Experience Pass4sure 9L0-623 exam VCE before test | braindumps | ROMULUS

Pass4sure Training bundle of PDF - Pass4sure Exam Simulator - examcollection - braindumps are at best price with coupon discount - braindumps - ROMULUS

Pass4sure 9L0-623 dumps | Killexams.com 9L0-623 true questions | http://tractaricurteadearges.ro/

9L0-623 Mac OS X Deployment 10.6

Study guide Prepared by Killexams.com Apple Dumps Experts

Killexams.com 9L0-623 Dumps and true Questions

100% true Questions - Exam Pass Guarantee with lofty Marks - Just Memorize the Answers

9L0-623 exam Dumps Source : Mac OS X Deployment 10.6

Test Code : 9L0-623
Test title : Mac OS X Deployment 10.6
Vendor title : Apple
: 64 true Questions

Exactly identical questions in true test, WTF!
Hurrah! I hold exceeded my 9L0-623 this week. And that i were given flying coloration and for gross this im so grateful to killexams. Theyve got give you so preempt and properly-engineered software program. Their simulations are very similar to the ones in actual tests. Simulations are the primary thing of 9L0-623 examination and certainly worth greater weight age then different questions. After making geared up from their program it turned into very smooth for me to treatment gross of the ones simulations. I used them for gross 9L0-623 exam and positioned them trustful each time.

the course to redeem together for 9L0-623 examination in shortest time?
properly I used to spent maximum of my time surfing the net but it become now not gross in useless because it become my surfing that introduced me to this killexams.com privilege earlier than my 9L0-623 exam. Coming here become the Great thing that befell to me since it were given me hold a study at properly and therefore placed up an excellent performance in my assessments.

those 9L0-623 true buy a study at questions labor superb inside the actual test.
This is the nice 9L0-623 useful resource on net. Killexams.Com is one I consider. What they gave to me is greater treasured than money, they gave me training. I changed into analyzing for my 9L0-623 test once I made an account on here and what I got in recur labored merely relish magic for me and I was very amazed at how tremendous it felt. My 9L0-623 check appeared relish a unmarried exceeded thing to me and I achieved success.

Passing 9L0-623 exam is simply click away!
The killexams.Com is the awesome web page where my goals near real. With the aid of manner of the usage of the fabric for the practise certainly introduced the true spark to the studies and severely ended up by course of the usage of acquiring the qualityrating within the 9L0-623 exam. Its miles pretty easy to stand any examination with the assist of your hold a study material. Thank youplenty for all. champion up the first-rate knack labor guys.

wherein am i able to locate 9L0-623 trendy dumps questions?
I used to exist operating as an administrator and changed into making prepared for the 9L0-623 exam as well. Referring to detailedbooks changed into making my training tough for me. However after I cited killexams.com, i discovered out that i used to bewithout vicissitude memorizing the applicable solutions of the questions. Killexams.Com made me confident and helped me in trying 60 questions in 80 minutes without trouble. I surpassed this exam efficaciously. I pleasant proposekillexams.Com to my friends and co-workers for easy coaching. Thank you killexams.

What study manual carry out I need to pass 9L0-623 examination?
It was very encourging experience with killexams.com team. They told me to try their 9L0-623 exam questions once and forget failing the 9L0-623 exam. First I hesitated to expend the material because I afraid of failing the 9L0-623 exam. But when I told by my friends that they used the exam simulator for thier 9L0-623 certification exam, i bought the preparation pack. It was very cheap. That was the first time that I convinced to expend killexams.com preparation material when I got 100% marks in my 9L0-623 exam. I really treasure you killexams.com team.

Get proper lore and study with the 9L0-623 and Dumps!
I passed the 9L0-623 exam thanks to killexams.com, too. Good to understand Im not alone! that is a fantastic course to prepare for IT assessments. i was concerned identification fail, so I ordered this package. The checking out engine runs very smoothly, so I ought to exercise inside the examination surroundings for hours, using true exam questions and checking my solutions. As a result, I knew pretty tons the gross lot at the exam, which become the trait Christmas and novel yr present I may want to supply myself!

Is there someone who handed 9L0-623 examination?
I exceeded the 9L0-623 exam today and scored one hundred%! never concept I should carry out it, however killexams.com grew to become out to exist a gem in examination training. I had a terrific emotion approximately it because it appeared to cover gross topics, and there hold been masses of questions provided. yet, I didnt assume to descry gross of the identical questions in the actual exam. Very best marvel, and i quite insinuate using Killexams.

Just tried 9L0-623 question bank once and I am convinced.
I passed, and very delighted to report that killexams.com adhere to the claims they make. They provide true exam questions and the testing engine works perfectly. The bundle contains everything they promise, and their customer service works well (I had to fetch in handle with them since first my online payment would not Go through, but it turned out to exist my fault). Anyways, this is a very Good product, much better than I had expected. I passed 9L0-623 exam with nearly top score, something I never thought I was capable of. Thank you.

take delivery of as proper with it or no longer, simply try 9L0-623 study at questions as soon as!
Being an underneath mediocre scholar, I were given terrified of the 9L0-623 exam as subjects seemed very tough to me. butpassing the buy a study at was a need as I had to change the task badly. searched for an antiseptic manual and got one with the dumps. It helped me retort gross a yoke of benign questions in 200 mins and bypass effectively. What an exquisitequery & solutions, understanding dumps! satisfied to fetch hold of two gives from well-known organizations with handsome bundle. I advise most effectual killexams.com

Apple Apple Mac OS X

Apple Brings Mac Mini back From the useless | killexams.com true Questions and Pass4sure dumps

Apple’s cramped computing device computer is not any longer only a punchline. today the commerce took the wraps off a revamped Mac Mini, changing its underpowered constituents with new, eighth technology Intel quad- and 6-core processors alternate options, up to 64GB of memory, as much as a 2TB SSD, a T2 protection chip, 10GB ethernet, and 4 Thunderbolt three ports. With the enhancements, Apple is bumping its longstanding $500 starting charge up to $800—but you received’t find face-melting specs with out paying much more.

sure, you’ll nevertheless need to carry your own monitor, keyboard, and mouse. And yes that you would exist able to, uh, fetch it in house grey now. At $800, the bottom model will near with 8GB of memory, a 3.6GHz quad-core i3 processor, and 128GB of SSD storage.

The Mini was firstly designed to win over novel converts to OS X (now macOS) with the first sub-$500 Mac. ultimate revamped eons in the past, in October 2014, it grew to exist a husk for out of date guts that no one, completely no one in their privilege understanding had any company recommending to a loved one. with the aid of the conclusion of its run, the newest incarnation seemed designed to shove buyers in this funds faraway from Apple, towards better offers from corporations relish Dell and HP.

Apple is billing the novel Mini as “5 instances quicker” ordinary with “60 p.c faster pictures.” It’ll exist purchasable on November 7.

Apple announces free OS X Mavericks unlock, novel iPads, Mac seasoned | killexams.com true Questions and Pass4sure dumps

At Apple’s “plenty to cowl” special adventure these days, the company paraded out an hour and a half’s value of novel products and updates, together with the release of OS X Mavericks, the brand novel iPad Air and iPad Mini, Mac pro, updated 13 and 15-inch MacBooks, and an up to date suite of iLife apps.

OS X MavericksThe operating gadget is free, and it’s attainable these days. Apple senior vp of utility engineering Craig Federighi prefaced the free up with, “This one is a doozy.”

available with a single-step upgrade from Snow Leopard, Lion, Mountain Lion or any MacBook dating returned to 2007, Mavericks has a slew of novel aspects. Its novel compressed reminiscence feature allocates pictures reminiscence in response to usage to optimize performance. The talent enables 6GB of data to fit into 4GB of materiel RAM.

(Beta remarks and an entire listing of aspects: users poke around OS X ‘Mavericks’)

Mavericks’ OpenCL uses reminiscence sharing to circulation initiatives operating on the CPU to the GPU, taking competencies of the GPU’s greater computing vigour to finished projects 1.8x faster, and 2x sooner for photograph projects.

a novel finder window enables initiatives and files to exist labeled with multiple tags for handy search and firm. click on the title bar of any document so as to add one or extra tags, or pick a tag from a list.

In Safari, Mavericks introduces improved notifications, permitting users to reply within the pop-up bubble devoid of leaving an utility. It moreover provides site notifications when novel content material is posted. the novel Safari precise websites view generates a feed of shared hyperlinks from adopted clients on sociable networks comparable to LinkedIn and Twitter.

There’s additionally a brand novel reader view, enabling consumer-accelerated scrolling directly from one article to the next with out clicking out.

the course to Revisit each edition of Mac OS X from your Browser | killexams.com true Questions and Pass4sure dumps

The Aqua GUI in Apple’s working systems has gone through a wonderful evolution in view that March of 2000, when it discovered its approach into OS X 10.0, and you could exist stunned at simply how divorce every cramped thing appears now. because of the newly launched Aqua Screenshot Library, you can revisit every edition of OS X (and macOS) throughout the years and examine the gradual evolution of Apple’s working system—all out of your browser.

The huge gallery is the latest labor via 512 Pixels, an internet library that attempts to hold tabs on gross things Apple (including the Mac’s many wallpapers). The Aqua Screenshot Library, as creator Stephen Hackett notes, gives a comprehensive appear on the tradition of Apple’s operating techniques, which covers its soar to from bulkier CRTs to compact, LED-backlit displays; Apple’s quite a few font adjustments over the years; and Apple’s circulate from disc-based mostly operating systems to (free) digital downloads.

Let’s buy a study at some of those major Mac milestones.

Mac OS X 10.0 (“Cheetah”)

March 24, 2001, marked the first trustworthy unencumber of the Mac OS X operating gadget, following a public beta the 12 months before. Hackett notes that its 128MB reminiscence requirement was “more than most Mac users had in their techniques on the time.” This result in many complaints about the OS’s gradual performance and unreasonable aid demand. The Cheetah interface retained the pin-striped menu and window design from the beta, but it surely began the feline-primarily based naming vogue which would final up to edition 10.8, “Mountain Lion.”

Mac OS X Leopard (10.5)

The ultimate months of 2007 introduced some huge adjustments to OS X. The free up of Leopard noticed Aqua tackle a a lot extra streamlined look, with gross home windows now defaulting to a single, fundamental gray design, as smartly as the debut of a redesigned Finder device. in foster of this, distinctive apps—and distinctive models of OS X—had assorted UI designs (for improved or worse). With Leopard’s free up, OS X gross started to seem extra uniform. most importantly, it was the primary edition to involve those rad, house-based mostly backgrounds.

OS X Mountain Lion (10.8)

Mountain Lion changed into the first edition of OS X to arrive after Steve Jobs’ demise, and it concentrated on aligning Mac computer systems with the late CEO’s different primary contribution to the tech industry: the iPhone. The 2011 OS X replace, Mac OS X Lion (10.7), kicked off Apple’s merging of iOS aesthetics into OS X, and the commerce doubled down with Mountain Lion. materiel and functions had been renamed after iOS points, and Apple introduced some tiny visual and input alterations to bridge the two working programs even nearer together—in trend, at least.

OS X Mavericks (10.9)

Mavericks become an enormous commerce pivot for Apple, because it was the primary edition of the OS the commerce released for gratis, provided to users as an help via the App champion in October 2013. Apple hasn’t long past lower back to paid operating systems due to the fact—luckily. Mavericks changed into moreover the primary version of OS X to expend non-tom cat nomenclature. It additionally ditched the galactic background theme for California landscapes, which they can gross disagree was a massive blunder. appropriate?

macOS Sierra (10.12)

edition 10.12 of Apple’s working materiel for the Mac is most is Great for its tall rebranding. Apple dropped the “OS X” title wholly during this unlock, instead calling its operating system “macOS” to align it the business’s operating techniques on other structures: iOS, watchOS, and tvOS. 

shopping the Aqua Screenshot Library is a enjoyable course to descry just how some distance macOS has come, primarily to descry how Apple’s design priorities alternate between the primary releases. however, the Aqua Screenshot gallery is just one of 512 Pixels’ many projects to check out. exist positive to poke across the other Apple-themed collections Hackett has assembled through the years, too, together with the spectacular 512 Pixels YouTube channel.

9L0-623 Mac OS X Deployment 10.6

Study guide Prepared by Killexams.com Apple Dumps Experts

Killexams.com 9L0-623 Dumps and true Questions

100% true Questions - Exam Pass Guarantee with lofty Marks - Just Memorize the Answers

9L0-623 exam Dumps Source : Mac OS X Deployment 10.6

Test Code : 9L0-623
Test title : Mac OS X Deployment 10.6
Vendor title : Apple
: 64 true Questions

Exactly identical questions in true test, WTF!
Hurrah! I hold exceeded my 9L0-623 this week. And that i were given flying coloration and for gross this im so grateful to killexams. Theyve got give you so preempt and properly-engineered software program. Their simulations are very similar to the ones in actual tests. Simulations are the primary thing of 9L0-623 examination and certainly worth greater weight age then different questions. After making geared up from their program it turned into very smooth for me to treatment gross of the ones simulations. I used them for gross 9L0-623 exam and positioned them trustful each time.

the course to redeem together for 9L0-623 examination in shortest time?
properly I used to spent maximum of my time surfing the net but it become now not gross in useless because it become my surfing that introduced me to this killexams.com privilege earlier than my 9L0-623 exam. Coming here become the Great thing that befell to me since it were given me hold a study at properly and therefore placed up an excellent performance in my assessments.

those 9L0-623 true buy a study at questions labor superb inside the actual test.
This is the nice 9L0-623 useful resource on net. Killexams.Com is one I consider. What they gave to me is greater treasured than money, they gave me training. I changed into analyzing for my 9L0-623 test once I made an account on here and what I got in recur labored merely relish magic for me and I was very amazed at how tremendous it felt. My 9L0-623 check appeared relish a unmarried exceeded thing to me and I achieved success.

Passing 9L0-623 exam is simply click away!
The killexams.Com is the awesome web page where my goals near real. With the aid of manner of the usage of the fabric for the practise certainly introduced the true spark to the studies and severely ended up by course of the usage of acquiring the qualityrating within the 9L0-623 exam. Its miles pretty easy to stand any examination with the assist of your hold a study material. Thank youplenty for all. champion up the first-rate knack labor guys.

wherein am i able to locate 9L0-623 trendy dumps questions?
I used to exist operating as an administrator and changed into making prepared for the 9L0-623 exam as well. Referring to detailedbooks changed into making my training tough for me. However after I cited killexams.com, i discovered out that i used to bewithout vicissitude memorizing the applicable solutions of the questions. Killexams.Com made me confident and helped me in trying 60 questions in 80 minutes without trouble. I surpassed this exam efficaciously. I pleasant proposekillexams.Com to my friends and co-workers for easy coaching. Thank you killexams.

What study manual carry out I need to pass 9L0-623 examination?
It was very encourging experience with killexams.com team. They told me to try their 9L0-623 exam questions once and forget failing the 9L0-623 exam. First I hesitated to expend the material because I afraid of failing the 9L0-623 exam. But when I told by my friends that they used the exam simulator for thier 9L0-623 certification exam, i bought the preparation pack. It was very cheap. That was the first time that I convinced to expend killexams.com preparation material when I got 100% marks in my 9L0-623 exam. I really treasure you killexams.com team.

Get proper lore and study with the 9L0-623 and Dumps!
I passed the 9L0-623 exam thanks to killexams.com, too. Good to understand Im not alone! that is a fantastic course to prepare for IT assessments. i was concerned identification fail, so I ordered this package. The checking out engine runs very smoothly, so I ought to exercise inside the examination surroundings for hours, using true exam questions and checking my solutions. As a result, I knew pretty tons the gross lot at the exam, which become the trait Christmas and novel yr present I may want to supply myself!

Is there someone who handed 9L0-623 examination?
I exceeded the 9L0-623 exam today and scored one hundred%! never concept I should carry out it, however killexams.com grew to become out to exist a gem in examination training. I had a terrific emotion approximately it because it appeared to cover gross topics, and there hold been masses of questions provided. yet, I didnt assume to descry gross of the identical questions in the actual exam. Very best marvel, and i quite insinuate using Killexams.

Just tried 9L0-623 question bank once and I am convinced.
I passed, and very delighted to report that killexams.com adhere to the claims they make. They provide true exam questions and the testing engine works perfectly. The bundle contains everything they promise, and their customer service works well (I had to fetch in handle with them since first my online payment would not Go through, but it turned out to exist my fault). Anyways, this is a very Good product, much better than I had expected. I passed 9L0-623 exam with nearly top score, something I never thought I was capable of. Thank you.

take delivery of as proper with it or no longer, simply try 9L0-623 study at questions as soon as!
Being an underneath mediocre scholar, I were given terrified of the 9L0-623 exam as subjects seemed very tough to me. butpassing the buy a study at was a need as I had to change the task badly. searched for an antiseptic manual and got one with the dumps. It helped me retort gross a yoke of benign questions in 200 mins and bypass effectively. What an exquisitequery & solutions, understanding dumps! satisfied to fetch hold of two gives from well-known organizations with handsome bundle. I advise most effectual killexams.com

Obviously it is hard assignment to pick solid certification questions/answers assets concerning review, reputation and validity since individuals fetch sham because of picking incorrectly benefit. Killexams.com ensure to serve its customers best to its assets concerning exam dumps update and validity. The vast majority of other's sham report objection customers near to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams cheerfully and effectively. They never trade off on their review, reputation and trait because killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams customer certainty is vital to us. Uniquely they deal with killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com sham report grievance, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. In the event that you descry any mistaken report posted by their rivals with the title killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com dissension or something relish this, simply remember there are constantly terrible individuals harming reputation of Good administrations because of their advantages. There are a Great many fulfilled clients that pass their exams utilizing killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams hone questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, their specimen questions and test brain dumps, their exam simulator and you will realize that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.

Vk Profile
Vk Details
Killexams Reddit
Google Album
Google About me

C2080-474 drill exam | 4A0-101 test prep | 3100-1 exam questions | CPHQ braindumps | 1Z0-860 true questions | ES0-007 drill test | ST0-155 mock exam | NS0-502 questions and answers | 000-732 exam prep | C2140-823 questions and answers | ICDL-EXCEL sample test | 10-184 bootcamp | VCS-412 dump | 000-134 brain dumps | 920-807 examcollection | HP0-S23 braindumps | 500-254 test prep | A2010-590 exam prep | HP2-N35 drill questions | 70-548-Csharp study guide |

9L0-623 exam questions | 9L0-623 free pdf | 9L0-623 pdf download | 9L0-623 test questions | 9L0-623 real questions | 9L0-623 practice questions

Here is the bests status to fetch benefit pass 9L0-623 exam?
In the event that you are intrigued by proficiently Passing the Apple 9L0-623 exam to initiate gaining, killexams.com has principle feature developed Mac OS X Deployment 10.6 exam questions with a understanding to ensure you pass this 9L0-623 exam! killexams.com offers you the greatest precise, concomitant and Popular cutting-edge 9L0-623 exam questions and to exist had with a 100% unconditional promise.

At killexams.com, they give absolutely surveyed Apple 9L0-623 exam prep which will exist the best to pass 9L0-623 exam, and to fetch certified with the benefit of 9L0-623 braindumps. It is a Great choice to quicken up your position as an expert in the Information Technology enterprise. They are thrilled with their notoriety of helping individuals pass the 9L0-623 exam of their first attempt. Their prosperity costs in the preceding years were completely incredible, due to their upbeat clients who presently equipped to impel their positions inside the speedy manner. killexams.com is the primary determination amongst IT professionals, especially the ones who are hoping to creep up the progression tiers quicker in their character associations. Apple is the commercial enterprise pioneer in facts innovation, and getting certified via them is an ensured technique to exist successful with IT positions. They allow you to carry out exactly that with their excellent Apple 9L0-623 exam prep dumps.

Apple 9L0-623 is rare gross over the globe, and the commercial enterprise and programming arrangements gave through them are being grasped by means of each one of the agencies. They hold helped in using a huge purview of corporations at the beyond any doubt shot manner of achievement. Far achieving studying of Apple objects are regarded as a censorious functionality, and the experts certified by using them are especially esteemed in gross associations.

We deliver genuine 9L0-623 pdf exam questions and answers braindumps in arrangements. Download PDF and drill Tests. Pass Apple 9L0-623 Exam swiftly and effectively. The 9L0-623 braindumps PDF benign is obtainable for perusing and printing. You can print more and more and drill mainly. Their pass rate is unreasonable to 98% and the comparability fee among their 9L0-623 syllabus prep guide and dependable exam is 90% in mild of their seven-year coaching history. carry out you want successs within the 9L0-623 exam in handiest one strive? I am positive now after analyzing for the Apple 9L0-623 true exam.

killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for gross exams on internet site
PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders extra than $ninety nine
OCTSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for gross Orders

As the simplest factor that is in any manner vital privilege here is passing the 9L0-623 - Mac OS X Deployment 10.6 exam. As gross which you require is a lofty score of Apple 9L0-623 exam. The just a unmarried aspect you need to carry out is downloading braindumps of 9L0-623 exam champion in understanding directs now. They will not let you down with their unconditional guarantee. The professionals likewise champion pace with the maximum up and coming exam with the intent to give the more a section of updated materials. One yr slack fetch privilege of entry to hold the capability to them via the date of purchase. Each applicant may additionally abide the cost of the 9L0-623 exam dumps through killexams.com at a low cost. Frequently there may exist a markdown for every body all.

