Slashdot Mirror


Apple To Ship Mac OS X Snow Leopard On August 28

okapi writes "Apple announced that Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard will go on sale Friday, August 28 at Apple's retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers, and that Apple's online store is now accepting pre-orders."

33 of 647 comments (clear)

  1. Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by weston · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Leopard messed up audio programs of all kinds until Apple finally got around to addressing the issues with the .3 update. The recent .8 update screwed up some people's wireless connectivity. It hasn't been that long since some early adopters lost entire volumes of data when they upgraded.

    Snow Leopard is supposed to be fixes, tweaks, and improvements, so maybe this one is a better bet, but still, I can't see myself pre-ordering.

    1. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by samkass · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm one of those crazy ones who always installs the .0 release. (I also back up, which is something most computer users don't do, either, so my risk profile is still probably better than average.) Most of the time for vast majority of people the upgrades go fine. There are always a few problems and the people experiencing those problems jump on the nearest message board and you hear a lot of noise about it. The millions who don't have problems don't, and you don't hear about them.

      Would I install 10.6.0 on a mission-critical, high-uptime machine? No, definitely not-- there's no immediate business justification for it yet. (Wait until more 64-bit and massively parallel software takes advantage of the new APIs.) My home machine, though, is for my own learning and fun, and it's definitely worth it for me there. I can always restore if things go terribly awry.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    2. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are many reasons to upgrade to Snow Leopard, for example a major one for some people will be Exchange support, and another one will be a performance tweak. For example, even though very little is different from Ubuntu 8.10 to 9.04, 9.04 sped up the boot process a lot and as such starts about 45 seconds faster for me on a normal HDD. Snow Leopard is expected to clean up the code and make it be in general faster.

      However the main reason will be the new APIs that will eventually require everyone to upgrade to Snow Leopard, but even before the new APIs get used much, its still a worthwhile upgrade.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by MiniMike · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...but still, I can't see myself pre-ordering.

      So it broke your webcam too?

    4. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by Movi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apple took out zfs support in the middle of development. Too bad since i was counting on it a lot to replace the aging hfs+ :/

    5. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by leamanc · · Score: 5, Informative

      As someone who has been testing Snow Leopard in many different scenarios for the past four months, I can say this is one update that will likely give you no problems if you install over the top of your existing 10.5.x installation.

      But, for maximum speed and efficiency, I would back up your user data and apps, and do a clean install. Snow Leopard is very lean and mean, and I noticed considerably more Snappiness on machines where I clean-installed and manually migrated my data.

      --
      :q!
    6. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by leamanc · · Score: 4, Informative

      OS X apps have had 32-bit and 64-bit executables in their bundles for quite some time now. At least since 10.4, if not some point in 10.3 (it was definitely soon after the arrival of the first G5), so this is a non-issue.

      I know there are true shared libraries (Unix-style) and OS X Frameworks--two separate entities--but I was dumbing it down for those who don't want to get all pedantic about it.

      And, lastly, I know that OS X apps have always utilized Frameworks. But the point is, in Snow Leopard, Apple is utilizing Frameworks more than ever. I mean, how else can Mail.app shrink for 192 MB to 16 MB? It's not just the PPC code being excised.

      I appreciate your clarifying things, but it is obscuring my main point--apps in Snow Leopard, and the OS itself, are VERY lean compared to any previous version of OS X, and there is a noticeable speed boost.

      --
      :q!
    7. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Informative

      OS X apps have had 32-bit and 64-bit executables in their bundles for quite some time now. At least since 10.4, if not some point in 10.3 (it was definitely soon after the arrival of the first G5),

      Nope - the output of "file" on the Mail executable on 10.5.8 is:

      $ file /Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail
      /Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures
      /Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail (for architecture i386): Mach-O executable i386
      /Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail (for architecture ppc7400): Mach-O executable ppc

      No 64-bit code there. Perhaps you're thinking of the libraries, some of which had 32-bit and 64-bit slices in 10.4, and most if not all of which had those slices in 10.5. They would still need their 32-bit PPC slices, even on Snow Leopard, for the benefit of PPC binaries running under Rosetta, although they could lose their 64-bit PPC slice, as Rosetta doesn't support 64-bit PPC binaries.

