Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > Snow leopard: Release

Snow leopard: Release (Page 8)
Thread Tools
mdc
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY²
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 08:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by angelmb View Post
tries to get the thread back to where it belongs

hey people, I found the Snow Leopard desktop picture, it is really nice.



You welcome.
Thanks. I prefer it to the 10.5 one and am using it on my second monitor at work.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 08:58 AM
 
Am I the only one that thinks the supernova backgrounds look cheesy?
     
Proudest Monkey
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mini-Apple, Minnesota
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 11:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Am I the only one that thinks the supernova backgrounds look cheesy?
I'm with you ... Apple should release retro desktop pictures from the pre OS X days ... might good for a laugh.
MacBook 13.3" C2D 2.0ghz 2gb/160gb
     
ajprice
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 12:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Proudest Monkey View Post
I'm with you ... Apple should release retro desktop pictures from the pre OS X days ... might good for a laugh.


Seamless texture rubber bands ftw!!

It'll be much easier if you just comply.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 12:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
(heck, I can buy 1GB sticks the price of a packet of gum these days!)
Where I am, they're usually around $8-$10. That's a pretty expensive pack of gum. (Yes, I know Amazon has some for around $6, and then you pay shipping and it's $8-$10 again). If I buy a spindle of optical media, they probably cost about a quarter each. I know which format I will prefer to use to send something to someone if I'm not guaranteed to get it back.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 01:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Am I the only one that thinks the supernova backgrounds look cheesy?
Am I the only one who knows what a supernova is - and what an aurora is?
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 01:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Am I the only one who knows what a supernova is - and what an aurora is?
No, you're not the only one.
     
JKT
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 01:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
Where I am, they're usually around $8-$10. That's a pretty expensive pack of gum. (Yes, I know Amazon has some for around $6, and then you pay shipping and it's $8-$10 again). If I buy a spindle of optical media, they probably cost about a quarter each. I know which format I will prefer to use to send something to someone if I'm not guaranteed to get it back.
I realise that prices are different in the US, but I would be intrigued to know where you can get writable Blu-Ray discs for that price... looking at amazon.com for the US prices suggests that the cheapest you can get is nearer $4 for a disc on a spindle, and about $10 to $13 for a single disc.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 02:36 PM
 
Sure, because Blu-Ray discs are relatively new. That will change. DVD-Rs and dual-layer DVD+Rs were really expensive too when they first came out - not anymore. I paid $5 each for some dual-layer DVD+Rs when the technology was new, but now they can be had for under a buck each on a spindle.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 02:49 PM
 
Just like flash memory.
     
JKT
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 03:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
Sure, because Blu-Ray discs are relatively new. That will change. DVD-Rs and dual-layer DVD+Rs were really expensive too when they first came out - not anymore. I paid $5 each for some dual-layer DVD+Rs when the technology was new, but now they can be had for under a buck each on a spindle.
It is possible, but you are assuming that Blu-Ray will become as ubiquitous as DVDs (and CDs) to achieve the same mass effect and thus cost savings for the manufacturers, which isn't exactly guaranteed given that competition from other formats and OTA downloads is far stronger than was the case for the CD and DVD formats. As Simon rightly points out, the same principle is already happening for Flash - prices for GB of Flash have plummeted over the past couple of years and it doesn't look like that trend will be stopping any time soon so if and when BR discs do become a dollar or less, it could be that a multi-GB Flash drive of similar capacity (or good enough capacity) will also be at that price point.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 04:15 PM
 
The problem with BR is, that there are just too many alternatives:
* flash
* internet
* good compression + DVD

CDs and DVDs (for a long time) didn't have that kind of competition.

-t
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 05:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Just like flash memory.
Flash memory has been around longer than dual-layer DVD+Rs, which also haven't gained anywhere near the ubiquity of either regular CDs/DVDs or Flash drives, and Flash is still an order of magnitude more expensive, even for a 1 GB stick. And if you want an 8 GB drive to actually rival the capacity of a dual-layer DVD+R, you'll be paying around $20, even on Amazon, or more than that in a store.

If JKT is right about Blu-Ray disks being $4 each on a spindle, then you could get five of them for the same price as one flash drive that has under a sixth of the capacity.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 05:29 PM
 
Seriously off topic people.
Vandelay Industries
     
TheoCryst
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 06:17 PM
 
This is the thread for derails. Don't forget about the two-page tangent about cookies and MacOffice a while back...

Snow Leopard! It's cool, and it's cheap, and it's coming soon! Woo!

