User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Speculation and Rumors »

OS 10.5 - any thoughts?


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
OS 10.5 - any thoughts?
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2  Next Thread Tools
kmac
 
 
2005-06-07, 08:18

Any thoughts on what 10.5 will contain as enhancements, new capabilities, etc? My thoughts are on an even tighter corporate model (i.e. an iCal that can plug into a Calendaring server, etc.), but as to any new features or eye-candy, my brain is smoking about now...

Any thoughts out there?

Apple is obviously gunning to blow Longhorn even further out of the water and this new announcement sheds a little light on why Tiger was not advertised as much (TV spots, etc)...perhaps they are waiting for Leopard. As Longhorn approaches and Microsoft launches their campaign, my money is Apple will do the same. But this new version better have some "wow" factor, other-wise a $129 price point won't fly for those users that already have Tiger and don't need a "x86" ready OS.
  quote
ezkcdude
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2005-06-07, 08:54

How about a visual XCode programming model? They've already started toward that direction with the CoreData modeling and QuartzComposer.
  quote
Yochanan
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
 
2005-06-07, 08:55

Before this whole Intel deal went down, I assumed that they would be talking to the developers about making resolution independent apps. That'll probably be the thing on the table by then. If the new OS comes in '07, when will the next OS come out? Let's assume by the pattern: '08-'09. By that time HiDef will be standard in everything (I hope), so comparatively super hi res screens will be out by that time.

That's when resolution independent GUIs and apps will be necessary, or else Apple's cinema displays will suffer. In preparation for this Apple will probably be laying down solid practices in resolution independence in 10.5, or even in a late point release for Tiger.
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2005-06-07, 09:07

I am swamped with all the posting about this whole Intel switch...
So forgive me for this if it is a repeat of something someone else posted elsewhere.. I haven't noticed it yet in any other posts yet..

I knew this Intel rumour was for real when the text update of the Keynote listed the next version of OS X as "Leopard".

It was a few minutes later the Intel bombshell was dropped.

You know the old saying about a Leopard changing it's spots...

Did anyone else notice the irony of that name choice?

Again, appologies if anyone posted this observation before, but I have been out at the Drop Zone all day and not had a chance to post this when AppleNova went down last night..

'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
ezkcdude
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2005-06-07, 09:08

scratt, someone did say that yesterday, but we won't hold it against you .
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2005-06-07, 09:09

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezkcdude
scratt, someone did say that yesterday, but we won't hold it against you .
Aw Shucks!!

If only Brad hadn't pulled the plug on me!! I was ready with that comment at 1:08 am (8 minutes into Keynote) Bangkok time this morning!

'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
Franz Josef
Passing by
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London, Europe
 
2005-06-07, 09:46

The timing of Leopard is odd. When Tiger was released Apple said they would slow down the frenetic pace of OS development and Tiger was pitched as a competitor to and better than Longhorn (no doubt true) and a year and a half earlier. If Leopard is the real Longhorn competitor, it really needs to have less of the minor bugginess of 10.4 and have some wildly original new features - otherwise people simply won't upgrade.
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2005-06-07, 09:57

Yes... I remember that also. 10.4 was meant to be the last major upgrade for 'some time'. I was quite suprised when they started talking about 'Leopard'. That was when the penny dropped about Intel.

'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
T'hain Esh Kelch
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
 
2005-06-07, 10:06

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yochanan
Before this whole Intel deal went down, I assumed that they would be talking to the developers about making resolution independent apps. That'll probably be the thing on the table by then. If the new OS comes in '07, when will the next OS come out? Let's assume by the pattern: '08-'09. By that time HiDef will be standard in everything (I hope), so comparatively super hi res screens will be out by that time.

That's when resolution independent GUIs and apps will be necessary, or else Apple's cinema displays will suffer. In preparation for this Apple will probably be laying down solid practices in resolution independence in 10.5, or even in a late point release for Tiger.
OSX 10.4 already supports resolution independent apps. Devs can just make them.
  quote
staph
Microbial member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Send a message via AIM to staph  
2005-06-07, 10:20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Franz Josef
The timing of Leopard is odd. When Tiger was released Apple said they would slow down the frenetic pace of OS development and Tiger was pitched as a competitor to and better than Longhorn (no doubt true) and a year and a half earlier. If Leopard is the real Longhorn competitor, it really needs to have less of the minor bugginess of 10.4 and have some wildly original new features - otherwise people simply won't upgrade.
Hey, it did slow down — 18–20 months is longer than a year, right?
  quote
Yochanan
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
 
2005-06-07, 11:50

Yes, it supports them, but we don't have them. The underpinnings for a resolution independent GUI have been in OS X since Cheetah, but I don't think we'll be seeing any visible push for it for at least a year.
  quote
Brad
Selfish Heathen
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Zone of Pain
 
2005-06-07, 11:57

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yochanan
The underpinnings for a resolution independent GUI have been in OS X since Cheetah
Really? I don't recall ever seeing anything like that. Apple didn't demonstrate or even mention this until a year ago with Tiger. Apple has already started to push developers to create resolution independent applications.

The quality of this board depends on the quality of the posts. The only way to guarantee thoughtful, informative discussion is to write thoughtful, informative posts. AppleNova is not a real-time chat forum. You have time to compose messages and edit them before and after posting.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Vieira
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2005-06-07, 12:35

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmac
Apple is obviously gunning to blow Longhorn even further out of the water and this new announcement sheds a little light on why Tiger was not advertised as much (TV spots, etc)...perhaps they are waiting for Leopard...


Ohmigosh...it's always SOMETHING down the road, isn't it? I've been hearing that here (and the old place) for years now..."no, pscates...they don't advertise because OS X isn't really dialed in yet...", "well, the hardware isn't up to snuff...", etc.

Meanwhile, it's one dancing silhouette after another.



Apple would be supremely stupid (they already are, for not hyping Panther, the iMac G5, iLife 05 and Tiger like any normal company would/should) if they are going to sit on their hands for two more years, then attempt some lame-dick "oh, and us too!" blitz when (if?) Longhorn ever sees the light of day.



They could be grabbing people NOW by the boatload, with what they currently offer. Screw "waiting on Leopard and Intel"...those aren't quite in the picture yet, you know?



My eternal heartache, as a Mac user..."Why oh why won't you brilliant sonsofbitches toot your own horn to the masses...even just a little? Humor me, just this once!"

  quote
nassau
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
 
2005-06-07, 13:08

Quote:
Originally Posted by pscates2.0


My eternal heartache, as a Mac user..."Why oh why won't you brilliant sonsofbitches toot your own horn to the masses...even just a little? Humor me, just this once!"


i 2nd that!
  quote
MadDoc
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
 
2005-06-07, 13:18

Quote:
How about a visual XCode programming model?
I would second that
  quote
Franz Josef
Passing by
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London, Europe
 
2005-06-07, 13:36

Quote:
Originally Posted by staph
Hey, it did slow down — 18–20 months is longer than a year, right?
Panther to Tiger was Oct 2003 to Apr 2005 - 19 months so Leopard is a similar timeframe. One interview sugggested Apple would aim for 2 yrs +. I'd like to understand a bit more about how they see OS X evolving.
  quote
Corpus_Callosum
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2005-06-07, 15:31

Quote:
Originally Posted by scratt
You know the old saying about a Leopard changing it's spots...

Did anyone else notice the irony of that name choice?
Yes, and in fact, I think Apple has a much deeper strategy than what we are seeing going on. I believe that Apple intends to make OS X, starting with Leopard, processor independent.



By that, I mean that they intend to allow OS X to be run on a variety of different platforms and Roseta + Fat binaries will make this transparent for the end user. Considering the advancements that we will be seeing in processor performance and in memory and storage devices over the next 10 years or so, this is a completely brilliant strategy.

With the basic system in place to effortlessly embrace new processor families as they come out, OS X will be able to glide from one advancement to the next. Consider the following:

All applications compiled for PPC today, when run on non-PPC (i.e. intel or AMD chips) that are fabbed one year from now, will run FASTER through Rosetta than they do on PPC today. This is true simply because one year from now, processors will be twice as fast and Rosetta will introduce only a 20% slowdown.

Taking this further, as new compatible architectures are introduced by Apple and the XCode fat binary deployment layer is updated for developers, from that point on all new applications will run at native speed for alternative architectures.

The result, between the two approaches (fat binaries for new stuff, rosetta for old stuff) is that there is never a time when you will install an application on a new architecture and have it run slower than it did on a previous architecture. So Leopard can not only keep it's spots in place, but keep it's speed while floating between architectures.

Beyond this, I do think resolution independence will be a big point in Leopard. I think we should expect more Core frameworks that can make use of custom processors. In particular, I would expect a Core Physics (Physics processors are becoming increasingly important in scientific, rendering and gaming research and development) and something like a Core Security (hardware abstracted DRM, encryption, decryption, cert management, biometrics) and Core Media (for hardware abstracted encoding and decoding). It would be cool to see something like Core Model as well (hardware abstracted 3D scene generation and interpolation).

There will probably be a few surprises also. But Leopard will be just what it sounds like - the cat who won't change his spots.

Last edited by Corpus_Callosum : 2005-06-08 at 14:38.
  quote
Bryson
Rocket Surgeon
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Canadark
 
2005-06-07, 16:48

Quote:
(it is the fastest cat)
[pedant]The Cheetah is the fastest cat. In fact, it's the fastest mammal.[/pedant]

Actually Cheetah is a great name for a speed-optimised version of Mac OS. !0.6, perhaps...the same features as 10.5, but much faster....

Cheetahs
  quote
sunrain
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Portlandia
 
2005-06-07, 17:01

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corpus_Callosum
All applications compiled for PPC today, when run on non-PPC (i.e. intel or AMD chips) that are fabbed one year from now, will run FASTER through Rosetta than they do on PPC today. This is true simply because one year from now, processors will be twice as fast and Rosetta will introduce only a 20% slowdown.
Where did you get that 20% figure? Linkage please.

Edit: and Bryson...[pedant]Cheetah was the code name for 10.0[/pedant]
  quote
flail
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
 
2005-06-07, 17:07

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryson
Actually Cheetah is a great name for a speed-optimised version of Mac OS. !0.6, perhaps...the same features as 10.5, but much faster....
Sorry, already been used!

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X
Quote:
Mac OS X versions are named after large felines. Prior to its release, version 10.0 was code named Cheetah internally at Apple, and version 10.1 was codenamed Puma. Version 10.2 was named Jaguar in Apple's product marketing, and 10.3 was similarly named Panther. Version 10.4 has been named Tiger. Leopard has been announced as the name for the next release of the operating system. Apple has also registered the trademarks Lynx and Cougar for future use.
  quote
Corpus_Callosum
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2005-06-07, 17:13

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunrain
Where did you get that 20% figure? Linkage please.

Edit: and Bryson...[pedant]Cheetah was the code name for 10.0[/pedant]
This figure comes from various sources regarding the overhead of Transitive Technologies "Quick Transit" which is currently used in SGI Prism systems to run MIPS code on itaniums and is thought to be the engine that Microsoft will use to power XBox back compatibility as well as Rosetta in x86 OS X.

You can find information about Quick Transit here. The actual quotes regarding 20% are scattered around the net and are most likely related to the deployed Prism solutiuons. I don't know if it will require more or less overhead to go from PPC to x86 than it does to go from MIPS to Itanium, but with the VLIW architecture of Itanium, my instincts tell me that Itanium translation would be more work.
  quote
Corpus_Callosum
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2005-06-07, 17:14

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryson
[pedant]The Cheetah is the fastest cat. In fact, it's the fastest mammal.[/pedant]

Actually Cheetah is a great name for a speed-optimised version of Mac OS. !0.6, perhaps...the same features as 10.5, but much faster....

