Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Expected to Demo Leopard Successor Next Week

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the or-not dept.

OS X 432

4roddas writes "Reports circulated Wednesday that Apple may demo the next iteration of Mac OS X next week or even release code to developers in preparation for an early-2009 launch. According to an account on Mac enthusiast site TUAW (The Unofficial Apple Weblog), Apple may provide early copies of Mac OS X 10.6 at next week's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC), which opens Monday and runs through next Friday in San Francisco. Mac OS X 10.6 will run on Intel-based hardware only, said TUAW, and so will mark the ditching of support for the older PowerPC processor-equipped Macs. Apple announced it would shift to Intel processors three years ago, and unveiled the first systems in January 2006; most analysts have said that move is largely behind the reason for Apple's renewed success selling personal computers. It has never disclosed how long it would support the PowerPC with OS upgrades, however. Ars Technica also weighed in Wednesday on Mac OS X 10.6; its sources pegged with OS with the code name 'Snow Leopard.'"

cancel ×

432 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hmm (3, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680419)

Apple are still only on X? They've got a long way to go before they catch up with X11!

Re:Hmm (5, Funny)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680493)

Apparently, they may be going to Y. They may even go to Z. And, according to a non-authoritative source, they may even bypass Y and Z and go to AA.

In other news, it may rain tomorrow. Or, it may not. And I may be having sex with your sister. But then, maybe I'm not.

That's it... I'm going into journalism. This is just way too easy!

Re:Hmm (4, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680527)

Have fun with the clap!

Only kidding. My sisters are actually men though. Seriously. Even the married one.

Re:Hmm (1)

harry666t (1062422) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680919)

"""Apparently, they may be going to Y. They may even go to Z. And, according to a non-authoritative source, they may even bypass Y and Z and go to AA."""

Well, then that'll be a long way until they catch up with XP (:

Re:Hmm (0)

dizzy tunez (89390) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681043)

They may even go to the W to the M to the C to the A!

Re:Hmm (1)

dintech (998802) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681219)

I think you mean Y instead of W.

Re:Hmm (1)

Genom (3868) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681137)

Apparently, they may be going to Y. They may even go to Z. And, according to a non-authoritative source, they may even bypass Y and Z and go to AA.


Let me know when they go to plaid. =)

Apple may or may not do something next week (3, Insightful)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680431)

Come on, how bout some actual news for nerds and stuff that matters?

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (4, Interesting)

youthoftoday (975074) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680529)

Any company that not only gets Unix[like] onto the desktop of NORMAL people, but also makes it look cool matters.

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (4, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680555)

OS X 10.5 (intel) is certified Unix.

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680557)

Any company that not only gets Unix[like] onto the desktop of NORMAL people, but also makes it look cool matters.
I didn't know pretentious teenagers were "normal people."

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (5, Funny)

telbij (465356) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680617)

I didn't know pretentious teenagers were "normal people."


I know you were trying to be funny, but think about that for a sec...

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (1)

Saint Gerbil (1155665) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680893)

I thought they already announced that it was going to be called "snow leopard" ?

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (1)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680541)

Come on, how bout some actual news for nerds and stuff that matters?
You must be new here (except your ID is too low!)

No, I'm New Here (5, Funny)

New Here (701369) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680549)

No, I'm New Here

Re:No, I'm New Here (4, Funny)

dintech (998802) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681273)

Wow, -1 Funny. You've invented anti-funny which I think that can trigger outbursts of straight-faced ness. That's quite an achievement.

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (1)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680553)

Yeah, and it's a replacement ID for an older one which was user 10,000

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680587)

A new release of the largest commercial Unix OS isn't geek news? I mean, it's not Linux but at least it's not Windows...

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (2, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680695)

More that there may or may not be a release of a commercial Unix OS isn't news.

In other news, NASA may or may not decide to demo a Death Star next week.

Re:Apple may or may not do something next week (2, Informative)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680719)

Except that it's not a new release. It's speculation about the possible announcement of a new version of the OS.

I'll go read mac rumor sites when I want to see that kind of stuff.

