April 28, 2005 6:59 AM PDT

From Apple, a Tiger to put in your Mac

The latest version of the software suite that makes up the Macintosh operating system debuts Friday. How is it?
Photos: Tiger's ready to pounce
The New York Times

The story "From Apple, a Tiger to put in your Mac" published April 28, 2005 at 6:59 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.


Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Tiger may be the one that makes me a convert
Good article. I've been waiting for c/net to come up with a description of Tiger's features and I'm impressed. This may be the version of OS X that converts me from Windows. I'll be at the Apple Store this weekend to check it out.

I do take issue with a comical and absurd claim made in this article: "One nice thing about Windows, though, is that Microsoft sics a new version on its customers only once every few years." That's supposed to be a "nice thing?". You gotta be kidding? Longhorn is way overdue and I'm so tired of waiting for it that it gives me another reason to convert to Apple and OS X. Apple seems much more capable of keeping up with the rapid advances that we consumers want. By the time MS gets them into their OS, they are no longer an new technology.

Tiger looks VERY interesting and appealing.
Posted by (61 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Tiger is noce...
.... but, on the surface, it doesn't seem to be all that much of an
improvement over Panther. Perhaps the problem lies in that I
haven't any use for some of the pops, bells, and whistles
supposedly included. Or that I just haven't found them yet.

Spotlight looks like a very good search tool, but I wish I could
get it to just wait until I've completely identified what I'm looking
for. Right now, it seems that Spotlight tried to jump the gun with
the first bit of data you provide. But it is fast and complete.

I do notice that Dashboard is no better than Konfabulator, and
the claim that Apple ripped off the Dashboard idea seems to
have some credibility.

Mail is laid out better, but has only minor improvements.

Safari still lacks selective cookie control and selective site
blocking. And no blocking for pop-under ads is there (can that
be done?) I haven't a clue on RSS, like do I need or want it?

iChat is something I don't use, nor am I likey to.

Automator remains to be explored.

QuickTime 7 with H.264 is a real winner from everything I've
heard. Now I get to see for myself. And QuickTime 6.X was
great, except it lacked a few key codecs.

I think most of Tiger's strengths aren't necessarily at the visible
level. But it runs cleam and solid, and witha very few updates, all
OSX programming continues to work well.

I'm pleased, and I'm glad I spent the money to buy it
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Sorry guys;.... it's NICE not NOCE...
Either I need to get a better spell checker or CNET needs to
implement the Jive Edit mode...

Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag
The single most important feature not featured
XGrid, has to be the single most important feature in Tiger, that
is not being actively promoted. While Spotlight is ground-
breaking, and invaluable, XGrid has deep, long-term, positive
consequences for computing.

Before you jump on me about "Spotlight is ground-breaking,
and invaluable", please note that this is not an add-on program
interface. Spot-light is part of the operating system, and is only
similiar to Googles search in what it is intended to do.

Now, back to the meat of the matter. Since XGrid is part of the
operating system, anyone will be able to cluster computers
locally or even over the internet, to perform grid computer tasks.
XGrid is something you can use to cluster 2, 3, nth macs
together to create your own computer cluster. Imagine the cost
of only 10 mini-macs clustered together to split processing
tasks. Thats ten, affordable mac that anyone, who desires to,
can easily create a computer cluster with. How about a group
of 100 students working on an intensive set of algorithms?
Instead of splicing up a single cpu to step through the
processes, each process can be run simultaneously, or whenever
a cpu is available.

To me, it seems that XGrid is something that can help change
the industry again. No, the idea is not new. But name one
commonly used, consumer OS that offers this capability now.
To my knowledge, this is something new to the everyday
consumer, that will allow the industry to expand in the direction
of grid computing far quicker than Sun thought it might. Oi
vay, and it comes with every new mac.

Well, that's my two cents, now I can start saving for a lot of mac
equipment. I have a project I have been dreaming about for 20
years, that only now has become feasible.
Posted by Thomas, David (1947 comments )
Reply Link Flag
While you're right, its a very important feature, I don't think your "typical" computer user will really care. For people like you and me, who have three 250 GIG drives packed plus backups, yeah, its important. Very much so.

But I think Dashboard, Parental Control, and Spotlight are for the more "typical" users, and more important for them.