If you're seeking out 9L0-623 drill Test containing true Test Questions, you are at proper place. They hold compiled database of questions from Actual Exams in order to benefit you prepare and pass your exam on the first try. gross training materials at the site are Up To Date and tested via their specialists.

killexams.com provide cutting-edge and up to date drill Test with Actual Exam Questions and Answers for brand novel syllabus of Apple 9L0-623 Exam. drill their true Questions and Answers to help your understanding and pass your exam with lofty Marks. They create positive your achievement in the Test Center, protecting gross of the subjects of exam and build your lore of the 9L0-623 exam. Pass four positive with their accurate questions.

100% Pass Guarantee

Our 9L0-623 Exam PDF includes Complete Pool of Questions and Answers and Brain dumps checked and established inclusive of references and references (wherein applicable). Their goal to collect the Questions and Answers isn't always best to pass the exam at the start strive however Really help Your lore about the 9L0-623 exam subjects.

9L0-623 exam Questions and Answers are Printable in lofty trait Study guide that you could download in your Computer or some other appliance and initiate making ready your 9L0-623 exam. Print Complete 9L0-623 Study Guide, carry with you while you are at Vacations or Traveling and delight in your Exam Prep. You can fetch privilege of entry to up to date 9L0-623 Exam out of your online account every time.

nside seeing the bona fide exam material of the brain dumps at killexams.com you could without numerous an enlarge broaden your declare to fame. For the IT specialists, it's miles fundamental to modify their capacities as showed by course of their labor need. They create it primary for their customers to hold certification exam with the assist of killexams.com confirmed and sincere to goodness exam material. For an splendid destiny in its domain, their brain dumps are the excellent choice. A nice dumps creating is a primary section that makes it straightforward for you to buy Apple certifications. In any case, 9L0-623 braindumps PDF offers settlement for applicants. The IT announcement is a needful troublesome attempt if one doesnt locate proper course as obvious aid material. Thus, they hold dependable and updated material for the arranging of certification exam. It is essential to acquire to the guide cloth in case one desires towards champion time. As you require packs of time to study for revived and dependable exam material for taking the IT certification exam. If you locate that at one location, what can exist higher than this? Its simply killexams.com that has what you require. You can store time and champion a strategic distance from hassle in case you purchase Adobe IT certification from their website online.

killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for gross tests on internet site
PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders extra than $ninety nine
OCTSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for gross Orders

Download your Mac OS X Deployment 10.6 Study guide straight away after shopping for and Start Preparing Your Exam Prep privilege Now!

9L0-623 Practice Test | 9L0-623 examcollection | 9L0-623 VCE | 9L0-623 study guide | 9L0-623 practice exam | 9L0-623 cram

Killexams NS0-202 bootcamp | Killexams C2090-619 exam questions | Killexams 9A0-382 free pdf download | Killexams 000-198 cram | Killexams 000-N05 mock exam | Killexams C4040-227 examcollection | Killexams HP2-E27 true questions | Killexams LOT-958 exam prep | Killexams C2070-981 free pdf | Killexams C9530-410 braindumps | Killexams ST0-149 dumps | Killexams MB3-210 drill test | Killexams C2150-624 test prep | Killexams 00M-620 braindumps | Killexams 000-253 drill questions | Killexams MD0-251 test prep | Killexams 648-232 braindumps | Killexams HP0-785 dumps questions | Killexams 190-622 exam prep | Killexams 1Z0-501 questions answers |

killexams.com huge List of Exam Braindumps

View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps

Killexams 70-773 free pdf | Killexams 648-232 drill test | Killexams C2090-304 free pdf | Killexams TB0-123 test prep | Killexams 70-411 exam prep | Killexams OAT braindumps | Killexams 1Z0-861 drill test | Killexams 74-343 sample test | Killexams 70-764 test prep | Killexams 000-820 pdf download | Killexams EE0-501 true questions | Killexams 920-177 braindumps | Killexams 000-M226 study guide | Killexams MB6-895 braindumps | Killexams ST0-086 true questions | Killexams C4040-120 exam questions | Killexams 1D0-525 exam prep | Killexams 400-051 VCE | Killexams GB0-360 drill questions | Killexams C4040-251 bootcamp |

Mac OS X Deployment 10.6

Pass 4 positive 9L0-623 dumps | Killexams.com 9L0-623 true questions | http://tractaricurteadearges.ro/

Siri Deployed on Mac OS X via Air impose | killexams.com true questions and Pass4sure dumps

Developer Avatron Software has released a two-piece utility that allows anyone who uses an iPhone and a Mac to deploy Siri Dictation on Mac OS X. The only ensnare is that you really need the novel iPhone 4S model which features the Siri assistant.

The benefit here is to fetch Siri Dictation working on your Mac: “Like Siri on your iPhone 4S? You'll relish it even more on your Mac,” says Avatron. “With Air Dictate, you can enter text on your computer by talking into your iPhone 4S. It's that simple.”

So, for instance, if you want to impose text into Mail, Pages, Microsoft Word, and even Apple’s own TextEdit app, gross you need is the Air impose app on your iPhone 4S and the Air impose Receiver app on your Mac. From there on, just pair the two and start talking.

The instructions provided by Avatron Software are reproduced below:

On Mac:

- Launch any app that allows text input. For example: TextEdit, Mail, Pages, Microsoft Word.

On iPhone 4S:

- Launch the Air impose app.

- pick your Mac from a list of nearby computers.

- Press the microphone button, talk for a while, and press the button again to stop.

According to the developer, speech will fetch converted into text and appear automatically in the text sphere on your Mac, just as if you had typed it using your keyboard.

To avoid any confusion (that may mount on the section of drooling iDevice owners hoping this is some benign of hack that puts Siri on their older iPhones), Air impose runs only on an iPhone 4S, and requires iOS 5.0. The app costs $0.99 (0.79 EUR).

Air impose Receiver requires a Mac running at least Mac OS X 10.6.8 (Snow Leopard) and is free to download.

Air impose is only the most recent application in Avatron Software’s portfolio, which includes such titles as Air Display, Air Sharing, and Print Sharing.

Visit the company here to check out gross their offerings, or visit the links below to fetch your dictation on privilege now.

Download Air impose for iPhone 4S

Download Air impose for Mac OS X (Free)

Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: the Ars Technica review | killexams.com true questions and Pass4sure dumps

Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: the Ars Technica review reader comments 454 Share this story
  • Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger: 150+  novel featuresMac OS X 10.4 Tiger: 150+ novel features

    In June of 2004, during the WWDC keynote address, Steve Jobs revealed Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger to developers and the public for the first time. When the finished product arrived in April of 2005, Tiger was the biggest, most important, most feature-packed release in the history of Mac OS X by a wide margin. Apple's marketing crusade reflected this, touting "over 150 novel features."

    All those novel features took time. Since its introduction in 2001, there had been at least one major release of Mac OS X each year. Tiger took over a year and a half to arrive. At the time, it definitely seemed worth the wait. Tiger was a hit with users and developers. Apple took the lesson to heart and quickly set expectations for the next major release of Mac OS X, Leopard. Through various channels, Apple communicated its intent to creep from a 12-month to an 18-month release cycle for Mac OS X. Leopard was officially scheduled for "spring 2007."

    As the date approached, Apple's marketing machine trod a predictable path.

    Steve Jobs at WWDC 2007, touting 300  novel features in Mac OS X 10.5 LeopardSteve Jobs at WWDC 2007, touting 300 novel features in Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard

    Apple even went so far as to list gross 300 novel features on its website. As it turns out, "spring" was a bit optimistic. Leopard actually shipped at the conclude of October 2007, nearly two and a half years after Tiger. Did Leopard really hold twice as many novel features as Tiger? That's debatable. What's certain is that Leopard included a solid crop of novel features and technologies, many of which they now buy for granted. (For example, hold you had a discussion with a potential Mac user since the release of Leopard without mentioning Time Machine? I certainly haven't.)

    Mac OS X appeared to exist maturing. The progression was clear: longer release cycles, more features. What would Mac OS X 10.6 exist like? Would it arrive three and a half years after Leopard? Would it and involve 500 novel features? A thousand?

    At WWDC 2009, Bertrand Serlet announced a creep that he described as "unprecedented" in the PC industry.

    Mac OS X 10.6 - Read Bertrand's lips: No  novel Features!Mac OS X 10.6 - Read Bertrand's lips: No novel Features!

    That's right, the next major release of Mac OS X would hold no novel features. The product title reflected this: "Snow Leopard." Mac OS X 10.6 would merely exist a variant of Leopard. Better, faster, more refined, more... uh... snowy.

    This was a risky strategy for Apple. After the rapid-fire updates of 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3 followed by the riot of novel features and APIs in 10.4 and 10.5, could Apple really fetch away with calling a "time out?" I imagine Bertrand was really sweating this announcement up on the stage at WWDC in front of a live audience of Mac developers. Their reaction? impulsive applause. There were even a few hoots and whistles.

    Many of these identical developers applauded the "150+ novel features" in Tiger and the "300 novel features" in Leopard at past WWDCs. Now they were applauding zero novel features for Snow Leopard? What explains this?

    It probably helps to know that the "0 novel Features" coast came at the conclude of an hour-long presentation detailing the major novel APIs and technologies in Snow Leopard. It was moreover quickly followed by a back-pedaling ("well, there is one novel feature...") coast describing the addition of Microsoft Exchange support. In isolation, "no novel features" may seem to imply stagnation. In context, however, it served as a developer-friendly affirmation.

    The overall message from Apple to developers was something relish this: "We're adding a ton of novel things to Mac OS X that will benefit you write better applications and create your existing code hasten faster, and we're going to create positive that gross this novel stuff is rock-solid and as bug-free as possible. We're not going to overextend ourselves adding a raft of novel customer-facing, marketing-friendly features. Instead, we're going to concentrate 100% on the things that influence you, the developers."

    But if Snow Leopard is a admire note to developers, is it a Dear John note to users? You know, those people that the marketing department might so crudely advert to as "customers." What's in it for them? Believe it or not, the sales pitch to users is actually quite similar. As exhausting as it has been for developers to champion up with Apple's seemingly never-ending stream of novel APIs, it can exist just as taxing for customers to sojourn on top of Mac OS X's features. Exposé, a novel Finder, Spotlight, a novel Dock, Time Machine, a novel Finder again, a novel iLife and iWork almost every year, and on and on. And as much as developers Hate bugs in Apple's APIs, users who experience those bugs as application crashes hold just as much understanding to exist annoyed.

    Enter Snow Leopard: the release where they gross fetch a crash from the new-features/new-bugs treadmill of Mac OS X development. That's the pitch.

    Uncomfortable realities

    But wait a second, didn't I just mention an "hour-long presentation" about Snow Leopard featuring "major novel APIs and technologies?" When speaking to developers, Apple's message of "no novel features" is another course of motto "no novel bugs." Snow Leopard is suppositious to fix obsolete bugs without introducing novel ones. But nothing says "new bugs, coming privilege up" quite relish major novel APIs. So which is it?

    Similarly, for users, "no novel features" connotes stability and reliability. But if Snow Leopard includes enough changes to the core OS to fill an hour-long overview session at WWDC more than a year before its release, can Apple really create Good on this promise? Or will users conclude up with gross the disadvantages of a feature-packed release relish Tiger or Leopard—the inevitable 10.x.0 bugs, the unfamiliar, untried novel functionality—but without any of the actual novel features?

    Yes, it's enough to create one quite cynical about Apple's true motivations. To pitch some more fuel on the fire, hold a study at the Mac OS X release timeline below. Next to each release, I've included a list of its most significant features.

    Mac OS X release timelineMac OS X release timeline

    That curve is taking on a decidedly droopy shape, as if it's being weighed down by the ever-increasing number of novel features. (The releases are distributed uniformly on the Y axis.) Maybe you reflect it's reasonable for the time between releases to stretch out as each one brings a heavier load of goodies than the last, but champion in understanding the analytic consequence of such a curve over the longhorn haul.

    And yeah, there's a cramped upwards kick at the conclude for 10.6, but remember, this is suppositious to exist the "no novel features" release. Version 10.1 had a similar no-frills focus but took a heck of a lot less time to arrive.

    Looking at this graph, it's hard not to prodigy if there's something siphoning resources from the Mac OS X evolution effort. Maybe, say, some project that's in the first two or three major releases of its life, quiet in that steep, early section of its own timeline graph. Yes, I'm talking about the iPhone, specifically iPhone OS. The iPhone commerce has exploded onto Apple's poise sheets relish no other product before, even the iPod. It's moreover accruing developers at an alarming rate.

    It's not a stretch to imagine that many of the artists and developers who piled on the user-visible features in Mac OS X 10.4 and 10.5 hold been reassigned to iPhone OS (temporarily or otherwise). After all, Mac OS X and iPhone OS participate the identical core operating system, the identical language for GUI development, and many of the identical APIs. Some workforce migration seems inevitable.

    And let's not forget the "Mac OS X" technologies that they later learned were developed for the iPhone and just happened to exist announced for the Mac first (because the iPhone was quiet a secret), relish Core Animation and code signing. Such intrigue theories certainly aren't helped by WWDC keynote snubs and other indignities suffered by Mac OS X and the Mac in common since the iPhone arrived on the scene. And so, on top of everything else, Snow Leopard is tasked with restoring some luster to Mac OS X.

    Got gross that? A nearly two-year evolution cycle, but no novel features. Major novel frameworks for developers, but few novel bugs. Significant changes to the core OS, but more reliability. And a franchise rejuvenation with few user-visible changes.

    It's enough to spin a leopard white.

    The charge of entry

    Snow Leopard's opening overture to consumers is its price: $29 for those upgrading from Leopard. The debut release of Mac OS X 10.0 and the eventual four major releases hold gross been $129, with no special pricing for upgrades. After eight years of this benign of fiscal disciplining, Leopard users may well exist tempted to halt reading privilege now and just Go pick up a copy. Snow Leopard's upgrade charge is well under the impulse purchase threshold for many people. Twenty-nine dollars plus some minimal flush of faith in Apple's talent to help the OS with each release, and boom, instant purchase.

    Still here? Good, because there's something else you need to know about Snow Leopard. It's an overture of a different sort, less of a come-on and more of a spur. Snow Leopard will only hasten on Macs with Intel CPUs. Sorry (again), PowerPC fans, but this is the conclude of the line for you. The transition to Intel was announced over four years ago, and the eventual novel PowerPC Mac was released in October 2005. It's time.

    But if Snow Leopard is meant to prod the PowerPC holdouts into the Intel age, its "no novel features" stance (and the accompanying want of added visual flair) is working against it. For those running Leopard on a PowerPC-based Mac, there's precious cramped in Snow Leopard to benefit shove them over the (likely) four-digit charge wall of a novel Mac. For PowerPC Mac owners, the threshold for a novel Mac purchase remains mostly unchanged. When their obsolete Mac breaks or seems too slow, they'll Go out and buy a novel one, and it'll near with Snow Leopard pre-installed.

    If Snow Leopard does conclude up motivating novel Mac purchases by PowerPC owners, it will probably exist the result of resignation rather than inspiration. An Intel-only Snow Leopard is most significant for what it isn't: a further extension of PowerPC life champion on the Mac platform.

    The final attractive group is owners of Intel-based Macs that are quiet running Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger. Apple shipped Intel Macs with Tiger installed for a cramped over one year and nine months. Owners of these machines who never upgraded to Leopard are not eligible for the $29 upgrade to Snow Leopard. They're moreover apparently not eligible to purchase Snow Leopard for the traditional $129 price. Here's what Apple has to exclaim about Snow Leopard's pricing (emphasis added).

    Mac OS X version 10.6 Snow Leopard will exist available as an upgrade to Mac OS X version 10.5 Leopard in September 2009 [...] The Snow Leopard solitary user license will exist available for a suggested retail charge of $29 (US) and the Snow Leopard Family Pack, a solitary household, five-user license, will exist available for a suggested charge of $49 (US). For Tiger® users with an Intel-based Mac, the Mac Box Set includes Mac OS X Snow Leopard, iLife® '09 and iWork® '09 and will exist available for a suggested charge of $169 (US) and a Family Pack is available for a suggested charge of $229 (US).

    Ignoring the family packs for a moment, this means that Snow Leopard will either exist free with your novel Mac, $29 if you're already running Leopard, or $169 if you hold an Intel Mac running Tiger. People upgrading from Tiger will fetch the latest version of iLife and iWork in the condense (if that's the preempt term), whether they want them or not. It positive seems relish there's an obvious status in this lineup for a $129 offering of Snow Leopard on its own. Then again, perhaps it gross comes down to how, exactly, Apple enforces the $29 Snow Leopard upgrade policy.

    (As an aside to non-Mac users, note that the non-server version of Mac OS X has no per-user serial number and no activation scheme of any kind, and never has. "Registration" with Apple during the Mac OS X install process is entirely optional and is only used to collect demographic information. Failing to register (or entering entirely bogus registration information) has no effect on your talent to hasten the OS. This is considered a genuine handicap of Mac OS X, but it moreover means that Apple has no trustworthy record of who, exactly, is a "legitimate" owner of Leopard.)

    One possibility was that the $29 Snow Leopard upgrade DVD would only install on top of an existing installation of Leopard. Apple has done this sort of thing before, and it bypasses any proof-of-purchase annoyances. It would, however, interpose a novel problem. In the event of a hard drive failure or simple determination to reinstall from scratch, owners of the $29 Snow Leopard upgrade would exist forced to first install Leopard and then install Snow Leopard on top of it, perhaps more than doubling the installation time—and quintupling the annoyance.

    Given Apple's history in this area, no one should hold been surprised to find out that Apple chose the much simpler option: the $29 "upgrade" DVD of Snow Leopard will, in fact, install on any supported Mac, whether or not it has Leopard installed. It will even install onto an entirely barren hard drive.

    To exist clear, installing the $29 upgrade to Snow Leopard on a system not already running a properly licensed copy of Leopard is a violation of the end-user license agreement that comes with the product. But Apple's determination is a refreshing change: rewarding honest people with a hassle-free product rather than trying to correct deceitful people by treating everyone relish a criminal. This "honor system" upgrade enforcement policy partially explains the tall jump to $169 for the Mac Box Set, which ends up re-framed as an honest person's course to fetch iLife and iWork at their accustomed prices, plus Snow Leopard for $11 more.

    And yes, speaking of installing, let's finally fetch on with it.


    Apple claims that Snow Leopard's installation process is "up to 45% faster." Installation times vary wildly depending on the speed, contents, and fragmentation of the target disk, the quicken of the optical drive, and so on. Installation moreover only happens once, and it's not really an attractive process unless something goes terribly wrong. Still, if Apple's going to create such a claim, it's worth checking out.

    To purge as many variables as possible, I installed both Leopard and Snow Leopard from one hard disk onto another (empty) one. It should exist renowned that this change negates some of Snow Leopard's most needful installation optimizations, which are focused on reducing random data access from the optical disc.

    Even with this disadvantage, the Snow Leopard installation took about 20% less time than the Leopard installation. That's well short of Apple's "up to 45%" claim, but descry above (and don't forget the "up to" weasel words). Both versions installed in less than 30 minutes.

    What is striking about Snow Leopard's installation is how quickly the initial Spotlight indexing process completed. Here, Snow Leopard was 74% faster in my testing. Again, the times are tiny (5:49 vs. 3:20) and again, novel installations on barren disks are not the norm. But the shorter wait for Spotlight indexing is worth noting because it's the first indication most users will fetch that Snow Leopard means commerce when it comes to performance.

    Another notable thing about installation is what's not installed by default: Rosetta, the facility that allows PowerPC binaries to hasten on Intel Macs. Okay Apple, they fetch it. PowerPC is a stiff, bereft of life. It rests in peace. It's rung down the curtain and joined the choir invisible. As far as Apple is concerned, PowerPC is an ex-ISA.

    But not installing Rosetta by default? That seems a cramped harsh, even foolhardy. What's going to betide when gross those users upgrade to Snow Leopard and then double-click what they've probably long since forgotten is a PowerPC application? Perhaps surprisingly, this is what happens:

    Rosetta: auto-installed for your convenienceRosetta: auto-installed for your convenience

    That's what I saw when I tried to launch Disk Inventory X on Snow Leopard, an application that, yes, I had long since forgotten was PowerPC-only. After I clicked the "Install" button, I actually expected to exist prompted to insert the installer DVD. Instead, Snow Leopard reached out over the network, pulled down Rosetta from an Apple server, and installed it.

    Rosetta auto-install

    No reboot was required, and Disk Inventory X launched successfully after the Rosetta installation completed. Mac OS X has not historically made much expend of the install-on-demand approach to system software components, but the facility used to install Rosetta appears quite robust. Upon clicking "Install," an XML property list containing a vast catalog of available Mac OS X packages was downloaded. Snow Leopard uses the identical facility to download and install printer drivers on demand, saving another trip to the installer DVD. I hope this technique gains even wider expend in the future.

    Installation footprint

    Rosetta aside, Snow Leopard simply puts fewer bits on your disk. Apple claims it "takes up less than half the disk space of the previous version," and that's no lie. A clean, default install (including fully-generated Spotlight indexes) is 16.8 GB for Leopard and 5.9 GB for Snow Leopard. (Incidentally, these numbers are both powers-of-two measurements; descry sidebar.)