      And, lastly, I know that OS X apps have always utilized Frameworks. But the point is, in Snow Leopard, Apple is utilizing Frameworks more than ever. I mean, how else can Mail.app shrink for 192 MB to 16 MB? It's not just the PPC code being excised.

      Where do you get the size figures from? ls -l? size? Activity Monitor? Some other tool? I'm not seeing them.

      The only valid way to determine whether, for example, Mail is using more libraries and frameworks is to run otool -L on the binaries and seeing whether it reports the Snow Leopard binary as being linked with more libraries and frameworks. That wouldn't tell you whether a given bit of functionality was moved from Mail to a framework, for use in other applications, but "Mail.app shrunk" won't tell you that, either.

      I appreciate your clarifying things, but it is obscuring my main point--apps in Snow Leopard, and the OS itself, are VERY lean compared to any previous version of OS X, and there is a noticeable speed boost.

      That wasn't your main point, it was the main point in the posting to which you were responding; the points in your article were claims as to the reason why that was the case:

      1. "many (all?) of the Apple-supplied apps have been slimmed down from Universal Binaries to Intel-only executables" - as I noted, that can't be it, as they were slimmed down and then fattened up;
      2. "there has been considerable "tightening up" of the Apple-supplied apps in that they use Frameworks (what's known as dynamic libraries or shared libraries on other OS's) as much as possible, instead of having nearly all code stuffed in their .app bundle" - speculative at best.
    8. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by walt-sjc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh yes... He could install the ancient OS X... But keep in mind that Apple no longer provides updates for it like MS does for XP of the same vintage (not that I'm a fan of MS by any means...) Furthermore, unlike XP, he will be unable to install most modern software since nobody supports 10.1, .2, and even 10.3 support is getting quite rare.

      But back to your point. Yes, you are 100% correct that the old stuff will continue to function PROPERLY, but methinks the OP REALLY meant Effectively and Securely. Paid updates from Apple are really required for that.

      I'll share my perspective having used Mac's since 10.1 (everything earlier I considered unusable,) Windows since 2.0, Linux since 0.99 and a plethora of random crap before that back to about 1978.

      The amount of time I have spent messing with OS issues (problems) on OS X versus Linux or XP is FAR FAR less. If I value my time at a pathetic $20/hr, I've saved the cost of OS X probably about 100 times over. Whining about the cost of OS X updates is really, in my opinion, short sighted. This doesn't even get into how much better 10.5 is to use than 10.1. There is no F-ing way I would ever go back.

    9. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by node+3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have a G4 PowerMac which apparently won't run 10.6. Can Linux be run on this machine? Are there any stores/dealers/whatever that would do the install for me?

      Yes, but why? Snow Leopard brings disk space benefits (good), full 64-bit support (useless to you), Grand Central which manages multi-core programming (useless to you) OpenCL (useless to you) and, um, QuickTime X.

      So, you're missing out on saving 6GB and running QuickTime without any window borders. The vast bulk of Snow Leopard's advances are to make it scream on modern hardware. I don't think it's such a horrible thing to suggest upgrading your seven year old computer if you're interested in running the most current software on it.

      But yes, you can run Linux on it. You'll save some more disk space, you won't get 64-bit support, multi-core anything, OpenCL, QuickTime X, or anything else that Snow Leopard or OS X in general gives you. But hey, at least you'll get to bitch about how you can't do those things with Snow Leopard either!

    10. Re:Are you crazy if you rush out and install it? by node+3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree, but since their apps like iCal, Mail, notes...etc are all bundled with OSX this is considered a major feature when it really is nothing more than a application upgrade to include EWS.

      Um, no. It's not using Exchange Web Service. It's interfacing with Exchange just like Outlook does.

      And it's not just an "application upgrade", the support is at the very core of OS X. Contacts, email, calendar, any program can make use of these services. Address Book is just an interface to the system wide address book subsystem. iCal is the same. Mail is the only app that you have to use to interface with that particular service, but even there, any program can utilize it, just like on Windows, except that you don't have to buy Outlook to connect to an Exchange server.

      Or, put differently, were MS to add Exchange support to Windows (which it doesn't have), it *would* be a big deal.

  2. Re:free upgrades? by wandazulu · · Score: 5, Informative

    All updates within a particular version are free (10.5.1, 10.5.2, 10.5.3, etc.), but jumping to a major version (10.4 -> 10.5) cost something. This particular upgrade is a little different insofar as they've tweaked the behind-the-scenes stuff more than anything else, which some folks might consider nothing more than a service pack, but because of that it's only $29 instead of the usual $129.

    HTH

  3. Running out of cats? by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pretty soon, Apple is going to run out of cats to name their OS X versions after. How many are left? When are they going to stoop to calling a new version "Housecat"?

    1. Re:Running out of cats? by jacktherobot · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can't wait for OSX Lolcat!!

    2. Re:Running out of cats? by AustinFloyd · · Score: 5, Funny

      Once OSX becomes more mature, they can release OSX Cougar.

    3. Re:Running out of cats? by azcodemonkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      One thing is certain, it'll definitely like newer hardware.

  4. kanji input by Speare · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The only feature of Snow Leopard that looks at all interesting is the hanzi/kanji input on the trackpad. Probably hard to draw the twenty-stroke characters, unlike the five-stroke example screenshots. But since I rarely use my laptop OPEN (I run in clamshell mode to an external monitor most of the time), even that is not particularly useful to me.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:kanji input by broken_chaos · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's a large number of under-the-hood rewrites and redesigns. The Finder is finally rewritten (so it's not using 10+ year old technologies), the major parts of the OS (kernel, most built-in apps) are 64-bit, and there's several other new things - like the new QuickTime (which serves, however terrible the app on other platforms is, as a very nice media playback framework on OS X).

  5. Re:free upgrades? by nine-times · · Score: 5, Informative

    OSX upgrades are as free as Windows upgrades are-- which is to say minor updates and bug-fixes are free, but major updates cost you.

    Lots of Windows fanatics like to point to the numbering scheme and claim that Apple makes you pay for "service packs", so they'll note that 10.4 to 10.5 is a paid upgrade, even though the version number stays the same. However, in OSX, it's the third version number that's similar to a service pack, i.e. 10.4.1 could be called Mac OSX v4, service pack 1.

    And that's not necessarily too different from Windows versioning. Windows 2000 was Windows 5.0, and Windows XP was version 5.1. Windows XP service pack 3, under Apple's versioning number scheme, could be called 5.1.3. Or really, since Apple isn't incrementing the "10" part of their versioning number, it could be 10.5.1.3.

    Ultimately I'm just saying that whole side of the argument-- that is, the version numbering-- is a little arbitrary and stupid. The point is that Apple releases small improvements and bug fixes all the time, and those are free. Every two years or so, they release a new version with new features and major improvements, and those can cost as much as $130. However, in the case of Snow Leopard, most of the improvements are under the hood, so the upgrade price is only $30.

  6. Everyone says Apple users are gay men but by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Funny

    the truth is we are literally swimming in pussy

  7. several interesting issues by v1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1) this is an update, not a full installation. There is no "full price" edition, you MUST have mac os 10.5 on it now

    2) 10.6 drops support for PPC (already mentioned previously here) so if they have older versions of Mac OS X on them it doesn't matter. However, some of the earliest intel macbooks and imacs shipped with 10.4.7-9 and their owners have not upgraded to 10.5 so there are some intels floating around without leopard on them.

