[RodriCO2000]

I have been reading various sites and a few have pointed to a release of 1.0 at a late February event... Do you guys think this will actually happen??? Any Ideas, thoughts?

I am really excited to see OS X finished very soon!!!!

Mybe just Maybe well know by Jan 9

Yeah it'll happen. Apple says that OSX is feature frozen and now all they have to do is attend to all the small glitches and optimize it for delivery. OSX IS a work in progress so It will be a little lean to begin with. I don't expect the majority of current Mac users to switch until a couple of updates have come as well as the carbonizing of many essential applications. It should be fun to watch this year.

[bleen]

I'd rather see a Public Beta 2 over OS X 1.0. This would introduce a lot of requests by users, bug requests, etc. This would allow current Public Beta users to expand the use of the money they spent on it and help see what's been added and the bug fixes to that.

[MikeM32]

They may release OS 9.1 in the January Expo, and it will be included with the new hardware. It's just a guess, but I think OSX won't be packaged with any new hardware for a little while (maybe the summer MWE).

Mike

[pmcd]

This would be a fiasco. All we need is to continue the excuse of vendors not shipping products because they are waiting for the final. No OS is perfect and the delays are already getting out of hand.

I truly hope for a release of OSX at MWSF (even if shipped a few weeks later) with people who bought Mac's for Christmas eligible for the fee OS upgrade. Enough of the beta stuff. Apple needs to get on with it.

Don't forget that Jobs loves Dec/Jan for releasing big surprises (Aqua last January when no-one expected it; switch from Motorola (black) to Intel(white), Sparc, etc...for NEXTSTEP way back...). It's hard to switch a large public company like Apple fast but Apple will play the cross-platform card one day.Perhaps we'll see a Sparc, Intel, Crusoe, etc...Developer Preview for OSX. Sounds far fetched, but Apple is rapidly moving towards software and consumer hardware.

Sorry for the speculation but I do find it hard to believe that we will se a steady as she goes MWSF, although it wouldn't be unreasonable. That's not the type of thing one would expect from someone wanting to change the world.

Philip

Originally posted by bleen:
I'd rather see a Public Beta 2 over OS X 1.0. This would introduce a lot of requests by users, bug requests, etc. This would allow current Public Beta users to expand the use of the money they spent on it and help see what's been added and the bug fixes to that.

[noliv]

Do you realise how difficult it is to build a new good OS ???? No, you don't.

February is soon enough.

No OS is perfect? yes, but MacOS X have to be better that Windows2000 and easy to use when it ships...

------------------
Noliv

Mac OS X Public Beta is already reasonably easy to use. The interface needs to be polished up slightly (there are a few glitches); heavy optimisation needs to be done; support for full-screen gaming, etc.

Mac OS X Public Beta is already reasonably easy to use. The interface needs to be polished up slightly (there are a few glitches); heavy optimisation needs to be done; support for full-screen gaming, etc.

[pmcd]

Well you have no idea whether or not I realize it or not. Febuary may be soon enough for you but it isn't for me. The OS is already very late. It is not at this time competing with win2k so I don't even know why you'd bring it up. OSX will come out and evolve over years. For goodness sakes a month is no big deal and you get to finally say you kept your word.

Finally, as others have pointed out OSX is already pretty darned easy to use. My kids use it. The only one who can't in our family is the cat.

Philip

Originally posted by noliv:
Do you realise how difficult it is to build a new good OS ???? No, you don't.

February is soon enough.

No OS is perfect? yes, but MacOS X have to be better that Windows2000 and easy to use when it ships...

[This message has been edited by pmcd (edited 12-27-2000).]

[tooki]

To release Mac OS X in its current state would be a death blow for Apple. It's still much too far from complete to release as competition to Win2K, which, Mac-user or not, one must admit is very complete, fast, and relatively stabile. Right now OS X has stability, by and large, but it lacks speed so badly that it's not funny, and its feature set rivals that of Mac System 6.

In my professional opinion, Apple should develop Mac OS 9 up through version 9.5 or 9.6, and keep OS X in the womb till this summer or fall.

You can't argue, in my opinion, that Mac OS X "is just version 1.0, it'll need time to evolve." It's not version 1.0. It's slated to replace Mac OS 9, yet X is clearly not as usable as 9 for production. If X is not a viable replacement OS, people will migrate to other platforms. You know what'll happen by the time X has evolved to where it's fully capable? Win2005 (or whatever), or Gnome or KDE with Nautilus (Eazel) running on Linux.

Apple needs to be a little more careful, IMHO.

tooki

[noliv]

ANSWER to pmcd:

hmm, yes, I'm really sorry...

I don't want this thread to become a dispute... I didn't want to be aggressive.

And yes, Mac OS X is already easy to use, but I think that I can't be very productive (as in Mac OS 9) with it. I am sure that the final release will be almost perfect but I prefer Apple to work hard on it some more weeks or months instead of releasing Mac OS X now. Why? Because I'm sure that the media would point the failings. The people who don't know Apple won't wait for updates, they will think that it's not a good OS, with no softwares to work on it, no games...

They will buy a PC win windows, that's good for them, we shouldn't care.

You and me would be aware that OS X is very good and would wait some updates if needed... but the reputation of Apple would be degraded
anyway.

Apple need to sell more macs.

That's approximately my point of view (I still have difficulties to write in English)

------------------
Noliv

[This message has been edited by noliv (edited 12-27-2000).]

[tonyibook]

There are a number of people stating that OSX is not ready for prime time release at issue 1.0. Have they actually seen version 1.0 yet?

I still have a lot of faith in Apple, and believe Apple have been working hard since the Beta release to fix problems and provide extra features.

