or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple's Snow Leopard disc will install on Tiger Macs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's Snow Leopard disc will install on Tiger Macs - Page 2

post #41 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Thank goodness this is finally cleared up (although we really knew yesterday with the story from Spain, although MR totally didn't report about the installation).

Maybe now all the douchebags who insisted that it absolutely wouldn't install without 10.5 already on the disk ("but it's an UPGRADE"!) based on absolutely nothing but their own hunches and wild speculation will learn to keep their yaps shut instead of trying to pass off their worthless opinions as fact.

But probably not.

Doubt we'll even see most of them admit they were wrong on this one. But here's your chance.

Man, how do you get up in the morning and look yourself in the mirror?

You actually think it's okay to go to a public forum and use the first post to spill this kind of idiotic bile on everyone concerned? For what? For the great slight of believing what a manufacturer says?

How dare they be reasonable after all? Don't they realise there are a lot of cheap angry people out there that are just champing at the bit to steal a few bucks from Apple? I mean who does Apple think it is making the best OS on the planet and charging the least amount of money for it? The nerve!
post #42 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Thank goodness this is finally cleared up (although we really knew yesterday with the story from Spain, although MR totally didn't report about the installation).

It's just that I'm wondering how that guy got a retail box before it's even out!
post #43 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Not arguing with you, but it seems odd to me if this is the case. This was the perfect moment to do something that would make it harder!

it will take a few weeks to find out why, but supposedly the new Mac Pro's are what make it possible
post #44 of 167
so if i have tiger on my intel imac, i can buy the 29$ upgrade Snow leopard and use that now, do i have to wipe my mac first, or not. Seams like we don't have all the answers yet, but basically how do i go about using the 29$ snow leopard on my tiger imac?
post #45 of 167
If Apple has actually shipped a full install disc in the $29 box, I wonder why, because they could have used an upgrade-only installer script like what is probably on the $9.95 Up-To-Date discs.

My Mac was eligible for a Leopard 10.5 Up-To-Date disc because it came with Tiger after Leopard was out, and the Leopard disc I got is specially marked and will NOT install without Tiger installed. It is definitely a different script than a regular retail disc. So Apple has the enforcement tools on the shelf.

So why isn't Apple doing that, if this report is right? If Apple is not mechanically enforcing the license they're probably saying they're pleased with the success of Family Pack sales, which are not mechanically enforced either. And Family Packs DO sell well, believe it or not. Or, Apple predicts people will buy the $29 box not knowing or not caring it's supposed to be an upgrade and Apple want to avoid unhappy returns more than they want to make extra money.
post #46 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Thank goodness this is finally cleared up (although we really knew yesterday with the story from Spain, although MR totally didn't report about the installation).

Maybe now all the douchebags who insisted that it absolutely wouldn't install without 10.5 already on the disk ("but it's an UPGRADE"!) based on absolutely nothing but their own hunches and wild speculation will learn to keep their yaps shut instead of trying to pass off their worthless opinions as fact.

But probably not.

Doubt we'll even see most of them admit they were wrong on this one. But here's your chance.


Your attack on whoever these people were are unfair. It has always been the case that Apple made upgrade-only discs for previously released systems so it was a fair assumption that they wouldn't make the $29 disc a clean installer. Anyone who applied to the up-to-date programme got a disc like that. It remains to be seen if this time the up-to-daters get the same disc as the $29 one.

Another point this article fails to make is that if Apple are saying that the $29 is licensed only for Leopard owners, Tiger owners will be breaching that. This needs to be clarified by somebody if this isn't the case.
post #47 of 167
Well, If someone wants to break the rules (EULA), than what's the point of purchasing the OS from Apple? You can just go and download it from the torrents. Either way, you're breaking EULA.

Mossberg and Pogue proved their utter incompetence in understanding licenses and software in general. How retarted is that, after 15+ years of journalism.
post #48 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Hmm... Purchased Leopard Family pack for multiple Macs at home solely because the software I needed for a project at the time was written and had functionality requiring OS 10.5 or so they say.

If the above quote is true, by my calculations, purchase of the $29.00 upgrade to SL vs the Family Pack upgrade will work just fine on my multiple Macs as well as knowledge that future OS releases to be installed on family of Macs does not require Family Pack.

Way to go Apple for single handedly debunking the mythical concept of the need for the "Family Pack"!

Either that or Apple owes me a refund! Bad Apple!!

So, because in your estimation paying for the OS last time was a rip-off of some kind, you are okay with ripping them off yourself this time?

It's amazing the moral contortions on this thread this morning, and over such a small amount of money. I admire someone who just says they are going to steal it because they want to steal it, but all this twisting and turning trying to justify the process is just idiotic IMO.

If you don't want to pay, then don't pay. It's clear that Apple doesn't want to force you. I just wish people would stop trying to make out like they have some kind of moral reason for doing so if they decide to not pay for it.

Best OS money can buy, for the cheapest price on the planet.
post #49 of 167
This is, indeed, fantastic news. Let's hope Apple does not take away our ability to do this.

Of course, I am expecting my iWork '08 and iLife '08 to continue to work decently with SL; it is really unconscionable of Apple to ask me for another $130 to update software I purchased a little over a year ago.... (it is bad enough that iWork '09 is not backwards compatible.)
post #50 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjcan77 View Post

I think it is safe to add that there are 2 Snow Leopard DVDs ... the upgrading set and the full OS set. So, even though someone would be able to install Snow Leopard on an Intel Tiger MAC, the person better buy the full program ... the news seemed to indicate you would be able to do so with the DVD for upgrade... I don't believe you can. Please let me know if I am wrong.

GS

Yes, you are wrong, the whole point of the article is that the $29 Snow Leopard disk *is* a full install and works with anything. Yes, upgrading from Tiger works (archive & install) without wiping.
post #51 of 167
That seems like great news, as I still have a 2006 Intel 20" iMac running Tiger. It does work great, but I was really thinking about SL....
But I've got a couple of doubts.....(see if anybody can enlighten me):

1-Will it not make my iMac slower when I install the new SL, as it is a more advance software, and therefore, I imagine, using more memory, CPU, etc... (as it happens with Windows!!!). Sorry, I don't know much about the "inner bits" of how these systems work...

2- Will many programs (some paid, some freeware) already on my Mac work OK with SL, or I would have to wait until each of them release an update? (i.e. Office 2004 for Mac, PowerPoint, iToner, WMP, Toast 8,...etc...). I hope not, cause in that case, I will definitively stay with Tiger then....

3- And on slight different matter: do you people run antiviruses on your Macs? I know viruses for Macs are very rare, but they really scare the hell out of me!!! (it might be that I haven't changed the switch completely from my old Windows mind after 20 years!!, hehe). I imagine the better and more advance OS, the stronger against viruses it would be made, I hope...

Thanks again!!
post #52 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chintan100 View Post

Isnt Apple the single best tech company of all time?

No! HP, Dell, Gateway, Sony with their cheap plastic, creaky laptops are the best tech companies! No, wait, MS's with their XP and Vista OS's is the best tech company! No, wait, Rim, Motorola, Nokia with their substandard phones are the best tech companies.

Wait....no you are right, Apple is THE best tech company by a long shot!
post #53 of 167
I'm still on Tiger 10.4.11. When Leopard was first announced, I listened to the presentation, and decided then and there to skip Leopard altogether. And I was true to my word. However, now I need new hardware - I'm still on PPC (iBook and mini). This is where the pain starts. I don't want an iMac, because I don't want that screen, and the laptop components are not optimal. The mini is just too wimpy. The MP is way, way, too expensive. I want a desktop for about $1000. Apple doesn't make one. I'm considering a hackintosh, and hoping SL will work well on one. I'm also thinking of buying a mini after all, just to tide me over, while the hackintoshes with SL are being experimented upon... and when a good process has been worked out, I'll build one. This $29 deal only makes it easier.
post #54 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

If it hadn't been this way, then if you have had to wipe and reinstall, you'd have to install 10.5 first, then 10.6. This way, you can wipe and simply install 10.6. So although they really do believe the $29 price is for guys who already bought 10.5, they're not so hard-core about it that they want to sabotage your experience.

Yes, I remember an experience with an operating system that shall not be named where I got screwed by an upgrade version. The system had an OS that was an original installation, plus one upgrade installation. Running the installer of the new version, it verified that I had a previous version, then asked me if I wanted to format the disk. Of course I had everything backed up, so, I opted for the "clean install". The installer reformatted the disk, then promptly informed me that this OS could only be installed on systems with THE (not just any, but only the most recently) previous version already installed. WTF!?

So, I had to install the original version, upgrade to the next version, then, finally, upgrade to the new version. Sabotage your experience doesn't even come close to a proper description.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tawilson View Post

My guess is that it's a honeypot for Psystar. They'll opt for the $29 copies so that they can either increase their margin/lower the price, at which point Apple will tear them a new one in court as it is a clear-cut upgrade.

Well, technically, isn't every version of Mac OS X except the one that comes with your Mac an upgrade version? So, illegal cloners can't even legally opt for the more expensive bundle.
post #55 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericvet8b View Post

That seems like great news, as I still have a 2006 Intel 20" iMac running Tiger. It does work great, but I was really thinking about SL....
But I've got a couple of doubts.....(see if anybody can enlighten me):

1-Will it not make my iMac slower when I install the new SL, as it is a more advance software, and therefore, I imagine, using more memory, CPU, etc... (as it happens with Windows!!!). Sorry, I don't know much about the "inner bits" of how these systems work...

2- Will many programs (some paid, some freeware) already on my Mac work OK with SL, or I would have to wait until each of them release an update? (i.e. Office 2004 for Mac, PowerPoint, iToner, WMP, Toast 8,...etc...). I hope not, cause in that case, I will definitively stay with Tiger then....

3- And on slight different matter: do you people run antiviruses on your Macs? I know viruses for Macs are very rare, but they really scare the hell out of me!!! (it might be that I haven't changed the switch completely from my old Windows mind after 20 years!!, hehe). I imagine the better and more advance OS, the stronger against viruses it would be made, I hope...

Thanks again!!

Others with more knowledge than I have will weigh in, but here's my 2¢:

1) From all that I've heard/read, it will make it faster, not slower.

2) I have some of these concerns too, since two of my machines at home are Tiger.

3) I've owned dozens of Macs since 1984, and have not bought/used anti-virus software once.
post #56 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineWine View Post

I'm still on Tiger 10.4.11. When Leopard was first announced, I listened to the presentation, and decided then and there to skip Leopard altogether. And I was true to my word. However, now I need new hardware - I'm still on PPC (iBook and mini). This is where the pain starts. I don't want an iMac, because I don't want that screen, and the laptop components are not optimal. The mini is just too wimpy. The MP is way, way, too expensive. I want a desktop for about $1000. Apple doesn't make one. I'm considering a hackintosh, and hoping SL will work well on one. I'm also thinking of buying a mini after all, just to tide me over, while the hackintoshes with SL are being experimented upon... and when a good process has been worked out, I'll build one. This $29 deal only makes it easier.

Curious as to why the mini is too wimpy.

Mine is just fine, and I only have 1 GB of RAM. SL will add the 9400M to the mix as well. Do you do a lot of Photoshop Work?
post #57 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

So, because in your estimation paying for the OS last time was a rip-off of some kind, you are okay with ripping them off yourself this time?

It's amazing the moral contortions on this thread this morning, and over such a small amount of money. I admire someone who just says they are going to steal it because they want to steal it, but all this twisting and turning trying to justify the process is just idiotic IMO.

If you don't want to pay, then don't pay. It's clear that Apple doesn't want to force you. I just wish people would stop trying to make out like they have some kind of moral reason for doing so if they decide to not pay for it.

Best OS money can buy, for the cheapest price on the planet.

Its also a slap in the face to a company that trusts you not to abuse that. All along you could have avoided buying the family pack, because Apple doesn't force you into it.
post #58 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by slinberg View Post

I'm upgrading from Tiger on the MBP and Leopard on the tower, and I did go ahead and order the Leopard box set last week to fulfill the upgrade conditions for the $29 SL upgrade. I'm glad to hear that the upgrade path will work on a clean HD with no OS, though... I bought a new HD to install on and I didn't want to have to go through an unnecessary Leopard install just to get SL running.

Kudos, Apple.

Ah, reading this article I was suddenly getting nervous that this Snow Leopard disk didn't offer clean install. Great to know that it is! Thanks!
post #59 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

Its also a slap in the face to a company that trusts you not to abuse that. All along you could have avoided buying the family pack, because Apple doesn't force you into it.

