Talk:Mac OS X v10.4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
 This article is part of WikiProject Macintosh. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as an article pertaining to Apple Computer, but is not currently working to improve it. WikiProject Macintosh itself is an attempt to improve, grow, standardize, and attain featured status for Wikipedia's articles related to Apple Macintosh and Apple Computer. We need all your help, so join in today!
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] System Requirements

Unless other Mac OS X pages, there is no system requirements section on this one. Anyone to fix this? --Bernard François 08:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming

I suggest renaming this article to Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, and similarly for the other versions of Mac OS X. Any objections? --Ellmist 22:31, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why rename? -- Taku 22:39, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
A redirect would be more appropriate. --huwr 23:05, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Largely indifferent oppose, unless you wish to redo the Panther page as well. Let's at least have some consistency. Icundell 00:40, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Strong Oppose. AlistairMcMillan 17:30, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I just noticed that you oppose so strongly that you moved the page without consultation. That is what has caused confusion noted below. 'Tiger' is a key part of 10.4's identity. You should not have moved it without seeking consensus. Icundell 12:26, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've always thought "Mac OS X 10.4" was a bit redundant, perhaps Mac OS 10.4 would be more appropriate, because we're actually saying Mac OS 10 10.4, which is kinda silly. —User:Ryguillian 2005-04-21

[edit] Move

Mac OS X Tiger is the name Apple and the press use to promote the OS [1] [2], and Mac OS X v10.4 "Tiger" is the full name they use to sell it as a product [3]. I believe the short name should be used for the article title, and the full name in the introductory paragraph. —Cantus…☎ 18:30, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Conditional Agree, assuming that the other pages are done to match. Since it clearly is the common-language version it makes more sense to use. --Ctachme 01:24, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
For earlier versions, we could use Mac OS X Panther (which indeed seems to be popular, by Google tests) and Mac OS X Jaguar. Mac OS X 10.1 would still be Mac OS X 10.1 as it was never known with its codename Puma as part of the name. The initial version of the system was simply known as Mac OS X, not Mac OS X 10.0, etc. etc.—Cantus…☎ 03:32, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
The original version was Cheetah. Icundell 15:25, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
But Cheetah was never advertised as part of the name of the OS, like in later versions. —Cantus…☎ 22:32, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

Please leave the article names as "Mac OS X v10.x". If we end up using the codenames on some of the articles and not on others, then not only does it make it harder to find articles by simply typing in addresses, but someone who is unfamiliar with the codenames is not going to understand comparisons. If someone says "Tiger includes full support for X but Puma only has partial support" they could mis-interpret Puma as following Tiger, however with the simple version numbers it is clear. AlistairMcMillan 17:29, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That's what redirects are for. I'm all for Mac OS X 10.x without the ugly "v". —Cantus…☎ 22:35, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

After considering, I agree that the articles should be named "Mac OS X v10.0", "Mac OS X v10.1", "Mac OS X v10.2", "Mac OS X v10.3", and "Mac OS X v10.4". I don't like removing the version numbers and using only the cat names, because then it's not immediately clear whether "Mac OS X Panther" is more recent or less recent than "Mac OS X Jaguar". I don't like leaving out the 'v' because "Mac OS X 10.0" is wrong according to Apple, redundant, and sounds weird when read ("mac oh ess ten ten point oh"). - Brian Kendig 23:05, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Exactly what is being proposed?

At the top of this page, and on the requested moves page, is proposes a move from Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger to Mac OS X Tiger.

Underneath that it says change it to Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger.

Which are we being asked to vote on? I have no problem with losing the 'v'. I have a problem with losing the version number. Can we have some clarity please? Icundell (after the fact signing 'cos I forgot)

There is no clarity. Essentially there are 3 issues:
  • Include a "v" prefixing the version number
  • Include the version number itself
  • Include the code name

There is no clear consensus at this point. I encourage us to vote on all three issues so we know exactly what we are doing. --Ctachme 02:07, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Right. In that case I'm inclined to say the 'v' is a bit ugly, but the version number is essentially. Icundell 00:42, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think it looks weird without the 'v', with the 'X' and '10' right next to each other - it's like when people would say "Mac OS 9 9.1". Otherwise I agree that the version number is important, whether or not the cat name (for Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger - not the previous two) is put after it. - Brian Kendig 02:58, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Poll on the Mac OS X talk page

I think this page is kind of confused and unclear on what people are voting, so I've tried to make the poll more concise, and I've posted it at Talk:Mac_OS_X#What should the versions be called? (because this applies to all Mac OS X versions, not just this one). - Brian Kendig 02:38, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Using PR Images

Apple releases official images of their products on [4] perhaps those would be better to use than ones grabbed off of the Web site? Any thoughts? — user:Ryguillian

I've been pondering this... the only thing is they have a pretty obvious user agreement thingy when you download image. It says somthing like "press-only," can we really consider ourselfs press? Besides it's better use our own picutres if we can... less copyright issues. --Ctachme 23:52, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well, we're using one of their images now, aren't we? That's right off the Web site! How is this justified? --Ryguillian

[edit] "Cupertino, Start Your photocopiers"

I strongly question the inclusion of the "Cupertino, Start Your engines" anecdote. a) It seems highly out of place with the rest of the entry, b) specifically bringing it up seems to imply a position on whether Dashboard is in fact a Konfab copy, something which is extremely debatable, and most importantly c) adds negligible informational value to the topic at hand. -John Kenneth Fisher 05:51, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

For a start, it's "Cupertino, start your photocopiers", and the point is that it is firing back the exact same sentiment at Apple that they fired at Microsoft at WWDC. In other words, according to Rose, the pot is calling the kettle black. It's hard to object to its current wording since it simply states the facts - the WWDC slogans are a matter of historical record, and are (and will remain) quite interesting. The Rose addition is also a matter of fact, though as time goes on it most likely will cease to matter - Dashboard is the thing, not Konfabulator, like it or not. So I'd say just give it time. It might remain interesting to note that at the time of Tiger's launch there was this little spat going on, and it's recorded here for posterity.Graham 11:53, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)


"though as time goes on it most likely will cease to matter" is indeed my point. It seems to me that the period of time in which that would be considered a noteworthy event in the history has already come and gone. But my objections are n the record, and if I'm the only one who thinks it is irrelevant information, I'll bow out quasi-gracefully. -John Kenneth Fisher 12:36, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Screenshot

Can we get a new screenshot of Tiger that:

  • has some open windows and applications (that come with Tiger)—not to the point of clutter, just one or two that are more relevant than a blank desktop;
  • uses a smaller resolution so that more detail is visible in the thumbnail?

—Miles←☎ 01:59, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Sure, i'll make one just like the one I did for panther --Ctachme 02:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Such a screen shot would idealy be shot at the smallest resolution possible with a Finder window open, the dock showing, and a spotlight search in progress. --huwr 06:31, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bizarre PDF Widget--Not the Only One

Hi people,

Newbie here.

Got a correction for the article if someone wants to either pick it up or encourage me to jump in:

The printing dialog in Tiger now features a drop down menu for creating PDFs, sending PDFs to Mail, and other PDF related actions. However the user interface has been criticised for creating a hybrid widget that looks like a plain button but acts like a pop-up menu. This is the only place in the entire Mac OS X interface where such an element appears.

Actually, there's one other place this annoying hybrid widget appears: in the Help Viewer where it's either a Home button for a particular help area, or a menu of all the help libraries.

Which takes the fire out of the last line (another reason I didn't want to jump in and fix it).

Cheers

Barefootguru 09:20, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)

OK, no-one's commented on this and have found another occurrence (the Save button in the attachments line when viewing an e-mail), so have corrected the article.—Barefootguru 05:30, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)

[edit] Remove x86 paragraph?

Mac OS X 10.4 itself has little to do with the intel transition, and the paragraph should be removed, i think. Is tiger intel-compiled?

I disagree. OS X has everything to do with the Intel transition. Without an operating system that is fundamentally cross-platform, Apple wouldn't be able to do what they are planning. --Yamla 22:06, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Tiger has been compiled for IA-32 x86, and someone's been leaking build numbers onto the Mac OS X page (that apparently the 10.4.3 release for those developers with Intel Transition kits was done within days of the official release for PowerPC). As far as what else is already recompiled and working on a MacIntel, I can't even speculate. --JohnDBuell | Talk 07:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
This whole sub-topic can probably be removed; Mac OS X 10.4.4 and later are available for the Macintosh Intel machines, and every system release since then has worked on both ppc and x86 architecture systems. Stattenf 04:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Quality

The images on this page are absolutely ugly. Anyone with Tiger can upload a hi-res version.--Nessup 17:31, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Out of date

This page is full of out-of-date information, mostly about the Intel transition.

Intel Macs aren't coming in June; they already arrived in January. (I'm typing on an Intel iMac right now.) The current Tiger release is a "universal" build that runs on both Intel and PPC. (The only thing that's still missing is 64-bit Intel.) It might even be worth putting in the summary that Tiger is the first version of OS X that runs on x86 boxes; while Apple isn't pushing it as one of the hundreds of new features in Tiger, it's clearly one of the most important.

Also, the information about unauthorized/pirated releases and Apple's Trusted Computing technology needs to be updated. It's also a little awkward as it stands. Either the whole discussion should be shrunk down to its essentials, or it should be expanded to include more information (and maybe even to mention the renewed speculation, in the face of the quick cracks, that Apple doesn't really care about DRM as much as their claims and lawsuits would imply).

There are probably a few other things, but that's what I noticed immediately.

On another note, it would be nice to mention that Tiger is based on Darwin 8 (both x86 and PPC), rather than just Darwin. It's surprisingly hard to find information on which Darwin version goes with which OS X version online, and this seems like a good place for it.

[edit] Sources

This is a pretty good article, but it's really lacking in the sources department, especially for claims in the "Interesting facts" section. Everything else that could be categorized as "news events" (like Apple filing suit against file sharers). Apple themselves are a fine source for information about the OS itself (ie. new features), but let's see if we can find some reliable sources for the rest. Warrens 23:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Added a source for the whole numbers thing. Also re-named the heading, firstly because it was a bit POV and secondly it is probably the least "interesting" section in the whole damn article. AlistairMcMillan 00:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Getting rid of the ugly black arrow

How do I change cursors in OS X 10.4?

That's new. I've never heard of anyone who wanted to change the cursor, and I can't find any software at the moment. Is there a particular problem you have with the current cursor? --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (T | C | @) 05:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

You can use Mighty Mouse [5] if you dont have an intel. 69.153.52.143 22:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 64 bit and x86 registers?

Is Tiger a 64 bit OS for the purposes of x86-64 extended registers? Frankie

No, it isnt at all. x86_64 support is introduced in Mac OS x v10.5 Leopard.
—Claunia 13:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for answering, was looking in here for it too. - MSTCrow 08:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/c/Talk%7EMac_OS_X_v10.4_01c9.html"