Mac OS X Snow Leopard Discussion

[Julius Caro]

The Windows 32/64-bit Conundrum.

When was that written? The current OS X is not as 64-bit savvy as it seems. In the "activity monitor" 64 bit processes are not singled out, and if they are, that means that nothing is running 64-bit despite the processor supporting it. This things are being sorted out for the next version anyway.

I agree that windows could have put vista 32 and 64 bit on a single DVD and let the installer decide whether to install the 64 or 32 bit version based on the processor capabilities. But that's a bad idea when you factor in the drivers support. I dont think the driver support for 64 bit windows is bad at all, because everything works for me. But windows does support an ultra wide away of hardware that os x doesnt have to support, since macs are confined to whatever on-board hardware apple decides to put in.

That problem is exacerbated by the fact that the 64-bit versions of Windows don?t run on 32-bit PCs

say what?

About merging the code base, I don't think it is in the best interest of us all that IA-64 and x64 codebase are merged. Because with vista they did merge the codebase of x64 and x86 if I'm not mistaken. IA-64 is a whole different story, and that's for people running server 2008 on ia-64 to worry about.

[CPressland]

I don't understand.

Kinda like DXDIAG on Windows, you get a little message asking you to fall back to the 32-bit version of the Applet in certain situations. Of course it makes almost no difference but meh.

From what I've used of Snow Leopard so far it's not faster and it's not any different. The only major differences are with the underpinnings and they havnt been changed enough to even make a dent so far.

After a year of development I'm sure that this'll change somewhat completely. But on my MacBook the current beta makes no difference at all. Short of the kick ass wallpapers anyway.

[Cara Veteran]

I don't think terrible Exchange support is always entirely the blame of folks like Apple. Unless i'm unfairly criticizing Microsoft, I don't think the Exchange protocol is open and documented for use by 3rd party developers - subsequently making it reliably play ball is somewhat difficult.

Exactly.

Exchange connectivity between Outlook and Exchange is handled by a proprietary set of API's known as Microsoft Messaging Application Programming Interface (MAPI). Some other vendors have created solutions, or licensed the Microsoft Technology, however if you go look for products with true Exchange connectivity there are very few. These API's have previously forced many clients, such as Apple Mail, to connect via the open IMAP services which may or may not be enabled on many exchange servers and thus provide a reduced feature set/functionality in their products.

For more information regarding MAPI visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAPI or http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms529058.aspx.

[Cadium]

System Preferences in Snow Leopard will ask you to switch to its 32-bit counterpart when trying to access a 32-bit only preference pane. Hopefully that will change once the OS gets out of beta.

I hope that this behavior changes, as Mac OS X has always focused on everything being equal and having a solid workflow, this is apparent with Rosetta and the switch from PowerPC to Intel processors, all of the underlying changes were transparent, the same applies to 32-bit/64-bit applications.

[Timan Veteran]

"For those who have tried it" Were the colors of the icons and other stuff a little off? Seemed everything but a few icons were "MUCH MORE" vibrant.

[AudioDope]

^ you guys worry about the OS too damn much.

Just concentrate on what you want to accomplish.

+1

[godzila]

what new on snow leopard?

[Aperture]

+1

That statement is debunk of brain power, obviously.

The OS is what helps you achieve what you like to accomplish, it's the building blocks, the ground work to each and every endevour you take on it. So why not worry about it? Performance and Functionality are key issues when it concerns an OS and a Work Flow, so quit yo jibba jabba!

[Hurmoth]

what new on snow leopard?

See http://www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/. Not a lot is known about Snow Leopard right now. We should find out more at WWDC in January.

[Elliott]

Exactly.

Exchange connectivity between Outlook and Exchange is handled by a proprietary set of API's known as Microsoft Messaging Application Programming Interface (MAPI). Some other vendors have created solutions, or licensed the Microsoft Technology, however if you go look for products with true Exchange connectivity there are very few. These API's have previously forced many clients, such as Apple Mail, to connect via the open IMAP services which may or may not be enabled on many exchange servers and thus provide a reduced feature set/functionality in their products.

For more information regarding MAPI visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAPI or http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms529058.aspx.

I understand the complications fully. I'm not saying Apple's developers were lazy or anything when implementing Exchange support into Address Book and Mail. I'm only say that I hope it's more reliable. I really don't like Exchange any more than Apple does, I'm sure. :laugh:

[nomis_nehc]

My biggest request for Snow Leopard is a new GUI... Leopard is fug in my opinion, Tiger was much better looking. Didn't help that the engine broke Shapeshifter either... =(

[Hurmoth]

My biggest request for Snow Leopard is a new GUI... Leopard is fug in my opinion, Tiger was much better looking. Didn't help that the engine broke Shapeshifter either... =(

I disagree. I love Leopard's UI over Tiger.

[Chicane-UK Veteran]

See http://www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/. Not a lot is known about Snow Leopard right now. We should find out more at WWDC in January.

Isn't it Macworld in January..?!

[sanctified Veteran]

I disagree. I love Leopard's UI over Tiger.

+1

Leopard's unified GUI looks and feels a lot better. There still some traces of Aqua here and there but overall its an advancement.

[giga Veteran]

Isn't it Macworld in January..?!

We'll probably get more info, but I'm not sure if it will be the main attraction as they're not touting many "consumer" features.

[Hurmoth]

Isn't it Macworld in January..?!

That's what I meant to say. Been a long couple of days with less sleep than normal. Sorry about that :(

[1759]

+1

Leopard's unified GUI looks and feels a lot better. There still some traces of Aqua here and there but overall its an advancement.

