Bearcat Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Software updates usually are released for any of the following reasons: 1) By this date, maybe for specific hardware requirements, such as the Time Capsule. 2) It's good enough, let the people at it. 3) Features need to get out to the people for competitive reasons. 4) We're tired of fixing it, just let it go and call it a day. With the number of developer seeds, I'm leaning towards number 4 drawing close :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konami® Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I don't understand why Apple does not like to tell the users when they are going to release Leopard Updates when is close to be out to the public. Why they keep all these {censored} secret is just beyond me, and all of us trying to guessing when is coming out. In Windows Vista SP1, everybody know when is coming out to the general users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agrafuese Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I don't understand why Apple does not like to tell the users when they are going to release Leopard Updates when is close to be out to the public. Why they keep all these {censored} secret is just beyond me, and all of us trying to guessing when is coming out. Because they don't want to get flamed by everyone when they can't release it in time! But seriously, think about it. If they give themselves a hardcore deadline, then they'll be obligated to meet it, thereby applying more pressure to themselves and rushing things out. I personally am not a fan of that kind of product. Rushed product = faulty product in most cases. I'd rather they take their time and give us something that is worth using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frohike Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I don't understand why Apple does not like to tell the users when they are going to release Leopard Updates when is close to be out to the public. Why they keep all these {censored} secret is just beyond me, and all of us trying to guessing when is coming out. Not only that, they get everyone used to being all hush hush at all times. This way they get to train everyone from the outset. If it's Apple there's a blanket "don't talk" and there's not a lot to think about as one NDA fits all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac.nub Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 10.5.2 9c30 information/screenshots are available in the topic I posted here. Luckily i've never had to sign/whatever the Apple NDA, anonymous sources for the win. ~mac.nub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IT-Pro Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 10.5.2 9c30 information/screenshots are available in the topic I posted here. Luckily i've never had to sign/whatever the Apple NDA, anonymous sources for the win. ~mac.nub Thanks for the information. I really appreciate it. I would like to know if Apple addressed that annoying dns bug or perhaps they plan to do so. The dns bug involves this: After you get your Mac out of sleep/hibernate you have to empty your dns cache because otherwise you won't be able to resolve any website you visit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arubinst Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Thanks for the information. I really appreciate it. I would like to know if Apple addressed that annoying dns bug or perhaps they plan to do so. The dns bug involves this: After you get your Mac out of sleep/hibernate you have to empty your dns cache because otherwise you won't be able to resolve any website you visit. That doesn't happen to me... My Mac sleeps all the time. I practically never turn it off. I open and close my MBP several times a day, change locations, etc. and it always works immediately after waking up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxintosh Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 iPhoto update issued... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 ...and ProKit update... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyman Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I don't think so, it could have just as easily have been a monetary issue. Depending on the final size of 10.5.2 they wouldn't have been able to fit everything on one DL disk, so they would have had to pay a lot more for packaging. Makes more sense to do it the way they did. Just because the upcoming 10.5.2 update will be more than 400MB in size doesn't automatically mean that these 400+ megabytes would have been to add to the actual size of the files on the Leopard DVD since most patches are only replacing existing software by newer versions. If they'd include major additions, then (maybe!) they would have surpassed the DL-DVD size limit. Firstly, the only people 'forced' to upgrade their hardware to run Vista is those with really old machines and for those people, the chances are their PC is out of date any way. Second, Vista isn't only restricted for some arbitrary marketing reason, there is no doubt DX10 is a selling point of Vista but there are technical reasons why it's limited to Vista and post-Vista OS. Thirdly, don't expect actual DX10 games to run on XP, or at least not strictly comparably like Crysis is [apparently] able to. Fourth, those with older machines and who aren't gamers aren't going to go out, buy a new OS and install it, they'll simply get it with their new machine so they aren't going to stick with it for those reasons because those reasons don't apply to them and they do not even know of those reasons. Well, to the first point I think it's