I think Apple's software pricing is amazing. It really encourages me to buy.
Would be sweet if Adobe had the same pricing strategy. They're the worst...
post #60 of 167
$29 Snow Leopard disk *is* a full install and works with anything.

If this is true... maybe it's because Apple is tearing a page out of Microsoft's playbook, and making a full out assault on Microsoft. With the added reports coming out of the Hackintosh arena, this is looking like a major "try it and you'll be hooked" market-share grab before Win7 officially hits the stands... and even after.

Just sayin'... and probably wrong(?) But consider:

Some of the old folks here will remember back in the day, when by design, it was MS's biz plan to get anybody, anywhere, anyhow to install Windows. They were fully aware that more than almost 70% of the installations world-wide did not have a valid license to go with them. Here in Germany up until I believe Win2000 and XP, it was estimated that over 40% of businesses did not have proper volume licenses, and a number of big companies were even taken to court over the fact.

The bummer to this story, is that at some point in time, as MS did, Apple will add a chip, or something to varify "legal" installs. Naturally, only a bummer if you're a hacker, cheap-skate, thief... or all of the above.

If for no other reason, Apple's just being cool to it's user-base... that's pretty commendable by itself IMHO.

Regardless, I can't wait til tomorrow when the post arrives, since I received the confirm a couple of hours ago... "Snow Kitty is on it's way" ))
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #61 of 167
Wait, are they absolutely sure? Because according to a lot of people on the internets, Apple is this evil corporation that is only out to make money and will screw everyone out of their money at any chance they get. So, I'm thinking the reviewers didn't get the actual release install DVD.

Anyway, I'm still going to get the Mac Box Set, due to the fact that my iLife is from '06 and iWork is from '05! I think they both need a bit of updating.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #62 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineWine View Post

I'm still on Tiger 10.4.11. When Leopard was first announced, I listened to the presentation, and decided then and there to skip Leopard altogether. And I was true to my word. However, now I need new hardware - I'm still on PPC (iBook and mini). This is where the pain starts. I don't want an iMac, because I don't want that screen, and the laptop components are not optimal. The mini is just too wimpy. The MP is way, way, too expensive. I want a desktop for about $1000. Apple doesn't make one. I'm considering a hackintosh, and hoping SL will work well on one. I'm also thinking of buying a mini after all, just to tide me over, while the hackintoshes with SL are being experimented upon... and when a good process has been worked out, I'll build one. This $29 deal only makes it easier.

I'm curious too. I have retail Leopard working very well on a hackintosh, and I will buy the upgrade to SL if it seems that it will work on my hardware too. I'll let you know.
I would have actually considered a Mac Mini if it weren't for the the fact that you can only upgrade its RAM and Hard Drive. I have a G4 mini and it works pretty well for basics and then some.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #63 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

$29 Snow Leopard disk *is* a full install and works with anything.

If this is true... maybe it's because Apple is tearing a page out of Microsoft's playbook, and making a full out assault on Microsoft. With the added reports coming out of the Hackintosh arena, this is looking like a major "try it and you'll be hooked" market-share grab before Win7 officially hits the stands... and even after.

Just sayin'... and probably wrong(?) But consider:

Some of the old folks here will remember back in the day, when by design, it was MS's biz plan to get anybody, anywhere, anyhow to install Windows. They were fully aware that more than almost 70% of the installations world-wide did not have a valid license to go with them. Here in Germany up until I believe Win2000 and XP, it was estimated that over 40% of businesses did not have proper volume licenses, and a number of big companies were even taken to court over the fact.

The bummer to this story, is that at some point in time, as MS did, Apple will add a chip, or something to varify "legal" installs. Naturally, only a bummer if you're a hacker, cheap-skate, thief... or all of the above.

If for no other reason, Apple's just being cool to it's user-base... that's pretty commendable by itself IMHO.

Regardless, I can't wait til tomorrow when the post arrives, since I received the confirm a couple of hours ago... "Snow Kitty is on it's way" ))


Well, every single release of OS X has been a full install that worked on everything. The only exceptions are the up-to-date disks and I believe the special free OS X 10.1 disks that were given out to purchasers of 10.0 But every retail release of OS X has always worked with everything, so really they are just doing the same thing they have always done. Nothing to see here really.
post #64 of 167
One more question: David Pogue, in his review, says that when running Windows on a Mac (with BootCamp, presumably), SL has the ability to open files on the Mac side without shutting down Windows.

Is this true? If so, isn't it huge? One would not need Parallels and such?
post #65 of 167
Apple likely does not have any authentication on SL to ensure that you have Leopard first because they want everyone on SL. SL is the platform from which nearly all new Mac OS technologies will be based. Apple loves control, they way they gain control of the OS you run in this instance is essentially by giving it away. The sw is being sold at a second hand store price which makes it very attractive to nearly everyone, making it almost impossible not to spend the measly $30 to upgrade. By pricing SL as they have it ensures that they have maximum control of the user experience going forward.
post #66 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

You have an intel Mac and you're still running 10.4??

He's not the only one. I run "tiger" and I love it. I just missed "leopard" when I got my mac. I particularly like iMovie HD (06) more than current version and do a lot of video and graphics, etc. I will probably upgrade to SL only because of 64 bit across the board ... but not for awhile .... have to see what hardware upgrades are coming first.
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #67 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by webpoet73 View Post

Well, I suppose Apple really wants all Intel-Mac users on Snow Leopard... odd they are trying to force iWork and iLife on Tiger users via this "box set." Isn't that kind of un-Apple?

Considering the iWork combo with Snow Leopard is still comparable to announced pricing on Win 7 Basic alone I'd say no one can really get that up in arms over it. Besides, Pages & Keynote beat the pants off of Word & PowerPoint, & numbers is slowly catching up to excel. Considering that OpenOffice's spreadsheet/database features are far superior to both & it's free, what does anyone really need in Office for Mac? Oh, wait, there is Entourage!
post #68 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

He's not the only one. I run "tiger" and I love it. I just missed "leopard" when I got my mac. I particularly like iMovie HD (06) more than current version and do a lot of video and graphics, etc. I will probably upgrade to SL only because of 64 bit across the board ... but not for awhile .... have to see what hardware upgrades are coming first.

Yes, I still have Tiger on my Mac Mini, primarily because of Front Row. Leopard broke two major things in front row. One is the ability to just put any movies in ~/Movies and have front row let you watch them and resume your spot later. The resume function no longer worked except for videos in iTunes. The second thing was they got rid of the 30-second skip forward and 10-second skip back.

Fortunately in Snow Leopard, the ability to resume any movies in ~/Movies is back and works again, which is a great relief. However, the 30-second skip is still missing. I'm hoping this is something that can be customized somehow, maybe with a hidden preference. Once this gets fixed I can finally upgrade my mini.
post #69 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

Curious as to why the mini is too wimpy.

Mine is just fine, and I only have 1 GB of RAM. SL will add the 9400M to the mix as well. Do you do a lot of Photoshop Work?

I want it to run both FCS and LS. Plus I like to multi-task (burning a DVD while listening to music through iTunes, and surfing the net etc.).

Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

I'm curious too. I have retail Leopard working very well on a hackintosh, and I will buy the upgrade to SL if it seems that it will work on my hardware too. I'll let you know.
I would have actually considered a Mac Mini if it weren't for the the fact that you can only upgrade its RAM and Hard Drive. I have a G4 mini and it works pretty well for basics and then some.

To me the mini is limited in many ways. I wish it was a quad core, but more importantly, I wish it took more than 4GB of RAM. I would be very interested in your experiences with a hacky. I'm looking to spend about $1K on the components (without BluRay or hard drive).
post #70 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuffe View Post

I bought my macbook with Tiger, and got Leopard free (well, $10) on the up-to-date program. If I try and install Leopard from scratch, it will (if it cannot find a 10.4 install to work from) request my Tiger DVD to be inserted as proof.

This way I cannot resell my Tiger disks (why would I want to...), but I can still install with having to install the old version first.

Why have they removed this simple hassle free check from the SL install? I wonder if the SL up-to-date disks show this behaviour...

It was only ever up-to-date disks that checked for a previous OS version before. I imagine SL up-to-date disks will do the same as the Leopard and Tiger up-to-date disks did (I have both).
post #71 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

what does anyone really need in Office for Mac? Oh, wait, there is Entourage!

