Apple's Snow Leopard disc will install on Tiger Macs - Page 3

You can't upgrade an all-in-one PC either. This is also one of the dumbest arguments I've heard since you imply the mac itself has no value. I love mac hardware.

Exactly, I see no benefit to a clean install because essentially archive & install *is* a clean install, except it then copies your apps, home directory and network settings back for you so you don't have to do it manually.

Except their "pro" software, such as Aperture, which does require you to enter a serial number when you install it and limits the number of machines you can run it on.

So what would you be upgrading this hackintosh from using the $29 upgrade disc since you do not have Leopard?

Maybe all their employees aren't fully informed yet? People have heard different stories from different employees. The fact is many people have reported that the disk installs fine on Tiger, or on a bare drive.

Of course, the employees are likely trying to encourage people to buy the more expensive product as well.

Sorry, don't know anything about 5.1 audio. I just have an old Sony tube TV with stereo speakers. I've never used any of my macs with more than two speakers. Anyone else know?

As for the skipping, I wish they would just add a preference, even a hidden one. Hopefully someone will find something in the next few weeks. I mainly use it to skip credits, you just jump ahead a couple times, then back once when you are past them. Skipping minutes ahead is not good for this.

My take on it would be that Apple is looking to profit from that software. The consumer sofware and the operating system is really there to support mac purchases. This would also be part of the reason why Windows is a bigger PITA to install, as Microsoft gains nothing if you pirate it. With Apple, at least you bought a mac (in theory).

Agreed. I don't know where Wired gets their idea about the need to do this thing they call a "clean install" (a fiction anyway, since it's not one of the actual options). What problem is this supposed to address?

Er, why, exactly?

Those people jumping from Tiger to Snow Leopard (or installing SL on multiple computers without a Family Pack) are doing it in violation of the EULA, and while I could personally care less, those copies of Snow Leopard is as legit as a Hackintosh. Which is to say, it's not.

Good luck getting supported for that, guys. Not saying Apple won't support you, but… well, they have perfectly legitimate grounds for not doing so.

Unfortunate, but it's a pretty decent deal though. The way the speculation was going, it looked like maybe we had to buy Leopard and then the SL upgrade, nearly the same cost as the Mac Box Set. It's likely to update you two versions of iLife and give you the latest iWork too.


I am. Leopard is nifty but for my needs, I didn't see enough benefit. Also, one program that I like doesn't work on Leopard. I don't *have* to have that one program, but I'd rather not do without it.


I recall that the EULA has to be available for inspection without having to buy the product, otherwise it's "sneakwrap". It might only be for the states in the Ninth Circuit though.

You certainly didn't need to write it so brashly, I don't recall anyone on the other side that wrote it anywhere nearly that harshly. It did seem like the most plausible way it was going to be, with the information given by Apple at the time. They did support their argument, Apple did have information on their web site as to what they were going to support and their recommended upgrade path. As some people said, just because it can be done doesn't mean it's licensed for that. We'll see what the license looks like.

I do think Apple's suggestion that Tiger users buy the box set makes sense though. It gives them the latest version of iLife and iWork which they will likely want or need anyway. And it gives them some of the money they missed from people who never bought Leopard.

But it's also nice to know it's not necessary as some people do *not* need newer versions of iLife and iWork, or even need them at all (i.e. for a media centre mac.)

Apple's OS releases work on the honor system - if you are installing on more than one computer, you should buy the family pack. But no, Apple will not send the police over to arrest you, and they don't have draconian DRM or other software to prevent you from installing on more than one system. They leave it up to you to be honorable. Sorry you're having second thoughts.

Duh. I installed SL on my MacBook with Tiger 10.4.11 ages ago.

So why didn't you feel compelled to report that to a forum such as AI ages ago, instead of now? Duh?

Apple honestly believes their iLife and iWork applications are good products and that every Mac user wants them. Personally I use and mostly like iPhoto, use but get frustrated by iTunes and occasionally use Pages. The rest just take up space on my hard drive and I'm unlikely to buy newer versions in the foreseeable future. iLife comes with new computers so I'll probably get the new version next year.

I don't need to have Leopard. All I need is a hard drive that's formatted for mac, and the $29 disc. That's the whole point of this thread. Of course, I could bittorrent SL, but I do want to give apple some $$. I'd give them a whole lot more if they had a $1000 desktop that wasn't married to a screen. As it is, I'll buy a mini, and later build a hackintosh.

While I am plunking my $30 down gladly, my money is on Snow Leopard having some unannounced functionality that is important to the Tablet and/or new ways that Apple will better bridge the distinctions between MacOS and iPhoneOS computing models

The assumption here is that Apple wants/hopes/needs everyone to upgrade to take advantage of something unannounced, and are pricing the upgrade accordingly.

