Bloomberg Anywhere Remote Login Bloomberg Terminal Demo Request


Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world.


Financial Products

Enterprise Products


Customer Support

  • Americas

    +1 212 318 2000

  • Europe, Middle East, & Africa

    +44 20 7330 7500

  • Asia Pacific

    +65 6212 1000


Industry Products

Media Services

Follow Us

Bloomberg Customers

Businessweek Archives

Leopard Delay Rumors Unfounded?

Various Responses To The “Apple Capital” Idea |


| A Million Would-Be iPhone Owners, Plus Samsung's "Upstage"

March 26, 2007

Leopard Delay Rumors Unfounded?

Arik Hesseldahl

Last week’s rumor mill was punctuated by several versions of a tale saying that Leopard, the next version of Mac OS X, will be late. This type of rumor isn’t all that uncommon when a new OS is coming. About a week or so before that, the rumors were pointing in the opposite direction, saying that Leopard would be released sooner than previously thought.

Apple of course is never terribly specific about exactly when it expects to ship a new OS, for a reason. Schedules on projects as complex as a computer operating system have a funny way of slipping. But there’s word today from Shaw Wu, analyst at American Technology Research in San Francisco saying that the “late” rumors are off-base. Saying that “spring” technically lasts until June 20 – astronomically speaking anyway – there are three months left during which Apple could still deliver Leopard and have met its deliberately vague commitment to a spring release, meaning there’s still about three months to go.

Additionally Wu, citing his own sources, says that Apple appears to be “one or two builds away” from a final release candidate for Leopard.

One intriguing detail concerns an Apple-made virtualization technology, that would give Leopard the ability to run Windows (and presumably other operating systems) seamlessly from within the Mac OS X environment, something like what Parallels Inc. offers now. Adding such a feature – something that would have to be a big improvement over the current version of Boot Camp – would, Wu argues, serve as a “major catalyst for Mac sales.” I can’t help but agree that it would. But here’s another idea: Why not just use some of that $12 billion cash horde I keep talking about, and acquire Parallels entirely?

02:01 PM

Rumors, Rumors, Rumors

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Leopard Delay Rumors Unfounded?: from Tech

There is a very good reason why I should write more. Just since my last post, I missed OSX Leopard being delayed, Pluto being a planet again (for you lucky citizens of New Mexico), Google/YouTube (or GooTube, as the cool kids are calling it) getting s... [Read More]

Tracked on March 27, 2007 11:15 AM

Analyst Says No Leopard Delay from Tech

Edit: There was a problem with the original that kept it from displaying properly. This is a repost to correct the problem.

There is a very good reason why I should write more. Just since my last post, I missed OSX Leopard being delayed, Pluto being ... [Read More]

Tracked on April 1, 2007 09:25 PM

"Saying that 'spring' technically lasts until June 20 – astronomically speaking anyway – there are three months left".

"Technically"? "Astronomically speaking"? What in the world is going on with folks -- and now even BusinessWeek -- making out like Apple is playing fast and loose with the definition of Spring?!? It's not a vague term and there's nothing ambiguous about it here! In fact, the only variable in its meaning is the issue of it being (*exactly six months*) different in the southern hemisphere -- which is clearly *not* the framework Apple is communicating in, and thus clearly irrelevant to questions of Leopard's release. With this definition having been brought up & discussed in forum after forum, it's reached the point where every time someone else throws out such gratuitous implications that there is something fishy, shaky, ambiguous, or deceptive on this count really undermines that someone's credibility and integrity.

Posted by: Paul Lustgarten at March 26, 2007 03:43 PM

I suprised that a publication as reputable as BusienssWeek would give such baseless rumors any credence.

Posted by: Robert Brown at March 26, 2007 05:20 PM

Would be a pity if Apple do delay as would risk missing those students about to start university who like media friendly laptops but do not want to have upgrade later, might lose out to Sony etc. I would guess Apple are keen to win over those students given how MS is pressing to win minds of younger students and schools !

Posted by: I simpson at March 27, 2007 05:39 AM

l simpson: interesting observation about university students.

In North America, most students start college in August/September, so a Leopard release in June shouldn't affect them.

Where you live, do students start earlier?

Posted by: nuvs at March 27, 2007 03:18 PM

Doesn't matter if Apple is late, whenever they release a product it's far more stable and functional than any Windows product. Steve knows what he is doing, he has ever since the release of OS X. If Bill wanted to step it up he would drop good ole DOS and move to the UNIX platform. I mean seriously all Vista is nothing more than Windows XP with Cisco CSA installed on it to better protect you, from yourself the novice user. Not to leave out the sad fact that you need to spend a ton of money on the OS but also tons of money to upgrade your system to just meet the requirements to run Vista.

I know I am on a soap box but it’s clear to me as an Apple/UNIX/Windows user that something just doesn’t seem right when you have a choice of either running one OS that does everything you want to do, or another OS that forces you to pick one version Whatever happened to the time when you just bought something that worked but didn’t limit you to just one thing, oh wait that’s Apple! So to I Simpson let me know how your new VAIO® Notebook TX SeriesVGN-TXN25N/W that cost $ 2,249.99 is when it’s only rated 2.3 running Windows Vista.

Posted by: Joey at March 29, 2007 09:44 AM

blog comments powered by Disqus