Not a surprise (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680435)

A few Apple people on the clang list have filed bug reports saying it doesn't build 'on 10.6' recently, so they're obviously running it internally. After the fiasco that 10.5 has been, I'd imagine that they'd want to move on as fast as possible - maybe 10.6 will be what 10.5 should have been.

Ditching PowerPC is an interesting choice though - it basically means that third-party developers won't be able to use any of the new features in 10.6 without abandoning a big chunk of their potential market.

Re:Not a surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680475)

I can't say that I think 10.5 is a fiasco. Granted, I bought my Macbook with 10.5.1 and upgraded to 10.5.2 a week later, but I have never had any real issues with it.

But was 10.5.0 really that bad?

Re:Not a surprise (1, Informative)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680531)

It was - it was almost as buggy as one of the betas, or perhaps 10.0.

I highly doubt it'll be called 'Snow Leopard' - Apple has registered the trademarks 'Cougar' and 'Lynx'. I have doubts about Lynx, because there is already LynxOS, and Lynx deodorant.

I also highly doubt they'll be abandoning PowerPC entirely yet. We'll probably see G4 support being dropped, but I highly doubt Apple would make such a rushed transition.

Re:Not a surprise (5, Insightful)

telbij (465356) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680655)

Okay some people were affected by a handful of real nasties, but I bought it the day it came out, was working 18 hours a day at the time on a product release on both a G4 and and Intel machine, and only noticed very minor issues.

To compare it to 10.0 is hyperbole.

Re:Not a surprise (1)

KGIII (973947) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680923)

There was already an iPhone too and that didn't stop 'em...

10.5.0 (4, Informative)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680787)

I didn't have any real problems with 10.5.0. I got my copy on release day, backed up my data, wiped the partition on my MacBook, and installed from scratch instead of upgrading from Tiger. Ask the ones who had problems if they upgraded or did a fresh install.

Re:Not a surprise (2, Interesting)

chunk08 (1229574) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680481)

After the fiasco that 10.5 has been, I'd imagine that they'd want to move on as fast as possible - maybe 10.6 will be what 10.5 should have been.
Sounds like Vista...

Re:Not a surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680843)

But Steve Jobs can do no wrong. Are you silly?

Re:Not a surprise (1)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680863)

Oh! Nice counter-attack

Re:Not a surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23681201)

Except that it didn't take several years to move from 10.5 to 10.6

Re:Not a surprise (5, Insightful)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680513)

Explain this "Fiasco". Every feature they said would be there has worked for me.

This isn't XP vs Vista, sounds more like "Waiter my soup was at 121F when I specifically asked for it at 120.4F. (49.4444444C and 49.1666667C to our international readers)

Re:Not a surprise (1)

tcc3 (958644) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680723)

For an OS thats constantly beating up the competition for being buggy and failure prone Leopard is not stable enough. My Macbook pro was rock solid with Tiger, but not Leopard. It crashes, it doesn't shut down, it doesn't wake up, etc.

Some of the features and improvements are cool, but not worth the bugs. I almost want to go back to Tiger.

Re:Not a surprise (3, Informative)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680871)

People seem to have quite varied experiences with Leopard, for me it has been much better than Tiger in the sense that with Tiger my iMac 24" managed to completely crash a couple of times under heavy load when using some not always stable apps but with Leopard the closest I've come to anything like that has been Finder crashing a couple of times.

In fact, the only real problem I've had with Leopard was with the incompatibility with Tiger FileVault images, I only had one user account (which was using FileVault) and after installing Leopard and then rebooting it was unable to mount the disk image which forced me to do some trickery in the console to convert it to a sparse disk image so I could rescue my files before doing an Archive and install installation.

/Mikael

Re:Not a surprise (5, Interesting)

timster (32400) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680741)

It's the same "fiasco" that the Tiger release was, according to people on the Internet. For every major Mac OS release, some people have problems, some of them quite serious, and these dominate Mac discussion forums for months. Nobody ever collects any statistics from the general user population that would allow us to determine whether one release was better or worse than another, and the general user population is not well-represented in Mac discussion forums.

