Apple to release Mac OS X Snow Leopard on August 28

15681011

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 215
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineWine View Post


    I'm very disappointed by reports of numerous bugs in the GM (according to posts on MR). This feels rushed. You would think with the whole focus on optimizing Leopard, they'd at least try to minimize bugs. As is I read many, many reports on how SL is actually slower than Leopard.



    I'm curious how SL compares to Win7 - many people reluctantly are admitting that Win7 blows SL out of the water. I'm sad - I switched to Apple, but I was hoping Apple would at least be able to keep up. We'll see. I won't make up my mind until both OSes are shipping, and we can get some user feedback.



    I think that its safe to say that SL is not slower than Leopard. As for the bugs, there will always be bugs. And from what I've read, they aren't that bad and many people have not run into them.



    Regarding Snow Leopard vs. Windows 7, I don't think that Win 7 is better than Snow Leopard. Win 7 may be more of an upgrade from Vista than SL is from Leopard, but that doesn't mean that Win 7 is better than SL. Apple was so far ahead of MS before SL and Win 7 that, in my opinion, even if Win 7 is a better upgrade than SL, SL is still, overall, a better OS than Win 7.
  • Reply 142 of 215
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineWine View Post


    I'm very disappointed by reports of numerous bugs in the GM (according to posts on MR). This feels rushed. You would think with the whole focus on optimizing Leopard, they'd at least try to minimize bugs. As is I read many, many reports on how SL is actually slower than Leopard.



    I'm curious how SL compares to Win7 - many people reluctantly are admitting that Win7 blows SL out of the water. I'm sad - I switched to Apple, but I was hoping Apple would at least be able to keep up. We'll see. I won't make up my mind until both OSes are shipping, and we can get some user feedback.



    Don't believe everything you read on the internet.
  • Reply 143 of 215
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    TimeMachine drives are not bootable which can leave you in quite a pickle with no way to get online of your boot drive dies. The install disks won't get you online and online is where all the free (and more knowledgeable) help is. Unless of course you live right next to a Apple Store or something and they are not busy.



    So what? You can still restore from it. I'm not clear about what circumstances you are guarding against by cloning a drive rather than having your Time Machine backup for a restore, in the very unlikely event you have a problem with an OSX upgrade. Except of course cloning takes more time, requires more expertise, has more potential for disaster, and is far more geeky.
  • Reply 144 of 215
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chadnchady View Post


    Hi guys, just a question that popped up



    I have a couple of macs in the house.



    With the single user license, what happens after i install it on one mac and then take the disc to a second mac and try to install again? How does it literally detect that it's already been used on the first mac.



    Thanks in advance





    The install disks are burned, so they shouldn't be able to be changed. However I have heard of certain DVD's/CD's that have a portion of the disk that is not burned, so data like the computers serial number or computers MAC address of their wireless can be burned there and "locked" into that first machine you use it on. Depends if Apple adopts this technology or not.



    All Mac's have to "talk" to Apple sometime and certain things like computer serial numbers, OS serial numbers, MAC address of your wireless card and so can be transmitted.



    So if things don't line up, then a flag goes up.



    What Apple will do about something your suggesting remains to be seen of course, perhaps you won't be able to register the machine after the upgrade or something...???



    Going "RIAA" on it's customers isn't a good PR move for Apple at this time, especially someone who has a house full of Mac's. But then again Apple has sued Mac related websites, this one included.
  • Reply 145 of 215
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fiorentino97 View Post


    Is there any chance of the actual install disks being included before September 8? I was hoping to get the best of both worlds by getting Snow Leopard with the iPod back to school promotion. Say I order a system from the Apple online store sometime next week. Will it come with 10.6 installed or 10.5 installed with a 10.6 upgrade disk?



    anytime they release a new OS you will get it if you order after the release for sure. so if you place the order on Friday you will at the least get Leopard installed and the disk for Snow Leopard. but you will get Snow Leopard
  • Reply 146 of 215
    I'm curious if it might be by US Postal System instead of FedEx. Our Post Office System in Santa Cruz is really bad. So I'd like early confirmation from you in the East if it arrives by FedEx or UPS please. Thanks in advance for your help.
  • Reply 147 of 215
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    So what? You can still restore from it. I'm not clear about what circumstances you are guarding against by cloning a drive rather than having your Time Machine backup for a restore, in the very unlikely event you have a problem with an OSX upgrade. Except of course cloning takes more time, requires more expertise, has more potential for disaster, and is far more geeky.



    While TM is nice, a clone is very useful and desirable in addition to TM, IMO.



    If your drive fails you can boot from the clone and continue using your machine until you can take your machine to Apple or replace the HDD yourself.



    I use SuperDuper and while it's not as easy to use as TM it isn't difficult to use. I wouldn't consider it much more 'geeky' than TM and certainly no more 'geeky' than off line backups.



    I've restored a new HDD from a clone and the process was easy and flawless. I would use it before I would do a full HDD restore form TM simply because I know it works well. I haven't tried that with TM.
  • Reply 148 of 215
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    So what? You can still restore from it. I'm not clear about what circumstances you are guarding against by cloning a drive rather than having your Time Machine backup for a restore, in the very unlikely event you have a problem with an OSX upgrade.



    You can only restore FROM a Time Machine drive to another working boot drive. It requires a working DVD drive to reinstall the OS from the (hopefully pristine) install disks onto a working drive first before restoring from Time Machine drive.



    A clone only requires a working firewire or USB port, which a typical Mac has many of. Something to think about if your Mac is failing for some reason (they are machines after all)



    If your primary drive in your laptop physically dies, with a clone one can option boot from the clone and get online and seek help or use your computer until you can get help and the drive replaced.



    Also if one can't boot from their primary boot drive, (and it still works physically) one can boot from the clone and retrieve files from it before deciding what to do. Erase, reinstall or reverse clone.



    Time Machine is a limited backup solution, but it's better that nothing of course. Cloning is superior and just as easy.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Except of course cloning takes more time, requires more expertise, has more potential for disaster, and is far more geeky.



    The first clone does take a hour or so, after that it can just be updated automatically.



    If someone can tell the software to clone (or update) drive A to drive B, then they can clone.



    A clone drive is a copy of the original drive, everything. No disasters. It's simple.



    It's not all that geeky the software does it all, a Time Machine restore is harder and more time consuming, as one has to first install the OS, update it (with upgrade disks) and then restore from Time Machine and later find out not all things are copied/restored/working.





    A reverse clone (booted from a clone and cloning that back onto the boot drive) is set up and forget it. Come back a hour later and it's done.
  • Reply 149 of 215
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Thomaspin View Post


    Will it run PPC apps?



    Many of us still use Intuit's Quicken (no Universal version available yet) and Photoshop CS2 (have you checked the price of CS4?)



    with Rosetta yes. which will be in the optional installs.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mclarenf1 View Post


    I have three Macs in the house. all with their own copies of OSX. Can I upgrade to the family pack for $49 or do I need to have a previous family pack to upgrade at that price? Also, will the family pack stop my laptop from saying "iChat already has you logged in under the same username?



    Thanks!



    two issues.



    1. yes you can use a family pack for SL.



    2. the message is part of AIM. i get it a lot since i leave my home computer logged in but 'away'. i just close the warning and go on. no big.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by webhead View Post


    Does anyone know if it's better to install Quicktime X with SL or keep the Quicktime Pro that I currently have with Leopard 10.5?



    do both. QT7 is with Rosetta in the optional installs. or as I understand it if you have a pro key the install will not override QT7 with QTX.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by corinhorn View Post


    You can try to get the up-to-date disc anyway. Just enter your purchase date as being after June 8th.



    the form requires the serial number of the machine so they can verify you are eligible.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ALBIM View Post


    I realize its an outdated architecture, but can anyone explain to me why Apple dropped PPC support? Is it hurting them in anyway to keep PPC or is it more of Apple telling me to update?



    you answered it. PPC is outdated.



    consider this. the last PPC machines were sold in August 3 years ago. so they are not going to be out of all possible warranties. and considering how much faster, bigger HD etc the newest ones are and how much repairing a 3 year old machine is out of warranty you are actually getting a better deal getting a new machine.



    however until then your PPC will keep running. it doesn't suddenly brick cause a new OS is out.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ihadmeavision View Post


    So If I'm on 10.2 and want to upgrade (not that I am), by your logic I should pay $390 or so dollars because I skipped a few OSes?



    setting aside that a machine with 10.2 is a PPC and can't be upgraded. no. you don't have to buy 10.3, 10.4 to get 10.5. so it's $158+tax at most.



    as for the box set snark, for basically ten bucks you get the software (which is normally over $100). you don't have to install it if you hate it so much. but a lot of folks that were on tiger were totally peeved that the new versions required leopard and they will be very happy to get a major discount as payback for being without the updates for several months



    Quote:

    How does that make sense? I hope they'll release it like they said at $129 period.



