does more in volume (especially magazines), but Apple's ones are more sexy. OSS doesn't count, the occasional firefox-ad notwithstanding; it just doesn't have the bling to pay for it. And even if it did - what would it advertise ? Linux AS ? Ubuntu ? Openoffice ? They're all so different, and differently deployable (even on windows and macs, some of them), it's just not doable, campaign-wise.
The geek-nephew-factor; splits three ways. Mac hackers have had a sudden wake-up call, and don't forget that there's a good deal of hackers running around that swear by Windows. And they can hack it front-to-back, some of them. However, most of them are just really glad to be able to get away with being called a geek because they know how to edit the registry (not that I do).
Now add up the points: MS have 33 + 16 + 11, Apple have 16 + 11, and OSS has 11. Not quite where we are today, but an illustration, in my mind, of where it can go, given the status quo. Bear in mind that these are growth-paths; the reaping is to be done later only. Also notice how Mac overtook OSS within two years time; showing how powerful a tool vision and money is, something where OSS sometimes lacks a bit. Lastly note, if you please, that I have not a single drop of expertise in trend-forecasting. Just my two eurocents.
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
If Leopard contains ANY of the "awesome" new features that are being rumoured and maintains good performance, this is going to be a massacre. On one hand, an elegant OS with cool new features that just works - on the other, a clunky compatibility nightmare with 20 different versions. For people without the hardware, Vista is going to look like a whole lot of nothing new, and that kind of perception (though somewhat unjustified) is bad news for Microsoft - and its shareholders. Employees who do use the new enhanced graphics are going to want it at work, but cheap business boxes are not going to be able to handle it.
Haiku for you!
Yeah fast and efficient. As in yanking the disgusting Carbon and AppleScript outta there. And as in no one gives a hoot about security. When Apple can't even spell the word yet. And left a gaping hole in the OS for three and one half years. A hole bigger than even clumsy Microsoft would have been guilty of leaving open.
As in a totally botched file system that can't call itself POSIX compliant and Apple admit it.
As in 'get a Mac but unfortunately right now all our computers are total shit, covered in thermal grease, overheat to 95 degrees Celsius, they whine, they MOO, they emit toxic vapour, they even smell like shit, their paint flakes, the lid rims peel off, they get big orange brown spots...'
Yeah right. You go, Apple. When there's a site called AppleDefects.com and there are no sites like DellDefects.com or even GatewayDefects.com all that remain on OS X are the people who actually mixed the Kool-Aid in the first place.
Drink up, boys and girls.
Here's the list of OS X code names:
The Luddites were ahead of their time.
I keep saying this I know, but if Apple gets a proper PDA out the door (Not a Newton, something i-Pod like with a touchscreen/stylus) then I'm sold. I can't use a system which doesn't sync perfectly with a PDA because I need contacts, calendar, notes, tasklist etc. available *instantly* with a sensible UI (Which rules out my phone for all but quick checks of my calendar).
.mac connectivity (And sync when on the road), and possibly it will carry your music as well. I feel that would drag over many business-types who use PCs because of Outlook (And the fact it is actually a damn good PIM).
I sense a PDA with a similar profile and same dock connector as an iPod so it will fit existing holders (Notice the 'universal dock' adaptors have quite a bit of free space, even for the largest of the iPods?). Perfect sync with iLife (As is Apple's trademark), wireless for
How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
Apple has a contract with Microsoft, signed way back in 1997, that gave them rights to use the Windows API through 2002 (see here about two-thirds of the way down). Windows XP came out just before that contract ended, so theoretically Apple has access to the XP API.
Despite that, you're probably right that it would be easier and safer to require a real Windows install underneath. Apple has always been about things Just Working, and using the real Windows code is the surest path to that.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Swing and a miss...
Uh, Firewire is available on ALL of the Macs. The only device that doesn't have it is the iPod. Firewire 800 (the faster version of the connection) isn't available on all of the machines.
Exactly how many USB devices could you find for your PCs until Apple forced the issue?
Also, the Macintosh II had multiple models. Some of them did indeed have 2x CD-ROM Drives.
Now I can't really argue the Lisa comment...
""Why aren't you using the normal win32? I want to use your app on my Mac!""
Yes, when MS got complaints from both users, they would rush to reconsider.
No seriously, are you trolling, or do you not understand the numbers here?
It will be cool and fast because Intel's CPU's are cooler and faster then the PowerPC crap Apple was using.
When you can boast that your current generation of Macintels are 5x - 10x faster then your previous generation, then you can claim your next OS will be faster.
OSX 10.5 will be the first Mac OS that will truly support Intel architecture, so I am sure that this will give it a performance edge that 10.4 doesn't have, which was kludged to support Intel architecture. While Apple did a brilliant job in making the transition to Intel seamless, I have no doubt that there are major performance and quality problems with running Tiger on an Intel platform. Also, you can't make me believe the whole Rosetta technology runs native PowerPC applications on Intel without a performance hit.
