Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

New Version of Mac OS X Leopard Leaked

Posted by Zonk on Tue Aug 15, 2006 07:59 AM
from the bad-day-for-big-cats dept.
Businesses OS X Operating Systems Apple
the linux geek writes "InfoWorld has an article informing us that an early beta of Mac OS X 10.5 has been leaked. This appears to be the same build Steve Jobs previewed at WWDC, and contains most of the new features, including Time Machine and Spaces." From the article: "Attendees at last week's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) received copies of the beta ware and had to sign legally binding agreements not to let Leopard stray onto file-sharing networks. Perhaps someone didn't read the not-so-fine print? MacUser reports that this version of Leopard is indeed legit, unlike a fake one that was reportedly making its rounds last week. The version of Leopard available on BitTorrent is 4.3GB, containing 93 files."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Backslash: More on Leopard, AOL, Reuters and the Universe 117 comments
Read on for some of the most interesting comments and exchanges on a handful of yesterday's Slashdot posts (on the age of the Universe, virtual desktops in OS X, trick photography on the Reuters wire, and AOL's latest privacy gaffe) in today's Backslash summary.
[+] Technology: Apple's Leopard Strategy to Kill Microsoft and Dell? 661 comments
RX8 writes "A Digital Trends article suggests that Apple's Leopard agenda is to get Windows users to use Apple hardware then convert them to the Apple camp and that Apple will also be directly targeting Dell by offering a better experience when it comes to media and related tasks. Lastly, they suggest that Steve Jobs held back on showing more Leopard features so people would not get too excited and stop buying in 2006. 'If you get too excited about what is supposed to be an incredibly amazing product you simply won't buy a new Apple this year.'"
This discussion has been archived.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.

New Version of Mac OS X Leopard Leaked 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Time Machine really works! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Pao|o (92817) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:03AM (#15909538)
    Tiger was also leaked a couple of years ago.

    Who didn't see this coming? Expect Apple Legal to have a field day with this one. :)

  • Well, (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Klaidas (981300) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:06AM (#15909550) Homepage
    Well, if they gave it out... how could they possibly think that it won't leak? Software, music, movies leak without giving them out. And now, there's the release of an expensive operating system and they give it out...
    I mean, how could they be sure that just signing the document would stop anyone? Sharing music, movies, etc. is illegal, but look at ftp servers, emule, torrents, etc.
    It the Internet, apple, think different!

    • Re:Well, (Score:5, Insightful)

      by andrewman327 (635952) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:20AM (#15909634) Homepage Journal
      It might surprise you, but most people really do follow the "not so fine print." Look at how many people hhave access to Windows source code yet there has only been one [microsoft.com]well known leak [slashdot.org].


      This shouldn't really matter to Apple anyway. This will increase speculation about the OS on sites like /. and any publicity is good publicity. The mainstream media will probably not even care about this whatsoever. A quick glance at Google News [google.com] shows that very few non-geeky news sources have picked up the story.

      • Re:Well, (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TheGreek (2403) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:26AM (#15909666)
        They could have given a slightly different copy to everyone present. Just change a few bytes here and there.
        Prohibitively expensive to do on pressed DVDs, but I've long thought that Apple's seeding servers should do precisely that.

          • Re:Well, (Score:4, Informative)

            by TheGreek (2403) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @09:06AM (#15909897)
            They do, dont they?
            No.

            There was a story last year about a student being caught releasing his ADC 10.4 developer seed, with it being tracked back to his ADC account and ultimately him.
            That's because he was retarded enough to upload it from the same host from which he downloaded it from ADC.

  • Big mac fan not sure about Leopard (Score:3, Insightful)

    by boxlight (928484) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:07AM (#15909556)
    I'm a big Mac fan -- *love* my iMac. But I'm not sure about Leopard. That is, Time Machine and Spaces looks neat. But not neat enough for me to shell out $150 for an upgrade.

    Tiger is awesome, those new feature all-in-all are pretty minor improvements.

    Now, if Jobs' TOP SECRET stuff is impressive, that may make a difference. But so far, I'm not seeing enough in Leopard for me to open my wallet.

    boxlight
    • That's the *big* feature. Screw the user interface tweakage, being able to forget about release pools and the rest of the manual storage management twaddle is going to be amazing.

