# Apple Previews Mac OS X Snow Leopard to Developers



## aryayush (Jun 10, 2008)

*Apple Previews Mac OS X Snow Leopard to Developers*

*i29.tinypic.com/2rn8wia.jpg​
SAN FRANCISCO—June 9, 2008—Apple® today previewed Mac OS® X Snow Leopard, which builds on the incredible success of OS X Leopard and is the next major version of the world’s most advanced operating system. Rather than focusing primarily on new features, Snow Leopard will enhance the performance of OS X, set a new standard for quality and lay the foundation for future OS X innovation. Snow Leopard is optimized for multi-core processors, taps into the vast computing power of graphic processing units (GPUs), enables breakthrough amounts of RAM and features a new, modern media platform with QuickTime® X. Snow Leopard includes out-of-the-box support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 and is scheduled to ship in about a year.

“We have delivered more than a thousand new features to OS X in just seven years and Snow Leopard lays the foundation for thousands more,” said Bertrand Serlet, Apple’s senior vice president of Software Engineering. “In our continued effort to deliver the best user experience, we hit the pause button on new features to focus on perfecting the world’s most advanced operating system.”

Snow Leopard delivers unrivaled support for multi-core processors with a new technology code-named “Grand Central,” making it easy for developers to create programs that take full advantage of the power of multi-core Macs. Snow Leopard further extends support for modern hardware with Open Computing Language (OpenCL), which lets any application tap into the vast gigaflops of GPU computing power previously available only to graphics applications. OpenCL is based on the C programming language and has been proposed as an open standard. Furthering OS X’s lead in 64-bit technology, Snow Leopard raises the software limit on system memory up to a theoretical 16TB of RAM.

Using media technology pioneered in OS X iPhone™, Snow Leopard introduces QuickTime X, which optimizes support for modern audio and video formats resulting in extremely efficient media playback. Snow Leopard also includes Safari® with the fastest implementation of JavaScript ever, increasing performance by 53 percent, making Web 2.0 applications feel more responsive.*

For the first time, OS X includes native support for Microsoft Exchange 2007 in OS X applications Mail, iCal® and Address Book, making it even easier to integrate Macs into organizations of any size.

*Performance will vary based on system configuration, network connection and other factors. Benchmark based on the SunSpider JavaScript Performance test on an iMac® 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo system running Mac OS X Snow Leopard, with 2GB of RAM.

Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s with the Apple II and reinvented the personal computer in the 1980s with the Macintosh. Today, Apple continues to lead the industry in innovation with its award-winning computers, OS X operating system and iLife and professional applications. Apple is also spearheading the digital media revolution with its iPod portable music and video players and iTunes online store, and has entered the mobile phone market with its revolutionary iPhone.

[Via Apple]


----------



## mavihs (Jun 10, 2008)

wow!!! nice!!!


----------



## iMav (Jun 10, 2008)

So it did happen.


----------



## BBThumbHealer (Jun 10, 2008)

Nice ....


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 11, 2008)

So now Apple is giving features Vista already gave in form of DirectX 10, CUDA, Aero, .net 3.0 & Directshow 10 just 4 years late. 

Cupertino has many cats, Copycats 

U need 2GB of RAM to see improvent in Safari's Javascript engine? gosh, firefox 3 is better


----------



## kostik (Jun 11, 2008)

*Hi *
*You are not clear with your thoughts, will you give more information. So I can help you out in this matter.*


----------



## aryayush (Jun 11, 2008)

LOL! Don’t bother trying to help him out with Mac OS X. Trust me on this, he’s a genius. 

(Seriously, there’s a reason why no exeprienced user replied to his post. For your own sake, don’t bother with this guy. He’s a lost case.)


----------



## Voldy (Jun 12, 2008)

hmm Nice news and indeed a grt news for mac fanboys


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2008)

> *Hi *
> *You are not clear with your thoughts, will you give more information. So I can help you out in this matter.*


 No, Thanks. My concepts are clear & every things Apple showed for Snow Leopard in WWDC, Windows Vista users are already enjoying with a DirectX 10 card. They said something about OpenCL & it's not even out yet...lolz. nVidia CUDA is already out there.



> LOL! Don’t bother trying to help him out with Mac OS X. Trust me on this, he’s a genius.
> 
> (Seriously, there’s a reason why no exeprienced user replied to his post. For your own sake, don’t bother with this guy. He’s a lost case.)


OH! the great Salesman has said...thou shell bow to him.

By the way, Andy is screwed big. According to the latest screen shots & developer information, *Apple is dropping support for PowerPC Mac  in Snow Leopard*. Apple, they know 1000 ways to extort money from the customers. Now all the Dual PowerPC G5 users need to upgrade to Intel Mac to use Snow Leopard & it's only 4 years old....he he he he he

Windows Vista installs & runs fine on the same generation Pentium 4 PC.

*www.logicielmac.com/captureupload/6846.jpg
Arya, please say that Apple has innovated easy Multi-Core Application developement with Grabd Central, GPGPU with OpenCL & Hardware video acceleration with Quicktime X, please Do.....Windows users will die laughing at you....lolz..

Cupertino indeed has many cats, Copy cats


----------



## aryayush (Jun 12, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> Andy is screwed big.


No, he isn’t. He happens to have a MacBook now, thank you very much.


----------



## preshit.net (Jun 12, 2008)

And 10.6 doesn't come out until another year passes by. That's not tomorrow.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2008)

So, is it ok to stop supporting those uber powerful Dual CPU based PowerPC G5 Mac Pros with 4 GB RAM?


----------



## aryayush (Jun 12, 2008)

Yes and no. It does seem a little too soon but there’s little point in prolonging the death of the platform. Mac OS X Leopard happens to be an extremely capable and well-built operating system which runs just fine on even ten-year-old hardware and Snow Leopard isn’t going to add any consumer level features. The under-the-hood improvements would’ve been significantly lesser if they’d had to keep dragging the PowerPC anchor around and those on PowerPC hardware wouldn’t have experienced a dramatic increase in performance anyway (if at all).

Snow Leopard is going to be Leopard with performance enhancements. For those on the PowerPC platform, there’s Leopard. For those who’ve advanced, Apple is paving the way for even better OS releases in future.

Yes, they could have maybe supported it for one more year or so, but all in all, I don’t think users will have much to complain about. In fact, I’m pretty sure that the loudest complaints will be coming from people like you—Windows users who don’t even have Macs, let alone ones that run on PowerPC. And we all know how well Vista runs on even top-of-the-line hardware, let alone Pentium IV based PCs.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2008)

lolz... .this has proved that Macboys r indeed blind. Arya, plz tell this to an owner who paid 4 lakh for a Mac Pro few years back & $ 129 this year for Leopard & then let us know how many teeths U have left


----------



## chandru.in (Jun 13, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> Arya, please say that Apple has innovated easy Multi-Core Application developement with Grabd Central, GPGPU with OpenCL & Hardware video acceleration with Quicktime X, please Do.....Windows users will die laughing at you....lolz..
> 
> Cupertino indeed has many cats, Copy cats



But multi-core app development and hardware acceleration are not Microsoft innovations too.  JVM has been scaling extremely well on several SMPs and across massive multi-cores like Ultrasparc T2 CPUs for a very long time.

OpenGL was out in 1992 but DirectX was out only in 1995.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 13, 2008)

lolz two of you fighting over so called "innovation" is highly amusing.

we all know where real power lies.

A truely powerful OS is one which lets the user customise it and push it with limits being only the user himself(or herself). We all know what such OSes are collectively called.

*cough* distro *cough*


----------



## desiibond (Jun 13, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Snow Leopard is going to be Leopard with performance enhancements. For those on the PowerPC platform, there’s Leopard. For those who’ve advanced, Apple is paving the way for even better OS releases in future.



A.K.A Service Pack 1


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2008)

no, bug fixes, optimisation which usually is a free service pack mean a new OS worth $129 mean in Apple world


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2008)

How do you know its price before it has even been announced?


----------



## preshit.net (Jun 13, 2008)

aryayush said:


> How do you know its price before it has even been announced?


Why ? Why do you even bother ?


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2008)

Honestly, I have _no_ idea. None at all.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 14, 2008)

aryayush said:


> users who don’t even have Macs, let alone ones that run on PowerPC.


Ofcourse there are. I know lots of people who own Xbox 360s and are windows guys. Xbox360, Sony PS3 are both based on PPC architecture in case you didn't know.

PowerPC = 1337 IBM, not Apple.

_*P*erformance *O*ptimization *W*ith *E*nhanced *R*ISC_


gx_saurav said:


> lolz... .this has proved that Macboys r indeed blind. Arya, plz tell this to an owner who paid 4 lakh for a Mac Pro few years back & $ 129 this year for Leopard & then let us know how many teeths U have left



Dude, you must be kidding. How ignorant can you be. Apple Mac Pro Workstation users don't give a damn to spending money. Don't you even get such a simple fact ? Who else would buy a system like that ? Go study the Mac Buyers Bible written by Steve Jobs and revised by Aayush.


----------



## preshit.net (Jun 14, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> Ofcourse there are. I know lots of people who own Xbox 360s and are windows guys. Xbox360, Sony PS3 are both based on PPC architecture in case you didn't know.



And those are Macs ? 

Let me quote his exact words.



> users who don’t even have Macs, let alone ones that run on PowerPC.



which means " ... users who don't even have Macs, let alone _Macs_ that run on PowerPC." 

Just trying to make things clear_er_


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 14, 2008)

preshit.net said:


> And those are Macs ?
> 
> Let me quote his exact words.
> 
> ...


thanks for clearing that part up a bit.
I thought he was pointing to Saurav's ignorance of the PPC architecture or its (possible) disadvantages.


----------



## mail2and (Jun 14, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> By the way, Andy is screwed big.



Would be better if you do away with the namecalling, and let me worry about myself. Just to clear up facts, I got a MacBook with Tiger pre-installed with a free 4GB iPod for £599, will get a further £100 off VAT once I leave the UK, got the £5 Leopard upgrade, and have been using it happily ever after. 

Hopefully, in about a couple of months, I'd be able to afford a lot lot more.


----------



## SunnyChahal (Jun 15, 2008)

Will this be a new OS X altogether with new GUI,kernel etc. or is it an update to Leapord?