I'd love to get a few more G4 PowerMac's and hook them up this way. I wonder how much my electrical bill will suffer? lol
Posted by (461 comments )
Link Flag
10 mini-macs = 5,000 usd
2 dual 2.3 powermacs = 4,000 usd
You get more processor power if did this.
Posted by Willy Wonker (73 comments )
Link Flag
Just a question
Why do you feel it is so important that Spot-light is part of the operating system?
You state that it is 'only similar to Googles search in what it is intended to do'. Yet Google's desktop search (and Copernic) do the job very well, regardless of weather or not it is third party. Many people rail against MS when it incorporates something into the OS, and shuts out third party solutions. Is that because they are MS?
I look forward to seeing how Spotlight behaves, especially how it handles meta-data. but I fail to see how you arrive at the conclusion that third-party mean substandard.
Posted by catchall (245 comments )
Link Flag
For the Windows People...
I'll say it for you..

PC's have 130% of the market

Windows had all those Tiger features back in 1942

Games are critical to the survival of the universe

Mac users are all snobs, gay, andor women. A true man would
only have a PC.

And anything else you might think of.

Now, with that said, please go away.
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Grow up...
My goodness, how backwards are you. You are telling Windows users to go away when this article could help them convert to Tiger? Is your little fan club really that exclusive? Or are you just that confused?

Poor guy, I feel sorry for you. Can't make up your mind if you want to help or hinder people.
Posted by (46 comments )
Link Flag
Calm down
There is no one insulting your precious putty tat. It looks like it will be a nice update. Take one look at any Microsoft story and you will see the Apple fanboys out trying to convert the sinners. Your aggression is unjustified.
Posted by Andrew J Glina (1673 comments )
Link Flag
I'm sorry...
I didn't know that Windows people couldn't recognize a lttile humor
when they saw it. I certainly didn't expect anyone to take it
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag
PLEASE APPLE. Please,PleasePlease...
...release it on x86/Intl chips. You'll kill Windows. We need a viable alternative.
Posted by ordaj (338 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Oh no
Not this debate again. To save time, Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. It would kill Apple.
Posted by Andrew J Glina (1673 comments )
Link Flag
Hardware won't support Tiger
The PC does not seem to be an adequate hardware design to
utilize Tiger's capabilities, which may be one reason why Tiger
and XP/Longhorn are very different OS's.

I would like to get a definitive answer from Intel andor MS on
whether or not the current PC processor/motherboard set is still
driven by requirements originating in the 8088/DOS era. Apple
has introduced new designs, and abandoned legacy OS's and
software at least twice, but the PC seems to still be carrying a lot
of legacy deadwood. That has to hurt performance.

ANyhow, if any truly knowledgeable person out thre has an
answer, I'd sure like to hear it.
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag
You wouldn't want it on x86. It would ahve to be completely rebuilt to operate on x86. Go buy a Mac mini or something and get aquainted with it. The hardware and software tie together, making it so compatible, you'll never mess with another driver again....EVER.
Posted by (461 comments )
Link Flag
Can you say V-CHIP?
First it would have to be with an AMD64/Intel64 bit chip system to operate like it does on the IBM PowerPC 64 bit G5 chips on Macs.

Second, WHAT IF Apple manufactured the PC Box with a proprietary V-Chip from Apple WITH a PC-64?
Apple could quality control the box,QC testing, install high end graphics cards, use 8 MB RAM,install all the drivers needed for PC devices (USB2/FIREWIRE) from a large variety of vendors (like they do on a MAC)so plug&play works right out of the box. Apple Monitors already work with Wintel PCs.
High end Industrial Design for box, etc.

MAC-G5 computer with MacOSX Tiger & 64 bit PowerPC, PLUS MAC-86 computer with MacOSX86 & V-CHIP. MacOSX86 only works if V-Chip is installed on an APPLE-PC (i.e. not Dell/HP/Gateway PCx86)

Apple sells software & hardware to Windows/Linux people, in ADDITION to Mac base.

Third: What if this was like the Mac Mini? A AMD64/Intel64 bit chip based Mini with Tigerx86 + V-CHIP?
Use any Monitor/Keyboard/Mouse/external devices that you want OR already own.

iPods work on Macs / Mac86 / Wintel PCs.

Win/Win for all...!

If Apple can "switch" to a UNIX based 64bit chip/OS system in just a few years, they can do this too.

Just a thought...
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Link Flag
WSJ Review
Tiger received a good review by Walt
Mossberg of the Wall Street Journal. Here's a

"Overall, Tiger is the best and most advanced
personal computer operating system on the
market, despite a few drawbacks. It leaves
Windows XP in the dust."
Posted by (26 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Walt Mossberg used to hate X-Box
In his review, he basically thinks XBox sucks. Guess what happens now? He is not that smart after all :)
Posted by 201293546946733175101343322673 (722 comments )
Link Flag
I got it.
Well, I got the joke. I thought it was pretty funny too. I think some others need to lighten up just a bit.

I have to say that I thought it meant those Windows Fan Boys who are going to rip on Mac just because it's not made by Microsoft. I didn't take it as all Windows users.

Either way this Windows user (even though I don't like it) got the joke.
Posted by System Tyrant (1453 comments )
Reply Link Flag
"Last year's" Panther?
Check those dates... Panther was released in 2003 (October, if I remember correctly), making it a year and a half ago.
Posted by Kelson (64 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Happy Birthday Uma Thurman!
<3 Uma
Posted by sigma8 (25 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Now, here's a totally...
... lost thought. Or am I missing a connection????
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag
I got it.
Well, I got the joke. I thought it was pretty funny too. I think some others need to lighten up just a bit.

I have to say that I thought it meant those Windows Fan Boys who are going to rip on Mac just because it's not made by Microsoft. I didn't take it as all Windows users.

Either way this Windows user (even though I don't like it) got the joke.
Posted by System Tyrant (1453 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Still too expensive.
Aside from the fact that Macs are just too dammed expensive for the average joe, the idea of having to pay the same amount to upgrade to the latest version number - i.e. 10.3 to 10.4 - as the person who buys the OS new, is ridiculous.

Windows XP is in some ways worse, because both their pro and home edition versions cost twice as much as they're worth, I've never understood why either company can't produce a home edition, cut down version for non-tech pros for under $50.

Fine, price the top quality pro edition at $100-150, but these versions are often over-featured for the average user, and a simpler, cheaper option would be a good alternative.

As for Linux, untill there's some actual software available forget it, and I mean real innovative software, something like a sub $100 3D rendering package, that's fully featured, or a sub $100 movie/animation editing suite, you know, stuff we used to get when the Amiga was still around. Fun stuff, not boring crap like greeting card editors or MS Office rip offs.

I would love to run a Mac, but I can't afford it, and no, the Mac Mini is not the answer for me because it's way too underpowered.

I would also love to run a Linux system, but none of the software packages I need are available for it, and I don't trust it's security at all. Maybe if I understood more how it's setup and configuration worked, that opinion would change, but until software that I want becomes available, I'll never buy another alternative system again.

I spent five years on the Amiga (1985-1990) before real software became available, and once I switched to the PC (1998), I may have missed the better OS, and the more affordable software, but at least everything I needed was available and still under development.

So could 2005 be the year I switch again, only if the Mac price comes down by a third or Linux has a lot more software appear (including games).

As for the price of the Mac, I need something that can do non-linear video editing, 3D Rendering and play some decent games. Tell me that a 256MB Mac Mini can do this without me pulling my hair out over the lack of speed, and I won't believe you. A twin G5 system would work, but I won't spend more than $800 (not including monitor) on any computer, ever.

My Athlon 64, motherboard and 2GB of ram cost less than $400, throw in my radeon 9700, audigy 2, 150GB serial ata HD, 16X DVD burner (burns and reads at 16X) and a decent case, and I may have broken $800, but only just, and only incrementally - upgrading piece by piece until I got something I wanted.

So I'll put up with the spyware and viruses, use Firefox to limit my exposure, 3 anti spyware applications and a decent anti virus app, until I'm convinced a real alternative exists.
Posted by ajbright (447 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Are you a video professional?
This may not apply to you, but I am always amazed at the money
people will spend on stereo equipment, and things to make
them look good, but be so penney pinching when it come to a

That said, if you are a professional video editor, does not the
cost of your equipment fall under the category of business? And
since we know you can do more, quicker, and easier with an
Apple solution, would it not mean you are able to make more

You can save now, produce less, or pay more and make more.
Posted by Thomas, David (1947 comments )
Link Flag
Too expensive?
So, your telling me that a 600 dollar Mac mini, WITH TIGER and the iLife suite installed is too expensive? I'd like to know what computer you can buy, that's not a Mac, with all of these features and programs under $2000.00

You can't. Not to mention the iLife suite itself is $79 by itself, which, I dare you to find something as complete for Windows under $1000.00

You can't.

Not to mention you won't have to spend money on Anti-virus or firewall software, because let's face it, a Unix virus for OS X has not been created yet, and the built-in firewall is quite impressive.

Initial investment in a high-end Mac is expensive, yes. But in the long run its much cheaper, especially since a high-end Mac will last you four years (I'm on my third year wiht my PowerMac) compared to a PC which will last you two years.

As far as Linux goes, I agree. It's not a viable desktop solution for anyone with digital media involved.

And as far as your sub $100.00 complete 3D rendering package... On what patform have you ever bought software of that caliber for that price for professional use? I have never seen one, and I think you're dreaming.
Posted by (461 comments )
Link Flag
Security through Obscurity
The problem is that most people don't realize a Mac is no more secure than a Windows or Linux PC. The difference is in where the hackers focus their effort. If the same amount of time and effort were put into a Mac virus as in a Windows virus, nobody would say that Macs are more secure. It is security through obscurity.
Posted by oreodad (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
True, to some degree...
... But it is also true that it takes a much more experoenced and
capable programmer to come up with a virus that will present a
hazard to OS X. And by the time a person is skilled enough, he is
also off to better tasks.
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag
tired argument. And it is actually a very stupid one.
Posted by Thomas, David (1947 comments )
Link Flag
Nah, Nah, na-nah, Nah
You don't have viruses and aren't sick and decrepid like me,
because nobody likes you.
Posted by Thomas, David (1947 comments )
Link Flag
Security through obscruity is mainly BS
Sure, a few viri and exploits will pop up if macs gain a large market share, but nothing compared to the sheer numbers of flaws in wondows. Security through obscurity means that you write a program with little to no security, but stays very small so no one knows about it, thus they can't exploit. This is almost what MS does, except that they don't stay small to keep their shoddy work 'secure'. Macs, and linux, are well knows, as is its much higher level of security. It is a ripe target for scumbags, but any exploits that show up, either don't get exploited before a fix, or cause few problems.

Linux has proved, time and again, that the theory of security through obscurity is bull. The amount of damage done, if someone was to write a MS sized virus on linux, far exceeds that of infecting a ton of windows boxes. Sure, it isn't 100% secure, but it is probably as close as we will get and OSX is about the same level as linux.

Hackers do what they do for many reasons, modesty is not one of them. If someone could seriously breach a mac or linux box, they would do it, just for the 'fame' and bragging rights. It has yet to be done.

Any clueless 12 year old can break into or otherwise use exploits in windows OS's, even ones that have been 'locked down' by third party programs and shuttiong of the nearly countless number of exploitable programs and services that MS bloated windows with. To think that OS's built with security in mind from the ground up, and have yet to have been seriously breached, will suddenly have the 1000's of exploits, viri and worms of windows is beyond stupid.
Posted by pcLoadLetter (395 comments )
Link Flag
Insecurity Thru Illinformed
When Apple Put out the fisrst G5 with OSX that had a contest that they offered $10,000 to ANYONE who could break into a particular PowerMac at Cupertino & discover the "secret prize code" to collect the money if somebody hacked into it form a provided link on their web site.

NOBODY could do it. NOBODY ever collected the money by "hacking" into that Powermac.

Also, why would the government & Military have hugh XGrid RAID Powermac G5 systems with thousands of Macs, if they were so "insecure" as you claim.

The Internet is based on UNIX by the government for a reason...security. When was the last time the Internet "crashed" or had the "blue screen of death / fatal error" message when you logged into it?
UNIX is very powerful & universal.
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Link Flag
All serious readers, please ignore Bib
He hasn't a clue about anything, but he does love to ramble on. I'd
like to give him a chance to say somethig important, but that's just
hoping for far too much.

Check his 'contributions' and you'll see.
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Reply Link Flag

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot



RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.