Any ramblings are entirely my own, and do not represent those of my employers, coworkers, friends, or species
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 06:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
IOW if I install a brand new HDD I will need to install Leopard first (or clone from an older Leopard install) to be able to install SL. Goodbye 45% time savings. Hello extra 45 min wait.
Well, then after you do the install the first time, make a disk image. Next time it'll be only 5 minutes.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 06:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by TheoCryst View Post
It's cool, and it's cheap, and it's coming soon! Woo!
That's what she said.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 08:21 PM
 
Can we talk about some of the new features introduced in SL DP2, or should I start a new thread for that?

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Proudest Monkey
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mini-Apple, Minnesota
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 08:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by ajprice View Post


Seamless texture rubber bands ftw!!
great!
MacBook 13.3" C2D 2.0ghz 2gb/160gb
     
Proudest Monkey
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mini-Apple, Minnesota
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 08:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Can we talk about some of the new features introduced in SL DP2, or should I start a new thread for that?
Yes we can ...

I'm most excited about the general cleaning up of the OS - smaller footprint, hopefully a boost a speed I'll probably couple with a RAM upgrade.

I would have like to have seen more done to the dock but I welcome the addition of scrolling in stacks and showing every open window for a program using expose
MacBook 13.3" C2D 2.0ghz 2gb/160gb
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 08:40 PM
 
The Finder live icon previews sounds pretty neat, too, although I'm not sure how useful it will prove to be.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 09:46 PM
 
I never liked the aurora desktop. First thing I changed.

Live icon previews and easy resizing is awesome. And the Dock-activated Expose was a long time coming. And Stacks now works the way it should have in the first place.

I did say Apple was gonna market SL as fast, and I was right!

I'm also excited about making your own Services with Automator.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 09:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
II'm also excited about making your own Services with Automator.
I hope it works better than the current automator.

I never really got anything useful done with it. I always resort back to Apple Script.

-t
     
TheoCryst
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2009, 10:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
That's what she said.


Seriously though, the updated Exposé looks pretty sweet: looks like a good response to Windows 7's new Aero Peek features. Here's hoping it's as easy to use as the demo made it look.

Any ramblings are entirely my own, and do not represent those of my employers, coworkers, friends, or species
     
Salty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2009, 03:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
I hope it works better than the current automator.

I never really got anything useful done with it. I always resort back to Apple Script.

-t
Only thing I ever really used automator for was to make a alarm script for iTunes at a certain time paired with a repeating event in iCal.

I think it would be helpful if more people made automator actions for their apps, as well if Apple made more automator actions for THEIR software IE iWork. I remember trying to convert all my pages files to pdfs for a project I was working on was a PITA! And Automator should have helped but it didn't.
     
Salty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2009, 03:50 PM
 
I don't think Click and Hold is a really intuitive thing. Kinda like hold Alt while leaving an App to auto hide. Which now I do without thinking. That said I sometimes used it to bring up the menu so that'll be annoying. I wonder if there'll be a modifier to make it instant. Not to mention I often open files by dragging them onto the dock icon of an App, will that now activate Expose? That might be very annoying!
     
ccrider
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brooklyn, yo...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2009, 04:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Salty View Post
I don't think Click and Hold is a really intuitive thing. Kinda like hold Alt while leaving an App to auto hide. Which now I do without thinking. That said I sometimes used it to bring up the menu so that'll be annoying. I wonder if there'll be a modifier to make it instant. Not to mention I often open files by dragging them onto the dock icon of an App, will that now activate Expose? That might be very annoying!
I think you have to hold the file over the icon for a sec or so to engage exposé. Otherwise it will open the file normally.
This is unverified but I'm always right
     
TheoCryst
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 11, 2009, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Salty View Post
I don't think Click and Hold is a really intuitive thing. Kinda like hold Alt while leaving an App to auto hide.
Holy crap that's frigging awesome. I had no idea you could do that...

Any ramblings are entirely my own, and do not represent those of my employers, coworkers, friends, or species
     
Salty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2009, 02:03 PM
 
See that's my issue. There's lots of cool things you can do on a Mac that you'll slow discover and they're nice and quick, but lots of users won't discover things like

Hold Alt when leaving an App to hide it.
Hold Shift when hitting the expose key to show the desktop. Heck hold alt when typing an e to get the accent (unless you're at work on Windows.)
Shift Command 3/4 to do screen captures.

I can't even think of all the other keyboard things that normal people don't even find out. I've been using the platform since 99 so I know tons of stuff, but even I sometimes find out new stuff.

I think Apple needs to include something like a web video series on things you didn't realize you could do with your Mac
     
JKT
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2009, 02:21 PM
 
Many of them are in the Help>Mac Help>Keyboard shortcuts listing but (a) you need to know to look there and for that terminology and (b) not many people do! (and (c) not all of them are listed, just many.)
     
