Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Technology (Apple) Businesses OS X Operating Systems Apple Technology

Jobs Previews Displays, Tiger at WWDC 832

Posted by pudge
from the 77-percent-larger dept.
DonaldGelman writes "Apple has just announced a 30-inch Studio Display capable of displaying a resolution of 2560x1600. The display requires a new Nvidia card with 2 parallel DVI connections. The display is going to retail for $3299 in August, and the Nvidia card for around $599." Jobs also announced new 20- and 23-inch displays, for $1299 and $1999 in July. All three feature a new aluminum enclosure, and DVI. Also from WWDC...
Jobs also previewed Tiger, with Spotlight (fast iTunes-like searching in all apps, and systemwide), Dashboard (Konfabulator-like widgets combined with Exposé for fast showing/hiding), Automator (visual AppleScript, combining prewritten actions into scripts), H.264 code for QuickTime (high definition scalable video from MPEG), iChat AV conferencing (up to 10 for audio, four for video), RSS reading in Safari, Core Image and Core Video (realtime filters at the core OS level), and system-wide Sync Services. All of this is extensible (except for iChat conferencing), with SDKs available for developers. There's a lot here, and a more detailed description is forthcoming. Tiger will be available in the first half of 2005.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jobs Previews Displays, Tiger at WWDC

Comments Filter:
  • iPod SDK! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by American AC in Paris (230456) * on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:12PM (#9553365) Homepage
    Dear Steve,

    Could you give us an SDK for the iPod? We've been very good boys and girls this year, and we promise to be nice with it.

    Thank you,
    AAiP

    P.S.: It'd be really cool if you could make it your "Oh, and one more thing..." We love it when you do that.

    • Re:iPod SDK! (Score:4, Informative)

      by iJed (594606) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:19PM (#9553462) Homepage
      Hey we've being given an iSync SDK this year. You can't have everything! ;-)
    • Re:iPod SDK! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by code shady (637051) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:23PM (#9553505) Homepage
      Forget the iPod SDK, i want the iSync SDK.
      I think it would be much much cooler to be able to write my own conduits to keep the information on my palm in sync with all the apple applications (iCal, Address Book, Mail, a bunch of others)

      please, please, pleasepleaseplease! open up the iSync SDK!!!!
    • Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Otto (17870) on Monday June 28, 2004 @05:00PM (#9554563) Homepage Journal
      Most of the iPod's data files have already been worked out to a great degree. Not everything, mind you, but most of it. All the important bits, anyway. It just takes a bit of searching around.

      I wrote a set of C++ classes for dealing with the iPod's data files, and with the help of Aero, we've refined it to cover just about everything in a plug-in for foobar 2000 called foo_pod [hydrogenaudio.org].

      We're almost there with real, live updating, smart playlist support now (which no other third party iPod-capable app has yet, that I know of). Just a few minor things left to be done on the back end, and the interface sounds like it is coming along nicely. :)

      There's very little an actual SDK could add at this point. When the iPod is connected to the computer, it just appears to be a hard drive to the computer. No special communication channels we can find at all.
  • by smaug195 (535681) * on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:12PM (#9553368)
    Let the copying of Tiger features into Longhorn... begin!
    • Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Informative)

      by sam_doshi (132520) * on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:16PM (#9553421)
      Actually I think Apple are already on to this: See here [gizmodo.com]
    • by eyeball (17206) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:17PM (#9553428) Journal
      Apple thought of this already. One of the banners at WWDC said "Introducing Longhorn" as well as a few other jabs at MS.

    • by gl4ss (559668) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:17PM (#9553433) Homepage Journal
      you got it wrong, the longhorn dev cycle is nearing the point at which they will silently start dropping years ago announced features.

      yes I'm trying to be funny/sarcastic().
    • Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by dasmegabyte (267018) <das@OHNOWHATSTHISdasmegabyte.org> on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:20PM (#9553477) Homepage Journal
      What, you mean like the indexing of all content based on meta data?