    They never said at any point (WWDC included) that there would be a Snow Leopard at $129. and there likely won't be.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ihadmeavision View Post


    What's wrong with charging the same amount as 10.5?



    okay fine.



    Snow Leopard is $129. but it still requires you to have Leopard. to that's really $129x2 for Tiger users.



    is that better.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    Depends upon inventory of the Mac your going to purchase.



    in the past, all machines in stores on the day of release had an update disk added to the box. new shipments came with the new software installed.



    this will likely follow that



    Quote:



    Also the resellers also throw in other deals, like free shipping, a free printer



    well apple is doing both those right now as well (the ipod thing is college students only by the way)



    and something only apple does is the setup/training thing. you can't buy that if you get your computer anywhere else. that is something that some folks will want. especially if upgrading from tiger cause you have the new OS, new ilife and new iwork to (potentially) learn.



    Quote:

    with the savings you can buy the iPod you want, instead of the one Apple wants to give you.



    my brother the grad student walked into an Apple store and got the ipod deal and got a classic. only gets back $229 (the price of the free touch) but it was not an issue for him to do the switch. I think he said only the 1gb shuffle is excluded.



    also something to be careful about with places like MacMall. sometimes those prices are so low because they are not the current models. they are the ones just replaced. so watch the specs carefully.
  • Reply 150 of 215
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineWine View Post


    ...many people reluctantly are admitting that Win7 blows SL out of the water. I'm sad - I switched to Apple, but I was hoping Apple would at least be able to keep up. We'll see. I won't make up my mind until both OSes are shipping, and we can get some user feedback.



    HAHAHAHAHA!!!





    Surely you are jesting!



    Microsoft is no competition to Apple, never has been. This comes from a old DOS and dot matrix boy too.



    Unless of course your counting malware and Microsoft certainly has Apple beat there!!!





    thanks for the laugh.
  • Reply 151 of 215
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    You can only restore FROM a Time Machine drive to another working boot drive. It requires a working DVD drive to reinstall the OS from the (hopefully pristine) install disks onto a working drive first before restoring from Time Machine drive.



    A clone only requires a working firewire or USB port, which a typical Mac has many of. Something to think about if your Mac is failing for some reason (they are machines after all)



    If your primary drive in your laptop physically dies, with a clone one can option boot from the clone and get online and seek help or use your computer until you can get help and the drive replaced.



    Also if one can't boot from their primary boot drive, (and it still works physically) one can boot from the clone and retrieve files from it before deciding what to do. Erase, reinstall or reverse clone.



    Time Machine is a limited backup solution, but it's better that nothing of course. Cloning is superior and just as easy.









    The first clone does take a hour or so, after that it can just be updated automatically.



    If someone can tell the software to clone (or update) drive A to drive B, then they can clone.



    A clone drive is a copy of the original drive, everything. No disasters. It's simple.



    It's not all that geeky the software does it all, a Time Machine restore is harder and more time consuming, as one has to first install the OS, update it (with upgrade disks) and then restore from Time Machine and later find out not all things are copied/restored/working.





    A reverse clone (booted from a clone and cloning that back onto the boot drive) is set up and forget it. Come back a hour later and it's done.



    Time machine isn't nearly as bad as you make it sound, but in the end it really is there for people that wouldn't back their stuff up otherwise. Cloning does have the advantages you described, but time machine is probably good enough for most people, including myself.
  • Reply 152 of 215
    I have both a clone and use Time Machine... TM is good for incremental backups. I have recovered many files using TM that weren't on my clone since I only do a full clone about once a month... probably should do once a week, but right now, once a month.



