9 Mac OS X Leopard Rumors
WWDC will run for 5 days starting on the 7th of August. In anticipation, here is a run down of the coolest Leopard rumors circulating on the Internet.
While I may be fueling the rumor mill that I complain about, we are now within five weeks of the day when most of these will be proven right or wrong. Or at least, will be postponed until the next version of Mac OS X.
So here are, in no particular order, my nine favorite Leopard rumors:
1. Bit Torrent
Of all the Mac OS 10.5 rumors, this one is my favorite. The rumor is that Apple is going to include a Bit Torrent client as part of the new operating system to distribute iTunes music/video and software updates. The benefit of sharing your bandwidth to offset Apple’s costs is that- according to the rumor- you will receive credit based on your participation. These credits could be for the iTunes store, the Apple store or something else. This is a great idea, as long as it is turned off by default and people are well-informed before they opt-in.
2. Virtualization
While Boot Camp was a great development, the true Mac-switcher-drool-inducer is virtualization. With the full product launch of Parallels for the Intel Mac, and Apple’s quiet endorsement of it, running Windows (or Linux) within OS X just got simple, inexpensive and impressive. Support for virtualization within the operating system would take it one step further, though recent mentions of Parallels in Apple literature makes the picture murky.
3. Windows API
The strangest- and strangely appealing- rumor may be the one about native support for Windows API in Leopard. That would mean that you could run most Windows-only applications in Leopard the same way you would run a Mac application.
4. Geographical Mapping
Then, there has been talk of the inclusion of geographical mapping software with the operating system. I am not sure at all what the benefit would be, except for some cool integration with Address Book, but with Google Earth and Microsoft Virtual Earth already out there, Apple may just be throwing their hat in to the ring.
5. Not Called Leopard
The most basic and appealing rumor I have come across so far is that the new operating system may not be called Leopard at all. Apple may move to a new naming scheme (dogs, maybe?) or a different cat (OS X Cheshire), but it seems like the world of marketing and re-branding may influence this decision more than an innate love of cats.
6. Living Elements:
A few rumor sites have been talking about ‘living elements’ within OS X. While the descriptions are vague, I think we can be quite confident that Mac OS 10.5 will include a lot of eye-candy and graphics that will introduce a host of new visual cues in to our jaded ways of using the Mac.
7. A New Finder
This one has been long overdue. The shortcomings in Finder are legendary and have spawned a cottage industry of small applications that overcome them. Of course, an improved Finder would kill that industry, but when has Apple shied away from introducing features that make entire companies redundant?
8. Improved Dashboard
The Dashboard has been one of those things that people either use rabidly or not at all. My reasons for not using it are numerous, but some small tweaks to the speed and usability could get me to use it. This may be one of the smaller updates to OS X, but I expect some changes here.
9. Collaborative Documents
Some rumors speak of collaborative document editing features. While these features would make more sense as part of the iWork suite, operating system level support could also be introduced.
And then, there are a few rumors that do not excite me a lot yet, but could in the future. TUAW recently reported that the OS X servers could move to Sun’s ZFS file system. Also, Mac OS X may be moving towards resolution independence, but I will hold off judgement on that until someone can explain the excitement about it. And finally, there are rumors about full-screen applications in Leopard that could allow you to do things like have your iCal calendar in the background of your desktop at all times. Nice, but not quite in the awesome category yet. Use the comments to point out why I should be excited about these features or to point out all the cool rumors I may have missed.
So there you have it—a round up of all the rumors that will keep me going until the WWDC conference in San Francisco, California this August. Apple Matters will have regular coverage from that event, so stay tuned.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
It would have to be an independent module -robotech
I’m envisioning it as a part of iTunes itself. Though it might make more sense for it to be part of the Quicktime platform, if they were going to use P2P for other functions in the Mac (while keeping the iTunes functionality parallel on PC).
it’s still friendlier and more advantageous to the podcaster -Beeb
True. It is possible that Apple could use its own impressive datacentre to act as a main source for the downloads. With a P2P system it would be simply another source, albeit a very fact one, that could be used to ensure the process of downloading was seamless in the case that there weren’t enough uploaders.
(I also admit this is slightly far-fetched. But I think in principle it’s a cool idea, though in practice…)
doesn’t bittorrent rely on numerous people wanting to download a file at the same time?
Actually, BitTorrent relies on numerous people generously seeding even after they’ve downloaded. If it weren’t for “generous” behaviour - that is, people seeding more than they leech - then BitTorrent would be terribly slow.
The way I can see this being overcome is if iTunes simply uploads/‘seeds’ in the background. However this might be a bit of a pain if you’re, for instance, web surfing and listening to music at the same time.
Also, if I were a podcaster and I put out a new episode, say at noon, and I have 1,000 subscribers through iTunes who all have their settings set so that they download it right away and set so that they would upload 100% of the file (so that they give back to the network at least as much as they’ve taken before disconnecting), this distribution system would work.
If there were a way to couple this with the existing server distribution system (where the server is actually seeding the torrent indefinitely so that the file is always available anyways) this would more than likely be faster than the typical download. Depending on the podcast, the download speed can be pretty slow (or at least they seem like it to me over wifi at least, compared to what I’m capable of, although I’ve always noticed iTunes as slow when it comes to the net). I would figure that there would be a core audience that wouldn’t mind seeding their favorite shows indefinitely so that others could benefit (there are already certain iptv shows that do this, MacBreak comes to mind over on twit.tv, which by the way, is where this idea of podcasting with torrents came from).