On a side note, I have personally found it very interesting to watch the way people on Mac forums approach problems versus Windows or Linux users. Often there is an implicit assumption that any problem encountered is an OS bug (sometimes even if nobody else can be found who is experiencing the same problem) and you see demands that it be fixed in the next release. Possibly this is because a high proportion of the problems experienced by Mac users are indeed OS bugs.

Re:Not a surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23681033)

Nobody ever collects any statistics from the general user population that would allow us to determine whether one release was better or worse than another, and the general user population is not well-represented in Mac discussion forums.

On a side note, I have personally found it very interesting to watch the way people on Mac forums approach problems versus Windows or Linux users. Often there is an implicit assumption that any problem encountered is an OS bug (sometimes even if nobody else can be found who is experiencing the same problem) and you see demands that it be fixed in the next release.
Absolutely I agree, but that is mainly because of the user-base and mind set of your average Mac User. All the forums are 'apple should fix this now!' and they expect that just because its on the forum it will get seen and that apple can read minds (logs? what are logs?). Sheesh..you get this all the time on the Logic Forums. It's tedious.

Apple Forums generally are rant-portals when new releases come out. I have given up on many forums because of this. They become more than useless.

Re:Not a surprise (1)

porcupine8 (816071) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681133)

I dunno, when my sister tried to update from 10.5.0 to 10.5.2, her computer refused to restart. She had to take it to a Genius Bar (and this is an emac, no easy task) where they restored it to 10.5.0. She still hasn't been brave enough to try 10.5.3. This was not an uncommon problem.

Plus, Apple made some absolutely ridiculous design errors - most of which, thankfully, were fixed with 10.5.2 (if you could get it to install).

I definitely wouldn't say "fiasco," you're right, that's outright hyperbole, but it seems like it's been a rougher upgrade than any other recent one. The soup was definitely lukewarm, but it's not like there was spit in it, or it was the wrong soup.

Re:Not a surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23681141)

It is a fiasco based on Apple software standards rather than the company rumored to use "If it compiles, ship it!" quality standards.
Ilgaz

10.5 issues - since you asked... (3, Informative)

zerofoo (262795) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681143)

Here are just some of the issues I've had to deal with since the 10.5 release:

1. Open Directory replica failures.
2. Tiger clients either do not bind to 10.5 open directory or do not inherit preferences correctly.
3. Software Update Server did not work until 10.5.2
4. "Blue Screen of Death" issue on some workstations.
5. Renaming files on Samba shares would cause a kernel panic on some workstations.
6. iChat server still does not work in a mixed Active Directory/Open Directory environment
7. Finder Move data loss problem.

These are the only ones at the front of my memory right now - I'm sure there are other issues. Granted these issues are a mix of Server and Workstation problems, but the lack of stability remains. My users do not care whether the bug manifests itself on a server or a workstation. If it breaks somewhere it is a BUG.

-ted

Re:Not a surprise (1)

Suzuran (163234) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681285)

One word: X11

Leopard's X11 was not even functional when it was released, and Apple is only now making it usable. It still doesn't work with Spaces or Expose.

Re:Not a surprise (4, Insightful)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680647)

Ditching PowerPC is an interesting choice though - it basically means that third-party developers won't be able to use any of the new features in 10.6 without abandoning a big chunk of their potential market.
Which is precisely why the PPC ditch for 10.6 is unlikely and simply a rumor to fuel hits to websites. Like the abandoning of 32-bit altogether.... Apple's not in the habit of abandoning platforms sold less than 3 years ago. Why would they all of a sudden start now? I don't doubt there's going to be a new OS on the horizon (for perhaps 2009 or so), but the "facts" associated with this 10.6 rumor are way beyond the usual... And Apple's predictable when it comes to keeping as much of their market in tow as they possibly can...

Re:Not a surprise (1)

chaim79 (898507) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681009)

10.5 was a 'fiasco'? where did that come from? I never had problems with 10.5, bought soon after it came out and installed on a fairly new MBPro. I've installed all the updates as soon as they came out, no problems encountered. Others have had issues with UI changes (stacks, transparent menu bar, the new dock, icon changes, etc) but that would not merit the label "fiasco".