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 15, 2008)

this is leopard service pack 1 

Microsoft showed Longhorn features such as Instant Search, GPU Accelerated UI before Mac OS implemented it, but apple was first to copy & relese them in form of 3 OS. Now when MS is silent about Windows 7, apple has nothing to copy & have paused adding features. lolz


----------



## iMav (Jun 15, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> this is leopard service pack 1
> 
> Microsoft showed Longhorn features such as Instant Search, GPU Accelerated UI before Mac OS implemented it, but apple was first to copy & relese them in form of 3 OS. Now when MS is silent about Windows 7, apple has nothing to copy & have paused adding features. lolz


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> Ofcourse there are. I know lots of people who own Xbox 360s and are windows guys. Xbox360, Sony PS3 are both based on PPC architecture in case you didn't know.
> 
> PowerPC = 1337 IBM, not Apple.
> 
> _*P*erformance *O*ptimization *W*ith *E*nhanced *R*ISC_


Dude, what the Hell does that have anything to do with the topic or anything mentioned by anyone in the conversation? Do you just jump into conversations to flaunt how good you can be at scanning through Wikipedia? WTF is wrong with you!



Sunny1211993 said:


> Will this be a new OS X altogether with new GUI,kernel etc. or is it an update to Leapord?


It’s like Leopard was to Tiger. It’s not an update of the GUI, kernel, etc.. Why would that be required? Mac OS X is a fantastic operating system.

It’s an upgrade to Leopard’s core technologies to make it faster and even more stable and secure. They’re overhauling the engine of the car and keeping the exterior unchanged. They’re probably dropping support for PowerPC, the dead platform (when it comes to Macs), and optimising the operating system to perform even better on Macs powered by Intel processors.

In the words of Bertrand Serlett, Apple’s senior vice president of Software Engineering, “We have delivered more than a thousand new features to OS X in just seven years and Snow Leopard lays the foundation for thousands more. In our continued effort to deliver the best user experience, we hit the pause button on new features to focus on perfecting the world’s most advanced operating system.”

You won’t see a lot of new features on the surface but your Mac will run better than it ever has before. Hopefully.


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 15, 2008)

> t’s an upgrade to Leopard’s core technologies to make it faster and even more stable and secure. They’re overhauling the engine of the car and keeping the exterior unchanged.





> You won’t see a lot of new features on the surface but your Mac will run better than it ever has before. Hopefully.



Hopefully? Are the features documented somewhere? Not the ones to optimize for a certain platform but actual new features which will come to Snow ?


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

Well, in the press release above and in the additional documentation given out to developers under the terms of an NDA.

No consumer level new features though.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jun 15, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> Now when MS is silent about Windows 7, apple has nothing to copy & have paused adding features. lolz


  What an observation!!! 



aryayush said:


> It’s not an update of the GUI, kernel, etc.. Why would that be required? Mac OS X is a fantastic operating system.


Err.. on what basis do you say that GUI, kernel etc. won't be updated?? To haf GPU acceleration the GUI core components mostly need to be updated... and for all those things to "perfect" Leopard, kernel updates are a must. Every new version of Mac OS X comes with a new kernel.



aryayush said:


> It’s an upgrade to Leopard’s core technologies to make it faster and even more stable and secure. They’re overhauling the engine of the car and keeping the exterior unchanged. They’re probably dropping support for PowerPC, the dead platform (when it comes to Macs), and optimising the operating system to perform even better on Macs powered by Intel processors.


So that means a definite kernel update. So plz next time you make some "technical" comments, think twice and post correctly.


----------



## Faun (Jun 15, 2008)

its fan-tastic


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 15, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Dude, what the Hell does that have anything to do with the topic or anything mentioned by anyone in the conversation? Do you just jump into conversations to flaunt how good you can be at scanning through Wikipedia? WTF is wrong with you!


Dude, WTF is wrong with YOU ?
I said PPC is not Mac exclusive.
Hope I made a point.
And no, I don't need Wikipedia for such simple expansions.

And yes, the fact that PPC is not mac exclusive for Home Computers anymore is the reason I guess Apple dropped PPC support. They wanted PPC for "distinction" from Intel PCs. Its such a beautiful architecture compared to x86(64). Infact, SPARC, PPC, Itanium, all are better than "generic" x86.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

infra_red_dude said:


> Err.. on what basis do you say that GUI, kernel etc. won't be updated?? To haf GPU acceleration the GUI core components mostly need to be updated... and for all those things to "perfect" Leopard, kernel updates are a must. Every new version of Mac OS X comes with a new kernel.
> 
> 
> So that means a definite kernel update. So plz next time you make some "technical" comments, think twice and post correctly.


I’m pretty sure his question was basically, “Will there be any big, sweeping changes that will take us by awe?” and my answer to that was in the negative. By saying that there wouldn’t be a GUI update, I meant that Snow Leopard won’t be what Vista was to XP, or even what Leopard was to Tiger. The GUI will look exactly as it does now in Leopard.

Of course, I’ve never tried to hide the fact that I know little about the technological underpinnings of Mac OS X, so it’s not like I was trying to feign having extensive knowledge about it. I was just trying to answer the question using the terminology that he used. I’m pretty sure I got the message across.


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 15, 2008)

Out of curiosity . How much would it cost to make an upgrade of your OS to Snow if it did come out. Im not looking for an exact price of course. Just a guesstimate . Cause I fail to see why anyone would spend money on a new product where the old platform works just fine. Not to mention that new platform contains nothing perceivable by the consumer itself. I mean,why not buy the OS when it comes out with those thousands of features it plans on using Snow as a foundation? Am I right that this is a new OS and not an update or is this like a service pack. Cause I find it outrageous that someone would charge you for fixes in code due to their lousy coding.



> Taking a break from adding new features, Snow Leopard — scheduled to ship in about a year — builds on Leopard’s enormous innovations by delivering a new generation of core software technologies that will streamline Mac OS X, enhance its performance, and set new standards for quality.



Source : *www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/
In other words they have nothing new and they intend on charging the customer for providing  fixes / optimization or "future innovations" which they will charge you again when they release the next OS after Mac OS X <insert random version>? Sorry if this somehow sounded mean or something. Finally , Just a question to aryayush, its your money I understand that and I definitely understand if you buy it . But may I ask why ? Are the performance gains going to be that huge  ?


----------



## cooldudie3 (Jun 15, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> So now Apple is giving features Vista already gave in form of DirectX 10, CUDA, Aero, .net 3.0 & Directshow 10 just 4 years late.
> 
> Cupertino has many cats, Copycats
> 
> U need 2GB of RAM to see improvent in Safari's Javascript engine? gosh, firefox 3 is better


man you better watch for your mouth! Apple will come and kill you(joke!)
You need to clear ur thoughts and think positive!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Back to the thread*

Wow! that's nice


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 15, 2008)

> Wow! that's nice


Whats nice?


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> Out of curiosity . How much would it cost to make an upgrade of your OS to Snow if it did come out. Im not looking for an exact price of course. Just a guesstimate . Cause I fail to see why anyone would spend money on a new product where the old platform works just fine. Not to mention that new platform contains nothing perceivable by the consumer itself. I mean,why not buy the OS when it comes out with those thousands of features it plans on using Snow as a foundation? Am I right that this is a new OS and not an update or is this like a service pack. Cause I find it outrageous that someone would charge you for fixes in code due to their lousy coding.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First of all, let me tell you that I respect you. I remember your posts in that Mac OS X legality discussion and now this post. krazzy, infra_red_dude and kalpik are other people on this forum who, like you, have a passion for a particular platform but are not crazy zealots (which I admit I can be sometimes). 

Now, as for your question—yes, I understand why you’re having those doubts. I have them too and so does almost everyone else in the Macverse, including _Macworld_ editors Dan Moren (also my editor), Jason Snell, Rob Griffiths and the like. We’re not sure how much Apple is going to charge for this update or if they are going to charge at all. In the past, when Apple released Mac OS X 10.0, it was a whole new operating system completely different from Mac OS 9, based on a different platform, so it had a slew of bugs and stability issues.

Apple then released Mac OS X 10.1 a year later as a major update (more than a service pack, less than a complete overhaul) that didn’t bring in any fancy new features but added a boatload of improvements all over the system and made Mac OS X usable. It was a free update, but one that people would happily have paid for given the amount of improvements it brought.

Since Apple already set that precedent, there is now the possibility that Snow Leopard might be a free upgrade. However, there’s also the very real (and more likely) possibility that Apple might charge for it, but an amount much less than what they do for a full blown upgrade with major new features ($129). _Macworld_ editors have guestimated that it will be around $30. The Apple of 2002 was much different from the Apple of 2008, so I don’t think a free update is on the cards.

At the end of the day, however, we can only know for sure when Steve Jobs announces it himself. When it’s Apple we are talking about, only what they officially declare is stuff worth believing.

-----------------

The other thing you offhandedly threw in was that it was “lousy coding” on their part. I don’t know whether you have used Mac OS X or not but anyone who has can clearly and categorically state that it’s not the result of lousy coding. Lousy coding does not result in something so terrific.

Snow Leopard is absolutely vital to the further growth of Mac OS X, much like Puma (10.1) was all those years ago. What you might not know is that right now, due to a series of events in the past, Mac OS X has a lot of legacy support—the remains of the classic environment (from the Mac OS 8 and 9 days), support for the PowerPC platform, for apps developed in Carbon as well as Cocoa and, of course, for the Intel platform, both 32 and 64 bit. There might be more legacy code that I’m unaware of.

Now that Mac OS X has established itself as a force to be reckoned with, someone needed to take a bold step and do away with everything that’s holding it back to prepare it for even more drastic enhancements in future. The more you keep clinging to the past, the harder it is to embrace what’s next. I’m sure it will anger a minor group in the Mac community, and Steve Jobs does too, but they think (and I agree) that it’s gotta be done.

I actually wish they would make Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard a fully 64-bit Intel native operating system that only runs Cocoa applications. Sure, it will completely screw things up right now (no Adobe or Microsoft applications) and even my (and Milind’s) Mac won’t be able to run it, but I won’t mind running Leopard for another couple of years. Since Snow Leopard won’t have any feature additions, I won’t be missing much. And by the time the next feature packed release comes along, my Mac will be old enough for us to part ways. I know that’s not on the cards yet but that would’ve meant a much better Mac OS X. 

