First batch of Leopard rumors

I was hoping for a new finder and a new decent window manager. Managing multiple windows is a royal pain in the ass. Looks like we have new stupid widgets and a new theme rather than basic os functionality

Be super fast on 8 cores no way the FSB bus will choke that up. But it will work good with AMD chips.

4 cores may be the max before FSB gets in the way.

And what will that cost $6000 and up with only 512 ram.

Wow, sounds exciting. I'm saving up for a black macbook (to match my black 5g ipod) so I'll be waiting for the release. Is there a specific date out or about when?

Mac OS Rumors is absolutely the worst source of "super-secret" Apple information. These guys are so messed up, they probably couldn't even tell you what day it is.

Here is what the Wikipedia has to say about them:

MacOSRumors

Run originally by a man named Ryan Meader, MacOSRumors.com was indeed a popular source for new Apple info, as they collected it first from message boards and usenet posts, and later developed contacts inside Apple. MacOSRumors was the first site to tell of, among other things, the new case design used with the G4 towers.[citation needed] They tried to spawn their popularity into other sites, including InternetWeather.com, but eventually gave up on that as well. More recently, some readers have felt that the quality of updates has deteriorated significantly, pointing to evidence that reports are more likely to be fabricated than from any actual source – and, while the site still exists, it is largely discounted and ignored by the active Mac rumor community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_rumors_community

Yeah, I'd agree that they're no pillar of Mac journalism.

You have not seen anywhere near Apple's best work with Intel and highly optimized compilers with mature code design from the ground up to take advantage of the uniquely efficient Core microarchitecture, until you've seen Leopard on a Mac Pro with four cores of Conroe ...

Umm.. four cores of Conroe WTF?

My favourite one was the super secret 68k ubercomputer that was capable of 10,000,000 megaflops and only cost $200. MacRumours == stupid

You mean this:

When it comes to the system-level "BitTorrent"-style bandwidth sharing system, we know it is indeed a very real project at Apple and will eventually be part of a package that comes with Mac OS X Server in the Leopard or post-Leopard era. It will allow large organizations to pool bandwidth at multiple locations for single purposes, like high-demand global media downloads or popular files, distributing Software Updates across their enterprise or to external customers/employees/partners and so forth. It will also allow, at least in potential, the donation of bandwidth to Apple in return for "credits" that can be used on iTunes, the Apple Store, or to buy anything else Apple offers. This will be very attractive to large companies with unused bandwidth who can help offset their own expenses, and Apple's by effectively selling their bandwidth to Apple at a bargain-basement rate. For those companies, however, bargain-basement for unused bandwidth is infinitely better than nothing, and Quality of Service is a fundamental part of this project that is being developed under code-name "Supercluster".

That idea isnt that rediculous. There could be advantages to clustering downloads with torrents. In fact, some places do that now. Torrents load balancing is a fantastic idea, and it does allow trusted hosts to trade their bandwidth for other advantages (most usually a reciprocal bandwidth sharing agreement).

So, Apple may trade something it has to akamai or fileplanet for their off-peak bandwidth.

Though, the law of the universe explicitely states that if MacRumors says it's true, It cant be. The minute MacRumours posted that article, 100 developers in the bandwidth sharing department at Apple lost their jobs.

EDIT: Lets all email mac rumours and pressure them to post an article saying "Apple will never sell OS X for vanilla PCs"

+crosses fingers+

That idea isnt that rediculous. There could be advantages to clustering downloads with torrents. In fact, some places do that now. Torrents load balancing is a fantastic idea, and it does allow trusted hosts to trade their bandwidth for other advantages (most usually a reciprocal bandwidth sharing agreement).

 

So, Apple may trade something it has to akamai or fileplanet for their off-peak bandwidth.

Fine, but it is totally ass-backwards. Unlike Akamai or whomever, Apple is not a bandwidth dealer. And the idea of exchanging mass corporate bandwidth for iTunes "credits"? Come on...

Though, the law of the universe explicitely states that if MacRumors says it's true, It cant be. The minute MacRumours posted that article, 100 developers in the bandwidth sharing department at Apple lost their jobs.

MacRumors is a different, respectable site, but MacOSRumors is a mere tabloid who might as well be running stories about Steve Job's two-headed love child.

You're right. A corporate client wouldnt be interested in trading it's bandwidth for itunes. It might be interested in selling it's bandwidth though. BT is capable of tracking the bandwidth used by a specific torrent.

If I were Apple, I'd distribute the file downloading functions to dedicated file downloaders, like fileplanet or akamai, and get out of the business altogether.

One more [absurd] thing:

We're talking about 100%+ performance boosts in many benchmarks that are dependent on compiler optimization...

While is certainly is true that Intel has some high performance compliers, the idea of a "100%+" performance boost is ridiculous. Furthermore, as far as I know, Intel's compliers still do not compile Obj-C (Cocoa), which is a huge issue as that is the "native" language of OS X.