      Of course, Longhorn's implementation of this by filesystem is completely different from Apple's implementation of it (creation of XML files which are then compiled into a fast, easy to read database)...but the end result will be transparent to the user. It's a chicken-and-egg thing. Apple started indexing content by metadata in Sherlock and the iLife apps. Microsoft says, "yeah, well we're gonna build it into our OS!" So Apple breaks out the Sherlock system and integrates it into the GUI...thus making it LOOK like an OS.

      Off topic, check out which site they chose for the screenshot of RSS in Safari [apple.com]. Cowboy Neal is famous once again!
    • You may joke... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by lxt (724570) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:20PM (#9553478) Journal
      ...but the actual promotional banners Apple are using at WWDC for Tiger have the strapline "Redmond, start your photocopiers".

      Although ironically, Steve Jobs noted in the keynote speech that he "ran into Bill Gates a few weeks ago and his company
      feels that their relationship with Apple is better than ever."

      I think there's some pics of the banners at macrumors.com...
    • Re:Microsoft... (Score:4, Informative)

      by tritone (189506) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:21PM (#9553494) Homepage
      Apple certainly doesn't seem cowed by Microsoft. There were three big banners at the WWDC dissing MS. One said "Redmond, start your photocopiers," One said "Introducing Longhorn" (above an image of a Tiger CD), and one "Redmond, we have a problem. Curiously, pictures are onPaul Thurrott's decidedly anti-Apple blog. [internet-nexus.com]
    • Re:Microsoft... (Score:4, Informative)

      by jford235 (677581) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:24PM (#9553517)
      banner pictures [gizmodo.com]
    • by llamafirst (666868) * on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:49PM (#9553798)
      So, how did CowboyNeal and Slashdot.org get into the image at the top of this page on the Apple site? Sucking up to Slashdot, perhaps? :-)

      http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/safari.html [apple.com]

      Also, those who are FIREFLY fans will note the movie is mentioned in the post...

  • SHHHH.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Frac (27516) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:13PM (#9553378)
    If it's quiet around you, you can probably hear the collective screaming of the Longhorn team from Redmond WA that sounds like "AGHGHGHGHHGHHHHHH!!!!"

    "Peter, did you copy all that down?"
    "I got only the first half before I fainted. You?"
    "I got most of it. Ok, the Longhorn features spec meeting is Wednesday morning, we have two days to put all that new Tiger stuff in!"
    • by eyeball (17206) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:19PM (#9553469) Journal
      If it's quiet around you, you can probably hear the collective screaming of the Longhorn team from Redmond WA that sounds like "AGHGHGHGHHGHHHHHH!!!!"

      "Peter, did you copy all that down?"
      "I got only the first half before I fainted. You?"
      "I got most of it. Ok, the Longhorn features spec meeting is Wednesday morning, we have two days to put all that new Tiger stuff in!"


      Wow, it's going to be such a long time before Microsoft copies OSX Tiger, and Linux gets around to copying Microsoft Longhorn. Attention Linux developers: cut out the middle-man and start copying Tiger directly.

    • Re:SHHHH.... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by sammy baby (14909) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:26PM (#9553555) Journal
      Believe me, Apple is running that joke into the ground [gizmodo.com] (note the picture).
  • by umrgregg (192838) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:14PM (#9553385) Homepage
    For those of you wondering where the pictures on the cinema displays came from it's the Jungfrau Region of Switerland. The valley is the Lauterbrunnen Valley. Now if I could only get the display to go with the picture...
  • by Apollo (15220) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:14PM (#9553396) Journal
    A nice Safari RSS screenshot [apple.com], starring our favorite site.
  • Yum (Score:5, Funny)

    by transient (232842) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:15PM (#9553401)
    Apple has just announced a 30-inch Studio Display

    Can you say "purchase order?" I'll take five.

  • Good move to DVI (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dark Paladin (116525) * <[jhummel] [at] [johnhummel.net]> on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:15PM (#9553402) Homepage
    Apple tends to succeed better when they adopt the standards (USB, Firewire, etc) rather than go it their own (ADC over DVI, for example).

