What's the harm of someone getting excited over a rumored product-to-be?
Plenty.
You have to realize that Apple market is much different than than of Dell's or VA's. The surprise factor is a significant catalyst. Do you think the iMac would have still would have received front page headlines if details and/or screenshots of it had leaked out three weeks prior to it's introduction? What about the announcement of the Microsoft investment?
Additionally, as several other people have pointed out, there's the "wait and see" problem. If user a is about to buy a powerbook, but sees that new models are coming out in three months, he may wait. Of course, the new models may actually come out in six months. The rumor sites don't really know. But in the meantime, Apple has lost sales.
It's not like most of the rumor sites are "information for the people" champions. Many of them are for-profit businesses.
But, it'll probably keep the calls down to a manageable number of truly serious testers/early-adopters.
Truly serious testers will probably realize this is a beta, file a bug report via the form, and boot back into Mac OS 9 if necessary. I suspect the phone option is for people that install Mac OS X on their rev. A iMac and get totally lost.
Technically, the license to use the software expires. It says so when you purchase it from the store. I sort of doubt that the software just ceases to boot. I'm sure the upgrade to the full version will be worth it. The license expiration may just be to cover Apple's butt, so that they aren't accused of not supporting the software later.
I wonder if they are charging a somewhat hefty price of $30 to reduce number of beta-testers...
Ah! Somebody's thinking! This also means that magazines can't just drop it in the sleeve of the next issue (although I'm sure the are other ways to prevent that).
Another thought -- Apple has to pay somebody to read all that feedback and build the knowledge base content.
I guess $20 would have been better, but I can live with $30. $40 would probably have been too much.
I realize this is probably a joke, but for a server to actually be slashdotted, it has to have less hardware then slashdot itself. I doubt this is the case with Apple.
Once again Apple demoes a supper cool operating system that is to be released "next year".
Mac OS X is quite capable of shipping. I don't know if you have played with it, but it's quite a bit more usuable than many Linux distros. I think Apple is basically waiting for developers to catch up with Carbon apps now.
A recent register article mentioned British protest over MacOS and its terminated British-English version. I thought I'd mention it, even though their protests will do little good.
I believe some part of Apple (Apple Europe?) agreed to meet with the protesters at some point in the future to discuss their issues. Check MacCentral, they had details over the past few days.
(btw, any chance of an X-compatibility layer or 'wrapper port'?)
Assuming you mean X11 (damn that's confusing -- does "X" mean OSX or X11?), there are several efforts underway. The commercial one is from Tenon, and there are some other floating around. Carmack did one for Darwin, I think.
"the people who brought user interface to personal computers are " - no longer working at Apple. Don't kid yourself.
For better or for worse, Steve Jobs has always been Apple's final word when it comes to anything visual. This includes advertising, industrial design, the web site UI, and certainly OS UI. This was true in 1984, and it is true today.
artists, who *are* entitled to compensation for their work, don't get any from Napster-doanloaded works. The winning strategy will be the one that exploits internet distribution and still lets the artist get paid.
There is some site that claims to provide a means for fans to pay artists directly, in the name of a song or album.. Alas, the URL escapes me.
I thought that originally Apple wanted developers to use either Java or Objective C to code for Rhapsody/OS X, but when they balked, they (Apple) focused on cleaning on the Mac OS API, which ended up creating "Carbon". Correct?
Correct. Apple's previous management wanted companies like Adobe to rewrite all their software in Objective-C. Jobs (perhaps with influence from people like John Warnock) realized this was a Bad Idea. Apple then canceled Rhapsody, took what was left of it and shipped it as Mac OS X Server/Darwin. Around the same time, Apple announced Mac OS X and Carbon.
Apple would love people to use Cocoa (Java/Objective-C) APIs, but Apple had to build a brige for people that had 15 years of Mac OS C code lying around. That bridge is Carbon. Carbon is basically a cleanup of all the Mac OS APIs. Apple has bolted this subset of APIs onto Mac OS X/Mach. According to Apple, most Mac apps are already 90% Carbon compliant. That extra 10% are old, crusty APIs that should no longer be used. Once an application is Carbon compliant, it can run "natively" on Mac OS X, as well as Mac OS 9.x (and perhaps 8.x) if CarbonLib is installed.