Fire away with any more questions you have (though don’t become too technical ).


----------



## Pathik (Jun 15, 2008)

Heh, Just see him once on IRC and all your respect for Filled Void will evaporate.


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 15, 2008)

> Heh, Just see him once on IRC and all your respect for Filled Void will evaporate.


 .



> Apple then released Mac OS X 10.1 a year later as a major update (more than a service pack, less than a complete overhaul) that didn’t bring in any fancy new features but added a boatload of improvements all over the system and made Mac OS X usable



I definitely understand this one. I wouldn't mind purchasing something if it came with Major Updates or huge performance gains. Giving that for free is definitely nice also. But I wouldn't mind the investment either. 



> Since Apple already set that precedent, there is now the possibility that Snow Leopard might be a free upgrade.



Now this makes absolute sense. I'm pretty sure it would only please the customer base that Apple has already by another free update . They could always charge for a new OS when they come out with something innovative and I'm sure the community would be thrilled with it . 



> However, there’s also the very real (and more likely) possibility that Apple might charge for it, but an amount much less than what they do for a full blown upgrade with major new features ($129). Macworld editors have guestimated that it will be around $30. The Apple of 2002 was much different from the Apple of 2008, so I don’t think a free update is on the cards.



Would you get it based on the facts on the table which are near to nil considering that the dev's have signed a NDA and hence theres nothing on paper as a fact. Other than the fact that its better optimized and future innovations will make use of this platform and might actually charge you for a new release then also. For this lets look at an example. Would you upgrade with the current information on the table or preferraby wait till someone has tested it and confirmed some noticeable gains for the money? But then again its way too early to guesstimate that. I've  always noticed that Apple has an Ace up its sleeve when the time comes to its products. 

However what I would like to really know is that whether all the Mac users on this board actually upgrade onces a new product hits the shelf or is there someone who actually is satisifed with the old product they are using? 



> The other thing you offhandedly threw in was that it was “lousy coding” on their part. I don’t know whether you have used Mac OS X or not but anyone who has can clearly and categorically state that it’s not the result of lousy coding. Lousy coding does not result in something so terrific.



Basic use yes. Nothing to be proud of . Although the missing mouse button just freaks e out  .Im not saying that they actually threw in random bits of code from every other place and stitched it up together.Hell no. That would be quite a silly on my part. But rather stating that they are releasing a product to optimze an older product. 

Or in other words we did release an OS which could have worked much more efficiently. But Guess what.. Its your lucky day. We are coming out with an update which will make your computer as fast as a ferrari (if not more) and its only coming out at $30. Not to mention that it sort of states that the OS you are using is quite inefficient? 



> Now that Mac OS X has established itself as a force to be reckoned with, someone needed to take a bold step and do away with everything that’s holding it back to prepare it for even more drastic enhancements in future.



True. But Vista sort of released itself with the same attitude or at least thats what I understand from gx's posts about Windows each time he talks about Vista. Noentheless I'm thinking that a good portion of the users feel alienated in some way because of it. However the future will tell I guess. Something tells me by SP2 Vista will probably be wehre XP SP2 is .



> Fire away with any more questions you have (though don’t become too technical )



I'm the last person who is technical about anything . I really don't care about whether someone is running Apple, Linux or Windows. Although I do see myself buying one of the Macbooks and somehow getting Linux/Mac OS (not even sure if dual booting works on it) and  before everyone stones me to death may I answer the question. "But Why?  Why on earth would you install Ubuntu on a MacBook?" .

Because I can. Oh and I need a new laptop which looks nice


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 15, 2008)

Good job there Aayush. I want to make a few comments:



> krazzy, infra_red_dude and kalpik are other people on this forum who, like you, have a passion for a particular platform but are not crazy zealots (*which I admit I can be sometimes*).


You can be _sometimes_ ? You always go about singing praise for your platform without trying to think beyond the picture. Thats hardly the kind of attitude expected from a person who writes for others to read, but in your case I can take an exception. If I were an Apple, Inc. lover, I would find your words highly inspiring and would enjoy them endlessly. There can be no doubt of it. And since you write for the same company you idolise, I recommend you keep up this attitude. It might not give you a high amount of respect elsewhere, but in the case of Apple Magazines, you will sell like hot cakes.



> Apple then released Mac OS X 10.1 a year later as a major update (more than a service pack, less than a complete overhaul) that didn’t bring in any fancy new features but added a boatload of improvements all over the system and made Mac OS X usable. It was a free update, but one that people would happily have paid for given the amount of improvements it brought.
> 
> Since Apple already set that precedent, there is now the possibility that Snow Leopard might be a free upgrade. However, there’s also the very real (and more likely) possibility that Apple might charge for it, but an amount much less than what they do for a full blown upgrade with major new features ($129). Macworld editors have guestimated that it will be around $30. The Apple of 2002 was much different from the Apple of 2008, so I don’t think a free update is on the cards.


That, IMO, is a very valid outlook and prediction. I think the price may be closer to 25$, but thats just me.

There is this fact that Mac10.6 is called Snow Leopard. So it sounds more like a continuation of the previous release. Otherwise we might have seen Mac 10.6 Lion instead. Just a comment about naming which I have no intention of using as a solid proof.



> The other thing you offhandedly threw in was that it was “lousy coding” on their part. I don’t know whether you have used Mac OS X or not but anyone who has can clearly and categorically state that it’s not the result of lousy coding. Lousy coding does not result in something so terrific.


Lousiness in coding needn't translate to an ugly interface, and beautiful interfaces needn't mean lousy coding. Thats as far as my experiences with programming go.

Besides, the word Terrific is often relative and contextual. You know how the saying goes - no matter how good it is(or you think it is), it can get much better.



> Snow Leopard is absolutely vital to the further growth of Mac OS X, much like Puma (10.1) was all those years ago. What you might not know is that right now, due to a series of events in the past, Mac OS X has a lot of legacy support—the remains of the classic environment (from the Mac OS 8 and 9 days), support for the PowerPC platform, for apps developed in Carbon as well as Cocoa and, of course, for the Intel platform, both 32 and 64 bit. There might be more legacy code that I’m unaware of.


From what most people have seen and from what has happened till now,  Apple is hardly the kind of company which would care about legacy support. And this is proved from the fact that even Macintosh 9 is not supported anymore by their software.

But I see hardly any reason to complain here. Apple always has this policy that development must take place, such that any factor which pulls it down must be immidiately removed, instead of finding a workaround.

Such a thought would be laughed at by GNU coders, but Apple is different again. Apple is not a company looking at the cost to performance ratio. Its all about creating products in a way it likes, and them being accepted by its ever ready fans.



> Now that Mac OS X has established itself as a force to be reckoned with, someone needed to take a bold step and do away with everything that’s holding it back to prepare it for even more drastic enhancements in future. The more you keep clinging to the past, the harder it is to embrace what’s next. I’m sure it will anger a minor group in the Mac community, and Steve Jobs does too, but they think (and I agree) that it’s gotta be done.


Once again, let me tell you that Macintosh can never become a force to be reckoned with since its completely isolated in nature. It has support only for its own platform, which itself is ever varying and the idea that you can expect your apple PC to last long as a stable product is riddiculous. Unless you keep upgrading, you are sure to loose out a vast maximum.

But again, all this critisism on apple has absolutely no value, since apple user base is totally different from the standard. So again, a full loud get going to apple.



> I actually wish they would make Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard a fully 64-bit Intel native operating system that only runs Cocoa applications. Sure, it will completely screw things up right now (no Adobe or Microsoft applications) and even my (and Milind’s) Mac won’t be able to run it, but I won’t mind running Leopard for another couple of years. Since Snow Leopard won’t have any feature additions, I won’t be missing much. And by the time the next feature packed release comes along, my Mac will be old enough for us to part ways. I know that’s not on the cards yet but that would’ve meant a much better Mac OS X.


Well, if I might be able to have a word here, I would say its much much better for apple if they move back to a non x86 platform. PowerPC Processors are once again very cheap. This is evident by the fact that the Xbox 360 is available at a starting price of like 300$. And it has both a powerful GPU and a triple core PPC CPU. So I think it would be great if apple again started selling IBM PPC machines

As far as running microsoft and adobe applications goes, you made a big mark there. If apple fails to support something, then thanks to this new hyper speed race for the perfect OS, its sure to loose out a big fat market share. Back when Macintosh 10 appeared, the only competing platform was windows, since Solaris, BSD and Linux were not home ready yet. Now, with hundreds of operating system for every perpose in the market, I doubt such a drastic move can be benificial to apple in the short to medium run.



> True. But Vista sort of released itself with the same attitude or at least thats what I understand from gx's posts about Windows each time he talks about Vista. Noentheless I'm thinking that a good portion of the users feel alienated in some way because of it. However the future will tell I guess. Something tells me by SP2 Vista will probably be wehre XP SP2 is .



Thats a difficult thing to beleive in. The problem is, in windows XP's days, there was nothing else worth using, so everyone bought it. Then the SPs slowly increased its creditability. But now in vista's case, the picture is a bit too different.



> I'm the last person who is technical about anything . I really don't care about whether someone is running Apple, Linux or Windows. Although I do see myself buying one of the Macbooks and somehow getting Linux/Mac OS (not even sure if dual booting works on it) and before everyone stones me to death may I answer the question. "But Why? Why on earth would you install Ubuntu on a MacBook?" .
> 
> Because I can. Oh and I need a new laptop which looks nice


Well, one of my friends did a similar thing a few months back by buying a 60K sony VAIO and installing Ubuntu on it, but nobody asked him why. They actually said him congratulations. (the congrutations part was because he was hardly a month into ubuntu and he already found out how to install it in a VAIO and enjoy it).


----------



## goobimama (Jun 15, 2008)

In my point of view (a very late one at that) this is NOT a service pack. Snow Leopard is not just about bug fixes or optimising the OS. It is about 'adding features', albeit ones that an end user cannot perceive other than in the form of gains in speed. All that GPU action, multi-core optimisation, Quicktime X, are all new features, not just bug fixes of an earlier OS - Leopard. 

