Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
OS X Operating Systems

Mac OS X "Tiger" Enters Final Candidate Stage 583

Orangez writes " reports that 'Tiger' reaches the final candidate stage. 'With massive software projects such as Tiger, Apple will sometimes seed several final candidate builds before one is declared gold master...'" The final release has widely been speculated to be in the next month or two.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mac OS X "Tiger" Enters Final Candidate Stage

Comments Filter:
  • by thesixthreplicant ( 866292 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:38AM (#12087792)
    But, but, but who would be stupid enough to pay 129 bucks for a POINT release...for the love of god!

    thankyou you've beening such a wonderful audience


    • by FidelCatsro ( 861135 ) <> on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:42AM (#12087820) Journal
      Its far more than a point release . The fact it adds many new features to the OS it is far more of an upgrade than most.
      The new search tech is fully integrated .
      The new G5 optimised code in the kernel is implemented iirc
      The Dashboard looks very cool ;)
      A reworking of many of the key areas of the functionality of the OS
      Read the article and read any review of the tiger betas out there to find out for yourself why this is more than a mere update.
      • Its far more than a point release

        I read in a local PC centric computer mag, that the new sync function requires a .Mac account. This seems absurd to me, especially considering that I and I'd imagine many others, would just want this functionality to sync my data between my Mac's and not a .Mac account. I don't have a .Mac account and I don't want one.

        Can someone put my mind to rest on this? This is the biggest feature I am eagerly waiting for. I was going to just use rsync and some scripting, but if Appl
        • I don't know anything about whether iSync will require .mac in 10.4, sorry. But I did want to bring a piece of sync software to your attention: Unison. []

          It works wonderfully well. It's a little cleverer than rsync in that it will do bi-directional updates (ie syncing) and also merges conflicts if it is able.

          I work on two macs and with unison I am pretty much able to work on either one without having to worry about which one is up to date.

          I have .mac too and

        • For syncing to multiple computers, or having an iDisk, you need to subscribe to the .Mac service. I'm sure someone out there has a hack for it, but out of the box, the file sync relies on Apple's Servers. It's just WebDAV though, so a hack isn't that hard. Anyway, to sync your Address Book to you phone or Palm, you just need the right connection (Bluetooth or USB.) Blu
        • by rohanl ( 152781 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @11:08AM (#12088480)

          I don't know about 10.4 (and if I did know I wouldn't be allowed to say) but I'm guessing that it's not that much different to the way iSync works now in 10.3.

          You can sync between one Mac, your phones, iPods, Palms, etc. without requiring a .Mac subscription. However for Mac to Mac syncing you do need .Mac

          However, if you have access to your own server somewhere, it is possible to fake it to look like .Mac Here are some instructions [] on how to do that.

          Note: I haven't actually tried it myself (yet)

    • by varmittang ( 849469 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:43AM (#12087831)
      For the love of God!!! Its not a point release. Man, just because Linux goes by that way of point releases doesn't mean OS X does. 10.x is not points but a full independent version, 10.x.y is a point release.
      • by KiloByte ( 825081 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:58AM (#12087931)
        Well, the difference between Linux 2.4 and Linux 2.6 is huge. It's the same as in your example: x is the MAJOR version, y is the point release.

        On the other tentacle, this is a case of comparing apples (uh oh) to oranges: OS X is a whole OS, Linux is just the kernel. We should be rather comparing Tiger to, let's say, Debian Woody or Debian Sarge.
    • by cowscows ( 103644 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:47AM (#12087859) Journal
      The fact that it's a a point release is basically just semantics. Apple sort of painted themselves into a corner with the name OSX. It's sort of the 10th version of the Mac OS, but the X was to make it sound cooler and sort of clever, but what comes after? OS XI? That looks weird. And a little too close to XP. So they've gone with 10.whatever, and used 10.x.x for what'd normally be considered a point release. 10.4 has been a long time coming, and it's got plenty of big changes over 10.3, such that a bigger name change wouldn't be that surprising, if apple could come up with a better name for it. That's probably why they've been making the big cat code names more official. Jaguar, Panther, Tiger...

      If you want, you can complain that Apple's devaluing the normal versioning numbering system, but I don't think they'll care much if you do.
    • by TylerL82 ( 617087 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:47AM (#12087864) Homepage
      Lots of people did it for Windows XP (WinNT 5.1).
      • Furthermore, when you pay Apple that $130, you're getting a full install disk set, not just an upgrade. And when you consider that a full OS install disk of Windows NT 5.1 Pro costs $300, Apple's "tax" suddenly seems a lot cheaper.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:53AM (#12087901)
      But, but, but who would be stupid enough to pay 129 bucks for a POINT release...for the love of god!