I use OSX Beta full time. Any delay to get it to version 1.0 will delay the generation of Carbon/Cocoa apps and device drivers.

[tonyibook]

There are a number of people stating that OSX is not ready for prime time release at issue 1.0. Have they actually seen version 1.0 yet?

I still have a lot of faith in Apple, and believe Apple have been working hard since the Beta release to fix problems and provide extra features.

I use OSX Beta full time. Any delay to get it to version 1.0 will delay the generation of Carbon/Cocoa apps and device drivers.

[Sven G]

Mac OS X & Windows 2001 "Whistler" (and, of course, also Linux Eazel, GNOME and KDE 2+)... it will be an interesting winter and spring, next year!

Sofar, in my opinion, the most feature-complete seems to be Whistler - also because we don't know much about Mac OS X 1.0...

As often said, here and elsewhere, Mac OS X may be the most interesting of those OSes/interfaces, because it has the potential of being a very, very powerful synthesis of the best features around, from the core system to the user interface - at least, if Apple continues to innovate them towards Internet-based computing, i.e., gradually replacing the "classic" PC concept with a new, modern, "distributed" and polycentric server-terminal concept (so, absolutely *not* controlled only by one super-company, as many fear: that potential threat has nothing to do with the technology - which is neither good nor evil, but only "usable" in good or bad manners, - but only with a too "economy-centered" society, a very bad thing indeed, I think ).

Gradually open-sourcing everything should (or could, at least...) eventually bring to us all a new era of "collaborative" development and computing (and, first of all, human relations, which are much more important! ), as already has happened on the Linux front - is this too optimistic, perhaps...?

[Spheric Harlot]

I dunno if it's too optimistic...it's already happening.

And Apple appears to be making all the right decisions to leverage it to their own - and their users' - advantage.

Quite exciting times, indeed.

-chris.

[crazyjohnson]

Naaaa. I think Apple should release it. [Then I think they are going to do a little revision shortly after 1.0 to clean up any problems - should be a free update] Untill 1.0 ships we wont have any problems with the developers. As somone mentioned earlier, the developers are using that as an excuse. GET TO WORK! When 1.0 comes everyone will release there apps. Only with our old apps ported to OS X - and all the new developers who make apps for OS X will we be able to compete with Win2K.

I already feel that X is better than 2K - but part of an OS is the apps. I think more developers will make programs for OS X - that way we will win!

Originally posted by pmcd:
It is not at this time competing with win2k so I don't even know why you'd bring it up. OSX will come out and evolve over years.

[mitchell_pgh]

It all boils down to: We don�t want OSX to be another OS/2 Warp... Nobody used it because it was hard to install, and it didn�t have many drivers... If they would have waited five more months to iron out all the bugs, who knows. It was a better technology, but it really wasn't ready for prime time. They fixed most of the major bugs, but by then, nobody cared...

wow GREAT point re: O/S 2 Warp. I really wanted to use that OS on release but my install was absolutely WTF! Couldn't trust an OS that can't even install properly. Canned it and never looked back.

The thing is, Apple can release a Public Beta 2 that is *really* good and satisfy all the people who they need too without freaking out new users who wouldn't install unless it was final. I really think they should drop that second PB on MWSF with an online update, plus 9.1. Then they can take a breath, get some last minute feedback from the second beta and hype a big polished release a few months later. Or they can panic, release a 1.0 that isn't fully cooked, and desperately try to spin doctor with a rushed 1.1 that they have to make sure everyone gets. Either way is tough. But as long as the platform is in "investing for the future" mode, do it right.

[dark3lf]

If Apple really is going to release it on February 22 (first day of MacWorld Tokyo), then a PB 2 is almost certainly out of the question.

[OddManOut]

Apple exec has confirmed there will be no more public betas. I don't think it's unrealistic to expect OsX come January. An Os is practially never ready but at some time you have to release it.

Originally posted by OddManOut:
Apple exec has confirmed there will be no more public betas. I don't think it's unrealistic to expect OsX come January. An Os is practially never ready but at some time you have to release it.

That's sad news. Yeah there is never really a truly final version of any OS. But the deciding factor to release should be how close it is to being ready, not how long they've worked on it. In other words, they shouldn't release the OS just because it's overdue.

Well it looks like I won't get my beta 2 so we'll just have to hope for the best. Maybe they'll surprise me, but in a good way .

-JB72

[pmcd]

Interesting point. I must say that I like Warp, but that is besides the point. I don't believe the analogy is correct. The problem Warp had/has is users kept using the win runtime and it was never upgraded to win32 and MS went to win95. I don't think the install was the issue at all. The real issue was all the software was on windows and people found they were spending most of their time in win-0s2.

Apple is not really competing with Microsoft at this time. In a sense it is competing against its own users.

Philip

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
It all boils down to: We don�t want OSX to be another OS/2 Warp... Nobody used it because it was hard to install, and it didn�t have many drivers... If they would have waited five more months to iron out all the bugs, who knows. It was a better technology, but it really wasn't ready for prime time. They fixed most of the major bugs, but by then, nobody cared...

[jblakeh1]

OS/2's downfall was due to the fact that it became a second OS to run Windows apps... software companies used it as an excuse to avoid writing apps specifically for OS/2... soon there was no advantage to using it.

Apple is not really competing with Microsoft at this time. In a sense it is competing against its own users.

I don't understand what you are saying by this. Apple is releasing a significant upgrade to the Mac OS, which will encourage a lot of people to get out and buy new Macs... how does this make Mac users competition?

------------------
.b
http://homepage.mac.com/jblakeh1
http://www.sit3.com