    A gigabyte by any other name

    Snow Leopard has another trick up its sleeve when it comes to disk usage. The Snow Leopard Finder considers 1 GB to exist equal to 109 (1,000,000,000) bytes, whereas the Leopard Finder—and, it should exist noted, every version of the Finder before it—equates 1 GB to 230 (1,073,741,824) bytes. This has the effect of making your hard disk suddenly appear larger after installing Snow Leopard. For example, my "1 TB" hard drive shows up in the Leopard Finder as having a capacity of 931.19 GB. In Snow Leopard, it's 999.86 GB. As you might hold guessed, hard disk manufacturers expend the powers-of-ten system. It's gross quite a mess, really. Though I near down pretty firmly on the powers-of-two side of the fence, I can't weakness Apple too much for wanting to match up nicely with the long-established (but quiet dumb, understanding you) hard disk vendors' capacity measurement standard.

    Snow Leopard has several weight loss secrets. The first is obvious: no PowerPC champion means no PowerPC code in executables. Recall the maximum possible binary payload in a Leopard executable: 32-bit PowerPC, 64-bit PowerPC, x86, and x86_64. Now cross half of those architectures off the list. Granted, very few applications in Leopard included 64-bit code of any kind, but it's a 50% reduction in size for executables no matter how you slice it.

    Of course, not gross the files in the operating system are executables. There are data files, images, audio files, even a cramped video. But most of those non-executable files hold one thing in common: they're usually stored in compressed file formats. Images are PNGs or JPEGs, audio is AAC, video is MPEG-4, even preference files and other property lists now default to a compact binary format rather than XML.

    In Snow Leopard, other kinds of files climb on board the compression bandwagon. To give just one example, ninety-seven percent of the executable files in Snow Leopard are compressed. How compressed? Let's look:

    % cd Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS % ls -l Mail -rwxr-xr-x@ 1 root wheel 0 Jun 18 19:35 Mail

    Boy, that's, uh, pretty small, huh? Is this really an executable or what? Let's check their assumptions.

    % file Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail: empty

    Yikes! What's going on here? Well, what I didn't disclose you is that the commands shown above were hasten from a Leopard system looking at a Snow Leopard disk. In fact, gross compressed Snow Leopard files appear to hold zero bytes when viewed from a pre-Snow Leopard version of Mac OS X. (They study and act perfectly established when booted into Snow Leopard, of course.)

    So, where's the data? The cramped "@" at the conclude of the permissions string in the ls output above (a feature introduced in Leopard) provides a clue. Though the Mail executable has a zero file size, it does hold some extended attributes:

    % xattr -l Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail com.apple.ResourceFork: 0000 00 00 01 00 00 2C F5 F2 00 2C F4 F2 00 00 00 32 .....,...,.....2 0010 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ (184,159 lines snipped) 2CF610 63 6D 70 66 00 00 00 0A 00 01 FF FF 00 00 00 00 cmpf............ 2CF620 00 00 00 00 .... com.apple.decmpfs: 0000 66 70 6D 63 04 00 00 00 A0 82 72 00 00 00 00 00 fpmc......r.....

    Ah, there's gross the data. But wait, it's in the resource fork? Weren't those deprecated about eight years ago? Indeed they were. What you're witnessing here is yet another addition to Apple's favorite file system hobbyhorse, HFS+.

    At the dawn of Mac OS X, Apple added journaling, symbolic links, and hard links. In Tiger, extended attributes and access control lists were incorporated. In Leopard, HFS+ gained champion for hard links to directories. In Snow Leopard, HFS+ learns another novel trick: per-file compression.

    The presence of the com.apple.decmpfs attribute is the first hint that this file is compressed. This attribute is actually hidden from the xattr command when booted into Snow Leopard. But from a Leopard system, which has no lore of its special significance, it shows up as unostentatious as day.

    Even more information is revealed with the benefit of Mac OS X Internals guru Amit Singh's hfsdebug program, which has quietly been updated for Snow Leopard.

    % hfsdebug /Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail ... compression magic = cmpf compression sort = 4 (resource fork has compressed data) uncompressed size = 7500336 bytes

    And positive enough, as they saw, the resource fork does indeed hold the compressed data. Still, why the resource fork? It's gross section of Apple's usual, sagacious backward-compatibility gymnastics. A recent sample is the course that hard links to directories demonstrate up—and function—as aliases when viewed from a pre-Leopard version of Mac OS X.

    In the case of a HFS+ compression, Apple was (understandably) unable to create pre-Snow Leopard systems read and interpret the compressed data, which is stored in ways that did not exist at the time those earlier operating systems were written. But rather than letting applications (and users) running on pre-10.6 systems choke on—or worse, pervert through modification—the unexpectedly compressed file contents, Apple has chosen to cover the compressed data instead.

    And where can the complete contents of a potentially big file exist hidden in such a course that pre-Snow Leopard systems can quiet copy that file without the loss of data? Why, in the resource fork, of course. The Finder has always correctly preserved Mac-specific metadata and both the resource and data forks when stirring or duplicating files. In Leopard, even the lowly cp and rsync commands will carry out the same. So while it may exist a cramped bit spooky to descry gross those "empty" 0 KB files when looking at a Snow Leopard disk from a pre-Snow Leopard OS, the desultory of data loss is small, even if you creep or copy one of the files.

    The resource fork isn't the only status where Apple has decided to smuggle compressed data. For smaller files, hfsdebug shows the following:

    % hfsdebug /etc/asl.conf ... compression magic = cmpf compression sort = 3 (xattr has compressed data) uncompressed size = 860 bytes

    Here, the data is tiny enough to exist stored entirely within an extended attribute, albeit in compressed form. And then, the final frontier:

    % hfsdebug /Volumes/Snow Time/Applications/Mail.app/Contents/PkgInfo ... compression magic = cmpf compression sort = 3 (xattr has inline data) uncompressed size = 8 bytes

    That's right, an entire file's contents stored uncompressed in an extended attribute. In the case of a standard PkgInfo file relish this one, those contents are the four-byte classic Mac OS sort and creator codes.

    % xattr -l Applications/Mail.app/Contents/PkgInfo com.apple.decmpfs: 0000 66 70 6D 63 03 00 00 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 fpmc............ 0010 FF 41 50 50 4C 65 6D 61 6C .APPLemal

    There's quiet the identical "fpmc..." preamble seen in gross the earlier examples of the com.apple.decmpfs attribute, but at the conclude of the value, the expected data appears as unostentatious as day: sort code "APPL" (application) and creator code "emal" (for the Mail application—cute, as per classic Mac OS tradition).

    You may exist wondering, if this is gross about data compression, how does storing eight uncompressed bytes plus a 17-byte preamble in an extended attribute redeem any disk space? The retort to that lies in how HFS+ allocates disk space. When storing information in a data or resource fork, HFS+ allocates space in multiples of the file system's allocation block size (4 KB, by default). So those eight bytes will buy up a minimum of 4,096 bytes if stored in the traditional way. When allocating disk space for extended attributes, however, the allocation block size is not a factor; the data is packed in much more tightly. In the end, the actual space saved by storing those 25 bytes of data in an extended attribute is over 4,000 bytes.

    But compression isn't just about saving disk space. It's moreover a classic sample of trading CPU cycles for decreased I/O latency and bandwidth. Over the past few decades, CPU performance has gotten better (and computing resources more plentiful—more on that later) at a much faster rate than disk performance has increased. Modern hard disk seek times and rotational delays are quiet measured in milliseconds. In one millisecond, a 2 GHz CPU goes through two million cycles. And then, of course, there's quiet the actual data transfer time to consider.

    Granted, several levels of caching throughout the OS and hardware labor mightily to cover these delays. But those bits hold to near off the disk at some point to fill those caches. Compression means that fewer bits hold to exist transferred. Given the almost comical glut of CPU resources on a modern multi-core Mac under established use, the total time needed to transfer a compressed payload from the disk and expend the CPU to decompress its contents into reminiscence will quiet usually exist far less than the time it'd buy to transfer the data in uncompressed form.

    That explains the potential performance benefits of transferring less data, but the expend of extended attributes to store file contents can actually create things faster, as well. It gross has to carry out with data locality.

    If there's one thing that slows down a hard disk more than transferring a big amount of data, it's stirring its heads from one section of the disk to another. Every creep means time for the head to start moving, then stop, then ensure that it's correctly positioned over the desired location, then wait for the spinning disk to redeem the desired bits beneath it. These are gross real, physical, stirring parts, and it's wonderful that they carry out their dance as quickly and efficiently as they do, but physics has its limits. These motions are the true performance killers for rotational storage relish hard disks.

    The HFS+ volume format stores gross its information about files—metadata—in two primary locations on disk: the Catalog File, which stores file dates, permissions, ownership, and a host of other things, and the Attributes File, which stores "named forks."

    Extended attributes in HFS+ are implemented as named forks in the Attributes File. But unlike resource forks, which can exist very big (up to the maximum file size supported by the file system), extended attributes in HFS+ are stored "inline" in the Attributes File. In practice, this means a limit of about 128 bytes per attribute. But it moreover means that the disk head doesn't need to buy a trip to another section of the disk to fetch the actual data.

    As you can imagine, the disk blocks that create up the Catalog and Attributes files are frequently accessed, and therefore more likely than most to exist in a cache somewhere. gross of this conspires to create the complete storage of a file, including both its metadata in its data, within the B-tree-structured Catalog and Attributes files an overall performance win. Even an eight-byte payload that balloons to 25 bytes is not a concern, as long as it's quiet less than the allocation block size for established data storage, and as long as it gross fits within a B-tree node in the Attributes File that the OS has to read in its entirety anyway.

    There are other significant contributions to Snow Leopard's reduced disk footprint (e.g., the removal of unnecessary localizations and "designable.nib" files) but HFS+ compression is by far the most technically interesting.

    Installer intelligence

    Apple makes two other attractive promises about the installation process:

    Snow Leopard checks your applications to create positive they're compatible and sets aside any programs known to exist incompatible. In case a power outage interrupts your installation, it can start again without losing any data.

    The setting aside of "known incompatible" applications is undoubtedly a response to the "blue screen" problems some users encountered when upgrading from Tiger to Leopard two years ago, which was caused by the presence of incompatible—and some would exclaim "illicit"—third-party system extensions. I hold a decidedly pragmatic view of such software, and I'm joyous to descry Apple taking a similarly practical approach to minimizing its impact on users.

    Apple can't exist expected to detect and disable gross potentially incompatible software, of course. I suspect only the most Popular or highest profile risky software is detected. If you're a developer, this installer feature may exist a Good course to find out if you're on Apple's sh*t list.

    As for continuing an installation after a power failure, I didn't hold the guts to test this feature. (I moreover hold a UPS.) For long-running processes relish installation, this benign of added robustness is welcome, especially on battery-powered devices relish laptops.

    I mention these two details of the installation process mostly because they highlight the kinds of things that are possible when developers at Apple are given time to polish their respective components of the OS. You might reflect that the installer team would exist hard-pressed to near up with enough to carry out during a nearly two-year evolution cycle. That's clearly not the case, and customers will gather the benefits.

    Snow Leopard's novel looks

    I've long yearned for Apple to create a antiseptic break, at least visually, from Mac OS X's Aqua past. Alas, I will exist waiting a bit longer, because Snow Leopard ushers in no such revolution. And yet here I am, beneath a familiar-looking section heading that seems to betoken otherwise. The truth is, Snow Leopard actually changes the appearance of nearly every pixel on your screen—but not in the course you might imagine.

    Since the dawn of color on the Macintosh, the operating system has used a default output gamma correction value of 1.8. Meanwhile, Windows—aka the ease of the world—has used a value of 2.2. Though this may not seem significant to anyone but professional graphics artists, the disagreement is usually evident to even a casual observer when viewing the identical image on both kinds of displays side by side.

    Though Mac users will probably instinctively prefer the 1.8 gamma image that they're used to, Apple has decided that this historical disagreement is more pains than it's worth. The default output gamma correction value in Snow Leopard is now 2.2, just relish everyone else. Done and done.

    If they notice at all, users will likely experience this change as a emotion that the Snow Leopard user interface has a bit more contrast than Leopard's. This is reinforced by the novel default desktop background, a re-drawn, more saturated version of Leopard's default desktop. (Note that these are two entirely different images and not an attempt to demonstrate the effects of different gamma correction settings.)

    LeopardLeopard Snow LeopardSnow Leopard Dock Exposé spotlight effectDock Exposé spotlight effect

    But even beyond color correction, dependable to form, Apple could not resist adding a few graphical tweaks to the Snow Leopard interface. The most evident changes are related to the Dock. First, there's the novel "spotlight" study triggered by a click-and-hold on an application icon in the Dock. (This activates Exposé, but only for the windows belonging to the application that was clicked. More later.)

    Furthermore, any and gross pop-up menus on the Dock—and only on the Dock—have a unique study in Snow Leopard, complete with a custom selection appearance (which, for a change, does a passable job of matching the system-wide selection appearance setting).

    New Dock menu appearance. Mmmm… arbitrary.New Dock menu appearance. Mmmm… arbitrary.

    For Mac users of a certain age, these menus may bring to understanding Apple's Hi-Tech appearance theme from the bad-old days of Copland. They're actually considerably more subtle, however. Note the translucent edges which accentuate the rounded corners. The gradient on the selection highlight is moreover admirably restrained.

    Nevertheless, this is an entirely novel study for a solitary (albeit commonly used) application, and it does clash a bit with the default "slanty, shiny shelf" appearance of the Dock. But I've already had my exclaim about that, and more. If the oath of Snow Leopard's appearance was to "first, carry out no harm," then I reflect I'm inclined to give it a passing grade—almost.

    If I had to characterize what's wrong with Snow Leopard's visual additions with just two words, it'd exist these: everything fades. Apple has sprinkled Core Animation fairy dust over seemingly every application in Snow Leopard. If any section of the user interface appears, disappears, or changes in any significant way, it's accompanied by an animation and one or more fades.

    In moderation, such effects are fine. But in several instances, Snow Leopard crosses the line. Or rather, it crosses my line, which, it should exist noted, is located far inside the territories of Candy Land. Others with a much lower tolerance for animations who are already galled by the frippery in Leopard and earlier releases will find cramped to admire in Snow Leopard's visual changes.

    The one that really drove me over the edge is the fussy cramped dance of the filename district that occurs in the Finder (surprise!) when renaming a file on the desktop. There's just something about so many cross-fades, color changes, and text offsets occurring so rapidly and concentrated into such a tiny district that makes me want to scream. And whether or not I'm actually waiting for these animations to finish before I can continue to expend my computer, it certainly feels that course sometimes.

    Still, I must unenthusiastically predict that most established people (i.e., the ones who will not read this entire article) will either find these added visual touches delightful, or (much more likely) not notice them at all.


    Animation aside, the visual sameness of Snow Leopard presents a bit of a marketing challenge for Apple. Even beyond the obvious problem of how to promote an operating system upgrade with "no novel features" to consumers, there's the issue of how to fetch people to notice that this novel product exists at all.

    In the run-up to Snow Leopard's release, Apple stuck to a modified version of Leopard's outer space theme. It was in the keynote slideshows, on the WWDC banners, on the developer release DVDs, and gross over the Mac OS X section of Apple's website. The header image from Apple's Mac OS X webpage as of a week before Snow Leopard's release appears below. It's pretty sever and dried: outer space, stars, affluent purple nebula, lens flare.

    Snow. The final frontier.Snow. The final frontier.

    Then came the golden master of Snow Leopard, which, in a pleasant change from past releases, was distributed to developers a few weeks before Snow Leopard hit the shelves. Its installer introduced an entirely different study which, as it turns out, was carried over to the retail packaging. For a change, let's line up the discs instead of the packaging (which is rapidly shrinking to barely enclose the disc anyway). Here's Mac OS X 10.0 through 10.6, top to bottom and left to right. (The 10.0 and 10.1 discs looked essentially identical and hold been coalesced.)

    One of these things is not  relish the others…One of these things is not relish the others…

    Yep, it's a snow leopard. With actual snow on it. It's a bit on the nose for my taste, but it's not without its charms. And it does hold one tall thing going for it: it's immediately recognizable as something novel and different. "Unmistakable" is how I'd sum up the packaging. Eight years of the giant, centered, variously adorned "X" and then boom: a cat. There's cramped desultory that anyone who's seen Leopard sitting on the shelf of their local Apple store for the past two years will fail to notice that this is a novel product.

    (If you'd relish your own picture of Snowy the snow leopard (that's right, I've named him), Apple was benign enough to involve a desktop background image with the OS. Self-loathing Windows users may download it directly.)

    Warning: internals ahead

    We've arrived at the start of the customary "internals" section. Snow Leopard is gross about internal changes, and this is reflected in the content of this review. If you're only interested in the user-visible changes, you can skip ahead, but you'll exist missing out on the meat of this review and the heart of Apple's novel OS.

    64-bit: the road leads ever on

    Mac OS X started its journey to 64-bit back in 2003 with the release of Panther, which included the bare minimum champion for the then-new PowerPC G5 64-bit CPU. In 2005, Tiger brought with it the talent to create dependable 64-bit processes—as long as they didn't link with any of the GUI libraries. Finally, Leopard in 2007 included champion for 64-bit GUI applications. But again, there was a caveat: 64-bit champion extended to Cocoa applications only. It was, effectively, the conclude of the road for Carbon.

    Despite Leopard's seemingly impressive 64-bit bona fides, there are a few more steps before Mac OS X can compass complete 64-bit nirvana. The diagrams below illustrate.

    64-bit in Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger 64-bit in Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 64-bit in Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard

    As we'll see, gross that yellow in the Snow Leopard diagram represents its capability, not necessarily its default mode of operation.


    Snow Leopard is the first version of Mac OS X to ship with a 64-bit kernel ("K64" in Apple's parlance), but it's not enabled by default on most systems. The understanding for this this is simple. Recall that there's no "mixed mode" in Mac OS X. At runtime, a process is either 32-bit or 64-bit, and can only load other code—libraries, plug-ins, etc.—of the identical kind.

    An needful class of plug-ins loaded by the kernel is device drivers. Were Snow Leopard to default to the 64-bit kernel, only 64-bit device drivers would load. And seeing as Snow Leopard is the first version of Mac OS X to involve a 64-bit kernel, there'd exist precious few of those on customers' systems on launch day.

    And so, by default, Snow Leopard boots with a 64-bit kernel only on Xserves from 2008 or later. I guess the assumption is that gross of the devices commonly attached to an Xserve will exist supported by 64-bit drivers supplied by Apple in Snow Leopard itself.

    Perhaps surprisingly, not gross Macs with 64-bit processors are even able to boot into the 64-bit kernel. Though this may change in subsequent point releases of Snow Leopard, the table below lists gross the Macs that are either capable of or default to booting K64. (To find the "Model name" of your Mac, select "About This Mac" from the Apple menu, then click the "More info…" button and read the "Model Identifier" line in the window that appears.)

    Product Model name K64 status Early 2008 Mac Pro MacPro3,1 Capable Early 2008 Xserve Xserve2,1 Default MacBook Pro 15"/17" MacBookPro4,1 Capable iMac iMac8,1 Capable UniBody MacBook Pro 15" MacBookPro5,1 Capable UniBody MacBook Pro 17" MacBookPro5,2 Capable Mac Pro MacPro4,1 Capable iMac iMac9,1 Capable Early 2009 Xserve Xserve3,1 Default

    For gross K64-capable Macs, boot while holding down "6" and "4" keys simultaneously to select the 64-bit kernel. For a more permanent solution, expend the nvram command to add arch=x86_64 to your boot-args string, or edit the file /Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/com.apple.Boot.plist and add arch=x86_64 to the Kernel Flags string:

    ... <key>Kernel</key> <string>mach_kernel</string> <key>Kernel Flags</key> <string>arch=x86_64</string> ...

    To switch back to the 32-bit kernel, hold down the "3" and "2" keys during boot, or expend one of the techniques above, replacing "x86_64" with "i386".

    We've already discussed why, at least initially, you probably won't want to boot into K64. But as Snow Leopard adoption ramps up and 64-bit updates of existing kernel extensions become available, why might you actually want to expend the 64-bit kernel?

    The first understanding has to carry out with RAM, and not in the course you might think. Though Leopard uses a 32-bit kernel, Macs running Leopard can hold and expend far more RAM than the 4 GB limit the "32-bit" qualifier might seem to imply. But as RAM sizes increase, there's another concern: address space depletion—not for applications, but for the kernel itself.

    As a 32-bit process, the kernel itself is limited to a 32-bit (i.e., 4GB) address space. That may not seem relish a problem; after all, should the kernel really need more than 4GB of reminiscence to carry out its job? But remember that section of the kernel's job is to track and manage system memory. The kernel uses a 64-byte structure to track the status of each 4KB page of RAM used on the system.

    That's 64 bytes, not kilobytes. It hardly seems relish a lot. But now reckon a Mac in the not-too-distant future containing 96GB of RAM. (If this sounds ridiculous to you, reflect of how ridiculous the 8GB of RAM in the Mac I'm typing on privilege now would hold sounded to you five years ago.) Tracking 96GB of RAM requires 1.5GB of kernel address space. Using more than a third of the kernel's address space just to track reminiscence is a pretty uncomfortable situation.

    A 64-bit kernel, on the other hand, has a virtually unlimited kernel address space (16 exabytes). K64 is an inevitable necessity, given the rapidly increasing size of system memory. Though you may not need it today on the desktop, it's already common for servers to hold double-digit gigabytes of RAM installed.

    The other thing K64 has going for it is speed. The x86 instruction set architecture has had a bit of a tortured history. When designing the x86-64 64-bit extension of the x86 architecture, AMD took the opening to leave behind some of the ugliness of the past and involve more modern features: more registers, novel addressing modes, non-stack-based floating point capabilities, etc. K64 reaps these benefits. Apple makes the following claims about its performance:

  • 250% faster system convoke entry point
  • 70% faster user/kernel reminiscence copy
  • Focused benchmarking would abide these out, I'm sure. But in daily use, you're unlikely to exist able to attribute any particular performance boost to the kernel. reflect of K64 as removing bottlenecks from the few (usually server-based) applications that actually carry out exercise these aspects of the kernel heavily.

    If it makes you feel better to know that your kernel is operating more efficiently, and that, were you to actually hold 96GB of RAM installed, you would not risk starving the kernel of address space, and if you don't hold any 32-bit drivers that you absolutely need to use, then by gross means, boot into the 64-bit kernel.

    For everyone else, my counsel is to exist joyous that K64 will exist ready and waiting for you when you eventually carry out need it—and tickle carry out cheer gross the vendors that create kernel extensions that you charge about to add K64 champion as soon as possible.

    Finally, this is worth repeating: tickle champion in understanding that you carry out not need to hasten the 64-bit kernel in order to hasten 64-bit applications or install more than 4GB of RAM in your Mac. Applications hasten just fine in 64-bit mode on top of the 32-bit kernel, and even in earlier versions of Mac OS X it's been possible to install and buy handicap of much more than 4GB of RAM.

    64-bit applications

    While Leopard may hold brought with it champion for 64-bit GUI applications, it actually included very few of them. In fact, by my count, only two 64-bit GUI applications shipped with Leopard: Xcode (an optional install) and Chess. And though Leopard made it possible for third-party developers to produce 64-bit (albeit Leopard-only) GUI applications, very few have—sometimes due to unlucky realities, but most often because there's been no Good understanding to carry out so, abandoning users of Mac OS X 10.4 or earlier in the process.

    Apple is now pushing the 64-bit transition much harder. This starts with leading by example. Snow Leopard ships with four end-user GUI applications that are not 64-bit: iTunes, Grapher, Front Row, and DVD Player. Everything else is 64-bit. The Finder, the Dock, Mail, TextEdit, Safari, iChat, Address Book, Dashboard, benefit Viewer, Installer, Terminal, Calculator—you title it, it's 64-bit.

    The second tall carrot (or stick, depending on how you study at it) is the continued want of 32-bit champion for novel APIs and technologies. Leopard started the trend, leaving deprecated APIs behind and only porting the novel ones to 64-bit. The improved Objective-C 2.0 runtime introduced in Leopard was moreover 64-bit-only.

    Snow Leopard continues along similar lines. The Objective-C 2.1 runtime's non-fragile instance variables, exception model unified with C++, and faster vtable dispatch remain available only to 64-bit applications. But the most significant novel 64-bit-only API is QuickTime X—significant enough to exist addressed separately, so sojourn tuned.

    64-bits or bust

    All of this is Apple's not-so-subtle course of telling developers that the time to creep to 64-bit is now, and that 64-bit should exist the default for gross novel applications, whether a developer thinks it's "needed" or not. In most cases, these novel APIs hold no intrinsic connection to 64-bit. Apple has simply chosen to expend them as additional forms of persuasion.

    Despite gross of the above, I'd quiet convoke Snow Leopard merely the penultimate step in Mac OS X's journey to exist 64-bit from top to bottom. I fully hope Mac OS X 10.7 to boot into the 64-bit kernel by default, to ship with 64-bit versions of gross applications, plug-ins, and kernel extensions, and to leave even more legacy and deprecated APIs to fade away in the land of 32-bit.

    QuickTime X

    Apple did something a bit odd in Leopard when it neglected to port the C-based QuickTime API to 64-bit. At the time, it didn't seem relish such a tall deal. Mac OS X's transition to 64-bit had already spanned many years and several major versions. One could imagine that it just wasn't yet QuickTime's spin to Go 64-bit.

    As it turns out, my terse but pessimistic assessment of the situation at the time was accurate: QuickTime got the "Carbon treatment". relish Carbon, the venerable QuickTime API that they know and admire will not exist making the transition to 64-bit—ever.

    To exist clear, QuickTime the technology and QuickTime the brand will most definitely exist coming to 64-bit. What's being left behind in 32-bit-only profile is the C-based API introduced in 1991 and built upon for 18 years thereafter. Its replacement in the world of 64-bit in Snow Leopard is the aptly named QuickTime X.

    The "X" in QuickTime X, relish the one in in Mac OS X, is pronounced "ten." This is but the first of many eerie parallels. relish Mac OS X before it, QuickTime X:

  • aims to create a antiseptic crash from its predecessor
  • is based on technology originally developed for another platform
  • includes transparent compatibility with its earlier incarnation
  • promises better performance and a more modern architecture
  • lacks many needful features in its initial release
  • Maximum available Mac CPU  quicken (MHz)Maximum available Mac CPU quicken (MHz)

    Let's buy these one at a time. First, why is a antiseptic crash needed? redeem simply, QuickTime is old—really old. The horribly blocky, postage-stamp-size video displayed by its initial release in 1991 was considered a technological tour de force.

    At the time, the fastest Macintosh money could buy contained a 25 MHz CPU. The ridiculous chart to the privilege is meant to hammer home this point. Forward-thinking design can only fetch you so far. The shape of the world a technology is born into eventually, inevitably dictates its fate. This is especially dependable for long-lived APIs relish QuickTime with a tenacious bent towards backward compatibility.

    As the first successful implementation of video on a personal computer, it's frankly wonderful that the QuickTime API has lasted as long as it has. But the world has moved on. Just as Mac OS organize itself mired in a ghetto of cooperative multitasking and unprotected memory, QuickTime limps into 2009 with antiquated notions of concurrency and subsystem layering baked into its design.

    When it came time to write the video-handling code for the iPhone, the latest version of QuickTime, QuickTime 7, simply wasn't up to the task. It had grown too bloated and inefficient during its life on the desktop, and it lacked Good champion for the GPU-accelerated video playback necessary to handle modern video codecs on a handheld (even with a CPU sixteen times the clock quicken of any available in a Mac when QuickTime 1.0 was released). And so, Apple created a tight, modern, GPU-friendly video playback engine that could fit comfortably within the RAM and CPU constraints of the iPhone.

    Hmm. An aging desktop video API in need of a replacement. A fresh, novel video library with Good performance even on (comparatively) anemic hardware. Apple connected the dots. But the trick is always in the transition. Happily, this is Apple's forte. QuickTime itself has already lived on three different CPU architectures and three entirely different operating systems.

    The switch to 64-bit is yet another (albeit less dramatic) inflection point, and Apple has chosen it to designate the border between the obsolete QuickTime 7 and the novel QuickTime X. It's done this in Snow Leopard by limiting gross expend of QuickTime by 64-bit applications to the QTKit Objective-C framework.

    QTKit's novel world order

    QTKit is not new; it began its life in 2005 as a more native-feeling interface to QuickTime 7 for Cocoa applications. This extra layer of abstraction is the key to the QuickTime X transition. QTKit now hides within its object-oriented walls both QuickTime 7 and QuickTime X. Applications expend QTKit as before, and behind the scenes QTKit will pick whether to expend QuickTime 7 or QuickTime X to fulfill each request.

    If QuickTime X is so much better, why doesn't QTKit expend it for everything? The retort is that QuickTime X, relish its Mac OS X namesake, has very limited capabilities in its initial release. While QuickTime X supports playback, capture, and exporting, it does not champion general-purpose video editing. It moreover supports only "modern" video formats—basically, anything that can exist played by an iPod, iPhone, or Apple TV. As for other video codecs, well, you can forget about handling them with plug-ins because QuickTime X doesn't champion those either.

    For every one of the cases where QuickTime X is not up to the job, QuickTime 7 will fill in. Cutting, copying, and pasting portions of a video? QuickTime 7. Extracting individual tracks from a movie? QuickTime 7. Playing any movie not natively supported by an existing Apple handheld device? QuickTime 7. Augmenting QuickTime's codec champion using a plug-in of any kind? You guessed it: QuickTime 7.

    But wait a second. If QTKit is the only course for a 64-bit application to expend QuickTime, and QTKit multiplexes between QuickTime 7 and QuickTime X behind the scenes, and QuickTime 7 is 32-bit-only, and Mac OS X does not champion "mixed mode" processes that can execute both 32-bit and 64-bit code, then how the heck does a 64-bit process carry out anything that requires the QuickTime 7 back-end?

    To find out, fire up the novel 64-bit QuickTime Player application (which will exist addressed separately later) and open a movie that requires QuickTime 7. Let's say, one that uses the Sorenson video codec. (Remember that? Good times.) positive enough, it plays just fine. But search for "QuickTime" in the Activity Monitor application and you'll descry this:

    Pretty sneaky, sis: 32-bit QTKitServer processPretty sneaky, sis: 32-bit QTKitServer process

    And the retort is revealed. When a 64-bit application using QTKit requires the services of the 32-bit-only QuickTime 7 back-end, QTKit spawns a divorce 32-bit QTKitServer process to carry out the labor and communicate the results back to the originating 64-bit process. If you leave Activity Monitor open while using the novel QuickTime Player application, you can watch the QTKitServer processes near and Go as needed. This is gross handled transparently by the QTKit framework; the application itself need not exist watchful of these machinations.

    Yes, it's going to exist a long, long time before QuickTime 7 disappears completely from Mac OS X (at least Apple was benign enough not to convoke it "QuickTime Classic"), but the path forward is clear. With each novel release of Mac OS X, hope the capabilities of QuickTime X to expand, and the number of things that quiet require QuickTime 7 to decrease. In Mac OS X 10.7, for example, I imagine that QuickTime X will gain champion for plug-ins. And surely by Mac OS X 10.8, QuickTime X will hold complete video editing support. gross this will exist happening beneath the unifying facade of QTKit until, eventually, the QuickTime 7 back-end is no longer needed at all.

    Say what you mean

    In the meantime, perhaps surprisingly, many of the current limitations of QuickTime X actually highlight its unique advantages and inform the evolving QTKit API. Though there is no direct course for a developer to request that QTKit expend the QuickTime X back-end, there are several circuitous means to influence the decision. The key is the QTKit API, which relies heavily on the concept of intent.

    QuickTime versions 1 through 7 expend a solitary representation of gross media resources internally: a Movie object. This representation includes information about the individual tracks that create up the movie, the sample tables for each track, and so on—all the information QuickTime needs to understand and exploit the media.

    This sounds Great until you realize that to carry out anything with a media resource in QuickTime requires the construction of this comprehensive Movie object. reckon playing an MP3 file with QuickTime, for example. QuickTime must create its internal Movie object representation of the MP3 file before it can initiate playback. Unfortunately, the MP3 container format seldom contains comprehensive information about the structure of the audio. It's usually just a stream of packets. QuickTime must laboriously scan and parse the entire audio stream in order to complete the Movie object.

    QuickTime 7 and earlier versions create this process less painful by doing the scanning and parsing incrementally in the background. You can descry this in many QuickTime-based player applications in the profile of a progress bar overlaid on the movie controller. The image below shows a 63MB MP3 podcast loading in the Leopard version of QuickTime Player. The shaded portion of the movie timeline slowly fills the dotted district from left to right.

    QuickTime 7 doing more  labor than necessary

    QuickTime 7 doing more labor than necessary

    Though playback can initiate almost immediately (provided you play from the beginning, that is) it's worthwhile to buy a step back and reckon what's going on here. QuickTime is creating a Movie object suitable for any operation that QuickTime can perform: editing, track extraction or addition, exporting, you title it. But what if gross I want to carry out is play the file?

    The pains is, the QuickTime 7 API lacks a course to express this benign of intent. There is no course to exclaim to QuickTime 7, "Just open this file as quickly as possible so that I can play it. Don't bother reading every solitary byte of the file from the disk and parsing it to determine its structure just in case I settle to edit or export the content. That is not my intent. Please, just open it for playback."

    The QTKit API in Snow Leopard provides exactly this capability. In fact, the only course to exist eligible for the QuickTime X back-end at gross is to explicitly express your intent not to carry out anything QuickTime X cannot handle. Furthermore, any attempt to execute an operation that lies outside your previously expressed intent will antecedent QTKit to raise an exception.

    The intent mechanism is moreover the course that the novel features of QuickTime X are exposed, such as the talent to asynchronously load big or distantly located (e.g., over a leisurely network link) movie files without blocking the UI running on the main thread of the application.

    Indeed, there are many reasons to carry out what it takes to fetch on board the QuickTime X train. For the media formats it supports, QuickTime X is less taxing on the CPU during playback than QuickTime 7. (This is beyond the fact that QuickTime X does not blow time preparing its internal representation of the movie for editing and export when playback is gross that's desired.) QuickTime X moreover supports GPU-accelerated playback of H.264, but, in this initial release, only on Macs equipped with an NVIDIA 9400M GPU (i.e., some 2009 iMacs and several models of MacBooks from 2008 and 2009). Finally, QuickTime X includes comprehensive ColorSync champion for video, which is long overdue.

    The X factor

    This is just the start of a long journey for QuickTime X, and seemingly not a very auspicious one, at that. A QuickTime engine with no editing support? No plug-ins? It seems ridiculous to release it at all. But this has been Apple's course in recent years: steady, deliberate progress. Apple aims to ship no features before their time.

    As anxious as developers may exist for a full-featured, 64-bit successor to the QuickTime 7 engine, Apple itself is sitting on top of one of the largest QuickTime-riddled (and Carbon-addled, to boot) code bases in the industry: Final sever Studio. Thus far, It remains stuck in 32-bit. To exclaim that Apple is "highly motivated" to extend the capabilities of QuickTime X would exist an understatement.

    Nevertheless, don't hope Apple to rush forward foolishly. Duplicating the functionality of a continually developed, 18-year-old API will not betide overnight. It will buy years, and it will exist even longer before every needful Mac OS X application is updated to expend QTKit exclusively. Transitions. Gotta admire 'em.

    File system API unification

    Mac OS X has historically supported many different ways of referring to files on disk from within an application. Plain-old paths (e.g., /Users/john/Documents/myfile) are supported at the lowest levels of the operating system. They're simple, predictable, but perhaps not such a Great concept to expend as the only course an application tracks files. reckon what happens if an application opens a file based on a path string, then the user moves that file somewhere else while it's quiet being edited. When the application is instructed to redeem the file, if it only has the file path to labor with, it will conclude up creating a novel file in the obsolete location, which is almost certainly not what the user wanted.

    Classic Mac OS had a more sophisticated internal representation of files that enabled it to track files independent of their actual locations on disk. This was done with the benefit of the unique file ids supported by HFS/HFS+. The Mac OS X incarnation of this concept is the FSRef data type.

    Finally, in the modern age, URLs hold become the de facto representation for files that may exist located somewhere other than the local machine. URLs can moreover advert to local files, but in that case they hold gross the identical disadvantages as file paths.

    This diversity of data types is reflected in Mac OS X's file system APIs. Some functions buy file path as arguments, some hope opaque references to files, and quiet others labor only with URLs. Programs that expend these APIs often spend a lot of their time converting file references from one representation to another.

    The situation is similar when it comes to getting information about files. There are a huge number of file system metadata retrieval functions at gross levels of the operating system, and no solitary one of them is comprehensive. To fetch gross available information about a file on disk requires making several divorce calls, each of which may hope a different sort of file reference as an argument.

    Here's an sample Apple provided at WWDC. Opening a solitary file in the Leopard version of the Preview image viewer application results in:

  • Four conversions of an FSRef to a file path
  • Ten conversions of a file path to an FSRef
  • Twenty-five calls to getattrlist()
  • Eight calls to stat()/lstat()
  • Four calls to open()/close()
  • In Snow Leopard, Apple has created a new, unified, comprehensive set of file system APIs built around a solitary data type: URLs. But these are URL "objects"—namely, the opaque data types NSURL and CFURL, with a toll-free bridge between them—that hold been imbued with gross the desirable attributes of an FSRef.

    Apple settled on these data types because their opaque nature allowed this benign of enhancement, and because there are so many existing APIs that expend them. URLs are moreover the most future-proof of gross the choices, with the scheme portion providing nearly unlimited flexibility for novel data types and access mechanisms. The novel file system APIs built around these opaque URL types champion caching and metadata prefetching for a further performance boost.

    There's moreover a novel on-disk representation called a Bookmark (not to exist confused with a browser bookmark) which is relish a more network-savvy replacement for classic Mac OS aliases. Bookmarks are the most robust course to create a reference to a file from within another file. It's moreover possible to attach capricious metadata to each Bookmark. For example, if an application wants to champion a persistent list of "favorite" files plus some application-specific information about them, and it wants to exist resilient to any movement of these files behind its back, Bookmarks are the best appliance for the job.

    I mention gross of this not because I hope file system APIs to exist gross that attractive to people without my particular fascination with this section of the operating system, but because, relish Core Text before it, it's an indication of exactly how immature Mac OS X really is as a platform. Even after seven major releases, Mac OS X is quiet struggling to creep out from the shadow of its three ancestors: NeXTSTEP, classic Mac OS, and BSD Unix. Or perhaps it just goes to demonstrate how ruthlessly Apple's core OS team is driven to supplant obsolete and crusty APIs and data types with new, more modern versions.

    It will exist a long time before the benefits of these changes trickle down (or is it up?) to end-users in the profile of Mac applications that are written or modified to expend these novel APIs. Most well-written Mac applications already exhibit most of the desirable behavior. For example, the TextEdit application in Leopard will correctly detect when a file it's working on has moved.

    TextEdit: a Good Mac OS X citizenTextEdit: a Good Mac OS X citizen

    Of course, the key modifier here is "well-written." Simplifying the file system APIs means that more developers will exist willing to expend the effort—now greatly reduced—to provide such user-friendly behaviors. The accompanying performance boost is just icing on the cake, and one more understanding that developers might pick to alter their existing, working application to expend these novel APIs.

    Doing more with more

    Moore's Law is widely cited in technology circles—and moreover widely misunderstood. It's most often used as shorthand for "computers double in quicken every year or so," but that's not what Gordon Moore wrote at all. His 1965 article in Electronics magazine touched on many topics in the semiconductor industry, but if it had to exist summed up in a solitary "law", it would be, roughly, that the number of transistors that fit onto a square inch of silicon doubles every 12 months.

    Moore later revised that to two years, but the time epoch is not what people fetch wrong. The problem is confusing a doubling of transistor density with a doubling of "computer speed." (Even more problematic is declaring a "law" based on a solitary paper from 1965, but we'll redeem that aside for now. For a more thorough discussion of Moore's Law, tickle read this classic article by Jon Stokes.)

    For decades, each multiply in transistor density was, in fact, accompanied by a comparable multiply in computing quicken thanks to ever-rising clock speeds and the dawn of superscalar execution. This worked great—existing code ran faster on each novel CPU—until the grim realities of power density redeem an conclude to the fun.

    Moore's Law continues, at least for now, but their talent to create code hasten faster with each novel multiply in transistor density has slowed considerably. The free lunch is over. CPU clock speeds hold stagnated for years, many times actually going backwards. (The latest top-of-the-line 2009 Mac Pro contains a 2.93 GHz CPU, whereas the 2008 model could exist equipped with a 3.2 GHz CPU.) Adding execution units to a CPU has moreover long since reached the point of diminishing returns, given the limits of instruction-level parallelism in common application code.

    And yet we've quiet got gross these novel transistors raining down on us, more every year. The challenge is to find novel ways to expend them to actually create computers faster.

    Thus far, the semiconductor industry's retort has been to give us more of what they already have. Where once a CPU contained a solitary analytic processing unit, now CPUs in even the lowliest desktop computers hold two processor cores, with high-end models sporting two chips with eight analytic cores each. Granted, the cores themselves are moreover getting faster, usually by doing more at the identical clock quicken as their predecessors, but that's not happening at nearly the rate that the cores are multiplying.

    Unfortunately, generally speaking, a dual-core CPU will not hasten your application twice as quick as a single-core CPU. In fact, your application probably won't hasten any faster at gross unless it was written to buy handicap of more than just a solitary analytic CPU. Presented with a glut of transistors, chipmakers hold turned around and provided more computing resources than programmers know what to carry out with, transferring much of the responsibility for making computers faster to the software guys.

    We're with the operating system and we're here to help

    It's into this environment that Snow Leopard is born. If there's one responsibility (aside from security) that an operating system vendor should feel in the year 2009, it's finding a course for applications—and the OS itself—to utilize the ever-growing wealth of computing resources at their disposal. If I had to pick solitary technological "theme" for Snow Leopard, this would exist it: helping developers utilize gross this newfound silicon; helping them carry out more with more.

    To that end, Snow Leopard includes two significant novel APIs backed by several smaller, but equally needful infrastructure improvements. We'll start at the bottom with, believe it or not, the compiler.

    LLVM and Clang

    Apple made a strategic investment in the LLVM open source project several years ago. I covered the fundamentals of LLVM in my Leopard review. (If you're not up to speed, tickle ensnare up on the topic before continuing.) In it, I described how Leopard used LLVM to provide dramatically more efficient JIT-compiled software implementations of OpenGL functions. I ended with the following admonition:

    Don't exist misled by its humble expend in Leopard; Apple has imposing plans for LLVM. How grand? How about swapping out the guts of the gcc compiler Mac OS X uses now and replacing them with the LLVM equivalents? That project is well underway. Not ambitious enough? How about ditching gcc entirely, replacing it with a completely novel LLVM-based (but gcc-compatible) compiler system? That project is called Clang, and it's already yielded some impressive performance results.

    With the introduction of Snow Leopard, it's official: Clang and LLVM are the Apple compiler strategy going forward. LLVM even has a snazzy novel logo, a not-so-subtle homage to a well-known compiler design textbook:

    LLVM! Clang! Rawr!

    LLVM! Clang! Rawr!

    Apple now offers a total of four compilers for Mac OS X: GCC 4.0, GCC 4.2, LLVM-GCC 4.2 (the GCC 4.2 front-end combined with an LLVM back-end), and Clang, in order of increasing LLVM-ness. Here's a diagram:

    Mac OS X compilers

    Mac OS X compilers

    All of these compilers are binary-compatible on Mac OS X, which means you can, for example, build a library with one compiler and link it into an executable built with another. They're moreover gross command-line and source-compatible—in theory, anyway. Clang does not yet champion some of the more esoteric features of GCC. Clang moreover only supports C, Objective-C, and a cramped bit of C++ (Clang(uage), fetch it?) whereas GCC supports many more. Apple is committed to plenary C++ champion for Clang, and hopes to labor out the remaining GCC incompatibilities during Snow Leopard's lifetime.

    Clang brings with it the two headline attributes you hope in a hot, novel compiler: shorter compile times and faster executables. In Apple's testing with its own applications such as iCal, Address Book, and Xcode itself, plus third-party applications relish Adium and Growl, Clang compiles nearly three times faster than GCC 4.2. As for the quicken of the finished product, the LLVM back-end, whether used in Clang or in LLVM-GCC, produces executables that are 5-25% faster than those generated by GCC 4.2.

    Clang is moreover more developer-friendly than its GCC predecessors. I concede that this topic doesn't hold much to carry out with taking handicap of multiple CPU cores and so on, but it's positive to exist the first thing that a developer actually notices when using Clang. Indulge me.

    For starters, Clang is embeddable, so Xcode can expend the identical compiler infrastructure for interactive features within the IDE (symbol look-up, code completion, etc.) as it uses to compile the final executable. Clang moreover creates and preserves more extensive metadata while compiling, resulting in much better mistake reporting. For example, when GCC tells you this:

    GCC  mistake message for an unknown type

    It's not exactly lucid what the problem is, especially if you're novel to C programming. Yes, gross you hotshots already know what the problem is (especially if you saw this sample at WWDC), but I reflect everyone can disagree that this error, generated by Clang, is a lot more helpful:

    Clang  mistake message for an unknown type

    Maybe a novice quiet wouldn't know what to do, but at least it's lucid where the problem lies. Figuring out why the compiler doesn't know about NSString is a much more focused task than can exist derived from GCC's cryptic error.

    Even when the message is clear, the context may not be. buy this mistake from GCC:

    GCC  mistake message for  imperfect operands

    Sure, but there are four "+" operators on that solitary line. Which one has the problematic operands? Thanks to its more extensive metadata, Clang can pinpoint the problem:

    Clang  mistake message for  imperfect operands

    Sometimes the mistake is perfectly clear, but it just seems a bit off, relish this situation where jumping to the mistake as reported by GCC puts you on the line below where you actually want to add the missing semicolon:

    GCC  mistake message for missing semicolon

    The cramped things count, you know? Clang goes that extra mile:

    Clang  mistake message for missing semicolon

    Believe it or not, stuff relish this means a lot to developers. And then there are the not-so-little things that exist substantive even more, relish the LLVM-powered static analyzer. The image below shows how the static analyzer displays its discovery of a possible bug.

    OH HAI I  organize UR BUGOH HAI I organize UR BUG

    Aside from the whimsy of the cramped arrows (which, admit it, are adorable), the actual bug it's highlighting is something that every programmer can imagine creating (say, through some hasty editing). The static analyzer has determined that there's at least one path through this set of nested conditionals that leaves the myName variable uninitialized, thus making the attempt to send the mutableCopy message in the final line potentially dangerous.

    I'm positive Apple is going hog-wild running the static analyzer on gross of its applications and the operating system itself. The prospect of an automated course to learn bugs that may hold existed for years in the depths of a huge codebase is almost pornographic to developers—platform owners in particular. To the degree that Mac OS X 10.6.0 is more bug-free than the previous 10.x.0 releases, LLVM surely deserves some significant section of the credit.

    Master of the house

    By committing to a Clang/LLVM-powered future, Apple has finally taken complete control of its evolution platform. The CodeWarrior experience apparently convinced Apple that it's unwise to reckon on a third party for its platform's evolution tools. Though it's taken many years, I reflect even the most diehard Metrowerks fan would hold to disagree that Xcode in Snow Leopard is now a pretty damn Good IDE.

    After years of struggling with the disconnect between the goals of the GCC project and its own compiler needs, Apple has finally sever the apron strings. OK, granted, GCC 4.2 is quiet the default compiler in Snow Leopard, but this is a transitional phase. Clang is the recommended compiler, and the focus of gross of Apple's future efforts.

    I know what you're thinking. This is swell and all, but how are these compilers helping developers better leverage the expanding swarm of transistors at their disposal? As you'll descry in the following sections, LLVM's scaly, metallic head pops up in a few key places.


    In Snow Leopard, Apple has introduced a C language extension called "blocks." Blocks add closures and anonymous functions to C and the C-derived languages C++, Objective-C, and Objective C++.

    These features hold been available in dynamic programming languages such as Lisp, Smalltalk, Perl, Python, Ruby, and even the unassuming JavaScript for a long time (decades, in the case of Lisp—a fact gladly offered by its practitioners). While dynamic-language programmers buy closures and anonymous functions for granted, those who labor with more traditional, statically compiled languages such as C and its derivatives may find them quite exotic. As for non-programmers, they likely hold no interest in this topic at all. But I'm going to attempt an explanation nonetheless, as blocks profile the foundation of some other attractive technologies to exist discussed later.

    Perhaps the simplest course to clarify blocks is that they create functions another profile of data. C-derived languages already hold duty pointers, which can exist passed around relish data, but these can only point to functions created at compile time. The only course to influence the deportment of such a duty is by passing different arguments to the duty or by setting global variables which are then accessed from within the function. Both of these approaches hold tall disadvantages

    Passing arguments becomes cumbersome as their number and complexity grows. Also, it may exist that you hold limited control over the arguments that will exist passed to your function, as is often the case with callbacks. To compensate, you may hold to bundle up gross of your attractive status into a context object of some kind. But when, how, and by whom that context data will exist disposed of can exist difficult to pin down. Often, a second callback is required for this. It's gross quite a pain.

    As for the expend of global variables, in addition to being a well-known anti-pattern, it's moreover not thread-safe. To create it so requires locks or some other profile of mutual exclusion to preclude multiple invocations of the identical duty from stepping on each other's toes. And if there's anything worse than navigating a sea of callback-based APIs, it's manually dealing with thread safety issues.

    Blocks bypass gross of these problems by allowing functional blobs of code—blocks—to exist defined at runtime. It's easiest to understand with an example. I'm going to start by using JavaScript, which has a bit friendlier syntax, but the concepts are the same.

    b = get_number_from_user(); multiplier = function(a) { recur a * b };

    Here I've created a duty named multiplier that takes a solitary argument, a, and multiplies it by a second value, b, that's provided by the user at runtime. If the user supplied the number 2, then a convoke to multiplier(5) would recur the value 10.

    b = get_number_from_user(); // assume it's 2 multiplier = function(a) { recur a * b }; r = multiplier(5); // 5 * 2 = 10

    Here's the sample above done with blocks in C.

    b = get_number_from_user(); // assume it's 2 multiplier = ^ int (int a) { recur a * b; }; r = multiplier(5); // 5 * 2 = 10

    By comparing the JavaScript code to the C version, I hope you can descry how it works. In the C example, that cramped caret ^ is the key to the syntax for blocks. It's benign of ugly, but it's very C-like in that it parallels the existing C syntax for duty pointers, with ^ in status of *, as this sample illustrates:

    /* A duty that takes a solitary integer controversy and returns a pointer to a duty that takes two integer arguments and returns a floating-point number. */ float (*func2(int a))(int, int); /* A duty that takes a solitary integer controversy and returns a block that takes two integer arguments and returns a floating-point number. */ float (^func1(int a))(int, int);

    You'll just hold to reliance me when I disclose you that this syntax actually makes sense to seasoned C programmers.

    Now then, does this exist substantive that C is suddenly a dynamic, high-level language relish JavaScript or Lisp? Hardly. The existing distinction between the stack and the heap, the rules governing automatic and static variables, and so on are gross quiet in plenary effect. Plus, now there's a gross novel set of rules for how blocks interact with each of these things. There's even a novel __block storage sort attribute to further control the scope and lifetime of values used in blocks.

    All of that said, blocks are quiet a huge win in C. Thanks to blocks, the friendlier APIs long enjoyed by dynamic languages are now possible in C-derived languages. For example, suppose you want to apply some operation to every line in a file. To carry out so in a low-level language relish C requires some amount of boilerplate code to open and read from the file, handle any errors, read each line into a buffer, and antiseptic up at the end.

    FILE *fp = fopen(filename, "r"); if (fp == NULL) { perror("Unable to open file"); } else { char line[MAX_LINE]; while (fgets(line, MAX_LINE, fp)) { work; work; work; } fclose(fp); }

    The section in bold is an abstract representation of what you're planning to carry out to each line of the file. The ease is the literal boilerplate code. If you find yourself having to apply varying operations to every line of many different files, this boilerplate code gets tedious.

    What you'd relish to exist able to carry out is factor it out into a duty that you can call. But then you're faced with the problem of how to express the operation you'd relish to execute on each line of the file. In the middle of each block of boilerplate may exist many lines of code expressing the operation to exist applied. This code may reference or modify local variables which are affected by the runtime deportment of the program, so traditional duty pointers won't work. What to do?

    Thanks to blocks, you can define a duty that takes a filename and a block as arguments. This gets gross the uninteresting code out of your face.

    foreach_line(filename, ^ (char *line) { work; work; work; });

    What's left is a much clearer expression of your intent, with less surrounding noise. The controversy after filename is a literal block that takes a line of text as an argument.

    Even when the volume of boilerplate is small, the simplicity and clarity reward is quiet worthwhile. reckon the simplest possible loop that executes a fixed number of times. In C-based languages, even that basic construct offers a surprising number of opportunities for bugs. Let's do_something() 10 times:

    for (int i = 0; i <= 10; i++) { do_something(); }

    Oops, I've got a cramped bug there, don't I? It happens to the best of us. But why should this code exist more complicated than the sentence describing it. carry out something 10 times! I never want to screw that up again. Blocks can help. If they just invest a cramped effort up front to define a helper function:

    typedef void (^work_t)(void); void repeat(int n, work_t block) { for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) block(); }

    We can exile the bug for good. Now, repeating any capricious block of code a specific number of times is gross but idiot-proof:

    repeat(10, ^{ do_something() }); repeat(20, ^{ do_other_thing() });

    And remember, the block controversy to repeat() can hold exactly the identical benign of code, literally copied and pasted, that would hold appeared within a traditional for loop.

    All these possibilities and more hold been well explored by dynamic languages: map, reduce, collect, etc. Welcome, C programmers, to a higher order.

    Apple has taken these lessons to heart, adding over 100 novel APIs that expend blocks in Snow Leopard. Many of these APIs would not exist possible at gross without blocks, and gross of them are more elegant and concise than they would exist otherwise.

    It's Apple intent to submit blocks as an official extension to one or more of the C-based languages, though it's not yet lucid which standards bodies are receptive to the proposal. For now, blocks are supported by gross four of Apple's compilers in Mac OS X.

    Concurrency in the true world: a prelude

    The struggle to create efficient expend of a big number of independent computing devices is not new. For decades, the sphere of high-performance computing has tackled this problem. The challenges faced by people writing software for supercomputers many years ago hold now trickled down to desktop and even mobile computing platforms.

    In the PC industry, some people saw this coming earlier than others. Almost 20 years ago, exist Inc. was formed around the concept of creating a PC platform unconstrained by legacy limitations and entirely prepared for the coming abundance of independent computing units on the desktop. To that end, exist created the BeBox, a dual-CPU desktop computer, and BeOS, a brand-new operating system.

    The signature ensnare phrase for BeOS was "pervasive multithreading." The BeBox and other machines running BeOS leveraged every ounce of the diminutive (by today's standards, anyway) computing resources at their disposal. The demos were impressive. A dual 66 MHz machine (don't create me demonstrate another graph) could play multiple videos simultaneously while moreover playing several audio tracks from a CD—some backwards— and gross the while, the user interface remained completely responsive.

    Let me disclose you, having lived through this epoch myself, the experience was mind-blowing at the time. BeOS created instant converts out of hundreds of technology enthusiasts, many of whom maintain that today's desktop computing experience quiet doesn't match the responsiveness of BeOS. This is certainly dependable emotionally, if not necessarily literally.

    After nearly purchasing exist in the late 1990s, Apple bought NeXT instead, and the ease is history. But had Apple gone with intent exist instead, Mac developers might hold had a scabrous road ahead. While gross that pervasive multithreading made for impressive technology demos and a Great user experience, it could exist extremely demanding on the programmer. BeOS was gross about threads, going so far as to maintain a divorce thread for each window. Whether you liked it or not, your BeOS program was going to exist multithreaded.

    Parallel programming is notoriously hard, with the manual management of POSIX-style threads representing the abysmal conclude of that pool. The best programmers in the world are hard-pressed to create big multithreaded programs in low-level languages relish C or C++ without finding themselves impaled on the spikes of deadlock, race conditions, and other perils inherent in the expend of in multiple simultaneous threads of execution that participate the identical reminiscence space. Extremely watchful application of locking primitives is required to avoid performance-robbing levels of contention for shared data—and the bugs, oh the bugs! The term "Heisenbug" may as well hold been invented for multithreaded programming.

    Nineteen years after exist tilted at the windmill of the widening swath of silicon in desktop PCs, the challenge has only grown. Those transistors are out there, man—more than ever before. Single-threaded programs on today's high-end desktop Macs, even when using "100%" CPU, extend but a solitary glowing tower in a sea of sixteen otherwise barren lanes on a CPU monitor window.

    A wide-open  unostentatious of transistorsA wide-open unostentatious of transistors

    And woe exist unto the user if that pegged CPU core is running the main thread of a GUI application on Mac OS X. A CPU-saturated main thread means no novel user inputs are being pulled off the event queue by the application. A few seconds of that and an obsolete friend makes its appearance: the spinning beach ball of death.


    Nooooooooo!!! Image from The Iconfactory

    This is the enemy: hardware with more computing resources than programmers know what to carry out with, most of it completely idle, and gross the while the user is utterly blocked in his attempts to expend the current application. What's Snow Leopard's answer? Read on…

    Grand Central Dispatch Apple's GCD branding: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foamer">Railfan</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_service">service</a>Apple's GCD branding: Railfan service

    Snow Leopard's retort to the concurrency conundrum is called imposing Central Dispatch (GCD). As with QuickTime X, the title is extremely apt, though this is not entirely lucid until you understand the technology.

    The first thing to know about GCD is that it's not a novel Cocoa framework or similar special-purpose frill off to the side. It's a unostentatious C library baked into the lowest levels of Mac OS X. (It's in libSystem, which incorporates libc and the other code that sits at the very bottom of userspace.)

    There's no need to link in a novel library to expend GCD in your program. Just #include <dispatch/dispatch.h> and you're off to the races. The fact that GCD is a C library means that it can exist used from gross of the C-derived languages supported on Mac OS X: Objective-C, C++, and Objective-C++.

    Queues and threads

    GCD is built on a few simple entities. Let's start with queues. A queue in GCD is just what it sounds like. Tasks are enqueued, and then dequeued in FIFO order. (That's "First In, First Out," just relish the checkout line at the supermarket, for those who don't know and don't want to follow the link.) Dequeuing the task means handing it off to a thread where it will execute and carry out its actual work.

    Though GCD queues will hand tasks off to threads in FIFO order, several tasks from the identical queue may exist running in parallel at any given time. This animation demonstrates.

    A imposing Central Dispatch queue in action

    You'll notice that task B completed before task A. Though dequeuing is FIFO, task completion is not. moreover note that even though there were three tasks enqueued, only two threads were used. This is an needful feature of GCD which we'll debate shortly.

    But first, let's study at the other benign of queue. A serial queue works just relish a established queue, except that it only executes one task at a time. That means task completion in a serial queue is moreover FIFO. Serial queues can exist created explicitly, just relish established queues, but each application moreover has an implicit "main queue" which is a serial queue that runs on the main thread.

    The animation above shows threads appearing as labor needs to exist done, and disappearing as they're no longer needed. Where carry out these threads near from and where carry out they Go when they're done? GCD maintains a global pool of threads which it hands out to queues as they're needed. When a queue has no more pending tasks to hasten on a thread, the thread goes back into the pool.

    This is an extremely needful aspect of GCD's design. Perhaps surprisingly, one of the most difficult parts of extracting maximum performance using traditional, manually managed threads is figuring out exactly how many threads to create. Too few, and you risk leaving hardware idle. Too many, and you start to spend a significant amount of time simply shuffling threads in and out of the available processor cores.

    Let's exclaim a program has a problem that can exist split into eight separate, independent units of work. If this program then creates four threads on an eight-core machine, is this an sample of creating too many or too few threads? Trick question! The retort is that it depends on what else is happening on the system.

    If six of the eight cores are totally saturated doing some other work, then creating four threads will just require the OS to blow time rotating those four threads through the two available cores. But wait, what if the process that was saturating those six cores finishes? Now there are eight available cores but only four threads, leaving half the cores idle.

    With the exception of programs that can reasonably hope to hold the entire machine to themselves when they run, there's no course for a programmer to know ahead of time exactly how many threads he should create. Of the available cores on a particular machine, how many are in use? If more become available, how will my program know?

    The bottom line is that the optimal number of threads to redeem in flight at any given time is best determined by a single, globally watchful entity. In Snow Leopard, that entity is GCD. It will champion zero threads in its pool if there are no queues that hold tasks to run. As tasks are dequeued, GCD will create and dole out threads in a course that optimizes the expend of the available hardware. GCD knows how many cores the system has, and it knows how many threads are currently executing tasks. When a queue no longer needs a thread, it's returned to the pool where GCD can hand it out to another queue that has a task ready to exist dequeued.

    There are further optimizations inherent in this scheme. In Mac OS X, threads are relatively heavyweight. Each thread maintains its own set of register values, stack pointer, and program counter, plus kernel data structures tracking its security credentials, scheduling priority, set of pending signals and signal masks, etc. It gross adds up to over 512 KB of overhead per thread. Create a thousand threads and you've just burned about a half a gigabyte of reminiscence and kernel resources on overhead alone, before even considering the actual data within each thread.

    Compare a thread's 512 KB of baggage with GCD queues which hold a mere 256 bytes of overhead. Queues are very lightweight, and developers are encouraged to create as many of them as they need—thousands, even. In the earlier animation, when the queue was given two threads to process its three tasks, it executed two tasks on one of the threads. Not only are threads heavyweight in terms of reminiscence overhead, they're moreover relatively costly to create. Creating a novel thread for each task would exist the worst possible scenario. Every time GCD can expend a thread to execute more than one task, it's a win for overall system efficiency.

    Remember the problem of the programmer trying to figure out how many threads to create? Using GCD, he doesn't hold to worry about that at all. Instead, he can concentrate entirely on the optimal concurrency of his algorithm in the abstract. If the best-case scenario for his problem would expend 500 concurrent tasks, then he can Go ahead and create 500 GCD queues and dole his labor among them. GCD will figure out how many actual threads to create to carry out the work. Furthermore it will adjust the number of threads dynamically as the conditions on the system change.

    But perhaps most importantly, as novel hardware is released with more and more CPU cores, the programmer does not need to change his application at all. Thanks to GCD, it will transparently buy handicap of any and gross available computing resources, up to—but not past!—the optimal amount of concurrency as originally defined by the programmer when he chose how many queues to create.

    But wait, there's more! GCD queues can actually exist arranged in arbitrarily complicated directed acyclic graphs. (Actually, they can exist cyclic too, but then the deportment is undefined. Don't carry out that.) Queue hierarchies can exist used to funnel tasks from disparate subsystems into a narrower set of centrally controlled queues, or to oblige a set of established queues to delegate to a serial queue, effectively serializing them gross indirectly.

    There are moreover several levels of priority for queues, dictating how often and with what urgency threads are distributed to them from the pool. Queues can exist suspended, resumed, and cancelled. Queues can moreover exist grouped, allowing gross tasks distributed to the group to exist tracked and accounted for as a unit.

    Overall, GCD's expend of queues and threads forms a simple, elegant, but moreover extremely pragmatic architecture.


    Okay, so GCD is a Great course to create efficient expend of the available hardware. But is it really any better than BeOS's approach to multithreading? We've already seen a few ways that GCD avoids the pitfalls of BeOS (e.g., the reuse of threads and the maintenance of a global pool of threads that's correctly sized for the available hardware). But what about the problem of overwhelming the programmer by requiring threads in places where they complicate, rather than enhance the application?

    GCD embodies a philosophy that is at the contradictory conclude of the spectrum from BeOS's "pervasive multithreading" design. Rather than achieving responsiveness by getting every possible component of an application running concurrently on its own thread (and paying a heavy charge in terms of complicated data sharing and locking concerns), GCD encourages a much more limited, hierarchical approach: a main application thread where gross the user events are processed and the interface is updated, and worker threads doing specific jobs as needed.