In any regard, I also think the whole "Microsoft should worry" statement in the article is inflammatory and unfounded. I have been running Vista Beta 2 for several weeks on my test platform, and it runs well, stable and except for occasional performance hiccups, relatively fast. Its beta software of course, so I will reserve judgment on it being slow and a resource hog until its release.
Also, most people are so upset about Vista requiring a GPU to run, and claim its a resource hog. When you stop and think about it, using the GPU to render UI frees up your CPU to do other things, the UI is no longer consuming CPU horse power to render. Windows is using a GPU when its remain an untapped resource in your box when your just running OS apps and utilities. I think people still hold on to old past experiences with Windows and don't allow themselves to understand the truth of Vista's new architecture. In fact, its the same thing OSX is doing to render their UI in OpenGL to take advantage of 3D rendering, although something tells me that Microsoft is the first to make it an exclusive operation of the GPU while OSX still relies on software OpenGL rendering consuming CPU power.
In any regards. Unless Apple introduces FLAWLESS Windows vitalization within OSX, complete with a ZERO performance hit, the I doubt Apple will make any impact on the PC market with Leopard. Tiger was supposed to be Apple's sledgehammer against Windows, as too was Jaguar and Panther, and the Ocelot, they haven't proven to be anything more then another entry in Apple's history books, an OS that has maintained 5% market share.
The bottom line is, why run OSX at all? I mean, except for iLife applications, there is nothing I can't do on my PC that I can do any better on my Mac. In fact, iLife is the ONLY reason many people are getting Mac's and OSX. But, I get better entertainment value from a PC because it supports better quality sound output (true surround support), HD support, true PVR/Media Center capabilities, and of course, Games which is a Billion Dollar industry Apple has soundly ignored. And there are handful of independent applications that give me good multimedia organization and video editting, just not as slick as iLife.
I love hearing these grandstand statements that Microsoft should worry about Apple. Why? Apple has existed for 30 years without being a real competitor to Microsoft. In the last 6 years, Apple has had a superior OS to Windows, and still can't take over the market. Now, even with Apple making PC clones that can run Windows, this might increase Apple's hardware share of the PC market, but people want to buy Mac's now to run Windows. Microsoft is more worried about Google and Apple is just a mosquito buzzing in their ears. The day that Apple takes over 90% marketshare will be the day I eat my shorts.
People have to understand that in the Apple Microsoft war, Microsoft has won, period, and did so like 10 years ago.
Apple will continue making good quality products for a niche market, they might gain a few percentage points in marketshare, but I think that Apple will eventually realize that putting time and money into OSX will never result in the returns they have been hoping for.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
What I'd like to see would be some sort of 'red box' for Linux. I've yet to find a program that I want to use that WINE runs well, much less flawlessly. I'd have no problem paying for a Windows installation, I just want to avoid all the problems that go along with it. A Virtual Machine isn't the environment I'd like to be working with, but something like the red box would be pretty cool with Linux. Linux development would keep up because most Linux users wouldn't want to touch Windows if it can be avoided.
Microsoft's software wasnt named Gazzelle or Antelope. That would be just too funny.
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling a pig in mud. Soon, you realize the pig is dirty, and he likes it.
How hard can it be for apple or NVIDIA to write drivers for there chip set / video cards same thing with ATI?
Intel, NVIDIA, and ATI are the three big chip set makers so they coming out with good drivers for Mac OSX may not be that hard.
Sound may be a issue but NVIDIA is working on sound storm 2 and then we may just need Creative to make some OSX drivers for it sound blaster cards.
How can apple go after the high end market with out cross fire or SLI support in there systems?
Also $899 systems with GMA 950 and only 512 ram with video eating up about 80 meg+ and because of the on board video you need fill both slots with 256 meg ram sticks is a bad idea.
What will happen if apple does not come with about $1000 system with a real video card?
People will buy the cheaper system and when they try to run a game / or windows vista they will get poor performance and I think there will be some people who will not want an iMac as they will want to use there own monitor.
I mod this article -1 (no shit sherlock). Hmm, Apple will announce its new OS at its developers conference! Boy, I didn't see that coming. Apple always full of surprises, huh. Then, I mod this article -1 (Yet another damn blog). Some dork posts a link on his website and its news that matter? Why not link directly to the story? I don't care about the dork, his interests, his profession, what he thinks, or to look his at ugly mug in a horrible picture. Let him post on Slashdot like the rest of us and earn his karma. In conclusion, editors RTFA!
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
As one who has recently switched (or joined) to Mac, I am very impressed with Apple and my Intel iMac. From a users point of view, working with Tiger is a joy compared to WinXP. Tasks are rarely unresponsive or hang, and when that happens a simple & fast power-cycle will cure the problem. Memory is not as big a problem as on WinXP - my iMac had no problem with the inital 512MB and the 1GB I added doesn't appear to be used all that often. I don't even notice when/if swapping is occuring. There are a few items I would like to change, but nothing like the hundreds on the WinXP list.
