Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

kman42 · Mar 18, 2001, 11:10 AM

One of these two gentlemen is a liar. Wincent apparently has this great review of final that he will post in encrypted format. Leonis says final is nothing but k78. These two positions are clearly mutually exclusive. If the final is k78 then wincent has nothing to fear by saying, "For my review of final see my review of k78." Apple couldn't do much about that. Since he hasn't done this, it implies that final consists of something other than just k78 (at a minimum it must be k78 with some added goodies). Leonis on the other hand says that final is k78; nothing more. If there was something more then he should tell us what it is (videos, iTunes, something).

Since neither of them will post any information to substantiate their claims that they have the final and since we have nothing better to do until Wed, let's take a poll on which one of them is lying. Please don't be mean, and include reasoning.

I'll start. Leonis-1, Wincent-0. I have never seen Leonis post any sort of inside info (doesn't mean he hasnt, I just haven't seen it), and he really hasn't said anything that would lead me to believe he has the final. While Wincent has pissed us all off with his little teaser, he has been pretty straight about things in the past and has always posted good reviews. I'm just more willing to give Wincent the benefit of the doubt than Leonis.

kman

sitox · Mar 18, 2001, 11:19 AM

We'll never get to know if 4K78 was final or not, because they'll NEVER ship the product with a 4K78 line in the 'about box'. Who'd be able to say at the end that final is the exact same OS he's been using before - minus some removed debugg code maybe, or some thrown in apps??

kman42 · Mar 18, 2001, 11:20 AM

After re-reading my first post, I just want to make sure that this thread isn't taken in the wrong way. I don't want it to be mean-spirited, I just wanted to prompt one of these guys to give us a little more substantive information. It was meant in a sarcastic prodding sort of way.

kman

sitox · Mar 18, 2001, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by me:
We'll never get to know if 4K78 was final or not...

unless on 21th someone says:
'just one more thing - all the guys thinking 4K78 was final, were right - isn' that amazing?'

Kristoff · Mar 18, 2001, 11:37 AM

4K78 is NOT the final version.
It is a Final Candidate.

The fact that DHCP hostname does not work in 4K78 should be a dead giveaway.
It worked perfectly in 33, it was broken in 46 and it half worked in 60 and 73 and is broken in 78.

What I consider working is:
registering DHCP hostname with DHCP server and DNS server and having "hostname" command return something other than "localhost"

zengravy · Mar 18, 2001, 11:39 AM

It IS interesting that Wincent's 4K78 review didn't cause such an uproar with Apple (or at least we are led to believe that they freaked out as a result of his "final" review). I think the 4K7 review is still there. Strange that Apple would demand that he not post the "final" review and leave the 4K78 hanging in the breeze if the two builds are identical...

BRussell · Mar 18, 2001, 11:42 AM

It very easily could be that neither is lying. Just because Wincent said they were going to do a full review of the final doesn't mean it's something different than 4K78. If they got the boxed retail, they'd want to do a review even if it was just basically 4K78. At this point, we haven't learned anything from Wincent.

Mar 18, 2001, 11:45 AM

According to Leonis the GM does say 4K78 in the about box. So we may find out after all...

sitox · Mar 18, 2001, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by Meebo:
According to Leonis the GM does say 4K78 in the about box. So we may find out after all...

no way

ZnU · Mar 18, 2001, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by BRussell:
It very easily could be that neither is lying. Just because Wincent said they were going to do a full review of the final doesn't mean it's something different than 4K78. If they got the boxed retail, they'd want to do a review even if it was just basically 4K78. At this point, we haven't learned anything from Wincent.

Except that one of his poll options seemed to imply that there were "major surprises."

Mk · Mar 18, 2001, 12:30 PM

I'd say the suckers who were quick to accuse wincent
of being full of **** are the friggin' Liars.
Because it sure seems now that he isn't.

Mar 18, 2001, 12:37 PM

4K78 is GM. Period. And it shows up in the About Box. You'll all see soon enough. (What's wrong with 4K78 again, by the way?)

vasu · Mar 18, 2001, 12:39 PM

I too will vouch for Leonis, he isn't someone that would lie. Now, i know two people that claim to have a retail version and it says 4k78 unfortunately. But there could be 2 explanations. Apple continuted to finish up some bugs and speed optimizations but left the build as 4k78. here's the thing, OSX development went all the way up 4k88. However the 4k8x series were worse than 4k78. just like 4k50 was worse than 4k46.

so here's my theory, which I think makes perfect sense. Since 4k78 was deemed FC1, they can't make changes to it and call it 4k80 since that already existed. I'm thinking that OSX Final/GM is 4k78 FC2 or FC3 or something, but the FC part isn't listed!