    I've been contemplating one of these screens, but never wanted to commit because I couldn't just slap in a KVM for my other machines (mainly the Windows 98 Box fo' Games and my wife's Windows 98 Box fo' Work Crap). Now, I don't have any excuse!

    (Looks at price tag.)

    Well, I guess I still have one....
    • Re:Good move to DVI (Score:4, Informative)

      by technothrasher (689062) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:33PM (#9553643)
      Apple tends to succeed better when they adopt the standards (USB, Firewire, etc) rather than go it their own


      Not to be nit-picky, but Firewire doesn't really illustrate your point. Apple didn't adopt Firewire. Apple invented Firewire instead of using the standard (USB).

      • Re:Good move to DVI (Score:4, Informative)

        by smileyy (11535) <smileyy@gmail.com> on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:42PM (#9553733)
        Different technologies. Apple needed to be able to do high-speed isochronous data transfer. Try taking input from a video camera over USB (especially USB 1.0, which was all there was when FireWire came out).
        • by solios (53048) on Monday June 28, 2004 @04:27PM (#9554200) Homepage
          True, but USB still sucks for video. Namely, USB bandwidth (including usb2) is BURST. Meaning that's the most you CAN get out of it, if you're lucky, and not for long. Firewire bandwidth is SUSTAINED- meaning it's There. All the time.

          You can chain four ATA-100 drives in firewire enclosures into one daisy-chain running into a single firewire jack and you'll barely saturate the bus. Compare to USB, which can't be chained. :-|
    • Re:Good move to DVI (Score:4, Informative)

      by John Newman (444192) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:47PM (#9553773)
      The real reason they dropped ADC was that they realized there was a limit to how much power you could push through the video card, and the 23" display was right about at that limit. If you check Apple's tech specs, you'll see that the 30" display has a 150W power supply - it simply needs a separate cord and brick. And once you're resigned to having two cables, it makes little sense to nitpick about having three. I like how they've at least bundled them at the monitor end, though.

      right-on rumor [thinksecret.com]
  • by iJed (594606) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:16PM (#9553422) Homepage
    The new advanced video technologies (core image) seem to have longhorn like requirements:

    ATI Radeon 9800 XT

    ATI Radeon 9800 Pro

    ATI Radeon 9700 Pro

    ATI Radeon 9600 XT

    ATI Radeon 9600 Pro

    ATI Mobility Radeon 9700

    ATI Mobility Radeon 9600

    NVIDIA GeForceFX Go 5200

    NVIDIA GeForceFX 5200 Ultra

    Seems some current Mac models will not support this! You can bet there will now be users who think that 10.4 will not run on their machine just because core image/video does not. They just won't get the advanced new graphics.
    • by Libertius (83369) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:20PM (#9553480)
      "The performance gains and features supported by Core Image ultimately depend on the graphics card. Graphics cards capable of pixel-level programming deliver the best performance. But Core Image automatically scales as appropriate for systems with older graphics cards, for compatibility with any Tiger-compatible Mac."
  • Speed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by scrotch (605605) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:17PM (#9553426)
    I'm hoping that the increases in speed seen in the last upgrades continue for "older" machines. I'm assuming so based on what Apple has posted on their website, but a lot of that is G5 performance info.

    I'm hoping that the "instant search of everything" feature, which I'll almost never use if my current searching is any indication, won't bog down the system while indexing everything.