    In other words, GCD doesn't require developers to reflect about how best to split the labor of their application into multiple concurrent threads (though when they're ready to carry out that, GCD will exist willing and able to help). At its most basic level, GCD aims to cheer developers to creep from thinking synchronously to thinking asynchronous. Something relish this: "Write your application as usual, but if there's any section of its operation that can reasonably exist expected to buy more than a few seconds to complete, then for the admire of Zarzycki, fetch it off the main thread!"

    That's it; no more, no less. Beach ball banishment is the cornerstone of user interface responsiveness. In some respects, everything else is gravy. But most developers know this intuitively, so why carry out they quiet descry the beach ball in Mac OS X applications? Why don't gross applications already execute gross of their potentially long-running tasks on background threads?

    A few reasons hold been mentioned already (e.g., the vicissitude of knowing how many threads to create) but the tall one is much more pragmatic. Spinning off a thread and collecting its result has always been a bit of a pain. It's not so much that it's technically difficult, it's just that it's such an definite crash from coding the actual labor of your application to coding gross this task-management plumbing. And so, especially in borderline cases, relish an operation that may buy 3 to 5 seconds, developers just carry out it synchronously and creep onto the next thing.

    Unfortunately, there's a surprising number of very common things that an application can carry out that execute quickly most of the time, but hold the potential to buy much longer than a few seconds when something goes wrong. Anything that touches the file system may stall at the lowest levels of the OS (e.g., within blocking read() and write() calls) and exist theme to a very long (or at least an "unexamined-by-the-application-developer") timeout. The identical goes for title lookups (e.g., DNS or LDAP), which almost always execute instantly, but ensnare many applications completely off-guard when they start taking their sweet time to recur a result. Thus, even the most meticulously constructed Mac OS X applications can conclude up throwing the beach ball in their visage from time to time.

    With GCD, Apple is motto it doesn't hold to exist this way. For example, suppose a document-based application has a button that, when clicked, will analyze the current document and display some attractive statistics about it. In the common case, this analysis should execute in under a second, so the following code is used to connect the button with an action:

    - (IBAction)analyzeDocument:(NSButton *)sender { NSDictionary *stats = [myDoc analyze]; [myModel setDict:stats]; [myStatsView setNeedsDisplay:YES]; [stats release]; }

    The first line of the duty body analyzes the document, the second line updates the application's internal state, and the third line tells the application that the statistics view needs to exist updated to reflect this novel state. It gross follows a very common pattern, and it works Great as long as no one of these steps—which are gross running on the main thread, remember—takes too long. Because after the user presses the button, the main thread of the application needs to handle that user input as quick as possible so it can fetch back to the main event loop to process the next user action.

    The code above works Great until a user opens a very big or very complicated document. Suddenly, the "analyze" step doesn't buy one or two seconds, but 15 or 30 seconds instead. Hello, beach ball. And still, the developer is likely to hem and haw: "This is really an exceptional situation. Most of my users will never open such a big file. And anyway, I really don't want to start reading documentation about threads and adding gross that extra code to this simple, four-line function. The plumbing would dwarf the code that does the actual work!"

    Well, what if I told you that you could creep the document analysis to the background by adding just two lines of code (okay, and two lines of closing braces), gross located within the existing function? No application-global objects, no thread management, no callbacks, no controversy marshalling, no context objects, not even any additional variables. Behold, imposing Central Dispatch:

    - (IBAction)analyzeDocument:(NSButton *)sender { dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(0, 0), ^{ NSDictionary *stats = [myDoc analyze]; dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{ [myModel setDict:stats]; [myStatsView setNeedsDisplay:YES]; [stats release]; }); }); }

    There's a hell of a lot of packed into those two lines of code. gross of the functions in GCD initiate with dispatch_, and you can descry four such calls in the blue lines of code above. The key to the minimal invasiveness of this code is revealed in the second controversy to the two dispatch_async() calls. Thus far, I've been discussing "units of work" without specifying how, exactly, GCD models such a thing. The answer, now revealed, should seem obvious in retrospect: blocks! The talent of blocks to capture the surrounding context is what allows these GCD calls to exist dropped privilege into some existing code without requiring any additional setup or re-factoring or other contortions in service of the API.

    But the best section of this code is how it deals with the problem of detecting when the background task completes and then showing the result. In the synchronous code, the analyze routine convoke and the code to update the application display simply appear in the desired sequence within the function. In the asynchronous code, miraculously, this is quiet the case. Here's how it works.

    The outer dispatch_async() convoke puts a task on a global concurrent GCD queue. That task, represented by the block passed as the second argument, contains the potentially time-consuming analyze routine call, plus another convoke to dispatch_async() that puts a task onto the main queue—a serial queue that runs on the main thread, remember—to update the application's user interface.

    User interface updates must gross exist done from the main thread in a Cocoa application, so the code in the inner block could not exist executed anywhere else. But rather than having the background thread send some benign of special-purpose notification back to the main thread when the analyze routine convoke completes (and then adding some code to the application to detect and handle this notification), the labor that needs to exist done on the main thread to update the display is encapsulated in yet another block within the larger one. When the analyze convoke is done, the inner block is redeem onto the main queue where it will (eventually) hasten on the main thread and carry out its labor of updating the display.

    Simple, elegant, and effective. And for developers, no more excuses.

    Believe it or not, it's just as easy to buy a serial implementation of a string of independent operations and parallelize it. The code below does labor on weigh elements of data, one after the other, and then summarizes the results once gross the elements hold been processed.

    for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { results[i] = do_work(data, i); } total = summarize(results, count);

    Now here's the parallel version which puts a divorce task for each element onto a global concurrent queue. (Again, it's up to GCD to settle how many threads to actually expend to execute the tasks.)

    dispatch_apply(count, dispatch_get_global_queue(0, 0), ^(size_t i) { results[i] = do_work(data, i); }); total = summarize(results, count);

    And there you hold it: a for loop replaced with a concurrency-enabled equivalent with one line of code. No preparation, no additional variables, no impossible decisions about the optimal number of threads, no extra labor required to wait for gross the independent tests to complete. (The dispatch_apply() convoke will not recur until gross the tasks it has dispatched hold completed.) Stunning.

    Grand Central Awesome

    Of gross the APIs added in Snow Leopard, imposing Central Dispatch has the most far-reaching implications for the future of Mac OS X. Never before has it been so easy to carry out labor asynchronously and to spread workloads across many CPUs.

    When I first heard about imposing Central Dispatch, I was extremely skeptical. The greatest minds in computer science hold been working for decades on the problem of how best to extract parallelism from computing workloads. Now here was Apple apparently promising to decipher this problem. Ridiculous.

    But imposing Central Dispatch doesn't actually address this issue at all. It offers no benefit whatsoever in deciding how to split your labor up into independently executable tasks—that is, deciding what pieces can or should exist executed asynchronously or in parallel. That's quiet entirely up to the developer (and quiet a tough problem). What GCD does instead is much more pragmatic. Once a developer has identified something that can exist split off into a divorce task, GCD makes it as easy and non-invasive as possible to actually carry out so.

    The expend of FIFO queues, and especially the being of serialized queues, seems counter to the spirit of ubiquitous concurrency. But we've seen where the Platonic standard of multithreading leads, and it's not a pleasant status for developers.

    One of Apple's slogans for imposing Central Dispatch is "islands of serialization in a sea of concurrency." That does a Great job of capturing the practical reality of adding more concurrency to run-of-the-mill desktop applications. Those islands are what seclude developers from the thorny problems of simultaneous data access, deadlock, and other pitfalls of multithreading. Developers are encouraged to identify functions of their applications that would exist better executed off the main thread, even if they're made up of several sequential or otherwise partially interdependent tasks. GCD makes it easy to crash off the entire unit of labor while maintaining the existing order and dependencies between subtasks.

    Those with some multithreaded programming experience may exist unimpressed with the GCD. So Apple made a thread pool. tall deal. They've been around forever. But the angels are in the details. Yes, the implementation of queues and threads has an elegant simplicity, and baking it into the lowest levels of the OS really helps to lower the perceived barrier to entry, but it's the API built around blocks that makes imposing Central Dispatch so attractive to developers. Just as Time Machine was "the first backup system people will actually use," imposing Central Dispatch is poised to finally spread the heretofore dim knack of asynchronous application design to gross Mac OS X developers. I can't wait.

    OpenCL Somehow, OpenCL got in on the <a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/8/#core-spheres">"core" branding</a>Somehow, OpenCL got in on the "core" branding

    So far, we've seen a few examples of doing more with more: a new, more modern compiler infrastructure that supports an needful novel language feature, and a powerful, pragmatic concurrency API built on top of the novel compilers' champion for said language feature. gross this goes a long course towards helping developers and the OS itself create maximum expend of the available hardware.

    But CPUs are not the only components experiencing a glut of transistors. When it comes to the proliferation of independent computation engines, another piece of silicon inside every Mac is the undisputed title holder: the GPU.

    The numbers disclose the tale. While Mac CPUs hold up to four cores (which may demonstrate up as eight analytic cores thanks to symmetric multithreading), high-end GPUs hold well over 200 processor cores. While CPUs are just now edging over 100 GFLOPS, the best GPUs are capable of over 1,000 GFLOPS. That's one trillion floating-point operations per second. And relish CPUs, GPUs now near more than one on a board.

    Writing for the GPU

    Unfortunately, the cores on a GPU are not general-purpose processors (at least not yet). They're much simpler computing engines that hold evolved from the fixed-function silicon of their ancestors that could not exist programmed directly at all. They don't champion the affluent set of instructions available on CPUs, the maximum size of the programs that will hasten is often limited and very small, and not gross of the features of the industry-standard IEEE floating-point computation specification are supported.

    Today's GPUs can exist programmed, but the most common forms of programmability are quiet firmly planted in the world of graphics programming: vertex shaders, geometry shaders, pixel shaders. Most of the languages used to program GPUs are similarly graphically focused: HLSL, GLSL, Cg.

    Nevertheless, there are computational tasks outside the realm of graphics that are a Good fit for GPU hardware. It would exist nice if there were a non-graphics-oriented language to write them in. Creating such a thing is quite a challenge, however. GPU hardware varies wildly in every imaginable way: number and sort of execution units, available data formats, instruction sets, reminiscence architecture, you title it. Programmers don't want to exist exposed to these differences, but it's difficult to labor around the complete want of a feature or the unavailability of a particular data type.

    GPU vendor NVIDIA gave it a shot, however, and produced CUDA: a subset of the C language with extensions for vector data types, data storage specifiers that reflect typical GPU reminiscence hierarchy, and several bundled computational libraries. CUDA is but one entrant in the burgeoning GPGPU sphere (General-Purpose computing on Graphics Processing Units). But coming from a GPU vendor, it faces an uphill battle with developers who really want a vendor-agnostic solution.

    In the world of 3D programming, OpenGL fills that role. As you've surely guessed by now, OpenCL aims to carry out the identical for general-purpose computation. In fact, OpenCL is supported by the identical consortium as OpenGL: the ominously named Khronos Group. But create no mistake, OpenCL is Apple's baby.

    Apple understood that OpenCL's best desultory of success was to become an industry standard, not just an Apple technology. To create that happen, Apple needed the cooperation of the top GPU vendors, plus an agreement with an established, widely-recognized standards body. It took a while, but now it's gross near together.

    OpenCL is a lot relish CUDA. It uses a C-like language with the vector extensions, it has a similar model of reminiscence hierarchy, and so on. This is no surprise, considering how closely Apple worked with NVIDIA during the evolution of OpenCL. There's moreover no course any of the tall GPU vendors would radically alter their hardware to champion an as-yet-unproven standard, so OpenCL had to labor well with GPUs already designed to champion CUDA, GLSL, and other existing GPU programming languages.

    The OpenCL difference

    This is gross well and good, but to hold any impact on the day-to-day life of Mac users, developers actually hold to expend OpenCL in their applications. Historically, GPGPU programming languages hold not seen much expend in traditional desktop applications. There are several reasons for this.

    Early on, writing programs for the GPU often required the expend of vendor-specific assembly languages that were far removed from the experience of writing a typical desktop application using a concomitant GUI API. The more C-like languages that came later remained either graphics-focused, vendor-specific, or both. Unless running code on the GPU would accelerate a core component of an application by an order of magnitude, most developers quiet could not exist bothered to navigate this exotic world.

    And even if the GPU did give a huge quicken boost, relying on graphics hardware for general-purpose computation was very likely to narrow the potential audience for an application. Many older GPUs, especially those organize in laptops, cannot hasten languages relish CUDA at all.

    Apple's key determination in the design of OpenCL was to allow OpenCL programs to hasten not just on GPUs, but on CPUs as well. An OpenCL program can query the hardware it's running on and enumerate gross eligible OpenCL devices, categorized as CPUs, GPUs, or dedicated OpenCL accelerators (the IBM Cell Blade server—yes, that Cell—is apparently one such device). The program can then dispatch its OpenCL tasks to any available device. It's moreover possible to create a solitary analytic device consisting of any combination of eligible computing resources: two GPUs, a GPU and two CPUs, etc.

    The advantages of being able to hasten OpenCL programs on both CPUs and GPUs are obvious. Every Mac running Snow Leopard, not just those with the recent-model GPUs, can hasten a program that contains OpenCL code. But there's more to it than that.

    Certain kinds of algorithms actually hasten faster on high-end multi-core CPUs than on even the very fastest available GPUs. At WWDC 2009, an engineer from Electronic Arts demonstrated an OpenCL port of a skinning engine from one of its games running over four times faster on a four-core Mac Pro than on an NVIDIA GeForce GTX285. Restructuring the algorithm and making many other changes to better suit the limitations (and strengths) of the GPU pushed it back ahead of the CPU by a wide margin, but sometimes you just want the system you hold to hasten well as-is. Being able to target the CPU is extremely useful in those cases.

    Moreover, writing vector code for Intel CPUs "the old-fashioned way" can exist a true pain. There's MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, and SSE4 to deal with, gross with slightly different capabilities, and gross of which oblige the programmer to write code relish this:

    r1 = _mm_mul_ps(m1, _mm_add_ps(x1, x2));

    OpenCL's native champion for vector types de-clutters the code considerably:

    r1 = m1 * (x1 + x2);

    Similarly, OpenCL's champion for implicit parallelism makes it much easier to buy handicap of multiple CPU cores. Rather than writing gross the logic to split your data into pieces and dole those pieces to the parallel-computing hardware, OpenCL lets you write just the code to operate on a solitary piece of the data and then send it, along with the entire block of data and the desired flush of parallelism, to the computing device.

    This arrangement is taken for granted in traditional graphics programming, where code implicitly works on gross pixels in a texture or gross vertices in a polygon; the programmer only needs to write code that will exist in the "inner loop," so to speak. An API with champion for this benign of parallelism that runs on CPUs as well as GPUs fills an needful gap.

    Writing to OpenCL moreover future-proofs task- or data-parallel code. Just as the identical OpenGL code will fetch faster and faster as newer, more powerful GPUs are released, so too will OpenCL code execute better as CPUs and GPUs fetch faster. The extra layer of abstraction that OpenCL provides makes this possible. For example, though vector code written several years ago using MMX got faster as CPU clock speeds increased, a more significant performance boost likely requires porting the code to one of the newer SSE instruction sets.

    As newer, more powerful vector instruction sets and parallel hardware becomes available, Apple will update its OpenCL implementations to buy handicap of them, just as video card makers and OS vendors update their OpenGL drivers to buy handicap of faster GPUs. Meanwhile, the application developer's code remains unchanged. Not even a recompile is required.

    Here exist dragons (and trains)

    How, you may wonder, can the identical compiled code conclude up executing using SSE2 on one machine and SSE4 on another, or on an NVIDIA GPU on one machine and an ATI GPU on another? To carry out so would require translating the device-independent OpenCL code to the instruction set of the target computing device at runtime. When running on a GPU, OpenCL must moreover ship the data and the newly translated code over to the video card and collect the results at the end. When running on the CPU, OpenCL must disarrange for the requested flush of parallelism by creating and distributing threads appropriately to the available cores.

    Well, wouldn't you know it? Apple just happens to hold two technologies that decipher these exact problems.

    Want to compile code "just in time" and ship it off to a computing device? That's what LLVM was born to do—and, indeed, what Apple did with it in Leopard, albeit on a more limited scale. OpenCL is a natural extension of that work. LLVM allows Apple to write a solitary code generator for each target instruction set, and concentrate gross of its effort on a solitary device-independent code optimizer. There's no longer any need to duplicate these tasks, using one compiler to create the static application executable and having to jury-rig another for just-in-time compilation.

    (Oh, and by the way, remember Core Image? That's another API that needs to compile code just-in-time and ship it off to execute on parallel hardware relish GPUs and multi-core CPUs. In Snow Leopard, Core Image has been re-implemented using OpenCL, producing a hefty 25% overall performance boost.)

    To handle task parallelism and provision threads, OpenCL is built on top of imposing Central Dispatch. This is such a natural fit that it's a bit surprising that the OpenCL API doesn't expend blocks. I reflect Apple decided that it shouldn't press its luck when it comes to getting its home-grown technologies adopted by other vendors. This determination already seems to exist paying off, as AMD has its own OpenCL implementation under way.

    The top of the pyramid

    Though the underlying technologies, Clang, blocks and imposing Central Dispatch, will undoubtedly exist more widely used by developers, OpenCL represents the culmination of that particular technological thread in Snow Leopard. This is the gold standard of software engineering: creating a novel public API by edifice it on top of lower-level, but equally well-designed and implemented public APIs.

    A unified abstraction for the ever-growing heterogeneous collection of parallel computing silicon in desktop computers was sorely needed. We've got an increasing population of powerful CPU cores, but they quiet exist in numbers that are orders of magnitude lower than the hundreds of processing units in modern GPUs. On the other hand, GPUs quiet hold a ways to Go to ensnare up with the power and flexibility of a full-fledged CPU core. But even with gross the differences, writing code exclusively for either one of those worlds quiet smacks of leaving money on the table.

    With OpenCL in hand, there's no longer a need to redeem gross your eggs in one silicon basket. And with the advent of hybrid CPU/GPU efforts relish Intel's Larabee, which expend CPU-caliber processing engines, but in much higher numbers, OpenCL may prove even more needful in the coming years.

    Transistor harvest

    Collectively, the concurrency-enabling features introduced in Snow Leopard limn the biggest boost to asynchronous and parallel software evolution in any Mac OS X release—perhaps in any desktop operating system release ever. It may exist hard for end-users to fetch excited about "plumbing" technologies relish imposing Central Dispatch and OpenCL, let alone compilers and programming language features, but it's upon these foundations that developers will create ever-more-impressive edifices of software. And if those applications tower over their synchronous, serial predecessors, it will exist because they stand on the shoulders of giants.

    QuickTime Player's  novel icon (Not a fan)QuickTime Player's novel icon (Not a fan) QuickTime Player

    There's been some confusion surrounding QuickTime in Snow Leopard. The earlier section about QuickTime X explains what you need to know about the present and future of QuickTime as a technology and an API. But a few of Apple's decisions—and the extremely overloaded meaning of the word "QuickTime" in the minds of consumers—have blurred the picture somewhat.

    The first head-scratcher occurs during installation. If you betide to click on the "Customize…" button during installation, you'll descry the following options:

    QuickTime 7 is an optional install?QuickTime 7 is an optional install?

    We've already talked about Rosetta being an optional install, but QuickTime 7 too? Isn't QuickTime severely crippled without QuickTime 7? Why in the world would that exist an optional install?

    Well, there's no need to panic. That item in the installer should actually read "QuickTime Player 7." QuickTime 7, the obsolete but extremely capable media framework discussed earlier, is installed by default in Snow Leopard—in fact, it's mandatory. But the player application, the one with the obsolete blue "Q" icon, the one that many casual users actually reflect of as being "QuickTime," that's been replaced with a novel QuickTime-X-savvy version sporting a pudgy novel icon (see above right).

    The novel player application is a tall departure from the old. Obviously, it leverages QuickTime X for more efficient video playback, but the user interface is moreover completely new. Gone are the gray verge and bottom-mounted playback controls from the obsolete QuickTime Player, replaced by a frameless window with a black title bar and a floating, moveable set of controls.

    The  novel QuickTime Player: boldly going where <a href="http://code.google.com/p/niceplayer/">NicePlayer</a> has gone before Enlarge / The novel QuickTime Player: boldly going where NicePlayer has gone before

    It's relish a combination of the window treatment of the excellent NicePlayer application and the full-screen playback controls from the obsolete QuickTime Player. I'm a bit bothered by two things. First, the ever-so-slightly clipped corners seem relish a imperfect idea. Am I just suppositious to give up those dozen-or-so pixels? NicePlayer does it right, showing crisp, square corners.

    Second, the floating playback controls obscure the movie. What if I'm scrubbing around looking for something in that section of the frame? Yes, you can creep the controls, but what if I'm looking for something in an unknown location in the frame? Also, the title bar obscures an entire swath of the top of the frame, and this can't exist moved. I treasure the compactness of this approach, but it'd exist nice if the title bar overlap could exist disabled and the controls could exist dragged off the movie entirely and docked to the bottom or something.

    (One blessing for people who participate my OCD tendencies: if you creep the floating controls, they don't remember their position the next time you open a movie. Why is that a blessing? Because if it worked the other way, we'd gross spend course too much time fretting about their inability to restore the controller to its default, precisely centered position. Sad, but true.)

    The novel QuickTime Player presents a decidedly iMovie-like (or is it iPhone-like, nowadays?) interface for trimming video. Still-frame thumbnails are placed side-by-side to profile a timeline, with adjustable stops at each conclude for trimming.

