Why you should care about Apple's Snow Leopard
Summary
Topics
Apple's Bertrand Serlet outlines changes to Mac OS X 10.6 at WWDC.(Credit: James Martin/CNET)
According to rumors, the release of Mac OS X 10.6, Apple's operating system also known as Snow Leopard, might arrive a bit early.
Though Apple announced at the Worldwide Developers Conference in June that Snow Leopard would hit stores in September, tech blogs became overly excited when it was whispered that it might be ready to debut on or about August 28.
How much does it matter that it could arrive five whole days before September officially begins? It doesn't. Regardless of when the operating system ships, here's what to expect from Snow Leopard, and why it might matter to you.
What's the difference between Snow Leopard and Leopard?
First thing to know: This is not a complete overhaul of Mac OS X. Rather, it's a series of small to medium-sized improvements, what Apple calls "refinements." Much of the new shine to OS X 10.6 comes from changes that are under the surface, possibly not obvious to the unobservant. But Apple does say that the improvements make the overall OS much faster, including a 45-percent faster installation than the previous version of the operating system, OS X 10.5, or Leopard. Apple is also promising faster boot times, quicker shut down, a speedier process when joining wireless networks, and faster backups to Time Machine. And it's not just quicker, Apple says, it's lighter: Upon install it frees up 6GB of space.
Specific applications have been tinkered with as well, with a lot of attention focused on Quicktime, Expose, and a shiny new Safari 4 browser, which was released in June. For more on that, see here.
Quicktime gets a mysterious new version number, and is now called Quicktime X. It's a bit slicker, and the new interface appears similar to the iPhone's media player. The real change is that many features that were previously in the Pro version of Quicktime are now in the free version. You will be able to edit video inside QuickTime using a video timeline ribbon that appears along the bottom of the screen. And there will be fewer steps involved in video uploading. You don't have to worry about file formats--Quicktime will do any necessary conversion and upload directly to video-hosting sites or MobileMe, Apple's subscription service that syncs personal files on any of its devices. Apple promises it will take just one click to record audio or video (on a Mac's built-in mic or camera) with the new Quicktime. It will also support HTTP streaming of a wider variety of file formats (like h.264 and AAC). It's a feature that many competing media players have long offered, and it automatically adjusts the playback bit rate according to what the connection can handle. It also means you can stream video or audio through more firewalls.
Expose, an operating system UI feature for organizing open application windows, or just the windows from a particular application currently running, gets tweaked a bit too. In Snow Leopard, Expose is integrated with app icons in the dock, which cuts out the need to first switch to the specific application you want before activating Expose to see its open windows. It also means you don't have to use a keyboard, or use a trackpad gesture to call it up. Clicking and holding an app's icon will bring all windows open that are associated with that program to the front.
What's the one killer feature worth upgrading for?
Many people will probably consider support for Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 the most important new feature of Snow Leopard. Improved Exchange support will be integrated into Mail, iCal, and Address Book in Snow Leopard, which means e-mail, calendar appointments, to-do lists, and contacts from Outlook will be viewable on your personal calendar, mail, and address books. It also allows things like dragging and dropping contacts into iCal to schedule meetings, and your Mac will be able to discover time conflicts between personal and work calendars and change the meeting time and location.
Related: Microsoft is improving its Exchange support for the Mac too. This week Microsoft said that Outlook for Mac will replace Entourage, the current e-mail and calendar program in the Mac Office suite. Although it will still differ from the Windows version of Outlook, it will add support for more Exchange features, such as public folders and rights management features.
How much?
Apple surprised people by putting the price to upgrade to Snow Leopard at a very attractive $29 for a single license, and $49 for a five-user family pack. But there's a catch: you have to already have Leopard installed to pay those prices. If you're upgrading from a previous version of Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger), you'll have to pay $169, which includes an upgrade to 10.5 (Leopard) and 10.6 (Snow Leopard). For a 5-user family pack license, it'll cost $229. And Snow Leopard is only compatible with Macs containing Intel chips. On the OS front, Leopard is the end of the line for PowerPC Mac owners.
Is it worth upgrading right away, or should I wait?
Some people are fans of waiting until the first update, the 0.1 release, which tends to correct any of the immediate issues that inevitably pop up when a new operating system is released to the public. Some who attempted to upgrade to the first version of Leopard ran into trouble after the software was installed, and when they attempted to restart their machines a blue screen would appear instead. But it appeared to hinge on a specific piece of third-party software many had installed that was out of date. The majority had a smooth transition to Leopard.