Blue box equalled MacOS apps on Rhapsody PPC(now carbon)
A believe Blue Box was more akin to the Mac OS X "Classic" environment -- basically Mac OS 8/9 in emulation.
Carbon, however, being an API rather than an environment, can actually take advantage of Mac OS X's modern features (protected memory, multitasking, multiprocessing, etc), whereas Blue Box could not. This was largely why Rhapsody was a bad idea, and why Carbon was created.
Just running the PPP dialer and netscape was enough to crash it every few hours of use. Now its running linux, and its rock solid, so it evidently is not a hardware problem.
I would expect this type of behavior out of Mac OS 7.x, or perhaps even 8.x. I would certainly not expect it out of Mac OS 9. Assuming you are running some Mac OS 9.x version, and you are consistently crashing "every few hours," then there is something wrong -- and I don't think you should be so quick to assume that your experience mirrors that of the rest of the userbase. If my G3 crashed every few hours, I certainly wouldn't be using it.
I'm not saying Mac OS 7.x-9.x is as stable as Linux, but I routinely have it up on my G3 or PowerBook for several days at a time before shutting it down overnight.
If Apple had continued to develop this, improving stability and porting more software to the platform, then M$ may not be in the dominant position it is today. This would also mean that the whole personal computing world could be focused on cheap x86 technology, rather than being fragmented betwen two different architectures
We would also have a lack of real choice. The beauty of nice, standardized Mac hardware is that it is far more likely to just work then hardware in the x86 world. I like to have that option available to me rather than being stuck in a situation where you have to buy x86 if you want a computer.
Besides, look at all the standards that Apple pioneered and eventually brought to the x86 marketplace: 3.5" floppy drives, built-in ethernet, SCSI, affordable/practical wireless networking, software power control, FireWire. Heck, it even did a lot to popularize USB for Intel. It's amazing to me that even to this day that most x86 machines don't come with ethernet built in, yet almost all Apple machines (even laptops) have had that for years and years. Additionally, Apple's now shipping gigabit ethernet standard on the MP G4s.
No, I contend that it's a good thing we have the Mac hardware platform. It's brought real choice and innovation to the market.
This is a preannoucement of a beta for a product that's years late. Apple has been about six months to a year from the new, protected-mode OS since about 1992. Remember how Apple spent $400 million buying NeXT so they wouldn't have to wait for the BeOS to be finished?
Let's be completely clear.
When Apple bought NeXT in 1997, it was with the intention of shipping something called "Rhapsody." This concept (which the CEO at the time, Gil Amelio, supported) revolved around the idea of forcing all of Apple's developers to rewrite their apps from the ground up in Objective-C.
Thankfully, Jobs realized this was suicidal. Instead, he took what was planned for Rhapsody, shipped it as Mac OS X Server, and got Apple started on work on Carbon.
I'm not going to start a flamewar, but there are clearly a lot of differences between OpenStep and BeOS -- more than just one is "done" and the other isn't.
I saw Mac OS X Server for sale 2 weeks ago at Fry's electronics in Arlington, TX. Why would they be selling it BEFORE the beta even comes out? Something is not right here
You're confusing Mac OS X Server with Mac OS X. Mac OS X Server was introduced 1.5 years ago (contrary to the claim that Apple has never shipped a modern operating system). MOSXS is based on somewhat a somewhat similar technology foundation (BSD, Mach), but Mac OS X is considerably more advanced in every significant way, and upon final release, will be aimed at consumers, as well as power uses, developers and server admins.
Also, the original concept for "Rhapsody" is what exists today in Mac OS X Server.
Slashdot Mirror
What's the harm of someone getting excited over a rumored product-to-be?
Plenty.
You have to realize that Apple market is much different than than of Dell's or VA's. The surprise factor is a significant catalyst. Do you think the iMac would have still would have received front page headlines if details and/or screenshots of it had leaked out three weeks prior to it's introduction? What about the announcement of the Microsoft investment?
Additionally, as several other people have pointed out, there's the "wait and see" problem. If user a is about to buy a powerbook, but sees that new models are coming out in three months, he may wait. Of course, the new models may actually come out in six months. The rumor sites don't really know. But in the meantime, Apple has lost sales.
It's not like most of the rumor sites are "information for the people" champions. Many of them are for-profit businesses.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
But, it'll probably keep the calls down to a manageable number of truly serious testers/early-adopters.
