| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Altermind
New Member
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Posts: 3
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 11:06 am Post subject: Leopard isnt supose to run in all mac models? |
 |
|
Thats what i was thinking about this, if leopard is able to run in any mac model, doesnt have to be an obligation to change the machine, here in dominican republic, even a mac mini is very expensive, im trying to get a dual 1.42 in ebay, and its about a thousand dollars cost, is lot of money for me, so imagine yourself how can i afford a mac pro, even an imac G5 or intel inside. Thats why i want to know if i can run leopard in any mac model, if i can get a G4 sawtooth 400mhz, can i run it there?
Thanks in advance to all....... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tenex
Veteran Member
Joined: 27 Feb 2006
Posts: 1421
Location: London
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Until Apple make the announcement it's just guesswork, but I think it's worth considering that they are in the business of selling software and alienating a large number of users of current machines isn't in their interest.
Where would MS be now if they'd ditched all the legacy stuff? in a far better position but that's another thread 
_________________
iMac intel CoreDuo 17" 1Gb
WD My Book Premium fw320Gb x2
Logitech S530, iPod Nano 2Gb
& a PPC Mini bought for my Mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
247 Photography
Veteran Member
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 875
Location: Oakland, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:35 pm Post subject: Re: Leopard isnt supose to run in all mac models? |
|
|
| Altermind wrote: | ... i want to know if i can run leopard in any mac model, if i can get a G4 sawtooth 400mhz, can i run it there?
Thanks in advance to all....... |
Tiger runs in any Power Mac, G3, G4, G5. The Leopard preview on the Apple site doesn't say, but I don't expect the requirements would change. At some point, all Power Macs will be unsupported by new software, but it's too soon for that, I think.
A problem with running new software on old hardware, however, is that operating system features are developed to take advantage of new hardware, i.e. fast processors with lots of memory. Some features of Leopard may be uncomfortable slow on older hardware. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SOCOMRAIDER
Veteran Member
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 2869
Location: Minneapolis
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:01 pm Post subject: Re: Leopard isnt supose to run in all mac models? |
|
|
| 247 Photography wrote: | | Altermind wrote: | ... i want to know if i can run leopard in any mac model, if i can get a G4 sawtooth 400mhz, can i run it there?
Thanks in advance to all....... |
Tiger runs in any Power Mac, G3, G4, G5. The Leopard preview on the Apple site doesn't say, but I don't expect the requirements would change. At some point, all Power Macs will be unsupported by new software, but it's too soon for that, I think.
A problem with running new software on old hardware, however, is that operating system features are developed to take advantage of new hardware, i.e. fast processors with lots of memory. Some features of Leopard may be uncomfortable slow on older hardware. |
Well it does say that Core Animation should run on most Macs made in the last two years. It makes me wonder more, since Core Animation is designed mostly for two core systems. As it was stated that the program runs on one core while Core Animation runs on another. I'm sure it can run otherwise, but what will the performance loss be like? That is what I'm wondering.
A G4 Sawtooth 400 MHz is not going to be able to run Core Animation, as I don't think a G4 Mac mini will be able to either. Since the G4 Mac Mini doesn't even support Core Image.
Yes Leopard will run, but you will be missing some features on the list and some eyecandy as well.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg
Veteran Member
Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 613
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've been reading a lot of opinion on various sites regarding the Leopard preview. There seem to be mixed impressions of the announced features or lack thereof. It got me thinking about what really mattered to me in regards to the next iteration of the OS. And what it comes down to is what I appreciate in OS X today (availability, integrity and usability). I want an OS that is rock solid. I don't want to have to worry about whether it will go wonky in the middle of a boot or after adding a new device. I want an OS that is secure in design and adequately safeguards administrative controls without living from security patch to security patch. I want an OS that supports a clean user interface that allows me to perform common, day-to-day tasks without unnecessary clutter. The rest is gravy. I think oftentimes folks catch featuritis and begin to lose sight of the need for an OS that performs at providing the underlying infrastructure support of a system and does it well leaving the bonus features to specialized applications. I would argue that some of the most important features or enhancements to an OS are not those immediately seen at the surface but rather those that provide the less glamorous yet most important underlying infrastructure. Regarding Leopard, I think some of the announced features (such as Time Machine) are very good additions. I just hope that the Mac OS doesn't fall victim to feature bloat but instead strengthens its core competency as a solid and reliable computing platform.
