Print this article | E-mail this article | Comment on this article

Apple Updates Mac OS X to 10.4.7

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

June 27, 2006, 5:03 PM

Apple has released the seventh major update to Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, adding a slew of improvements to Mail, iChat, Safari and a number of other applications. Also on the long list of changes are networking enhancements, along with bug fixes for Finder, Aperture and iTunes.

Mac OS X 10.4.7 additionally brings support for addition image formats in Automator, compatibility with more RAW image formats, and native support for Sierra Wireless and Novatel cards used for EVDO and other high-speed wireless services. The update can be downloaded through the operating system's built in Software Update feature or from Apple Downloads.

Add a Comment (30 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.

By frankwick

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 9:43 AM

Is this equivalent to an XP service pack?

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 1:11 PM

No, Apple isn't charging for it.

Score: 0

By Kompressor

edited Jul 2, 2006 - 9:58 PM

error

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 11:46 AM

no - the update actually does what it says and doesn't break everything else

Score: 0

By Kramy

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 3:55 PM

This kodak camera I have lying around agrees with you.

Score: 0

By frankwick

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 11:50 AM

Not sure I understand your comment. If you're referring to the SP2 firewall blocking some apps, then give me a break. I work in the corporate world and we were warned months in advance that SP2 would ship with the firewall enabled. We took the required measures, rolled it out to 400 PCs, and had no problems.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 9:54 AM

Yeap. But Apple and their hardcore fans wouldn't admit it. For them, it's a merely an update with more features.

Score: 0

By Kramy

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 6:43 PM

I'm curious, what happens when they hit 10.4.9, and they don't want to release a 10.5 yet?

Score: 0

By dmainzman

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 11:32 PM

FYI, they won't need to get so close to 10.4.9, because 10.5 ('leapord,' right?) is coming up very soon. They're going to announce/preview it to the public in august.
But if they did want to go beyond 10.4.9 and not hit 10.5, I'm sure they could go with 10.4.10 like the other user said, or go with 10.4.9.9.9.1 if it suits them, because as far as i'm concerned there are no rules for these crazy version numbering schemes.

Score: 0

By Kramy

edited Jun 28, 2006 - 4:00 PM

Yeah, that's true...I always laughed at those crazy version numbers Macromedia picks.

"8,0,24,0"
"9,0,16,0"

Actually, I wonder if their next one will be "10,0,8,0"?

Score: 0

By lvthunder

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 7:06 PM

I would bet 10.4.10.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 7:02 PM

10.4.10, version numbers don't follow math...hence the double decimal points. Or they brag about how their "next" version is free.

Score: 0

By fyrewalll

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 10:05 PM

So far Apple hasn't gone past .9. 10.2 only went up to .8 I believe and 10.3 only went up to .9. 10.3.9 actually came out after 10.4 did as well.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 6:35 PM

Thought OSX is perfect?

Score: 0

By Gerwin

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 9:55 AM

Better leave the thinking to people with brains.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 10:35 AM

so not you right?

Score: 0

By spongy-poo

edited Jun 27, 2006 - 10:35 PM

idiot. grow up.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 8:08 AM

haha someones buttons got pushed.

Score: 0

By jbaltz69

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 5:34 PM

Just installed it. Looks pretty good.

Score: 0

By spongy-poo

posted Jun 27, 2006 - 5:54 PM

Always good.

Score: 0

By peter4654

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 8:46 AM

Microsoft could learn a lot from Apple, such as security authentication. Microsoft are having a lot of difficulty getting the balance between U.A.C ( User Access Control )and usability correct in Vista. Surely there's something to be learned from Apple on how to handle security?

Score: 0

By frankwick

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 9:42 AM

apples and oranges. Apples doesn't have have to worry about security (to the same level as MS) at this point due to a very small market share. I think OSX has around a 2.5% to 2.8% market share while Windows has 95%+. The result being that even through both OSs have potential security problems, Apple doesn't have the visibility to make hacking worthwhile.

Score: 0

By Gerwin

edited Jun 28, 2006 - 10:02 AM

That's beside the point. OSX just has a very nice UAC because it uses the standard Unix 'sudo' for it, and it works well. It's safe but not intrusive. The thing is, in OSX, it's built in the fundamentals, in Vista, it's an afterthought.
And your argument that hacking OSX is not worthwile is invalid, proven by the hundreds of attempts to hack my mac every day. None succeed, although I'm running ssh and a webserver on it.
Windows sux, OSX is good. Now go away!

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 1:28 PM

And your argument that hacking OSX is not worthwile is invalid, proven by the hundreds of attempts to hack my mac every day. None succeed, although I'm running ssh and a webserver on it.
How do you know they are hacking attempts. If they are in the hundreds daily, then it makes me wonder. How many real world hacking attempts against mac webservers actually check to see if they are hacking a mac in the first place, or just blindly assume the only options are linux/windows?

That is where the market share everyone claims is unimportant comes into play.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 10:37 AM

ha your running a webserver on osx? hahha

and you spelled sucks wrong.

Score: 0

By frankwick

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 11:41 AM

and you spelled "you're" wrong.

Score: 0

By peter4654

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 11:19 AM

I'm not a computer geek, so the webserver slight on OSX is lost on me. There isn't a great deal of differences between the two OSes in terms of the applications that they can run. Win XP I hate, but think that Vista may be better as soon as the UAC problem is sorted, although I doubt it as it still uses the NTFS. Unix is far more stable, but I would have liked to see how WinFS would have turned out

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 1:31 PM

the webserver slight on OSX is lost on me

While it has admittedly been awhile since I last checked, the last time I checked Macs only worked good as webservers when there was only one or two connections/clients. More than that and performance went in the proverbial toilet. And this was with Mac's server version of OS X.

Score: 0

By frankwick

posted Jun 28, 2006 - 11:46 AM

I think the argument of Unix being more stable than Windows is an old argument. I work as an IT director for a medium-sized company and have used various flavors of Unix and Windows over the past 10 years. During the NT days, I would argue that Unix (AIX/Solaris) were more more stable. But, MS has come A LONG WAY since then. Windows Server 2003 was the beginning of what I consider MS's move into the credible world of corporate computing. 2003 offfers a great combo of ease of use and stability. Actually, it's rock solid and is MORE reliable than my Mandrake and Redhat machines that running in the adjoining rack. Server 2003 is also secure. I get hits everyday from various hackers and haven't suffered a breach yet - but I have a firewall appliance and I'm smarter than most people.

If Vista is built on the same codebase then I think we'll see great things from the desktop OS.

Score: 0

By tpaman1975

posted Jun 29, 2006 - 9:17 AM

Also on that note, if Vista is just a stepping platform to another OS in 2008, I would wait to see what happens.

No one wants to use a stepping stone OS, remember Windows ME and what a disaster that was?

Score: 0

Sep 5 - 8:44 PM ET Mozilla's Aza Raskin: The journey back to Ubiquity

Sep 5 - 7:10 PM ET Red Hat buys virtualization specialist Qumranet

Sep 5 - 7:06 PM ET Analysts: Online news viewers rising as newspaper readership falls

Sep 5 - 6:55 PM ET Where does Sarah Palin stand on technology issues?

Sep 5 - 6:51 PM ET Adobe Flash to deliver NFL games in full

Sep 5 - 4:29 PM ET Exclusive beta invitation from GameTap and BetaNews

Sep 5 - 4:09 PM ET Report: OLPC buy one, give one deal returns

Sep 5 - 3:45 PM ET No ruling yet in TiVo vs. EchoStar patent case

Sep 5 - 3:37 PM ET Google Analytics starts tracking Chrome, with intriguing results

Sep 5 - 2:14 PM ET Comcast challenges FCC's authority in sanction appeal