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.
$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.
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?
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.
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.
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!
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.
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
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).
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).
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).
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)
$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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
$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.
Is this true? If so, isn't it huge? One would not need Parallels and such?
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.
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!
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.
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.).
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).
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).
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).
it's possible to do a clean install, only it's necessary to insert the leopard disk
http://discussions.apple.com/thread....ageID=10051245
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)
$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.
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.
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.
...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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.