    Trimming in the  novel QuickTime Player Enlarge / Trimming in the novel QuickTime Player

    Holding down the option key changes from a thumbnail timeline to an audio waveform display:

    Trimming with audio waveform view Enlarge / Trimming with audio waveform view

    In both the video and audio cases, I hold to prodigy exactly how useful the fancy timeline appearances are. The audio waveform is quite tiny and compressed, and the limited horizontal space of the in-window display means a movie can only demonstrate a handful of video frames in its timeline. Also, if there's any talent to carry out fine adjustments using something other than extremely watchful mouse movements (which are necessarily theme to a limited resolution) then I couldn't find it. Final sever Pro this is not.

    QuickTime Player has learned another novel trick: screen recording. The controls are limited, so more demanding users will quiet hold a need for a full-featured screen recorder, but QuickTime Player gets the job done.

    Screen recording in QuickTime PlayerScreen recording in QuickTime Player

    There's moreover an audio-only option, with a similarly simplified collection of settings.

    Audio recordingAudio recording

    Finally, the novel QuickTime Player has the talent to upload a movie directly to YouTube and MobileMe, send one via e-mail, or add it to your iTunes library. The export options are moreover vastly simplified, with preset options for iPhone/iPod, Apple TV, and HD 480p and 720p.

    Unfortunately, the list of things you can't carry out with the novel QuickTime Player is quite long. You can't cut, copy, and paste capricious portions of a movie (trimming only affects the ends); you can't extract or delete individual tracks or overlay one track onto another (optionally scaling to fit); you can't export a movie by choosing from the plenary set of available QuickTime audio and video codecs. gross of these things were possible with the obsolete QuickTime Player—if, that is, you paid the $30 for a QuickTime Pro license. In the past, I've described this extra fee as "criminally stupid", but the features it enabled in QuickTime Player were really useful.

    It's tempting to attribute their absence in the novel QuickTime Player to the previously discussed limitations of QuickTime X. But the novel QuickTime Player is built on top of QTKit, which serves as a front-end for both QuickTime X and QuickTime 7. And it does, after all, feature some limited editing features relish trimming, plus some previously "Pro"-only features relish full-screen playback. Also, the novel QuickTime Player can indeed play movies using third-party plug-ins—a feature clearly powered by QuickTime 7.

    Well, Snow Leopard has an extremely pleasant astonish waiting for you if you install the optional QuickTime Player 7. When I did so, what I got was the obsolete QuickTime Player—somewhat insultingly installed in the "Utilities" folder—with gross of its "Pro" features permanently unlocked. Yes, the tyranny of QuickTime Pro seems to exist at an end…

    QuickTime Pro: now free for everyone?QuickTime Pro: now free for everyone?

    …but perhaps the key word above is "seems," because QuickTime Player 7 does not hold gross "pro" features unlocked for everyone. I installed Snow Leopard onto an barren disk, and QuickTime 7 was not automatically installed (as it is when the installer detects an existing QuickTime Pro license on the target disk). After booting from my fresh Snow Leopard volume, I manually installed the "QuickTime 7" optional component using the Snow Leopard installer disk.

    The result for me was a QuickTime Player 7 application with gross pro features unlocked and with no visible QuickTime Pro registration information. I did, however, hold a QuickTime Pro license on one of the attached drives. Apparently, the installer detected this and gave me an unlocked QuickTime Player 7 application, even though the boot volume never had a QuickTime Pro license on it.

    The Dock

    The novel appearance of some aspects of the Dock are accompanied by some novel functionality as well. Clicking and holding on a running application's Dock icon now triggers Expos�, but only for the windows belonging to that application. Dragging a file onto a docked application icon and holding it there for a bit produces the identical result. You can then continue that identical drag onto one of the Exposé window thumbnails and hover there a bit to bring that window to the front and drop the file into it. It's a pretty handy technique, once you fetch in the employ of doing it.

    The Exposé display itself is moreover changed. Now, minimized windows are displayed in smaller profile on the bottom of the screen below a thin line.

    Dock Exposé with  novel placement of minimized windows Enlarge / Dock Exposé with novel placement of minimized windows

    In the screenshot above, you'll notice that no one of the minimized windows appear in my Dock. That's thanks to another welcome addition: the talent to minimize windows "into" the application icon. You'll find the setting for this in the Dock's preference pane.

    New Dock preference: Minimize windows into application iconNew Dock preference: Minimize windows into application icon Minimized windows in a Dock application menuMinimized window denoted by a diamond

    Once set, minimized windows will slip behind the icon of their parent application and then disappear. To fetch them back, either right-click the application icon (see right) or trigger Exposé.

    The Dock's grid view for folders now incorporates a scroll bar when there are too many items to fit comfortably. Clicking on a folder icon in the grid now shows that folder's contents within the grid, allowing you to navigate down several folders to find a buried item. A tiny "back" navigation button appears once you descend.

    These are gross useful novel behaviors, and quite a reward considering the suppositious "no novel features" stance of Snow Leopard. But the fundamental nature of the Dock remains the same. Users who want a more elastic or more powerful application launcher/folder organizer/window minimization system must quiet either sacrifice some functionality (e.g., Dock icon badges and bounce notifications) or continue to expend the Dock in addition to a third-party application.

    The option to champion minimized windows from cluttering up the Dock was long overdue. But my enthusiasm is tempered by my frustration at the continued inability to click on a docked folder and hold it open in the Finder, while moreover retaining the talent to drag items into that folder. This was the default deportment for docked folders for the first six years of Mac OS X's life, but it changed in Leopard. Snow Leopard does not help matters.

    Docking an alias to a folder provides the single-click-open behavior, but items cannot exist dragged into a docked folder alias for some inexplicable reason. (Radar 5775786, closed in March 2008 with the terse explanation, "not currently supported.") Worse, dragging an item to a docked folder alias looks relish it will labor (the icon highlights) but upon release, the dragged item simply springs back to its original location. I really hoped this one would fetch fixed in Snow Leopard. No such luck.

    Dock grid view's in-place navigation with back buttonDock grid view's in-place navigation with back button The Finder

    One of the earliest leaked screenshots of Snow Leopard included an innocuous-looking "Get Info…" window for the Finder, presumably to demonstrate that its version number had been updated to 10.6. The more attractive tidbit of information it revealed was that the Finder in Snow Leopard was a 64-bit application.

    The Mac OS X Finder started its life as the designated "dog food" application for the Carbon backward-compatibility API for Mac OS X. Over the years, the Finder has been a frequent target of dissatisfaction and scorn. Those imperfect feelings frequently spilled over into the parallel debate over API supremacy: Carbon vs. Cocoa.

    "The Finder sucks because it's a Carbon app. What they need is a Cocoa Finder! Surely that will decipher gross their woes." Well, Snow Leopard features a 64-bit Finder, and as they gross know, Carbon was not ported to 64-bit. Et voila! A Cocoa Finder in Snow Leopard. (More on the woes in a bit.)

    The conversion to Cocoa followed the Snow Leopard formula: no novel features… except for maybe one or two. And so, the "new" Cocoa Finder looks and works almost exactly relish the obsolete Carbon Finder. The biggest indicator of its "Cocoa-ness" is the extensive expend of Core Animation transitions. For example, when a Finder window does its schizophrenic transformation from a sidebar-bedecked browser window to its minimally-adorned form, it no longer happens in a blink. Instead, the sidebar slides away and fades, the toolbar shrinks, and everything tucks in to profile its novel shape.

    Despite crossing the line in a few cases, the Core Animation transitions carry out create the application feel more polished, and yes, "more Cocoa." And presumably the expend of Cocoa made it so darn easy to add features that the developers just couldn't resist throwing in a few.

    The number-one feature request from heavy column-view users has finally been implemented: sortable columns. The sort order applies to gross columns at once, which isn't as nice as per-column sorting, but it's much better than nothing at all. The sort order can exist set using a menu command (each of which has a keyboard shortcut) or by right-clicking in an unoccupied district of a column and selecting from the resulting context menu.

    Column view sorting context menu Enlarge / Column view sorting context menu Column view sorting menu Enlarge / Column view sorting menu

    Even the lowly icon view has been enhanced in Snow Leopard. Every icon-view window now includes a tiny slider to control the size of the icons.

    The Finder's icon view with its  novel slider controlThe Finder's icon view with its novel slider control

    This may seem a bit odd—how often carry out people change icon sizes?—but it makes much more sense in the context of previewing images in the Finder. This expend case is made even more relevant by the recent expansion of the maximum icon size to 512x512 pixels.

    The icon previews themselves hold been enhanced to better match the abilities available in Quick Look. redeem it gross together and you can smoothly zoom a tiny PDF icon, for example, into the impressively high-fidelity preview shown below, complete with the talent to spin pages. One press of the space bar and you'll progress to the even larger and more elastic Quick study view. It's a pretty smooth experience.

    Not your father's icon: 512x512 pixels of multi-page PDF previewingNot your father's icon: 512x512 pixels of multi-page PDF previewing

    QuickTime previews hold been similarly enhanced. As you zoom in on the icon, it transforms into a miniature movie player, adorned with an odd circular progress indicator. Assuming users are willing to wrangle with the vagaries of the Finder's view settings successfully enough to fetch icon view to stick for the windows where it's most useful, I reflect that odd cramped slider is actually going to fetch a lot of use.

    The Finder's QuickTime preview. (The "glare" overlay is a bit much.)The Finder's QuickTime preview. (The "glare" overlay is a bit much.)

    List view moreover has a few enhancements—accidental, incidental, or otherwise. The drag district for each list view item now spans the entire line. In Leopard, though the entire line was highlighted, only the file title or icon portion could exist dragged. Trying to drag anywhere else just extended the selection to other items in the list view as the cursor was moved. I'm not positive whether this change in deportment is intentional or if it's just an unexamined consequence of the underlying control used for list view in the novel Cocoa Finder. Either way, thumbs up.

    Double-clicking on the dividing line between two column headers in list view will "right-size" that column. For most columns, this means expanding or shrinking to minimally fit the widest value in the column. Date headers will progressively shrink to demonstrate less verbose date formats. Supposedly, this worked intermittently in Leopard as well. But whether Cocoa is bringing this feature for the first time or is just making it labor correctly for the first time, it's a change for the better.

    Searching using the Finder's browser view is greatly improved by the implementation of one of those cramped things that many users hold been clamoring for year after year. There's now a preference to select the default scope of the search sphere in the Finder window toolbar. Can I fetch an amen?

    Default Finder search location: configurable at last.Default Finder search location: configurable at last.

    Along similar lines, there are other long-desired enhancements that will Go a long course towards making the desktop environment feel more solid. A Good sample is the improved handling of the dreaded "cannot eject, disk in use" error. The obvious follow-up question from the user is, "Okay, so what's using it?" Snow Leopard finally provides that information.

    No more guessingNo more guessing

    (Yes, Mac OS X will spurn to evict a disk if your current working directory in a command-line shell is on that disk. benign of cool, but moreover benign of annoying.)

    Another possible user response to a disk-in-use mistake is, "I don't care. I'm in a hurry. Just evict it!" That's an option now as well.

    Forcible ejection in progressForcible ejection in progress

    Hm, but why did I fetch information about the offending application in one dialog, an option to oblige ejection in the other, but neither one presented both choices? It's a mystery to me, but presumably it's related to exactly what information the Finder has about the contention for the disk. (As always, the lsof command is available if you want to figure it out the old-fashioned way.)


    So does the novel Cocoa Finder finally exile gross of those embarrassing bugs from the bad-old days of Carbon? Not quite. This is essentially the "1.0" release of the Cocoa Finder, and it has its participate of 1.0 bugs. Here's one discovered by Glen Aspeslagh (see image right).

    Do you descry it? If not, study closer at the order of the dates in the supposedly sorted "Date Modified" column. So yeah, that obsolete Finder magic has not been entirely extinguished.

    There moreover remains some weirdness in the operation of the icon grid. In a view where grid snap is turned on (or is enabled transiently by holding down the command key during a drag) icons seem terrified of each other, leaving huge distances between themselves and their neighbors when they select which grid spot to snap to. It's as if the Finder lives in mortal awe that one of these files will someday fetch a 200-character filename that will overlap with a neighboring file's name.

    The worst incarnation of this deportment happens along the privilege edge of the screen where mounted volumes appear on the desktop. (Incidentally, this is not the default; if you want to descry disks on your desktop, you must enable this preference in the Finder.) When I mount a novel disk, I'm often surprised to descry where it ends up appearing. If there are any icons remotely nearby to the privilege edge of the screen, the disk icon will spurn to appear there. Again, the Finder is not avoiding any actual title or icon overlapping. It appears to exist avoiding the mere possibility of overlapping at some unspecified point in the future. Silly.

    Finder report card

    Overall, the Snow Leopard Finder takes several significant steps forward—64-bit/Cocoa future-proofing, a few new, useful features, added polish—and only a few shuffles backwards with the slight overuse of animation and the continued presence of some puzzling bugs. Considering how long it took the Carbon Finder to fetch to its pre-Snow-Leopard feature set and flush of polish, it's quite an achievement for a Cocoa Finder to match or exceed its predecessor in its very first release. I'm positive the Carbon vs. Cocoa warriors would hold had a sphere day with that statement, were Carbon not redeem out to pasture in Leopard. But it was, and to the victor Go the spoils.


    Snow Leopard's headline "one novel feature" is champion for Microsoft Exchange. This appears to be, at least partially, yet another hand-me-down from the iPhone, which gained champion for Exchange in its 2.0 release and expanded on it in 3.0. Snow Leopard's Exchange champion is weaved throughout the expected crop of applications in Mac OS X: iCal, Mail, and Address Book.

    The tall caveat is that it will only labor with a server running Exchange 2007 (Service Pack 1, Update Rollup 4) or later. While I'm positive Microsoft greatly appreciates any additional upgrade revenue this determination provides, it means that for users whose workplaces are quiet running older versions of Exchange, Snow Leopard's "Exchange support" might as well not exist.

    Those users are probably already running the only other viable Mac OS X Exchange client, Microsoft Entourage, so they'll likely just sit taut and wait for their IT departments to upgrade. Meanwhile, Microsoft is already making overtures to these users with the promised creation—finally—of an honest-to-goodness version of Outlook for Mac OS X.

    In my admittedly brief testing, Snow Leopard's Exchange champion seems to labor as expected. I had to hold one of the Microsoft mavens in the Ars Orbiting HQ spin up an Exchange 2007 server just for the purposes of this review. However it was configured, gross I had to enter in the Mail application was my plenary name, e-mail address, and password, and it automatically discovered gross relevant settings and configured iCal and Address reserve for me.

    Exchange setup: surprisingly easyExchange setup: surprisingly easy

    Windows users are no doubt accustomed to this benign of Exchange integration, but it's the first time I've seen it on the Mac platform—and that includes my many years of using Entourage.

    Access to Exchange-related features is decidedly subdued, in keeping with the existing interfaces for Mail, iCal, and Address Book. If you're expecting the swarm of panels and toolbar buttons organize in Outlook on Windows, you're in for a bit of a shock. For example, here's the "detail" view of a meeting in iCal.

    iCal event detailiCal event detail

    Clicking the "edit" button hardly reveals more.

    Event editor: that's it?Event editor: that's it?

    The "availability" window moreover includes the bare minimum number of controls and displays to fetch the job done.

    Meeting availability checker Enlarge / Meeting availability checker

    The integration into Mail and Address reserve is even more subtle—almost entirely transparent. This is to exist construed as a feature, I suppose. But though I don't know enough about Exchange to exist completely sure, I can't quiver the emotion that there are Exchange features that remain inaccessible from Mac OS X clients. For example, how carry out I reserve a "resource" in a meeting? If there's a course to carry out so, I couldn't learn it.

    Still, even basic Exchange integration out-of-the-box goes long course towards making Mac OS X more welcome in corporate environments. It remains to exist seen how convinced IT managers are of the "realness" of Snow Leopard's Exchange integration. But I've got to reflect that being able to send and receive mail, create and respond to meeting invitations, and expend the global corporate address reserve is enough for any Mac user to fetch along reasonably well in an Exchange-centric environment.


    The thing is, there's not really much to exclaim about performance in Snow Leopard. Dozens of benchmark graphs lead to the identical simple conclusion: Snow Leopard is faster than Leopard. Not shockingly so, at least in the aggregate, but it's faster. And while isolating one particular subsystem with a micro-benchmark may disclose some impressive numbers, it's the course these tiny changes combine to help the real-world experience of using the system that really makes a difference.

    One sample Apple gave at WWDC was making an initial Time Machine backup over the network to a Time Capsule. Apple's approach to optimizing this operation was to address each and every subsystem involved.

    Time Machine itself was given champion for overlapping i/o. Spotlight indexing, which happens on Time Machine volumes as well, was identified as another time-consuming task involved in backups, so its performance was improved. The networking code was enhanced to buy handicap of hardware-accelerated checksums where possible, and the software checksum code was hand-tuned for maximum performance. The performance of HFS+ journaling, which accompanies each file system metadata update, was moreover improved. For Time Machine backups that write to disk images rather than native HFS+ file systems, Apple added champion for concurrent access to disk images. The amount of network traffic produced by AFP during backups has moreover been reduced.

    All of this adds up to a respectable 55% overall improvement in the quicken of an initial Time Machine backup. And, of course, the performance improvements to the individual subsystems benefit gross applications that expend them, not just Time Machine.

    This holistic approach to performance improvement is not likely to knock anyone's socks off, but every time you hasten across a piece of functionality in Snow Leopard that disproportionately benefits from one of these optimized subsystems, it's a pleasure.

    For example, Snow Leopard shuts down and restarts much faster than Leopard. I'm not talking about boot time; I exist substantive the time between the selection of the Shutdown or Restart command and when the system turns off or begins its novel boot cycle. Leopard doesn't buy long at gross to carry out this; only a few dozen of seconds when there are no applications open. But in Snow Leopard, it's so quick that I often thought the operating system had crashed rather than shut down cleanly. (That's actually not too far from the truth.)

    The performance boosts offered by earlier major releases of Mac OS X quiet dwarf Snow Leopard's speedup, but that's mostly because Mac OS X was so excruciatingly sluggish in its early years. It's easy to create a tall performance delta when you're starting from something abysmally slow. The fact that Snow Leopard achieves consistent, measurable improvements over the already-speedy Leopard is gross the more impressive.

    And yes, for the seventh consecutive time, a novel release of Mac OS X is faster on the identical hardware than its predecessor. (And for the first time ever, it's smaller, too.) What more can you question for, really? Even that obsolete performance bugaboo, window resizing, has been completely vanquished. Grab the corner of a fully-populated iCal window—the worst-case scenario for window resizing in the obsolete days—and quiver it as quick as you can. Your cursor will never exist more than a few millimeters from the window's grab handle; it tracks your frantic motion perfectly. On most Macs, this is actually dependable in Leopard as well. It just goes to demonstrate how far Mac OS X has near on the performance front. These days, they gross just buy it for granted, which is exactly the course it should be.

    Grab bag

    In the "grab bag" section, I usually examine smaller, mostly unrelated features that don't warrant full-blown sections of their own. But when it comes to user-visible features, Snow Leopard is benign of "all grab bag," if you know what I mean. Apple's even got its own incarnation in the profile of a giant webpage of "refinements." I'll probably overlap with some of those, but there'll exist a few novel ones here as well.

    New columns in open/save dialogs

    The list view in open and redeem dialog boxed now supports more than just "Name" and "Date Modified" columns. Right-click on any column to fetch a choice of additional columns to display. I've wanted this feature for a long time, and I'm joyous someone finally had time to implement it.

    Configurable columns in open/save dialogsConfigurable columns in open/save dialogs Improved scanner support

    The bundled Image Capture application now has the talent to talk to a wide purview of scanners. I plugged in my Epson Stylus CX7800, a device that previously required the expend of third-party software in order to expend the scanning feature, and Image Capture detected it immediately.

    Epson scanner + Image Capture - Epson software Enlarge / Epson scanner + Image Capture - Epson software

    Image Capture is moreover not a imperfect cramped scanning application. It has pretty Good automatic object detection, including champion for multiple objects, obviating the need to manually crop items. Given the sometimes-questionable trait of third-party printer and scanner drivers for Mac OS X, the talent to expend a bundled application is welcome.

    System Preferences bit wars

    System Preferences, relish virtually gross other applications in Snow Leopard, is 64-bit. But since 64-bit applications can't load 32-bit plug-ins, that presents a problem for the existing crop of 32-bit third-party preference panes. System Preferences handles this situation with a reasonable amount of grace. On launch, it will display icons for gross installed preference panes, 64-bit or 32-bit. But if you click on a 32-bit preference pane, you'll exist presented with a notification relish this:

    64-bit application vs. 32-bit plug-in: fight!64-bit application vs. 32-bit plug-in: fight!

    Click "OK" and System Preferences will relaunch in 32-bit mode, which is conveniently indicated in the title bar. Since gross of the first-party preference panes are compiled for both 64-bit and 32-bit operation, System Preferences does not need to relaunch again for the duration of its use. This raises the question, why not hold System Preferences launch in 32-bit mode gross the time? I suspect it's just another course for Apple to "encourage" developers to build 64-bit-compatible binaries.

    Safari plug-ins

    The inability of of 64-bit applications load 32-bit plug-ins is a problem for Safari as well. Plug-ins are so needful to the Web experience that relaunching in 32-bit mode is not really an option. You'd probably need to relaunch as soon as you visited your first webpage. But Apple does want Safari to hasten in 64-bit mode due to some significant performance enhancements in the JavaScript engine and other areas of the application that are not available in 32-bit mode.

