I'm surprised none of you have said anything about this yet; I for one was very surprised to see it! It would seem as though Apple have decided to copy one of the worst bits of Vista, that of course being the legendary delays...

I really doubt that the delay has anything at all to do with the iPhone. It's generally not practical to move people from one massive engineering effort to another on a short term basis, especially when they are as distinct projects as a telephone and a computer operating system. While the two may have similarities at some level, they are different enough that I can't really see them sharing the same workforce with any realistic hope of getting anything done faster.

So, nah, I'm pessimistic on this one, and I don't think 10.5 is delayed because the engineers are working on the iPhone (which implies the iPhone will also be considerably delayed, btw).

Peace,
Drew

It wouldn't suprise me if it was the iPhone that's holding this back. They both run OS X, and the iPhone probably needs one helluva good software team for it.

Besides, Apple has said that it's because they diverted people to the iPhone
_________________
PPC Macs:

• Power Macintosh G4
  
• B&W Power Macintosh G4
  
• Power Macintosh 6500/225

As I've mentioned before, this worries me that the focus has now gone to the iPhone and taken away people that are needed for the Leopard release. I have a feeling that this move might take away any momentum that was made before the pullout when they come back to focusing on Leopard. I surely hope that I'm wrong. I just hope we don't end up with something lackluster after having to wait another 6 months. The end result had better be really good, especially considering the long-time Macintosh user base and their tolerance for less-than-great. Also, Apple will be under a lot more scrutiny since they just pulled a Microsoft after pushing an aggressive campaign against them and Vista.

I surely hope that this release will surely be Insanely Great.

You're probably going to hate me for saying this, but I think I'm actually half hoping that Leopard is not very good, so that I won't feel that I'm really missing out by not being able to get it! (assuming that it can't be made to work on G3s) If it does turn out to be amazing, and a million times better than Tiger, I'll feel really left out and back to being stuck in the Mac's past
_________________
Main system: custom C2D 2.66GHz tower/4GB RAM/2600XT 512 MB/500GB HD/XP Pro x86+Vista Business x64
Main Mac: Beige G3 minitower (Sonnet G4 500MHz/640 MB DVD/USB/Radeon 32 MB/OS 9.2.2+10.4.11)

I'd probably buy a copy of Leopard if:

1. I could afford it
2. Tiger didn't do everything and more that I need it to.
3. I had proof that it won't bog down my G4 any more than Tiger.
_________________
PPC Macs:

• Power Macintosh G4
  
• B&W Power Macintosh G4
  
• Power Macintosh 6500/225

Remember that even to this day, the minimum supported version is 10.3.9 by the majority of Mac developers. 10.4 has been the latest for about 2 years now, which means that 10.3 has been supported for 4 years. That's still quite a long time. For those running Tiger, there will be support for quite a long time, especially with 10.5 still being wet behind the ears even after its release.

And as for using .0 releases, I wouldn't recommend it on any OS. WIndows, Mac OS, even a new Linux kernel is something that I wouldn't try on a working system. Why else would people stay behind with XP (which is right now as stable as Windows has ever been) than use Vista which was just released. Why else would so many be eagerly expecting SP1 for Vista?

I'll wait happily until 10.5.1, thankyouverymuch.

Better a loping late Leopard—late for any imaginable or unimaginable reason—than a limping Leopard on time.

Each to his own. There is no single correct approach to OS upgrades, because it depends upon need as well as on greed. There are six Macs in this household that can run OS X natively, without artifice. Only one is a G4, the most 'modern' processor in the house. One G3 runs Jaguar, because that is the last OS supported for its principal software, an audio wave editor. Four, including the G4, run Panther, for which I have five licences. Don't discount multiple licences as a reason for staying with an OS. Only one G3 runs Tiger.

My other 40-odd Macs have each the highest OS/System that they can run comfortably, with whatever hardware upgrade they have and considering the constraints of RAM, except for a few G3-upgraded Macs that could be persuaded to run 9.2.2. I'm not-at-all diffident about remaining behind the technology until I need it. Apple is not immediately about to abandon Panther, which will serve many a Mac well for some time to come, and also serve many Macs that have yet to be upgraded that far. Not the least incentive for Apple to continue support of Panther is the size of its installed base.

de
_________________
(60x) 13DT + 3PB + PTPro; (G3) 7DT/MT; (G4) 3T + PB. System 8.1 to OS 10.5.8

In truth, neither of us does or can know. Think of it this way. OS 9.2.2 has now been unsupported for some time. Unsupported, that is, in the sense of further development. With ordinary, prudent care in its installation and management it is a mature, stable, fast OS on the systems for which it was conceived. Short of a total rewrite, say, so as to take advantage of Unix principles ... it had gone as far as it could go. Few makers can produce software that remains infinitely forward-compatible.

So with Panther. When it becomes the antepenultimate release instead of the penultimate, and Leopard is the new mostest, there will have been time for a couple/few Security Updates, even if not numbered version updates, and there will be little in Panther to grizzle about except for its speed. That cannot be fixed without a total rewrite. And isn't Tiger effectively that rewrite? Tiger, anyone?

de
_________________
(60x) 13DT + 3PB + PTPro; (G3) 7DT/MT; (G4) 3T + PB. System 8.1 to OS 10.5.8