    3) VERY IMPORTANT - Apple will stop selling 10.5 the day they release 10.6. So if you have a macbook or intel imac with 10.4(.11) on it and don't get it updated to 10.5 before the 28th you cannot install Snow Leopard. The AASPs are going to go mad as of today trying to order as many 10.5 retail packs as they can get their hands on. If you will be needing one, you'd better get it NOW.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:several interesting issues by v1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      also 4) for $170 you can get the 10.6 box set that includes ilife and iwork. that is the only option apple will offer you if you get stuck with a 10.4 intel after the 28th.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  8. Re:Snow Leopard? More like SLOW Leopard! by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Funny

    See, I changed one letter, an 'n', for another, an 'l', as a way of making fun of the new release of Mac OS... I don't have any real reason for thinking it's slow, and it's not like I really have anything against Snow Leopard (apart from the fact that I, myself, am not interested in running Mac OS X any more) - it's just fun to make fun of it.

    iSee.

  9. Re:Windows 7 by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just wait until it gets bloated and begins to slow down. It happened with every previous version of Windows and unfortunately the behavior continues in 7 (I blame the registry). I have never had this issue with OS X, maybe because it separates the OS from the Applications so much.

  10. Boxed Set by ThrowAwaySociety · · Score: 4, Informative

    3) VERY IMPORTANT - Apple will stop selling 10.5 the day they release 10.6. So if you have a macbook or intel imac with 10.4(.11) on it and don't get it updated to 10.5 before the 28th you cannot install Snow Leopard. The AASPs are going to go mad as of today trying to order as many 10.5 retail packs as they can get their hands on. If you will be needing one, you'd better get it NOW.

    Apple sells a "boxed set" that upgrades Tiger to Snow Leopard, with no intermediate steps.

    Yes, the Boxed Set is $169, which is more than Leopard alone was($129) but it does inlcude iLife and iWork as a bonus. (Yes, this is just a ploy to get more copies of iLife and iWork out there.)

  11. Re:Windows 7 by Chees0rz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You sir are an idiot.

    The more you use your OS- the slower it gets. Browser histories get bigger and take longer to open. Search bar suggestions take longer to load (as the data gets more bloated). Folders take longer to open as there is more to list. 'My Computer' gets slower with every drive you add since it feels the need to refresh its data with the latest usage and sizes. Sometimes programs install themselves to context menus and that has some overhead when right clicking. How about programs that have background processes always running... these didn't come with the OS (I am looking at you Java- where the hell do you hide?). And why can't more registry items slow down windows? Searching takes time. Storing it in memory takes... well, memory (which could cause you to swap).

    You're right in that an OS doesn't slow down on its own. It's additional applications that do it. But most people don't have a computer to JUST "use" Microsoft Windows. And for some other typical applications (browser, office, email)- usage causes more overhead overtime as the program tries to become smarter or has to show the user more data.

    *drops the mic*

  12. Re:new mac user here by Yaztromo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Picked up a mini first of the year. This will be my very first upgrade.

    As I understand it, the version numbers here are pretty much on par with a Microsoft OS version number so 10.5 to 10.6 will be like going from 98 to Win2k and should be handled the same way, upgrading will make for an unstable system so I should backup everything and do a fresh install. Is this conventional wisdom still correct?

    You shouldn't have to backup your Mac just for Snow Leopard; ideally you've been keeping backups all along. Leopard made keeping good backups so brain-dead easy that all you have to do is get yourself an external USB/Firewire drive and plug it in, and let Time Machine take care of the rest. You don't even have to start the process in any way -- plug the drive in occasionally and let it do its thing in the background.

    However, presuming for a moment you haven't being doing regular backups: yes. Backup everything first.

    That having been said, with OS X I've never had to do a full wipe and reinstall. OS X has this very, very nice "Archive and Install" option that will move all of your existing system files into a "Previous System" folder, and then do a clean system install (optionally preserving all of your users and network settings, which I suggest). This does require a lot of free disk space, but it's safe and effective, and has always given me a very nice stable install of each new OS X release since Panther (10.3).

    Yaz.

