Apple Delays Leopard to October

SuperMog2002 writes "Apple Insider has the sad news that Mac OS X Leopard has been delayed until October. Apparantly software engineers and QA had to be reassigned to the iPhone in order to get it out on time, costing Leopard its release at WWDC. For now the original press release from Apple can be found on the 'Hot News' part of their site, though Apple did not provide a permanent link to the story. 'While Leopard's features will be complete by June, the Cupertino-based company said it cannot deliver the quality release expected by its customers within that time. Apple now plans to show its developers a near final version of Leopard at the conference, give them a beta copy to take home so they can do their final testing, and ship the software in October.'"

Comments

Re:Sounds a lot like Vista

[largesnike]

The thing I've found about development is that you can't just throw more at a product. This is Microsoft's problem. They have hundreds and hundreds of developers. Every 5 developers needs a team leader, every couple of team leaders need analysts and project managers, project managers need to have meetings to discuss release schedules, then there's compatability concerns and merging issues. The whole thing becomes an incredibly hard-to-steer buraucracy, where five or six dedicated developers would have sufficed.

Companies can only really focus on a few products, regardless of size, you just can't be everything to everybody, because the friction of beuracracy will just slow to standstill.

I think Apple are right to stagger development like this, it shows patience, understanding and maturity.

Re:Welcome To The New Apple

[linguae]

1. Apple didn't piss off IBM. IBM wasn't able to keep up with its schedule for PowerPC G5 chips (we were promised 3.0GHz PowerPC G5 chips by 2004, but to this day, they never materialized and the fastest the G5 went was 2.7GHz). Plus, notebook computers are a major source of Apple's marketshare, yet IBM wasn't able to produce a G5 for them. The G4 was also starting to get quite long in the tooth. I'd still lust over a PowerBook G5, but it is impossible to stick a G5 in a notebook barring an incredible change in architecture.
   I'm personally also not too fond of the Intel switch, myself. Don't get me started on the x86 (little endian, lack of registers, CISC instruction set, etc.). However, Apple had very little choice but to switch. Besides, Intel's Pentium M and Core chips were getting very great performance for their power consumption, which is another factor. Plus, my complaints of the x86 comes from an architectural standpoint. But they do the job, and I like my Core Duo in my MacBook, thank you very much.
2. I emphasize with you here. However, I am not opposed to Apple branching out into other products. Apple's experience with usability and quality can go wonders in other electronics. Now if only they'd release an RPN calculator....
3. Apple's OS development pace is slowing because much of the low-hanging fruit of removing OS 9 and improving OS X has already been complete. Apple now has to work harder with each release because all of the major issues in OS X have been solved. We've came a long way since OS X 10.0. However, I agree that Apple better not rest on their laurels. Apple has rested on their laurels before in the mid-90s (*cough* Pink *cough* Copland *cough* Gershwin *cough*), which led to Microsoft's 95% marketshare.
4. Now, this is where I agree. I, as well as many other OS X users, could (or couldn't, in Britain) care less about a phone, media center box (iTV), or even a portable music player. I'm not interested in a "digital lifestyle." I want to buy high quality tools that allow me to do my work as a computer science student. They're the only place where you can buy a laptop loaded with an easy to use Unix with support for certain required proprietary software packages. That is why I am a Mac user. Apple already has the technical lead, and a spring release of Leopard would have made Vista look bad. But by waiting another six months, this gives Microsoft some time for Vista to get used more and even release a service pack that allows them to take the lead. Why would Apple sacrifice its flagship product over a phone that has nothing to do with what Apple is known for?

Once again, I have no problem with Apple branching out to consumer electronics. However, I seriously hope that Apple doesn't forget about the Macintosh platform, which is the impression that I'm starting to get. At MacWorld, there were no Mac announcements. The only hardware update that we've received since November was the new 8-core Mac Pros. Where is iWork 2007 (or even iLife 2007 for that matter)? I don't want the Mac to go the way of the old pre-Fiorina HP calculators; heavily demanded, great quality products that are no longer made (of the same quality) simply because the company wanted to rebrand itself. I've seen these trends in the technology industry before. The Mac is the heart of Apple. I know it's wrong to be attached to products, but I like my Mac a lot. It makes my job much easier, and I can't imagine having to go back to Windows, Linux, and BSD. Where will I go if something happened to my Mac and you can't get another new one? I think this is the sentiment of some of us Mac users.

Date

[Anonymous Coward]

It's obviusly the marketing guys who's delaying it. They just want to release it 10/5.