Why Apple Delayed Leopard for the iPhone

Ernest DeFarge writes "Apple recently announced that they've pulled several key programmers from the OS X 10.5 "Leopard" and assigned them to the iPhone in order to get it done on time. In doing so, they delayed Leopard for 4 months. Does that mean that the iPhone is more important to Apple than Mac OS? Or is it just capitalizing on the current state of Apple's fanbase?"

Unfair comparison

I guess brand new massively hyped iPhone is more important to Apple than the difference between OS X 10.4 and 10.5 during the limited time period of the summer of 2007.

Re:Unfair comparison

Pretty much. This isn't "Apple Vista" we're talking about here. 10.4 is a good OS and there's no rush to upgrade. I think we'll all survive waiting for 10.5 if it means that the iPhone (something which is completely unavailable to the market) gets here faster.

From a business perspective, Apple doesn't want their major announcements overlapping. So delaying the OS by a few months means that they can provide a steady stream of announcements.

Re:Unfair comparison

Pretty much. This isn't "Apple Vista" we're talking about here. 10.4 is a good OS and there's no rush to upgrade.

There doesn't seem to be much of a rush to upgrade to Vista either.

Re:Unfair comparison

Pretty much. This isn't "Apple Vista" we're talking about here.

Quite right. Copland/Rhapsody was Apple's Vista.

Captivated market

Given the Apple emphasis on support for open standards (such as a standards-compliant web browser and email client) and the UNIX base of Mac OS X, I'd say Apple users are relatively much less locked in than Windows users.

Apple users are certainly no more locked in than users of any other platform. The average useful life of a general purpose personal computer has been two to four years, depending largely on individual use case. If you don't like being locked in to Windows, buy a Mac the next time you need a new system. Same works in reverse.

Re:Captivated market

I don't see how the Unix base has anything to do with it. Which Unix systems can run typical OS X apps?

relevancy

No, it would also be relevant if UNIX applications could run on Mac OS X, or if Mac OS X applications interoperated seamlessly with UNIX servers, both of which are true. Thus my comment.

Who is being held captive?

You can not install the update and deal with new apps not working with your Mac, or you can install Windows or Linux on your Mac, wasting the premium you paid for the box.

You're making the usual Apples v. Oranges mistake. Just as nobody would compare a $500 Windows machine with a $2,000 Windows machine, it is foolish to compare bargain basement PCs with Macs. If you want to compare quality hardware with quality hardware, compare $2,000 machines. You spend $2,000 each on three different laptops. Here are the three scenarios:

On your Mac, if you can not install the update and deal with new apps not working with your Mac, you CAN install Windows or you CAN install Linux on your Mac.

On your Windows machine, Microsoft comes out with an upgrade. You cannot install the update and deal with new apps not working with your Windows computer. You CAN install Linux on your machine. You CANNOT install Macintosh on your machine.

On your Linux machine, the latest and greatest Linux distro arrives. You cannot install the update and deal with new apps working sluggishly or not working at all on your computer because of processor speed, graphics card limitations, or limited disk space. You CAN install Windows on your machine. You CANNOT install Macintosh on your machine.

So the Macintosh hardware gives you three OS choices. The other two only give you two OS choices each. I fail to see how the Apple hardware locks you in more than PC hardware.

Re:Not locked in, locked OUT

What you're complaining about is being locked out, not being locked in. How does your problem affect Mac users?

Re:Not locked in, locked OUT

There's not a lack of choices for the consumer. I can run any of a number of Fedora Core, Ubuntu, Solaris x86, FreeBSD, Windows XP, Windows 2000, DOS, Debian, and dozens upon dozens of other operating systems on my machine. The fact that I can't run one in particular doesn't indicate to me that I have a lack of choices. It means one provider of operating systems chooses not to target me as a potential customer. It happens all the time.

Re:Not locked in, locked OUT

This is not an example of "giving the customer what they want".

No, it's an example of you're not the customer. You haven't purchased a computer from them, so you're not a customer. Period. Whine and gripe about it all you want, but if you want Mac OS X, you must become Apple's customer, and that pretty much requires a hardware purchase.

Try thinking of it like this: Apple sells computers. Mac OS X is a pack-in (and really, it's optional, you can install Linux or Windows if you want). You don't get the "free" copy of Mac OS X and a fully supported installation without buying hardware. You could just buy the boxed version of Mac OS X (well, once 10.5 is out, anyway) and install it on your existing hardware, but it's unsupported. And don't bother with the tired "it's not allowed by the EULA" argument, since that hasn't ever stopped anyone before and it probably isn't even legally enforceable, much less enforceable in a practical sense.