    All in all, not too revolutionary. Which is just fine with me. I think Panther is damn nice and would rather they spent time cleaning up and helping developers make their apps more reliable than anything else.
  • 10.4 Server (Score:5, Informative)

    by Johnny Mnemonic (176043) <[mdinsmore] [at] [gmail.com]> on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:17PM (#9553429) Homepage Journal

    Not announced on stage, but previewed off, is 10.4 Server [apple.com]: includes 100% 64bit libs, ACLs, iChat server, SUS. Also includes NT migration tool, improved email, and a one-click SOHO setup. Nice bump.
  • by Libertius (83369) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:17PM (#9553434)
    "You can now host your own iChat server. Instant Messaging serves as a vital means of communication for organizations of all sizes, so it's useful to deploy and run your own private and secure IM server. Based on the open source Jabber project, the new iChat server in Tiger Server lets your company protect its internal communications by defining its own namespace, using SSL/TLS encryption to ensure privacy, and Kerboros for authorization. The iChat server works with both the iChat client in Mac OS X Tiger and popular open source clients available for Windows, Linux and even PDAs."

    http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/tiger/
  • by RAMMS+EIN (578166) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:17PM (#9553435) Homepage Journal
    So, they did it again. They released the new version of their software, and it has real new features that really enhance the experience and could really compel me to buy it. Hopefully they have also fixed some of the issues I had with especially Safari (unusable while loading slow page) and iChat (goes bad after receiving voice chat invite behind firewall).
  • Uh-Oh - Konfabulator (Score:4, Informative)

    by Dark Paladin (116525) * <[jhummel] [at] [johnhummel.net]> on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:19PM (#9553461) Homepage
    Remember Watson? Remember how Sherlock 3 basically became Watson?

    Remember Konfabulator [konfabulator.com] with all of its widgets? Well, now Tiger's going to have Dashboard [apple.com]. I wonder if it will accept Konfabulator widgets (which I've been using) or if there will be an "import" program? And Konfabulator 1.7 just added Expose-like features (press F8 to get your Widgets in front - useful).

    Granted, Apple had something like this back in the older Mac days (or so I've read here and there), so it's kind of like they're "bringing back" something old into the new - but if you're an Apple developer, it seems as though there's always the fear that your favorite app will get assimilated into the next version of OS X.

    Granted, I like OS X (my work is buying me a new Powerbook in about a week - yay me), but it does kind of make you go "Hm".
  • by homb (82455) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:19PM (#9553466)
    Well finally OS X will have 64-bit pointers and long longs.
    I've been waiting for that feature for a while now and to me that's the most valuable thing, along with Xcode being updated to take advantage of the LP64 model.

    Up until now, the 64-bit G5 processor was rather wasted.
  • by This is outrageous! (745631) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:20PM (#9553473)
    Three bits I found interesting here [apple.com]: in Tiger,
    • UNIX utilities such as cp, tar and nsync can properly handle HFS+ resource forks
    • command-line access to Spotlight
    • new Open Source libraries for XML transformations (libxslt [xmlsoft.org]) and data persistence (SQLite [sqlite.org])
  • by Prince Vegeta SSJ4 (718736) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:20PM (#9553481)

    Apple has just announced a 30-inch Studio Display capable of displaying a resolution of 2560x1600

    Jobs also previewed Tiger

    There Grrrrrrreaat!

  • nVidia SLI (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mhesseltine (541806) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:21PM (#9553488) Homepage Journal

    Aha! So this is why nVidia has been working on the 2 card video load balancing system.

  • by stienman (51024) <{moc.scisabu} {ta} {sivada}> on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:25PM (#9553536) Homepage Journal
    Fortunately they also announced these products to the development teams today.

    In other news, starbucks stores around the Apple campus are open 24 hours a day over this summer...

    -Adam
  • by Random BedHead Ed (602081) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:31PM (#9553622) Homepage Journal

    Hey, check out the Dashboard page here:

    On the simulated Dashboard you can have all sorts of nifty mini-programs called Widgets. One of Apple's sample programs is a stock price table, and they're up 7.36 percent. Microsoft is the only stock on the fictional list that's down. Direct link to the image here [apple.com].

    Nice to see Apple's sense of humor. And in fact this sort of functionality is a real smack in the face to Redmond, who have updated little on their desktop (XP) in three years, while Apple has had three release cycles that have been better each time.