As far as the PowerPC argument goes, it is long since known that PowerPC is a dead platform. The last PPC was shipped in Dec 2005. Two years later they got Leopard, working seamlessly (just one edition!). And two years after that Snow Leopard will debut. That's a whole 4 years staying with the latest and greatest OS. I would say it is not that bad a deal. 

Considering that most of the Macs out there right now are Intel based, it would be logical to put full effort in optimising the code to run on Intel machines. I too don't mind not being able to install Snow Leopard on my 32bit system, 64bit is surely the way to go with this one...


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> Would you get it based on the facts on the table which are near to nil considering that the dev's have signed a NDA and hence theres nothing on paper as a fact. Other than the fact that its better optimized and future innovations will make use of this platform and might actually charge you for a new release then also. For this lets look at an example. Would you upgrade with the current information on the table or preferraby wait till someone has tested it and confirmed some noticeable gains for the money?


Of course, we’ll wait for the tests but in the two years of my association with the company, I’ve never known them to outrightly lie about anything. Marketing double-talk? Sure. But promising something and not delivering? No. In any case, if someone isn’t satisfied with just the performance gains in Snow Leopard, they can always just sit it out till the next release comes along a year later. They’ll be able to purchase it for $129 and upgrade directly from Leopard.



FilledVoid said:


> But then again its way too early to guesstimate that. I've  always noticed that Apple has an Ace up its sleeve when the time comes to its products.


Yeah, that’s not outside the realm of possibility. There might be a “One more thing…” at the Macworld ’09 keynote where Steve Jobs announced some mind-blowing new feature with dramatic flair. However, I absolutely do not think that’s on the cards (and I have a tendency to be right when it comes to Apple).



FilledVoid said:


> However what I would like to really know is that whether all the Mac users on this board actually upgrade onces a new product hits the shelf or is there someone who actually is satisifed with the old product they are using?


Well, except for the battery life, I’m very pleased with my first generation iPhone and do not feel any urge to upgrade to the newer version. Having said that, I was one of the few who couldn’t wait for Leopard to be launched and used the developer preview for three months before its release. I’m definitely getting it, no matter what the improvements.



FilledVoid said:


> Or in other words we did release an OS which could have worked much more efficiently. But Guess what.. Its your lucky day. We are coming out with an update which will make your computer as fast as a ferrari (if not more) and its only coming out at $30. Not to mention that it sort of states that the OS you are using is quite inefficient?


No, it doesn’t. It’s just accepting the fact that writing software, specially the size of an operating system, over decades is a process that never quite ends. For the past seven years, they’ve stabilised a completely new platform, kept support for all the customers who were reticent about upgrading and continually added some amazing new features to the mix (Spotlight and Exposé being prime examples).

I actually think it’s quite uncharacteristic and brave of a company led by Steve Jobs to acknowledge that fact and let go of their show and glamour for this one release and focus on perfecting it. It takes strength of character to sell that idea to your customers (who’re always looking for sweeping new changes that will blow them away, specially from a company like Apple and man like Steve Jobs) and I’m glad that Apple possess it.



FilledVoid said:


> True. But Vista sort of released itself with the same attitude or at least thats what I understand from gx's posts about Windows each time he talks about Vista. Noentheless I'm thinking that a good portion of the users feel alienated in some way because of it. However the future will tell I guess. Something tells me by SP2 Vista will probably be wehre XP SP2 is .


I’m not sure what prompted you to compare Vista, of all things, to Snow Leopard but they’re like two opposite ends of a pole. Whereas Vista was supposed to be all things to all people, a revolutionary new operating system that took the world by storm and added thousands of new features, Snow Leopard is just Leopard with bug fixes. It took seven years to get Vista to the market and Snow Leopard will take less than a couple. Vista is a complete and utter failure (critically defamed and shunned by customers and the general public) while Leopard, which Snow Leopard will build on, is a resounding success. There are no similarities at all.

Plus, to compare Vista to Mac OS X is an insult to Apple. Mac OS X is Apple’s core strength, just like Windows is Microsoft’s. And while Microsoft doesn’t mind screwing up with Windows, I’m damn sure that, even if Apple fails in all other fields (and they’re showing no signs of it), Mac OS X is going to continue to be a shining beacon of everything the company stands for, everything that it right with the company—at least as long as Steve Jobs stands at the helm.

Not to mention the fact that it is not just about Macs anymore. The more Mac OS X improves, the stronger the foundation is laid for the Apple TV, iPod touch and the iPhone (and whatever other new products they might have up their sleeves). Mark my words, Snow Leopard is going to be a success.



FilledVoid said:


> I do see myself buying one of the Macbooks and somehow getting Linux/Mac OS (not even sure if dual booting works on it)


“Somehow”? LOL! It’s pretty much as easy as popping in the DVD and hitting the Install button. Dual-booting is a painless process on a Mac.


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Jun 15, 2008)

could you all please underline the main points when you post rather long posts,just like 10th grade students do in their history exam,its kinda boring to read whole posts.:S


----------



## Pathik (Jun 15, 2008)

^+1.. I miss the "You suck", "You fkin n00b" kinda posts. Too much respect becomes boring.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

goobimama said:


> In my point of view (a very late one at that) this is NOT a service pack. Snow Leopard is not just about bug fixes or optimising the OS. It is about 'adding features', albeit ones that an end user cannot perceive other than in the form of gains in speed. All that GPU action, multi-core optimisation, Quicktime X, are all new features, not just bug fixes of an earlier OS - Leopard.


Yeah, just to make it clear, I know this. I just didn’t want to make it an argument in the OS’ favour. It can be categorised under performance enhancement—how they do it is entirely their lookout.



goobimama said:


> As far as the PowerPC argument goes, it is long since known that PowerPC is a dead platform. The last PPC was shipped in Dec 2005. Two years later they got Leopard, working seamlessly (just one edition!). And two years after that Snow Leopard will debut. That's a whole 4 years staying with the latest and greatest OS. I would say it is not that bad a deal.


Six years, actually, assuming that 10.7 ships two years after Snow Leopard. Snow Leopard is just Leopard for the PowerPC users anyway (i.e. even if the platform was supported).



goobimama said:


> Considering that most of the Macs out there right now are Intel based, it would be logical to put full effort in optimising the code to run on Intel machines. I too don't mind not being able to install Snow Leopard on my 32bit system, 64bit is surely the way to go with this one...


Though, just in case you didn’t know, that’s not happening. 32-bit will be supported in Snow Leopard. I bet Apple’s developers are cursing Intel right now for releasing those Core Duos. What was the whole point! If Apple had directly been able to jump to Core 2 Duos, their life would’ve been so much easier and my MacBook Pro would’ve been 64-bit.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jun 15, 2008)

aryayush said:


> I’m pretty sure his question was basically, “Will there be any big, sweeping changes that will take us by awe?” and my answer to that was in the negative. By saying that there wouldn’t be a GUI update, I meant that Snow Leopard won’t be what Vista was to XP, or even what Leopard was to Tiger. The GUI will look exactly as it does now in Leopard.
> 
> Of course, I’ve never tried to hide the fact that I know little about the technological underpinnings of Mac OS X, so it’s not like I was trying to feign having extensive knowledge about it. I was just trying to answer the question using the terminology that he used. I’m pretty sure I got the message across.


My point was to get across the msg, anything that you say about the Mac platform or GX about Windows is taken seriously while nobody gives a damn when you or GX say something about Windows and Mac respectively.

So when you post something be 100% sure about it



goobimama said:


> In my point of view (a very late one at that) this is NOT a service pack. Snow Leopard is not just about bug fixes or optimising the OS. It is about 'adding features', albeit ones that an end user cannot perceive other than in the form of gains in speed. All that GPU action, multi-core optimisation, Quicktime X, are all new features, not just bug fixes of an earlier OS - Leopard.


Never believe anything that companies like Apple, Microsoft etc. say about their future product. You never know what comes out till a stabilized beta is out. Not blaming any company but this is how things turn to during development.



The_Devil_Himself said:


> could you all please underline the main points when you post rather long posts,just like 10th grade students do in their history exam,its kinda boring to read whole posts.:S


+1000000000000......... oh man.. no second thots about it!


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 15, 2008)

> No, it doesn’t. It’s just accepting the fact that writing software, specially the size of an operating system, over decades is a process that never quite ends. For the past seven years, they’ve stabilised a completely new platform, kept support for all the customers who were reticent about upgrading and continually added some amazing new features to the mix (Spotlight and Exposé being prime examples).
> 
> I actually think it’s quite uncharacteristic and brave of a company led by Steve Jobs to acknowledge that fact and let go of their show and glamour for this one release and focus on perfecting it. It takes strength of character to sell that idea to your customers (who’re always looking for sweeping new changes that will blow them away, specially from a company like Apple and man like Steve Jobs) and I’m glad that Apple possess it.



Its not the process Im questioning . Its the actual fact of releasing a whole Operating system to optimize an existing one . Remember as of such they haven't promised anything as of yet. The fact that they will release a new feature is just an assumption. here are the features already listed for Leopard *www.apple.com/macosx/technology/ . So basically it had all these features in the OS you re using. Rather they are releasing something that enhances the performace of the product you are using. Which soudns like a fix to me.



> I’m not sure what prompted you to compare Vista, of all things, to Snow Leopard but they’re like two opposite ends of a pole.



I didn't mean to compare Vista and Leopard. I merely stated that Vista sort of embraced that everyone would accept moving on with new technology and get off their old 486's as everyone here puts it. At the moment alot of folks dont seem to be happy about it. But I guess Apple folks wouldn't mind since the hardware is restricted and hence are in a controlled environment. 



> “Somehow”? LOL! It’s pretty much as easy as popping in the DVD and hitting the Install button. Dual-booting is a painless process on a Mac.


Thats good to know. 



> could you all please underline the main points when you post rather long posts,just like 10th grade students do in their history exam,its kinda boring to read whole posts.:S


* Sorry I'll refrain from posting more than you can comprehend. j/k See you in IRC.*


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 15, 2008)

goobimama said:


> As far as the PowerPC argument goes, it is long since known that PowerPC is a dead platform. The last PPC was shipped in Dec 2005. Two years later they got Leopard, working seamlessly (just one edition!). And two years after that Snow Leopard will debut. That's a whole 4 years staying with the latest and greatest OS. I would say it is not that bad a deal.


For macs may be, but I think PowerPC is an excellent platform for computers.
I am still hoping tat one day, Apple will realise its mistake and go back to POWER architecture.
It will ensure that there are lesser hackintoshes around.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

I hope you realise that a major share of Apple’s recent success is due to the move to Intel. If there’s one thing that _wasn’t_ a mistake, it was to leave PowerPC behind and get with the times.

I find it really amusing when people say stuff like this—deserting PowerPC was a mistake for Apple and iPods sell only because they can be hack to run Linux variations. No offense to PowerPC or Linux but those two are the dumbest statements ever and really show that you (as in the person who’s saying it) have no idea about anything even remotely related to Apple.

Don’t be offended by what I’m saying. Just trying to be frank. I hope you realise some day that you just don’t _get_ Apple and stop pretending like you do. One example is when you said that they might price it at $25. In Apple’s entire product lineup, there isn’t a single product that’s priced at a number that ends in 5 (or 4.99).

The moment someone says something like that, I immediately realise that he thinks Apple is just another company that does what other companies do. If there is one company in the industry that definitely does things differently and always prefers its own approach, no matter how ridiculed it may be, it’s Apple. They’re just different, for better or for worse, and if you don’t think so, you just do not know Apple.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 15, 2008)

> However what I would like to really know is that whether all the Mac users on this board actually upgrade onces a new product hits the shelf or is there someone who actually is satisifed with the old product they are using?


Yep! I'm more than satisfied with my iMac and feel no need to upgrade. 



> My point was to get across the msg, anything that you say about the Mac platform or GX about Windows is taken seriously while nobody gives a damn when you or GX say something about Windows and Mac respectively.
> 
> So when you post something be 100% sure about it


Well hey! Why have this thread in the first place? No one has any proof of what the OS is actually going to be like. We are all just speculating.


----------



## SunnyChahal (Jun 15, 2008)

@Aayush,does your MacBook Pro not have a C2D?All C2Ds and later processors are 64 bit ones.Not sure about your MBP but Milind's iMac has C2D 2.0Ghz and can easily run 64 bit OS X.


----------



## Kenshin (Jun 15, 2008)

+1 risc is faster than cisc....but then cisc provides more flexibility to the programmers.


----------



## Faun (Jun 15, 2008)

^^teh EnT guy


----------



## goobimama (Jun 15, 2008)

Mine is Core Duo 32bit.


----------



## Kenshin (Jun 15, 2008)

T159 said:


> ^^teh EnT guy



Hardcore elex


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

Sunny1211993 said:


> @Aayush,does your MacBook Pro not have a C2D?All C2Ds and later processors are 64 bit ones.Not sure about your MBP but Milind's iMac has C2D 2.0Ghz and can easily run 64 bit OS X.


Both my and Milind’s machine have the same processor—2.16GHz Intel Core Duo. In fact, our entire configuration is same except for his 20-inch screen compared to my 17-inch one.


----------



## chandru.in (Jun 15, 2008)

Nice to see all these flames from my safe & cool Ubuntu box.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 15, 2008)

aryayush said:


> I hope you realise that a major share of Apple’s recent success is due to the move to Intel. If there’s one thing that _wasn’t_ a mistake, it was to leave PowerPC behind and get with the times.
> 
> I find it really amusing when people say stuff like this—deserting PowerPC was a mistake for Apple and iPods sell only because they can be hack to run Linux variations. No offense to PowerPC or Linux but those two are the dumbest statements ever and really show that you (as in the person who’s saying it) have no idea about anything even remotely related to Apple.
> 
> The moment someone says something like that, I immediately realise that he thinks Apple is just another company that does what other companies do. If there is one company in the industry that definitely does things differently and always prefers its own approach, no matter how ridiculed it may be, it’s Apple. They’re just different, for better or for worse, and if you don’t think so, you just do not know Apple.


Dude, you must be seriously out of your mind.

apple works this way
apple works that way
apple does not like number 5
if apple tells PPC is good then it is
apple moved from ppc to x86. It rocks
apple Safari is the best browser ever, they made it all by themselves
if you buy an iPod, don't ever customise it, rockbox sucks
customising is only for geeks. Apple is for cool guys
Apple decides what you need to do. Its good for you.

*WTF ? Can't you think from a normal guy's mind ?*



> Don’t be offended by what I’m saying. Just trying to be frank. I hope you realise some day that you just don’t _get_ Apple and stop pretending like you do. One example is when you said that they might price it at $25. In Apple’s entire product lineup, there isn’t a single product that’s priced at a number that ends in 5 (or 4.99).



I was refering to the maximum price that can be put on a service pack like this. Not the price apple asks people.



> iPods sell only because they can be hack to run Linux variations.


WTF ? You are the guy who got things wrong here.

1. iPod can run only a single distro

2. WTF are linux "variants" ? Distros are Operating systems with a BSD/Linux/Solaris kernel at their heart. Thats all.

3. You think people don't require any flexibility ? You think FLAC support and MPC support is useless ? You think its pointless playing DOOM on iPod ? You think running GBA games on iPod is a waste of time ?

WTF again. Apple may think that way, but not a good buyer. A good buyer always considers all options.

*No person in his right mind will buy a product seeing its brand name.*

I hate having to comment like this, but its your attitude that makes me sick. You pretend that you know everything about what people want.



Kenshin said:


> +1 risc is faster than cisc....but then cisc provides more flexibility to the programmers.


A little bit of difficulty in programming is I think worth the power difference.
Then again, there are other architectures than x86, like Itanium and SPARC.
Most of them are awssome at handling heavy loads.


PS: I mentioned PPC's power only because Aayush was going about how its "dead" and how nobody uses PPC.



goobimama said:


> Mine is Core Duo 32bit.


Wait a sec there: Apple is NOT 64 bit already ?
I thought they moved to 64 bit Intel x86 from IBM PowerPC.


----------



## chandru.in (Jun 15, 2008)

Kenshin said:


> +1 risc is faster than cisc....but then cisc provides more flexibility to the programmers.



Are there so many programmers still coding their programs in assembly?  If they are using even C (the lowest level high-level language), they need not bother so much about the CPU architecture at all (except in very few cases where they absolutely have to embed asm code in C like in certain parts of OS and device drivers).


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 15, 2008)

> No person in his right mind will buy a product seeing its brand name.


Just to point something out. Theres a good amount of research showing that theres a noticeable chunk of consumers who base their purchasing decisions just based on brand name. 

Now that the topic is going way off course I think I'lll choose to stay off it .


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

Yeah, well, you could’ve chosen to ignore it. Several months of such diatribes with gx_saurav has made me an expert on that.

As for that comment, his whole post is completely unrelated to the point I was trying to make. Who’s saying that the PowerPC architecture is not good or that a Linux variant (look the word up in a dictionary, Gautham—just because everyone uses the word “distro” doesn’t mean it’s the only appropriate one) for the iPod is not desirable.?
My point was that comments like Apple’s switching from PowerPC being a mistake and Linux being a major selling point (or any selling point at all) for the iPod are just plain stupid. Words are not enough to describe how stupid they are.

But, of course, he had to go off on a passion induced tangent to prove some redundant, completely unrelated point. It’s impossible to have a proper conversation with people like him.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 15, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> Just to point something out. Theres a good amount of research showing that theres a noticeable chunk of consumers who base their purchasing decisions just based on brand name.
> 
> Now that the topic is going way off course I think I'lll choose to stay off it .


I said "in his right mind"
Even I am aware of this fact that ppl are sometimes ignorant buyers.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 15, 2008)

Oh, and by the way, branding plays a vital role in the purchase decisions of 90% of all middle class people and 100% of all those above the middle class, and it should. How do you know whether you can trust a particular company’s product or not (in any field, not just in technology)? You look at the brand value and the quality of products you’ve used in the past that carried that branding. That’s just how normal people purchase things. If you don’t, you’re the one who’s doing it wrong—not the other way round.


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 16, 2008)

> Yeah, well, you could’ve chosen to ignore it. Several months of such diatribes with gx_saurav has made me an expert on that.



Lol my bad there. Anyway if my posts has somehow contributed some kind of OS war here I hope the posters beyond this post stick to the topic rather than deriving unintended meanings from something I posted. 

Thanks.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 16, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Yeah, well, you could’ve chosen to ignore it. Several months of such diatribes with gx_saurav has made me an expert on that.
> 
> As for that comment, his whole post is completely unrelated to the point I was trying to make. Who’s saying that the PowerPC architecture is not good or that a Linux variant (look the word up in a dictionary, Gautham—just because everyone uses the word “distro” doesn’t mean it’s the only appropriate one) for the iPod is not desirable.?
> My point was that comments like Apple’s switching from PowerPC being a mistake and Linux being a major selling point (or any selling point at all) for the iPod are just plain stupid. Words are not enough to describe how stupid they are.
> ...


You mean to say it was because of gx_saurav that I wasted my time trying to remember all I know about IBM POWER while you did not start it ?

Saurav, I shall have my revenge.


aryayush said:


> Oh, and by the way, branding plays a vital role in the purchase decisions of 90% of all middle class people and 100% of all those above the middle class, and it should. How do you know whether you can trust a particular company’s product or not (in any field, not just in technology)? You look at the brand value and the quality of products you’ve used in the past that carried that branding. That’s just how normal people purchase things. If you don’t, you’re the one who’s doing it wrong—not the other way round.


Relying on brand alone can be disasterous.
I agree brand Equity is an important bonus for the company...
But for customers....
Look at the XFX 8600GT for example.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jun 16, 2008)

goobimama said:


> Well hey! Why have this thread in the first place? No one has any proof of what the OS is actually going to be like. We are all just speculating.


I understand that. What I meant to say is that at least for things which are certain (like the kernel upgrade and stuff), we shouldn't provide wrong info. This only leads to digression and then stuff like.. oh not even a kernel upgrade? And then 10 other useless replies follow. Anyways.. I'm sure the point I'm trying to make is clear.



MetalheadGautham said:


> Dude, you must be seriously out of your mind.
> 
> apple moved from ppc to x86. It rocks


Moving to the Intel platform was probably the best decision by Apple as far as the sales are concerned.