Re:Not a surprise (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681179)

Ditching PowerPC is an interesting choice though - it basically means that third-party developers won't be able to use any of the new features in 10.6 without abandoning a big chunk of their potential market.

Huh? It's no different than any other new version of the OS; as long as the application doesn't require the new features, it will work on older versions of the OS. So, build a Universal Binary and check before you use any new features from 10.6, then you'll work in 10.5 on Intel and PowerPC Macs, or 10.6 and later on Intel Macs.

Dude... After Leopard? (1, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680449)

The drummer only has one arm!

Re:Dude... After Leopard? (3, Funny)

hostyle (773991) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680461)

Wrong leopard dude. You must be def.

Re:Dude... After Leopard? (1)

CptNerd (455084) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680485)

He was probably mis-Led...

Re:Dude... After Leopard? (0, Redundant)

Megane (129182) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681181)

At least he isn't Def.

Linux (0, Troll)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680473)

Does it run on Linux?

Re:Linux (5, Interesting)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680797)

Not yet, but it will. The Cocoa/Linux Integration Framework (CLIF) is a project (currently in alpha) based on GNUStep, but with a goal of source *and* binary compatability with OS X/Cocoa. There's a lot of work and some kernel modules may be needed, but we're optimistic at the current progress.

Slow down, Apple... (3, Interesting)

PhotoGuy (189467) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680499)

Either get Leopard solid, stable, and most importantly, *fast* before you move onto the next OS (unless Snow Leopard addresses a lot of these issues).

Typically with an OSX release, the early point versions go through some growing pains, and it's not until the mid point releases that things get rock solid and fast. When I first tried leopard (10.5.0), it broke a number of things; it offered enough extra that I put up with what it broke, but I wouldn't recommend it to others especially for mission critical business stuff. It seems to be getting better with each point release that rolls in, and 10.5.3 just came in the other day (and things actually seem a bit peppier), but I get the impression it has a little way to go yet.

I think Leopard's early problems has hurt Apple a bit, and I'd hate to see a 10.6.0 come out too soon, with a lot of the same issues as Leopard's first release. I want a fast and stable OSX! (Even at its worst, Leopard was head and shoulders above XP in terms of speed and stability and usability, of course; but when I first jumped ship to Mac when Tiger was mature, things were even better stability-wise.)

While the Windows release cycle is painfully slow and buggy, I worry that Apple's is almost a little too fast with this announcement (although the wait for Leopard seemed to take forever.)

Now who knows, maybe Snow Leopard isn't too revolutionary; maybe in losing some of the backwards compatibility hassles of PPC to move Leopard forward it will improve its speed and stability. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Re:Slow down, Apple... (1)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680551)

Either get Leopard solid, stable, and most importantly, *fast* before you move onto the next OS (unless Snow Leopard addresses a lot of these issues).

Just FYI they actually miss-spelt it, it should read Slow Leapard

.

Re:Slow down, Apple... (1)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680563)

Just FYI they actually miss-spelt it, it should read Slow Leapard
Just FMI I miss-spelt that too.

Re:Slow down, Apple... (1)

MrMr (219533) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680831)

Yes that should be
'Slow Leper' the Xth century OS.

Re:Slow down, Apple... (5, Informative)

Rogue Pat (749565) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680659)

Either get Leopard solid, stable, and most importantly, *fast* before you move onto the next OS (unless Snow Leopard addresses a lot of these issues).
RTF arstechnica A : "it will not contain major OS changes. Instead, the release is heavily focused on performance and nailing down speed and stability."

Re:Slow down, Apple... (2, Insightful)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680829)

For which they will charge 129.00

I'm too cheap (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680713)

I don't need another paid release so soon. I don't care to spend $100 a year for my OS. If Microsoft tried that stunt people would be eating them for lunch

Re:I'm too cheap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680765)

Then don't buy it. No one if forcing you.

Apple have done this 3 or 4 times since version 9. Don't see them being eaten for lunch.

Were Apple actually in the corporate market like MS are, then perhaps they wouldn't do this. But they aren't and as long as people keep buying, they will keep selling.