CIA
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 01:16 AM
 
Can we discuss our experiences with the Snow Leopard Developer Preview release here? Or will that get us booted?
Work: 2008 8x3.2 MacPro, 8800GT, 16GB ram, zillions of HDs. (video editing)
Home: 2008 24" 2.8 iMac, 2TB Int, 4GB ram.
Road: 2009 13" 2.26 Macbook Pro, 8GB ram & 640GB WD blue internal
Retired to BOINC only: My trusty never-gonna-die 12" iBook G4 1.25
     
angelmb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 02:56 AM
 
How They Shrank the Mac OS. David Pogue.



However, a bunch of you wrote, in essence: “Well, of COURSE Snow Leopard is half the size — they just ripped out all the code for the PowerPC Macs! All that’s left is the code for Intel Macs!”

I smacked my forehead. Well, DUH — no wonder Snow Leopard is so much smaller (and takes so much less time to install)!

So I asked Apple if that was the explanation for Snow Leopard’s big diet. The answer: Not quite.

There is some savings achieved by ripping out the PowerPC code. However, most of those savings are eaten up by the new code required to let 64-bit programs run in Snow Leopard.

In fact, most of the six-gigabyte savings, Apple says, comes from fine-tuning — line-by-line refinement and optimization — and “file-system compression."
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 03:00 AM
 
Actually most of that comes from not installing GBs of printer drivers by default anymore.
Vandelay Industries
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 03:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
Can we discuss our experiences with the Snow Leopard Developer Preview release here? Or will that get us booted?
It hasn't in the past, so go ahead.

Stable / bugfree enough to use as a production system? Apple did say that it was a "close to release build".

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 06:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay View Post
Actually most of that comes from not installing GBs of printer drivers by default anymore.
I agree. What they told Dave sounded like a bunch of marketing BS to me. They didn't save 6GB of code by fine-trimming lines in their .cc files. And certainly not because of the 64bit buzz word either. Most of those 6GB will be resources. Pics, audio, etc.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 10:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
I agree. What they told Dave sounded like a bunch of marketing BS to me. They didn't save 6GB of code by fine-trimming lines in their .cc files. And certainly not because of the 64bit buzz word either. Most of those 6GB will be resources. Pics, audio, etc.
Yeah, that description from Apple in the Pogue article sounds bogus.

P.S. My installs are usually several GB smaller than the default, because I never install the bazillion printer drivers anyway. I also avoid installing the bazillion different localizations I never use.

Oh and I'm a bit disappointed it won't run on PPC, considering I still have some PPC machines. I was expecting PPC support in the most recent Mac OS X for~5 years, so until 2011. IOW, I was expecting 10.7 to go Intel-only. Nope, off by one point update version.

However, I do wonder how much faster they can get Intel performance now that they don't have to worry about PPC support. Does making universal binaries significantly slow down Intel performance, or should it not matter most of the time?

What about 64-bit? Does the 64-bitness preclude (most) PPC support? I would imagine no since some Intel machines are 32-bit anyway.
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 11:05 AM
 
I'm pretty sure UBs were always Intel-optimized, so it doesn't matter.
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 11:08 AM
 
10.6 runs on 32 and 64 bit Intel processors. They could have supported 32 bit PowerPC and the G5 are 64 bit processors so in theory they even could have supported 4 architectures total. The presence of a binary for one architecture has zero effect on the performance on another architecture. Apple just chose not to spend the resources to develop and test for PowerPC any more. It was done to save money and time.
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 11:20 AM
 
They already had 4 architecture binaries in Leopard. Chess is 32bit PPC, 64bit PPC, 32bit i386 and 64bit i386. So, it's very doable, probably just not desirable on their part.
Vandelay Industries
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 11:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by adamfishercox View Post
I'm pretty sure UBs were always Intel-optimized, so it doesn't matter.
Ah yes. From what I gathered it did seem that any optimizations Apple was putting in the OS were geared towards Intel machines. PPC support in some ways may essentially have been frozen since 2006.

Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
10.6 runs on 32 and 64 bit Intel processors. They could have supported 32 bit PowerPC and the G5 are 64 bit processors so in theory they even could have supported 4 architectures total. The presence of a binary for one architecture has zero effect on the performance on another architecture. Apple just chose not to spend the resources to develop and test for PowerPC any more. It was done to save money and time.
Yeah, I figured as much. It's just that a 3-year obsolescence period is very fast even by Apple's standards. IIRC, Apple tended to support machines in their latest OSes for about 5 years. But then again, come to think of it, it isn't really 3 years. It's really more like 4, since the last PPC machines were actually released in 2005, even though they were still the only machines on sale in early 2006.
     
