Apple Announces OS X 10.6

[izanbardprince]

Haha why do we? This one will come out about 15 months after the last one, so about the time it takes us to come out with 3
( Take the Dapper to Feisty progression as the best example of this...)

Ubuntu doesn't charge you an arm, leg, eye, kidney, and testicle to stay current.

[Redrazor39]

Ubuntu doesn't charge you an arm, leg, eye, kidney, and testicle to stay current.

lol nice choice of words

but good point. My thoughts exactly.

[acelin]

Ubuntu doesn't charge you an arm, leg, eye, kidney, and testicle to stay current.

Well honestly OS X is a more polished OS, and performs better on Mac hardware than Ubuntu does on wither Mac or PC hardware. I would pay money for Ubuntu if it came on its own brand of computers and worked perfectly with them, looked nice, and had lots of professional programs with it.

I really wish their were Open-Source programs that compared with Adobe CS3...

[izanbardprince]

Well honestly OS X is a more polished OS, and performs better on Mac hardware than Ubuntu does on wither Mac or PC hardware. I would pay money for Ubuntu if it came on its own brand of computers and worked perfectly with them, looked nice, and had lots of professional programs with it.

I really wish their were Open-Source programs that compared with Adobe CS3...

Ubuntu gives you a good place to start from, honestly their theme is about the only part of the system that irritates me, I replaced it with the Nimbus theme and Compiz settings from OpenSolaris, and find this to be a really good combination, I've used OS X, including Leopard, in trying to decide what I wanted to have for my next computer, and this system ended up running Ubuntu, I really think they've done an excellent job creating an OS that blows the doors off OS X in performance, I think a lot of this is due to Apple's decision to use Mach lugging around a braindead BSD (Not saying BSD is bad, but Apple's implementation of it is slow and terrible), I just overall had a distaste for OS X, yeah it might be UNIX and POSIX certified, but the spirit of openness isn't there, and the open source core of OS X is under an unacceptable license that is incompatible with the goals of Free Software.

Apple even tried to run a project for a while called OpenDarwin, and surprise, nobody wanted to write OS X for them for free, so they ended up shutting it down.

And no, I'm not trying to troll, at the end of the day it ain't Windows, and I think we can all find a common ground there.

Edit: As for CS3, there are a number of open source utilities you can use to get professional results, I'd say the top 90% of Adobe's functionality, but Wine will run all of their stuff anyway if you really need it that bad, and I don't see why they'd have any reason to sabotage this, it *is* more sales.

[aysiu]

Not everyone's a designer? Everyone I know who needs CS3 is a friend or co-worker of my wife (she's a graphic designer).

[handy]

Haha why do we? This one will come out about 15 months after the last one, so about the time it takes us to come out with 3
( Take the Dapper to Feisty progression as the best example of this...)

Ubuntu doesn't charge you an arm, leg, eye, kidney, and testicle to stay current.

& with Arch you can upgrade your entire system at any moment just by typing sudo pacman -Syu

Arch also runs much faster than Leopard on my iMac too.

[cprofitt]

Why do they always have to make a new operating system all the time? Other than that mac is awesome.

They do not make new ones all the time... they produce updates to one and call them new... oh, they charge for those service packs too.

[cprofitt]

Well honestly OS X is a more polished OS, and performs better on Mac hardware than Ubuntu does on wither Mac or PC hardware. I would pay money for Ubuntu if it came on its own brand of computers and worked perfectly with them, looked nice, and had lots of professional programs with it.

I really wish their were Open-Source programs that compared with Adobe CS3...

It would be nice if Apple actually developed some of their 'new' features instead of 'stealing' them from the open-source world and making the claim that they did it.

It would be nice if Apple would have made their 10.4 iBooks work with Cisco wireless gear without telling my company to upgrade to 10.5 (at our cost).

[izanbardprince]

It would be nice if Apple actually developed some of their 'new' features instead of 'stealing' them from the open-source world and making the claim that they did it.

It would be nice if Apple would have made their 10.4 iBooks work with Cisco wireless gear without telling my company to upgrade to 10.5 (at our cost).

Whenever someone asks me what the problem with the BSD license is, I point to OS X and say "there you go", Apple essentially hoards other people's work for 90% of their operating system, and figures out ways to sleaze out of having to give anything meaningful back, the BSD license made it really easy for them, but they took advantage of the GPL as well when they privately forked KHTML and worked on it for a year before regurgitating Webkit and a giant megapatch that KHTML's devs could actually make very little use of, Apple is actually very hostile to free/libre software, they essentially plagiarize because on the surface, there's no way to know that OS X contains a lot of code from the BSD, X.org, and KDE projects.

The GPL needs to be changed to make them give back source code even while working on something privately, of course Google takes advantage of that loophole too in using a customized Ubuntu without having to give anything back.

[handy]

Whenever someone asks me what the problem with the BSD license is, I point to OS X and say "there you go", Apple essentially hoards other people's work for 90% of their operating system, and figures out ways to sleaze out of having to give anything meaningful back, the BSD license made it really easy for them, but they took advantage of the GPL as well when they privately forked KHTML and worked on it for a year before regurgitating Webkit and a giant megapatch that KHTML's devs could actually make very little use of, Apple is actually very hostile to free/libre software, they essentially plagiarize because on the surface, there's no way to know that OS X contains a lot of code from the BSD, X.org, and KDE projects.

The GPL needs to be changed to make them give back source code even while working on something privately, of course Google takes advantage of that loophole too in using a customized Ubuntu without having to give anything back.

These are similar reasons to why MS will never open any of their previously (at least) written software because of the amount of stolen code that it contains. Also, MS would only ever consider open licensed software if they were certain of making money or damaging their opposition, which is everyone else isn't it?