And anyway...what is the difference between Windows 2000, XP and now Vista?

Isn't that three paid releases in 8 years? So how is this different...Panther, Tiger, Leopard.

Whiner

Re:I'm too cheap (0)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680961)

Mod parent up, Apple shouldn't be immune to criticism

Re:Slow down, Apple... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680915)

Either get Leopard solid, stable, and most importantly, *fast* before you move onto the next OS (unless Snow Leopard addresses a lot of these issues).
Why? Just because you want them to?

yeah right...you don't work in software do you? If we all waited for solid, stable and fast...no one would ever release any product.

Also, it's about perception...new new new new new

people like new

they don't like old (even if it is stable and solid) and by people I mean joe public not the /. herd.

Re:Slow down, Apple... (5, Informative)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680935)

Either get Leopard solid, stable, and most importantly, *fast* before you move onto the next OS (unless Snow Leopard addresses a lot of these issues).

Actually, according to all rumors about "Snow Leopard", those are exactly the issues that it's supposed to address. That's the entire rumor about Snow Leopard, that it's going to be a quick release that won't add much in the way of features, but it will be cleaning out legacy code, squashing bugs, and making the whole thing run fast. Some people have also noted that the last time Apple did this (10.1) the upgrade was free.

MacOS for PC's (0, Redundant)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680525)

They release MacOS X only for Macs. Is there a reason why they don't release it for regular PC's? Is it because they'd like people to buy Mac hardware along with the OS? But maybe there would be more Mac OS's sold if they also made a version for regular PC's? Or maybe they do it because there are less possible compatibility problems if they only make it for their own Mac hardware, because PC's are too customizable?

Re:MacOS for PC's (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680571)

Basically the answer to all of the questions you posed is - Yes.

Mac sells computers. They want the OS to be a selling point for their hardware, not the other way round. They've also always had significant limits on what's ok to put in a Mac, in order to prevent issues with OS and driver compatibility, in addition to making sure cheap junk doesn't easily get put in the machine.

They don't care as much about OS market share as they care about how many computers they sell.

Re:MacOS for PC's (5, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680619)

BeOS tried that. NeXT tried that. IBM (OS/2) tried that. It doesn't work.

Re:MacOS for PC's (1)

linhares (1241614) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681023)

add Vista to your list

Re:MacOS for PC's (4, Insightful)

ivano (584883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681067)

Well at least one person on Slashdot gets it. There is more than one business model in the world - not everything has to be done like Microsoft, nor like Linux. Apple does it their way, for good or bad, it makes a shit load of money for their shareholders.

Re:MacOS for PC's (2, Informative)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680627)

They release MacOS X only for Macs. Is there a reason why they don't release it for regular PC's? Is it because they'd like people to buy Mac hardware along with the OS? But maybe there would be more Mac OS's sold if they also made a version for regular PC's? Or maybe they do it because there are less possible compatibility problems if they only make it for their own Mac hardware, because PC's are too customizable?
This question is nothing new, people are constantly asking it and just about any story on Slashot about OS X has multiple threads about it.

I don't think we've ever gotten an actual answer from Apple, the the usual answers from Apple fans are:
  • They make money of their hardware solutions, the OS is just the cheese to get the consumers in the door. Remove the cheese and a decent percentage will go elsewhere for their hardware (at a cheaper price).
  • Stability - Apple's moniker is "it just works," whether you agree with that is another discussion. By limiting the combinations of hardware + drivers they can make a decently stable solution. If they open it up to everything then they will lose their "stability" reputation for the short term until drivers are developed.

Some say it's only a matter of time before they release it for PCs, others say it will never happen. Personally I wouldn't be surprised either way.

Re:MacOS for PC's (4, Insightful)

Weedlekin (836313) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680669)

"They release MacOS X only for Macs. Is there a reason why they don't release it for regular PC's?"

1) It avoids treading on Microsoft's toes. Mac versions of MS Office help to sell lot of Apple machines, so pissing the Redmond Gorilla off by competing with them in the commodity OS market wouldn't be a particularly good idea.