Truly serious testers will probably realize this is a beta, file a bug report via the form, and boot back into Mac OS 9 if necessary. I suspect the phone option is for people that install Mac OS X on their rev. A iMac and get totally lost.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
No, only the SUPPORT for the Beta will expire.
Technically, the license to use the software expires. It says so when you purchase it from the store. I sort of doubt that the software just ceases to boot. I'm sure the upgrade to the full version will be worth it. The license expiration may just be to cover Apple's butt, so that they aren't accused of not supporting the software later.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I wonder if they are charging a somewhat hefty price of $30 to reduce number of beta-testers...
Ah! Somebody's thinking! This also means that magazines can't just drop it in the sleeve of the next issue (although I'm sure the are other ways to prevent that).
Another thought -- Apple has to pay somebody to read all that feedback and build the knowledge base content.
I guess $20 would have been better, but I can live with $30. $40 would probably have been too much.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Uh, why is this a troll? It's clearly a joke. The Apple Expo floor in Paris was flooded.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Having the same problem. Slashdotted? Hehehe.
I realize this is probably a joke, but for a server to actually be slashdotted, it has to have less hardware then slashdot itself. I doubt this is the case with Apple.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Everything he showed, everything he demoed, everything being discussed here is already supported under Windows 2000.
BTW: Have you ever put NextStep and Windows 95 side-by-side?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Once again Apple demoes a supper cool operating system that is to be released "next year".
Mac OS X is quite capable of shipping. I don't know if you have played with it, but it's quite a bit more usuable than many Linux distros. I think Apple is basically waiting for developers to catch up with Carbon apps now.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I don't think anyone's pointed out yet that "Project Builder", the IDE for Mac OS X Cocoa developers, doesn't seem to be included in the beta.
Really? Do you have the beta already?
Project Builder was included in DP4.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I dont own a powerpc, i will soon but for now all i have is i386. Can anyone drop any info on macosx for i386?
Not for a while, if ever. Apple makes money on hardware sales.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
A recent register article mentioned British protest over MacOS and its terminated British-English version. I thought I'd mention it, even though their protests will do little good.
I believe some part of Apple (Apple Europe?) agreed to meet with the protesters at some point in the future to discuss their issues. Check MacCentral, they had details over the past few days.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I was seriously afraid for a time they would leave a proper CLI out of it.
The rep I spoke to at Seybold said there was (unsurprisingly) a bit of internal controversey over this before actual deciding to ship it.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
(btw, any chance of an X-compatibility layer or 'wrapper port'?)
Assuming you mean X11 (damn that's confusing -- does "X" mean OSX or X11?), there are several efforts underway. The commercial one is from Tenon, and there are some other floating around. Carmack did one for Darwin, I think.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
So what happened to Apples' industry leading creatively in design? It looks exactly like NeXT...
You're seriously saying that Mac OS X looks reasonably similiar to Next? Huh?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Unfortunately, Aqua is looking super childish.
Surely you noticed "Graphite mode," in the recent builds, right?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
"the people who brought user interface to personal computers are " - no longer working at Apple. Don't kid yourself.
For better or for worse, Steve Jobs has always been Apple's final word when it comes to anything visual. This includes advertising, industrial design, the web site UI, and certainly OS UI. This was true in 1984, and it is true today.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
OSX, the whole tamale, with DPDF and all the other nifty stuff,
is Apple hardware only. And with Jobs in control, that's not likely to change.
At least, not if he doesn't want to be lynched by the shareholders.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
artists, who *are* entitled to compensation for their work, don't get any from Napster-doanloaded works. The winning strategy will be the one that exploits internet distribution and still lets the artist get paid.
There is some site that claims to provide a means for fans to pay artists directly, in the name of a song or album.. Alas, the URL escapes me.
Anyone?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I thought that originally Apple wanted developers to use either Java or Objective C to code for Rhapsody/OS X, but when they balked, they (Apple) focused on cleaning on the Mac OS API, which ended up creating "Carbon". Correct?
Correct. Apple's previous management wanted companies like Adobe to rewrite all their software in Objective-C. Jobs (perhaps with influence from people like John Warnock) realized this was a Bad Idea. Apple then canceled Rhapsody, took what was left of it and shipped it as Mac OS X Server/Darwin. Around the same time, Apple announced Mac OS X and Carbon.