Compatibility. OpenOffice/iWork aren't there yet. That said, I use Keynote exclusively as it is genuinely better than Powerpoint (not just "Apple fanboy" better, like Pages, which clearly isn't better than Word).
post #72 of 167
thought i'd share this with whoever's interested

it's possible to do a clean install, only it's necessary to insert the leopard disk

http://discussions.apple.com/thread....ageID=10051245

Quote:
DirtDogg

Posts: 1
From: UK
Registered: Aug 26, 2009
Re: Snow Leopard - Clean Install Option?
Posted: Aug 26, 2009 11:02 AM in response to: Sohaila\t \t
\t\t Reply\t\tEmail

I have just spoken to Apple Support about me wanting to do a 100% clean install. To tell you the truth this has been the third time that I have phoned Apple Support about this question.

I have spoken to three different people and the last two people have told me what I am about to tell you below. The first person really didn't have a clue BUT all of them did not give me an answer straight away and had to confer with their colleagues first. Not what I expected from Apple Support and there so called Geniuses!

Anyway this is what they told me;

If you want to do a 100% clean install. For example The process of backing up all your personal files to another drive, launching the installation CD from boot up, Erasing the partition, re-formatting the partition and then installing Snow Leopard directly on the Mac without having to use any previous OS installation disks i.e Leopard (10.5) you will need to purchase the Mac Box Set that includes iLife 09 and iWorks 09.

The upgrade disk for $29 WILL offer you the option to do a clean install BUT what this will do depending on what option you select from the "Archive and Install" options, it will completely erase your hard disk and data but it will ask you for your Installation Disks for Leopard first, it will then install Leopard and then it will ask you for the Snow Leopard disk and then upgrade Leopard to Snow Leopard.

So in conclusion if you are one of the people like me that wants to do a 100% fresh clean install buy the Mac Box Set.

Hope this helps. If I am wrong blame Apple Support lol

Cheers

iMac (2009), MacBook Pro (2009), Mac OS X (10.5.8)
post #73 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

$29 Snow Leopard disk *is* a full install and works with anything.

If this is true... maybe it's because Apple is tearing a page out of Microsoft's playbook, and making a full out assault on Microsoft. With the added reports coming out of the Hackintosh arena, this is looking like a major "try it and you'll be hooked" market-share grab before Win7 officially hits the stands... and even after.

I wouldn't say that since you had to already have a mac to make use of snow leopard (the average person won't make a hackintosh). If Apple wanted to do a full out assault on Microsoft, they would have a netbook, and a mid range desk desktop, and possibly allow third party vendors to install OSX legally. Apple, however, isn't going after market share at any cost. They will only enter markets where there is a profit to be made, they have no interest in a low margin race to the bottom as seen in netbooks and desktops. Furthermore, Microsoft isn't even a direct competitor with Apple as Apple is primarily in the hardware business. Windows just happens to be the operating system that Apples' competition (Dell, HP, Acer, etc.) uses.

I would consider the $29 full version of Snow Leopard to be another case of Apple treating their customers well.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #74 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

Nowhere have I seen the EULA posted for the 10.6 upgrade disks. Until anyone actually has seen it and read it... it's only speculative as to what it says.

According to MacWorld: "Unlike previous editions of Mac OS X, which could be freely installed on any old Mac so long as it met the system requirements, Snow Leopard’s license specifically limits it to users who are already using Leopard, which has been shipping since October 2007... However, in contrast to Microsoft—which offers a confusing array of full and upgrade versions of Windows, all of them requiring that users enter a unique serial number in order to prove they’re not pirates—Apple continues to rely on the honor system for Mac OS X."

http://www.macworld.com/article/1424...tml?lsrc=top_1

However, it appears that, like in the past, Apple is being customer friendly and is willing to overlook the hobbiest hackintosh folks, and those who may buy one copy and install it on two Macs, or install it on a Tiger machine, in exchange for making the upgrade process easier for "legit" customers.

In the extremely unlikely event Psystar wins its case, that would all change. Apple would be forced to take more drastic measures to protect its business model. Psystar would still not be able to sell computers with OS X because Apple would put in more explicit barriers, and the rest of us would have to suffer through less friendly OS installs.
post #75 of 167
I am not surprised in the slightest by this. All Apple software, that I know of, can be installed on multiple computers even if it is a Single User only. Apple knows this, they know that if someone wants to pirate software, they will regardless of any "safeguards."