So don't use Apple computers. It is, as you stated, your choice. But know that by not using them, you aren't a customer, and aren't entitled to be treated like one.

Re:Not locked in, locked OUT

> I've got a great new Core 2 duo machine, and I've spent a lot of time and money creating a quiet cooling system
> for it because I use the computer for music production.

> I'd like Apple to sell me a version of OSX that I could run on this new machine, too, but they've decided that I can't use
> their OS unless I pay a premium for their hardware (which is basically either the same or inferior to what I've got).

You spent a lot of time and money creating a quiet and cool machine for music production, yet you are not willing to pay Apple any kind of premium to make you a quiet and cool machine for music production? Apple has specifically made "quiet" a feature since the 1980's. They put time and effort into that whereas others don't and then you have to.

In addition to making your machine quiet and cool, Apple will also include a complete multichannel digital audio subsystem with plug-in format and 32-bit 192 kHz support, it is a whole digital mixer in there. It takes me about 20 minutes to install MOTU drivers on a Mac and hook up through USB and FireWire and in no time I'm running Logic Pro and Ableton Live side-by-side and it all just works. It would be worth paying a premium for, but you don't because it is all the same Intel hardware. The software is essentially free.

> This is not an example of "giving the customer what they want".

In this you are 100% correct because you are not one of their customers. You bought a Windows PC.

> Free markets are supposed to be about choices. It's the lack of choices that has kept me from switching to Vista. After careful
> consideration, and despite the fact that I admire much about OSX, I choose not to use Macs because I don't want to be limited
> in such a way.

You bought a Windows PC with version 5.1 of the OS ... Vista is version 6.0. You don't have a choice not to use it. You have to change to another computing platform to avoid Vista.

Complaining that you would rather run the PS3 operating system or the Mac operating system or the iPod operating system on your Windows computer is pointless.

Earlier you blamed Apple for "deciding" that in order to use their OS you have to buy their PC. It is you who decided to buy a commodity PC. It is you who is to blame for the fact that your operating system choices are limited to commodity operating systems. Apple is not the only company to build specific OS for specific hardware, in fact, this is the typical method. The only company that does it the OTHER way is PART of Microsoft. It is not even all of Microsoft, because with XBox and Zune they are using the typical method same as Apple and Sony.

> I'm less certain of the long-term viability of the Macintosh platform now than I've been at any time since 1998.

Apple is selling more Macs now than ever. You buy a really good computer and it comes with tons of world-class software, and if you have other uses for it you can run Windows or Unix on it or do as you please. It's hard to argue with that compared to other name brands.

However if you are doing music and you're not using a Mac I truly think you are a mad man. CoreAudio is worth buying a Mac just to use it. It takes me 20 minutes to turn a stock Mac into a digital audio workstation using a couple of MOTU boxes and a handful of software installers and then it just works. It is easy to swap a Mac out for a new one and get more CPU because the IT overhead is almost zero, even in a music studio.

Re:Captive market

Either way, everybody using a Mac has to buy it and will buy it.

Yeah, I know they've FORCED me to buy the upgrades several times now. Damn I wish I still had freewill...

Re:Unfair comparison

Since Vista has proven to be absolutely no competition to even the current OS X, what's the rush for Leopard? Get the iPhone right and they'll have a HUGE winner on their hands. A million people [reuters.com] have already queried AT&T about the iPhone through the notification list at Cingular [cingular.com], so who's your daddy?

Re:Unfair comparison

What do you mean? There are probably at least 10 times as many new computers sold with Vista, as with OS X

That's down from 20 times a few years ago. Two-thirds of the people in my office drop kicked their PCs and bought Macs in the last couple of years. That's a trend I'm watching first hand. Those who still want/need a new PC are trying to figure out where to get one with XP. They don't even WANT Vista but that's what's shipping now, like it or not. I've shown a few PC users XP under Parallels and they all had that "aha" moment. More switchers, albeit AC/DC.

Re:Unfair comparison

Because the release of Vista hasn't really made a dent in Mac sales. Sure, Vista's sold many more copies than Mac OS X has, which everyone should have expected given the market four months ago (i.e. MS dominates and almost all new computers ship with Windows). The key is that, year over year, Apple's sales are still increasing, even though last year they didn't have to compete with Vista and this year they do. Sure, when the iPod first came out 5 years ago, maybe MP3 players were all that was keeping Apple alive. However, today Mac sales are self sustaining and rising.

In my mind, there was never much of a doubt that Vista would do well. Microsoft just had too much momentum for it to flop. What's up the air right now, especially if it takes 5 years to come out, is Windows 7. MS's momentum is decreasing, and if they don't reverse the trend, then they eventually won't have enough to get another free pass like Vista. The fact that Vista didn't slow Mac sales is bad for them. Very bad.

Re:Unfair comparison

http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html [paulgraham.com]

Paul Graham's article "Microsoft is Dead" [paulgraham.com] may be applicable here. For me, I'm no longer worried about buying another Windows machine (yes, I'm on XP right now) because I no longer use apps that are tied to Windows. In fact, as things go, I use fewer and fewer apps that aren't web based. I just don't need them any more. Beyond that, most of the apps I use have free alternatives and I use them.

The one proprietary application I still use is iTunes with my iPod. So a Mac machine might work for me next time around. I want one because they are so well designed, unlike this HP piece of junk whose battery doesn't make it an hour, and because friends and family have all had very good experiences.

Then again, I might just throw the whole lot out and buy something cheap and put Ubuntu on it.

Whatever the case, there's more to the equation than Bill Gates's relative worth.

Indeed...

What's up with these binary comparisons? Just because OS X 10.5 was delayed a few months for the iPhone doesn't mean anything to do with OS X being unimportant. The iPhone runs OS X; it must be important.

Most users are happy with 10.4 and 10.5 is more of a luxury than a necessity. All this means is that 10.4 is sufficient that the general Apple buyer isn't screaming for OS improvements, but that the market may indeed be screaming for a decent mobile phone, like they were screaming for a decent MP3 player around when the iPod gained in popularity.

Anyway, a lot of the funds and improvements from the potential success from the iPhone will probably be funneled back into OS X and the Mac hardware. Haven't some of the improvements in 10.5, like Core Animation, been brought about due to the iPhone already?

Re:Indeed...

Taco? Is that you? How much space do you have left on that Nomad these days?

iPhone?

What is this "iPhone" that you speak of???

What can wait?

Cell phone buyers, or releasing the preview to Microsoft's next OS features?

...and you know the end product never lives up to the previews ;-)

Re:What can wait?

I don't know about you, but Windows Vista certainly lived up to my expectations. It might even have surpassed them by a little.

BTW, don't take this to mean I'd ever be willing to come within 5km of a computer running it though.

Rumor has it

That Apple wasnt delaying to for the iPhone more than they are delaying it for some secret additions to the codebase and the testing involved for it that we will get a hint of come WWDC.

Call me crazy

...but when I read the subject line, I imagined a team of executives, military men and helicopters keeping a leopard at bay in the wild, while they looked for one of their prototype iPhones in the grass.

"FOUNT IT!"

"Ok, you may now pass Mr. Kitty"

~A
--
X's and O's for all my foes.

They're playing the hype

I don't know what Leopard is. I know what an iPhone is. You know why?

Because the iPhone is on the news, tv, radio; everyone is talking about it. It is absolutely more important than OSX at the moment. The iPhone could potentially be Apple's new iPod.

iPhone, OS X, what's the difference?

Let's not forget that many OS features on which the iPhone depends are practically guaranteed to make an appearance on the desktop version of OS X, whether that happens in Leopard or the next version after. Things like resolution independence, multitouch, smooth scrolling, Core Animation.

On a related note, I can't wait until OS X and apps begin expecting high-res displays and multitouch input, making the marriage of OS to hardware ever more obvious even to the squarest of squares. Finally that ought to silence the clueless pundits who still try to peg Apple as either a hardware or a software company.

Yes!

Does that mean that the iPhone is more important to Apple than Mac OS?

Did nobody else notice that when Jobs announced the iPhone, he also renamed the company to take the word "Computer" out of it?

That sounds kind of, well, I dunno, strategic to me.

A bit too much drama

Its been delayed only 4 months, I don't know what all the drama is for. In fact, this extra development time is going to be very beneficial, because they are going to release a full beta at WWDC for developers.

Regurgitating blog posts

Apple Computers is notoriously quite about the future of their products

I don't suppose the opinions stated in this blog post deserve much attention if the author can't be bothered to write the name of the company correctly.

Priority?

I suppose this means that the Apple Accessory fanboy is more important than the Mac fanboy.

I Think Their Excuse is Lame

Pulling QA and Software Engineers off the Leopard project onto iPhone?? I don't care if its the "same" OS, i.e. iPhone using the mobile version of OSX. Adding developers and QA towards the end of a project lifecycle usually means disaster. I'm curious to see if they pull it off.

Re:I Think Their Excuse is Lame

How do you know it happened just now. It could have happened 3 months ago, and they're just telling us now. For all we know, those programmers could have been reassigned last year (in like Oct) and are now heading back to Leopard (which is why we now have a time estimate on release)

tiger

maybe because for many people tiger is just fine and even though leopard will add great features, it wont be like the transition from shit ui phone to iphone

don't be so gullible

You can't conclude from a press release what the real reason for the delay is. Leopard may be delayed because of the iPhone, or it may be delayed because it's still buggy, or maybe Apple is still trying to file some last minute patents, or maybe it's something completely different.

Occam's razor

The demo was largely smoke and mirrors, and as it turns out, delivering that level of functionality on an underpowered device requires corners cut and tremendous optimization.

Of all the various theories about why it won't run third-party software, mine is that they don't want people to actually see what they had to do to Mac OS to get it on the device.

Quite obvious...

..it's a matter of which one they can't afford to fail with. I saw a *lot* of mainstream press on the AppleTV, simply because it was Apple. The reviews weren't that great though, and they really can't afford the iPhone to be a flop - they'll go from being the iPod king to so-so producer of stylish consumer electronics. That is far more important to them than missing an OS upgrade (how long was Vista delayed again? Debian etch? It's not like Apple is the bad apple here.

Release early, release often

I think (Apple has a couple million advisors everywhere) Apple should have aimed lower with 10.5.

They should release 10.5 right before Vista or right after it, with the flashiest features (the ones that increase wow-factor and are easy to do) thrown in and steal Redmond's thunder.

That way, they could even have more time to finish 10.6 with the real (i.e. versioned FS instead of time machine) features and still avoid Vista stealing OSX's spotlight (pun intended).

But that's just me. I bet they have very competent people on their payroll.

Re:Release early, release often

I think Apple has no need to aim lower. 10.4 is already better than Vista. There's no pressure on them to rush anything.

Apple makes more money on hardware sales than it does with software. Thus, it makes sense that the iPhone is a priority (if that is actually the case). Apple got a big hardware sales boost with switching to Intel. However many Mac users, such as myself, haven't upgraded to Intel machines because of the delay with Adobe CS3.

Leopard is icing on the cake, and I'm sure it's going to be great, but CS3 is going to sell many more new Macs than Leopard.

They've BEEN doing that!

Have you been in a cave on the dark side of the moon since 2000?

During the last five years, Apple released major versions of OS X about every 1-1.5 years while all Microsoft had was XP. Third party developers were actually complaining because of the rapid pace of change of OS X. Before Tiger was released, Apple announced they would be slowing down the pace of their OS X releases. [eweek.com]

I'm disappointed that I have to wait longer than expected for Leopard, but I'd rather they ship it when it's ready-- besides, it's not like they had to scrap it midstream and start over, and then chop all the compelling features to make an already embarassingly late ship date.

  It does make sense to focus on the iPhone right now, because the mobile phone market is much larger than the personal computer market. If Apple gets a nice foothold in it, it will mean more money for them to pour into expanding their presence in the computer market.

~Philly

Re:They've BEEN doing that!

You are not getting it. "Mac OS X" is just a marketing name, just as "Microsoft Windows" or "Microsoft Windows Vista" is. When looking for a final name for Rhapsody, Apple realized that in order to avoid alienating the (classic) Mac OS users it was a good idea to give a similar name to the new operating system (just like Windows NT vs old Windows). And since the next mayor version was 10, they decided to call the new OS "Mac OS X", with the X in Roman to differentiate it.

Well, Jobs and his cronies found out that they really liked the big X, and quite frankly XI isn't that appealing, so they decided to name subsequent major versions as 10.2, 10.3, etc. Some day that will wear off, but meanwhile marketing-wise it's working. Minor (point) versions, the equivalent of a less-juicy but more-frequent Windows Service Pack, are named 10.x.y.