Apple would love people to use Cocoa (Java/Objective-C) APIs, but Apple had to build a brige for people that had 15 years of Mac OS C code lying around. That bridge is Carbon. Carbon is basically a cleanup of all the Mac OS APIs. Apple has bolted this subset of APIs onto Mac OS X/Mach. According to Apple, most Mac apps are already 90% Carbon compliant. That extra 10% are old, crusty APIs that should no longer be used. Once an application is Carbon compliant, it can run "natively" on Mac OS X, as well as Mac OS 9.x (and perhaps 8.x) if CarbonLib is installed.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Blue box equalled MacOS apps on Rhapsody PPC(now carbon)
A believe Blue Box was more akin to the Mac OS X "Classic" environment -- basically Mac OS 8/9 in emulation.
Carbon, however, being an API rather than an environment, can actually take advantage of Mac OS X's modern features (protected memory, multitasking, multiprocessing, etc), whereas Blue Box could not. This was largely why Rhapsody was a bad idea, and why Carbon was created.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Just running the PPP dialer and netscape was enough to crash it every few hours of use. Now its running linux, and its rock solid, so it evidently is not a hardware problem.
I would expect this type of behavior out of Mac OS 7.x, or perhaps even 8.x. I would certainly not expect it out of Mac OS 9. Assuming you are running some Mac OS 9.x version, and you are consistently crashing "every few hours," then there is something wrong -- and I don't think you should be so quick to assume that your experience mirrors that of the rest of the userbase. If my G3 crashed every few hours, I certainly wouldn't be using it.
I'm not saying Mac OS 7.x-9.x is as stable as Linux, but I routinely have it up on my G3 or PowerBook for several days at a time before shutting it down overnight.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
If Apple had continued to develop this, improving stability and porting more software to the platform, then M$ may not be in the dominant position it is today. This would also mean that the whole personal computing world could be focused on cheap x86 technology, rather than being fragmented betwen two different architectures
We would also have a lack of real choice. The beauty of nice, standardized Mac hardware is that it is far more likely to just work then hardware in the x86 world. I like to have that option available to me rather than being stuck in a situation where you have to buy x86 if you want a computer.
Besides, look at all the standards that Apple pioneered and eventually brought to the x86 marketplace: 3.5" floppy drives, built-in ethernet, SCSI, affordable/practical wireless networking, software power control, FireWire. Heck, it even did a lot to popularize USB for Intel. It's amazing to me that even to this day that most x86 machines don't come with ethernet built in, yet almost all Apple machines (even laptops) have had that for years and years. Additionally, Apple's now shipping gigabit ethernet standard on the MP G4s.
No, I contend that it's a good thing we have the Mac hardware platform. It's brought real choice and innovation to the market.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
This is a preannoucement of a beta for a product that's years late. Apple has been about six months to a year from the new, protected-mode OS since about 1992. Remember how Apple spent $400 million buying NeXT so they wouldn't have to wait for the BeOS to be finished?
Let's be completely clear.
When Apple bought NeXT in 1997, it was with the intention of shipping something called "Rhapsody." This concept (which the CEO at the time, Gil Amelio, supported) revolved around the idea of forcing all of Apple's developers to rewrite their apps from the ground up in Objective-C.
Thankfully, Jobs realized this was suicidal. Instead, he took what was planned for Rhapsody, shipped it as Mac OS X Server, and got Apple started on work on Carbon.
I'm not going to start a flamewar, but there are clearly a lot of differences between OpenStep and BeOS -- more than just one is "done" and the other isn't.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I saw Mac OS X Server for sale 2 weeks ago at Fry's electronics in Arlington, TX. Why would they be selling it BEFORE the beta even comes out? Something is not right here
You're confusing Mac OS X Server with Mac OS X. Mac OS X Server was introduced 1.5 years ago (contrary to the claim that Apple has never shipped a modern operating system). MOSXS is based on somewhat a somewhat similar technology foundation (BSD, Mach), but Mac OS X is considerably more advanced in every significant way, and upon final release, will be aimed at consumers, as well as power uses, developers and server admins.
Also, the original concept for "Rhapsody" is what exists today in Mac OS X Server.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Question is, will it run on my SuperMac clone with Newer Tech G3 upgrade?
Can you ride a bike across a tightrope?
You could probably figure out a way to do it, but I wouldn't recommend it.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson