Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Apple Delays Leopard to October

Posted by Zonk on Thu Apr 12, 2007 06:52 PM
from the sad-panda-err-leopard dept.
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.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Technology: Why Apple Delayed Leopard for the iPhone 453 comments
Ernest DeFarge writes "Apple recently announced that they've pulled several key programmers from the OS X 10.5 "Leopard" and assigned them to the iPhone in order to get it done on time. In doing so, they delayed Leopard for 4 months. Does that mean that the iPhone is more important to Apple than Mac OS? Or is it just capitalizing on the current state of Apple's fanbase?"
[+] Answers From Steve Jobs at Apple's Shareholder Meeting 162 comments
DECS writes "At today's Apple annual shareholder meeting, a series of proposals were presented for voting after which CEO Steve Jobs answered a series of questions from the audience. Jobs talked about Greenpeace, stock options, the iPhone, Mac OS X Leopard, and .Mac."
[+] Sun CEO Says ZFS Will Be 'the File System' for OSX 384 comments
Fjan11 writes "Sun's Jonathan Schwartz has announced that Apple will be making ZFS 'the file system' in Mac OS 10.5 Leopard. It's possible that Leopard's Time Machine feature will require ZFS to run, because ZFS has back-up and snapshots build right in to the filesystem as well as a host of other features. 'Rumors of Apple's interest in ZFS began in April 2006, when an OpenSolaris mailing list revealed that Apple had contacted Sun regarding porting ZFS to OS 10. The file system later began making appearances in Leopard builds. ZFS has a long list of improvements over Apple's current file system, Journaled HFS+.'"
[+] Apple Confirms No (Default) ZFS In Leopard 362 comments
javipas writes "Despite recent rumors about the possible inclusion of ZFS as the filesystem of choice for MacOS X 10.5 'Leopard', an Apple executive has denied this possibility. Brian Croll, senior director of product marketing for the Mac OS has as much as said 'ZFS is not happening ... Croll declined to comment on statements made last week by Sun Chief Executive Jonathan Schwartz, who said the use of ZFS would be announced at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco. Upon further questioning, Croll would only confirm that Apple had never said ZFS would be a part of Leopard. A representative with Sun did not have any immediate comment.' Users of the future operating system will have to keep working with HFS+, a filesystem that is almost ten years old now." Update: 06/12 19:57 GMT by KD : An Apple spokesman contacted InformationWeek with a correction, which they ran as a comment on their original story: What Apple meant to say was, "ZFS would be available as a limited option, but not as the default file system."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • October? (Score:5, Funny)

    by WrongSizeGlass (838941) on Thursday April 12 2007, @06:54PM (#18710493) Homepage
    I guess I'll be dressing up as a Leopard for Halloween this year. I sure hop Flanders it's handing out toothbrushes again.


    warning: The above content may test positive for sarcasm and/or could be a failed attempt at humor and as such should be taken with a pound of salt.
    • by Overly Critical Guy (663429) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:32PM (#18711001)
      Windows fans everywhere, admiring the pretty Macs in the window: "If only our biggest complaint was having to wait two and a half years instead of just two years for a new OS release."
      • Re:October? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Sam Ritchie (842532) on Thursday April 12 2007, @08:22PM (#18711817)

        I remember when people were complaining about Apple putting out a full-priced major release every year.

        I probably would have made the same call. Leopard will be a good product - a competent, incremental improvement on an existing product - but it won't open up any vast new revenue streams like the iPhone (hopefully) will.

  • Damn (Score:5, Funny)

    by inKubus (199753) on Thursday April 12 2007, @06:54PM (#18710503) Homepage Journal
    I was just bragging to the office MS pundit that Leopard would be out soon. Then I get Vista'd (tm) by APPLE.

    Vista'd- to be up a creek without a paddle

        • Re:Damn (Score:5, Funny)

          by YU Nicks NE Way (129084) on Thursday April 12 2007, @08:10PM (#18711627)
          Being at the bottom of shit creek, however, would entail being submerged in shit. Your tastes may vary, of course -- and, of course, there's nothing wrong with that -- but I'd prefer to remain floating on top of the creek, if that's the alternative.

          Of course, my preference would be to stay away completely, all things considered.
  • by Rosyna (80334) on Thursday April 12 2007, @06:55PM (#18710519) Homepage
    Saying it was delayed it slightly inaccurate [unsanity.org] since Apple has been saying Spring '07.
  • Leopard's delay isn't that big a deal for most of Apple's regular users. Tiger works well enough. There isn't all that much in Leopard that I'm really looking forward to having.

    I can wait comfortably for another quarter if it means that Leopard will be released as a better operating system than was Tiger when it was released initially.