The best way to get your mind untangled is to look at Darwin [wikipedia.org], the underlying OS. It started with a major screw-up with the version numbers, but then Apple recognized that:
1) Darwin/Mac OS X is more a descendant of NeXTSTEP and OPENSTEP than of MacOS.
2) Puma (10.1) was more like a huge service pack for Cheetah (10.0). That's not true for the subsequent cats.

Thus, they revised the numbering so that Darwin would fit in the NeXTSTEP lineage. The Darwin versions and the corresponding Mac OS X versions can be found here [wikipedia.org]. Now you see that Jaguar, Panther and Tiger are all major versions.

(For another famous mash-up of version numbers, look at SunOS vs Solaris [wikipedia.org] and the jump of Solaris 2.6 to Solaris 7 [wikipedia.org].)

So, assuming that we can make a similar argument for Windows NT 5.1 (aka "XP"), since the year 2000 Microsoft has released:
Windows 2000 and 2000 Server (NT 5.0)
(Windows ME doesn't count, since it was not an NT).
Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 (NT 5.1 & 5.2)
Windows Vista (NT 6.0) (Longhorn Server may be released this year, or more likely next).

And Apple has released:
Cheetah + Server (I'm not counting Puma, which was anyway a free upgrade) (Darwin (screwedup-number)-5.x)
Jaguar + Server (Darwin 6.x)
Panther + Server (Darwin 7.x)
Tiger + Server (Darwin 8.x)
Leopard (+ Server) on October. (Darwin 9.x)

If you want to count all the service packs, MS made around 12 major+minor releases, Apple almost 40. But that's not very significant, since Microsoft packs more into each service pack than Apple does, and that's OK. Only major releases matter.

Follow the money

The margins on a $500 phone are much higher than a computer or operating system, particularly when Cingular is going to be bearing most of the distribution and much of the marketing costs.

WIndows XP SP2 delayed Vista

Maybe there deadlines for contracts with Cingular that needed to get done be fore ATT took them over?
getting the software retry for FCC testing. The Soft is not 100% done yet but needed to get it to a state in where the FCC can test I-phone out.

It's no longer the "Apple Computer Company" is it.

It's the iTunes company.

AppleTV, iPod, iPhone, Airport, etc.... all complements to iTunes.

This is ridiculous

I do have to say that this is one of the most stupid things I've ever read on slashdot. A point release for an OS that's already recognized as great, or finish one of the most anticipated products in history on schedule? The choice here for apple is obvious. Especially considering the large amount of hype that was generated by fake iPhones in the months preceding the reveal.

I can see why they would delay it

I shall not lie, im in the telecom buisness makeing software for mobile phones (not Apples though). And one thing I know about is rushing schedules and stuffing in to many features. So if Apple have promised more then they can deliver and need to sort a lot of bugs out before release they sure need to hurry now. Cause if they lack F.O.T.A. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over_The_Air_Programm able [wikipedia.org] they might have a firmware upgrade from hell on their hands when it reaches customers. Just my 2 cents.

Captive markets...

It makes sense for Apple to put a bit more effort into the iPhone because it's a new market - they'll make quite a bit of money off it and sell new product to new customers.

However, Leopard is pretty much a point upgrade to an existing product; there's no threat to its market leverage apart from its successor, and most copies of it will be supplied with a new Mac - put simply, they an afford to let it slip as it's not as big a cash cow and isn't cracking open a new market for them. In fact for Apple, an OS update must be getting a bit dull by now - there's not a huge amount of stuff missing or wrong with it that they could add to teh mix.

iPhone on the other hand has to be right - it's one phone in a sea of hundreds, so that little bit of spit and polish to get things just right could pay off big time.

It's because of earnings

I read through most of the comments and didn't see anyone state the obvious. Earnings are due next week for AAPL and they'll need to explain why they've lowered targets for Q3. An OS release quarter brings in alot of cash, and analysts need to know ahead of time when so they can accurately (haha) predict the earnings.

It's a not-so-transparent ruse

... they delayed Leopard for 4 months. Does that mean that the iPhone is more important to Apple than Mac OS?

This tells me that Leopard was not in very good shape. This sounds like a convenient way to extend its schedule so they could address Leopard's problems while spinning it as a positive commitment to the iPhone. Clever, but transparent.

Damn you Apple

I think I woul speak not only for me but for a many developers out there - pretty please, with the sugar on top, it is time to release f*ing xnu 10.4.9 sourses already..

