MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Simply music (iTunes?) to the ears...

First post!

I cannot begin to describe how excited I am about the 26th October 2007!

It's gonna be a good day for Apple. I'm gonna CCC my Tiger system to an external, then do a fresh clean install of Leopard.

Cannot Wait!!!!!!!

I want to cry.

The proportion of users who are already satisfied with the existing Mac OS 10.4 is massive, so the contentment factor is the one thing that will prevent many to upgrade: there simply is no need. And, will the new system run faster or slower on Leopard, using existing equipment? So far I haven't heard a word on that important question, except of course new and higher minimum processor speeds are specified.

Other posters have noted that the TRUE marvel of 10.5 is the ZFS feature; I concur. Paired with Unix 3 certification, the big boys have to take a long, hard look at Mac now. Really.

Anyone know if eWorld 2.0 made it in?

Is it true that Time Machine will require an external (or separate) drive?

we will really see the benefit when leopard specific apps start coming out and if apple release an ilife update, can anyone say core animation imovie effects, could be the reason it wasnt in the original release

I am starting to burn backups of my pics, just in case.
I hope my wife will be understanding on Fri 26th and will give me a break.

Apple's Leopard page says yes, external drive required.

"Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time."

How long can M$ go on fooling most of the people?

Many years from now, your grandkids will ask you where you were when Leopard made its official public appearance. They will stare with wide eyes in awe and disbelief as you regale them tales of camaraderie, engineering brilliance and the groundbreaking thrust that propelled the world out of the Dark Ages of information exchange. Those old enough to remember will weep softly to themselves overcome with emotion and their own fondest memories of the day that changed the world and mankind forever.

@happycampers: Yes I am satisfied with Tiger, which only leaves me with one decision.

Do I pre-order and hope they deliver it before 6:00PM so I can be an early bird? Or do I drive the 60 miles to the Apple Store, get my free t-shirt, and have it installed on my laptop before I even get home?

MW - Interest - I have no interest in sleeping on the 26th!

Jim:

"Time Machine requires a non-booting hard-drive or partition to be connected to the computer.[1] It can backup to internal hard-drives or partitions, as well as to external volumes connected by USB or Firewire. It can also backup to networked drives, including those connected wirelessly via the Airport Extreme 802.11n router. Further, the volume needs to be formatted with the Mac OS extended file system."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Machine_(software)

"@Jim" is correct, the Leopard pages does say an external drive is required; however the "technical specifications" tab on that page only says an "additional " drive is required, but it has a picture of an external drive in the write-up.

OK, does anyone REALLY know what Time Machine takes? There are now two different set of requirement versions, one Apple and one Wikipedia, plus an additional somewhat confusing, or misleading, version; also from Apple.

ZFS -- Will someone please tell me what the benefit is of having ZFS capabilities that are only "Read Only"?

I mean, if you can't write to the drive, then... it might as well be a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, right?

Bull. Thurrot says it's garbage, and we all know he is always right. Let's face it, it's time for Apple to shut down and give the money back to the shareholders.

"ZFS -- Will someone please tell me what the benefit is of having ZFS capabilities that are only "Read Only"?"

It gives mactards something to brag about.

Oh dear, that writer really gets worked up over Leopard! Normally, when you see guys this enthusiastic, there's a fine pair of boobies involved. Let's hope when he'll finally get his Install DVD, he won't have a premature ejection.

@ jay

Us with Leopard installed know, but you will have to wait.

PS. It is Sooooooooo Cooooooooooooool

"...The whole thing is easy to grok, and the tools and docs are free..."

The current OS is easy to me, too...

...for the uninformed...

run a good backup CCC / superduper, etc and do a complete, full back up to an external before taking the shrinkwrap off the box.

really.

seriously.

I mean it.

.... and then when you don't need it - yell at me then that you wasted your time taking a full back up....

Ok, be that way.

As a Unix lover, all I can say about this article is:

It's a thing of beauty!

The Vista headline: A triumph of ineptitude, a total disaster.

I second Shogun's question. What is the value of a read-only ZFS? I ask out of genuine curiosity. The basic capabilities of ZFS do sound very cool. Theoretical answers are entirely acceptable, for those of you under the NDA umbrella. (nudge nudge, wink wink)

The debut of Leopard will not be hailed by generations to come. As great as Leopard sounds, its debut will be forgotten when 10.6 arrives.

Now we need the whole world to know this - AND SWITCH!

I'm excited. I'm taking out my AOL 400K single sided disc and load it to Leopard. It's going to SCREAM!!!!!

Seriously that article is great. If only word will get out on what Yager is talking about, people will understand how much more robust and powerful OSX is compared to Windows Vista. All 7 versions of it. LOL

There is no real point to OS X having read-only access to ZFS. Why? Because ZFS won't matter to 99% of the users. Unless you are getting a Mac Pro with multiple drives or creating an external drive system, ZFS will be useless to you.

Having said that, I'm waiting for the first ZFS-based network attached storage systems to arrive. I don't want to build a server and install ZFS on it, I just want to pull the system out of a box and plug it in to my network and turn it on. So with that, I don't really need OS X to support ZFS since I'd be mounting my ZFS system with either NFS or CIFS.

