Full Version: Leopard as soon as March
Sweet link, Thanks!
hopefully
QUOTE(nickg331 @ Feb 9 2007, 04:10 PM) 
hopefully
It couldnt take as long as MS putting Vista out
Not to piss all over your parade, but I would like to point out the obvious...
You do realize that Spring officially starts March 20th.
Point is that Leopard could show up as Early as Early Spring or as Late as Late Spring.
There is nothing new there.
You do realize that Spring officially starts March 20th.
Point is that Leopard could show up as Early as Early Spring or as Late as Late Spring.
There is nothing new there.
anyone know anything about hte new ilife/iwork (other than the supposed excel-killer)
QUOTE(nickg331 @ Feb 9 2007, 04:12 PM)
anyone know anything about hte new ilife/iwork (other than the supposed excel-killer)
I have read very little about it. so sorry
that was four posts in 3 minutes... wow
theres supposed to be all this integration with leopard, but unless they introduce new apps what could it be (other than just like coreanimation integration)?
theres supposed to be all this integration with leopard, but unless they introduce new apps what could it be (other than just like coreanimation integration)?
No clue, Guess we will just have to wait until March (hopefully early march 
)
)
Spring does not start until "LATE MARCH"!
You will not get a Winter Leopard Release. Apple already said Spring, reiterated Spring, put Spring in every single piece of documentation on planet earth, updated said documentation saying Spring when they decided to change their name, and then have continually said again and again to newspapers, magazines, tv news shows, and websites, "We have already said that Leopard will be released in the Spring. We are not going to go into any further detail because we do not discuss the status of unreleased products."
You are not going to get ANYTHING before March 20th.
You will not get a Winter Leopard Release. Apple already said Spring, reiterated Spring, put Spring in every single piece of documentation on planet earth, updated said documentation saying Spring when they decided to change their name, and then have continually said again and again to newspapers, magazines, tv news shows, and websites, "We have already said that Leopard will be released in the Spring. We are not going to go into any further detail because we do not discuss the status of unreleased products."
You are not going to get ANYTHING before March 20th.
thanks for the optimism
apple has been known to completely disregard its own timeframes before, and also even late march is pretty soon...
apple has been known to completely disregard its own timeframes before, and also even late march is pretty soon...
cant wait
thx for the link cant wait.
MacRumors.com says this may be true:
http://www.macrumors.com/2007/02/20/mac-os...t-end-of-march/
http://www.macrumors.com/2007/02/20/mac-os...t-end-of-march/
Leopard will come out Spring 2007.
Spring 2007 begins the end of March.
It ends the end of June.
So, saying that it could be out as early as the end of March is stating the obvious.
Spring 2007 begins the end of March.
It ends the end of June.
So, saying that it could be out as early as the end of March is stating the obvious.
Lol, leave the n00bs be
haha...yes, I was just posting this article for curious people.
Nah not at you, but just in general, all the people getting hyped up over spring.
If its late March as rumored, then JAS and the rest of the gang have a lot of work on their hands to get Leopard and 10.4.9 working on generic x86 systems. 
JaS has already retired, in case you have been updated with the news.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
It will not be x64 only. It will not support g3, but it will support anything from g4 and on. Yes, this does mean that it will run natively on Intel and PPC.
QUOTE
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
lie
FYI, we already have leopard and 10.4.9 running on our pc's.
QUOTE(Purple Puppy @ Feb 20 2007, 08:38 PM)
JaS has already retired, in case you have been updated with the news.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
God that x64 claim is so wrong it's not even funny.
And Spring is anywhere from late-march till mid-june, so that's a 3-ish month time frame that 'Spring' technically is in effect.
QUOTE(Purple Puppy @ Feb 21 2007, 04:38 AM)
JaS has already retired, in case you have been updated with the news.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
G3 PPC - 32 Bit - Not officially supported but persons have gotten Leopard builds to run on it.
G4 PPC - 32 Bit - Leopard runs on it
G5 PPC - 64 Bit - Leopard runs on it
Intel Core Duo - 32 Bit - Leopard runs on it
Intel Core 2 Duo - EM64T - Leopard runs on it
Intel XEON (Core 2 based) - EM64T - Leopard runs on it
I'm actually amazed and full of respect towards Apple for getting Leopard to support "both" 32 and 64 bit drivers to work natively without any interference.
it will be out on june ( )
)
well my magic stick says, july the 21st at 6 am est.
Disclaimer: I could be wrong
Disclaimer: I could be wrong
x64 only! damnit I am going to need a new Macbook! what a puzzling business decision from Apple.......
that would be quite daft.
that would be quite daft.
Its going to be an AIO (x64 and x86 in one package, like PPC binaries and Intel, ahh Mach kernel rocks), and will be released in June at WWDC.
Why do you think the moved wwdc up to June?
Why do you think the moved wwdc up to June?
