Snow Leopard is coming???!!!

Discussion in 'Apple' started by weedhopper, Jun 4, 2008.

  1. weedhopper

    weedhopper Guest

    SOS with a new name.

    Maccies will be busy for a long, long time.

    Just when you're going to get 10.5.3 running half way - a new dot.

    http://arstechnica.com/journals/app...0-6-code-named-snow-leopard-may-be-pure-cocoa

    "People familiar with the situation have confirmed to us that TUAW's details
    are true-Snow Leopard is currently on track to come out during next
    January's Macworld, and it will not contain major OS changes."

    I guess it's still cheaper than writing a whole new OS. And it shows.
     
    weedhopper, Jun 4, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. The action claimed in this article breaks so many of Apple's traditional
    practices, and each of them so severely, that it stretches the bounds of
    credibility.
     
    Gregory Weston, Jun 4, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. weedhopper

    John Drako Guest

    I find this rumour a little hard to believe. It would break with
    everything Apple has done since OS X came out in 2001.
     
    John Drako, Jun 4, 2008
    #3
  4. *yawn* Go back to nursing that giant chip on your shoulder. This is too
    boring.
     
    Jamie Kahn Genet, Jun 5, 2008
    #4
  5. weedhopper

    Alan Baker Guest

    Care to place a wager on that?

    --
    "The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
    "I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
    "It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
    '[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
    'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
    IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
    'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
    on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
     
    Alan Baker, Jun 5, 2008
    #5
  6. weedhopper

    Philo D Guest

    Yep, those old powerpcs willl all stop working on that date!
     
    Philo D, Jun 5, 2008
    #6
  7. weedhopper

    Dave Seaman Guest

    System 7.0 was the first Mac OS that wasn't free. Maybe I'll get
    around to upgrading from System 6 one of these days. :)
     
    Dave Seaman, Jun 5, 2008
    #7
  8. weedhopper

    Guest Guest

    system 7 was the first system that one could buy a retail box with
    manuals, but it was (and still is) available on line for free.

    system 7.1 was the first system that not free and not available on line
    at all. if you wanted it, you paid for it (or pirated it).

    system 7.5 was also not free, but at some point well after it was
    superceded (i don't recall exactly when), it was posted on line at
    apple.com.
    i bet it boots faster than os x does on an intel mac:)
     
    Guest, Jun 6, 2008
    #8
  9. Leopard is a major disappointment for me. Nothing really impressive,
    the Time Machine is useless.
     
    eatfastnoodle, Jun 6, 2008
    #9
  10. Maybe if you had a hard drive. Floppy booting was damn slow. :)
     
    Steven Fisher, Jun 6, 2008
    #10
  11. weedhopper

    Guest Guest

    Maybe if you had a hard drive. Floppy booting was damn slow. :)[/QUOTE]

    floppy booting was slow, but it also loaded a *lot* less data. time it
    sometime, you might be surprised. :)

    this test used a mac plus with a hard drive, but nevertheless, it held
    its own:
    <http://hubpages.com/hub/_86_Mac_Plus_Vs_07_AMD_DualCore_You_Wont_Believ
    e_Who_Wins>
     
    Guest, Jun 6, 2008
    #11
  12. weedhopper

    weedhopper Guest

    Perhaps you can explain how a WINDOWS machine gets slower and slower over
    time. I haven't seen that phenomenon yet. But I have only been using
    WINDOWS computers for twenty years.
     
    weedhopper, Jun 7, 2008
    #12
  13. weedhopper

    You Guest

    Because Uncle Billy, keeps adding BLOATware to the Windoz OS to the point
    that it HOGS all the Cpu Cycles mashing around in the OS, instead of
    dealing with the application software, like in the real world.....
     
    You, Jun 7, 2008
    #13
  14. weedhopper

    weedhopper Guest

    When I get WINDOWS updates, my machine always runs faster. Maybe if you
    owned a real computer running WINDOWS, you would see the errors of your
    statements.
     
    weedhopper, Jun 7, 2008
    #14
  15. weedhopper

    weedhopper Guest

    The joke is; most maccies are using a minimum of 2GB of RAM to run OSX
    halfway acceptable.
     
    weedhopper, Jun 8, 2008
    #15
  16. weedhopper

    Guest Guest

    apple didn't kill non-apple ram. what happened was that some ram that
    did not meet the required specs didn't work after the firmware update,
    which was more stringent about flaky ram. since the memory was out of
    spec, the fact that it did work previously was luck. people who bought
    non-apple ram that *did* meet the required specs had *no* problem
    whatseoever. furthermore, anyone who bought ram from a reputable
    supplier and had a problem could get a warranty replacement.
     
    Guest, Jun 8, 2008
    #16
  17. weedhopper

    Guest Guest

    no, they did not.
    got a source to back up that claim?
    the fact that something works doesn't necessarily mean it's within
    spec. it could be outside spec but close enough that it works. then a
    change occurs that *requires* it to be within spec, not 'close enough,'
    so it stops working.
    that may be true, but they weren't the only people who had no problem.
    those who bought ram that met the required specs, regardless of who
    made it, also had no problems.
    apple did no such thing, except in your troll infested mind.

    cite some credible references that back it up, otherwise, this is just
    more bullshit.
     
    Guest, Jun 9, 2008
    #17
  18. Good grief. All the technical specifications are online; look it up
    yourself. It was also all over the Internet; do a couple searches. Or
    just, you know, put on a tinfoil hat and unplug your computer from the
    Internet.
     
    Steven Fisher, Jun 9, 2008
    #18
  19. Oops! I misread what you wrote. My apologies, you're right. :)
     
    Steven Fisher, Jun 9, 2008
    #19
  20. weedhopper

    Alan Baker Guest

    Yup.

    We've been over this ground with Edwin before. The information in the
    ROM of the RAM was a necessary part of the spec. He just can't accept it.

    --
    "The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
    "I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
    "It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
    '[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
    'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
    IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
    'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
    on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
     
    Alan Baker, Jun 9, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.