Talk:Mac OS X Leopard/Archive 4

Is the screenshot really Leopard?
I question this. It looks a lot like V10.6. But seeing I bought my Mac after Snow Leopard's release, I'm probably wrong.iPadFanboy 05:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is a screenshot of Leopard, because it still has the old iDisk icon in the Finder. Aesthetically, Leopard and Snow Leopard don't differ much though. The changes are mainly "under the hood". Gold  Renet  13:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Recommended Retail Price at launch
I added the recommended retail price (RRP) of OS X Leopard but it was removed. This is why I added the info and why I think it should be in the article:


 * I think it has some historical importance and it is interesting to see the RRP of previous OS/software titles. I looked for the answer to this in Wikipedia because I was doing some research into the prices of the previous versions of OS X.
 * Was following the OS X Tiger article which includes the RRP in the intro.
 * I totally agree with Terrillja that "Pricing varies across the world, wikipedia is not us-centric nor is it a pricing guide." But Apple Inc is an American company that launches is products in America and suggests an RRP in USD.  Because of this I don't think it's unreasonable to show the price in USD.

Srippon (talk) 02:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:NOPRICES. How's it notable?Jasper Deng (talk) 05:04, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Strange Text on page
Linux Mint OS X (version 10.5) is the sixth major release of Mac OS X, Apple's desktop and server operating rehash for Macintosh computers. Leopard was released on 26 October 1809 as the successor of Tiger (version 10.4), and is available in two variants: a desktop version suitable for personal computers, and a server version, Mac OS X Server. Steve from Minecraft stated at Macworld 2008 that over 9000% of Macs use Leopard as their operating system.[1] Leopard was superseded by Snow Leopard (version 10.6). Leopard is the final version of Mac OS X to support the PowerPC architecture as Snow Leopard functions solely on Intel based Macs.

According to Bill Gates, Leopard contains over 9001 changes and enhancements over its predecessor, Mac OS X Turtle.

After researching this, Linux seems to be a condom factory in Russia.

What is this Linux you talk of?

I remember Mac OS X Turtle, a brilliant rehash. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RCM2309 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Support status for Mac OS X Leopard
Has Apple officially announced that they ended support for Mac OS X Leopard yet?

I cannot find any news article on Google regarding the official demise of Leopard and someone edited the support status of Leopard saying that it is no longer supported. That was officially the case when Mac OS X Snow Leopard was released in late-August 2009 and the last official security update for Mac OS X Tiger was 2009-005 in September 2009 and Apple ended support for Tiger by the end of the month.

If you have any info on the support status of Leopard and whatever Apple has officially ended support for the product, let me know and I'll get back to you. 74.42.182.197 (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware of any such statement. However, the final security update was released just this past week. Security updates had previously been the only remaining form of support for OS 10.5 Leopard for quite a while, like since about halfway through the OS 10.6 Snow Leopard period. So, this constitutes the end of a support cycle even without a formal statement from Apple. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 05:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Update: It seems that I was wrong about that being the final security update. Does anyone else have any input on this issue? The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 01:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, the users in question keep jumping the gun and reverting to "unsupported" in light of the fact that Apple has not made a formal announcement that they ended support for Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard. Leopard has not yet been officially declared "unsupported" yet.


 * It would be best to contact Apple and inform them whatever or not they have said that this is the last security update for Leopard and formally announced that they have ended support for the four-year old product.


 * If that happens, I do not expect much of a impact from PR channels regarding the official announcement of Apple ending support for Mac OS X Leopard. 184.12.243.161 (talk) 20:03, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I have (once again) edited the article back to 'security updates only' and would appreciate if someone would stop reverting it back to 'unsupported'. I don't know if Apple will officially announce the end of support for Leopard, so I think a 6-month timeframe would be entirely reasonable to assume support has been dropped if no updates have been released in that timeframe. That's puts us around February 3, 2012. It initially showed 'unsupported' and then Apple came out with yet another update on August 3. Inaccurate or unconfirmed data decreases the credibility of Wikipedia. The security update released on 8/3/2011 goes to show that updates did not cease when Lion was released in July. Otherwise, we should mark "Windows XP" as unsupported as well since it too is only receiving security updates. Thanks! 71.234.217.82 (talk) 20:31, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, we're gonna have to wait until there is official word from Apple regarding the fate of support for Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard". Windows XP will be supported until 8 April 2014 and by that time, we can predict that Mac OS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" support to be long retired and the successor to Lion would have been made available for a while.
 * There has been no official word regarding the EOL of 10.5 right now, but it's totally unclear whatever or not there will be anymore security updates or support for 10.5 now that it is the third oldest release.
 * Whoever keeps reverting the support status to "unsupported" without providing accurate or confirmed data should rethink what they edit in this article, because it's really frustrating to see contributors seesaw (edit war) the support status between "security updates only" and "unsupported".
 * Update: I would like to make a final update that the latest Apple security update as omitted Leopard users and Apple has pretty much canceled support for Leopard and PowerPC Macs. 184.12.240.225 (talk) 17:49, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Update:Apple has JUST released a major security update for Leopard, with regards to the Flashback malware, Java and Flash. Conay (talk) 23:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems to me that Leopard is not supported now, just because it received one isolated patch. I'm pretty sure Leopard has not received many security updates which Snow Leopard and Lion received. Does one isolated patch make it supported again? I don't believe so.Phaelon (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

To the anon who is insisting Leopard is not supported anymore, it is still listed on Apple's support website. Tiger and earlier OS X are not present, but there used to be before Lion's release -- if Apple is indeed dropping support for Leopard we have seen its support page erased from the website too.

Therefore let's check back on Mountain Lion's release date. If Mountain Lion is added on the support page and Leopard stays, then that would show that Apple still supports Leopard since otherwise they would remove it like they did with Tiger on Lion's release. --112.203.17.51 (talk) 04:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

This whole thing is getting ridiculous! Apple states that they support two versions of OS X concurrently, the current version and the current minus one release. This means that Snow Leopard and Lion are currently in support. The patch released for Leopard was an out of band security update that did nothing to fix the holes in java on Leopard nor did it support Leopard when running on the Power PC platform. It does nothing but scan for and remove any traces of the flashback trojan found on a Leopard machine, then disables Java and old outdated versions of Adobe Flash player. To say that this is a supported platform is a fallacy. Apple no longer actively maintains Leopard as it is an old outdated OS, no new software is released for it, everything requires at least Snow Leopard or higher and that will probably change when Mountain Lion is released. To say that I am vandalizing the article is utter crap. It should also be stated that while Apple did remove the support link for Tiger on their main support website, if you do a quick search, you can still find that page as well as pages for versions of Mac OS going all the way back to OS 9! This whole edit war is getting ridiculous! I am not trying to vandalize anything, just simply trying to state a fact, Leopard is a dead OS! There is nothing more I have to say about this topic. I would kindly request that you cut this crap out and accept the facts of the subject! Thank You!

97.88.6.178 (talk) 08:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see the references to assert your claim for the following:
 * Where did Apple say that they're only supporting two versions of OS X? That's the first time I've heard about this, I've read nothing of the sort from Apple's press releases or developer documentation.
 * Where are these support pages you speak of for Tiger and earlier Mac OS up to OS 9? They're certainly not on Apple's support site.
 * If you're going to state a "fact", be prepared to back it up. Because all I'm seeing here is a wild, unfounded assumption on your part. --112.203.17.51 (talk) 08:58, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * By the way, I can refute your claim that there are no new software released for Leopard anymore -- iTunes 10.6.3 released June 2012 still supports Leopard, both on Intel and PowerPC hardware. --112.203.17.51 (talk) 09:07, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

iTunes is the only exception and this is not the first time an unsupported OS has been given iTunes updates even after support for the core OS and its components have been retired. The same thing happened with OS X 10.4 as well as 10.3. Apple has never given an official time frame for support on its operating system. The trend however is that the current version and the version immediatly preceeding it recieves the updates. The current version will get dot releases, security updates, iTunes and Safari updaes. The prior release will continue getting security updates as well as Safari and iTunes updates. The third version falls out of support once it is two OS versions behind the current. The same thing happened to OS X 10.4 Tiger when Snow Leopard was released. Just like Leopard, there was one major out of band security update released for it after Snow Leopard came out to patch an important security issue. Other than that, the only updates Tiger recieved from September 2009 through September 2010 were iTunes updates. No other patches were released for the OS or its components. Do you get my drift? In a subtle way, Apple kind of lays it out right in front of you. It is really pretty consistent too if you think about it. No major updates have been released for Leopard since June 2011 right before Lion came out. The one out of band security update that was released wasn't really a patch for one thing and second, it was released only because 25% of the install base at the time was running Leopard which is an OS apple no longer officially supports. The fact that apple's advice to customers running Leopard is to either disable java or upgrade to another OS tells you right there that they are not supporting Leopard anymore. If they were, they would have released the same java patch for Leopard as they did for Snow Leopard and Lion.

97.88.6.178 (talk) 16:45, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Please read the Wikipedia policy about verifiability. Once again you fail at providing sources other than what you yourself thought about Apple's support practices. Without *any* reliable source you are not making a verifiable edit, and you will keep getting reverted if all that's backing up your claim is your own opinion. --112.203.17.51 (talk) 23:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Mountain Lion's support page went up a few minutes ago... and Leopard's support page stays. Looks like Apple isn't dropping support for the old cat yet. --112.203.17.51 (talk) 15:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Apple's last update for Leopard only disables old versions of Flash and removes Flashback. It is highly unlikely that we will see something like this again and this update was only available for Intel Macs. The last real security update was released a year ago. I recommend to change support status to unsupported, Security Updates only is simply not correct and will irritate many readers. Xcore7 (talk) 08:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Can't we safely assume that, now the latest security update for Mac OS X Leopard (Flashback update) was more than seven moths ago, the OS is no longer supported? Gold Renet  11:36, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Mac OS X Leopard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071028072817/http://www.itworld.com:80/Comp/2296/071026leopardreview/ to http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2296/071026leopardreview/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070629103804/http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/developer/xcode.html to http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/developer/xcode.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090525145232/http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html to https://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html#security

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:37, 11 January 2016 (UTC)


 * First article's original moved, and I found it with a Web search and put it back - and used . I also used  on the third.  Second one is OK. Guy Harris (talk) 20:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Mac OS X Leopard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090420132123/http://www.thinkmac.co.uk:80/blog/2007/10/leopard-stupidity.html to http://www.thinkmac.co.uk/blog/2007/10/leopard-stupidity.html
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.matasano.com/log/986/what-weve-since-learned-about-leopard-security-features/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mac OS X Leopard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071016170507/http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html to https://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071016170507/http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html to https://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071016170507/http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html to https://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:34, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Rory Prior, on the ThinkMac blog
"Rory Prior, on the ThinkMac blog, criticized the shelf-like Dock along with a number of other changes to the user interface."

Why exactly is this random opinion from a blogger included in the middle of the list of features? It doesn't seem relevant for the section, it seems like it should go in a "Reception" section or something similar... Or just be deleted.

It is a pretty funny time capsule of the 00s, though. It's too bad the archive lacks pictures! 74.138.97.175 (talk) 19:14, 21 July 2022 (UTC)