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.
Comments
There is another sweet “rumour” but this one has more salt in it than the Dead Sea since it comes from market analysts of Money/CNN.
The good folks at CNN/Money announced the possible inclusion of a “Skype”-kind of capability (http://money.cnn.com/blogs/browser/index.html#115161697194363366), also termed endearly Voice over IP (VoIP) to most Mac faithfuls.
That would be awesome and just salivate from the mere thought of communicating virtually free. I’m sure it will not get to $0.00/minute for that is an impossibility. I have too much rationality to propose otherwise.
What’s your take Mac commando hopefuls?
Seeing as though all of my friends use MSN for online chat, I’ve never had the chance to really use iChat (and since I’m connected via wifi it wouldn’t be all that great anyway), but my understanding is that you can already use iChat for .mac and also AIM, with voice and video (as has been pushed in many a mac comercial and print ad on their site, like with the screen of the macbook pro). One thing I like about this is that I can just connect my video camera via firewire and all of a sudden I’ve got me a web cam. Just no one to chat with…
If Apple were to expand iChat to include support for popular networks, like MSN, Yahoo and the like, with VoIP and webcam support with people using Windows as well as OS X, now that would be something. That way it wouldn’t matter that MSN and Yahoo clients for Mac don’t support VoIP, as you could just connect to those networks using iChat, making it into the killer app it could and should be (almost making the case for another switch ad).
There are some third party apps that do this already, but in my experience the compatibility isn’t there (chatting with one of my friends using one of these clients caused their MSN to mess up after every message) and the GUI needs some work as well in terms of the bugginess (although I do like the whole tabbed messaging bit).
http://tinyurl.com/nw9pg
Just figured I’d follow up the Skype angle. Apparently they’re working on video, so there’s something for ya. I’m still pretty sure that iChat would work better if they were able to tap into more networks, like MSN and Yahoo. This would make it free and cross-platform, which would be great.
I have no idea on what sort of problems might prevent such a move from being made, although I would imagine there would be more than one dealing with how MSN and Yahoo transfer their data, which may be why they didn’t include the feature on their Mac clients. Then again, it’s only Apple that has much to gain from interoperability so it’s been left to them to put in the hard work of properly coding it. Here’s hoping they see it that way…
Like you mentioned, C2N, “interoperability” is key, and this tidbit of a Skype-type capability in Leopard and iChat is now becoming clear…
I use Skype for OSX (of course) on a regular basis and has been improving in leaps and bounds since, oh 1 year ago. The end user hardly perceive the “talking bucket” effects any longer that used to plague the old versions. I still ask the famed Verizon call, “How do you hear me now?” every so often though…
Anyway, many possibilities can come out of this. One as you mentioned, interoperability with other VoIP clients - possibly with Skype users (now passed 100 mils worldwide! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype). That would be something to behold, indeed.
Another, this BitTorrent (read prior posts) technolgy implementation, VoIP can use that plumbing in OSX for a very elegant, very efficient call-routing system. Wow! I can already visualize many a scenarios…but I will get back with you on later reports…
And how about the much-hyped (even by credible analysts) iPhone contraption? Now, my Mac faithfuls, you are beginning to convolve all these impending events to that singularity - Apple wants to be your voice/data provider for free - virtually free.
You all are freaking nerds. Where does speculating do? Just Wait until the seventh.
Nathan, you wouldn’t be reading this “speculative” article if you weren’t so interested, would you not?
By reading up all the “speculative” posts down to #49, deep inside that rugged externals I freely call your skull, you are a closet “nerd”, like the rest of A.M. readers, and just obsessing to liberate that anguish by… posting a demeaning and belittling snipish comment.
Now what do you have to contribute? Hmmm…?
I’m probably too late to this discussion . I’ll have to learn where the regular forums are!
Anyway - a point on Bittorrent. The traditional bittorrent isn’t very “smart” in who it connects to. An Apple bittorrent could be smart.
For instance:
1) What if you only download from (and upload to) peers who are nearby - ie: on your existing ISP, or in your city, or whatever. Speeds would increase, pressure on the internet would decrease, ISPs would be happy.
2) As a downloader in BT today, you download from multiple sources and upload till you’ve uploaded the same amount (hopefully). It would be more effective if you only downloaded from 10 people at once but they gave you all their bandwidth - and you would also only upload to 1 person at a time, giving them your full upload speed and forget balancing hundreds of concurrent connections.
3) As a podcaster (etc), perhaps you could configure Apple’s BT servers to only point downloaders to your BT-source machines when the average speed-per-downloader drops below a certain level. You could alternatively configure Apple’s BT servers to download from Apple when bandwidth was low (with a fee?).
It seems to me that this could be far more wide-reaching than simple downloads. Apple was rumoured to be considering 100GB(?) .Mac accounts for storing your downloaded movies on - that could be a “virtual” 100GB which is really bittorrent downloads of anything you’ve already paid for. The only “requirement” for an unlimited virtual hard disk would be that you upload as much as you download… this way it costs Apple next to nothing.
Nice hopes for 10.5