  • Metadata (Score:4, Informative)

    by RAMMS+EIN (578166) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:32PM (#9553634) Homepage Journal
    I have been asking myself how long till Apple would put metadata to good use, and if it would be before WinFS and Reiser4. Well, it looks like the answer is here [apple.com].
  • by Colonel Panic (15235) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:40PM (#9553714)
    No mention of virtual desktops in Tiger, so for now we have to assume it isn't going to get them.

    Seems like a no-brainer to at least include an option for virtual desktops if you would like to use them.

    Oh well, at least there's Desktop manager [sourceforge.net]. Still it would be great if this were built-in.

  • by metalligoth (672285) <metalligoth.gmail@com> on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:49PM (#9553800)

    If you look at the calculator in the Dashboard demo [apple.com], you'll notice it says 1.337!

    I love a company with a sexy UNIX based OS and a sense of humor.

  • by Ancil (622971) on Monday June 28, 2004 @03:59PM (#9553905)

    Hell, if you want to spend some real money, buy one of these babies [viewsonic.com].

    3840 x 2400. 9,216,000 pixels for about $6,300. Per pixel, that's cheaper than buying two 30" Cinema displays.

    • by John Whitley (6067) on Monday June 28, 2004 @05:31PM (#9554852) Homepage
      I've seen this display (actually, IBM's Roentgen display, the immediate predecessor of the Viewsonic model). It is utterly fantastic, with some caveats.

      It was originally designed to have the resolution and quality needed for certain xray diagnostics and other image-sensitive telemedicine applications as a primary market (thus the Roentgen name -- the discoverer of X-Rays). One of the demos I saw used a modified version of (IIRC) Framemaker to display a document with footnotes with a 4pt physical size. The serifs on the font were clearly visible, with no eyestrain (due to the monitor, anyways ;-) or blockyness. The detail on high-res museum art scans was astonishing.

      HOWEVER, this is roughly a 200dpi display -- current operating systems simply aren't designed for screens with pixel density this high. GUI widgets and text are often ridiculously small.

      That, plus the original display required a four-head graphics card (or cards w/ four total outputs) to drive it. Looks like the newer Viewsonic uses four separate DVI-D connections.
  • by tyrione (134248) on Monday June 28, 2004 @06:44PM (#9555603) Homepage

    Most people up on stocks knows that Merrill Lynch was predicting new iMac announcements at WWDC.

    They don't announce them and like pouting children Wall Street responds by punishing the stock down nearly $1.25.

    I personally think Steve loves to poke at them once in a while.

    I expect the iMac to be announced closer to August in time to hit a big splash with the Education sector once again.

  • Am I the only one... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AusG4 (651867) on Monday June 28, 2004 @07:02PM (#9555754) Homepage Journal
    Am I the only one who is could care less about Tiger and more about XCode 2? I hope not. I'm not that much of a loser, am I? :)

    Two words, one hyphenated:

    auto-vectorizing compiler.

    For those wondering what this is ... what really sets the G4 and the G5 apart from the P4 and Opteron is the presence of the VMX/Altivec/Velocity Engine unit (to use AIM/Motorola/Apple nomenclature). This unit allows you to process up to 4 32-bit values (128-bits) at the same time with one instruction (Single Instruction, Multiple Data).

    Intel CPU's do have this technology as well, although it's half the width (64-bits at a time, rather than 128-bit).

    When Apple posts benchmarks showing their machines to be faster than x86 machines, the benchmarks almost always make heavy use of these SIMD instructions... and rightly so. A vectorized application can be enormously fast compared to it's analog floating point/integer application.

    The problem is that the SIMD instructions are relatively tough to use... you have to be very careful when taking advantage of them, otherwise your applications could actually run -slower-.