GM IS 4K78, BUT I don't think it's Release 1, I think it's release 2 or 3 or something. Does that make sense? if they make FC1/RC1 better they can't go up in build number since those already existed, so they went up in FC/RC number, but that's not listed in the about window. I think that makes perfect sense. It's the same build (as far as features go), just a different/upgraded release which isn't listed next to the build number. The 4k78 that developers got, for exampel if 4K78 RC1, and GM might be 4K78 RC2 or RC3, but RC wasn't even listed in the developers release, so it wouldn't be in the final.

I'm also going to go out on a limb and say that Quicktime5 and maybe some other core components are finalized in the GM release and not the RC1 release.

So in short, GM is 4K78, but it's a newer release, like RC2 or RC3. So for all the people saying 4K78 is GM, I believe you, I'm just not 100% sure that it's RC1, i think it's a later RC. I don't even think QT5 final was in RC1, which Phil Shiller said would be in the shipping version.

-vasu

kman42 · Mar 18, 2001, 12:53 PM

Well, it looks like Leonis may be coming through after all. He is now offering to email and photo of the box and a screenshot.

Mar 18, 2001, 01:00 PM

Vasu, you're saying what I've been speculating. That 4K78 is essentially the GM but some recompiles and such done on it. The ymay have frozen the build number and tweaked it. The only difference from what I thought earlier is that I thought they did this and called each recompile/optimized build a new build number, thus the 4K83 rumors. t if it's the same code and just streamlined a bit, I suppose they might stick to the same build and just call each 4k78 rc1, rc2, etc.

This is all about semantics at this point. There seems to be some consensus about the state of OS X final -- only how optimized/quicker it is is still up to debate (the debug/driver thing).

kman42 · Mar 18, 2001, 01:04 PM

Please note that Leonis has ponied up the goods. I apologize to him for my previous speculations on his character.

eating crow,
kman

das · Mar 18, 2001, 01:07 PM

[email protected]

ckohler · Mar 18, 2001, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by sitox:
We'll never get to know if 4K78 was final or not, because they'll NEVER ship the product with a 4K78 line in the 'about box'. Who'd be able to say at the end that final is the exact same OS he's been using before - minus some removed debugg code maybe, or some thrown in apps??

Why not just look at the file creation dates? If the boxed, final version of OSX is truely just 4k78 then the dates will be the same. I'm placing my money on the dates being at least several weeks later.

Bluebomber21XX · Mar 18, 2001, 01:11 PM

[email protected]

I'd be interested if you'd send...

------------------
For great justice!
http://cafepress.com/rockman/

Mar 18, 2001, 01:12 PM

When did wincent every say that 4k78 is any different than the final shipping product? He hasn't. He speculated that it wouldn't be the GM but it was simply a guess and he said so. At no point has he said that his review will be any different than the one he has already posted about 4k78.

kman42 · Mar 18, 2001, 01:15 PM

Oh come on, southwest, why would wincent post a new review of final if it is the same as k78. He could just say that they are the same. There is no way one can get in trouble for saying that.

They are the same.

See, no Apple police at my door yet. Wincent is implying that there are major changes by saying that he is going to post a review.

kman

dark3lf · Mar 18, 2001, 01:46 PM

Steve must be reading all of this and laughing his mfing ass off.

the_sisko · Mar 18, 2001, 01:53 PM

It'd be nice if Wincent would just give us the thumbs up or the thumbs down on the GM, even without giving any details.

SkullMacPN · Mar 18, 2001, 01:55 PM

[email protected]

bitfly · Mar 18, 2001, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by piracy:
What's wrong with 4K78 again, by the way?

You are kidding, right?

Mar 18, 2001, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by kman42:
See, no Apple police at my door yet. Wincent is implying that there are major changes by saying that he is going to post a review.

Ding Dong!!

applenut1 · Mar 18, 2001, 03:30 PM

Leonis is a liar. Unfortunately the AI boards are down. Once they are up do a search of some messages and you'll see that he has lied in the pass and never has anything positive to say regarding apple.