      • Re:Garbage Collection in Objective C (Score:5, Interesting)

        by BasilBrush (643681) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:23AM (#15909643)
        Hey I'd missed that feature. That's certainly going to be a boon to developers. But it's also going to improve the user experience for users. With 512MB of memory every other day Tiger slows to a crawl because it's filled up RAM, presumably with memory leaks. Safari is a bad offender in this regard. Auto garbage collection should clear most of those leaks.

        • Re:Garbage Collection in Objective C (Score:5, Informative)

          by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @09:07AM (#15909904)

          Wow... Slashdot is a "Nerd" site, but this is the first I've heard of this feature... where on slashdot is the feature list that is interesting to *developers*?

          I haven't seen a single consolidated list of all the features, but all of the features shown were aimed at developers, either as demonstrations of what the new APIs support or as features useful to developers. Time Machine, for example, was demoed as an API that can be built into a developer's apps. Other features you might have missed include a full port of DTrace from Solaris, built into the new X-ray profiling software, resolution independent UI, core graphics, quicktime, and core animation features, more parity between carbon and cocoa, a built in grammar checking service for all apps, RSS, multiple clipboards, improved python and ruby tools included, Apache 2, and default inclusion of Subversion.

          Most of the coverage on Slashdot has been for end-users, rather than developers, but there has been plenty of discussion elsewhere on development sites for industries using these elements. Heck, the DTrace message boards have been talking about little else for a week now.

    • Re:Big mac fan not sure about Leopard (Score:4, Interesting)

      by AccUser (191555) <mhg AT taose DOT co DOT uk> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:14AM (#15909591) Homepage
      It depends what you want it for, I suppose.

      Personally I was blown away by iChat, in particular the iChat Theater mode in conjunction with Keynote. I know that I have a use for that right now, but to be honest, it was not something that I was looking for until I saw it. It surprised me, but there you go.

      I doubt I will upgrade all my machines to Leopard - as you say Tiger is more than adequate for the work I do - but I will more than likely buy a new Mac Pro and a Mac Book Pro when Leopard is released.
    • Comments like this have been driving me insane. These features were announced at a developers conference. The majority of what Steve discussed about leopard was aimed at said developers. It may not seem like a whole lot of excitement to some. But to those developing on the platform, there is a lot to look forward to. - Garbage collection in Objective-C - An updated QTKit - Time Machine's API - Improved Spotlight - CoreAnimation - Xcode 3 - DashCode - Improved Boot Camp - And more that I can't think of off the top of my head.

    • Leopard will help Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)

      by Dystopian Rebel (714995) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:50AM (#15909788) Journal
      Leopard's system-wide grammar checker will help reduce the pressure on Slashdot's overworked Grammar Nazis. ;o)

  • A little conspiracy (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MikeRT (947531) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:08AM (#15909560) Homepage
    Crazy idea here... maybe the reason Apple doesn't really put any meaningful controls in place for a while other than a piece of paper is that they want a handful of geeks to get ahold of bootleg copies, test them on non-Apple hardware and talk about the results? That accomplishes two things: gets them data and doesn't tip their hand. I wouldn't put such a sneaky way of using people past Steve Jobs.

    • Re:A little conspiracy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:15AM (#15909604)
      Crazy idea here...
      Yes, yes it is. Why do these retarded conspiracy theories always get modded up? Even if Apple were intending to sell Mac OS X for third party PCs they still wouldn't care about compatibility on some random hobbyist/pirate's setup. Never mention the effort required to collect the data from random blogs all over the internet.

  • I was tempted to download the torrent... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AccUser (191555) <mhg AT taose DOT co DOT uk> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:09AM (#15909570) Homepage
    ...but my desire to be surprised got the better of me. I watched the WWDC keynote, and thought that some of the new features looked really nice, and to be honest, I am prepared to wait. I want my experience of Leopard to be without prejudice.

    BTW, I installed Windows Vista Beta Preview a couple of weeks ago, just for fun and it confirmed what I had anticipated - I will not be buying an upgrade to Windows Vista, nor will I purchase any machine with it pre-installed.

    OS X is a dream to use on the desktop, with various GNU/Linux installations running on all my servers. The machine with Vista on it? Going to install the latest Ubuntu.

    Hasta la vista, Vista...

  • Summary (Score:5, Informative)

    by kevin_conaway (585204) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:10AM (#15909576) Homepage

    Since I'm not a mac-head, the summary didn't make too much sense to me.