MetalheadGautham said:


> 3. You think people don't require any flexibility ? You think FLAC support and MPC support is useless ? You think its pointless playing DOOM on iPod ? You think running GBA games on iPod is a waste of time ?


When you want that "flexibility" you don't buy Apple products!!



MetalheadGautham said:


> *No person in his right mind will buy a product seeing its brand name.*


You are mistaken my boy!

[Offtopic]



MetalheadGautham said:


> A little bit of difficulty in programming is I think worth the power difference.


PPC arch. has always been poorly exploited. The potential it has is immense. But a lot of things improved for Apple when they moved over to Intel. It was more of a business related decision.



MetalheadGautham said:


> PS: I mentioned PPC's power only because Aayush was going about how its "dead" and how nobody uses PPC.


PPC is dead in the computing world! Its existence is negligible. You don't buy Mac OS X to install it on PS3! Get real, dude!

I agree, tho, that ethically it was bad on Apple's part to announce that PPC won't be supported. Its a bit too early!

[/Offtopic]



MetalheadGautham said:


> Wait a sec there: Apple is NOT 64 bit already ?
> I thought they moved to 64 bit Intel x86 from IBM PowerPC.


They did when Macs started being shipped with C2Ds. Leopard has multiple kernels.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 16, 2008)

infra_red_dude said:


> I understand that. What I meant to say is that at least for things which are certain (like the kernel upgrade and stuff), we shouldn't provide wrong info. This only leads to digression and then stuff like.. oh not even a kernel upgrade? And then 10 other useless replies follow. Anyways.. I'm sure the point I'm trying to make is clear.
> 
> 
> Moving to the Intel platform was probably the best decision by Apple as far as the sales are concerned.
> ...


Thanks for that.
Cleared some things up and bettered others.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2008)

Thank _you_, because all the things he said were exactly what I was trying to say and pretty much in those exact words. I’m just glad _somebody_ got through to you. 



infra_red_dude said:


> What I meant to say is that at least for things which are certain (like the kernel upgrade and stuff), we shouldn't provide wrong info. This only leads to digression and then stuff like.. oh not even a kernel upgrade? And then 10 other useless replies follow.


Oh, I can certainly identify with _that_. 



MetalheadGautham said:


> Relying on brand alone can be disasterous.


Yes, it absolutely can. I disagreed with you that you shouldn’t look at the brand when buying any product but I did not insinuate that you should just look at it either. All I’m saying is that when you set out to purchase a product, branding plays a crucial role, one among many others (user reviews, for example).

I’ll give you an example: I wanted to buy a Bluetooth headset for myself. Given that I have an iPhone and Apple sells a sexy Bluetooth headset that matches the look of the phone, is tiny and comes with a Dock that charges both the iPhone and itself, I thought I would buy it. So I went to the Apple Online Store and read the reviews left by customers and, to my surprise, pretty much every reviewer hated the headset—static issues, no noise cancellation, poor call quality and lack of durability were some of the issues repeatedly mentioned, on Apple’s own online store no less (full credit to them for being honest and not censoring the negative reviews).

So I up and bailed and decided to buy one from Plantronics instead, one that is slightly more expensive than the Apple version, much less attractive (at least from what I could see in the picture) and, the biggest bummer, does not come with a charging station for both itself and the iPhone.

When I said I’m only an Apple fanboy _sometimes_, this is the sort of thing I was referring to. Yes, money is hardly a factor for me when making purchase decisions. It’s all about quality and that doesn’t necessarily mean that I will always buy Apple products no matter what.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2008)

we r back to square 1 that Apple is updating Mac with optimisation & new technologies that Microsoft has already given with Vista. 

Apple is simply copying what Vista already gave 2 years back. , they r trying to match Microsoft in OS backend department with new technologies which will break compatibility with existing product & drop support for a high end Mac released only 3 years back, but it's a good thing when Apple does it but bad when MS

Talk about double standards. Apple was mocking Vista that because of it people having old computers have to buy new. Now even only 3 year old Apple hardware needs to be thrown away & replaced with new one. Well, Vista ran fine on a 2004 purchased Pentium 4 PCs but Mac OS X Snow Leopard won't 

run on 2004 purchased high end Mac


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jun 16, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> we r back to square 1 that Apple is updating Mac with optimisation & new technologies that Microsoft has already given with Vista.
> 
> Apple is simply copying what Vista already gave 2 years back. , they r trying to match Microsoft in OS backend department with new technologies which will break compatibility with existing product & drop support for a high end Mac released only 3 years back, but it's a good thing when Apple does it but bad when MS
> 
> ...


Sir, if I read all the posts correctly here this is what you said last time.. and in the post before that.. and before that.. and so on... don't you haf anything new to say?!!!

We know that Apple announced that Snow Leopard won't run on PPC. THAT IS BAD! Point noted.. and I doubt if a single person here would say that its NOT BAD to drop PPC support so early.



MetalheadGautham said:


> Relying on brand alone can be disasterous.


Agree with you 100%. But then its a double edged sword!


----------



## mail2and (Jun 16, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> I said "in his right mind"
> Even I am aware of this fact that ppl are sometimes ignorant buyers.



Interesting to note that you believe that half of the students and faculty at a university that produced 13 nobel laureates including Dr. Amartya Sen, numerous heads of states, CEOs/CFOs of virtually every big corporation on earth, are 'ignorant' buyers.

Don't get me wrong, I have used Linux extensively. But, choosing a Mac over say a HP laptop wouldn't make me exactly ignorant. It's called a person's choice. This choice costed me less than any competing choice. So, please do learn to respect choices.  

It'll be a sad day when the chairman of Creative Commons in the UK, a professor at my university, was to be called ignorant; or the world's leading academic on outsourcing to be said not to 'be in his right mind'.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2008)

@Anirudh 

It's not about that, it's about Apple's double standerds. They bashed Vista for breaking compatibility & not running on some old computers but when they r doing the same thing it's all of a sudden justified according to Macboys


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2008)

Yeah, because what Microsoft did with Vista and what Apple is doing here is totally the same thing. Marketing your OS as being capable of running on low end hardware (while it’s clearly not) and making deals with your hardware vending partners to stick “Works with Vista” logos on computers that run Vista extremely slowly and hardly even have all the requisite drivers is exactly the same as explicitly and transparently dropping support for a platform they moved away from four years ago (after notifying customers a year in advance, if I may add). Yeah, both are the exact same things and poor ol’ Microsoft has to take an unfair bashing for what is essentially a crappy operating system release (after seven _freaking_ years) that doesn’t work. Totally similar cases.

Not to mention the fact that it’s not like PowerPC users are going to miss anything because Snow Leopard isn’t going to bring in any new consumer level features (except support for Microsoft Exchange). Of course, then you might argue that XP users don’t miss anything either by not upgrading to Vista, and I agree with that, so yeah, that point kinda falls apart. 

------------------

Also, please note (all of you) that the decision to drop PowerPC hasn’t been finalised yet (though I personally think it has) and, for all we know, it could be supported in the final release of Snow Leopard.

And whatever I’ve said in reply to gx_saurav doesn’t mean that I change my stance on the whole issue—dropping support for PowerPC is indeed too early. They could’ve stalled it to until after 2010.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2008)

I m so sorry Arya, I forgot U R unable to use Windows at all due to your computing noobness.

Do I have to remind again that somehow I was able to use Windows Vista better then XP on my old P4 Machine with right deployment, I wonder how I did that & wrote a guide to help everyone. Just cos U failed to use Vista doesn't mean it is bad.

Here in my new office all workstations run XP which I updated to SP3. I asked for a new workstation on day 1 & was given a HP Workstation. People were skeptic about it due to Vista FUD but I told them to use Vista on it with personal assurence that it will work fine & right now after optimising properly, it is running better then XP SP3 on same hardware. Now, everyone wants to work on my PC cos it just works better for same work then XP


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2008)

Uh… just to make it clear, my previous post does not mean that I’ve stopped ignoring your replies. I just had some scathing (and funny) remarks to make and couldn’t bear the thought of letting them die in my head, so I poured them out. Your posts are still as unimportant to me as they’ve been for the past year.

Now, with that out of the way, feel free to dish out whatever crap you want—just don’t expect much in the way of replies. Thank you!


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> I m so sorry Arya, I forgot U R unable to use Windows at all due to your computing noobness.
> 
> Do I have to remind again that somehow I was able to use Windows Vista better then XP on my old P4 Machine with right deployment, I wonder how I did that & wrote a guide to help everyone. Just cos U failed to use Vista doesn't mean it is bad.
> 
> Here in my new office all workstations run XP which I updated to SP3. I asked for a new workstation on day 1 & was given a HP Workstation. People were skeptic about it due to Vista FUD but I told them to use Vista on it with personal assurence that it will work fine & right now after optimising properly, it is running better then XP SP3 on same hardware. Now, everyone wants to work on my PC cos it just works better for same work then XP


I wonder, just wonder, why the Core 2 Duo system running Vista is slower than an Intel E2120 running XP... it just boggles the mind.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2008)

Haven’t you been paying attention? Because you didn’t do the oh-so-crucial “optimisation”, man. I can suggest at least one optimisation—upgrade to XP (if Windows is the only option, that is).


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2008)

Optimisation? What's that? I'm just a dumb n00b macboy, you know, those pretty computers with the cool UI....


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2008)

LOL! Coming back to form, I see. Good one.


----------



## Kenshin (Jun 16, 2008)

chandru.in said:


> Are there so many programmers still coding their programs in assembly?  If they are using even C (the lowest level high-level language), they need not bother so much about the CPU architecture at all *(except in very few cases where they absolutely have to embed asm code in C like in certain parts of OS and device drivers).*



Those are the most imp cases...even me when codin for any controller use c....but hv to use #asm...where i hv to get things done faster....like eg if  i use a delay the compiler may blindly write NOP thousands time...so my throughput goes down, so a loop in assembly is a better option.



> PPC arch. has always been poorly exploited. The potential it has is immense. But a lot of things improved for Apple when they moved over to Intel. It was more of a business related decision.



+100 
PPC is dead for pcs...its all for embedded systems now..


----------



## Pathik (Jun 16, 2008)

goobimama said:


> I wonder, just wonder, why the Core 2 Duo system running Vista is slower than an Intel E2120 running XP... it just boggles the mind.


FYI, there is NO Intel E2120.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2008)

@kenshin: Holy mother of three gorillas! What was that!

@pathiks: Like I care. The numbers of the processor are something like that.


----------



## Pathik (Jun 16, 2008)

goobimama said:


> @kenshin: Holy mother of three gorillas! What was that!



RISC vs CISC debate!



> @pathiks: Like I care. The numbers of the processor are something like that.



You should. It decreases your post's credibility. Looks like you didn't research stuff properly. And yea, increase your post's length if you want to be taken seriously.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2008)

Okay so its the Intel E2140. Big deal.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2008)

LOL! Am I the only one who’s finding the conversation in this thread very amusing?


----------



## Kenshin (Jun 16, 2008)

aryayush said:


> LOL! Am I the only one who’s finding the conversation in this thread very amusing?



You are not alone , all threads with mac become amusing at some point of time.


----------



## Pathik (Jun 16, 2008)

Kenshin, How do you set a delay in assembly without NOOP then?


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 16, 2008)

> Kenshin, How do you set a delay in assembly without NOOP then?



Thats easy.... You first open a new thread for it.


----------



## iMav (Jun 16, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> Thats easy.... You first open a new thread for it.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> Thats easy.... You first open a new thread for it.


LOL! Good one.


----------



## Faun (Jun 16, 2008)

teh q00u way 

or teh better 1337 way


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 16, 2008)

Offtopic: 


> teh q00u way
> 
> or teh better 1337 way



You have been cordially invited to join us in the IRC channel . I see the force is strong with you.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 16, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Thank _you_, because all the things he said were exactly what I was trying to say and pretty much in those exact words. I’m just glad _somebody_ got through to you.
> 
> Oh, I can certainly identify with _that_.
> 
> ...


FYKI, Anirudh was much more clear in what he intended to say.
You were praising apple in every other line instead of talking sense.
This is a general forum, not macworld.


Anyway, forget that, I am glad thee made that point about thyself not going by brand name. But millions others don't act sensibly, anb think iPods are the best without considering the quality. Thats what concerns me.


gx_saurav said:


> we r back to square 1 that Apple is updating Mac with optimisation & new technologies that Microsoft has already given with Vista.
> 
> Apple is simply copying what Vista already gave 2 years back. , they r trying to match Microsoft in OS backend department with new technologies which will break compatibility with existing product & drop support for a high end Mac released only 3 years back, but it's a good thing when Apple does it but bad when MS
> 
> ...


Mac and Windows are in different legues. You really can't compare them.
Both are equal though, in abusing power.
But mac is for the rich who care not to spend money.
So apple is justified in all that they are doing.
Windows on the other hand, is forcefully sold with every computer.


mail2and said:


> Interesting to note that you believe that half of the students and faculty at a university that produced 13 nobel laureates including Dr. Amartya Sen, numerous heads of states, CEOs/CFOs of virtually every big corporation on earth, are 'ignorant' buyers.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I have used Linux extensively. But, choosing a Mac over say a HP laptop wouldn't make me exactly ignorant. It's called a person's choice. This choice costed me less than any competing choice. So, please do learn to respect choices.
> 
> It'll be a sad day when the chairman of Creative Commons in the UK, a professor at my university, was to be called ignorant; or the world's leading academic on outsourcing to be said not to 'be in his right mind'.


Did I say that ?


gx_saurav said:


> @Anirudh
> 
> It's not about that, it's about Apple's double standerds. They bashed Vista for breaking compatibility & not running on some old computers but when they r doing the same thing it's all of a sudden justified according to Macboys


look above.


aryayush said:


> Yeah, because what Microsoft did with Vista and what Apple is doing here is totally the same thing. Marketing your OS as being capable of running on low end hardware (while it’s clearly not) and making deals with your hardware vending partners to stick “Works with Vista” logos on computers that run Vista extremely slowly and hardly even have all the requisite drivers is exactly the same as explicitly and transparently dropping support for a platform they moved away from four years ago (after notifying customers a year in advance, if I may add). Yeah, both are the exact same things and poor ol’ Microsoft has to take an unfair bashing for what is essentially a crappy operating system release (after seven _freaking_ years) that doesn’t work. Totally similar cases.
> 
> Not to mention the fact that it’s not like PowerPC users are going to miss anything because Snow Leopard isn’t going to bring in any new consumer level features (except support for Microsoft Exchange). Of course, then you might argue that XP users don’t miss anything either by not upgrading to Vista, and I agree with that, so yeah, that point kinda falls apart.
> 
> ...


....


gx_saurav said:


> I m so sorry Arya, I forgot U R unable to use Windows at all due to your computing noobness.
> 
> Do I have to remind again that somehow I was able to use Windows Vista better then XP on my old P4 Machine with right deployment, I wonder how I did that & wrote a guide to help everyone. Just cos U failed to use Vista doesn't mean it is bad.
> 
> Here in my new office all workstations run XP which I updated to SP3. I asked for a new workstation on day 1 & was given a HP Workstation. People were skeptic about it due to Vista FUD but I told them to use Vista on it with personal assurence that it will work fine & right now after optimising properly, it is running better then XP SP3 on same hardware. Now, everyone wants to work on my PC cos it just works better for same work then XP


ignorant fanboyism.


aryayush said:


> Haven’t you been paying attention? Because you didn’t do the oh-so-crucial “optimisation”, man. I can suggest at least one optimisation—upgrade to XP (if Windows is the only option, that is).


more ignorant fanboyism.


aryayush said:


> LOL! Am I the only one who’s finding the conversation in this thread very amusing?


Mujhe bhool gaya kya ?


FilledVoid said:


> Thats easy.... You first open a new thread for it.


+1


----------



## hullap (Jun 16, 2008)

is this some expansion pack type thingie?
[offtopic]
I REALLY LOVE FANBOY FIGHTS 
[/offtopic]


----------



## Kenshin (Jun 16, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> Thats easy.... You first open a new thread for it.







Pathik said:


> Kenshin, How do you set a delay in assembly without NOOP then?


 
just use asm flag and write the code...like suppose 

             MOV CX,ffff
there:     DEC CX
             JCXZ here
             JMP there
here:

if i wud hv said delay_ms(delay in ms)
then the compiler wud hv place lots of NOPs without thinkin ...in that case i wud lose lots of space.


----------



## Faun (Jun 16, 2008)

^^are u talking about placing a loop to behave as delay ?
instead of directly using interrupt to delay ?



FilledVoid said:


> Offtopic:
> 
> 
> You have been cordially invited to join us in the IRC channel . I see the force is strong with you.


i shall prefer to remain at the dark side 

IRC and chatting is not my bowl of blood


----------



## chandru.in (Jun 16, 2008)

@Kenshin

I accept that a small amount of ASM is required in device programming (not for the scenario you said though).  When you write device controllers, you target a very specific hardware platform so it shouldn't be a major issue.  If generic system kernels as huge as Linux, BSD and Solaris can be written with very very little ASM in them, any other program can be written so too.

Re-Writing this very small amount of ASM code for different platforms, is not a Herculean task even if it is a RISC CPU.  Also, any good programmer in 2008 should have very very little hardware dependent assembly code as C compilers (and cross-compilers) have been ported to almost all available architectures and the need for ASM is very very rare.

So I really see no point in dropping support for a good architecture like PPC in future versions of Mac OS X.  But who am I to comment??  Apple and Steve Jobs want to be *DIFFERENT*.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 16, 2008)

hullap said:


> [offtopic]
> I REALLY LOVE FANBOY FIGHTS
> [/offtopic]


Why is it offtopic ?
Its the source of all my entertainment here.
Apple Fanboy vs MS Fanboy


----------



## Kenshin (Jun 17, 2008)

chandru.in said:


> @Kenshin
> 
> I accept that a small amount of ASM is required in device programming (not for the scenario you said though).  When you write device controllers, you target a very specific hardware platform so it shouldn't be a major issue.  If generic system kernels as huge as Linux, BSD and Solaris can be written with very very little ASM in them, any other program can be written so too.
> 
> ...



Point noted. Also the compilers now are made efficient.I think the only reason apple changed to intel was to increase its sales.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 24, 2008)

*Snow Leopard Putting OS X On a Diet, Applications to Shrink Dramatically*

Snow Leopard Putting OS X On a Diet, Applications to Shrink Dramatically

*gizmodo.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2008/06/SnowLeopard3_01.jpg

There might be more to Snow Leopard than meets the eye, as rumors have emerged outlining tremendous cuts in application size for 10.6. Mail.app will drop from 287MB to 91MB, iChat from 111MB to 52MB, and iCal from 89MB to 48MB. Cuts are practically universal, with already small apps like the 13MB Calculator, 15MB Image Capture and 22MB TextEdit each to be recoded to a svelte 2MB or less. As a whole, the Snow Leopard's Utilities folder will take up just 25% of the space that it does in 10.5.

AppleInsider chalks the size decreases up to wider use of vector graphics and a centralized localization scheme, so as to prevent redundant language installations. More likely, however, is that the exclusion of PowerPC support has allowed for some serious pruning, allowing Apple to shed years of IBM residue from each app. Read more…

[Via Gizmodo]


Awesome! Again, sure it’s early but there is no doubt that dropping PowerPC support is great for the long term prospect of Mac OS X’s development and evolution. Immediately evident improvements like this one are just a small sampling of what’s to come. I just can’t wait for Snow Leopard to be launched.


----------



## cooldudie3 (Jun 24, 2008)

I don't understand what this snow leopard is! Is it another system? Isn't there leopard already?


----------



## iMav (Jun 24, 2008)

Another OS, after leopard, there is snow leopard. As gx said rightly, no new eye candy or user features just a core over haul.


----------



## cooldudie3 (Jun 24, 2008)

why called snow leopard or not lion or something?


----------



## aryayush (Jun 24, 2008)

cooldudie3 said:


> I don't understand what this snow leopard is! Is it another system? Isn't there leopard already?


It’s an upgrade to Mac OS X. It’s what Leopard is to Tiger and Feisty Fawn is to _Dancing Demon_ (or whatever its name was) in Ubuntu-land. What’s there not to understand?