AppleGirl1990  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 12:05 PM
 
10,000 views and still going. sweet.

I for one was a little disappointed to hear that SL is going to be available in September. I think everyone was expecting a July release (especially with all the chatter about the # of builds floating around).

They really are testing this OS out before releasing it.
MAC PRO: Two 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5400 processors
ATI Radeon HD 4870 with 512MB of GDDR5 memory
1600MHz, 64-bit dual independent frontside bus
16 Gigs (4x4) of 800MHz DDR2 memory
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 12:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by AppleGirl1990 View Post
I think everyone was expecting a July release (especially with all the chatter about the # of builds floating around).
Actually, I don't think *anybody* was expecting a July release, especially not anybody who followed Snow Leopard development even casually.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 12:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
10.6 runs on 32 and 64 bit Intel processors. They could have supported 32 bit PowerPC and the G5 are 64 bit processors so in theory they even could have supported 4 architectures total. ... Apple just chose not to spend the resources to develop and test for PowerPC any more. It was done to save money and time.
On the low level (which is where many of the changes took place), the development effort increases substantially when you support another architecture. I've heard from a friend (who is in the DevCon) that the changes to Snow Leopard's kernel have been substantial and porting was (somehow) not such an easy matter anymore. As you say, they chose to reallocate those resources elsewhere.
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Yeah, I figured as much. It's just that a 3-year obsolescence period is very fast even by Apple's standards. IIRC, Apple tended to support machines in their latest OSes for about 5 years.
The switch from PowerPC to Intel was a phase transition and not a normal upgrade. I don't think Apple will permanently shorten the duration of support for older Macs afterwards.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2009, 01:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
The switch from PowerPC to Intel was a phase transition and not a normal upgrade. I don't think Apple will permanently shorten the duration of support for older Macs afterwards.
I hope you're right.

This is esp. important now IMO, considering that the slowest MacBook ever created back in 2006 is still a 1.83 GHz dual-core machine. I'd have no problem using that as my daily laptop for quite some time to come, but I'd prefer to be able to run newer OSes. ie. I'd hope that 10.7 will be supported on it.

The main reason I'm buying the new Unibody 13" MacBook Pro is not for the speed, but because I like the enclosure, the illuminated keyboard, and the battery life. Oh and the fact that it got Firewire back. However, if the new unibody had the same 2.0 GHz Core Duo as my original 2006 white MacBook, I'd have no problems with that.
     
AppleGirl1990  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2009, 08:31 AM
 
Harlot, i do for SL. About a year ago it was scheduled for a June 09 release. Did you forget it was pushed back?
MAC PRO: Two 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5400 processors
ATI Radeon HD 4870 with 512MB of GDDR5 memory
1600MHz, 64-bit dual independent frontside bus
16 Gigs (4x4) of 800MHz DDR2 memory
     
64stang06
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2009, 10:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by AppleGirl1990 View Post
Harlot, i do for SL. About a year ago it was scheduled for a June 09 release. Did you forget it was pushed back?
I don't recall Apple saying June 2009; I remember them saying it would be out "in about a year". I think they learned their lesson the hard way with the 3GHz G5 claims.
MacBook Pro 13" 2.8GHz Core i7/8GB RAM/750GB Hard Drive - Mac OS X 10.7.3
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2009, 12:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by AppleGirl1990 View Post
Harlot, i do for SL. About a year ago it was scheduled for a June 09 release. Did you forget it was pushed back?
Actually, the only thing they said publicly was "in about a year", in June 08.

I quite distinctly remember a release that was publicly pushed back: That was Leopard, 10.5, IIRC, and it was announced that they'd push it back until fall 2007, because Apple's crew was concentrating on the iPhone.
     
cwkmacuser
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Northern California--SF Bay Area
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2009, 12:42 PM
 
Like AppleGirl said, SL was pushed back too. There were rumors of a June '09 launch. But obviously, that didn't happen.
Chris K.
White MacBook and iPod Nano 3rd Generation
Experienced Mac User
Don't hold me accountable for jokes-I have a lousy sense of humor!
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2009, 12:43 PM
 
I forgot that rumors = promised release date.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2009, 01:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by cwkmacuser View Post
Like AppleGirl said, SL was pushed back too. There were rumors of a June '09 launch. But obviously, that didn't happen.
There were rumors of a G5 Powerbook, as well.

I guess they were pushed back?
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:17 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,