In New shocking news....

Company moves a couple devs from 1 project to another... News at 11.

Capitalizing?

The current Apple funbase is pretty pissed (developers at least). Dont't know how long you can capitalize on that...

All worked up for nothing

It just seems to be in people's nature to blow things out of proportion and get all worked up over nothing. iPhone looks nifty, I can't afford one at the time, but probably in the future. as for Leopard, some of the features shown are neat, but not making me have apple fever. Really, I always thought it was going to go down like this. WWDC will allow El Jobso to reveal the "TOP SECRET" features, let the devs have some time to support them, etc.

and really, I don't think anyone was expecting a release before the end of June, so this is 3 whole months? not that big of a deal.

I was going to write my own comment...

I was going to write my own comment but then I read John Gruber's Bottleneck [daringfireball.net]... and well it better states my opinions on this then I could do myself.

Watch out for the iphone

My personal theory is that Apple is hiding a big iphone feature. They announced it in January because they had to for FCC filings, they showed us a bunch of the features to get people excited, but there's going to be something more that justifies the price and their entry into the market.

Just marketing

Pushing Leopard back to October lines it up for Christmas and for the fall product line refresh. Releasing Leopard in late spring lines it up for ... nothing much.

I see this as the opposite of Vista's release. Apple will release a mature, tested, stable product with actual usability improvements that runs *faster* on existing hardware.

iPhone is future for sure

I just went to a show called Willcom Forum in Tokyo on Friday. It featured maybe 30 companies selling products associated with Willcom's WinCE based phones with slide-out keyboards and touch screens. They are extremely neat, and sophisticated.. they can be used with VPNs, with RFID readers in stores, as Point of Purchase video displays in supermarkets, etc. etc. With the iPhone Mac OSX could go head to head with WinCE too. However phones are a huge tough market and I think it probably greatly dwarves the Mac buying community, I could be wrong. Many competitors but if they win it will be a big win for OSX and Apple.

Personally though I'm bummed because I was waiting to get a new Mac Book Pro with Leopard on it!! Darn! The idea of getting a cheap XP laptop instead for now went through my mind but I guess it will be upgradable, so will probably get it with the current version of Mac OSX sooner instead. I don't want to wait until October! Boo-hoo. Oh well, an Apple with money in the bank is much more friendlier to customers than the old kind. At least that is the theory..

link [willcom-inc.com]

Apple is not Microsoft

Apple makes more money on the hardware so delaying an OS is smart for them. Why hire on more programmers and take on expenses to put out something that will bring in minimal revenues. They do make money selling upgrades, but nothing like Microsoft. Nor do they rely on that income to bolster earnings.

Apple's Current Priorities

A Lot of people went to MacWorld (empahsize Mac as in MACINTOSH) and did not see a new version of the OS or hardware enhancements but a Phone and a box that hooks to a TV. And the announcement that Apple is taking "Computer" out of thier company name, great news for all thopse computer show attendees, eh?.

Of course Apple said, "Just wait till spring, we'll annouce all that computing goodness you paid to hear about" , which has now become, "Well, expect it later in the year, the Phne this is more important to us now than those old computer updates anyway."

Yeah I really miss the Apple of a few years back, before they became another MicroSoft, jumping on every market but thier core one (you know, computers and OSs). But I am really glad to see all the software/interoperability innovations in the GNU/Linux community though. These companies should be conneting the dots, offering more consumer-oriented music/video whiz-bang eye candy (and relatede DRM) is certainly turing off the "let's get stuff done" IT types who just wand a SMB protocol that works and a Finder that does not have the dreaded "Pinwheel of wait" features..

Yep IT planning may not have Apple or MS in the picture, at least for for those looking for long-term solutions not Zunes and iPhones.

Apple didn't just reassign a bunch of people.

The engineers who've been lent from other parts of the company to the iPhone project have been working on it for quite a long time. This left their departments short-handed, and what happened yesterday is that the OS X program office took a look at where they were, and where they needed to be on the schedule, did the math, and announced a four-month slip.

-jcr

Bad idea

If this is true, it may be a bad idea.

Assigning more programmers to a project running behind schedule will make it even later, due to the time required for the new programmers to learn about the project, as well as the increased communication overhead.

-- Fred Brooks [wikipedia.org], The Mythical Man-Month [wikipedia.org]

Let's just hope iPhone wasn't behind schedule in the first place.

Should change the title of this...