That article is a load of {censored}. I know a  Mac developer whose division gets all the Apple betas and test machines, and he hasn't heard anything about developer seeds of Leopard yet, which also means we aren't going to be getting Leopard until November at the earliest, most likely Macworld '07.

That is basically right. There are no Leopard betas outside of Apple yet. At the WWDC in the begining of August, Jobs will demo Leopard and describe the new features. Then we should expect a WWDC Developer Preview to be passed out. A series of Leopard betas should follow starting about October. With Vista being delayed we should expect Leopard no sooner then January and quite possible about March (roughly when Vista is "suppose" to ship).

Two things, I wonder if we will be able to run Lepord as well, this should translate to better hardware support once the towers come out.

2nd, I think VISTA is terrible, bloated and will not make that much headway for at least a few more years.

If OSX can get the .exe to work (can't recall the link but there is progress), Windoze is in trouble. This program that I speak of runs .exe native, no virtual, re-booting, emulation or anything, it just runs.

On the flip side, Apple doesn't make CPU's, chipsets or motherboards, and QC for the past INTC products have been garbage compared to prior PPC products. Hoping that newer cooler chips trickle down to all lines as well as price drops as the Duo Core already had a price drop but is only seen in PC and Desktops, not one MAC product has dropped in price. Typical Apple. The core duo is half the cost of what is was 1 month ago.

What are the chances that this site somehow got tons of insider info on Leopard when meanwhile there's been only a trickle of rumors? It seems more like a wishlist than a newsworthy article. Despite all the credible people they got this info from supposedly, there's not a single leaked screenshot?

AppleInsider.com and ThinkSecret.com have been 95% right consistently. What makes me more suspicious is that neither site seems to have acess to the supposed information that MacRmors acquired. Both sites are usually the first places to find new Apple news.

Part of me makes me think that these guys have some actual information. The Quartz 2D is a pretty random thing to make up.

But who knows? We report, you decide.

I was hoping for a new finder and a new decent window manager. Managing multiple windows is a royal pain in the ass. Looks like we have new stupid widgets and a new theme rather than basic os functionality

yeah I know what you mean have you tried out pathfinder.. ?

if this was fully intergrated into Leopard it would be killer.. if you enable "show pathfinder desktop" in the Pathfinder pulldown menu (why it isnt in the options i dont know) it is pretty well integrated into your whole system mind you.

bofors is right MacOSRumors is dreadful when it comes to predictions but hopefully Quartz 2D Extreme support is switched on by default, multiple desktops built-in not through some addon program and a new improved Finder

jrsdead

Pathfinder is great. Good call.

Two things, I wonder if we will be able to run Lepord as well, this should translate to better hardware support once the towers come out.

 

2nd, I think VISTA is terrible, bloated and will not make that much headway for at least a few more years.

 

If OSX can get the .exe to work (can't recall the link but there is progress), Windoze is in trouble. This program that I speak of runs .exe native, no virtual, re-booting, emulation or anything, it just runs.

Windoze is in trouble.

Not in tell osx run on non apple hardware.

yeah I know what you mean have you tried out pathfinder.. ?

if this was fully intergrated into Leopard it would be killer.. if you enable "show pathfinder desktop" in the Pathfinder pulldown menu (why it isnt in the options i dont know) it is pretty well integrated into your whole system mind you.

yeah pathfinder is great, apple should buy it and end the finder shame, my only big problem is that pathfinder doesn't seem to work as root and i need to be logged as root when i'm raping the os. When i run it as root only the menu shows up weird. I end up using mucommander a subpar totalcommander clone

If OSX can get the .exe to work (can't recall the link but there is progress), Windoze is in trouble. This program that I speak of runs .exe native, no virtual, re-booting, emulation or anything, it just runs.

I think you mean the osx port of wine(Wine Is Not an Emulator)? WINE will never work perfect, the win32 api is always changing... it is hard to hit a moving target. Even running WINE under linux(what wine first ran under and the most compatible port) it will run some programs ok, but a lot of windows apps are unstable.

No major corpartion will switch to MacOS because of wine... and for most people they will want to use the same system they work with... Windows will only be in trouble if major business start to switch to OS X.

You have not seen anywhere near Apple's best work with Intel and highly optimized compilers with mature code design from the ground up to take advantage of the uniquely efficient Core microarchitecture, until you've seen Leopard on a Mac Pro with four cores of Conroe ...

 

Umm.. four cores of Conroe WTF?

I think they ment Kentsfield 4 cores (2x2 Conroe) processor, but my bet would be that Apple will use one Woodcrest (witch is double core also but is for servers) or two Woodcrests (4 cores)

I think they ment Kentsfield 4 cores (2x2 Conroe) processor,

too bad that the FSB will choke that up and 2 amd-quad cores will kick its ass