      You're clearly being facetious, but not everyone will pick up on that. Thus, a point of explanation:

      It's a mere point release, but that's an artifact of marketing. The number and magnitude of changes under the hood is incredible, with huge advances in developer productivity through tools like CoreData, CoreImage, and CoreVideo. The rendering subsystem has been worked over to the point where some operations are hundreds or thousands of times faster than they used to be, and the system takes advantage of modern GPUs to offload even more processing (formerly it was just compositing, not it's a whole lot more). Add to that new versions of Safari, Quicktime that's build on CoreAudio, and a ton of other neat stuff (Automator). You get a lot for your $140.

      And remember, the 2.6 kernel was just a point release!

      • Wow.

        Sorry, but for most people CoreImage and CoreVideo is going to be utterly useless. Apple still ships shit, shit, shit video processors on the iBook, Mac Mini and only the latest generation Powerbooks, PMs and iMac have the much-needed Pixel Shader on their GPUs. I'd guess probably 10-20% of the Mac userbase uses a Powerbook latest revision, PM G5, or iMac G5. The iBook was Apple's best selling Mac a few months back and I'm sure that the Mac Mini will replace it.

        So are you honestly going to tell me dev
        • by Have Blue ( 616 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @11:23AM (#12088654) Homepage
          • It's sad that this has to be said in every single Tiger thread, but Core Image/Video will not refuse to work on older Macs. It has an AltiVec fallback path that is slower than the GPU path but produces the same results.
          • The real importance of CI/V is not how cool it looks applying Photoshop filters to movie trailers; it's having an advanced image and video transformation infrastructure built into the OS and available to all developers. Apple is clearly planning for the future here, and the real benefits of CI/V will not be felt until months after Tiger ships and apps start appearing that were designed taking blur/distortion/etc for granted. That 10-20% is only going to grow in the future.
          "If I don't want it, it's utterly worthless" is one of the most persistent and insidious memes on Slashdot. Please don't succumb to it.
        • Wow, an Anit-Apple troll by any other name...

          Sorry, but for most people CoreImage and CoreVideo is going to be utterly useless. Apple still ships shit, shit, shit video processors on the iBook, Mac Mini and only the latest generation Powerbooks, PMs and iMac have the much-needed Pixel Shader on their GPUs.

          CoreImage and CoreVideo are going to make these effects go as fast as they can on your hardware. It puts the power to do what the Quartz EX people have been doing into the hands of developers. Of cou

    • yup, and I'm waiting for linux 3.0.0 before I upgrade my kernel again :)
    • Isn't every modern Solaris actually 2.x or something?
    • I agree $129 is a bit much. I just bought a Mac Mini a few months ago, the upgrade should be free. You can pre-order Tiger now at Amazon for $94.99 after a $35 rebate [].
  • FP? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:39AM (#12087797)
    I woulda got first post but Bittorrent is using all my bandwidth downloading OS X Tiger Final Canidate.
  • Grrrrrr (Score:3, Funny)

    by jimijon ( 608416 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:39AM (#12087804) Homepage
    It's Great!
  • Paying again... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by xtracto ( 837672 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:40AM (#12087813) Journal
    I'd like to see them ship this sooner rather than later. People are excited about this release and we'd like to get our hands on it to become familiar with it.

    I hope this release sticks around for a few years and Apple chooses to update it rather than come up with some new cat name and ask people to pay for it. I doubt that, however, since OS updates seems to be a major cash cow for Apple.

    They are inadvertently (or purposefully) creating a situation where people are running 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and now 10.4...makes it very tough for developers. We can't assume that everyone has the money to upgrade their OS all the time (and yes, I know they should).
    • Re:Paying again... (Score:5, Informative)

      by elbobo ( 28495 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:52AM (#12087896)
      You know, you don't have to pay for each new OS each year. You can skip one, or hell, two if you like.

      The incredibly amount of work that goes into each new major OS X version easily justifies putting a price tag on them. These aren't Windows 98 to Windows Me steps, these are considerable feature and functionality upgrades.