Yeah, it took awhile to get used to the transparency in the menu bar, ditching most of the Aqua elements was long over due.

Now, if Apple would allow customization of the colors, without resorting to hacks, I would be so happy. A black/dark gray menu bar would look so nice; it's one of the things I love about Aero, having the black glass option. :yes:

[giga Veteran]

^ ctrl+opt+cmd+8 :ninja:

[1759]

^ ctrl+opt+cmd+8 :ninja:

:laugh: trippy

[Quillz]

I disagree. I love Leopard's UI over Tiger.

As did I. Tiger wasn't unified at all, with a horrible clash of brushed metal, unified plastic and various other odd things.

[.Neo]

+1

Leopard's unified GUI looks and feels a lot better. There still some traces of Aqua here and there but overall its an advancement.

When opening Activity Monitor on Snow Leopard the Aqua "Show" bar has been replaced by one in the matte iTunes button style. Hopefully it's a sign the rest of Aqua will go as well. (Y)

After years of flashy "cool" Aqua elements it really looks like Apple is reverting back to a more subdued look. In some ways it reminds me of Platinum, but heavily modernized of course.

[giga Veteran]

New article about ZFS for those unaware of the advantages and features it has.

Finally, a modern file system on a consumer OS

As if Grand Central weren?t enough bad news for Microsoft, now they have ZFS to contend with. Building a reliable, high-performance file system takes years and Microsoft doesn?t have years to respond.

The formal announcement is for Snow Leopard server, which is how Apple introduces new file systems. HFS+ first arrived on a server version as welWho cares?

Anyone who stores data should.

Microsoft?s NTFS is 20 year old technology borrowed from DEC. Fine for small disks and puny CPUs. Not so great for today?s data intensive systems and applications.

Silent data corruption is common - only you don?t know it - because the corruption shows up as other problems, like missiZFS: open source from Sunom Sun

ZFS is the first desktop file system with true end-to-end data integrity. Thanks to sophisticated tree-based it detects and corrects silent data corruption anywhere in the data path: disks, cables, interfaces and more. more.

The checksums are stored with the parent block, so the file system always knows that the child block is both uncorrupted and the correct block. That?s just one of the errors that NTFS and most other commodity file systems - including the Mac?s HFS+ - are prone too.

Sun?s ZFS engineering team started working on ZFS 7 years ago as a cleaIt combines file system and volume management functionality. Instead of managing individual disks, you manage a pool of blocks. ZFS takes care of the details.thTurning up the heat on Microsoft

n Microsoft

For all of Microsoft?s fine talk about innovation they don?t do squat unless someone else does it first. Remember IE 6? ZFS is a modern and innovative file system that solves some difficult data storage and integrity proNo more Disk Warrior

re Disk Warrior

Data corruption on PCs and Macs is a sad and stupid fact of life. Power failures, flaky RAM, poor grounding, (slowly) failing hard drives, driver glitches, phantom writes and more conspire to rot your data.

ZFS eliminates that. All blocks are checksummed and the checksum is storedZFS always knows if the block is correct and/or corruptt and/or corrupt. Every block has a parent block (with one obvious exception that gets special treatment), so the entire data store is self-validating. You?ll never have to wonder if all your data is cNo RAID cards or controllers

ds or controllers

ZFS implements very fast RAID that fixes the performance knock-off against software RAID. In ZFS all writes are the fastest kind: full sRAID is running on the fastest processor in your system (your Mac) system (your Mac), rather than some 3-5 year old microcontroller.

Just add drives to your system and you have a fast RAID system. With Serial Attach SCSI and SATA drives you?ll pay for the drives (cheap and getting cheaper), No more volumes

No more volumes

Every time you add a disk to your Mac you see another disk icon on the desktop. If you want to RAID some disks you use Disk Utility (or something) to create the volume. Slow, eZFS eliminates the whole volume concept. Add a disk or five to your system and it joins your storage pool. More capacity. Not more management.

oBackup made easy

Backup made easy

ZFsnapshot copyled snapshot copy, which creates a copy of all your data at whatever point in time you want. Copy the snapshot up to a disk, tape or NAS box and you are backed up.

Create a snapshot on every write if you want, so if your database barfs you can go back to But that?s not all!

that?s not all!

For in-depth treatment of ZFS see here and here. Includes links to more technical info and benchmarks.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=335

[Cormier6083]

My biggest request for Snow Leopard is a new GUI... Leopard is fug in my opinion, Tiger was much better looking. Didn't help that the engine broke Shapeshifter either... =(

It's funny how I hated Leopard when it first came out. I thought it was way to dark. But I couldn't imagine going back to Tiger, way too bright.

[StevoJD]

ZFS will be a deep kick in Microsoft's ass. (Y)

About time someone made the move. Thank you Apple.

[CPressland]

It's funny how I hated Leopard when it first came out. I thought it was way to dark. But I couldn't imagine going back to Tiger, way too bright.

+1

And nice one giga on all that ZFS info, still, it wont be included in Snow Leopard from the get go right? Only Server?

Seams a little frustrating but then again I guess i'd rather stick with the tried and tested HFS+ and let the 'real' nerds try out ZFS first :D

I love the idea of Checksumming, but dislike the idea of the automatic RAIDing system, I love my little volumes.

What'd be really nice is if we got ZFS support in Snow Leopard, Windows Seven, and Ubuntu 9.

It'd have the compatibility of FAT32 and still kick everything else's ass :D