a question of defining "old". I guess if I had run Vista on my old P4C 3.0GHz machine with 1GB of RAM, OS X would have performed slicklier compared to Vista in terms of GUI performance (Exposé, Dashboard, Spaces etc.). Prove me wrong, I can't tell for sure, because I sold my "old" PC about one and a half years ago to get my MBP. For the second point I am interested what are these technical reasons. I can only say there are patches for like every Vista-only game out there so they can be run on XP, too, I don't know about drawbacks in comparison to Vista, though! Concerning point four that is exactly what I wanted to express. Of course, the average Windows user doesn't go out and buy Vista if he has an "older" machine anyway. Since he can get a new machine with Vista coming with it, he doesn't even see to ask himself if he should stick with XP or go with Vista, he would rather be saying "Well, I got a new PC AND it's coming with the LATEST MS OS, too - if that ain't cool!". But you know - the average user has other preferences than a gamer or other performance enthusiasts. Back to 10.5.2: if it's true that the delays between developer builds are getting shorter, this should indicate that a release is more or less imminent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxintosh Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Vista ISN'T a failure. Thanks, I needed that More and more each day vista is being referred to as "Windows Millenium Edition 2" See what ZDNet thinks about vista Even microsoft has, through their actions, admitted that vista is a failure in so many words. Deal with it. Most people see vista as a failure. Only windows fanboys stick up for it If they'd include major additions, then (maybe!) they would have surpassed the DL-DVD size limit. We don't know what the final size of 10.5.2 will be so it's hard to say, but all I'm saying is that Apple probably considered this, saw it as a possible monetary issue, and so just went ahead and released Leopard as is, knowing that they could simply issue these large patches down the line. Generally though I agree with you. One thing is for sure, it's getting really big in size. Those that own laptops should be wise and plug it into the AC when updating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mifki Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 it doesnt take long to install the update, it isnt evern big, just comprehensive, nearly every feature of the OS has been recompiled and bug-fixed. Instead of complaining about the size you should be happy to see that it is so comprehensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclonefr Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Thanks, I needed that More and more each day vista is being referred to as "Windows Millenium Edition 2" See what ZDNet thinks about vista Even microsoft has, through their actions, admitted that vista is a failure in so many words. Deal with it. Most people see vista as a failure. Only windows fanboys stick up for it We don't know what the final size of 10.5.2 will be so it's hard to say, but all I'm saying is that Apple probably considered this, saw it as a possible monetary issue, and so just went ahead and released Leopard as is, knowing that they could simply issue these large patches down the line. Generally though I agree with you. One thing is for sure, it's getting really big in size. Those that own laptops should be wise and plug it into the AC when updating Even though other people "claim" and are expressing their oppinion, I'm surely not a Windows fanboy : I'm spending at least 99% of my times under Leopard. But when I wanna do some gaming ? What am I doing ? Well I boot back into Vista 1% of my time. I'm happy I can launch programs almost instantly thanks to Superfetch, I can use all the new Vista programs (windows photo gallery, etc) without having to use the {censored} "Preview soft" from XP. Oh, and I like to use the instant search features, ways better than the "ZzZZzZ" search from XP. I like better the way the Explorer is now, where you have Stacks like Leopard for Downloads etc. So yes, i'm keeping Vista because I want something NEAR Leopard experience when I do NEED Windows. I don't want some old 2001 OS with 2001 features. We are in 2008, it's time to move on. Comparing Me to Vista is rubbish. You surely DIDN'T TRY both of them to say Vista is another Me. But yeah sure NT 6.0 kernel sucks blah blah blah blah, NT5.1 is more stable etc... We know the drill. I'm not saying which OS between MacOS and Windows is BETTER so don't treat me as a WINDOWS fanboy. I have the choice to install pretty much any Windows... Would I install Windows 3.0 ? No. Would I install Vista for the same price ? Yeah sure. If one's asks me to choose between giving me Vista or XP, i'd take Vista. But if you are bashing Vista so much, go back to DOS 6.22, at least it was running faster than Vista is. You should be fine on your rig. At least you are fashioned, you are saying like everyone else the favorite sentence : Vista sucks, hail to XP ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scannerfm77 Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I don't like all this waiting. I check their website every time I get my hand on internet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agrafuese Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 But if you are bashing Vista so much, go back to DOS 6.22, at least it was running faster than Vista is. Amen! Don't we all need a little more DOS in our lives? Bring on the DOS!!! No waiting for updates, that's for sure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts