Comments on: Digitimes.com Could Still be Right (about Leopard)

By: Phil Sommers

Phil Sommers — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 02:52:48 +0000

I love this blog. Thanks for the great information. I have it bookmarked and will be back. If anybody needs how to get a new credit file don't hesitate to come on over.

By: applejuice

applejuice — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 06:50:45 +0000

I think what is really going on is different from what has been said here. I think Apple found a new “element” which will tie in with the iPhone and seeing the numerous advantages, wants the iPhone to gain some ground (marketshare) prior to releasing Leopard. This integrated element will be used to entice current PC users who will have bought iPhones to consider Apple for their future desktop/laptop purchases.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 14 Apr 2007 03:41:01 +0000

Apple said it would not develop something because it was happy with a third party solution. The one thing everyone is missing is that Apple could be very happy third party solution and already have purchased it or they are thinking of another solution to allow window apps to launch.

I think the deal with Cingular for the iphone should be considered as a way Apple can work with outside parties and maintain secrecy. What if Apple has already licensed or has a letter of intent to purchase Parrellels?

By: IdleWander

IdleWander — Sat, 14 Apr 2007 00:48:31 +0000

Apple also said that Lepoard would not be delayed either and that it was right on track for a spring release. And yet now it is pushed back to October. Digitimes was right that it would be delayed who really cares as to why. (As a side note I am pissed that it is delayed due to a worthless phone. I need a new OS NOT a phone that is locked to a carrier I will NEVER switch too.)

By: Geoffrey Sneddon

Geoffrey Sneddon — Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:54:51 +0000

Why does it matter what they’ve said? Announcing the iPod Photo they said they wouldn’t ship a video one. I think it’s obvious that Apple can quite easily mislead.

By: Eytan

Eytan — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:16:57 +0000

Apple has repeatedly said they do not plan to offer virtualization, content with current (and forthcoming solutions). All integrated means is Bootcamp will be installed by the OS Install. Integrated Boot Camp is VERY different than integrated Windows. Maybe if they said “a version of bootcamp that can run an Integrated Windows” but basically DigiTimes is blowing air out their behinds

By: Craig

Craig — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:18:46 +0000

Apple has already directly disputed the Digitimes rumor so I don’t know why anyone is still discussing it.

By: Arnold Kim

Arnold Kim — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:13:39 +0000

#1. I don’t think what Apple’s said is relevant to what this rumor is saying. I’m not saying this is likely, just restating what they are actually stating.

#2. I think you are reading it too literally. They are saying an “integrated version of Boot Camp”, in that they are saying an “integrated version of letting you run Windows”. Obviously, Boot Camp in its current form won’t run side-by-side. That’s why they are saying it’s going to take time to develop one that does. (much like a version of Parallels.)

By: huxley

huxley — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 15:08:31 +0000

Integrated = “In the next major release of Mac OS X Leopard, Apple will include a new technology called Boot Camp that lets you install and run Windows on your Mac. If you have an Intel-based Mac computer and would like to try Boot Camp, you can download the public beta today.”

from: http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

By: Hammer of Truth

Hammer of Truth — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:33:37 +0000

Boot Camp couldn’t run side by side since it is giving you the option of which OS to BOOT up and run. It is not virtualization like Parallels.
According to your quote on what they said, Boot Camp would be integrated into the OS install and not a separate one like iTunes and Safari once were.