The article title should be changed to "Pure Speculation on why Apple Delayed Leopard for the iPhone". There are no sources, documents, statements within or outside Apple cited to back up the claims of the article, its just speculation by someone who has no more information than anyone else sitting in there underwear typing a blog at home claiming what they say to be absolute truth. As far as the type of stories that Slashdot links to, I would like more NEWS that matters and less editorials by nobodys.

iPhone integration...

I would think that for proper integration into OSX Leopard, it would be good to have the iPhone out the door.

Also, there's not been a major hardware upgrade in quite a while, perhaps the delay will mean something in the pipeline as exciting and important as the iPhone, like systems matched to Leopard. This delay could make the Leopard release
--
Franklin Brauner

ignore the hype

There's a single OS X development team. OS X is running on Mac, AppleTV, iPhone, and god knows what other products Apple has in the development stream. The team is going to focus on numerous facets of the OS; currently, they're focused more on the iPhone drivers & UI et al. All of which is going to pay off for us Mac users.

My bet is that the big OS X secret is going to have something to do with new ways of interacting with the computer, using technologies developed expressly for the iPhone initially. All Apple products are high-touch/interactive; the iPhone is *especially* so. The computer and TV platforms can only benefit by that.

These are very exciting times in the OS world. We are *finally* beginning to get an OS that really lives up to everything an OS should be: stable, secure, great UI, intuitive, pleasant.

It is apple so fsck FOTA

They will have a hardware upgrade in 3 to 6 months for HSDPA. Most EDGE networks are not MCS-12 yet..

Ho-Hum

ho-hum. Tiger's just fine. We don't need a new OS every year or even every few years. I would much prefer to see Apple work on perfecting 10.4.

Wrong Assumption

All the talk about Apple delaying Leopard because of the iPhone assume The Apple statement was telling the truth. My bet is that the real reason for the delay is bugs in Leopard that are taking longer than expected to kill. Notice that all of the developer releases of Leopard have a long list of known issues. Apple needs time to work these off and of course any big company loads people between departments. But Apple can't say publically "Leopard is broken and it will take us until October to fix it/" That simply sounds bad.

Nothing to do with important-ness

Jobsmonster only has to ask his (paying) slaves to bend over, and they will.

I think it's a cover.

I've been keeping track of Apple's development cycle for the past few years, and I don't think the iPhone has anything to do with the delay. ;) In fact, I have been saying for some time that I didn't think the quality of Leopard was on target for a spring release... well before the iPhone announcement. While I suppose it's possible that the iPhone was somewhat of a drain on the core OS developers, I think this all ties into Steve's "Top Secret Features" announcement... the suspicious lack of any Leopard discussions during MacWorld San Francisco is interesting... but not necessarily surprising... If Apple really does have a rabbit up its sleeve, they may have wanted to wait until Vista was sufficiently saturated before unveiling it.

Keep in mind that Apple claims the iPhone is delayed until June because of the need for FCC approval... so which story are we supposed to believe? ;)

Also, if you actually break down the time that Leopard has had for development... it's *much* longer than previous releases, and that doesn't have anything to do with the Intel work because Apple's been keeping things in sync for 5 years...

I'm skeptical of the announcement... Either Apple's dates have slipped, or they've got something big. It surprised me that Jobs stood up and said there were "Top Secret" features coming, so I hope he makes good on that promise... I expect the unexpected at WWDC in June.

Stocks go up

If iPhone delays then Apple's stock actions will go down, a lot more that when they announce that Leopard will be delayed 4 months... iPhone is more important in economic/stock terms

Apple screws up its non-US customers

I am not living in the US. Apple have just delayed a product I was interested in buying in favor of another that not only am I not interested in (I hate cellphones), but I won't be able buy anyway because it will be US-only at launch.

That's just fucking brilliant, Apple.

Re:Hi, you don't "get it"

I wish I were a dunderhead too if that means showering in money.

Re:So Ignorant.

I'm not trolling, but i'd genuinely be interested in a brief summary or some references for this statement.

Re:Hi, you don't "get it"

I agree. Apple isn't even called Apple Computers anymore.

Not that the submitter seems to have noticed.

Re:Since when is incomplete software acceptable??

"A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever." - Shigeru Miyamoto

Re:Hi, you don't "get it"

Yeah, you don't get it. I'm not surprised, either, on a site like Slashdot where everyone seems to have tunnel vision regarding the applicability of technology to solve everyday problems.

Wasn't it only a few months ago here that everyone here was predicting the PS3 would pummel the Wii in the market, since people so obviously prefer superior technobabble to superior fun? How'd that turn out, champ?

Re:This piece doesn't make much sense....

Makes perfect sense to me. Apple has become a consumer electronics goods company, thus the name change. Theyre a leader in portable music players and are tired of locking horns with MS, Dell, etc in the PC marketplace. I wouldnt be surprised if they stopped making computers in 10 years or just sold vanity windows laptops like Sony does with the VAIO line.

I dont see any harm in what apple is doing. Its loyalists can wait quite a bit for the next version of OSX. Its not like theyre going to jump ship to Dell. Apple's offerings are fashionable consumer lifestyle products more than they are computers. Apple delaying OSX is like Gucci raising the prices on their handbags. If anything, it just makes the product more desirable for those who have internalized the Apple brand.

Re:This piece doesn't make much sense....

You're spot on. As a college tech geek, I'm greatly annoyed that Leopard won't be out this summer; I was really looking forward to some of the new features for the Fall semester (release-quality Boot Camp would be a god-send), as well as hoping to get it pre-installed (not an after-market upgrade) on hundreds of new computers being purchased by our students in July/August. An iPhone isn't even on my Xmas wish list, and I resent it a bit for stealing resources from Leopard. However, I agree that Apple's decision to put Leopard on the back burner to enable them to calmly place a bug-free iPhone into the sweaty hands of its target customers on time, makes perfect sense from a business standpoint.

Re:The real reason for the delay

Plausible, but I think if this is true, then we'll start hearing leaks very soon.

Re:This piece doesn't make much sense....

Well, this announcement illustrates the difference between Apple fans and Mac fans. Apple fans like the decision because they feel that the iPhone would be a great product. The Apple fans are the ones saying that the delay of the OS is fine; OS X 10.4 is good enough for them. Apple fans like the idea of Apple becoming a consumer electronics company. Mac fans, on the other hand, don't really care about the iPhone. They feel that this decision is a slap in the face to Apple's loyal Mac customers, who want to prioritize a new phone over their long-standing product with millions of users. They'd rather see better Macs and improvements to OS X than to see a phone. Mac fans are worried that the Mac would be marginalized as Apple chases profits from MP3 players, phones, media center boxes, and other consumer electronics.

I fall in the Mac fan category. Personally, I'm starting to get worried about Apple's change from Apple Computer, Inc. to just Apple, Inc. At MacWorld 2007, not a single Mac product was announced. The only hardware update that we've received in five months was the updated Mac Pros that came out recently. Now OS X is delayed to work on a phone. I, and many other Mac users who have switched away from Linux, BSD, and other Unices, are not interested in Apple because of their phones, media centers, or MP3 players. We're interested in Apple because of their easy to use Unix with commercial software support and easy to use GUI applications. I hope the Mac doesn't become marginalized, but I already feel that it has by Apple's actions this year.

I'll just have to wait and see. But for now, although I like my MacBook, I'll be very careful to not be locked-in. Just as I switched to the Mac last summer from Windows XP and FreeBSD, I will switch back if I discover that Apple doesn't care about us.

Re:Ohhh for [whatever's] sake ...

Unlike certain fanboys of another-not-to-be-named-OS who waited through intermediate releases (XP, XPsp2) for over 5 years - wait, what? 7?), I think I can handle 3 months.

Heh, well, I'm going to count how many "intermediate releases" Windows OS releases I've had since 2000.

Win2k SP1, WinXP, Win2k SP2, WinXP sp1, Win2k SP3, Win2k3, WinXP SP2, Win2k3 sp1, Win2k SP3, win2k3 sp2, WinVista etc.

Every year, I've definitely played with new 'intermediate' Windows OS versions.

Re:Perhaps...

I too have seen machines go wonky as a result of corrupted fonts. All the same, I've never seen it as solely Apple's fault. Quark's font reserve is piss poor (Quark in general is piss poor, IMHO) and Adobe's is not much better.

I blame the poor software much more than the OS.

Re:my guess

I didn't think anybody still minced around being a 'Mac User' in public. I thought all the air was out of that bag and Apple was just a consumer electronics company that still had a vestigal interest in 'salon' style computers.

I stand corrected.

Re:So Ignorant.

It was a joke... Im sorry, I should have added a [/sarcasm] html tag...