My only real gripe is with the Dock, that dividing line is just plain wrong, the perspective is totally off.

And if that's my only complaint (admittedly this is from screenshots and specs only) then I'm gonna be very happy with it.

What a contrast in this review vs the reviews of Vista by an equivalent MS fan. Where even the good reviews of Vista (if you can find any) include as much that they don't like as that they do like, with Leopard there is hardly anything anyone doesn't care for or think has been done wrong. We'll get an abundance of legal Leopard reviews after the 26th and I'm expecting this trend to continue.

By the way ... did you folks read about how Vista can't copy a large number of certain types of files without running out of memory? The kicker is that it doesn't tell you about it. Any Windows fan care to comment on that one?

NICE!!! can't wait to get a new mac pro now!

Just bought a new iMac so 10 bucks for me. Even tho Tiger is fine.

WHERE DID ALL THE HATERS GO?

First of many positive articles on Leopard that I'm sure will be coming. Unlike some Windows software that had less than positive reviews.

You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.

It's magnificent!! Magnificent, I tell you!!

You can fool some of the people all the time, all of the people some of the time, and after awhile....you can do it again.

You humorless twit. Follow the thread.

Your anxieties are showing.

M. Dell: That would be "Shut it down and give TWICE as much money back to the shareholders."

You must be the one that posted the George W. Bush comment; humorless twit indeed.

I can't wait to see what great things the release of Leopard does for software from other companies.

Counting down the days...

Curious about this:

If Time Machine backs up your changes every time something changes, what happens to those huge Parallels HD files? Mine (shrunken) are still about 15GB, so EVERY time I go into Parallels, Time Machine will note that it changes and copy that giant virtual drive to an external drive. Sooner or later that drive will fill up with gigantic files which are different versions of my Windoze virtual drives. That will be a bad thing.

So the ultimate question is (if anyone knows this please respond), will Time Machine have the ability to EXCLUDE certain files or directories from its backup routine? That would be great if it did, because it would make Time Machine much more useful for me without having to buy an external 10TB drive! (Not that I would do that).

Thanks in advance,
Ferfffff

'Nix me up Scotty

And again I'll pose this question, merely as an exercise in academic futility:

If we take 2 external drives
And 'Time Machine' them to mirror one another
So we're backing up the back up of a back up
Would it be possible to record lost data before it exists ?




Thanks, BC

MDN 'Magic Word' - were - as in (to paraphrase Rick Dees):

It could be that you were here
But wherever you go
There you are

Yes, you can choose what to back up and what to exclude with time machine.

happycampers wrote
"And, will the new system run faster or slower on Leopard, using existing equipment?"

Leopard running on 64-bit processors (meaning all G5 and Core 2 Duo) will run noticeably faster, perhaps massively faster. Mac OS X has been rewritten from the ground up to take full advantage of 64-bit processing (meaning it will run really fast on the right hardware.) All you lucky G5 owners, prepare for the surprised of how fast Leopard will be on your old hardware.

The question remains, how fast will Leopard be on existing 32-bit processors (G4 and Core 1 Duo). It will either be slightly faster, or slightly slower, perhaps not even noticeably different then Tiger. We'll all find out soon enough.

I'm excited, but i'm not looking forward to installing my CS3 onto it. Last time I tried to transfer from my old PowerBook to my MacBook it refused, and I ended up on the phone to Adobe getting a 15 digit code from an Indian guy who couldn't even understand my name (is Jim really a hard name to grasp, in any language?)

Anyways, that's my only worry.

Leopard last beta on latest model Powerbook G4 is noticeable faster than Tiger.
Not just slightly faster but considerably faster: like having suddenly a revamped processor.

UltraVisitor says "Leopard running on 64-bit processors (meaning all G5 and Core 2 Duo) will run noticeably faster, perhaps massively faster."

That is something I haven't heard or read anywhere. Do you have a source? I'm not sure why that would be true and I'm interested in finding out.

Yes, Leopard is very cool, but there are two things people seem to have missed:

ZFS support isn't really there yet, in a meaningful way. Full read/write support was just released as a developer preview less than 2 weeks ago (i.e. it won't be in the retail box), and already people are running around talking about how Time Machine is made possible by ZFS. Umm... no. Just as Apple implemented Spotlight, a feature Microsoft thought they needed a whole new relational-DB filesystem for, on top of HFS+ in a fraction of the time, the same will be with Time Machine. (This is why they're running circles around MS - they're not trying to reinvent all the wheels.)

Resolution independence - don't expect to see it in the initial release. Apple hasn't listed it as one of the 300+ features, and I'm pretty sure I recall them saying "late 2008" in a WWDC session that covered resolution independence. I'm betting 10.6.

@William

Steve Jobs promoting web apps for the iPhone, and now promoting native apps, is not really a contradiction. Both kinds of software will coexist on the iPhone; they both have advantages and disadvantages. Web apps are, and will still be, a great platform for developing software on the iPhone because they are cross-platform, and can be updated continuously. Native apps has many advantages, such as better utilizing of hardware, and not requiring internet connection. But native apps also have disadvantages too: it takes much more effort to distribute regular updates, and it won't be cross platform.

Both native apps and web apps will coexist. The developers will choose which approach makes more sense for any given program.