    Apple's solution is similar to what it did with QuickTime X and 32-bit QuickTime 7 plug-ins. Safari will hasten 32-bit plug-ins in divorce 32-bit processes as needed.

    Separate processes for 32-bit Safari plug-insSeparate processes for 32-bit Safari plug-ins

    This has the added, extremely significant benefit of isolating potentially buggy plug-ins. According to the automated crash reporting built into Mac OS X, Apple has said that the number one antecedent of crashes is Web browser plug-ins. That's not the number one antecedent of crashes in Safari, understanding you, it's the number one antecedent when considering gross crashes of gross applications in Mac OS X. (And though it was not mentioned by name, I reflect they gross know the primary culprit.)

    As you can descry above, the QuickTime browser plug-in gets the identical treatment as flash and other third-party 32-bit Safari plug-ins. gross of this means that when a plug-in crashes, Safari in Snow Leopard does not. The window or tab containing the crashing plug-in doesn't even close. You can simply click the reload button and give the problematic plug-in another desultory to duty correctly.

    While this is quiet far from the much more robust approach employed by Google Chrome, where each tab lives in its own independent process, if Apple's crash statistics are to exist believed, isolating plug-ins may generate most of the benefit of truly divorce processes with a significantly less radical change to the Safari application itself.

    Resolution independence

    When they eventual left Mac OS X in its seemingly interminable march towards a truly scalable user interface, it was almost ready for prime time. I'm unlucky to exclaim that resolution independence was obviously not a priority in Snow Leopard, because it hasn't gotten any better, and may hold actually regressed a bit. Here's what TextEdit looks relish at a 2.0 scale factor in Leopard and Snow Leopard.

    TextEdit at scale factor 2.0 in LeopardTextEdit at scale factor 2.0 in Leopard TextEdit at scale factor 2.0 in Snow LeopardTextEdit at scale factor 2.0 in Snow Leopard

    Yep, it's a bummer. I quiet remember Apple advising developers to hold their applications ready for resolution independence by 2008. That's one of the few dates that the Jobs-II-era Apple has not been able to hit, and it's getting later gross the time. On the other hand, it's not relish 200-DPI monitors are raining from the sky either. But I'd really relish to descry Apple fetch going on this. It will undoubtedly buy a long time for everything to study and labor correctly, so let's fetch started.

    Terminal splitters

    The Terminal application in Tiger and earlier versions of Mac OS X allowed each of its windows to exist split horizontally into two divorce panes. This was invaluable for referencing some earlier text in the scrollback while moreover typing commands at the prompt. Sadly, the splitter feature disappeared in Leopard. In Snow Leopard, it's back with a vengeance.

    Arbitrary splitters, baby!Arbitrary splitters, baby!

    (Now if only my favorite text editor would fetch on board the train to splittersville.)

    Terminal in Snow Leopard moreover defaults to the novel Menlo font. But wayward to earlier reports, the One dependable Monospaced Font, Monaco, is most definitely quiet included in Snow Leopard (see screenshot above) and it works just fine.

    System Preferences shuffle

    The seemingly obligatory rearrangement of preference panes in the System Preferences application accompanying each release of Mac OS X continues in Snow Leopard.

    System Preferences: shuffled yet again Enlarge / System Preferences: shuffled yet again System Preferences (not running) with Dock menuSystem Preferences (not running) with Dock menu

    This time, the "Keyboard & Mouse" preference pane is split into divorce "Keyboard" and "Mouse" panes, "International" becomes "Language & Text," and the "Internet & Network" section becomes "Internet & Wireless" and adopts the Bluetooth preference pane.

    Someday in the faraway future, perhaps Apple will finally arrive at the "ultimate" arrangement of preference panes and they can gross finally Go more than two years without their muscle reminiscence being disrupted.

    Before stirring on, System Preferences has one well-organized trick. You can launch directly into a specific preference pane by right-clicking on System Preferences's Dock icon. This works even when System Preferences is not yet running. benign of creepy, but useful.

    Core location

    One more gift from the iPhone, Core Location, allows Macs to figure out where in the world they are. The "Date & Time" preference pane offers to set your time zone automatically based on your current location using this newfound ability.

    Set your Mac's time zone automatically based on your current location, thanks to Core Location.Set your Mac's time zone automatically based on your current location, thanks to Core Location. Keyboard magic

    Snow Leopard includes a simple facility for system-wide text auto-correction and expansion, accessible from the "Language & Text" preference pane. It's not quite ready to give a dedicated third-party application a hasten for its money, but hey, it's free.

    Global text expansion and auto-correction Enlarge / Global text expansion and auto-correction

    The keyboard shortcuts preference pane has moreover been rearranged. Now, instead of a single, long list of system-wide keyboard shortcuts, they're arranged into categories. This reduces clutter, but it moreover makes it a bit more difficult to find the shortcut you're interested in.

    Keyboard shortcuts: now with categories Enlarge / Keyboard shortcuts: now with categories The sleeping Mac dilemma

    I don't relish to leave my Mac Pro turned on 24 hours a day, especially during the summer in my un-air-conditioned house. But I carry out want to hold access to the files on my Mac when I'm elsewhere—at work, on the road, etc. It is possible to wake a sleeping Mac remotely, but doing so requires being on the identical local network.

    My solution has been to leave a smaller, more power-efficient laptop on at gross times on the identical network as my Mac Pro. To wake my Mac Pro remotely, I ssh into the laptop, then send the magic "wake up" packet to my Mac Pro. (For this to work, the "Wake for Ethernet network administrator access" checkbox must exist checked in the "Energy Saver" preference pane in System Preferences.)

    Snow Leopard provides a course to carry out this without leaving any of my computers running gross day. When a Mac running Snow Leopard is redeem to sleep, it attempts to hand off ownership of its IP address to its router. (This only works with an AirPort Extreme foundation station from 2007 or later, or a Time Capsule from 2008 or later with the latest (7.4.2) firmware installed.) The router then listens for any attempt to connect to the IP address. When one occurs, it wakes up the original owner, hands back the IP address, and forwards traffic appropriately.

    You can even wake some recent-model Macs over WiFi. Combined with MobileMe's "Back to My Mac" dynamic DNS thingamabob, it means I can leave gross my Macs asleep and quiet hold access to their contents anytime, anywhere.

    Back to my hack

    As has become traditional, this novel release of Mac OS X makes life a bit harder for developers whose software works by patching the in-memory representation of other running applications or the operating system itself. This includes Input Managers, SIMBL plug-ins, and of course the dreaded "Haxies."

    Input Managers fetch the worst of it. They've actually been unsupported and non-functional in 64-bit applications since Leopard. That wasn't such a tall deal when Mac OS X shipped with a whopping two 64-bit applications. But now, with almost every application in Snow Leopard going 64-bit, it's suddenly very significant.

    Thanks to Safari's want of an officially sanctioned extension mechanism, developers looking to enhance its functionality hold most often resorted to the expend of Input Managers and SIMBL (which is an Input-Manager-based framework). A 64-bit Safari puts a damper on that entire market. Though it is possible to manually set Safari to launch in 32-bit mode—Get Info on the application in the Finder and click a checkbox—ideally, this is not something developers want to oblige users to do.

    Happily, at least one commonly used Safari enhancement has the Good fortune to exist built on top of the officially supported browser plug-in API used by Flash, QuickTime, etc. But that may not exist a feasible approach for Safari extensions that enhance functionality in ways not tied directly to the display of particular types of content within a webpage.

    Though I intent to hasten Safari in its default 64-bit mode, I'll really miss Saft, a Safari extension I expend for session restoration (yes, I know Safari has this feature, but it's activated manually—the horror) and address bar shortcuts (e.g., "w noodles" to study up "noodles" in Wikipedia). I'm hoping that sagacious developers will find a course to overcome this novel challenge. They always seem to, in the end. (Or Apple could add a proper extension system to Safari, of course. But I'm not holding my breath.)

    As for the Haxies, those usually crash with each major operating system update as a matter of course. And each time, those determined fellows at Unsanity, against gross odds, manage to champion their software working. I salute them for their effort. I delayed upgrading to Leopard for a long time based solely on the absence of my beloved WindowShade X. I hope I don't hold to wait too long for a Snow-Leopard-compatible version.

    The common trend in Mac OS X is away from any sort of involuntary reminiscence space sharing, and towards "external" plug-ins that live in their own, divorce processes. Even contextual menu plug-ins in the Finder hold been disabled, replaced by an enhanced, but quiet less-powerful Services API. Again, I hold faith that developers will adapt. But the waiting is the hardest part.


    It looks relish we'll gross exist waiting a while longer for a file system in shining armor to supplant the venerable HFS+ (11 years young!) as the default file system in Mac OS X. Despite rumors, outright declarations, and much actual pre-release code, champion for the impressive ZFS file system is not present in Snow Leopard.

    That's a shame because Time Machine veritably cries out for some ZFS magic. What's more, Apple seems to agree, as evidenced by a post from an Apple employee to a ZFS mailing list eventual year. When asked about a ZFS-savvy implementation of Time Machine, the reply was encouraging: "This one is needful and likely will near sometime, but not for SL." ("SL" is short for Snow Leopard.)

    There are many reasons why ZFS (or a file system with similar features) is a consummate fit for Time Machine, but the most needful is its talent to send only the block-level changes during each backup. As Time Machine is currently implemented, if you create a tiny change to a giant file, the entire giant file is copied to the Time Machine volume during the next backup. This is extremely wasteful and time consuming, especially for big files that are modified constantly during the day (e.g., Entourage's e-mail database). Time Machine running on top of ZFS could transfer just the changed disk blocks (a maximum of 128KB each in ZFS, and usually much smaller).

    ZFS would moreover bring vastly increased robustness for data and metadata, a pooled storage model, constant-time snapshots and clones, and a pony. People sometimes question what, exactly, is wrong with HFS+. Aside from its obvious want of the features just listed, HFS+ is limited in many ways by its dated design, which is based on HFS, a twenty-five year-old file system.

    To give just one example, the centrally located Catalog File, which must exist updated for each change to the file system's structure, is a frequent and inevitable source of contention. Modern file systems usually spread their metadata around, both for robustness (multiple copies are often kept in divorce locations on the disk) and to allow for better concurrency.

    Practically speaking, reflect about those times when you hasten Disk Utility on an HFS+ volume and it finds (and hopefully repairs) a bunch of errors. That's bad, okay? That's something that should not betide with a modern, thoroughly checksummed, always-consistent-on-disk file system unless there are hardware problems (and a ZFS storage pool can actually deal with that as well). And yet it happens gross the time with HFS+ disks in Mac OS X when various bits of metadata fetch corrupted or become out of date.

    Apple gets by year after year, tacking novel features onto HFS+ with duct tape and a prayer, but at a certain point there simply has to exist a successor—whether it's ZFS, a home-grown Apple file system, or something else entirely. My fingers are crossed for Mac OS X 10.7.

    The future soon

    Creating an operating system is as much a sociable exercise as a technological one. Creating a platform, even more so. gross of Snow Leopard's considerable technical achievements are not just designed to benefit users; they're moreover intended to goad, persuade, and otherwise herd developers in the direction that Apple feels will exist most advantageous for the future of the platform.

    For this to work, Snow Leopard has to actually find its course into the hands of customers. The pricing helps a lot there. But even if Snow Leopard were free, there's quiet some cost to the consumer—in time, worry, software updates, etc.—when performing a major operating system upgrade. The identical goes for developers who must, at the very least, certify that their existing applications hasten correctly on the novel OS.

    The accustomed course to overcome this benign of upgrade hesitation has been to pack the OS with novel features. novel features sell, and the more copies of the novel operating system in use, the more motivated developers are to update their applications to not just hasten on the novel OS, but moreover buy handicap of its novel abilities.

    A major operating system upgrade with "no novel features" must play by a different set of rules. Every party involved expects some counterbalance to the want of novel features. In Snow Leopard, developers stand to gather the biggest benefits thanks to an impressive set of novel technologies, many of which cover areas previously unaddressed in Mac OS X. Apple clearly feels that the future of the platform depends on much better utilization of computing resources, and is doing everything it can to create it easy for developers to creep in this direction.

    Though it's obvious that Snow Leopard includes fewer external features than its predecessor, I'd wager that it has just as many, if not more internal changes than Leopard. This, I fear, means that the initial release of Snow Leopard will likely suffer the typical 10.x.0 bugs. There hold already been reports of novel bugs introduced to existing APIs in Snow Leopard. This is the exact contradictory of Snow Leopard's implied swear to users and developers that it would concentrate on making existing features faster and more robust without introducing novel functionality and the accompanying novel bugs.

    On the other side of the coin, I imagine gross the teams at Apple that worked on Snow Leopard absolutely reveled in the opening to polish their particular subsystems without being burdened by supporting the marketing-driven feature-of-the-month. In any long-lived software product, there needs to exist this benign of release valve every few years, lest the entire code foundation Go off into the weeds.

    There's been one other "no novel features" release of Mac OS X. Mac OS X 10.1, released a mere six months after version 10.0, was handed out for free by Apple at the 2001 Seybold publishing conference and, later, at Apple retail stores. It was moreover available from Apple's online store for $19.95 (along with a copy of Mac OS 9.2.1 for expend in the Classic environment). This was a different time for Mac OS X. Versions 10.0 and 10.1 were slow, incomplete, and extremely immature; the transition from classic Mac OS was far from over.

    Judged as a modern incarnation of the 10.1 release, Snow Leopard looks pretty darned good. The pricing is similar, and the benefits—to developers and to users—are greater. So is the risk. But again, that has more to carry out with how horrible Mac OS X 10.0 was. Choosing not to upgrade to 10.1 was unthinkable. Waiting a while to upgrade to Snow Leopard is reasonable if you want to exist positive that gross the software you charge about is compatible. But don't wait too long, because at $29 for the upgrade, I hope Snow Leopard adoption to exist quite rapid. Software that will hasten only on Snow Leopard may exist here before you know it.

    Should you buy Mac OS X Snow Leopard? If you're already running Leopard, then the retort is a resounding "yes." If you're quiet running Tiger, well, then it's probably time for a novel Mac anyway. When you buy one, it'll near with Snow Leopard.

    As for the future, it's tempting to view Snow Leopard as the "tick" in a novel Intel-style "tick-tock" release strategy for Mac OS X: radical novel features in version 10.7 followed by more Snow-Leopard-style refinements in 10.8, and so on, alternating between "feature" and "refinement" releases. Apple has not even hinted that they're considering this sort of plan, but I reflect there's a lot to recommend it.

    Snow Leopard is a unique and gorgeous release, unlike any that hold near before it in both scope and intention. At some point, Mac OS X will surely need to fetch back on the bullet-point-features bandwagon. But for now, I'm content with Snow Leopard. It's the Mac OS X I know and love, but with more of the things that create it infirm and eccentric engineered away.

    Snowy eyes Looking back

    This is the tenth review of a plenary Mac OS X release, public beta, or developer preview to hasten on Ars, dating back to December 1999 and Mac OS X DP2. If you want to jump into the Wayback Machine and descry how far Apple has near with Snow Leopard (or just want to bone up on gross of the tall cat monikers), we've gone through the archives and dug up some of their older Mac OS X articles. gratified reading!

  • Five years of Mac OS X, March 24, 2006
  • Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard, October 28, 2007
  • Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, April 28, 2005
  • Mac OS X 10.3 Panther, November 9, 2003
  • Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar, September 5, 2002
  • Mac OS X 10.1 (Puma), October 15, 2001
  • Mac OS X 10.0 (Cheetah), April 2, 2001
  • Mac OS X Public Beta, October 3, 2000
  • Mac OS X Q & A, June 20, 2000
  • Mac OS X DP4, May 24, 2000
  • Mac OS X DP3: trial by Water, February 28, 2000
  • Mac OS X Update: Quartz & Aqua, January 17, 2000
  • Mac OS X DP2, December 14, 1999

  • Apple patches Java cavity that was being used to compromise Mac users | killexams.com true questions and Pass4sure dumps

    Direct Download of over 5500 Certification Exams

    3COM [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AccessData [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACFE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Acme-Packet [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACSM [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Admission-Tests [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ADOBE [93 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AFP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AICPA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AIIM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alcatel-Lucent [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alfresco [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Altiris [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Amazon [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    American-College [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Android [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APICS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Apple [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AppSense [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APTUSC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Arizona-Education [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ARM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Aruba [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASIS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASQ [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASTQB [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Autodesk [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Avaya [96 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AXELOS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Axis [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Banking [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BEA [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BICSI [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlackBerry [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlueCoat [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Brocade [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Objects [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Tests [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CA-Technologies [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certification-Board [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certiport [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CheckPoint [41 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIPS [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cisco [318 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Citrix [47 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIW [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cloudera [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cognos [19 Certification Exam(s) ]
    College-Board [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CompTIA [76 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ComputerAssociates [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Consultant [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Counselor [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institue [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institute [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CSP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNP [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Dassault [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DELL [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DMI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DRI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECCouncil [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECDL [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    EMC [129 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Enterasys [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Ericsson [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ESPA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Esri [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExamExpress [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Exin [40 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExtremeNetworks [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    F5-Networks [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FCTC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Filemaker [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Financial [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Food [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fortinet [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Foundry [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FSMTB [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fujitsu [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GAQM [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Genesys [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GIAC [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Google [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GuidanceSoftware [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    H3C [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HDI [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Healthcare [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HIPAA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hitachi [30 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hortonworks [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hospitality [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HP [746 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HR [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HRCI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Huawei [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hyperion [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAAP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAHCSMM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBM [1530 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBQH [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICDL [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IEEE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IELTS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IFPUG [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIBA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IISFA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Intel [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IQN [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IRS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISACA [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISC2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISEB [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Isilon [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISM [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    iSQI [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ITEC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Juniper [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LEED [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Legato [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Liferay [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Logical-Operations [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Lotus [66 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LPI [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LSI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Magento [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Maintenance [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McAfee [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McData [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Medical [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Microsoft [368 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Mile2 [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Military [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Misc [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Motorola [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    mySQL [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NBSTSA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCEES [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCLEX [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Network-General [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NetworkAppliance [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NIELIT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nokia [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nortel [130 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Novell [37 Certification Exam(s) ]
    OMG [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Oracle [269 Certification Exam(s) ]
    P&C [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Palo-Alto [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PARCC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PayPal [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Pegasystems [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PEOPLECERT [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PMI [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Polycom [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PostgreSQL-CE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Prince2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PRMIA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PsychCorp [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PTCB [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QlikView [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Quality-Assurance [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RACC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Real-Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RedHat [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RES [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Riverbed [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RSA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sair [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Salesforce [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SANS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAP [98 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SASInstitute [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCO [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCP [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SDI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    See-Beyond [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Siemens [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Snia [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SOA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Social-Work-Board [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SpringSource [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUN [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUSE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sybase [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Symantec [134 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Teacher-Certification [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    The-Open-Group [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Tibco [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trainers [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trend [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TruSecure [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    USMLE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    VCE [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veeam [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veritas [33 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Vmware [58 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Wonderlic [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Worldatwork [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    XML-Master [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Zend [6 Certification Exam(s) ]

    References :

    Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/11802974
    Wordpress : http://wp.me/P7SJ6L-1Kc
    Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12566657
    Blogspot : http://killexamsbraindump.blogspot.com/2017/12/exactly-same-9l0-623-questions-as-in.html
    RSS Feed : http://feeds.feedburner.com/Apple9l0-623DumpsAndPracticeTestsWithRealQuestions
    Box.net : https://app.box.com/s/9103753jrwiupoh5mjfd3agcrbykulee

    Back to Main Page

    Killexams 9L0-623 exams | Killexams 9L0-623 cert | Pass4Sure 9L0-623 questions | Pass4sure 9L0-623 | pass-guaratee 9L0-623 | best 9L0-623 test preparation | best 9L0-623 training guides | 9L0-623 examcollection | killexams | killexams 9L0-623 review | killexams 9L0-623 legit | kill 9L0-623 example | kill 9L0-623 example journalism | kill exams 9L0-623 reviews | kill exam ripoff report | review 9L0-623 | review 9L0-623 quizlet | review 9L0-623 login | review 9L0-623 archives | review 9L0-623 sheet | legitimate 9L0-623 | legit 9L0-623 | legitimacy 9L0-623 | legitimation 9L0-623 | legit 9L0-623 check | legitimate 9L0-623 program | legitimize 9L0-623 | legitimate 9L0-623 business | legitimate 9L0-623 definition | legit 9L0-623 site | legit online banking | legit 9L0-623 website | legitimacy 9L0-623 definition | >pass 4 sure | pass for sure | p4s | pass4sure certification | pass4sure exam | IT certification | IT Exam | 9L0-623 material provider | pass4sure login | pass4sure 9L0-623 exams | pass4sure 9L0-623 reviews | pass4sure aws | pass4sure 9L0-623 security | pass4sure coupon | pass4sure 9L0-623 dumps | pass4sure cissp | pass4sure 9L0-623 braindumps | pass4sure 9L0-623 test | pass4sure 9L0-623 torrent | pass4sure 9L0-623 download | pass4surekey | pass4sure cap | pass4sure free | examsoft | examsoft login | exams | exams free | examsolutions | exams4pilots | examsoft download | exams questions | examslocal | exams practice |

    www.pass4surez.com | www.killcerts.com | www.search4exams.com | http://tractaricurteadearges.ro/