When the update does come out, how many know enough NOT to download it from the Software Update panel, but to start with their DVD, check the HD, repair permissions, go back to the Software Update panel, install the update, and then repair permissions again?
Hell, how many OLD Mac users know that they have to do that?
Apple states that this should be done, but then does not mention it when the update comes down. It just updates.
I hate to think that tens of thousands of new Mac users are going to go through that just a few weeks after they bought their new machine.
If the bugs were minor, fine, but reports are coming in about data corruption, failed upgrades because of SCSI cards, the reappearance of upgrade Firewire problems, security lapses with Dashboard, etc.
These problems should NOT BE HERE! These are the things that a proper beta program is designed to catch, and proper development is supposed to fix.
Sales numbers shouldn't determine when an OS upgrade is fit for release. We are talking of perhaps $50-75 million additional this quarter, hardly major. They would make the sales up 30 days later.
I have a fair amount of Apple stock, and it's getting hammered lately for lots of reasons. I don't want to read in Forbes that new purchasers are unhappy with Apple.
Obscure bugs, fine, I'll grant that. But not major ones such as these.
I've very rarely done permissions repairs or hard drive checks before or after an update. I don't think its necessary. Every so often I'll do a permissions check if things are running slowly. BUT if it was necessary Apple would build it into the update.
This is for those of you complaining about MS getting new chips before Apple.
You guys need to keep in mind that Apple has much stricter demands on the chips then MS has. Since MS is using them on a platform that THEY write the OS for, that THEY define the specifications to, and that THEY create the SDK for, they can wrap themselves around whatever IBM is willing to give them.
MS doesn't need chips that are compatible with an already existing code base, so IBM can give them stuff that Apple can't use. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this chip is something Apple rejected because it wasn't compatible with the existing mac line.
I would also be willing to bet that those tri-core chips have a different instruction set then the G5s.
i'm on 10.3.9... i never do that. i just do the software update whenever i hear of a new update... then every few weeks i let Onyx have it's half-an-hour-way with my iBook
well, we will see if it was worth 'rushing' Tiger out the door....
Both you and Maccrazy have been either very lucky, oy you've had problems that you weren't aware of.
Apple DOES recommend this procedure. They don't put it into Software Update because they are too into the "this is so easy" blather.
When I bought my 950 in late '91, it came out with a 330 page manual for the software, and a hardware manual of almost 100 pages.
Even my 9600 came with a 234 page users manual.
Over the years Apple has been pairing this down to nothing.
The online help isn't nearly as good as it should be. Looking through a manual is still the best and easiest way to learn things.
The point I'm making is that Apple oversimplifies things to the point of foolishness.
On their site is (I'm not going to look for it now) information about updating and upgrading. It says exactly what I have said. Macfixit and Macintouch, as well as all of the Mac mags will tell you to do the samething as well.
You should also ONLY update with the combi updaters, never the individual ones.
Both you and Maccrazy have been either very lucky, oy you've had problems that you weren't aware of.
Apple DOES recommend this procedure. They don't put it into Software Update because they are too into the "this is so easy" blather.
When I bought my 950 in late '91, it came out with a 330 page manual for the software, and a hardware manual of almost 100 pages.
Even my 9600 came with a 234 page users manual.
Over the years Apple has been pairing this down to nothing.
The online help isn't nearly as good as it should be. Looking through a manual is still the best and easiest way to learn things.
The point I'm making is that Apple oversimplifies things to the point of foolishness.
On their site is (I'm not going to look for it now) information about updating and upgrading. It says exactly what I have said. Macfixit and Macintouch, as well as all of the Mac mags will tell you to do the samething as well.
You should also ONLY update with the combi updaters, never the individual ones.
Well when 10.4.1 comes out there wont be a combi updater! But i'll do a permission repair etc. I've got multiple macs and never had a problem with any of them. I think Apple should build it into the update - to make it easier for the consumer.
Well when 10.4.1 comes out there wont be a combi updater! But i'll do a permission repair etc. I've got multiple macs and never had a problem with any of them. I think Apple should build it into the update - to make it easier for the consumer.
I didn't mention 4.1 because it's the first update, so there can't be a combi.
I agree that Apple should build it in. I've told them this many times. I'm alsways told that they are "looking into it".
You should always check your drive. if there is a problem that you aren't aware of, it will affect the update/upgrade. This is basic.
I'll repeat. These are not the same chips Apple uses. These are simpler, cheaper chips.
Just as the Cell is able to get to 4 GHz with a PPC core chip on it, these can get to 3.2 GHz by not being full general purpose cpu's, but rather simple, highly optimized versions.
Apple can't use these.
That was basically my point.
What will be the next chip upgrade is a secret to us right now, when a 3Ghz chip does come I'm sure it will be much better than what is in the Xbox.
Comments
Originally posted by melgross
When the update does come out, how many know enough NOT to download it from the Software Update panel, but to start with their DVD, check the HD, repair permissions, go back to the Software Update panel, install the update, and then repair permissions again?