Overall, we think this will be a worthwhile upgrade if the speed claims turn out to be true. Another way of looking at is that for the price of the Quicktime to Quicktime Pro upgrade, you get most of the Quicktime Pro features plus a newly tweaked core OS. We think it's a good deal for Apple OS X 10.5 users.
When will it be available?
So far, Apple has said only "September." Recent rumors have indicated it might be ready earlier than that, but it's mid-August now, so that's mostly inconsequential. No matter what, it's going to be available before Windows 7 is set to roll out on October 22. When it's available, we'll be sure to let you know.
This article was originally posted on CNET News.
Talkback Most Recent of 201 Talkback(s)
-
How about security?
Update: I have answered my own questions with the precious few details found here: http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/
Are there any security improvements in Snow Leopard? yes, a few
Will the NX/DEP finally be switched on in Safari and all other internet facing programs?
Presumably it will be switched on for 64bit programs. All bundled apps will be 64 bit, but 3rd party apps may not be
Will ASLR be extended to more than a few system libraries and have increased entropy? no info
Will SL have any form of heap corruption protection, like e.g. heap encryption/checksum or canaries? Any safe exception handling in sight? yes, heap checksumming. No mentioning of exception handling
How about memory allocation techniques to foil attacks, such as variable reordering, string protection etc? No info
Last but certainly not least, will the "sandbox" finally be turned on to protect Safari, mail.app etc? No info. Presumably not because a real sandbox is an architectural change which involves splitting apps up in more processes
I was told a long time ago that Snow Leopard would be the release of OSX which would finally get it right. SL does feature more security for 64bit apps.
OSX is still by far the most vulnerable operating system out there. IBM researchers find that OSX is hit with 3 times the vulnerabilities compared to Vista for the past 3 years. 2009 is no different, according to Secunia. Independant security researchers are all telling it like it is: OSX is the easiest OS to exploit. Once you find a vulnerability (plenty to choose from) nothing prevents you from exploiting it. Unlike Vista and to some degree, Linux.
There are now definite signs that attackers now are beginning to turn their attention to OSX. Must OSX users wait another 2-3 years for Apple to catch up while OSX is a swiss cheese?
honeymonster17th Aug 2009 -
Honey you need to get out more...
First, I do understand that you have a preference for Vista and are a little biased in that direction, and I won't try to convince you that you should switch to OSX, but have you read: "Bypassing Browser Memory Protections
Setting back browser security by 10 years" by Alexander Sotirov and Mark Dowd? (Those guys work for IBM btw)
The fact is that Vista has many weaknesses as well, even if on paper it appears more robust, and many of these are due to lax implementation of security features. I'm not saying OSX is better, far from it, but I will say that I find it is more usable, and secure enough for what I do. Our IT has standardized on Apple laptops (except for Safari; we use Firefox as our browser of choice), I suspect they aren't loosing sleep over it's insecurities either. It comes down to a) How well you follow best practices and b) How big of a target are you? On that second point, I think OSX is still a much less likely target for malware than Windows.
So, OK, OSX may have more vulnerabilities on paper, but in the real world it's still safer than Windows, at least for the time being.
914four17th Aug 2009 -
Gee. A service pack... really? And they charge for this?
Faster shut down and boot time, connects to wireless networks faster, and a new version of quicktime....
And the Apple customers get to PAY for this as a "major upgrade"... Apple really has some balls to pull this stunt.
trance2tec17th Aug 2009 -
Still puzzled by the emphasis placed on startup and shutdown.
This also extends to joining a wirless network. While improvements in these areas is nice the emphasis placed on them too high. Seriously...how much more productive will you be if your system takes 10 seconds less to boot up or shut down? Or 2 seconds less to join the network after waking? These tasks don't take too long right now and they're not done frequently enough that a 2 second increase in speed isn't going to change things.
ye17th Aug 2009 -
Especially on a Mac....
We are always reminded about how you can plug in your Mac, and never have to reboot or shut it down for years....
Why so much emphasis on start up/shut down? And why charge your customers for this service pack?
trance2tec17th Aug 2009 -
Bacause..
the whole Apple business model is to rip-off consumers. Apple cannot make a honest buck it is agains it's very nature.
Sure MacOS is cheaper, but you need to buy it 4 times....
Mectron17th Aug 2009 -
Now, Now, Behave Yourself
That's not a nice thing to say.
You sound like a bitter old IT guy.
yobtaf17th Aug 2009 -
well it is true....
Apple is definitely not a company that is focused on value, as much as they pretend to be.
Their products are decent, but overpriced. You can buy expensive Windows based machines too with great fit and finish similar if not better than a Mac- but you pay quite a bit for it.
trance2tec17th Aug 2009 -
Actually what he said is not true....
OSX is much the same as Windows it is the brand name and its not
likely going to change. So Tiger and Leopard are much the same as XP
and Vista in each case you pay for it.
Not taking tiger as an example its numeric code was 10.4 you paid
not a single cent for 10.4.1 to 10.4.11. THose are the rough equal to
your SP1 and SP2 etc.
This particular upgrade/enhancement is a bit different of that I will
admit but still since the base upgrade cost for OSX is cheaper than the
base upgrade cost for Windows I don't see much of a problem here.
One more thing you make the classic PC centric mistake when you
look at a Macintosh. It is not the individual tree's or hardware it is the
forest that counts. The individual pieces do play their role of that I
will admit but the greater whole that they create is what is truly
important and has value.
Pagan jim
James Quinn17th Aug 2009 -
Over Paying? I'm not.
I laugh a little when a consumer says something is overpriced.
Overpriced means it won't sell.
"Costs too much" is what you probably mean. Just because you won't
pay for it doesn't mean others won't.
Perhaps you're thinking "Over paid" which means you think you paid
more than you had to, i.e. you think you can get all the same benefits
from something that costs less. Hey, if you can, then duh, go for it.
As for me, I'm a Windows, Linux, and Mac power user. I've pushed
them all to the limit, and the Mac is a far better machine for a guy like
me. I can do everything on this machine that I could do on other
machines... everything. Even my wife has an little better experience on
a mac, mostly because it's lower maintenance, no antivirus slowing
down the machine and getting in the way, and it came with more of
the powerful tools she uses, like iPhoto, iMovie, and iDVD, and it was
compatible with FireFox and Thunderbird which she'd become
comfortable with on Windows before her switch.
Some people feel they could get by with a cheaper machine, but buy a
Mac anyway, just to be sure they won't wish they had later. That
doesn't make them a sucker (not all of them anyway). It's a free
country and that's their choice.
Some people could really benefit from switching to a Mac, but they
stick with Windows anyway. That doesn't make they idiots (not all of
them). If their choice of hardware gets the job done, and they're
happy, more power to them. I have many friends in this boat, and we
agree to disagree stay friends.
And yes, there are some people who shouldn't switch. Those took
years to learn how to check email and browse the web, and think that
makes them "good with a computer", they'll have a hard time making
the switch, and won't see any benefit. They should stick with the
cheapest thing they can get, or probably stick with Windows, even if
it's more expensive than a Linux based machine, just so they don't
have to relearn anything.
wjanoch18th Aug 2009 -
Who shuts down their Macs anyway...
Mine just hibernates and wakes up. I do the start up and shut down to install updates.
The same applies for Windows 7 RC however; it has shown itself to manage memory much better than its predecessors. It is too easy to suspend the virtual machine...
dcristof17th Aug 2009 -
puzzled 2
...not to mention that many of us haven't rebooted their Macs since the
last upgrade :))
HyperCog17th Aug 2009 -
Amen to that
6 days 3 hours 45 minutes.
Read 'em and weep.
I do shutdown the desktop overnight.
DannyO_0x9818th Aug 2009 -
Exactly
It is amazing MS keeps providing free SP for it OS and APPLE charges for it.. and eveybody loves it... .. The prices are decent.. but still you pay more for you mac..
dave@...17th Aug 2009 -
Except they aren't Service Packs.
Your knowledge of what a service pack is...
well... it's something that disturbs me.
" A service pack (in short SP) is a collection
of updates, fixes and/or enhancements to a
software program delivered in the form of a
single installable package. Many companies,
such as Microsoft or Autodesk, typically
release a service pack when the number of
individual patches to a given program reaches a
certain (arbitrary) limit. Installing a service
pack is easier and less error-prone than
installing a high number of patches
individually, even more so when updating
multiple computers over a network."
An example is Tiger to Leopard, with over 300
new things. Too many for a service pack. Even
looking at wikipedia tells me that Leopard to
Snow Leopard would be well worth it if I had a
Mac.
I'd get it just for the trimming, the improved
64-bit support, the improved multi-core
support, and OpenCL. Of course, I actually
won't get it. I don't have a Mac. But I do see
this as being "as big of an update" as Vista to
Seven, with it costing less.
Michael Alan Goff17th Aug 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox




