What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy casts another employee in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Jarice Brodie has done some cool things in his life. Next: Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
273 Comments
- bremstrong, on 01/05/2009, -3/+146Serious refactoring:
"Mail is down to 91MB in size, whereas before it was 287MB. QuickTime is now 8MB instead of 29MB, TextEdit has been reduced from 22MB to 2MB and the Mac OS X Utility folder has dropped from 468MB to 111.6MB. Similar size reductions are reported in other OS X applications too." - Maddoktor2, on 01/05/2009, -9/+104Can anyone say "Free Upgrade"?
Here's hoping... - Scott2, on 01/05/2009, -1/+82I can't wait. My iMac isn't slow, but I still want more speed!
- digitalpencil, on 01/05/2009, -13/+77Windows 7 is doing exactly what SL is.. consolidating the current setup and reducing system load/bloat.
- serif69, on 01/05/2009, -3/+62I welcome any upgrade that will optimize performance from the software side. Though I'd like it to be free, I won't complain much if we do have to pay for it.
- thekeg88, on 01/05/2009, -31/+82I can't wait for this to speed up everyday use and it is a huge slam against Vista and Windows 7 by saying we have all the features we want so we are just going to make more solid instead of adding bloatware.
- tama00, on 01/05/2009, -0/+46It's somewhat due to the fact that they had PPC code and X86 code in the one folder now they will just have the X86 code. But still that is pretty big difference even for just removing PPC code.
- nebkiwi, on 01/05/2009, -1/+46"While Carbon is designed to offer backwards-compatibility with PowerPC-based Macs, Cocoa most certainly isn't, and so a Finder written in Cocoa just can't be run on a pre-Intel Mac. And given the massive reduction in size of OS X and its applications, what could possibly be coming out if it's not the PPC code?" ummm, what? Of course the cocoa API runs on PPC macs...
- Scott2, on 01/05/2009, -2/+44That's the complete opposite of Apple's intention with 10.6 - they've been doing that since OS X came out. Remember, 10.5 will likely be the last PPC compatible Mac OS. 10.6 is optimizing and stabilizing for Intel going forward. Sounds like a great idea to me.
- gimmeslack12, on 01/05/2009, -7/+49Did he really speculate that 10.6 would be a free upgrade? Has this guy EVER bought anything from Apple?
- DeathToaster, on 01/05/2009, -1/+35Cause Apple thinks alot of Intel Macs could be running fastER. "Fast enough" should never enter into the minds of any technology manufacturer.
- Mizzike, on 01/05/2009, -18/+52...only, there's so much more that Windows could do, but doesn't. Hate to be a fanboy here, but I'm absolutely satisfied with my Mac. They're doing it right.
- bigsteve, on 01/05/2009, -1/+32The upgrade from 10.0 to 10.1 was also free. That was also a full point release that really didn't bring much in the way of new features to the table, but rather increased speed and stability enough to warrant a full point increment.
- eAi2k, on 01/05/2009, -5/+35Buried for the dumb cocoa statement at the end that just makes you realise how clueless the author is. They've just pulled together a load of quotes and pretended it's an article.
- fahrvergnuugen, on 01/05/2009, -0/+28Whoever wrote this article apparently knows nothing about Carbon.
- slifty, on 01/05/2009, -0/+25you don't have to do anything. If you like what it does and are happy with its functionality as is, you won't have to pay another dime.
- Chirp08, on 01/05/2009, -8/+33As to waiting 4x as long and paying 4x as much for the same thing from windows?
- albertsquare, on 01/05/2009, -2/+27Hi,
I've emailed the author to clarify what he meant about cocoa's backwards compatibility and will post a reply here tomorrow.
Regards,
Nick
TechRadar Editor in chief - eleven, on 01/05/2009, -1/+22Damn, I remember upgrading to System 7. It wasn't the price of the OS it was the extra 2MB of ram I needed to run it.
- nicc, on 01/05/2009, -0/+20yeah, I saw that in the article and had a little WTF moment...didnt Cocoa come out at 10.0?
- Balanced, on 01/05/2009, -1/+20Always? System 1-6 was free... Of course, getting it was a bit tougher.
- CIAVT, on 01/05/2009, -0/+19Ugg, VLC's interface is a pain in the ass. Transcoding with it is the exact opposite experience of what I expect Apple software to do. I do like that VLC will playback almost anything I throw at it.
Buy out perian and roll it into quicktime, ditch the paid "pro" version, and you have a solid QT program. - MrSkills, on 01/05/2009, -2/+21You've just made 3 anti-Apple comments in a row on three different articles. Who's the insecure one?
:-) - jwdav, on 01/05/2009, -1/+18QuickTime is not just a video player or even a codec - it's an entire framework; saying "replace QuickTime with VLC", is like saying "replace PostScript with an inkjet printer.
- hartley, on 01/05/2009, -6/+21@Mizzike the only thing Windows could do to really help itself is to kill the registry. It will happen eventually but not with 7. Something like this would take a full re-write. MS always has problems with legacy (dos to nt kernel, and xp to vista) and I don't think they're ready yet to face these legacy issues with the business world yet.
XP sp3 and Vista sp1 are both stable as hell, while vista might be a bit of a ram hog, there's not much I can see MS doing with these os's to make them "better" besides getting rid of the horrifically outdated registry. The lower resources imo is due to the fact MS is getting killed in the netbook market with linux dominating. That and the whole "Vista capable" fiasco. - inactive, on 01/05/2009, -9/+23Dream on, its another 100-150 bucks a year or year and half.
Its always been this way with Apple. - soopafly, on 01/05/2009, -1/+15I dunno, Quicktime runs great on my Mac Pro
- bbardlbradd, on 01/05/2009, -2/+15Yeah, but that was only a special circumstance seeing as 10.1 was just a stability/reliability update for 10.0.
Oh wait... - betheturtle, on 01/05/2009, -0/+13drugs ain't cheap, son.
- Tehrab, on 01/05/2009, -0/+13I am down with any OS development effort that focuses on stability, performance and behind-the-scenes-modernization instead of user features I will never need or use.
- BruceAnderson, on 01/06/2009, -0/+12The shrinkage isn't due to stripping out the PPC code. It's because they're leaving out all the superfluous languages. Seriously, try this: go to your Applications directory and get info on, let's just say TextEdit. Click the disclosure triangle next to Languages and select everything but your native language and then click the remove button (it's the minus sign). TextEdit will drop to 1.9mb. So this is all they've done so far. It's great, but it's nothing you can't do yourself with a little time and patience (or an app like XSlimmer, if you trust it).
- Poltras, on 01/05/2009, -3/+15FTFA: """While Carbon is designed to offer backwards-compatibility with PowerPC-based Macs, Cocoa most certainly isn't, and so a Finder written in Cocoa just can't be run on a pre-Intel Mac. And given the massive reduction in size of OS X and its applications, what could possibly be coming out if it's not the PPC code?"""
What has this guy been smoking? Carbon was invented to make a smooth transition between OS9 and OSX (similar API). Cocoa was the native supported API since OSX 10.0, and it was damn well supported on the PPC. Hell, it was _created_ for the PPC. Furthermore, at this exact moment in time, if Apple wanted to make Snow Leopard PPC-compatible, nothing would stop them.
And the 64-bit part was poor at best.... Only more RAM? What about more registers, no need to swap address space between 32-bit kernel and 64-bit processes, drivers speedup and more?
This guy knows nothing and shows it off... - MrJagil, on 01/05/2009, -0/+12Though i really am a sucker for new features, Snow Leopard's approach is welcomed. There's alot of ***** i rarely use, so the refactoring is indeed welcomed...
- fentanyl, on 01/05/2009, -0/+12VM size is just the theoretical amount of disk space if all running processes filled all their allocated virtual memory at the same time. Since that will never happen, it's pretty much a useless number. "Swap used" shows how much actual disk space is used by virtual memory.
- redwallhp, on 01/05/2009, -0/+12Everyone *wants* it, that doesn't mean they *need* it.
- jbhannah, on 01/05/2009, -0/+11PPC binaries are larger than plain Intel binaries (if you use something like MacPilot to take the PPC binaries out of an application, it'll be around or more than a 50% reduction in size), but it does sound like there's also some pretty major rewriting going on behind the scenes too. Probably other reasons include rewriting everything to be Grand Central capable instead of manually coding for multiple cores, and taking advantage of the various other performance features in 10.6 (like QuickTime with OpenCL).
- soopafly, on 01/05/2009, -3/+14I'm I the only one who's tired of people using the term "service pack" referencing a Mac update?
- Macintoshreader, on 01/05/2009, -2/+13Yeah, that reminds me of when Apple charged people to upgrade from Mac OS X 10.0 to 10.1.
Oh wait... - tortov, on 01/05/2009, -0/+10Yeah, that's a pretty big WTF?! line. Hell, what we now call Cocoa was originally developed for Motorola 68K-based NeXT boxes.
- cawpin, on 01/05/2009, -4/+14Sure they'll keep it in mind. Then, they'll charge $129 for it.
- superkendall, on 01/05/2009, -0/+10They'll see a difference - not because Finder is in Cocoa, but because it was re-written.
However using Cocoa may well have made for improved redevelopment speed and make possible some features it couldn't use before. - misterparry, on 01/06/2009, -1/+11I love leopard and love fast computers....i'm sold
- CoreyTamas, on 01/05/2009, -0/+9I actually put off buying Leopard for quite a while because I didn't want the features. I wanted speed and stability. So I say bring it on.
- farfromsubtl, on 01/05/2009, -1/+10How do you know it is a ripoff when they haven't even set a price yet? At the end of the article they even speculate that if may be free. No one knows.
- superkendall, on 01/05/2009, -1/+10I think they were confused with Classic, the OS 9 compatibility layer which intel macs have never been able to run!
- spacebuddy, on 01/05/2009, -2/+11This is going to be awesome.
- archer75, on 01/05/2009, -0/+9I think they went with snow leopard because it's not that much different than leopard, in terms of features.
- boozedrinker, on 01/05/2009, -0/+8Hey - why don't you tell us about the entire 3-year history of bumps, bruises, spills, and restarts of your computer. I for one am dying to hear it :-\
- CoreyTamas, on 01/05/2009, -4/+12If you think Snow Leopard is a service pack then you should have your case worker read the article to you again.
- MrJagil, on 01/05/2009, -3/+11Seriously, if you're gonna come with critique, please let the phrasing differ from that of a drunk 4 year old....
-
Show 51 - 100 of 279 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is