2) Apple tried it in the past, and ended up losing far more from lost sales revenue to clone makers than they were earning by licensing the OS. This was therefore one of the first things Jobs killed off when he took over at Apple, so it's unlikely he'd want to risk the same thing happening again.

Re:MacOS for PC's (1)

mini me (132455) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680779)

It's pretty safe to assume that the commodity PC version of OS X would sell in the same price range as Windows: $400-$500. When you factor in that cost, it's cheaper to just buy a Mac in the first place.

There is no advantage for Apple to support the regular PC. And unless you are a part of the extremely tiny group of people who like to tinker with your hardware, there is no real advantages of running OS X on PC hardware either.

Re:MacOS for PC's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680931)

Well, you have to understand that before Compaq, every computer company operated the way Apple does: they sold you both hardware and software. When Compaq reversed IBM's bios and developed the first clone, they did so knowing that MS had held onto the rights to DOS. IBM wanted to get something out fast to compete with Apple, they had gone to Gates for their OS, and Gates was smart enough to see that software could be sold as a separate commodity from hardware.

So Apple sees themselves as a vertical product company - they sell you both the hardware and the software - the whole experience. It's a different model from the Microsoft model, and while Apple's market share isn't nearly as big as Microsoft's, the product they're producing (the hardware) is a big-ticket item with a big-ticket margin (sure, once you have an OS, the replication costs are nothing: but MS still needs to sell enough copies to pay off the development expenses, and right now, thanks to Vista, that's not happening as it should). Apple is perfectly happy where they are, thank you, selling "the Mercedes" and letting MS have the Ford segment of the OS market.

Re:MacOS for PC's (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681103)

Yes.

No really, the answer to all your questions are "yes". You seem to understand the situation so I'm not sure why you're asking.

Q:Is there a reason why they don't release it for regular PC's?
A:Yes, there are a couple reasons, at least. You give two of them later on.

Q:Is it because they'd like people to buy Mac hardware along with the OS?
A:Yes. Apple makes most of its money selling hardware. That's the business they're in. OSX and iLife are largely built to be enticements to buy their hardware, just as the iTMS was created to encourage people to buy iPods.

Q:But maybe there would be more Mac OS's sold if they also made a version for regular PC's?
A:Yes, there would most surely be more sales of OSX. The question is, would the increased profits from OSX be enough to make up for the lost hardware sales? The answer is "probably not".

Q:Or maybe they do it because there are less possible compatibility problems if they only make it for their own Mac hardware, because PC's are too customizable?
A:Yes, that's another problem with supporting generic PCs-- you're going to have to support every little piece of crappy hardware anyone wants to buy. Worse yet, you're going to have to deal with the fact that a lot of that hardware comes with poorly-written drivers that will crash your system. The fact is that a *lot* of instability that people see on Windows is driver-related. By being both the OS developer and the systems integrator, Apple gets a level of stability that would otherwise be much more difficult to reach.

Re:MacOS for PC's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23681105)

Because Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. OS X is used to differentiate their hardware from other hardware.

Running OSX on any PC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680543)

Does this shift mean that I go out and buy the software and run it on my HP?

Re:Running OSX on any PC (1)

spud603 (832173) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680635)

not easily [hackint0sh.org]

Why abandon the PPC platform completely? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680547)

I mean, not that its great, but doesn't that mean that the developers will stop supporting the PPC platform with their software and more and more people would have to switch to x86 in the nearest future? Thus meaning that they would have to buy a really new computer to get all the latest software available for the Mac and I think that this would be a big issue for the guys with older macs.

Effectively Kill CPU Upgrade Market (3, Interesting)

Black-Man (198831) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680589)

I still run 10.4.x on a Mac Pro because of issues I read about - and Apple still is issuing security patches and the like for 10.4.x, so I take it w/ a grain of salt they would stop supporting PowerPC at this point. I have a G4 I would like to upgrade the CPU - but who in their right mind would order a CPU card upgrade w/ the rumor floating around that PowerPC is about to get shut out? I pay a premium for Apple hardware, but I justify it by the ability to get 5 years out of their pro machines - the last 2 on CPU upgrade or Video card upgrade.