Cheetahs
Yep. My bad.
  quote
Dave
Ninja Editor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
 
2005-06-07, 20:44

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corpus_Callosum
This figure comes from various sources regarding the overhead of Transitive Technologies "Quick Transit" which is currently used in SGI Prism systems to run MIPS code on itaniums and is thought to be the engine that Microsoft will use to power XBox back compatibility as well as Rosetta in x86 OS X.

You can find information about Quick Transit here. The actual quotes regarding 20% are scattered around the net and are most likely related to the deployed Prism solutiuons. I don't know if it will require more or less overhead to go from PPC to x86 than it does to go from MIPS to Itanium, but with the VLIW architecture of Itanium, my instincts tell me that Itanium translation would be more work.
That's all well and good, but the initial xBench scores show the current G5s running about 4x faster than the emulated version using Rosetta.

K, the dude took the the link down, but you can still read all the comments and such here.

When I was a kid, people who did wrong were punished, restricted, and forbidden. Now, when someone does wrong, all of the rest of us are punished, restricted, and forbidden... and the one who did the wrong is counselled and "understood" and fed ice cream.

Last edited by Dave : 2005-06-07 at 21:01.
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2005-06-07, 22:34

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corpus_Callosum
All applications compiled for PPC today, when run on non-PPC (i.e. intel or AMD chips) that are fabbed one year from now, will run FASTER through Rosetta than they do on PPC today. This is true simply because one year from now, processors will be twice as fast and Rosetta will introduce only a 20% slowdown.
Good theory... I am with you most of the way..

But it doesn't hold up on the speed issue.

We had 2Ghz G5's over a year ago, and I don't see any 4Ghz processors out there.

I definitely don't think we will be seeing 8Ghz Intels in a years time.

Remember that most manufacturers are starting to hit a speed wall.

A lot of R&D is being done on shorter pathways, and even using light instead of current in processors because of this literal physical limitation of the speed at which electrons can move around inside processors!

What we are finding is that the more we add all these layers onto operating systems the more we are throwing away the power which we have on tap.

Chist, if we were writing effecient code for our modern processors, instead of this multi-platform, compiled, 'Core' technology based soup we would be gaining so much more from our hardware.

I know I have had this discussion with people before, and their are valid arguments against my viewpoint. i.e Developement time, compatibility, productivity etc. The hard fact remains that we are increasingly using the extra processor power made available to us by manufacturers to support an infrastructure in operating systems which is not about speed, and effeciency, but about market and productivity.

'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
Corpus_Callosum
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2005-06-08, 14:24

Quote:
Originally Posted by scratt
Good theory... I am with you most of the way..

But it doesn't hold up on the speed issue.

We had 2Ghz G5's over a year ago, and I don't see any 4Ghz processors out there.

I definitely don't think we will be seeing 8Ghz Intels in a years time.
Speed is not all about Ghz. But even in clock-rates, processors are getting mighty fast. Intel already has roughly 4Ghz processors (high 3s). Better and more parallel designs such as hyperthreading (SMT) and now transitions to dual core and even in the case of the CELL and Waternoose, higher multi-core, are really putting some serious horsepower into modern chips.

Taken as a whole, the amount of work per second that computers can perform is more than doubling every year (at least recently), even though the clock-rates are not quite doing that. This trend shows no signs of slowing down.

Quote:
Remember that most manufacturers are starting to hit a speed wall.