Hell, how many OLD Mac users know that they have to do that?
Apple states that this should be done, but then does not mention it when the update comes down. It just updates.
I hate to think that tens of thousands of new Mac users are going to go through that just a few weeks after they bought their new machine.
If the bugs were minor, fine, but reports are coming in about data corruption, failed upgrades because of SCSI cards, the reappearance of upgrade Firewire problems, security lapses with Dashboard, etc.
These problems should NOT BE HERE! These are the things that a proper beta program is designed to catch, and proper development is supposed to fix.
Sales numbers shouldn't determine when an OS upgrade is fit for release. We are talking of perhaps $50-75 million additional this quarter, hardly major. They would make the sales up 30 days later.
I have a fair amount of Apple stock, and it's getting hammered lately for lots of reasons. I don't want to read in Forbes that new purchasers are unhappy with Apple.
Obscure bugs, fine, I'll grant that. But not major ones such as these.
I've very rarely done permissions repairs or hard drive checks before or after an update. I don't think its necessary. Every so often I'll do a permissions check if things are running slowly. BUT if it was necessary Apple would build it into the update.
Originally posted by gelosilente
will quartz 2d extreme be enabled?
I've been told that it's very likely. They have some bugs to work out with it.
You guys need to keep in mind that Apple has much stricter demands on the chips then MS has. Since MS is using them on a platform that THEY write the OS for, that THEY define the specifications to, and that THEY create the SDK for, they can wrap themselves around whatever IBM is willing to give them.
MS doesn't need chips that are compatible with an already existing code base, so IBM can give them stuff that Apple can't use. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this chip is something Apple rejected because it wasn't compatible with the existing mac line.
I would also be willing to bet that those tri-core chips have a different instruction set then the G5s.
Originally posted by melgross
I've been told that it's very likely. They have some bugs to work out with it.
good news
Originally posted by sunilraman
i'm on 10.3.9... i never do that. i just do the software update whenever i hear of a new update... then every few weeks i let Onyx have it's half-an-hour-way with my iBook
well, we will see if it was worth 'rushing' Tiger out the door....
Both you and Maccrazy have been either very lucky, oy you've had problems that you weren't aware of.
Apple DOES recommend this procedure. They don't put it into Software Update because they are too into the "this is so easy" blather.
When I bought my 950 in late '91, it came out with a 330 page manual for the software, and a hardware manual of almost 100 pages.
Even my 9600 came with a 234 page users manual.
Over the years Apple has been pairing this down to nothing.
The online help isn't nearly as good as it should be. Looking through a manual is still the best and easiest way to learn things.
The point I'm making is that Apple oversimplifies things to the point of foolishness.
On their site is (I'm not going to look for it now) information about updating and upgrading. It says exactly what I have said. Macfixit and Macintouch, as well as all of the Mac mags will tell you to do the samething as well.
You should also ONLY update with the combi updaters, never the individual ones.
Originally posted by melgross
Both you and Maccrazy have been either very lucky, oy you've had problems that you weren't aware of.
Apple DOES recommend this procedure. They don't put it into Software Update because they are too into the "this is so easy" blather.
When I bought my 950 in late '91, it came out with a 330 page manual for the software, and a hardware manual of almost 100 pages.
Even my 9600 came with a 234 page users manual.
Over the years Apple has been pairing this down to nothing.
The online help isn't nearly as good as it should be. Looking through a manual is still the best and easiest way to learn things.
The point I'm making is that Apple oversimplifies things to the point of foolishness.
On their site is (I'm not going to look for it now) information about updating and upgrading. It says exactly what I have said. Macfixit and Macintouch, as well as all of the Mac mags will tell you to do the samething as well.
You should also ONLY update with the combi updaters, never the individual ones.
Well when 10.4.1 comes out there wont be a combi updater! But i'll do a permission repair etc. I've got multiple macs and never had a problem with any of them. I think Apple should build it into the update - to make it easier for the consumer.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
Well when 10.4.1 comes out there wont be a combi updater! But i'll do a permission repair etc. I've got multiple macs and never had a problem with any of them. I think Apple should build it into the update - to make it easier for the consumer.
I didn't mention 4.1 because it's the first update, so there can't be a combi.
I agree that Apple should build it in. I've told them this many times. I'm alsways told that they are "looking into it".
You should always check your drive. if there is a problem that you aren't aware of, it will affect the update/upgrade. This is basic.
Originally posted by melgross
You guys should read earlier posts.
I'll repeat. These are not the same chips Apple uses. These are simpler, cheaper chips.
Just as the Cell is able to get to 4 GHz with a PPC core chip on it, these can get to 3.2 GHz by not being full general purpose cpu's, but rather simple, highly optimized versions.
Apple can't use these.
That was basically my point.
What will be the next chip upgrade is a secret to us right now, when a 3Ghz chip does come I'm sure it will be much better than what is in the Xbox.