As on the subject line - I am very impressed with Tiger and cannot wait for Leopard.
Comparing the market share of Apple Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows is really not very informative. Apple has positioned itself as a platform company - that means it competes both as a software and hardware vendor, both with Microsoft and Dell, HP, Gateway, etc.(but more with Dell, HP, Gateway than Microsoft, since OS X can't be sold or licensed to third party vendors.) Comparing Apple market share isn't a very good way to guage it's success in the market, since even a tiny percentage of market share gain over Microsoft for Apple means they've just made billions of dollars in new hardware revenue. One can't say that about a market share gain for Windows, which can be divided up among several different OEM manufacturers. It's not even a good estimation of *future* success - since the installed base percentage (the number of computers currently running OS X) for Apple is much, much larger than the market share(15% was a number I heard) . This reflects the total mindshare Apple has in the computer market, and as such, is a more promising statistic for measuring future growth for the company's computer division. Moreover market share just measures what percentage of world or US computer sales Apple is responsible for - but the entire industry is growing at such a substantial rate that even keeping up with past years means that Apple is an extremely successful company. And *any* market share gain therefore means Apple is exceeding expectations by a *lot* - the emphasis is on *change* versus a snapshot of what Apple's slice of the market is right now. I for one prefer that Apple be below 5% to 10% of market share. There have been quality issues with iPods and other Apple products that have hindered their success, and I believe these problems have stemmed from Apple not being able to handle that scale of production, having spent so long as a marginalized hardware company. If they grew too quickly too fast we're likely to see some more problematic quality failures as well. Being small preserves their ability to innovate.
"in sharp contrast to slow and resource hungry Windows Vista" No way in hell. Vista is not slow OR resource hungry. It runs faster than XP, and only uses marginally more memory than XP. The XP Beta 2 used like 350+MB of memory, but less than 256MB in the final release. Vista beta 2 is using around 500MB. The final release should be a a bit under that as well.
After a bit of digging in an old box, I too found a pre-iMac usb card!, The iMac did, however play a big part in bringing USB to the attention of the consumer not to mention peripheral developers (if i remember lots of the newly released peripherals at the time were suddenly badged as iMac/Win compatible and strangely came in translucent plastic. Am also aware that USB was developed by Intel and never claimed apple invented any of this stuff(?) As regards the lisa, I'm not going to argue about whether it was or wasn't in the 'Marketplace' as far as i'm concerned it was a product that was marketed, sold and failed, it was however, released. And anyway, even if the Lisa was a prototype as you believe, The mac wasn't long after, and still beat everyone else. The bit about the Lisa being the first Mac underplays the huge technical differences between these machines.
Yeah, ElvisCrapperJohn...why don't you log in with your rebuttal so you can get that nice -1 added to your list of gems.
Actually, I'd say that implementing Win32 on Mac OS X would be a way that Apple could screw Microsoft, but good. A second implementation would freeze it: "Why aren't you using the normal win32? I want to use your app on my Mac!"
This was already tried with IBM OS/2 and it failed, and IBM was even requiring that users have a real copy of Windows. The future is vitualization and being able to run any version or patch of Windows. BootCamp is cool but it is temporary.
David Pogue (of Missing Manual fame & New York Times fame) raked Apple over the coals for Apple's last BIG "upgrade" - which ran much slower than previous versions! When are Apple clone/lemmings going to turn into responsible consumers and start demanding what consumers need and usability - rather than let Apple get away with "gee...... isn't it cool.....???"
Apple's matches it's " cloning through coolness" marketing with it's stifling approach - which attempts to restrict how consumers use THEIR (the consumer's) computer and THEIR (the consumer's ) software. If car buying consumers matched the attitudes of computer buying consumers - we would still be driving cars that came off the assembly lines with an average of 120 defects and spent endless hours in repair shops.
As you all know the Japanese cars manfacturers (Toyota and then Honda) listened to car buying consumers and swept the market. This week, analysts indicate that General Motors move under the control of Toyota. How much longer is it going to take - for computer consumers to wake up?
That sounds about right. As I recall, the iMac was mainly important in driving USB support in Linux. Before the Linux/PPC guys got it working out of necessity, USB support in Linux was generally slow in coming. Also, the fact that USB was the iMac user's only choice for mice, keyboards, printers, etc. probably jumpstarted the USB market at least a little.
Seems like a great time to buy Apple shares right now as they are in a dip at around $57. Peaking at around $85 earlier this month with news of this and the new powermacs expected it will definitely be an easy jump if you are looking for a short term investment.
Uh, in recent history Apple stock has dropped in the same timeframes that new Mac systems were being announced. And these are some of the best systems that Apple has ever released. Apple stock movement beyond $30 or so has been all about iPod. Apple is a pretty volative and risky stock stock right now. Sure volatility can lead to short term profit but be very willing to accept the high risk.