A lot of R&D is being done on shorter pathways, and even using light instead of current in processors because of this literal physical limitation of the speed at which electrons can move around inside processors!
The speed wall is in current fab techniques, you are right. But once again, that is only a wall for clock-rate. There are no walls stopping parallelization and increasing the amount of work done per clock. Using fabbed waveguides on the chip to carry signal with solid-state lasers is indeed a new up-and-coming technology and it is this sort of thing that will revolutionize the chip industry with mighty speed bumps (I think it is a few years off still - there have been recent breakthroughs).

Quote:
What we are finding is that the more we add all these layers onto operating systems the more we are throwing away the power which we have on tap.
It doesn't quite work that way, but your statement is not without merit. As the firehose of processor power widens, it is a great temptation for developers to direct a bit of that power towards higher abstraction. Abstraction is the enemy of on-the-metal efficiency, but it is an absolutely neccessary tool for the advancement of software technology. The degree of seperation that our software has from our hardware increases proportionally to the power of the hardware and this is for good reason. Someday, a computer will be able to communicate with us in a human language and present visuals and other media from it's imagination while communicating. This is the ideal level of abstraction and it sits on the abstraction time-line that we are currently walking down (just pretty far in the future). Between punch-cards and that AI vision of the future sits every abstraction advancement that computers have gone through and will go through (such as terminal based operating systems, proceedural programming languages, OO, GUI, virtual machines, ...).

Today, we are at an interesting cross-roads in the abstraction game. You can see it happening everywhere - emulators. The internet is mad with emulation mania, we are ressurrecting old game machines and old computers into virtualized representations of those on our macs and pcs. Java and .NET provide us with virtual machines that abstract the hardware away completely. The Core frameworks in OS X abstract away the powerful GPUs that sit on our graphics cards. And now, it appears, Apple is going to abstract away the CPU itself.

This is a quite natural and necessary transition. Yes, we loose a little performance (more in the beginning than a few years from now when the technology really matures). But what we gain in return is freedom. It is likely that in 10 years, you will *never* compile down to a processor's instruction set unless you are writing hardware drivers or kernel code. Everything will be virtualized and JITed. This is a good thing and we should look forward to it.

Quote:
Chist, if we were writing effecient code for our modern processors, instead of this multi-platform, compiled, 'Core' technology based soup we would be gaining so much more from our hardware.
A long time ago, I used to write 6502 machine language. I got to talk directly to the hardware and my code ran as fast as it possibly could, given my understanding of how to get the job done. Thank god I don't have to do that anymore. You still can hand-tuned assembly today, and if you really know what you are doing, your code might run 10% faster or in some cases maybe even 30% faster than using modern approaches. But more likely, it will take you 10x longer to finish and will end up running 50% slower because you are not as skilled in the art as the guys that wrote the virtualization stuff or the Core APIs or the JIT or the optimizing compiler.

Quote:
I know I have had this discussion with people before, and their are valid arguments against my viewpoint. i.e Developement time, compatibility, productivity etc. The hard fact remains that we are increasingly using the extra processor power made available to us by manufacturers to support an infrastructure in operating systems which is not about speed, and effeciency, but about market and productivity.
Hey, your thoughts on this are reasonable. At first glance, it does look like all these translators and mappers and virtualizers and wrappers, all the layers of APIs and abstractions of abstractions and JITs and emulators would mess things up and slow things down. But a better way to think about them is that we are (as an industry) focusing our attention on the hard problems and solving them the best we can in one common place with the best possible techniques. That way, developers and users don't have to reinvent the wheel - they can leverage strong solutions.

Everything I just wrote is a gross oversimplification. The real truth is much more complicated ;-)
  quote
Corpus_Callosum
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2005-06-08, 14:31

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
That's all well and good, but the initial xBench scores show the current G5s running about 4x faster than the emulated version using Rosetta.