    The only thing I don't do is take a clone off-site in case of disaster...
  • Reply 153 of 215
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by suckerpunch86 View Post


    Since the OpenCL requirements mentioned the NVIDIA 8600GT (woohoo!), does this meant you need minimum 128MB VRAM as the official requirements page no mention of how much? I happen to have the Late 2007 low-end model.



    I do recall telling people that the earlier listed OpenCL GPGPU supported list would expand and got flamed. Glad your system is included, as it should.
  • Reply 154 of 215
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lorre View Post


    Won't that fry my MacBook?



    My main concerns are making my April '08 MacBook as snappy as my August '07 iMac (which has a 320GB 7200RPM HDD, which can be the only hardware component that causes this difference in "snappyness") while maintaining the battery life and noise and vibration levels of the stock hard drive, if possible.



    It currently has the stock 160GB 5400RPM HDD.





    The MacBooks have integrated graphics, the iMac has a seperate graphics card.



    The MacBook has a limited processor to reduce heat/cooling/ increase battery life, the iMac has a more powerful processor with a larger cooling system and unlimited power.



    The MacBook has a power saving 5400 RPM drive, the iMac doesn't need to save power, thus has the faster 7,200 RPM drive.



    If you could you could get the MacBook drive upgraded with a 7,200 RPM, but it will shorten your battery life. I got a MBP and did that and now it's short leash for battery life.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lorre View Post


    Another reason I want a bigger drive is that, due to personal reasons, the MacBook will have to do for both business AND pleasure the coming year, whereas now it is just used for business. This means my 35GB and growing music collection and my 100GB of movies would have to be on the machine.



    I could start juggling with external drives but I will be moving to a tiny dorm room the coming year so the less desktop clutter, the better.



    OT: good to know someone installed the latest build out there on a blank drive, this means it'll probably work





    The 35 GB music collection and 100 GB of movies doesn't have to be on the same drive.



    Put all that on a external firewire drive. Will cost you about $100.



    Yes you can place the iTunes folder onto another drive and point iTunes to it. (you should be seriously backing up all that data to DVD via iTunes as well before anything)



    Use a iPod for casual listening, and only use iTunes when fiddling around with your music, buying or watching movies.



    Getting the MacBook drive upgraded will cost you nearly the price of a new MacBook if it has to be opened up by a technician. Also the faster speed will cost you battery life and void your warranty/Apple care if not done by Apple authorize tech.





    Another option would be to get a used or new Mac Mini and a cheap used monitor, cheap keyboard and mouse. Then place your music and video there and use Screen Sharing (a hidden little treat of OS X) to control the Mac Mini wirelessly from your MacBook.



    It's a little complicated, requiring one to know all about networks and all, but I placed my iTunes on another computer and used it as a music server to my surround sound system so I could use my laptop at the couch without it burning my lap.



    If I needed to rate a song or something, I'd pull out the other Mac's screen from the MBP Dock and make a change to iTunes on the other Mac.



    Worked great, until someone spilled a beer on the other Mac's keyboard...



    Oh well, cover the keyboard next time...
  • Reply 155 of 215
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post


    Time machine isn't nearly as bad as you make it sound, but in the end it really is there for people that wouldn't back their stuff up otherwise. Cloning does have the advantages you described, but time machine is probably good enough for most people, including myself.





    Time Machine is fine as a backup solution and by all means if your comfortable keep using it.





    You get a spare external hard drive, try cloning your whole boot drive using Carbon Copy Cloner and then hold option while booting to select it to boot from.



    You'll see it's really not that hard and later on you'll see the tremendous advantages of having a clone of your boot drive. Especially if your comfortable reinstalling your operating system, it saves a LOT of work!



    cheers.
  • Reply 156 of 215
    It will be interesting to see the scripts for new "I'm a Mac" Ads - comparing Snow Leopard and Win 7. I expect the angle will be along the lines of PC Guy being proud of all the Vista code that has been removed - for only $120 upgrade, compared to MAC Guy who will list some of the new features - for only $29. Punch line along the lines of... Windows 7 = less for more$, Mac = More for Less$...



    "Look how much less you get for $120"



    There is probably a lot of mileage for Apple Marketing as well in the Windows 7 upgrade chart ( http://mossblog.allthingsd.com/20090...fficial-chart/ ) which implies an expectation that a lot of users will accidentally erase their personal data when they upgrade, or have to buy a new external hard drive to do this.