Heres a post on my analysis:

Analysis: Apple June Quarter Earnings Call
http://bit.ly/vbi9q

Check it out if interested.

Mark

iTunes has always been free, you never needed iLife for that. (In older versions of iLife, they did include iTunes for convenience, so you could install it without downloading, but a free download was always available.)

You're absolutely right, but I could have afforded a PC that wasn't an all-in-one. When I decided to taste the Apple Kool-Aid, the best Mac I could afford was an iMac and not the only upgradeable Mac that currently starts at $2499.

But you missed the point anyhow. Getting OS X requires a minimum investment of $599 for which Apple won't even throw in a keyboard and mouse (but after the painful experience those items were, Apple is free to keep them next time. Apparently ergonomic is a foreign word to the keyboard/mouse design areas).


Congrats to you. I haven't seen any real reason to be any more impressed than regular PC hardware.

Given that Apple make their money from hardware, i wonder how much of the OSX pricing is really about their interpretation of accounting law. They charge a little for Leopard users because they claim it is a low-feature release for the consumer. They charge more for Tiger users because users are getting all the Leopard features plus Snow Leopard. This might also explain why single-user OSXs can be installed on multiple machines while they charge more for a family license. Otherwise, Apple might just be happy to cover their distribution costs and be happy that people love buying Macs.

You'd give them a whole lot more if you could give them a whole lot less. Nice thinking.

???

What's wrong with my thinking? Isn't it true that there's a hole in Apple's product line? Specifically between the mini and the MP? I'm sorry, but an all-in-one with laptop components is not something that everyone is looking for. What if you have a monitor, and need a desktop, but the mini is too little and the MP is way too much (and too expensive). That's why on the PC side you have products in every price category. Now, if Apple can't make a "$500 computer that's not junk", fine, I understand, but I'm talking about a $1000 computer. There's a bit of a product hole if your only options are $599 or $2500 and nothing in between (without a screen). Sheesh! Really, some people are so judgmental without having an idea of fundamental basic fairness.

Many folks like me (9 Macs) still run 10.4.11 when possible under the premise of if it ain't broke don't fix it. Users of demanding mission-critical apps often find it smarter to keep a stable fast OS/apps/drivers combination unchanged rather than deal with inevitable upgrade anomalies just to add a few cutesy bells and whistles. And IMO 10.5 was mostly bells and whistles.

Snow Leopard however is literally a cleaner/stronger/better OS, not just bells and whistles, so I will be upgrading after the 10.6.0 version dust settles.

-Allen Wicks

I was wondering what kind of disc came for those of us who qualified for the Up-to-Date program so contacted them through the store chat. This is what I found out:

Apple: Hi, my name is Danielle C. Welcome to Apple!
A: Good afternoon.
A: How may I help you today?

Me: I ordered a copy of Snow Leopard through the "Up-to-Date" program and I was wondering if the version I am receiving will be a full retail copy or an upgrade disk. The reason I ask is I plan on doing a fresh install on a new hard drive I bought and was wondering if I will have to install Leopard first then upgrade to Snow Leopard or if I will be able to just insert the Snow Leopard disk and let it go to work?

A: It is a full retail copy.
A: Unfortunately the clean install option is not available with Snow Leopard.
A: You have to have Leopard on the computer in order to install it.

Me: OK, so I will just have to do a fresh install of Leopard and then upgrade?

A: That is correct yes.

Me: OK, I was just trying to plan my Friday and that helps. Thank you!

My conclusion of this is one of confusion. She was either lying, had no idea what she was talking about, or a little of both. From what we have heard, you will be able to do a fresh install with the full retail copy, and I believe that to be true, but previous UTD versions have been upgrade only and required the discs from the previous OS.

I have half a mind to cancel my UTD order (it hasn't shipped yet according to my order status) and walk into a store tomorrow and spend the extra $20 to save the time and hassle of having to do a fresh install of Leopard and then upgrade to Snow Leopard.

What are your thoughts? Do you think the UTD will be full retail like I was told or an upgrade version?

Every reputable third-party rating and survey outfit (JD Powers, Consumer Reports, etc.) has Apple computers at the top of their lists. Certainly OS X is a factor but the hardware itself has to be a big reason behind the lofty ratings.

Especailly as a sales rep, she better toe the company line, regardless of what she actiually knows.

From everything described here (and other reports), there is only one version of SL.
Until it is actually delivered and tested, no one will know absolutely.

I think we'll have to wait to find out. However, it's possible the remarks can be seen as not contradictory though. The disk can be retail and the comment about requiring Leopard is a *policy* or *license* requirement, not a *technical* requirement. (i.e. the up-to-date program is specifically designed only for Leopard users who purchased since June.)

The comment about the "clean install" option is also technically correct. The install menus do *not* give you a optional choice of "clean install" at anytime in the process, unlike previous versions. Instead before starting the install, you must use the menus to run disk utility and manually re-format the drive, then continue the install process, which will still work fine.