I would definitely reconsider my position if they went thru with this.

Re:Effectively Kill CPU Upgrade Market (2, Insightful)

grm_wnr (781219) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680643)

the ability to get 5 years out of their pro machines
The G4 stopped production almost exactly 4 years ago. And it may be a year until 10.6 actually comes out. Plus, it's not like a new OS release suddenly makes your G4 stop working just because you can't install it.

In any case, your rule is working. If you want to reconsider your position, go ahead, but you'll have to justify it to yourself a little more congruently.

I go with the Engineer myself (1)

UberHoser (868520) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680667)

Never could get the trick of blowing up a leopard with demo.

Oh wait...

New Name is just an Excuse to Charge you Again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680685)

Do they plan on charging all of their apple users yet another giant fee again for the bug fixes? How come Apple manages to get away with charging everybody multiple times (what are we at now... 5? 6?) for essentially the same OS while if Microsoft had done the same thing the anti-monopoly police would have been banging down their door?

Re:New Name is just an Excuse to Charge you Again (1)

grm_wnr (781219) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680785)

If you bought at versions of OS X ever, you're at $650 in the wost case (probably lower; you likely at least bought a new Mac in the meantime, which s one license less, and OS X only really came into its own with 10.2, so many people didn't buy it before).

In comparison, for Windows' top of the line editions of in the same time period (XP and Vista), you paid about $500. Note that OEM and system builder version of OS X don't exist for obvious reasons, so you can't compare those. And nobody ever said Macs were cheap. But it's certainly not outrageous.

iPhone info (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680711)

This isn't related to MacOS, but is as good a place as any to report it....

From a third-hand source, take with a grain of salt:

iPhone 2.0 goes on sale next week. Initial roll-out in NYC and LAX, not sure why it is staged.

iPhone 1.0 sales were suspended by Apple, to avoid the debacle when they lowered the price shortly after release (and subsequently gave rebates to people who had just bought one).

Apple still has plenty of iPhone 1.0's. After iPhone 2.0 is released, iPhone 1.0's will be offered at deep discounts.

As reported earlier, AT&T employees have been prohibited from taking vacation for a month, starting 2008-06-15.

Same week as we see a multi-touch Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680769)

we see 10.6 being touted. It makes sense - why not advertise long in advance, if it stops your competitors grabbing a large chunk of the publics imagination.

Also, don't even think about forecasting a release date, 10.5 was supposed to ship long before Vista. When 10.6 comes, it will probably be timely.

How many cat names do they have? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23680771)

When they run out of cat names, will they make OS XI ?

What cat is this one? (2, Funny)

killeena (794394) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680839)

What cat is this one going to be, Ocelot? Domestic Shorthair? Mau?

BOO, Apple! (1, Informative)

Progman3K (515744) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680879)

So this leaves a great number of PowerPC hardware owners with a bunch of very nice bookends?

Run Linux, you will probably never have to worry about the next version being unavailable for your preferred hardware platform!

Re:BOO, Apple! (3, Informative)

teg (97890) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681029)

No? The earlier versions of the software continue to run, they don't magically stop working when 10.6 is out.

Why bookends? (2, Insightful)

ctid (449118) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681035)

Surely 10.5.x and 10.4.x will continue working anyway when 10.6.0 comes out? Presumably that may mean a hit on resale prices for G3, G4 and G5 Macs but the machines will still work!

Re:BOO, Apple! (4, Insightful)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681089)

So this leaves a great number of PowerPC hardware owners with a bunch of very nice bookends?
Yes, because, as we all know, when 10.6 is released, everything else just suddenly stops working. Completely.

It may (rumors, remember) leave PowerPCs unsupported. But that is an inevtiability, anyway.

Re:BOO, Apple! (1)

ivano (584883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681165)

Only if you believe a few stupid things all at once. Really, it's all speculation, all we need to do is WAIT A FEW DAYS to find out, but instead the Mac haters just love to show how stupid the Mac buyers are. OK so let me run Linux and where..do..I...put Photoshop?