    Spaces [apple.com]: a new application for the Leopard operating system that enables users to group different applications in separate environments.

    Time Machine [apple.com]: you can back up and preserve everything on your Mac -- including priceless digital photos, music, movies, and documents -- without lifting a finger, you can go back in time to recover anything you've ever backed up.

    • Re:Summary (Score:4, Funny)

      by Rik Sweeney (471717) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:14AM (#15909590) Homepage
      Spaces: a new application for the Leopard operating system that enables users to group different applications in separate environments

      There were going to prefix this with "My" but Tom sent them a Cease and Desist...

    • Oh, a neat idea... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by argent (18001) <peterNO@SPAMslashdot.2006.taronga.com> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:19AM (#15909629) Homepage Journal
      Spaces: Virtual desktop with Exposé eye-candy.

      Time Machine: Incremental backups with Exposé eye-candy. The hooks for applications to use Time Machine are a pretty cool idea, I don't think I've seen that kind of capability before.

      What Apple needs to add:

      Let's call it "Testbed": They could use FreeBSD jails and overlays to give you the ability to run a testbed environment that would looks almost like a virtualised system (like Parallels or VMware) which even "root" couldn't see out of, but without the overhead of virtualization. Plus Exposé eye-candy!

      Plus, extend fast user switching to allow you to log in multiple times *as the same user*, giving OS X full virtual console capability.

      Combine these with Time Machine, you could actually log into a version of your whole system as it existed a week ago, or two weeks ago... and (pause) with Exposé eye-candy.

  • Glad this article's on Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rik Sweeney (471717) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:11AM (#15909580) Homepage
    I've been waiting ages for this to download, now that it's on Slashdot we'll get more seeders!

    Listens out for the sound of Bittorrent clients starting up...

  • Serious question. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LinuxGeek (6139) * <linuxgeek@djand.cCOLAom minus caffeine> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:14AM (#15909594)
    I see on the Apple site that I can buy a single OS X license for $129 or a 5-pack family license for $199. The fine print says it is to be used on "Apple-labeled computers". Has anyone tested their willingness to sell to generic x86 owners? Also, dosen't it make M$ seem even greedier to not have something like this for XP and Office? Imagine how many pirated copies would disappear if they had a $199 family 5-pack of XP Home.

    • Re:Serious question. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by topham (32406) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:16AM (#15909608) Homepage

      I'd love to see the sales statistics on the Family Pack. I mean it is entirely voluntary purchase as there is nothing preventing someone from buying a single copy and using it on all their computers at home.
      • I have two friends (they're roommates) that decided to get the family pack, since it was cheaper than buying two separate copies. If you move in with them, you get a free copy of OS X!

      • Re:Serious question. (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Cloud K (125581) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @09:44AM (#15910134) Homepage
        I think you'd be surprised.

        I hold my hand up - I've used my fair share of software that fell off the back of the internet. Let's leave the generic legal/moral arguments for another day. But there are two major things which convinced me to do the Right Thing when Tiger came out:

        * Fair pricing. If you're fair with me, I'm fair with you. If you charge me the full extortionate price 5 times for being a loyal and legal customer and legally upgrading all 5 of my family PCs, let's just say I'll be a little miffed...

        * Trust. It's a two-way process. It's like, if someone puts out a cookie jar for someone else and says "I know you want to steal one of those cookies, but I'll make you suffer the consequences, and I'll be watching so DON'T DO IT" - the first thing a lot of people will do is try to think of a way to steal a cookie. It's the human instinct to push boundaries and see what you can get away with, and chances are because they were so snotty with you and treated you like dirt, you lost all respect for them. On the other hand, if they said "I'd like you give you one of these, but I can't. I kindly ask that you do not take any" - as an adult at least, I'm much more willing to comply. Yes I know, at the end of the day an illegal act is an illegal act, end of.... but people *will* do wrong. And I think if you treat them like an adult and not like a criminal or a child or both, then you're more likely to combat piracy than any digital protection.

    • Re:Serious question. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Rob86TA (955953) <Robert.Atkinson@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:28AM (#15909674)
      Apple and MS have different motivation to release a 5-pack.

      Apple sells hardware... by letting you install on 5 computers, they are hoping you will buy 4 more computers. $$$ in their pocket.

      MS doesn't sell hardware... by letting you install on 5 computers, they have removed 4 purchases the revenue stream. Sure you give more $$$ to Dell, Sony, or the whitebox dealer... and they just sold 4 less copies of XP. That's why there is no 5 pack for XP.

    • Re:Serious question. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Richard_at_work (517087) <richardprice.gmail@com> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @09:04AM (#15909887)
      Theres no Intel version of the Family Pack, the included DVD is not Universal. Thus it can be argued that the licenses included dont extend to the Intel version, since that isnt the product included.

      • Re:Serious question. (Score:4, Informative)

        by (startx) (37027) <slashdot@@@unspunproductions...com> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @09:39AM (#15910092) Homepage Journal
        Theres no Intel version of the Family Pack, the included DVD is not Universal.

        There's no Intel version of the single 10.4 box either. That's because every Intel Mac sold already comes with Tiger. Since the EULA says you can only run OS X on Apple branded hardware, they have no reason to sell x86 Tiger. All potential customers already have it.

        I'm sure the retail 10.5 boxes and family packs will include an x86 or universal version.

  • Who would want an early beta. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer (103300) * on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:15AM (#15909600)
    Other then developers who are going to use the brand new features and see if their code will break, who will need or even want an early beta. Having an early Beta of OS X is like having a Production version of Windows, and you know how buggy and anoying that is. Heck Steve Himself wouldn't demo many of the feature wich were labeled "Top Secret" which probably is a code word for too buggy for a SteveNote. As well OS X interface is relitivly small changes for the interface over time, it is not like Windows Beta users who use the Beta version so they can have say 7 years of XP Experience and probably next year say they have 2 years of Vista Experience, because every version moves everything around forcing you to relearn the OS again and again. While I am interested in Leopard when it is released but not now in early beta where is is just slightly less then a Year away from production. Companies don't like Beta Releases because non-Beta Wize users get a hold of it Judge the quality when it is Beta and talk down to it even when all the problems are fixed. It is like a person who used Linux last in 1994 and today are still saying I used Linux and its interface is horible, having to go to a config file to configure your windows manager is so out of date.

  • What garbage (Score:5, Insightful)

    by agent dero (680753) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:16AM (#15909610) Homepage
    This is absolutely garbage journalism, and there's a lot I take concern with, first off, with how they refer to BitTorrent like it's some sort of unified network. I'm sure I could have gotten Leopard off of Efnet at some point over the past two weeks, does that mean I got Leopard off of IRC? They're just feeding the fire as to why ISPs and *AA's take concern when it comes to BitTorrent the protocol.

    Secondly, after the Bono releases a record and it shows up on P2P, does that make it worthy of a new story? Look, people, file sharing is going to happen, as soon as something is digitally encoded, it's chances of being pirated approach 100%. Leopard finding it's way onto a BitTorrent tracker isn't news worthy, it's not even unexpected!

  • Clarification (nitpick)... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Cjays (866936) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:23AM (#15909647)
    Attendees at last week's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) received copies of the beta ware and had to sign legally binding agreements not to let Leopard stray onto file-sharing networks.
    They didn't have us sign anything. Obviously there was an already established legal agreement, but nothing was signed on the spot.

  • Thanks MacWorld! (Score:3, Funny)

    by iainl (136759) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:27AM (#15909668)
    It's really useful when a news source not only tells me that new pirate software exists, but how to tell the 'good' one from the fake.

  • Forward this story (Score:3, Interesting)

    by etresoft (698962) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:28AM (#15909673)
    to the developers at Adobe and the MAC BU at Microsoft. Maybe if they can get a beta version of Leopard soon enough they will be able to release compatible software less than a year after it gets released. This while Mac OS X on Intel seems to have really caught them by surprise.

  • "leaked" (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tomstdenis (446163) <{tomstdenis} {at} {gmail.com}> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @09:10AM (#15909927) Homepage
    Yeah I'm sure. It was "leaked." As in, Apple wants more press so they do what they do with every other release and accidentally get a beta out the door.

    Can we stop pretending to be gullible and just call it what it is?

    Tom

  • And now . . . (Score:5, Funny)

    by ElephanTS (624421) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @02:02PM (#15912183)
    [drum roll]

    There were rumours that Bit Torrent would be integrated into Leopard. In reality it looks like Leopard's been integrated into Bit Torrent.

    Thanks, I'll be here all week

    [bread roll]

    • Re:One thing... (Score:3, Informative)

      by autojive (560399)
      It's Universal Binary.

    • It's not going to be generic. (Score:5, Informative)

      by argent (18001) <peterNO@SPAMslashdot.2006.taronga.com> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:07AM (#15909559) Homepage Journal
      Apple wouldn't release a generic OS X even for developers-only.

      Apple has announced that Leopard will be Universal (PPC + Intel) but it'll still require an Intel Mac, it won't run on random Intel hardware.

        • Re:It's not going to be generic. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Loconut1389 (455297) * on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:43AM (#15909762)
          no- they definitely wouldn't.. the iPods are generating more revenue than their computers and many people would still buy mac hardware- especially since anything in it would be inherently supported.

          Their os userbase would expand greatly, their hardware userbase would probably stay very close in size, iPods would be unaffected or perhaps grow in sales...

          They don't want to deal with all of the calls coming in that joe schmoe cant get it to work on his cyrix cpu or schmo joe can't get his el-cheapo scsi controller working or his $2 video card. Apple wants to keep the perceived quality (and actual quality) of their products high- rather than having reports published about how incompatible it is with some guys random mobo configuration. People currently understand that the machines and OS only works with authorized apple hardware (and from partners), but as soon as you open the floodgates, joe schmoe idiot will go out and buy a copy thinking itll just work on the computer his son set up and it wont. Apple doesn't want to do it half assed.

          I honestly don't think it has anything to do with their market share.

          • Re:It's not going to be generic. (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Shaper_pmp (825142) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @10:17AM (#15910365)
            the iPods are generating more revenue than their computers


            Which tells you exactly what kind of market share their desktop machines have at the moment. Anything which reduces this further risks making their desktop market share so small it's effectively negligible.

            and many people would still buy mac hardware- especially since anything in it would be inherently supported.


            Nah, not for shit IMO. Aside from elitist Charles [penny-arcade.com] geeks people buy Macs now because of Mac OS/X's user interface and the fact that It Just Works. If Mac OS/X was available for commodity PC hardware nobody (again: normal people, not geeks) would spring the extra $$$ for Mac hardware too ("What's the point?", they'd chuckle - "I can be clever and safe a few hundred bucks!") and the Mac hardware platform would die (or at least, be taken very ill).

            Of course, penny-pinching consumers would also find that on third-party commodity hardware It Just doesn't Work as well, so Apple (through no direct fault of their own) would also find their IJW reputation going down the tubes.

            Their os userbase would expand greatly, their hardware userbase would probably stay very close in size, iPods would be unaffected or perhaps grow in sales...


            Their OSX userbase would expand moderately - it's incompatible with Windows, so it's not going to expand "greatly" at any time while 90%+ of all PCs are still Windows, regardless of how great it is.

            Their hardware userbase would shrink rapidly - normal users just won't pay over the odds for something they don't perceive as any better. We know OSX has been designed to run on the hardware and vice-versa. Your old maiden aunt buying her first Mac (assuming she isn't tempted away by de-facto standard Windows) will get a choice between OSX-and-Mac, or OSX-and-PC for a few hundred bucks less. In the absence of any real understood difference between them, and bearing in mind they both look and feel the same (OSX), which do you think she's going to choose?

            iPod userbase wouldn't change - it's already Mac and PC compatible, so if Apple stopped making Macs tomorrow the iPod sales would hardly change.

            They don't want to deal with all of the calls coming in that joe schmoe cant get it to work on his cyrix cpu or schmo joe can't get his el-cheapo scsi controller working or his $2 video card.


            That's one reason, yes. The other is that OSX not being Windows-compatible hurts Apple when it comes to attracting new consumers to it. Making the hardware and software one package at least forces users to view Macs as a seamlessly-working package, which they don't mind paying a little extra for. Breaking the package open stops any part of it being perceived as seamless, and virtually ensures penny-pinching consumers will just nickle-and-dime them to death.

            People currently understand that the machines and OS only works with authorized apple hardware (and from partners)


            No. "People" understand that you buy "a PC with Windows", or you buy "a Mac". Macs are a package, indivisible.

            "Most people" don't even understand there is a distinction between the hardware spec and the operating system. Hell, remember "most people" still can't program their video recorder clocks right.