The difference is that you *can* do a "clean install" but there is *not* a "clean install option". Again, this is splitting hairs, but Apple has been known to do so before.

Where did Apple concede this?

That was a quote from Walt Mossberg. Obviously he contacted Apple and received this confirmation from them. Hence this article.

People aren't looking for desktops. The desktop market, as it stands today, is dying.

The money is in notebooks and portables.

Apple's numbers and consumer trends certainly don't show any deficiency in Apple's desktop line. You'd better call Cupertino and tell Jobs and co. that their record-setting mac sales and non-holiday record quarter were just dumb luck and the changing moon phase. Same for their 18 out of 19 last quarters that beat The Street.

Apple doesn't deal in the low-end, and even locks out a good portion of the mid-end. Apple deala in the Premium end, and does astoundingly well. In a recession, no less, when the other also-rans are losing money. You should be giving your "advice" to Dell and the rest.

Do you have any understanding at all of Apple's market? Hint: most of it DOES NOT inlcude the minority of tech enthusiasts who post on Mac forums in the dark little corners of the internet. Hackintosh users and their needs amount to roughly 0.001% of of the market. So . . . aside from doing Apple a favour with your anecdotes about how OS X works on new hardware, and apart from the few of you that buy (one would hope) copies of OS X to screw around with, you don't really matter.

I'm not going to restart a debate which consumes so many threads here. Suffice to say, Apple isn't in business to make everybody happy. They can't be all things to all people without becoming nothing to nobody.

I still think there's soon in their product line for a mid-range desktop system. It could potentially have great profit margins since it wouldn't require the miniaturization of the mini. Maybe something the size of the old Cube or a bit bigger with a single expansion slot and an upgradable video card. Maybe room for 2 hard drives, so mirroring or striping could be done.

I do think there's a market for this, and they could up-sell many mini users to it. The only risk I see is canabalizing sales of the Mac Pro, but that's not a large market for them anyway. This would also provide incentive for more third parties to manufacture Mac edition video cards and other expansion cards (right now these can only be used in the Mac Pro.)

Not sure if they'll ever do it, but I think there's definitely room in the lineup for a product like this, sort of like the 13-inch Macbook Pro in the portable line.

Agreed 100%.

I hope that, at some point, AI pulls together all of the good info on this issue, filters the FUD, and provides a nice little tutorial on what Tiger users should do. That would be a huge service.

There must be millions like me, with a couple of Tiger systems and a couple of Leopards, all who want to (one day) get all of their home systems to SL without having to spend a fortune, or be bludgeoned into buying the latest-greatest-etc version of iWork and iLife.

Based on hope generated by this thread, I ordered an SL family pack. Hope that will suffice for all of my computers at home......\

I agree with concept of if it aint broke dont fix it even though I much prefer to break things so I can fix it to see how it works, but Leopard was far from being bells and whistles. There were a lot of core foundations that Apple really tackled to make this a great OS over Tiger. However, Snow Leopard takes this to a whole. notha. leva with core changes. Im getting sick of some people crying that Apple is charging anything for this service pack that is only bug fixes.

I agree with you here. Especially on the "Use Desktop Parts" portion. Apple can KEEP their margins while the price stays around 800 dollars. Craft the case in aluminum mATX form factor, and you have yourself a nice winner.

Apple won't do it though. Too focused on "what is currently working". The reason its working is because it has the Apple logo on the back. Slap the logo on the xMac, and you've got another winner. Till then, I'll do it myself.

Yes, the family pack should be fine. I think most of the facts are now clear:

- The Snow Leopard disk for $29 and in the Box Set are the same
- You can do a full install on Tiger, Leopard or a bare disk

The only question remaining is whether the up-to-date disk is the same as above or if it does some kind of Leopard disk check.

w-f-a! (waa-fucking-waa)

there's just no pleasing some people.

--a response to all the whiners out there who simply aren't happy about anything apple does.

I will concede your point that you have to buy a computer to utilize an operating system, and you can buy one that is capable of running windows for less. I really don't see the point of such a remark though.


I don't have an imac, but I love my MBP (core duo) hardware. Apple includes the little things that make a better experience. Illuminated keyboards, better trackpads, built in bluetooth, stiffer frames, lighter weight, no flimsy tray loading drives, ambient light sensor that auto ajusts brightness, etc, etc. I've also opened up my MBP on a couple occasions (once to replace a fan, macs aren't perfect \ and once to add a larger hard drive), and I was amazed at how well utilized the space was. The mounting setup for the hard dive was pretty cool too, the hard drive floats securely on rubber mounts ensure that the vibrations don't get transfered to the frame and other parts of the laptop. There is definitely a level of attention to detail that I haven't seen elsewhere.