They’re calling it Snow Leopard because it doesn’t really have any consumer level amazing new features. It’s more of a core overhaul, fine tuning the performance and stability of the system, reducing its footprint and bringing in major new developer level features. Therefore, they wanted to keep the branding similar to Leopard, to signify that it’s not much different from Leopard on the outside but a lot has changed under the covers.


----------



## chandru.in (Jun 24, 2008)

You corrected too fast.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 24, 2008)

WOW! You were quick.


----------



## iMav (Jun 24, 2008)

cooldudie3 said:


> why called snow leopard or not lion or something?


They were out of cool cat names


----------



## aryayush (Jun 24, 2008)

Hey, I like Snow Leopard. It’s much better than, say, Lion or something.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 25, 2008)

Snow Leopard is the perfect name for this release. The name says it all. 

Although I'm sure Lion (10.7) will sound just as good as Leopard after hearing about all the stuff its gonna bring to the table.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 25, 2008)

Is Apple running out of hard disk space? Centralised Scheme sounds like registry. Langauage is a welcome edition to Mac OS, it's been quite long that it is exclusive to Vista only


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 25, 2008)

> Is Apple running out of hard disk space? Centralised Scheme sounds like registry. Langauage is a welcome edition to Mac OS, it's been quite long that it is exclusive to Vista only



Is your sole purpose on this forum inserting random comments about Vista in every other thread you see? Because frankly the act is getting quite boring.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 25, 2008)

aryayush said:


> It’s an upgrade to Mac OS X. It’s what Leopard is to Tiger and Feisty Fawn is to _Dancing Demon_ (or whatever its name was) in Ubuntu-land. What’s there not to understand?
> 
> They’re calling it Snow Leopard because it doesn’t really have any consumer level amazing new features. It’s more of a core overhaul, fine tuning the performance and stability of the system, reducing its footprint and bringing in major new developer level features. Therefore, they wanted to keep the branding similar to Leopard, to signify that it’s not much different from Leopard on the outside but a lot has changed under the covers.





aryayush said:


> Hey, I like Snow Leopard. It’s much better than, say, Lion or something.





goobimama said:


> Snow Leopard is the perfect name for this release. The name says it all.
> 
> Although I'm sure Lion (10.7) will sound just as good as Leopard after hearing about all the stuff its gonna bring to the table.


Yup. the king of cats, Lion, has an uncool name. 

As for the remaining, as far as a true geek is concerned, it matters little whats outside. Its the INSIDE that matters the most.

 I still think some of the sizes for the software is unusually large, but 

[sarcasm]
since Mac Mini comes with a WHOPPING 80 GB OF DISC SPACE, I doubt it would make a difference.
[/sarcasm]


gx_saurav said:


> Is Apple running out of hard disk space? Centralised Scheme sounds like registry. Langauage is a welcome edition to Mac OS, it's been quite long that it is exclusive to Vista only


1. Apple can NEVER run out of HDD space. Their systems are for the guys who care little bout money, and shrinking software is a GOOD thing.

Language ? Ever heard of the OS family with support in almost every single language in the world ? *cough* distro *cough*

Why do you need to bring vista into places where it is NOT WELCOME ?


FilledVoid said:


> Is your sole purpose on this forum inserting random comments about Vista in every other thread you see? Because frankly the act is getting quite boring.


+1


----------



## aryayush (Jun 25, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> [sarcasm]
> since Mac Mini comes with a WHOPPING 80 GB OF DISC SPACE, I doubt it would make a difference.
> [/sarcasm]


[sarcasm]
since Mac Pro comes with a DERISORY 4096 GB OF DISC SPACE, I doubt it would make any sense to mention it instead.
[/sarcasm]


----------



## mail2and (Jun 25, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> Their systems are for the guys who care little bout money,



I care a lot about my money, and I own a Macintosh. I'd say a lot of my friends here - some of whom will become heads of states, leading researches and professors, CEOs, CFOs etc. - also do care a lot about their money.

So, please stop the stereotyping. It will help you a lot.


----------



## W i d e S c r e e N (Jun 25, 2008)

aryayush said:


> Furthering OS X’s lead in 64-bit technology, Snow Leopard raises the software limit on system memory up to a theoretical *16TB of RAM*.



somebody plz explain this


----------



## chandru.in (Jun 25, 2008)

For me too the word "theoretical" is confusing.

In pure theory, a full-fledged 64-bit system should support 16 Exabytes of RAM.  But AMD and Intel CPUs allow 256 TB due to their 48-bit addressing.

Where does this 16 TB come from?  It is mostly due to restrictions in other chipsets on our mobo.  If an Apple system supports only 16TB of RAM, I guess it is the practical amount and not just *theoretical*.  If I'm wrong, please correct me.


----------



## Kenshin (Jun 26, 2008)

Even the 32 bit ones support 48-bit addressing.48-bit addressing uses the 16-bit segment selector, and a 32-bit offset to access memory. 16TB does seem low.


----------



## chesss (Jun 26, 2008)

> There might be more to Snow Leopard than meets the eye, as rumors have emerged outlining tremendous cuts in application size for 10.6. Mail.app will drop from 287MB to 91MB, iChat from 111MB to 52MB, and iCal from 89MB to 48MB. Cuts are practically universal, with already small apps like the 13MB Calculator, 15MB Image Capture and 22MB TextEdit each to be recoded to a svelte 2MB or less. As a whole, the Snow Leopard's Utilities folder will take up just 25% of the space that it does in 10.5.


287mb mail app!! 
:O baap re! how? 



> Do I have to remind again that somehow I was able to use Windows Vista better then XP on my old P4 Machine with right deployment, I wonder how I did that & wrote a guide to help everyone


give the link plz..


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 26, 2008)

mail2and said:


> I care a lot about my money, and I own a Macintosh. I'd say a lot of my friends here - some of whom will become heads of states, leading researches and professors, CEOs, CFOs etc. - also do care a lot about their money.
> 
> So, please stop the stereotyping. It will help you a lot.


I am talking from the Indian context where macs are quite expensive

I know its different in Europe.

Maybe I forgot to mention other points, like its for those who need to use a PC without learning what an OS is, or without bothering with the system and just get to use software, but still... what I mean is that this type of people are _usually_ ones ready to spend money.

Stereotyping is done mostly by our friend Aryayush here about non mac users 



aryayush said:


> [sarcasm]
> since Mac Pro comes with a DERISORY 4096 GB OF DISC SPACE, I doubt it would make any sense to mention it instead.
> [/sarcasm]


[sarcasm]
I am a well informed buyer. I feel that its much better to buy a mac pro for 200 grands instead of building a system thats as powerful but spending only 80k. Because nobody can build systems better than Apple.
[/sarcasm]


----------



## FilledVoid (Jun 26, 2008)

> Maybe I forgot to mention other points, like its for those who need to use a PC without learning what an OS is, or without bothering with the system and just get to use software, but still... what I mean is that this type of people are usually ones ready to spend money.



I'm going to disagree with this. I'm pretty sure theres more to the story than that or there wouldn't be hackintoshes all over the place. Not to mention that although I only know a few (5-6 max) Mac users all of them seem to be much proficient at using computers. But then again theres the style "bling" I guess.


----------



## mail2and (Jun 26, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> I am talking from the Indian context where macs are quite expensive
> 
> I know its different in Europe.



The basic Macbook is cheaper in India than it is in the UK. Also, from next time I would appreciate if you do not leave things to imagination and state them clearly. Not everyone is smart enough to comprehend what you say.



> Maybe I forgot to mention other points, like its for those who need to use a PC without learning what an OS is, or without bothering with the system and just get to use software, but still... what I mean is that this type of people are _usually_ ones ready to spend money.



Do you have any facts or figures that prove your points?



> Stereotyping is done mostly by our friend Aryayush here about non mac users



I'd suggest not taking names, but then I can only suggest.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 26, 2008)

mail2and said:


> The basic Macbook is cheaper in India than it is in the UK. Also, from next time I would appreciate if you do not leave things to imagination and state them clearly. Not everyone is smart enough to comprehend what you say.


Yes basic macbook is cheaper in India.
But other notebooks, with much better configurations, like Dell XPS also come at same cost.
Thats why I said macbook is expensive.
_relatively speaking_.



FilledVoid said:


> I'm going to disagree with this. I'm pretty sure theres more to the story than that or there wouldn't be hackintoshes all over the place. Not to mention that although I only know a few (5-6 max) Mac users all of them seem to be much proficient at using computers. But then again theres the style "bling" I guess.


Hackintosh... its all about the OS. not the laptop.
the problem with macs is that these two get mixed up in conversations.
the OS and the PC.

Besides, hackintoshes are mainly products of intense curiosity coupled with unwillingness to spend money.

As for Mac users being so much proficient at using computers, I suggest you try an experimnent. Give a guy a Sidux loaded laptop. Give another guy a Windows Vista laptop. Give the last guy a Mac loaded laptop. Ensure that all these guys are ignorant about computer usage before. See their status in 1 week. The mac guy would have been most comfortable. Thats how a mac is designed. Its meant to be used by almost about anybody.

Mac is all about user interface, good bundled software and flashy comfortable hardware.


----------



## mail2and (Jun 26, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> Thats how a mac is designed. Its meant to be used by almost about anybody.
> 
> Mac is all about user interface, good bundled software and flashy comfortable hardware.



That's what the casual computer users want, don't they? I mean a history or a classics student won't have the same use for the computer as, say, an engineering student. Even people in the financial industry (except the quants, who're again Ph.Ds and engineers) mostly use Excel, Word and Powerpoint.

For me, both Mac OS X and the various linux distributions have their own charm. For example, I find the Xfce desktop environment very addictive.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 26, 2008)

mail2and said:


> That's what the casual computer users want, don't they? I mean a history or a classics student won't have the same use for the computer as, say, an engineering student. Even people in the financial industry (except the quants, who're again Ph.Ds and engineers) mostly use Excel, Word and Powerpoint.
> 
> For me, both Mac OS X and the various linux distributions have their own charm. For example, I find the Xfce desktop environment very addictive.


thats it. thanks to you, milind, filled-void and amitava, I am starting this thread:
*www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=91428
answer me or else face the wrath of a sleep deprived guy who can't sleep due to trying to find the logic over most of your statements.


----------