            As such, as soon as they realise the package is customisable and there's a choice, they'll plump for the cheapest option every time, and Apple much-vaunted reputation for solid engineering (apart from style, their only advantage over MS) flies right out of the window. And once people are used to OSX running on beige boxes and crashing because of dodgy third-party drivers, watch how long their reputation for coolness lasts, too.

            You're half right in what you say - the third-party driver issue is a big reason to keep OSX Mac-only. However, there are several other just-as-good reasons as well, like preserving what little share of the desktop hardware market they currently have.

            • Re:It's not going to be generic. (Score:4, Informative)

              by CatOne (655161) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @11:03AM (#15910700)
              You should check your facts, though -- iPods + iTMS are still not the majority of Apple's business -- the Mac business still the larger portion. It's like $6B for iPods, and $8B for Macs, software, etc.

              So over the past 4 years iPods have gone from $0 to $6B and Macs have gone from $5.7B to $8B. Whether these lines will cross in the future I don't know... we'll see. But today, iPods are *not* the majority of Apple's business. And Apple has seen real market share gains (from 2% to 4%) in the last 24 months.

            • Re:it could be though (Score:4, Interesting)

              by misleb (129952) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @04:26PM (#15914053)
              That's easy enough for them to address-no support on anything but mac hardware.


              People will expect support if there is any hint from Apple that OS X will work on a beige box PC. Doesn't matter if there is some fine print somehere that says "only supported on offical Mac hardware."

              ut I also doubt they will do it at this time, but eventually they will, as open source keeps chipping away at all aspects of the computer environment. Might be some many years down the road but eventually they'll do it. They've shown that they will make hard decisions, with good, bad or "meh' as the outcome, but they have proven they can alter their business direction. Most likely it will occur once their OS will boot due to third party enthusiast's work on random x86 hardware, which it eventually will do in a non painful manner. I don't think they'll be able to prevent that, so their hand will be forced.


              As long as Apple maintains the offical line that OS X doesn't run on non-Apple hardware, they will not be forced to do anything. Let the hackers and enthusiast's run OS X on beige boxes if they want. They are not the kind of people to expect support when none is offered and they are unlikely to generate bad press complaining about broken divers or whatever.

              It might be nice, however, if Apple allowed OS X to run in VMware so that people could get a "taste" of OS X before switching. A cheap, downloadable VMware Player image would be interesting. I know lots of people who would give that a try.... Linux AND Windows users. The nice thing about that idea is that it is practically guaranteed to "Just Work" like OS X is supposed to. No problems with drivers and whatnot. VMWare would benefit as well.

              -matthew

          • Re:Do they still have that upgrade program? (Score:4, Informative)

            by Teilo (91279) on Tuesday August 15 2006, @09:57AM (#15910219) Homepage
            Um, wrong.

            I got an upgrade discount from Panther to Tiger. They were available when you purchased the upgrade online, simply by entering your registration info and your hardware's S/N.

            In fact, I even missed the purchase cut-off date by about 15 days. I still got the discount.
    • Seriously, though. $150 a year for your OS. It seems a bit shady to me. Do you apple fans have plans to skip eve/odd releases or something?

      It's more every 18-months than every year, and the education price gives a steep discount. Unlike MS educational discounts, you get a full version for the educational price (not a license that expires when you leave academia). This means you can resell it, so if you know someone in full-time education then they can get the student price for you. The lifespan of a

    • I'm still running Windows 2000 and have no plans to downgrade* to XP, let alone Vista, until I absolutely have to. As the neighborhood "nice guy who knows about computers" I've found people running Windows 98 and Me. Why on earth do you think typical Apple users are any different than typical Windows users?

      Sure, the obsessives and the hardcore gamers (but I repeat myself) track the latest version of the OS, but most people won't even understand your question.

      (* Windows XP - Windows 2000 with a few more driv

    • Re:Oh snap. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatman@NospaM.gmail.com> on Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:48AM (#15909779) Homepage Journal
      Stevie J. will be unpleased with this development.

      What are you talking about? Jobs probably leaked it himself. Not only does it generate free press for Apple, but it would help ramp up the buzz machine. Jobs can then take that general feedback ("oh, this feature sucks" or "that feature is wonderful!") and redirect it back into the product without having to provide tech support for a beta product!

      Just about the right time for it, too. Apple has already revealed the features in this copy, and is obviously at the later stages of development. Which means that they are ready to start polishing, but still have time to yank and replace components if necessary.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.