I'm a big Apple fan since before NeXT purchased Apple for -430 million dollars... And the only marketshare gain since 1980 when I first began to track such things against IBM (and M$ later) has been effectively negatively positive, meaning damage control. I simply have a hard time believing that Apple's 'new' OS release (another mod version of Panther, Tiger) is going to put a significant marketshare dent in Microsoft's Windows sales, or even the vaporware Vista... Droids will always migrate to M$ for the same reasons they did for IBM in the hardwareland, 'nobody loses a job for buying IBM/M$'... However I have seen many people sadly disposed when purchasing Apple products.
pleeeeeeaaaaaase (haha)
Windows 2000 still runs fine, and as fast as it ever did.
I guess the gamers will be forced to Vista when DirectX 10-only games come out, but I won't care.
> Apple has always been about things Just Working, and using the real Windows code is the surest path to that. ?!
My point is not that people who use windows are idiots (at least I hope they're not!) my point is that computer technology is often implemented in areas where a microsoft solution either isn't or wasn't prefered. These choices were made out of necessity not some fanboy reasons. It just annoys me to hear people slagging of machines, OS's and especially users of these systems, when their own knowledge and experience is based on the concept that (Best Product=Highest Number Shipped).
I'd guess that they will add support for hybrid disk drives in Leopard. I wouldn't be surprised if they introduced new hardware to demo the capabilities (instant boot/sleep, lower power consumption, blah blah blah) at the same time.
FYI: When tasks hang, control-click (or right-click if using a two-button mouse) the icon in the Dock, and select "Force Quit". Or, if you're a unix geek, open a terminal and kill -9 $task.
I've been using OS X for about a year now (my work bought me a mac laptop, so I can't complain), and had to power-cycle my mac exactly twice. Both for it not coming out of sleep mode properly.
The UI is not "irrelevant", it's one of the most irritating things about using a Mac.
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
Meanwhile, Apple market share continues to dwindle downward.
Yup, that's how to win in the OS world -- base your strategy around an old legal agreement with Microsoft. (maybe it's valid, maybe it's not, but if Microsoft doesn't like what you are doing, they've got an effectively infinite amount of lawyers to keep you tied up in court indefinitely)
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
I think you're all a little off track. Sure, Apple plans to use Windows, but not in the way you think. It has some rights to the XP APIs, but Steve is more interested in cooperation rather than confrontation, and it's realised it can save billions in operating system development costs by making use of the best, rather than worst of Microsoft. Microsoft's XP operating system (like, presumably, Vista) has an excellent kernel, but its front end needs sprucing up, and the security model of the userland, like IE, couldn't be worse. Imagine how it would benefit both Apple and Microsoft if Apple was to work on the user-interface for Microsoft's OS, and Microsoft was to use their long time skills in kernel development (the NT kernel being, rightly, regarded highly, and not to be confused with the old DOS Windows kernels) to produce a platform that worked.
Now, I have a friend who works for Apple and knows people at a high level. He told me what's going on, and in particular told me about so-called "Red Tuesday", the day Vista was released. Apparently there was a high level meeting that morning - before the Vista delay was announced - at Apple. Apparently, this is what happened.
The board meeting
So it's Tuesday morning at Apple. The boardroom is having another meeting about the future of the Macintosh. They're perusing the feedback over the unofficial port of Windows to the Mac, and considering the consequences. There's a whole bunch of things on the agenda. OS development is hard, and it's expensive. Their competitors, Sony and Lenovo, doesn't need to do it, and they're doing pretty well all in all. Plus, there's the whole break up plan. When Apple separates into Apple Macintosh Inc and iTunes Corp, how attractive will Apple Macintosh be as a take-over target? The whole move to Intel will be for naught if it hasn't made Dell and friends just a little more excited and comfortable they could fit the Macintosh into their lines.
Apple has some little development projects on the boil and has for some time. To begin with, it's pretty much completely reimplemented the Carbon APIs under Windows. Indeed, that's how iTunes and Quicktime are implemented. But, interestingly, so are the Cocoa APIs. They're all there, Apple never stopped developing them, even after it nixed WebObjects for that platform. It's also in need of certain features that would help it with the future. Apple has no "managed code" environment - it supported Java to a certain extent, but Cocoa never was a perfect fit for that. Apple's progress with .NET, unofficially, under Windows and OS X, is coming along surprisingly well.
As time has gone on, the notion of switching to Windows as the base platform really has gotten more and more plausable. There are still roadblocks, Apple needs Microsoft to provide them with a little more customizability of the UI. A switch to Windows without providing the essential Macintosh experience just wouldn't do. But, well, .NET, and Aero, are Microsoft's attempts to break with the past. Perhaps an OS built upon these APIs could, with Microsoft's help, look entirely like a Mac environment - with the right code, obviously. You don't want a Dell user flipping a registry switch and getting a Mac.