Re:BOO, Apple! (4, Insightful)

realinvalidname (529939) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681315)

Run Linux, you will probably never have to worry about the next version being unavailable for your preferred hardware platform!

And instead, you can worry about drivers never being available for your cards, peripherals, etc.

It's way too early to ditch PPC (3, Interesting)

argent (18001) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680903)

Leopard supports five year old desktops and laptops. If they release this on schedule they will be abandoning some people with three year old hardware at that point.

Lots of PPC in EDU... (1)

jpellino (202698) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680907)

I'd be not too happy explaining to my boss how in order to be current you have to buy all that Lexan all over again at $1K per unit. I'd be really miserable having to explain why we'd have to re-buy racks full of iron at $2-$3K each.

Why would you have to re-buy? (2, Insightful)

ctid (449118) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681003)

I presume Apple maintain support for 10.5.x for some time yet?

Re:Lots of PPC in EDU... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681187)

I'd be not too happy explaining to my boss how in order to be current you have to buy all that Lexan all over again at $1K per unit.

This is however a wonderful time to explain how he can save absolutely thousands by simply switching to Linux. Start with the PPCs as they're something of a captive audience, and then once you have that working, do the x86 stuff which will almost certainly be easier. As a result, your next hardware purchases can be significantly cheaper...

A dying breed: (3, Funny)

BForrester (946915) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680959)

I question the foresight of naming the new release after an endangered, almost extinct species.

I'll wait for OS X 10.7, codename "dodo" or 10.8, "brontasaurus."

Re:A dying breed: (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23681115)

You know that tigers are endangered too, right?

PA Semi? (5, Interesting)

605dave (722736) | more than 6 years ago | (#23680987)

OK, maybe Apple is coming out with a preview of a 10.6 next week, but I can't imagine them dropping PowerPC support. Why? They just bought a company that specializes in PPC chips for several hundred million dollars. So why in the world would they put the OS X ecosystem on a course to only support Intel? I doubt this is the plan. 1. Buy PowerPC design company. 2. Stop making your software compatible with PPC 3. Profit!

OS Code Names (5, Interesting)

usermilk (149572) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681015)

Why do people insist on referring to their Mac OS with a code name instead of a number? I have no clue what version of the Mac OS Tiger was versus Puma but I can easily figure out if 10.4 is newer than 10.2.

Re:OS Code Names (1)

MrMickS (568778) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681299)

Why do people insist on referring to their Mac OS with a code name instead of a number? I have no clue what version of the Mac OS Tiger was versus Puma but I can easily figure out if 10.4 is newer than 10.2.
Perhaps its because that's what Apple refers to the releases as. Its a marketing distinction as much as anything but 'OS X Leopard' sounds more impressive than 'OS X 10.5'.

OSX (2, Interesting)

Dr.D.IS.GREAT (1249946) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681145)

Well, it is my feeling that 10.6 may bring forth some UI changes as well as under the hood improvements. also this WWDC may make mention of todays clones as well as the boys from OSX86. I think apple should really take advantage of this community because they are starting to make up a good amount of OS X 10.5.x sales as well as encouraging people to buy macs. In addition, I believe this may be the year of Mac OS on PC, this could be big, maybe 10.6 will support booting MBR and BIOS in addition to EFI and GPT. Who knows, something is always going on at apple and they do respect the hackerly community; for jobs and woz were hackers themselves at one point.

Dr. D

Hopefully this means no more fat binaries (1)

Junks Jerzey (54586) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681153)

On a standard install of OS X on Intel hardware, all of the applications AND all of the command line tools are fat binaries. You can strip the PowerPC code out of the tools if you wish, but then when download an OS update, you get the fat versions again. How much network bandwidth and hard drive space is wasted because of that?

Release Date and other inferred info (1)

macbuzz01 (1074795) | more than 6 years ago | (#23681251)

Clearly with a name like "Snow Leopard" it will:
- be released in the winter.
- be targeting the Central Asia market
- given taxonomic debate [wikipedia.org] surrounding the "Snow Leopard", there will be much debate whether this iteration is more closely aligned to the leopard family or the tiger family
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>