      As to writing software for them, my understanding is that they haven't often broken backwards compatibility, and thus haven't broken forwards compatibility. If you want your app to work for multiple versions, then only use the feature set exposed by the lowest version you want your app to be capable of running on. I don't think that's creating an unfair situation for developers at all.
      • Re:Paying again... (Score:5, Informative)

        by TomorrowPlusX ( 571956 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @10:11AM (#12088020)
        In fact, Apple provides build configurations such that you can specificallly target, say 10.2 or 10.1 from 10.3, and be confident that you'll have the correct API & ABI versioning.

        That said, with each version of OS X, shareware developers salivate to use the new features, since they often make the dirty work easier, or negligible ( for exampe, Cocoa Bindings for 10.3 ).

        Obviously, the big development houses, Adobe, Quark, etc will not generally use these new features.
    • I really hope that they don't release Tiger early since an unstable, unfinished product isn't good in any one's book. Apple have a history of updating their operating systems every other month with a point release for stability, small new features and such and it would be nice to actually have a finished operating system from day one for once.

      I LOVE Panther and I am in no need for upgrading, so my message to Apple is: DON*T RUSH IT! There's really no need. Wait a month or two and get it right!

      I would hate
    • Re:Paying again... (Score:3, Informative)

      by mbbac ( 568880 )
      If you haven't noticed already, their OS X release schedule is slowing. The first major revision was free and a few months after 10.0. 10.2 and 10.3 were close to a year apart. 10.4 looks like it will be released about 18 months after 10.3.
      • Re:Paying again... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by rjung2k ( 576317 )
        Anyone actually believe Apple's engineers and coders like putting together a major OS release every year?

        While the initial blitz of MacOS X updates was necessary to get it established, slowing down to 18-24 months between releases is better for Apple and customers in the long term.
    • Re:Paying again... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MrLint ( 519792 )
      Id rather have it out later and have it be finished.

      If you think there is no value in the systems updates then dont buy one. Perhaps youd like win98 second edition that add neat to nothing and isnt an upgrade for the thing that do need fixing?
  • by Mean_Nishka ( 543399 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:42AM (#12087821) Homepage Journal
    Does anyone know what Apple typically does for new systems? I bought my G4 Powerbook about a month ago and curious if I will have to pay the full rate for the upgrade. I recall in the past there have been special discounts/freebies for new owners.
    • by allgood2 ( 226994 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:55AM (#12087912)
      Typically, there's a 30 or 60 day (I forget which) period, that if you've purchased new equipment you can get the new OS either for free or the cost of shipping, something like that. I know I got Jaguar for less than $25 when it came out, because I had just purchased a laptop before its release.
    • by LanMan04 ( 790429 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:58AM (#12087935)
      I worked as a Mac Genius when Jaguar came out, and there was an official cut-off date about 5 weeks before the official release. If you purchased a mac between then and the release date, you got the free upgrade. Not the stand-alone OS install, mind you, but the "drop in" upgrade discs that they toss in the boxes of new macs at the store that don't have the OS preloaded. They do have a little give around these dates if you whine enough (hope I'm not violating my NDA...=)

      You CAN install the OS from scratch (you aren't forced to do one of those nasty upgrades), but you MUST have the previous OS installed for the discs to work. Which you do, so don't worry. It just means if you ever need to reinstall your OS in the event of a disaster, you'll have to install 10.3 first, then do the format-(or archive)-and-install with 10.4.
      • I bought my first mac (a 15" PowerBook 1.25 GHz) as soon as they were announced. As I recall, it was only about 4-6 weeks later that 10.3 was released. I called Apple and asked about using my 'OS Upgrade certificates" to be told "we currently are not running any promotions with those."

        {rant mode on}
        I was very upset to think that they would not offer me the option to upgrade at a discounted rate so soon after I bought a top-of-the-line notebook. I've never dropped $3K on a PC before, and it was shocking.

      • How soon after a new Mac OS is released does it appear on new Mac inventory? I assume current Mac Minis ship with Mac OS 10.3.8 installed. How soon after Mac OS X 10.4 is shipped will I be able to buy a Mac Mini with Mac OS 10.4 pre-installed?
        • That I don't know. The new macs that came in had Jaguar on them pretty quick, and at the rate Minis are going I'd say a week or two tops. Hell, if you ordered one today you'd probably get one with 10.4, since there's a waiting list. Or, once they're in stock, roll into your local Apple store and ask them for one with 10.4. They can open the box real quick and if the install discs it comes with are 10.4, then you'll know.
  • by mariox19 ( 632969 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:42AM (#12087822)

    Any word on how it's expected to run on older hardware: meaning, any G4 from the last 4 or 5 years?

    Every newer OS X has run better than the previous version on these machines from my experience, and from what I've heard others say. Realistically, how long can that go on though until newer versions start to overwhelm older hardware?

    Anyone with their hands on a pre-release version of Tiger have any insight into this?

    • by mbbac ( 568880 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @10:26AM (#12088132)
      Reports are saying that Tiger will run faster than Panther on the same hardware.
  • Logistics (Score:4, Informative)

    by LittleGuernica ( 736577 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:44AM (#12087837) Homepage
    Rumurs are that it will be presented this Friday (april 1st) and that it will be "unleashed" on April 15. Is it logistically possibly that right now it's not even "gold master" and that 2 weeks later millions of discs are pressed and packaged?

    So I believe the 15th as release date is very improbable (by Zarquon), maybe June 6th at WWDC?
    • I heard that you can get a $35-off coupon from Amazon [] on Tiger. Sure enough, you can. And there are two date-related items involved in this that give a clue as to Tiger's release:

      1. The coupon says you have to pre-order by 5/31/05, and then postmark the coupon by 7/1. OK, that doesn't necessarily mean much, but that 5/31 date looks suspiciously as if the release will be June 1.

      2. After I ordered it, Amazon gave me an estimated shipping date of 6/1/05.

      Now maybe they don't know either and they are ju

    • New Hardware (Score:5, Interesting)

      by anticypher ( 48312 ) <> on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @06:28PM (#12094279) Homepage
      Disclaimer: I am not under any Apple NDA, nor does any of this information come directly from someone under NDA.

      There is some new hardware coming out, sometime between "now" and "the end of 2005" (how is that for vague). This new hardware will require extra drivers and code to support some new features. The beta testers have only been able to run Tiger on this hardware, released versions of 10.X don't work much, or at all.

      Since releasing Tiger before the hardware is announced means that legions of Mac fanatics will be picking it apart, they will quickly find the code relating to new hardware names. So it is almost a certainty that Apple will release Tiger at the same time they announce the new hardware. The hardware might ship later, but at least it will be announced by the Tiger ship date. Tiger may be announced as much as a month in advance of its ship date, if past announcements are any guide.

      So the speculation is centred around which events in Apple's calendar would be good for announcing a new round of hardware upgrades and new models, as well as releasing Tiger. The WWDC has been a favorite target until recently, as it is now approaching rapidly and Tiger is still in beta, MacPsychics are looking further into the summer for good announce dates.

      the AC
      My money is on the WWDC for a ship date
  • Will it cost money? (Score:5, Informative)

    by ( 302970 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:49AM (#12087873)
    Yes, it will cost money.

    No, this is nothing new.

    Yes, the version number seems to indicate it's not a new version but only an update. You have to simply ignore the leading "10.". It ain't that hard.

    Yes, this is actually like Microsoft charging you for XP (NT5.1) after you already bought Win2000 (NT5.0) or NT4.0 or NT3.51 - the leading "10." is like the leading "NT" from Microsoft.

    Yes, this is old news, but the issue comes up every time Apple releases a new version of OS X.

    • Before I get started, this isn't really supposed to be a troll. I'm just trying to give you an insight into _why_ we're wondering about people buying every MacOS point release. And in return maybe you'll help me understand why you do that.

      You know, for all the being called "Redmond fanboys" or whatnot, we Windows people don't go buying every single release. Yes, Microsoft fully expects you to pay for XP, but most sane people will not actually upgrade to XP from 2000.

      My second computer is still happily run
      • by swb ( 14022 )
        IMHO OS X wasn't fully baked out of the oven.

        10.0 was buggy as hell, missing features and nobody really used it for production. 10.1 and 10.2 were massive bugfixes and feature adds. Hard-core Mac fans will dispute this, no doubt.

        I actually think that 10.3 was where things leveled out, software vendors caught up with X versions of their applications that worked reliably and so on.

        Apple's managed to produce an OS that was stable _enough_ that people would use it, but in reality was highly beta-ish. I th
      • Yes, Microsoft fully expects you to pay for XP, but most sane people will not actually upgrade to XP from 2000...Seeing people getting all excited at the thought of buying yet another yearly remake of the same OS is, well, a bit strange.

        I understand what you're saying, but a few points:

        • There were a lot of people who excitedly went out and purchased (or illegally downloaded) an upgrade from Windows 2000 to Windows XP.
        • There will be a lot of people who will stick with Panther after Tiger is released. Ther
      • You'd be suprised how many computers still exist out there with Windows '98, or even Windows '95, or in some pathological cases Windows 3.1.

        Well, there are quite a few people running Mac OS 9 or even Mac OS 8. I just don't get your point.

        In fact, I think that in the Windows world, it's safe to say that the OS is the _least_ important part. It's there just so the applications will load. We'd run just as happily (or actually happier) without any OS, if the same apps could be booted directly without an OS.

      • by shawnce ( 146129 )
        Seeing people getting all excited at the thought of buying yet another yearly remake of the same OS is, well, a bit strange.

        1) I wouldn't call it a remake... you get new features and capabilities (for both users and developers) more often then the 4-5+ year cycle seen on the Windows side and in a single package. I personally like this.

        2) It isn't yearly by any means and in fact Apple has said now that Mac OS X has matured (said around the time of 10.3 release) that major revisions will come less frequen
  • by bach37 ( 602070 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @09:55AM (#12087910)
    Looks like there will be a 10.3.9 [] update soon, interestingly enough.
  • by cocoamix ( 560647 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @10:07AM (#12087997)
    All this talk about "point releases" is just semantics. I know most Slashdotters aren't zoologists, but all significant OS X upgrades are SPECIES updates.

    Jumping over to Family Canidae from Family Felidae, would you upgrade from a Chihuahua that shits on your keyboard to a Golden Retriever that fetches beer and Hot Pockets? I sure would.

    That's about the difference that Tiger is going to be over 10.0 (Cheetah).
  • Question (Score:4, Funny)

    by mattmentecky ( 799199 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @10:23AM (#12088112)
    If Linus and Apple with their Tiger release got together and released an OS would you have a Liger, only like, the best OS ever? Gosh.
  • by microcars ( 708223 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @10:57AM (#12088372) Homepage
    The Catwomen point series!

    11.0 Halle Berry
    11.1 Eartha Kitt
    11.2 Julie Newmar
    11.3 Nastassja Kinski...


  • by beef3k ( 551086 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @10:58AM (#12088377)
    I mean, if you stick with Microsoft you'll only have to pay for a new OS every 7-10 years or so!
  • by MarkWatson ( 189759 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @11:23AM (#12088656) Homepage
    I am most looking forward to having JDK5 (or JDK1.5) support. I have put off using the new Java language extensions for production code because I do a lot of development work using OS X. JDK5 support alone is worth the upgrade price to me.

    I am also interested in playing with Searchlight.
  • by master_p ( 608214 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @11:36AM (#12088779)
    What impressed me more is these two technologies. It may lead to a complete transformation of the way we code: by simple drag-n-drop, we can combine inputs and outputs, making components, then combine those components with others ad infinitum...
    • Well, not quite.

      CoreData and Bindings do reduce the amount of code you have to write, but they don't reduce the whole exercise to drag-and-drop. Sure, if all you need to do is keep a list of records showing strings, dates, images, etc, that much you can do with no code, but once you have any custom business logic you want to apply in your app, you'll still be writing code.

      That being said, writing an app with Cocoa on Tiger will be less work than it's been to date.

  • by sabat ( 23293 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @01:09PM (#12089873) Journal
    Pay your $599 license fee, you slack-off bastards!
  • by klatty ( 871061 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @01:44PM (#12090301)
    From what I hear, every release of OS X get *faster*, allowing older hardware to run the new OS better than it could it's previous OS.

    I would think Micro$oft would want to take a look at this....Of course this would mean people wouldn't have to buy PCs as often...I wonder how Micro$oft's relationship with PC makers compares with Apple making their own hardware...

    Something to think about. Any thoughts?
    • That is due to the way they focused on OS X. Apple focused on all the groundwork(10.0, .1, etc) and foundation and only in .2 and .3 have they focused on optimizing what is there. Each release gets faster because 1. the past release (early OS X) was quite slow) and 2. they optimize non-optimized code. There is a ceiling, one can only assume, on how long Apple can improve speed on each release on moderate/old hardware.

      PS: Apple has made a release every 12-18 months on OS X (every .x release, that is), Steve
  • by jonr ( 1130 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @03:43PM (#12091975) Homepage Journal
    When Apple runs out of cool cat code names? Mac OSX "Hello Kitty"?

I've finally learned what "upward compatible" means. It means we get to keep all our old mistakes. -- Dennie van Tassel