It's clear that whatever happens, OS X is doomed. Postings by MacRumors alumni arguing that the porting of Windows to the Mac spells disaster are read out, and largely agreed with. But the question then is - does Apple continue to pour money into OS X, or could Gates and Ballmer be ameanable to making the modifications needed to make Windows Vista the next Macintosh OS?
The phone call
Jobs picks up the phone and calls Gates. There's a brief discussion, and then the phone's put down. A few minutes later, the phone rings. It's Ballmer, Gates, and Allchin.
"We think we can do it, Steve" says Bill Gates. "I mean, this is a major thing for us. It's a coup, and I know you know we're thinking it. So we're going to
I know we are trying to assume the new MacOS will be much lighter/faster, but as someone who has Vista running on one machine and MacOS (The new intel core duo mac mini) on another, my impression has been that MacOS is the slow resource hungry operating system, and by comparison Vista is quite snappy.
;))
The Windows machine is more than twice the clock speed of the economy mac mini, but even with this in mind I can't help but get the impression the MacOS is abnormally sluggish.
I am not traditionally a mac user (or a windows user for that matter) and people who are more familiar with Apples history tell me that the lack of a 'snappy' feeling in the GUI is just something you get used to, and not representative of the efficiency of the O/S... but i'm not sure that I buy into that.
Anyway, Let me go ahead and make my points very clear:
1) Vista is really not sluggish in the sense we are talking about here. Especially if you get the new RTM (post beta2) builds from MSDN. In fact it is much snappier than any Mac/Gnome/KDE desktop I have worked in on similar hardware. (Perhaps this is becuase the windows GUI is so ugly
2) Current MacOS IS sluggish, maybe its becuase of all that silly anti-aliasing and frequent x86 emulation, I really don't know, but if they make a new O/S which solves this problem there would be ALOT of people more willing to use it, especially if they can get some damn native applications available for x86.
Big ones, small ones, some as big as yer 'ead!
Give 'em a twist, a flick o' the wrist...
"As regards the lisa, I'm not going to argue about whether it was or wasn't in the 'Marketplace' as far as i'm concerned it was a product that was marketed, sold and failed"
I'm a little more generous to Apple than you on the Lisa. As the equivalent of a concept car, it wasn't a failure.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Apple really has pulled the wool over everybodies eyes for the past 5 years. This company is no different than Microsoft, just better at marketing to teens. Answer me this: Why is a controlled hardware enviroment any better for innovation than a controlled software inviroment? Apple would have put the screws to everybody and have been the same abusing monopoly as microsoft had they had the money. What really sucks is that the third choice is just as bad. Linux is still dominated by snobbishness that has ruled it since its inception. Linux doesn't want to be the computer for "everybody" it wants to be the computer for people that know computers. No attempt has ever been made to make it easy to use or reduce the learning curve so that it could be an accessable OS. Honestly to all you Linux fanbois if you had started with Linux and never used another OS you would have hated computers and you all know it. If you want to challenge microsoft you would need to provide an easy to master, all hardware encompassing, gamer friendly system that would have a spreadsheet tool that was better than excel (whose power and functionality is approaching dedicated mathematics programs like mathcad/matlab [honestly, this is the best program MS makes anymore and the real reason they dominate industry]) that would ship with the computer. This OS would beat the crap out of all others out there. Give it whatever look you like, any functionality anything, but make it meet those criteria and it will displace windows. Until then, windows is what those of us with jobs in industry and hobbies in gaming are stuck with.
I bought a Mac Mini over a year ago and have been unimpressed with OS X (though iLife is useful to me). Then again I'm coming from Linux as my prefered OS.
Why is this bad news for MS?
MS has been cherry-picking corporate apple users for the past ten years a a nice clip. "Macs are great for imaging" argument was lost a long time ago. "Macs are great for paginating" is dead too.
Fact is, mixed desktop environments is a thing of the past. Companies understand multiple OS's are a pain to support and are moving to the FAR cheaper solution, Microsoft.
Until Apple drops prices to compete with the desktop/MS world, they will never compete with them for the desktop.
Yes yes yes, there are 100% Apple shops, and for some corporations its a good fit. It's a very narrow market and I'm sure MS is happy to relent that arena.
"I have an odd craving to whisper about those few frightful hours in that ill-rumored and evilly shadowed seaport of dea
Apple's 2% market share did not cause anyone to make USB peripherals.
Seriously. It's that simple.
Oops - the link to my brainstorm did not work.
"Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair" - George Washington
I find your post both intriguing and an excellent source of fertilizer for my garden. Somehow, I don't think either company would agree to this on a phone call without asking their counsel how loudly the SEC would howl.
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
Thanks for the info. Some tasks hang so thoroughly that I can't use the Dock and can't start terminal/console, so it is power-cycle at that stage. But like I wrote before, it is a rare occurance.
The more likely issue is hanging on shutdown. After the Dock, Dashboard, icons, etc., go away and you are left with just the Desktop (wallpaper). Fortunately power-cycles on a Mac are not anywhere near as bad as on a Windows box.
No, no they don't. Were Apple to implement the Windows API, they'd be doing so with more legal grounds than Microsoft had when they pulled the same trick on Apple, and the courts were pretty clear they were permitted to do so.
Moreover, the '95 agreement between Apple and Microsoft forbids either party from suing each other for this sort of thing again. One could speculate that this is the largest reason Microsoft's been pushing Vista, because now that Apple's an x86 platform there's no substantial hurdle left to make OS X compatible with the Win32 API (excepting possibly DirectX).
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
I'll be excited about the next release of OS X when Apple admits that the piercing whine made by my five day old MacBook Pro is not "normal" as claimed by the fellow at the Apple Store. Until it's fixed, I feel cheated having spent nearly $2,000 on a computer I can't comfortably use in a quiet room.
That Thinkpad is starting to look awfully nice. If only I could return my Mac without incurring a 10% restocking fee.
Windows 2003. If it wasn't so damned expensive I would put it on all of my workstations. I see consistant 100% performance increases in many 3d and compositing apps. They put magic fairy dust in there, that's the only explanation I can find.
Not only does this bode poorly for Slashdot's credibility as having important and accurate information, but what does this say about journalism in general, when this passes for a good article. Oh, wait, it's not even an article! It's a blog posting! Do we even know who this Max Fomitchev is? I've never heard of him. This place is slowly becoming a rumor mill full of dupes.
Yeah, but you know... It's a refreshing change from the 8 years of "Linux will rule the world! Any day now... just you wait... it's right around the corner... Micro$oft is d00med!" posts.
iSync can sync all of these with pretty much any device that supports SyncML. It syncs iCal and Address Book with my 'phone regularly and has with the last three 'phones I've owned.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
My personal experience is similar. I am in the 18-25 age group at college, and I've noticed over the last two years people have been looking more and more seriously at a Mac. Before it was just "wouldn't it be nice to have something that slick without paying through the nose?", but now with the MacBook I'm seeing *many* people who are actually switching.
Personally I'm getting an iMac. The ATI X1600 may not be the world's greatest video card, but it gets most of the job done. It can play HL2 at native res (1440x900) with details cranked reasonably high, and I'm not hardcore enough of a gamer to want anything more than that. Plus now I can run all my Win32 games :P
Apple is making HUGE leaps and bounds with the style-aware college demographic, and in a few years when these kids start graduating I think we'll see a reflection in industry adoption brought about by this. For the same reason MS hands out free copies of Visual Studio to CS students, Apple getting students addicted to OSX can only be good in the long run.
May the asbestos in your fireproof suite hold true.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
...and the fact that Slashdot posts drivel like this is why I prefer Ars Technica. Shame really, Slashdot used to be informative.
Yeah, mac users will never be able to compete with people who spend $1000 to play 'niche' games on a computer. Yeah idiots like Mac users will probably just have to spend $50 dollars on a gamecube and play stuff created by the world greatest games developers... oh dear. Not to worry Vista should be out soon, so you will be able to spend another $100 on making your email program run more slowly. How the world of technology envies you!!!!
I spent less on my gaming computer than anyone has ever spent on a new Mac [not a mini, a real computer with some actual performance capabilities], and it can run a lot of very good games not made by "the worlds greatest game developers". [Obligatory: Yes, it runs linux]. Of course, your entire post is baseless opinions, and was likely modded insightful by some other Mac fanboy. The majority of the people who I know buying new Macs are people who don't share my view that paying $2500 for a laptop to play mp3s and do word processing is ridiculous.
On the other hand, I would personally love to see Windows have some real competition, and I would really love to see Mac end up with a large enough market share that their hardware and software get shorn apart by the DoJ, because if they were in Microsoft's position, that would be an antitrust suit waiting to happen.
No... Windows will continue to represent the 'world of computing' to people who don't know what a computer is (and presumably think that Macdonald's make the best food in the world!!).
What the fuck is this? Seriously? I don't agree with your fanboy opinions of Mac so presumably I'm an uncultured slob? -1 Flamebait.
So Mac OSX is faster than Windows XP?
Maximum PC set up an Apple iMac to boot both OS X 10.4 and Windows XP, finally having a single platform with which to effectively compare the performance of both systems. I don't recall what issue it was, but it was fairly recent.
The results demonstrated that Windows XP was faster in virtually every test they conducted. So much for OSX's so-called performance advantage.
Considering that no one has seen the new OSX nor has a final version of Vista been benchmarked yet I don't understand the basis for such baseless claims of performance.
On several places i have read that Apple can use the original Windows API, MS and Apple had a technology exchange and the API was part of it. Lets hope they use it.
Meh, OSX plays natively the only game that really matters... World of Warcraft... :) And if I want to play other games, a quick reboot brings me into Windows. :: shrug :: Oh, and WoW flies on the new Intel-based Macs...
I really hope I never have to use any software written by you. The UI is the difference between a great piece of software and a hack. It is the difference between fighting the software, and having it work for you. The difference between getting one job done in an hour, and two.
What does UI stand for? User Interface. Think on that. It is the part of the code that sits between the machine and the user. If the UI is irrelevant, then so is the user.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I don't see the SEC worrying too much about it to be honest, and I don't see why Apple or Microsoft would care about that as an issue. From the SEC's point of view, this would be about the world's two best operating system vendors working together, putting together an operating system that would be the best of Microsoft, and the best of Apple. How could that not be good for consumers?
Let's talk about rumored features. Like VoIP or Maps. It would be interesting to say the least to have maps upload to my ipod. If they finally get to an ipod with VoIP capability then perhaps gps or something similar to verizons mimo mapping deal would make my ipod gain a whole new niche in my life. More rumors include Bit Torrent, Virtualization, Windows API support, Not Called Leopard, Living Elements, A New Finder, Improved Dashboard, and Collaborative Documents. Way out rumors go as far as IE7, hooks with windows to encourage gaming and having .mac do word processing/iwork stuff online. Either way they are beating Windows to the punch and always look better doing it. When Vista is finally launched Apple will be readying Lion. I honestly hope the competition with Microsoft pushes apple to start introducing a smart way to interface with my media center ;) HD shows that I can keep, watch on multiple devices, ect - I will pay as much as I pay my frikin cable company to subscribe to 10 shows per month. C'mon and see the holy grail - hook a macmini to my tv and let me kill my cable box.
You can also press Command + Option + Escape. This brings up the Force Quit dialogue.
When that happens, try this:
Click on the desktop (to give focus to the Finder)
Under the Apple Menu, select Force Quit and select the non-responsive app to terminate it.
Not always true! For example, I have a new Motorola Razr phone and although it supports bluetooth hotsyncing to my Mac with "iSync" - it won't sync the calendar entries at all. Keeps saying that function is "unsupported" (although it syncs the phone numbers from Address Book fine).
Microsoft never implemented any of Apple's APIs. What they did do was infringe on some software patents held by Apple, but you don't need to implement an API to do that.
Microsoft is not pushing Vista, at least no more than any previous operating system, possibly less. The betas for Vista have been good, but Microsoft has officially delayed the operating system, clearly not seeing this as something that must go out now whatever the cost.
There is a hurdle to be crossed if Apple implements Win32, and that's that it's a huge PITA to implement. The Wine people have been trying to get this running for decades. They'll get close, and then Windows will move forward again. Some features, (DirectX, hard to implement as you point out, is one of them), have never been properly implemented. Even once implemented, a Windows application will need to be installed (not the case for a Mac app), it will require some massaging of the APIs to get something that even vaguely fits into the same desktop as traditional Macintosh applications, it will, in short, be half-arsed. Imagine what the WINE people have had to go through. Now apply Steve Job's perfectionism, and Apple's lack of time and resources, and ask how Apple can possibly come up with code by themselves that will work.
They'd be better off just licensing Win32. The real thing. Or applying the OS/2 approach, and allowing users to install Windows using a custom installer and a replacement module or two. Or ignoring the issue altogether, because whatever they do is going to have incompatibilities, and Apple will get it in the neck for releasing a shoddy product every time a program fails to install and/or run properly. If Apple will not release Mac OS X for generic hardware because of some supposed risk of being blamed for bad third party drivers, how likely is it they'll try EMULATING WINDOWS?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
According to the update here, Sekhon acknowledges the discovery of the performance issue with malloc. He does, however, still find issues with medium-sized datasets. There only logical explanation for this is darwin system call overhead (discussed in the article I linked, AND the comments of the blog post you linked).
Next time, read the page you link.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
I believe he meant the FTC or the Dept. of Justice.
When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
So you read this Cringely column too?
Does this mean they've finally jettisoned Mach?
If what was proposed earlier functionally builds a monopoly, the SEC might not get involved but it would catch the stockholders' attention. My earlier point was that this story sounds and smells like bullshit (Jobs calls Gates, suggests MS make dramatic, possibly vulnerable business decision and within minutes all three MS top dogs are behaving like bobbleheads).
I can imagine the idea, but not the way it's played out in one act--hell, one scene. Points for the drama, negative points for credibility (compared with the other insider's story ACed here).
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
Well, Max Fomitchev won't be getting many dates with that picture.
Without access to internal APIs, doing it entirely through blackboxes.
XP is done. There may be tweaks, but the API is frozen.
I mentioned DX because of firmware differences between Mac/PC video cards from the same vendor.
You're assuming it has to live in the same partition/filesystem as OS X. Bootcamp shows it doesn't. Moreover, Classic and X11 have given their dev team upwards of five years' experience dealing with sandboxes.