    Personally I'd go with;



    PC: "Hi Mac. I'm just trying my new faster Windows 7. It's faster than Vista."

    MAC: "Oh cool. Is it faster than XP?"

    PC: "It's faster than Vista"
  • Reply 157 of 215
    marzetta7marzetta7 Posts: 1,323member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineWine View Post


    I'm very disappointed by reports of numerous bugs in the GM (according to posts on MR). This feels rushed. You would think with the whole focus on optimizing Leopard, they'd at least try to minimize bugs. As is I read many, many reports on how SL is actually slower than Leopard.



    I'm curious how SL compares to Win7 - many people reluctantly are admitting that Win7 blows SL out of the water. I'm sad - I switched to Apple, but I was hoping Apple would at least be able to keep up. We'll see. I won't make up my mind until both OSes are shipping, and we can get some user feedback.



    Define many people? I'm using Windows 7 (64-bit) and it isn't anything to write home about. In fact, I'd say my iMac running OS X Tiger is waaaaaay better an OS than Windows 7--not that Microsoft didn't try to emulate Apple as much as they possibly could.



    Regardless, I've had quite the numerous blue screens when connecting to our corporate network via VPN on Windows 7. Have had numerous driver issues (mostly with the display) with my screen not showing up when I dock or redock my laptop. I've also experienced very painful and slow logon times (this is with 4GB of RAM too mind you). Anyhow, I'll give it to Microsoft that Windows 7 is snappier once you finally get logged in. It also takes a smaller memory footprint which is nice. However, it doesn't offer many bells and whistles or much improvement other than more snapiness--in fact, it is pretty much a faster version of Vista and lets just say it's not to hard to improve on Vista.



    And don't get me started on how Windows 7 handles their 64-bit directory structure (like Vista)! What a pain in the a--. It's as if 64-bit computing is an afterthought. You have to keep up with 2 program file directories (Program Files and Program Files (x86)) and 2 system directories (system32 and SysWOW64). Makes me want to go right back to 32-bit on Windows 7 until Microsoft can get their act together...but I digress.



    I'm really excited about SL. Sure there will be improvements shortly around the corner in terms of updates, but what OS doesn't when it is newly released? I'm sure Windows 7 will have more than its fair share. Let's just hope SL updates aren't as necessarily frequent as Vista was. Me, I'm not believing the hype machine that is Microsoft. I found typically that the hype machine that emanates out from Apple is more close to the actual end product and what is promised.



    Let's sit back and see.
  • Reply 158 of 215
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zaphod4269 View Post


    Off topic from snow leopard but,



    I like carbon copy cloner, but recently had a bad experience with its scheduled cloning operation.



    The hard drive it was cloning to was not plugged in, so it decided to copy the entire contents of the Macintosh HD into a folder inside of /Volumes, which in effect filled up the entire drive! It took a while to figure out where all the space went since i was only adding up the space used by visible folders and it wasn't adding up properly.



    Just something to be aware of...





    I wasn't aware of any problems with scheduling cloning of CCC. Hopefully you made the developers aware of this problem. I don't use it.



    For safety and security reasons (as I surf the rather dangerous areas of the internet), always keep my clones physically disconnected and don't use auto backups. I certainly don't use Time Machine for the same reason.



    Browser exploits are the ticket into a Mac.
  • Reply 159 of 215
    Or how about:



    PC: "Hi Mac. I'm just trying my new cheaper Windows 7. It's cheaper than Vista."

    MAC: "Oh cool. Is it cheaper than XP?"

    PC: "It's cheaper than Vista"



    Closing screen shows the price of the SL UG v W7 UG
  • Reply 160 of 215
    dcj001dcj001 Posts: 301member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    Getting the MacBook drive upgraded will cost you nearly the price of a new MacBook if it has to be opened up by a technician. Also the faster speed will cost you battery life and void your warranty/Apple care if not done by Apple authorize tech.





    Why do you say this?



    Why do you believe that this is true?



    Or is this simply an urban myth based on word of mouth?



    Replacing one's hard drive does not void one's MacBook warranty unless the one doing the replacing damages something in the process, at which point only the damage caused during the hard drive replacement is not covered.
Sign In or Register to comment.