QUOTE(asap18 @ Feb 21 2007, 01:58 PM)
Its going to be an AIO (x64 and x86 in one package, like PPC binaries and Intel, ahh Mach kernel rocks), and will be released in June at WWDC.
Why do you think the moved wwdc up to June?
Why do you think the moved wwdc up to June?
I don't know, its a Universal Binary I would say. The Frameworks (Carbon and Cocoa) have been compiled as one universal binary that is dynamic I believe by running when it detects the appropriate instruction set, whether its PPC 32-Bit, PPC 64-Bit, Intel x86 or Intel EM64T.
I could be wrong. Just saying its an AIO would mean there are 4 versions of Leopard:
Leopard for PPC 64-Bit
Leopard for PPC 32-Bit
Leopard for x86
Leopard for EM64T
I am sure a Dual Layer DVD can only hold 8 GBs worth of data. 4 x 4 = 16 which means, Leopard would have to come on at least 2 dual layer DVDs which just not sound like something I think they want to do. Its an amazing feat they have accomplished to get it working so smoothly on so many architectures.
Where the hell do you people get this information?
Leopard runs on EVERYTHING, G3 unofficially, G4 no problems, G5 no problems, Intel 32-bit and Intel 64-bit just fine.
Quit spouting off mindless garbage that you know nothing about!
The applications use Fat Binaries, ones that have extra code added to them to allow them to run natively under multiple architectures. The big thing in programs are the Resource Files, the ones that give you your UI, your icons, and all that other stuff.
While it is actually an "All In One", it does not have multiple versions of the same files on the disc. It is one OS that runs everywhere and you can swap between architectures with no issues.
Leopard runs on EVERYTHING, G3 unofficially, G4 no problems, G5 no problems, Intel 32-bit and Intel 64-bit just fine.
Quit spouting off mindless garbage that you know nothing about!
The applications use Fat Binaries, ones that have extra code added to them to allow them to run natively under multiple architectures. The big thing in programs are the Resource Files, the ones that give you your UI, your icons, and all that other stuff.
While it is actually an "All In One", it does not have multiple versions of the same files on the disc. It is one OS that runs everywhere and you can swap between architectures with no issues.
@asap...
They did not move WWDC up to June...last year they moved it back to August.
They did not move WWDC up to June...last year they moved it back to August.
QUOTE(projectle @ Feb 21 2007, 09:34 AM)
Where the hell do you people get this information?
Leopard runs on EVERYTHING, G3 unofficially, G4 no problems, G5 no problems, Intel 32-bit and Intel 64-bit just fine.
Quit spouting off mindless garbage that you know nothing about!
Leopard runs on EVERYTHING, G3 unofficially, G4 no problems, G5 no problems, Intel 32-bit and Intel 64-bit just fine.
Quit spouting off mindless garbage that you know nothing about!
Thank you for saying what I was thinking ;-)
QUOTE(Purple Puppy @ Feb 20 2007, 11:38 PM)
JaS has already retired, in case you have been updated with the news.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
Leopard is supposed to be x64 only, wonder if they are going to crack is so badly that it runs on the 32bit x86 systems as well.
About getting leopard by late march, it has been experience that Apple doesn't delay its products as much as Microsoft, so it is highly improbable that leopard will be behind schedule. Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that it will be here by spring.
That's strange, because the PowerPC would be 32 bit for only the G4, but the G5 and Intel Core chips are all 64-bit. Strange... Cause Tiger x86 is 32-bit as of now except the Mac Pros. Fortunately, I have EM64T, for those without, this may be the end of the road, as there's no way to "patch" this, as all the code is 64-bit.
I take back my words about x64 only. Sorry I haven't read the apple website carefully enough.
QUOTE(track09 @ Feb 21 2007, 11:48 PM)
That's strange, because the PowerPC would be 32 bit for only the G4, but the G5 and Intel Core chips are all 64-bit. Strange... Cause Tiger x86 is 32-bit as of now except the Mac Pros. Fortunately, I have EM64T, for those without, this may be the end of the road, as there's no way to "patch" this, as all the code is 64-bit.
shall I open up my Macbook and ask the godamn Core Duo if its 64-bit or would you like to use Google and edit your post accordingly?
Only the Core2Dous and Xeons are 64-bit processors.
The CoreSolos and CoreDuos are 32-Bit.
The CoreSolos and CoreDuos are 32-Bit.
umm fizzeh, http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/faq/
actually the g5 chip is a 64 bit chip.
Leopard wll probably ship with two double layer dvds. One for Intel one for PPC, itd be very hard to put qll on one disk.
actually the g5 chip is a 64 bit chip.
Leopard wll probably ship with two double layer dvds. One for Intel one for PPC, itd be very hard to put qll on one disk.
Why would is ship as two DL-DVDs...right now the UB is about 5.5 gigs...and fits on a DL-DVD
QUOTE(projectle @ Feb 21 2007, 05:34 PM)
The applications use Fat Binaries, ones that have extra code added to them to allow them to run natively under multiple architectures. The big thing in programs are the Resource Files, the ones that give you your UI, your icons, and all that other stuff.
While it is actually an "All In One", it does not have multiple versions of the same files on the disc. It is one OS that runs everywhere and you can swap between architectures with no issues.
While it is actually an "All In One", it does not have multiple versions of the same files on the disc. It is one OS that runs everywhere and you can swap between architectures with no issues.
Fat Binaries, thats the word I was looking for. Perfect answer.
QUOTE(Fizzeh @ Feb 22 2007, 02:21 AM)
Why would is ship as two DL-DVDs...right now the UB is about 5.5 gigs...and fits on a DL-DVD
Mistake, projectle corrected with the FAT binaries answer.
I think it will be shipped with multiple DVD if needed (one for the OS and another one for the softwares) because not all macs support DL DVD.
QUOTE(mr.manatane @ Feb 22 2007, 09:28 AM)
I think it will be shipped with multiple DVD if needed (one for the OS and another one for the softwares) because not all macs support DL DVD.
But even my Macbook Pro CoreDuo, which only has a single layer superdrive, can read DL DVD disks.
BTW: in regards to other posts, the processor in it is a 32 bit processor.
With Tiger, a CD version (of about 5 CDs) was available.
Additionally, some people say iLife 07 will be bundled with Leopard, and that would need its own DL-DVD
Additionally, some people say iLife 07 will be bundled with Leopard, and that would need its own DL-DVD
QUOTE(Bearcat @ Feb 22 2007, 02:34 PM)
But even my Macbook Pro CoreDuo, which only has a single layer superdrive, can read DL DVD disks.
BTW: in regards to other posts, the processor in it is a 32 bit processor.
BTW: in regards to other posts, the processor in it is a 32 bit processor.
really? its 32bit? i thought for sure core was 86-64 arch. (AMD64) and yea, theyd probably make it dvd dl, but some older macs that would support it dont have dvd-dl, so there may be a cd version too.
All DVD drives can read Dual-Layer DVDs.
Not all DVD recorders can write Dual-Layer DVDs.
Oh, and under Intel, only the Core2's and Xeons are 64-bit.
Okay, there are others, but none that are used in Macs.
Not all DVD recorders can write Dual-Layer DVDs.
Oh, and under Intel, only the Core2's and Xeons are 64-bit.
Okay, there are others, but none that are used in Macs.
QUOTE(bwhsh8r @ Feb 22 2007, 10:22 PM)
really? its 32bit? i thought for sure core was 86-64 arch. (AMD64) and yea, theyd probably make it dvd dl, but some older macs that would support it dont have dvd-dl, so there may be a cd version too.
As Adrian has nicely put it.
Any machine with at least a combo drive or dvd-rom will be able to read DL-DVDs. Only DL burners can create them.
All CoreDuo machines (Mac mini, Macbook 1st gen, Macbook pro 1st gen, iMac CoreDuo 1st gen) are all 32 bit machines. (all with G wireless in them).
All Core2Duo machines (iMac 2nd Gen and 24", Macbook 2gn Gen, Macbook pro 2ng gen) released last fall are 64 bit machines. (all with N wireless in them).
All Mac Pros (Xeon Woodcrest) machines are 64 bit.
Hope that helps
QUOTE(Bearcat @ Feb 22 2007, 06:03 PM)
As Adrian has nicely put it.
Any machine with at least a combo drive or dvd-rom will be able to read DL-DVDs. Only DL burners can create them.
All CoreDuo machines (Mac mini, Macbook 1st gen, Macbook pro 1st gen, iMac CoreDuo 1st gen) are all 32 bit machines. (all with G wireless in them).
All Core2Duo machines (iMac 2nd Gen and 24", Macbook 2gn Gen, Macbook pro 2ng gen) released last fall are 64 bit machines. (all with N wireless in them).
All Mac Pros (Xeon Woodcrest) machines are 64 bit.
Hope that helps
Any machine with at least a combo drive or dvd-rom will be able to read DL-DVDs. Only DL burners can create them.
All CoreDuo machines (Mac mini, Macbook 1st gen, Macbook pro 1st gen, iMac CoreDuo 1st gen) are all 32 bit machines. (all with G wireless in them).
All Core2Duo machines (iMac 2nd Gen and 24", Macbook 2gn Gen, Macbook pro 2ng gen) released last fall are 64 bit machines. (all with N wireless in them).
All Mac Pros (Xeon Woodcrest) machines are 64 bit.
Hope that helps
oh yea, i forgot about the core vs core2, thanks for clarifying it for me
To clarify about DVDs...Most commercial DVD movies are Dual Layer, so therefore any *close to decent* player can read them.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.