I guess I didn’t make clear just how little I know about WINE and GNU beyond that they exist, although I just saw a digged cnet story where WINE is running on OS X, which is kinda odd. Apparentl it’s an app called Crossover Office from Codeweaver. Just figured I’d share that.
Apologies to Ben Hall for the redundancy of my post
The jist of it is that if something is popular, instead of creating a bottleneck with slower download speeds for the individual and having the provider end up with larger distribution costs, the viewer would get it faster and put less stress on the network (giving back about as much as s/he’s downloading).
If something is less popular, there would therefor be fewer leachers (downloaders) as well as fewer seeders, so in general you can still achieve good download speeds (40 kb/s or more) which is quite nice if you download at an odd time of the day as therefor with fewer leachers at that point, you can leach all the available bandwidth for yourself.
Actually, BitTorrent relies on numerous people generously seeding even after they’ve downloaded. If it weren’t for “generous” behaviour - that is, people seeding more than they leech - then BitTorrent would be terribly slow.
Very true. Perhaps iTunes could have a two-part system that pulls from the server or from peers depending on the available download speeds.
It SOUNDS feasible. I don’t know if it is.
Apologies to Ben Hall for the redundancy of my post
Ditto to you, chicken. I didn’t refresh in time to see your idea about a dual system is exactly the same as mine.
After pondering the many configuration possibilities for a BT-type technology in Leopard and iTunes, in particular, I came up with a rational list of assumptions:
1. It will not be a full-blown P2P.
It will not function as a P2P client as we know it now with BT clients such as Azureus or BitTornado. If you visualize the iTMS/iTunes distribution topology as a star or hub/spokes or a peer/node. Let’s concentrate on the peer/node or P2N from here on.
Well, with the way BT works now is P2P where any client can directly connect to any other client without knowledge of the central node. This is exactly what Apple does not want - losing control of such critical portion as the info of who exactly is downloading. This is a critical aspect. and I don’t mean they have to know your personals but they want to know if the downloaders are authenticated iTMS users.
Also, Apple will not advocate “slurpees” in that an uncontrolled corporate-backed piracy is rampant. That would really be too much for the feds and will only get a U.S. vs Apple kind of situation. Apple can leave that problem to the untamed BT clients (above).
2. BT technology can be system-wide (Spotlight, Widgets,etc) or application-centric (iTunes, iTMS, .Mac, iWork, iPhoto, and other iApps).
In the aspect of Spotlight, imagine being able to use that to search the “swarm” or just plain shared folder “digging” of a remote peer client. The former is more intriguing since we can already view your P2P friend’s shared folders with capable clients.
With Widgets, authors can publish and distribute their useful wares quite easily and efficiently over a centralized distribution.
As for the iApps, iPhoto can use BT for “pixcasting” which is a new feature of iPhoto. It analogous to podcasting.
Of all the iApps, iTunes would receive most of the attention (for good reasons) since it is the most bandwidth hog of all Apple services - and that includes .Mac.
3. BT technology will be an API-level or in this case, provided as a QT service.
I originally proposed a modular addition (a.k.a. plug-in) to iTunes client or a separate app. Now after a thorough examination, that is not feasible.
Apple will enhance the QT layer libraries to implement the BT protocol within the system itself. Many system functionalities such as media-centric kinds depend on the Quicktime subsystem. Implementing BT there would solve the problem of supporting both the clients and the system - Spotlight and Widgets.
In this evolution of QT, iTunes will be a BT client with a seeding capability, but not superseeding or tracking. Those functionalities will be implemented in .Mac and iTMS. This way, no client can seed a new swarm without Apple’s nodes knowing about it.
Authenticity is key and even if a peer is collectively funneling from the swarm, that peer must be authenticated by iTMS or .Mac periodically (every sync frame at the least).
DRM (BBx’s favorite) will not be absent from this system despite some individual’s extreme oppositions. DRM just moves on to a bigger, grander scale. How about that for convenience of thought?
This way, no client can seed a new swarm without Apple’s nodes knowing about it. -Me
That should say “not knowing about it”. I apologize for the quick mind to keystroke transfer coefficient. Now, that makes more sense to what I was saying.
“No-one… without… knowing about it” was correct. With “not knowing”, you triple-negatived your way to Apple not knowing.
“without ... not knowing” says that they are kept in the dark.
“without ... knowing” says that they find out when it happens.
So, do you have any *FACTS* xenedar to give to us Mac faithfuls??? Do not even post if you have NOTHING! Understand?
This forum is for rational reasoning and not factless irrational bickering!!! This is the last time I’ll warn you.
Xenedar, I recommend while you are roaming and collecting *FACTS* regarding the BT technology in Leopard, it would be very, very wise, indeed, to learn some Anglo manners and introduce yourself properly to us Mac faithfuls.
And while sipping that 3p.m. “cup of of tea”, it is worthwhile to read and heed proper English grammer composition. I do not want to see any more gibberishly composed English report from you.
“No-one… without… knowing about it” was correct. With “not knowing”, you triple-negatived your way to Apple not knowing.
Heheheheh.
But give it up, Xenedar. You’re obviously wasting your time. Some of us are still trying to figure out if he’s even real, or just a very unfunny prank.
Some of us are still trying to figure out if he’s even real… -Bbx
As real as your infinitesimal mind can afford my dear…
But give it up, Xenedar. You’re obviously wasting your time… -Xdr
No, Xenedar is entitled to have negative reports to the Supreme Commander. All he needs to give are facts and not garbage predisposition.
Xenedar, I can truly feel can defend himself without the help of anyone. So what do you have Xdr? Anything good to report to me?