With considerably fewer years to do it. If we assume Red Box dates back to 1997, that means XP in 2001 was an incremental change for them, not a sea change. Codeweavers, in contrast, did everything through reverse engineering.
Have you SEEN the Finder?
Cite references to either imaginary factor?
Assuming Red Box exists in a workable form, it's been in the works since 1997. Rhapsody was all about getting Classic/Win apps to run natively inside it on the processor-relevant platform, as well as creating a framework to run natively inside Windows itself. Do some homework.
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
If Apple reverse engineered the Windows API, Microsoft would probably make "improvements" to it out of spite, to cause things to break when run on the Mac's reverse-engineered API.
Microsoft does that anyway. Something may not break going from one OS to the next but it very well may if you skip an upgrade.
FalconShould there be a Law?
The decision Microsoft made was a no-brainer. A former rival, a friendly, non-competing rival, indeed, says that they want to buy a product from Microsoft. That they're prepared to buy it as long as it's Vista, with certain modifications, many of which Apple is prepared to do themselves.
From Microsoft's point of view, this was a sales opportunity. Why would they have kept Jobs waiting? How is their company more vulnerable as a result?
He never said that. In fact, he said that the release cycle was slowing down after Panther. Closer to every 18-24 months. Expect Leopard in the May-July, 2007 timeframe.
"If 'Leopard' is really what it claims to be, i.e. fast and efficient, in sharp contrast to slow and resource hungry Windows Vista"
I'm likely to be modded down for this, but I do enjoy consistently finding biased posts here at Slashdot.
In nearly every case when using a hypervisor on top of such hardware (where there is a ring -1 for the hypervisor) the performance has beat native performance. Or put another way; using a hypervisor for virtualization provides you with virtualization with NO performance hit at all.
Care to back that up with actual data? Oh, that's right, you can't. You're talking out of your ass based on shit you read and naively believed.
Take a look at Macworld's review of Parallels. Notice anything? Oh yeah, in every case the virtual machine is slower than the same test running on bare metal.
Stop spreading misinformation!
Tiger brought us the joy of Dashboard, a useless performance lowering scheme, Spotlight, a subsystem that updates itself over the net without consulting the user, and Automator which is a great idea with a clumsy and disk filling implementation. Is it safe to assume that with the Leper release things will get even worse? More crap no one really needs that gets in the way, less control, installs that keep getting bigger--much bigger ... Ubuntu here I come!
Speaking for myself, and around 4-5 acquaintances who have switched to Macs within the last year to year and a half, it's not the status that matters, it's the fact that, even with the performance-lagging G4 processors, the Apple laptops offer great functionality, at reasonable prices. Before you open your mouths to say that they lack power, RAM, or whatever other hardware spec, consider this: Ideally, when you buy a computer, you pay x money expecting y funcionality. That's it, no more, no less.
Sure, my iBook 12" isn't the fastest machine I've ever worked with. However, my productivity while working on it is a great deal better than on Linux, and miles away from my windows work performance. Here by productivity I mean actual amount of useful work generated over time, and comfort while working (which yields long periods of effective work). There's very little that you could buy for the price of most 15" or smaller apple laptops that would give me a better return on investment, as measured in productivity. Since it is strictly a work machine, that's the only metric that matters.
I subscribed to get access to the full archives of user's posts. That was to search the past posts of another user I got into a flame war with. It took me about an hour or so, but I found enough information in his old posts to really seriously burn the guy. That was the best $5 I ever spent! Thanks Slashdot! Now I set my ad-free page views to 0 though so I keep my subscriber status without paying extra.
My other first post is car post.
Parallels is NOT hypervisor based you n00b. Read up on the Xen project at Sourceforge and Intel's Vanderpool technology. We're not talking VMWare, VirtualPC or Parallels here. Those are weak virtualization models based on concepts that always incur a performance hit. When you know what ring -1 and ring 0 are, then come back and talk to me. Until then, you've made it quite clear you know nothing about virutalization.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
What blatant hit whoring. The article has nothing new in it whatsoever. Did nobody check to see that it was submitted by the author?
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
You make a good point there. I have an 8 year old 266 MHz iMac G3 with OS 10.3.9 on it that still performs well. It's slow but it never crashes. I use it for typing in vi and running LaTeX mostly.
-- Cheers!
It's a remarkable =5% which is - as an absolute number - truly remarkable compared to the =1% of new information in the referenced article.
k2r
How can the article even claim to know what Vista is?
Based on a few betas?
Seems like PR hype for Leopard to me.
I find it funny how Microsoft made changes to the Windows API to kill off OS/2 compatibility when in Bill Gates' Book "The Road Ahead" he states that the problem with windows is that windows programs cannot run on different operating systems. I'd love to see some sort of classic-like windows program compatibility on Mac OS X Leopard, but I'm unsure of whether or not it will happen.
Sig: I stole this sig.