    The bigger concern would seem to me to be the developers who've pegged their next release on feature that are Leopard only. They're going to lose out on four months worth of income. Hopefully the new features in Leopard, especially the under-the-hood suff makes developing so much easier that it's going to be worth it for them.

    In the meantime, I'll download a nightly of webkit (safari is the only real annoyance I have on my Mac) and get on with my work.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:08PM (#18710701)
      Reminds me of when my boss starts yelling at me for missing a deadline and I let them know it's no big deal because what I was working on really sucked...

    • Bugs me (Score:5, Interesting)

      by pavon (30274) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:44PM (#18711245)

      Tiger works well enough. There isn't all that much in Leopard that I'm really looking forward to having.
      See I'm the opposite. I passed on Tiger because it all seemed fairly ho-hum to me. I didn't really care about Spotlight, Dashboard or Automator, and while the new developer API's looked cool, I realized that between school and work I wouldn't have much time to play with them.

      On the otherhand Leopard has had me excited. I have been wanting virtual desktops on OS X since it came out, the the third party implementations have all be lacking, so I am very excited about Spaces. I am also quite interested in Time Machine as I have never seen a backup system easy enough for my parents to use, and have never seen any backup system that makes it as slick and easy to find the correct revision of a backed up documents.

      In addition, several of the apps I use are getting outdated as the developers no longer support Panther (including some Apple ones). And to top it all off, I'd like to get a new machine and was naturally waiting for Leopard to come out so I don't have to pay another $150 dollars in 6 months. So the delay is somewhat of a big deal to me. That said I would much rather have stable software than an early release date. That goes for anyone, not just Apple.
  • by davidwr (791652) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:09PM (#18710709) Homepage Journal
    Hi, I'm a Mac.
    And I'm a PC.

    <squeaky kid voice> I'm an iPhone play with me watch this oh I got a boo-boo make it better daddy let's play catch can I have some ice cream can I can I huh huh oh look a kite I wanna kite mommieee!

    Steve Jobs: Damn I forgot how much attention new products need.
  • by The Breeze (140484) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:25PM (#18710915) Homepage
    Apple just can't seem to match Microsofts's superior delay history. Microsoft has already astounded the world by an amazing THREE YEAR delay in the original Vista release date and the actual delay; this impressive delay is one of the longest delays for a product that actually eventually made it out of the front door instead of dying...

    And here's Apple, trying to out-do Microsoft, and the best then can do is delay Leopard for three lousy months - and technically speaking, it's not much of a delay since the original release date was "Spring 07".

    I mean, come on, Apple. Surely you can break something in Leopard to force a longer delay. Microsoft wins, hands down. Apple still lags way behind MS on viruses, as well. With my Windows machine, unpatched, I have THOUSANDS of viruses that can infect my machine if I want to. Apple just doesn't give me that ability. Maybe they just don't care.

  • by rizzo320 (911761) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:34PM (#18711037)
    As a person who works in higher ed, I hate the fact that lots of new things are announced around the WWDC during the summer. The demand is there from the customers (professors, students), but not enough testing time. I know the world doesn't revolve around higher-ed, but its still a pain.

    With a release date of October, I'll have many months to test and play around with things before rolling it out. And since we only buy computers in the July/August timeframe, I won't be taken by surprise when they come with Leopard pre-installed. Heck, they'll be at 10.5.1 or 10.5.2 by Fall 2008.

    I don't believe they will loose a lot of sales because of this announcement. A lot of students are getting Macs at the back-to-school time of year specifically because of Leopard- they are getting them because of the total package and the "it just works" mentality. That's not going to change despite the delay. And for those who were going to wait, they now have to make the choice continuing until the October release or biting the bullet and getting a new computer before then.

    I'm sure many are cursing up a storm because of this, but at the same time, I bet a lot of support folks like myself are breathing a sigh of relief. Besides, we now know EXACTLY when it will be released (October), not just a general esitmate (like Spring 2007). That's ALOT coming from Apple.
    • by largesnike (762544) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:20PM (#18710837)
      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.
    • by rizzo320 (911761) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:41PM (#18711161)

      I hate that Apple announces the same kind of delays Microsoft had with Vista.


      Same kind??? Your math is a little off. 4 months (Leopard) does not equal 3 years (Vista). :-)
    • by Blakey Rat (99501) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:23PM (#18710885)
      They've gone, what, 5 releases without fixing (much) in Finder; what makes you think they'll fix it this time around? Wasn't it 10.3 where Apple claimed they were re-writing Finder from scratch, and we ended up with almost the exact same mess of poor usability and terrible bugs we were using before? Hell, I'd be happy if it just didn't utterly freeze for minutes at a time when your network got disconnected-- it's like the Finder programmers never heard of wifi!

      It's sad when the one application that is hard-coded to run on every boot for every user is the worst application Apple makes.
      • by blibbler (15793) on Thursday April 12 2007, @08:31PM (#18711979)
        I don't want to defend the Finder in 10.4, but the Finder included in 10.0 sucked so much harder than the current version. On a G4, when resizing a "column-view" window, it would only refresh every couple of seconds or so. IIRC, this wasn't fixed until 10.2. There are still large complaints with the Finder (especially the networking one you mentioned) but it is unfair to say there haven't been improvements.
    • by rilister (316428) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:32PM (#18711005)
      hmmm. remember OSX 10.0? Quoth Wiki:

      "The initial version was slow, not feature complete, and had very few applications available at the time of its launch, mostly from independent developers. Many critics suggested that while the OS was not ready for mainstream adoption, they recognized the importance of its initial launch as a base on which to improve."
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSX [wikipedia.org]

      I also seem to remember a total absence of a DVD player...
      • Re:New Finder... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Blakey Rat (99501) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:40PM (#18711153)
        Sorry, I'm new to mac .... what is so crummy about the Finder in Tiger? I've had some difficulties using it, but always penned it as user error. What was good about previous implementations?

        It has terrible usability design, with two "modes" (a Windows-esque 'browser' mode, and a Mac Classic 'spatial' mode), neither of which work correctly. The Spotlight UI, in particular, is almost criminally complex and quirky... a Linux/Windows user might not notice it, but to a Mac Classic user it's like fingernails on a chalkboard. People used to Classic are driven spare by the Command-N keyboard shortcut that used to create a new folder, but now creates a new window-- even in Spatial mode (which makes no sense.)

        If you have make the horrible error of trying to open a network drive when the network it's on is no longer available (you know, like the huge number of people who use wifi on their laptops), Finder will freeze for minutes at a time. Finder will also freeze for several minutes if you have the audacity to drag-and-drop files to the desktop from some applications. DotMac will also freeze Finder for several minutes if it attempts to sync itself while on an un-reliable network. There's no multi-threading whatsoever.

        Opening a window with a large number of images will frequently crash Finder as it creates thumbnails. And no, it's not a corrupt image file, because if I do the same view in Windows, Windows will create the thumbnails in seconds with no errors. When Finder's image previews do work, generating them is super-slow.

        It's still missing features that were in Mac Classic, like tabbed folders. (Although to be fair, they have added Labels back in and Pop-Open drag&drop.) Text clippings are nearly useless, as you can no longer drag them directly into a word processor/edit field (like in OS 9), nor can you select and Copy text from them. Oh, and Finder will silently delete the contents of old Mac Classic text clippings, so I hope you didn't have a bunch of important passwords in one or anything... oops!

        If you create a new file on the CLI, it still won't show up right away in Finder. You frequently have to 'prod' Finder into showing it, by closing and re-opening the window, or creating a new folder and then deleting it.

        It's just bad. Given, a bad Macintosh file browser is still as good as the average Linux or Windows file browser, but that's not much of an excuse, especially for us old-school Mac users. I'd be happy if they fixed some of the more blatant bugs and added tabbed folders, even if it's not a total re-write.
    • by linguae (763922) on Thursday April 12 2007, @07:58PM (#18711465)
      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.

    • by LionMage (318500) on Thursday April 12 2007, @08:08PM (#18711603) Homepage

      Piss off IBM so much they dump Apple as a customer and force Apple to run to PASemi, AMD, and then finally Intel

      I realize this has already been modded flamebait, but I just had to point out that Apple dumped IBM, not the other way around. I challenge anyone to cite a credible source that says otherwise. IBM wouldn't deliver the kind of chips Apple wanted (G5 chips usable in mobile applications) without Apple forking over a substantial amount of money to help IBM finish the development cycle. That's assuming IBM ever made much headway on that effort to begin with.

      (In fairness to IBM, they couldn't justify making the G5 a high priority and soak up all the R&D costs to make it low-power and fit within a laptop-appropriate thermal envelope. They couldn't justify that because the volume of systems that Apple ships is simply not large enough for IBM.)

      Also, while it's true that Apple shopped around to both AMD and Intel, they never sourced processors from AMD, so it's a bit misleading to say that they ran "to [...] AMD, and then finally Intel."

      As for delaying the OS because of the iPhone, I don't see that as a major problem. OS X 10.4 is still competitive with Windows, even Vista. There's no reason to rush Leopard (10.5) to market, and the users wouldn't stand for a rushed OS product since, you know, they tend to rely on the stability of their Macs for productivity and so forth. The company has finite engineering and QA resources, and since they pre-announced the iPhone, the clock is ticking on that product. They don't dare slip the iPhone schedule or the competition will eat their lunch, and the iPhone will be stillborn. The consequences of this logic should be obvious.

      As a general rule, the buying public is more tolerant of software delays than hardware delays.