MSN Messenger 5 for OSX Release date

By .Dan
in Apple (macOS)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mentor

PureLogic

Posted
Posted
It just occurred to me that the MBU might be taking the time now to move their programs from Carbon to Cocoa to make the transition to OS X/Intel easier (I believe most of their stuff is Carbon right now).? Thatmight> be an explanation why they are taking so long to finish MSN Messenger.

586060326[/snapback]

I've read somewhere that the Microsoft don't need any porting at all to run on Intel, I feel kinda stupid because I can't find the article back.:((

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
I've read somewhere that the Microsoft don't need any porting at all to run on Intel, I feel rkinda stupid because I can't find the article back. :(

586060328[/snapback]

I highly doubt that. Steve said that Carbon apps would take the longest (other than things not coded in XCode) to port, and I'm fairly certain that most of Microsoft's programs are Carbon.

Mentor

PureLogic

Posted
Posted
I highly doubt that.? Steve said that Carbon apps would take the longest (other than things not coded in XCode) to port, and I'm fairly certain that most of Microsoft's programs are Carbon.

586060344[/snapback]

It had to do something with the fact that Microsoft already coded them from the start for both platforms. Not sure tho.

But like I said, I can't find the article anymore so don't quote me on it.;))

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
But like I said, I can't find the article anymore so don't quote me on it. ;)

586060392[/snapback]

OK, I won't :p

Considering some of the misinformed articles I read about the transition last week, I'd say it was most likely a reporter who got some of the facts mixed up. He probably saw Word, etc. running on Steve's computer, heard the Microsoft rep say that they would support the Intel Macs, put 2 & 2 together and came up with 5.

Grand Master

Spartan_X

Posted
Posted
Or he was using one of the original Pentiums  :p.  Then again, most people here aren't old enough to remember that fiasco.

586062894[/snapback]

you mean the "Pentium FDIV bug" back on 1994?

On October 30, 1994, Professor Thomas Nicely of Lynchburg College reported a bug in the Pentium floating point unit. He reported that certain division operations returned a value which was wrong by a very small amount. This result was quickly verified by other people around the Internet, and became known as the Pentium FDIV bug (FDIV is the x86 assembly language instruction for floating point division). Other people found division problems where the result returned by the Pentium was off by up to 61 parts per million. Note that this problem occurred only on some models of the original Pentium processor. Any Pentium family processor with a clock speed of at least 120 MHz is new enough not to have this bug.

This report stirred up a huge controversy. Intel at first denied that the problem existed. Later, Intel claimed that it was not serious and would not affect most users; however, people who could prove that they were affected would get their processor replaced by Intel. However, although most independent estimates found the bug to be of little importance and have negligible effect on most uses, it has caused a great public outcry. Companies like IBM (whose "586" microprocessor competed at that time with the Intel Pentium line) joined the condemnation. Finally, Intel was forced to offer to replace all flawed Pentium processors, at huge potential cost to the company (however, it turned out that only a small fraction of Pentium owners actually bothered to get their chips replaced).

Source: Wikipedia

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
you mean the "Pentium FDIV bug" back on 1994?

Source: Wikipedia

586068115[/snapback]

Yep, that's the one. Back in 1994, it was a much bigger deal than that article implies. People in the tech industries were constantly making jokes about it. Eleven years later, many people don't even remember much about it, other than what they have heard from someone else.

Grand Master

Spartan_X

Posted
Posted
Yep, that's the one.  Back in 1994, it was a much bigger deal than that article implies.  People in the tech industries were constantly making jokes about it.  Eleven years later, many people don't even remember much about it, other than what they have heard from someone else.

586068330[/snapback]

shhhhhhh!!! you're making me feel older than I am... :blush: :happy: :laugh: :rofl:

geeezzzzz, time flies when you're having fun at work... :p

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
shhhhhhh!!! you're making me feel older than I am...?:blush::?:happy:y::laugh:gh::rofl:fl:

geeezzzzz, time flies when you're having fun at work..:p:p

586073001[/snapback]

LOL, I've got nearly 7 years on you, so I'm the one who should feel old. You are 1 month older than my wife (well 29 days to be exact).

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
I have a feeling, MS won't release any new softwares on PowerPC now more

586078146[/snapback]

Why is that? Their rep at WWDC stated that they would support both platforms. It's not like supporting both is all that difficult. In some cases it's as simple as checking a box in XCode.

Think about it. There are roughly 25 million or more OS X users out there, and currently 100% of those are on PowerPC. That won't even begin to change until about a year from now. Even then, the vast majority of the users are going to be on PowerPC probably for at least the next 5 years or so until those users upgrade their hardware (Mac users tend to keep their systems longer than Windows users). It would be stupid for a developer to stop developing PowerPC based OS X software anytime in the near future (at least before 2010).

Explorer

RJT

Posted
Posted
In the WWDC keynote a Microsoft representative stated that they are hard at work on the next version of Messenger for OSX and that it will be released in a few months...

586027361[/snapback]

Her name is Roz, Ho.

And for your information she is the General Manager of the Macintosh Business Unit at Microsoft, she leads all the development teams for Microsoft Products on the Macintosh. So she's not a rep.

Grand Master

BajiRav

Posted
Posted
Her name is Roz, Ho.

And for your information she is the General Manager of the Macintosh Business Unit at Microsoft, she leads all the development teams for Microsoft Products on the Macintosh. So she's not a rep.