K, the dude took the the link down, but you can still read all the comments and such here.
The link is dead. That would be interesting to see.
  quote
yeyeogun
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2005-06-08, 18:00

Listen to this: The Cheetah always shows it's spots! I believe Apple should use this as a slogan to Microsoft, IBM, and it's current user base. Apple has shown us that they are not to be trusted. Other wise, I will still buy Apple products in the future. At least they are honest enough to show us they can't be trusted enough. This goes for the Power PC abandonment, the promises of a 3 MHZ, the OS vs. Long horn being released at the same time, the iPOD battery problem, etc...
  quote
Ryan
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
 
2005-06-08, 21:34

Quote:
Originally Posted by yeyeogun
Listen to this: The Cheetah always shows it's spots! I believe Apple should use this as a slogan to Microsoft, IBM, and it's current user base. Apple has shown us that they are not to be trusted. Other wise, I will still buy Apple products in the future. At least they are honest enough to show us they can't be trusted enough. This goes for the Power PC abandonment, the promises of a 3 MHZ, the OS vs. Long horn being released at the same time, the iPOD battery problem, etc...
Um, what?



What do you mean "the OS vs Longhorn being released at the same time"? Do you mean your unhappy because Tiger came out sooner than Longhorn?

The iPod battery problem has to do with the type of battery used in the unit. No rechargeable battery that can be used in an iPod will be able to last forever. All rechargeables have only so many charge cycles before their maximum capacity begins to drop.

Apple can't be trusted to stay with PowerPC? You mean they can be trusted to bring us the best computers down the road. They can be trusted to be responsible to their shareholders. Apple is a company. They have to turn a profit, and yes I know that they are doing very well right now. Apple knows something we don't, of course, about the PowerPC's future, and it must not be good, hence we will have x86-based Mac's in a few years.

Okay, maybe they overreached a bit with the 3Ghz expectations, but then again IBM might have been dead sure that 3Ghz would be available within that timeframe, and was wrong.
  quote
yeyeogun
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2005-06-08, 21:52

What I mean is this:
Most Apple fanatics either feel betrayed or overwhelmed. I personally feel Apple should do what ever it takes to survive. I am an Apple fan all the way. I have spent my money on some looser products over time such as the 1st bread of iPods. Now that died 7 months later. Am I complaining, No! I bought another one. I also purchased 10.0 and did not receive the 10.1 upgrade for free as did many. Did I complain, No! I also purchased Logic right before Apple bought the parent company. Did I complain when I had to buy an upgrade that should have been given for free, No! By the way that update was minor and removed Emagic Logo for an Apple Emagic Logo. I am no Longhorn fan. What I am stating is Microsoft should watch it's back. IBM was careless enough to think Apple would always depend on them. Well think again big blue. Apple is a fierce competitor and will take a loss just to make bigger gains. That includes taking the wind out of the Longhorn introduction.
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2005-06-08, 22:00

What are you on?

You seem to be doing nothing but complaining about Apple, and yet asking us to believe you are an Apple supporter.

You are also generalising for Apple 'fanatics'. I am sure there are a whole host of emotions they are feeling, including, but not limited to; apathy, excitement, intrigue, indifference, anger etc. etc.

Was there anything wrong with the copy of Logic you bought? Were you happy at the time of purchase?

Your iPod that failed... Did you think about getting it repaired? What was the failure and why?

Why do you feel it is necesary to share this in a thread about 10.5?

Why do you think you deserved a free 10.1 upgrade?

What loss that Apple has taken 'to make bigger gains' are you talking about.

To be frank, your posts are almost contradictory inside themselves and certainly when put against each other, and what you are saying is not clear at all...


'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 1 of 2 [1] 2  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sharing our deepest thoughts and dreams (diary entries) murbot AppleOutsider 17 2021-10-10 16:06
Your thoughts on life "out there" and whatnot... psmith2.0 AppleOutsider 68 2010-03-15 06:09
Your thoughts on the Zodiac jdulak General Discussion 0 2005-04-21 14:59
Couple of thoughts on "Apple Stores" Stone Of Love General Discussion 18 2005-03-30 22:32
Thoughts on Apple super "iApp" AIO application? thedustin General Discussion 18 2004-08-15 00:05


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 00:18.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova