Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Apple Set to Ship Leopard October 26

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

October 16, 2007, 11:47 AM

Apple has finally set a date for the next release of its Mac OS X operating system, said to include some 300 new features.

Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" will go on sale through Apple retail stores and resellers on October 26 at 6:00pm local time. Additionally, the company will accept pre-orders for the new OS beginning Tuesday.

Compared to previous releases, Leopard has taken a little longer for Apple to ship. Since the first consumer version of Mac OS X in March 2001, the company has more or less shipped a new version every year.

The first update, 10.1 arrived in September 2001, while 10.2 came in August 2002. This was followed by 10.3 in September 2003. For the current version, 10.4 "Tiger; it took 19 months for it to appear, which it did in April 2005.

Leopard will have taken the company two and a half years to produce. Jobs has said previously that the company post-Tiger will slow down the update schedule to a new version once every 18 months or so to focus on more expansive updates.

"Leopard is the best upgrade we've ever released," CEO Steve Jobs said. ""And everyone gets the 'Ultimate' version, packed with all the new innovative features, for just $129."

Among the new features is a redesigned dock, the first update to that feature since Mac OS X 10.3; an updated Finder application, and Spotlight searches could now include any networked computer. Finder also now can preview files without having to open them.

A backup application called Time Machine allows consumers to easily backup their Macs. Mail has also received a face lift, and now includes stationery designs and automatic detection of specific types of data, allowing users to easily add information to iCal, Address Book, and other applications.

iChat has received an update that allows participants to share videos, presentations, files, or photos. Photo Booth also has new features including new effects and capabilities.

Boot Camp will be brought out of beta, allowing Windows to be run natively on the Mac. Parental controls have also been strengthened to allow more control over what kids may do online.

Apple said that those who buy new Macs between October 1 and 26 are eligible for a free upgrade to the new OS by only paying a $9.95 shipping and handling fee for the disc.

Add a Comment (67 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By weylin

edited Oct 22, 2007 - 7:35 PM

It's great to see innovation taking place at the rate it is.

The Apple iMac looks beautiful and with Leopard it should be even better. The problem with Apple though has always been the price. And Mac's aren't gamer friendly either.

I just ordered up Ubuntu and Kubuntu for free and if it did everything I needed, I would switch. Linux is finally becoming a viable alternative for the desktop. It looks great and finds all of my hardware easily.

I'm running Vista right now on my 2 year old HP and it runs flawlessly. All drivers and programs run without a hitch. No Aero on my old video card though :(

I like to browse the internet, do email, and burn CD's and DVD's. Windows seems best for my needs at this point.

Score: 0

By BeyondYourFrontDoor

edited Oct 18, 2007 - 3:57 PM

Looks neat to me - nice to see a different take on presenting a user interface. I hope they aren't drifting too far away from the 'easy to use' mantra they've been building on. Seems like many of the new features are getting a bit techie.

If all you do is photos, video, and web-based mail - any PC/Mac will do you fine. Maybe I'm getting old, but 90% of my friends do 90% of their 'computing' in the browser.

I'm going to iMac just because I want to try something new. A think more people would give it a try, but the price of admission is still roughly x2 what you pay for the same hardware on the PC side of things. Here it is $1599 for the 20 inch with 320GB drive... The same dual-core in a Dell or HP with display is in the $699 range...

Anyway, as more 'applications' switch to Web2 design, it's not going to matter whose sticker is on the box. Even Photoshop has a browser version! Pretty cool.

As cheesy as it sounds, I want an iMac because I like the iPod touch, and I prefer things to work well together. You've got a whole generation that is iPod-ready, and when they start cashing their Micky-D's cheques, they'll be saving for anything that comes from Apple and starts with "i".

Remember, 'funner' is sometimes 'better', regardless of the technology behind it. Right now, Apple is marketing fun.

I also wonder though how much longer before there is some lawsuit over their 'monopoly' of OSX and it not running on anything but Apple hardware. Part of the reason it works is because they don't have to support 7000 different gaphic cards, etc, from 1970 until now...

Score: 0

By Program86

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 11:34 AM

Nobody said you have to come to the greener side of the fence did they? So why are all the MS faqnboys have their panties in a twist? Unless they feel in some way threatened by Apple's resurgence... LATFI

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 10:20 PM

Same reason Apple fanboys invade Windows threads and fling insults, or PS3 fanboys hit the 360 threads, etc. Because they're fanboys and that's what they do. It gives them a feeling of purpose in life I guess.

Score: 0

By IceyKola

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 10:00 AM

has anyone else read the minimum requirements for leopard? They sound an awful like the minimum requirements of vista just use a few less gigs of needed HDD space. I'm sure much of that disc space difference is the amount of included drivers needed.

And anyone that wants to call windows a copy should think twice. I could list of a few features of mac os x and new features in leopard that were in windows long before (but in different forms).

A couple examples:
1) the dock is nothing more than apple's version of the task bar (windows 95) and quicklaunch toolbar (came with IE4).
2) Applications stack like the applications part of the start menu.
3) downloads stack... downloads user folder.
4) time machine... previous version
5) translucent menu bar... translucent task bar

And of course there are ideas that ms borrowed from apple too. When I was in college I remember an MS rep that was demo-ing windows XP for us back when it was in beta, he told us that there was an agreement between ms and apple that they could borrow ideas from each other freely (of course not exact copies). My point is I wish everyone would put the mac os is better than windows or windows is better than mac os (yes there are people that believe that) aside. each has their ups and downs, and no vista doesn't have more downs than ups, that's subjective. In my case windows serves my uses better than mac os. One day I plan on getting a macbook pro and boot camping vista so i can have the best of both worlds. use which ever OS fits your needs best. for a lot of people that's a cheap $500 notebook that they could use for e-mail and web-browsing.

Score: 0

By nn123654

posted Oct 19, 2007 - 9:01 PM

actually its entirely possible to install Mac on a PC. Just you can't do it leagally.

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 10:18 PM

Yeah, Microsoft copies ideas, Apple copies ideas, even Linux. Why do people make such a big freakin' deal over that. Some ideas are just so fundamental it only makes sense for others to implement them. Look at any device from different manuafacturers and they'll all have similar features. Come on, who cares.

Score: 0

By sumone

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 9:06 AM

MS has more editions because they target the small business and enterprise market as well. Agree that there should not have been so many. Home and Professional (including Home's capabilities) would have been enough.

Score: 0

By godofthunder

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 9:11 AM

People don't realize that OSX is a polished UNIX + BeOS hybrid based system.
The BeOS operating system is considered to be one of the most stable and fastest OS's in the world.

Its good to see that Apple has made it so far on a derivative system.

Windows will NEVER be able to get close to how refined this OS is. I am a windows user, but know that for what OSX CAN do, it does it extremelly well.

keep up the good work I say...

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 20, 2007 - 12:48 PM

To bad Apple's OS will never be as flexible with hardware as Microsoft's OS.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 10:55 AM

OSX is piece of s***. Too much limitation.
Can't even handle hardware properly. Try throw a ram stick into their system, and guess what it can't be read. Fine with PC.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Oct 21, 2007 - 10:59 PM

uh, you cant just make stuff up and think that we will believe it. Mac OSX is way more refined than any other OS. It works way better than windows in every way except compatibility with software, and thats not their fault. I use both OSX and Windows, but in a perfect world, I wouldn't use the latter.

Score: 0

By nn123654

edited Oct 19, 2007 - 8:59 PM

you seriously even try mac, Mac is awesome, with windows you spend 10 or 15 minutes looking for a driver and getting it to work. With mac you just plug it in lol.

Score: 0

By cap737

posted Oct 18, 2007 - 2:16 PM

do you own a mac to actually back up that comment? Didn't think so...

Score: 0

By Latz !

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 10:14 PM

Wow, everything you said is completely false. Congratulations.

Score: 0

By Program86

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 11:30 AM

Said like a true blind fanboy... Your ignorance betrays your stupidity bwhahahahahaha

Score: 0

By pitdingo

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 8:46 AM

Tons of new features. It is going to be great. the bar has been raised. How long will it take M$ to clone this version of Mac OS X?

Score: 0

By Program86

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 11:35 AM

They already tried cloning Tiger with Vista.

And you see how well that turned out... hahahahahahah

Score: 0

By pitdingo

posted Oct 18, 2007 - 1:36 PM

lol. yeah...Vista is a steaming pile of dung.

Score: 0

By AnthonySPT

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 6:28 PM

Has anyone else read through the '300' features?

Some of the touted features get to the point of being downright 'sad' when you look at them.

• Stationary Email - Wow, just like Windows98

Or really simple non-feature UI items.

• Transparent Button Control when Viewing Video - Wow like Windows Media Player 10

Or where they start listing the different screen savers as features.

• Clock Screensaver - WTH?

I'm not arguing that this isn't a good upgrade for OS X, but when they have to start listing stuff like this, it just sounds horribly desperate, especially when it doesn't include anything that Vista didn't have last year, or anything architecturally that Vista doesn't have or cannot do.

On the other hand, architecturally, there are many things Vista has and can do that no other consumer OS can do, and not even the new version of OS X.

If MS Would have promoted Vista like this, we would have seen horrible ads with '1000 new features of Vista'. If you count up the changes in Vista at the same silly level Apple has, it would easily be 1000 new features.

OS X Leopard - 5 new features over Tiger, but stretched out to sound like 300...

Score: 0

By GS5

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 7:21 PM

300 new features sounds a lot better that 5 new features. Apple is like the Chris Angel of the computer world!

Score: 0

By pitdingo

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 6:26 PM

can't wait to get it. I have been holding off on a Macbook Pro for this. Can't wait to get it.

Score: 0

By mdotwills

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 6:25 PM

Vista is just a pretty face. Mac OSX, not as pretty as Vista, however has a lot of power. I suppose we can't have both...

Score: 0

By Bogunch

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 10:41 PM

You Idiot! What made OS X powerful was the Intel processor! What was it back then - five times faster?

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 12:44 AM

...and the most stupid post of the year award goes to, Bogunch!

Score: 0

By Sexbarril

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 7:05 AM

And Latz! returns!!!

Not most stupid award, but will definitely not be neglected in the "honorable mentions" list :).

Latz ( the orig ), SB

Score: 0

By Latz !

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 3:45 PM

The word just intrigues me. Seriously though, what does it mean? Is your name Latz, or is it like some kind of slang for "later"? Enquiring minds want to know. :P

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Oct 21, 2007 - 11:02 PM

idiot its all about the motorola turbo 6 core processor thats why beos works so well on a dell

(i like making up random things)

Score: 0

By ModderXManiac

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 6:14 PM

Affordable and actually a substantial upgrade...Hear that Microsoft?!

Score: 0

By clifton

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 4:28 PM

I'm a hardware tech at a college and I repair both macs and dells. The perfect computer would be OS X on a Dell. You get the best of both worlds, reliable hardware and the best OS.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 20, 2007 - 12:51 PM

We have Dells and eMachines at work, both of which have issues.

Score: 0

By JerryC

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 12:55 PM

DELL ??????
We have Dell computers at work , most of them have
problems in the motherboards and they have changed
to new ones. I bet they will have problems too.
Those computers have Windows 2000 , cos they have
had no problems.

Score: 0

By philosopher_dog

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 3:59 PM

I love the claim that os x running on any old pc would bury vista or
any windows operating system. Come on! You've got to be joking. Could you imagine os x operating on such diverse hardware and being in the least stable? Let's face it, the only reason os x is so stable (I'm not sure it's that much more stable frankly), is because there's such tight control on the hardware side, and they seriously limit tweakability. Imagine having to write an operating system that's compatible with everything Windows has to worry about? So, the day will never come that you see os x for PC's. It would go against the whole of what makes Mac in the least successful, if you regard 5-6% of the market a success story.
BTW, I love that they will charge you shipping for the disk if you purchased in October. I guess this isn't surprising since they'll charge you shipping if the machine breaks after the first 6 months and you need to service it under their "complimentary warranty".

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 4:39 PM

"Could you imagine os x operating on such diverse hardware and being in the least stable?"

I can. You haven't used a UNIX type much have you?

Score: 0

By Bogunch

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 3:31 PM

...an updated this, an updated that.... a genius at marketing, give each build a new name and you can get $129 for a service pack!

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 3:43 PM

Right, just like Windows NT 5.0 to NT 5.1 was just a "service pack". You might want to look up the term and see what a service pack is before you go trolling...

Apple service packs are free, they are numbered as 10.x.x, 10.4.3 for example.

Score: 0

By Bogunch

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 4:19 PM

Windows NT 5.0 = Windows 2000
Windows NT 5.1 = Windows XP Home, Pro, Original 64-bit
Windows NT 5.2 = XP Pro x64

Vastly different builds - not just minor updates

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 4:34 PM

That was my point. OS X 10.5 is as much a new version as those are; it isn't just a minor update either. The argument that Apple is charging for service packs just isn't valid. It's true that Apple knows how to market to the iSheep, but I just don't agree the service pack thing. Hundreds of new features is not a service pack.

Score: 0

By Bogunch

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 6:22 PM

Read the article - everything is an update!!!!

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 7:33 PM

Not everything, and besides so what? Most new OSs are simply updates of older ones. If you don't think it's worth it, simple solution. Don't buy it. You're mixing up updated features with security updates, which is a service pack.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 20, 2007 - 12:52 PM

Because this one is not substantial.

Score: 0

By Bogunch

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 10:43 PM

There you go. You don't know what a service pack is. MS puts a lot of new features in service packs.

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 12:38 AM

Sorry but you just showed that you're the one that doesn't know what a service pack is. Microsoft only added new features once, in XP SP2 and even then it wasn't really very many new features. Every other service pack, and there have been a lot of them, have just been a cumulative rollup of security patches and bug fixes.

Score: 0

By Alex Stevens

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 12:50 PM

Now if they would just allow it to run on non-Macs they could easily bury Vista. Plus it's not as if people would suddenly stop buying Macs, to some Apple is a religion. They would make a lot more money by opening it up.

Score: 0

By Program86

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 1:34 PM

OSX has been able to dual boot on PC hardware for a while now. You just have to know how to code a bit. All of you know how to do that dont you? lol

Score: 0

By Alex Stevens

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 2:24 PM

That's true, but very few people are going to know how to do that. Plus it really isn't fully functional unless you have very specific hardware as I recall. Anyway I was thinking more of the mainstream, being able to buy OS X and install it on any computer. I think it would be a good move for them myself, then again I don't have my own company so I could be wrong. It would certainly put a lot more support costs on their shoulders with all the third party hardware out there. I think they could handle it though, but Steve Jobs would probably never allow it to happen.

Score: 0

By IceyKola

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 9:33 AM

**deleted duplicate comment**

Score: 0

By IceyKola

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 9:30 AM

And then Mac OS will be just as bloater as windows with all the included drivers.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 20, 2007 - 12:52 PM

Shows how you know nothing.

Score: 0

By Latz !

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 3:46 PM

Drivers are not what makes Windows "bloater".

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 3:08 PM

It would certainly be interesting to see, but I agree that Stevie Wonder-boy would never let it happen.

Sucks since it's somewhat based on an OS that works just fine on the PC...one he got developed (NeXT).

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 2:02 PM

Not legally, and it certainly does not operate as intended.

Score: 0

By Program86

posted Oct 17, 2007 - 11:42 AM

Not legally, true... But it certainly works 100% as intended.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 12:58 PM

Yeah, that'd be sweet! Go from not usable on 70% of hardware (Vista) to not usable with 70% of software(MacOSX).

/sarcasm
//Yeah, *that* was a troll
///or flamebait...take yer pick.

Score: 0

By Program86

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 1:34 PM

Excuses, excuses...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 2:02 PM

You would know. :)

Score: 0

By Alex Stevens

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 1:15 PM

Sarcasm and trolling aside, common sense would dictate that as it suddenly became more widely available, so would the amount of software made available for it.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 2:01 PM

Huh...

Would common sense not dictate then that Software and Drivers for Vista will suddenly become more widely available when it's adoption numbers begin impacting the mainstream?

Or does your common sense only apply to things not related to Microsoft?

Score: 0

By Alex Stevens

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 2:30 PM

Yes, drivers for Vista are becoming more widely available. Did I ever say otherwise?

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 3:06 PM

Nope. Just checking. You have trolled Vista on it's hardware support (as recently as the 10th), and the implication could be drawn, but I won't go that far.

Score: 0

By Alex Stevens

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 3:35 PM

No, I posted my personal opinions about Vista and why I didn't feel it was worth upgrading to over XP. Just because someone's opinions differ from your own, it doesn't make them a troll. Hardware support was far from the only reason I gave.

I like Microsoft, and I like Apple. I don't like every product they make though.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 9:56 AM

By Alex Stevens

edited Oct 10, 2007 - 5:10 PM

Windows XP was already better than Vista. Even Windows 2000 is better than Vista. I'd almost say Windows NT 4.0 but since, like Vista, it hardly supports any current hardware I'll call that one a tie.

Vista actually supports a lot of "current" hardware. More than XP, actually. I think you were thinking of "older" hardware. :)

I like Microsoft, and I like Apple. I don't like every product they make though.

Which is fine. But saying Vista doesn't support the majority of hardware currently for sale on the market is untrue. There is a *lot* of older hardware that is not supported, a lot of which is still in use, but the stuff on the market now? You bet.

You may not be a troll, but telling people flat out lies (perhaps it was just worded wrong?) comes across as such.

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 17, 2007 - 3:49 PM

Uh, I believe that was a joke. Come on, NT 4.0? You might want to have your humor chip diagnosed, it may need an upgrade. :P

Score: 0

By AntiochMedia

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 1:21 PM

I love OSX on my DELL =) - I agree too, but maybe it just isn't the right time for them?

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 3:01 PM

"OSX on my DELL"

*shudders*

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Oct 16, 2007 - 4:38 PM

Dells are not really bad hardware wise, it's just the crap that they install on them. Wipe that out and do a clean install of your own OS and they work fine. Now the cases are kind of crappy, not as bad as the plastic Compaq/HP cases that literally fall apart but still that doesn't really affect their operation.

Score: 0

By patrickberg

posted Oct 16, 2007 - 7:19 PM

Note, a single user license pre-order is being sold by Apple (free shipping included) for $129.00. Amazon.com has had listed for sometime & still today for $109 with free shipping.

Score: 0

Jul 3 - 6:45 PM ET Netflix box by Roku to get more content providers

Jul 3 - 6:30 PM ET US Justice Dept. sued for info on cellular tracking practices

Jul 3 - 6:27 PM ET Next Patch Tuesday has few security updates, big Vista reliability fix

Jul 3 - 5:49 PM ET BlackBerry Pearl users can test voice input for Google Maps

Jul 3 - 5:30 PM ET Adobe pushes its Flash 10 beta 2 refresh

Jul 3 - 4:39 PM ET Nokia and InterDigital start to disassemble their running feud

Jul 3 - 4:34 PM ET Do-it-yourself phone manufacturer declares its independence tomorrow

Jul 3 - 4:16 PM ET Study: US broadband access up overall, but down among the poor

Jul 3 - 3:54 PM ET Beta test a portable Web browsing device

Jul 3 - 3:20 PM ET Nvidia: 'Previous generation' GPUs failing at high rates