Apple makes it easy to install any of their software on multiple computers because they want people to use their software! They will never go out and say "Pirate our software, it's easy!" but they will not go after you if you use it for personal use (note Psystar is an exception). Apple software only works on Apple hardware, you pirate the software, you buy the hardware.
post #76 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

...and charging the least amount of money for it?

The least amount? My copy of OS X set me back nearly $2K when I got it over 2 years ago. Yes, it did include a computer that I can't upgrade (and won't shut down properly because of some Apple update early this year) and will be rendered into a large paperweight if either the computer or monitor kicks the bucket. Looking at the Apple Store site, the cheapest non-upgrade copy of OS X I can find is $599 with the typical price being at least $1199. Leat amount of money, my foot.

This is why Apple is okay only charging $29 for the upgrade; they already know that for 99% of SL purchasers, they already got a substantial amount of money. The fact that these people are continuing to throw money at them is just gravy.
post #77 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyourownthing View Post

thought i'd share this with whoever's interested

it's possible to do a clean install, only it's necessary to insert the leopard disk

http://discussions.apple.com/thread....ageID=10051245

Untrue, as even people later in the thread have stated. Apple just no longer lists a clean install in the default menu choices (because people were mistakenly erasing all their files without a backup.)

All you do is run disk utility, erase the drive, then proceed with the installation. At no point does it ask for any disks, that part is just completely wrong.

Also, btw, archive and install is what is does by default now, so it no longer gives you that as a choice, it's just what it does anyway, although it no longer bothers to create a "Previous System" folder.


Edit: To be *completely* clear, the disk you get in the box set and the disk you get for $29 are the *same* disk.
post #78 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmason View Post

Also, btw, archive and install is what is does by default now, so it no longer gives you that as a choice, it's just what it does anyway, although it no longer bothers to create a "Previous System" folder.

Absolutely correct, and I highly recommend that you backup and then do a standard upgrade. The process is much improved and it saves a lot of time compared to a clean install.
post #79 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmason View Post

Untrue, as even people later in the thread have stated. Apple just no longer lists a clean install in the default menu choices (because people were mistakenly erasing all their files without a backup.)

All you do is run disk utility, erase the drive, then proceed with the installation. At no point does it ask for any disks, that part is just completely wrong.

Also, btw, archive and install is what is does by default now, so it no longer gives you that as a choice, it's just what it does anyway, although it no longer bothers to create a "Previous System" folder.


Edit: To be *completely* clear, the disk you get in the box set and the disk you get for $29 are the *same* disk.

okay not to be snarky, but who are you? apple support? this person is stating what apple told them
post #80 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmason View Post

Yes, I still have Tiger on my Mac Mini, primarily because of Front Row. Leopard broke two major things in front row. One is the ability to just put any movies in ~/Movies and have front row let you watch them and resume your spot later. The resume function no longer worked except for videos in iTunes. The second thing was they got rid of the 30-second skip forward and 10-second skip back.

Fortunately in Snow Leopard, the ability to resume any movies in ~/Movies is back and works again, which is a great relief. However, the 30-second skip is still missing. I'm hoping this is something that can be customized somehow, maybe with a hidden preference. Once this gets fixed I can finally upgrade my mini.

Since you seem to be familar with how FrontRow works in SL, perhaps you can answer a question about support for 5.1 surround sound in iTunes Store video. Playing the video from iTunes plays the 5.1 track if you've selected it, so I know the video has it. In FrontRow, playing DVDs or video_ts gets 5.1, so I know FrontRow can output 5.1. But whenever I play iTunes Store video in FrontRow, it plays the stereo track and there is no way to select the 5.1 track like you can in iTunes.

I assume this is related to QuickTime not being able to play 5.1 tracks outside of iTunes, but it sure would be nice if FrontRow would use the track selected in iTunes instead of reverting back to the stereo track. Any idea if this is fixed? Can someone with SL take a iTunes Store video and play it in either QuickTime or FrontRow and confirm if this has been fixed?

As for the skipping forward/backward. I wouldn't say Leopard "broke" it. More like it "updated" it with a different method. Don't expect it to ever change back, because then they'd be "breaking" it for those who like the new method better.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple's Snow Leopard disc will install on Tiger Macs