  13. My personal experience with 10.6 by angelbunny · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm on 10.6 right now and even the betas seemed far more stable than 10.5. Also, the speed increase is definitely there. I honestly never expected moving to 64 bit using every day desktop apps like mail and safari would have a noticeable speed increase, but I was wrong. It is much faster. However, I admit the speed increase is the most noticeable on first load of that app, or a cold start. After that most apps in 10.5 are so fast the speed increase in 10.6 is hardly noticeable.

    The dock has changed yet again. The even in the most resent release of 10.5 I have issues dragging an item from a folder in the dock to the trash. If I do this to quickly the trash can does not come up. 10.6 has cleaned out most (if not all) of the dock issues in 10.5 in my case. The new folder design in the dock is nice but I wish it had more options. I would love to shrink the icon size or change the display format (like details) in the folders in the dock.

    Quicktime X bothers me. The logo for the new quicktime in the dock is terrible looking and when running the program even if the UI looks nice it doesn't match the rest of the OS. It is like running the most recent version of windows media player in Win2k. The theme may be nice but it is kind of odd. They also removed features I used from quicktime 7. Like, I would go into full screen and it would auto start playing. In quicktime X I have to manually hit the play button after full screen. If I stream a video I can't find the options any more to turn off the auto play. I hate it when it starts playing randomly when the window is minimized ffs.

    All in all, 10.6 is nice but so is 10.5 and honestly the UI changes with the dock and quicktime in 10.6 I dislike. I would of been much happier with 10.6 looking identical to 10.5 and just running faster and being far more stable.

    The only features I haven't "played" with yet is OpenCL. My macbook pro has a 128meg geforce 8600 which is the min requirements. In windows for openCL the min is 256meg (it sometimes works half assed with 128meg) so I need to make an RSA decrypter or something to see how well it runs. I'm honestly not expecting much in this area.

  14. Re:I'll try the Kool-Aid. by Drizzt+Do'Urden · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'd think twice about that if you had an SSD in your machine. Think about the Macbook Air with the 64GB SSD... ;)

  15. is this youtube now? by linhares · · Score: 5, Informative
    I have read this entire discussion and to my dismay it sound much more in line with youtube comments than /., and no. I am not new here. This update is interesting because of Grand Central Dispatch, some minor new 64-bit apps, and specially, OpenCL.

    OpenCL is going to change scientific computing, for good. NVIDIA's CUDA is great and all, but you get bogged to one vendor's platform. With OpenCL you can define compute kernels that will be run in the GPU, if the thing supports it. For neural networks, genetic algorithms, matrix stuff, fast fourier transform, etc, expect HUGE performance gains. Especially whenever there's an NVIDIA TESLA with 192 cores behind it you might find gains of 100x speed. I'll probably be modded as funny or some shit, but imho OpenCL is a game-changer for the scientific community.

    Finally, ONE DAY, there will be a killer app for the general public using the power of the GPU. Then I hope everybody will understand.

    In the meantime, I, and my students, will be studying and working with it.

  16. Re:Windows 7 by tres · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft's Astroturf campaign has been phenomenal for Windows 7.

    It reminds me of the old days when Microsoft Marketing could have sold shrink-wrapped poo; those guys were that good. It's too bad the software was never as good as the marketing.

    --
    Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us
  17. Re:Windows 7 by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Without a doubt what you say is true.

    However, the parent is right in that increasingly, over time, Windows systems typically slow down. even if you don't add much in the way of applications or other software. Without a doubt, part of this phenomenon is related to increasing data bloat, especially in the registry. (After all, this is where things like the a MRU lists and settings are stored.)

    But the difference between Mac OS X, Linux, etc. over Windows is that the former lack the registry altogether, instead preferring to store this data in individual files rather than one huge database.

    Like it or not, this slowdown is a limitation of the system as designed.

  18. Re:Windows 7 by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It reminds me of the old days when Microsoft Marketing could have sold shrink-wrapped poo; those guys were that good

    Which makes their failure to sell Vista especially noteworthy.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.