    With the auto-vectorizing version of GCC included with XCode 2, we could start to see see some very respectable performance coming out of Macintosh applications in the future. Obviously you probably won't be able to simply recompile your application, but surely taking advantage of the auto-vectorization will be far easier than writing to the standard vec_x functions.
    • by WasterDave (20047) <davep&zedkep,com> on Monday June 28, 2004 @09:58PM (#9556888)
      I wouldn't hold your breath. I've used intel's "auto vectorizing" compiler, and truth be told it doesn't auto vectorise shit. You need to write your loops in such a way that there's no way it can bail before the end of the loop, and ... I can't remember ... other stuff. Point is that I found it both easier and faster to use the built in MMX primitives (it was integer math) and go back to using gcc.

      Altivec has another problem. The data structures *have* to be aligned on a 16 byte boundary. Note that this is not a "runs really slowly if it's misaligned" thing, this is a "comes to a complete screeching halt" thing. Moving between Altivec and scalar registers is also incredibly slow - it's necessary to write the data to memory then read it back in, meaning you need to move at least one cacheline in the process.

      On the plus side, when you do get it right, Altivec f'kin screams along. You can do almost anything with it and be bandwidth limited on a G4. Dunno about a G5 - there are some _more_ limitations to using altivec on a G5 too.

      Look into the gcc primitives, it's surprisingly easy.

      Dave
    • by barawn (25691) on Tuesday June 29, 2004 @12:49AM (#9557652) Homepage
      Intel CPU's do have this technology as well, although it's half the width (64-bits at a time, rather than 128-bit).

      The MMX registers are 64 bit, although they're not the main limitation of the MMX implementation. For some inane reason, Intel decided to use the floating point registers for integer data (namely, MMX registers) and so MMX doesn't require additional registers to be added. However, since you're absconding with the floating-point hardware, you can't do floating point math at the same time, and you have to save the state of the floating point hardware before you switch to MMX. In other words, MMX was... "interesting", but in the end, not that useful. After all, for one thing, it eliminated your floating point capability unless you wanted to context-switch out. (AMD's 'improvement' to that was 3DNow! which was basically "MMX that you can use for floating point as well!" - okay, better, but ... it still kinda sucked).

      AltiVec didn't have those limitations - it was very, very improved over MMX.

      SSE, however, *did* add 8 new registers, and 128-bit wide objects, for floating point. So an x86 processor with SSE extensions does have 128-bit vector abilities, albeit in floating point. Vectorized integer math is a little rare (hence why MMX isn't that useful anyway) so AltiVec and SSE are actually pretty comparable. AltiVec does have 32 registers (which makes sense, of course, given PPC's 32 register scheme), whereas SSE only has 8 registers. I'm sure some comp. eng. person can come along and tell me why it's efficient to have vector hardware that's the same depth as your register hardware (as x86 has 8 registers and 8 SSE registers, and x86-64 has 16 SSE registers, and 16 normal registers)

      (SSE2 basically said "OK, MMX really blew - now you can just use the SSE registers for integer as well.")

      When Apple posts benchmarks showing their machines to be faster than x86 machines, the benchmarks almost always make heavy use of these SIMD instructions... and rightly so.

      When Apple used to post benchmarks. A modern G5 can keep pace with top end Athlons and P4s anyday, without any specialized benchmarks. Be nice to Apple - the days of the "G3 is 50% faster than a Pentium II using Photoshop's 'G3K1ckZA$$' filter on a mostly-red image of a cow... on Tuesdays!" are over, thank God. And if you had vectorized code on the x86 (using SSE), the comparison wouldn't be that unequal, unless it was heavily biased towards the PPC's obvious strengths (high register count). Then again, it's not like the x86 has any real strengths anyway...

      But anyway, my point was that the SIMD implementation on x86 isn't really very different than on the PPC, once you count SSE. SSE is register-starved compared to PPC, sure, but so is x86 in general. x86-64 removes that last limitation (mostly, 16 registers is still starved compared to 32, I guess) but I doubt there would be a big performance jump going from 16 128-bit registers to 32 128-bit registers. There's not a ton of code that could efficiently utilize that. There is *some*, sure, but not a lot.

IF I HAD A MINE SHAFT, I don't think I would just abandon it. There's got to be a better way. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.

Working...