586093493[/snapback]

time and again she's proved that she's a really bad dressing sense :no: did anybody else feel the same ?

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
Her name is Roz, Ho.

And for your information she is the General Manager of the Macintosh Business Unit at Microsoft, she leads all the development teams for Microsoft Products on the Macintosh. So she's not a rep.

586093493[/snapback]

Since she was at WWDC "representing" Microsoft, she is a "rep", in a manner of speaking.

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
Damm, when I saw this on the main page I thought it said "MSN Messenger 5 for OSX Released".

586093836[/snapback]

Yeah, that happens quite often. The title gets clipped in just the right spot to be confusing.

Grand Master

KeR

Posted
Posted
Her name is Roz, Ho.

And for your information she is the General Manager of the Macintosh Business Unit at Microsoft, she leads all the development teams for Microsoft Products on the Macintosh. So she's not a rep.

586093493[/snapback]

I see you are from Scotland and I am not sure how different your use of the English language is, but here in the U.S. since she was there representing Microsoft she is considered a representative no matter what her job position is :blink:

Grand Master

Vice

Posted
Posted
time and again she's proved that she's a really bad dressing sense  :no: did anybody else feel the same ?

586093525[/snapback]

I thought she looked nice, shame she cannot speak very well you can understand her but she speaks like she is building her confidence while she is on stage, she talks over people clapping and awkward silences make her not the best guest speaker. Just my opinion.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Apple is expanding Private Cloud Compute beyond its own data centers

      By pradeepviswav · Posted

      Apple is expanding Private Cloud Compute beyond its own data centers by Pradeep Viswanathan At WWDC 2026, as part of the improved Apple Intelligence capabilities, Apple today announced that it is expanding Private Cloud Compute (PCC), its privacy-focused cloud infrastructure for Apple Intelligence, beyond its own data centers for the first time. Private Cloud Compute was designed to handle Apple Intelligence requests that are too complex to run fully on-device. The PCC system does not store user data and does not allow Apple or anyone else to access user requests. Last year, Apple also expanded its Security Bounty program with rewards of up to $1 million for researchers who could find serious vulnerabilities in PCC. Until now, Apple's PCC data centers were using Apple's own silicon. As part of the expansion, Apple is working with Google and NVIDIA to run new Apple Intelligence workloads on Google Cloud systems powered by NVIDIA GPUs. Apple will be using this new infrastructure to execute more demanding AI tasks while maintaining the same privacy and security guarantees of PCC. The new implementation uses NVIDIA Confidential Computing with NVIDIA GPUs, Intel CPUs with TDX, and Google’s Titan chip. Apple says it has worked with Google to build additional protections beyond a traditional confidential computing deployment. Despite the expansion to third-party data centers, Apple claims that its core PCC requirements remain unchanged, including stateless computation, no privileged runtime access, non-targetability, and verifiable transparency. The company highlighted that it will continue to control the PCC software stack, and Apple devices will only trust PCC software that has been cryptographically approved by Apple. To take security to the next level, Apple mentioned that it is maintaining an append-only ledger of Google Cloud hardware that is part of the PCC fleet. The company claims this will help reduce the risk of supply chain attacks. In addition to AI infrastructure, Apple also worked with Google to use technologies behind the Gemini family of models to build the next generation of Apple Foundation Models to power Apple Intelligence features across on-device and cloud workloads. As expected, for more demanding AI tasks like agentic tool use and complex reasoning, Apple will rely on the expanded PCC infrastructure running on Google Cloud. The expansion of PCC on Google Cloud will gradually ramp toward the full set of protections during the summer preview period. As before, Apple will also publish binaries for public inspection, provide research tooling, and give researchers access to live PCC nodes in research mode through the Apple Security Bounty Program.
    • Classic Outlook vs New Outlook — Which one do you prefer and why?

      By Bdpy · Posted

      my problem with outlook (new) is that it connects only to outlook.com. all connections to external providers goes through there. Got your mail server and want to use imap directly? no way... it adds a connector on outlook.com. last bug; if your email on an external provider if the same as principal email of your microsoft account, it doesn't work...
    • Apple finally brings the slider for Liquid Glass and many other changes

      By cleverclogs · Posted

      It's the only reason I finally have an iPhone (for work) and enjoy using it so much that I'm tempted to move from android next time I need to replace my own device
    • WhatsApp slams Isreali firm, NSO Group, for trying to spy on its users

      By leonsk29 · Posted

      So is Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, just to mention a few. What's your point? Everyone is a threat from their enemies' perspective. I'd say that Israel is only a threat to their immediate enemies like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iranian regime, not to anyone else.
    • Signal accuses UK government of using child safety as cover for mass surveillance

      By astropheed · Posted

      The government is not the good guy either. You propose 99% of people require that the government overreach and govern their freedom of information and privacy, while ignoring the government is made up 100% of people, of which 99% are (as you described) brain dead. You can't have both. The reality is Signal is absolutely right and the government is doing what it has always done. Ignoring that we are their boss and grabbing all the power they possibly can to make sure we aren't. Your (societies) ###### parenting is not reason enough as to why I can't have a safe platform for my data/information. Thinking the government is helping is precisely what they are targeting psychologically to take suckers like you for a ride. "Think of the children" was, has, is, and will always be a mechanism of control. In the rare occasion it's actually essential the mass consensus has always been there and it doesn't become a debate.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Very Popular
      Captain_Eric earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • One Month Later
      amusc earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      509
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      222
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      92
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      86
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      81
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!