_________________
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB RAM
miniStack 500GB
Dell 1905FP
Logitech Wave Cordless Desktop |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
247 Photography
Veteran Member
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 875
Location: Oakland, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:57 am Post subject: just a tool |
|
|
| greg wrote: | | ... what I appreciate in OS X today (availability, integrity and usability). I want an OS that is rock solid. I don't want to have to worry about whether it will go wonky in the middle of a boot or after adding a new device. I want an OS that is secure in design and adequately safeguards administrative controls without living from security patch to security patch. I want an OS that supports a clean user interface that allows me to perform common, day-to-day tasks without unnecessary clutter. The rest is gravy. ... |
I agree with this point of view completely. A computer (with its OS) is just a tool, and should be judged as such, i.e. how it enables useful work to be accomplished. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SOCOMRAIDER
Veteran Member
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 2869
Location: Minneapolis
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| greg wrote: | | I've been reading a lot of opinion on various sites regarding the Leopard preview. There seem to be mixed impressions of the announced features or lack thereof. It got me thinking about what really mattered to me in regards to the next iteration of the OS. And what it comes down to is what I appreciate in OS X today (availability, integrity and usability). I want an OS that is rock solid. I don't want to have to worry about whether it will go wonky in the middle of a boot or after adding a new device. I want an OS that is secure in design and adequately safeguards administrative controls without living from security patch to security patch. I want an OS that supports a clean user interface that allows me to perform common, day-to-day tasks without unnecessary clutter. The rest is gravy. I think oftentimes folks catch featuritis and begin to lose sight of the need for an OS that performs at providing the underlying infrastructure support of a system and does it well leaving the bonus features to specialized applications. I would argue that some of the most important features or enhancements to an OS are not those immediately seen at the surface but rather those that provide the less glamorous yet most important underlying infrastructure. Regarding Leopard, I think some of the announced features (such as Time Machine) are very good additions. I just hope that the Mac OS doesn't fall victim to feature bloat but instead strengthens its core competency as a solid and reliable computing platform. |
Well I think they are doing a good job even with the eye candy. If you take a look at how Core Animation works, it just makes programs that much more easier to make and troubleshoot them. It takes something and reduces the line of code needed by a factor of 10 or higher. I mean what was the screensaver that they demoed, what was it originally? to 400 lines of code. I think they are finding ways to optimize like that.
Lets not forget that the most important features are not revealed yet. Jobs said he wanted to keep them under wraps for a while longer, right up until launch time. So if Time Machine may seem like a big feature, or an updated iChat, etc. Imagine what they may be hiding, something they want to keep secret.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg
Veteran Member
Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 613
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SOCOMRAIDER wrote: | | Lets not forget that the most important features are not revealed yet. Jobs said he wanted to keep them under wraps for a while longer, right up until launch time. So if Time Machine may seem like a big feature, or an updated iChat, etc. Imagine what they may be hiding, something they want to keep secret. |
True. The point I'm making is that what you see on the surface is not necessarily the most important part of the product or its core function. I've worked in commercial software development for years and I can tell you that for the products that I've worked on some of the best improvements were "under the covers" and not necessarily obvious to the typical end user.
_________________
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB RAM
miniStack 500GB
Dell 1905FP
Logitech Wave Cordless Desktop |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scooper
Veteran Member
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 988
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| greg wrote: | | I just hope that the Mac OS doesn't fall victim to feature bloat but instead strengthens its core competency as a solid and reliable computing platform. |
Me too. I already feel that OS X slightly lags behind the speed of Windows in certain areas. Time Machine may be an example of bloat. I mean it looks like a cool application and will certainly be handy, but my better judgment tells me it's the kind of application that will hog system resources if it isn't implemented right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chinarut
Member
Joined: 06 Sep 2005
Posts: 100
Location: Thailand
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| scooper wrote: | | Time Machine may be an example of bloat. I mean it looks like a cool application and will certainly be handy, but my better judgment tells me it's the kind of application that will hog system resources if it isn't implemented right. |
heh - any ClearCase friends out there
dare I say time will tell?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
picaman
Veteran Member
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1444
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a great ArsTechnica article about the inner workings of file systems, backup types, and Time Machine:
http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits.ars/2006/8/15/4995
It's a bit technical but is a fascinating read.
For SuperDuper fans, the developer Dave Nanian has said on his site (as much as he can say without breaking his non-disclosure) that his program will work with Time Machine and Leopard and add functionality.
I think Time Machine is going to be a huge selling point for Apple, and that it will also solve a lot of support issues for Apple as well.
Jamie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chinarut
Member
Joined: 06 Sep 2005
Posts: 100
Location: Thailand
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hey picaman - that was a great read!
glad to see somene out there being really intentional about squashing rumors at the geek level - our minds are so quick to explode
I think he makes an important point:
"The most significant feature of Time Machine has nothing to do with the underlying file system or copy engine. Apple has set backups free from the traditional "utility application" model that so many people find intimidating and confusing."
given this goal, Apple engineers definitely went gung ho on taking a user-centric iterative approach to reinventing everyone's relationship to the file system one step at a time!
I can't download the PDF presentation he talks about and at first glance, it does seem a bit too low level for my tastes - i just want basic SCM best practices to come alive in my everyday work dammit!
too much to ask for by WWDC2008?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnodd4
Senior Member
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 471
Location: united states,kent washington
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thhis sounds great i cant wait and i feel sorry for all those stupid people that couldn't wait and downloaded the preview edition illegally so there computer can get new spyware and viruses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
picaman
Veteran Member
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1444
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chinarut wrote: | I think he makes an important point:
"The most significant feature of Time Machine has nothing to do with the underlying file system or copy engine. Apple has set backups free from the traditional "utility application" model that so many people find intimidating and confusing." |
I completely agree. The "geeks" may quibble about the implementation and the inner workings, but to the average user this is going to be huge. The ability to easily select and restore any file from any point in time (limited by storage space, of course) is going to be a major selling point. And it's a capability that (Thurott's FUD about Volume Shadow Copy notwithstanding) Vista ain't going to have at the same level.
Anything that gets more than 4% of Mac users to back up is a positive development. I was truly shocked when I heard Steve Jobs give that number in his WWDC talk.
Jamie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
picaman
Veteran Member
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1444
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| johnodd4 wrote: | | i feel sorry for all those stupid people that couldn't wait and downloaded the preview edition illegally so there computer can get new spyware and viruses |
I don't follow you here. Can you explain? How is installation of a Leopard preview going to open you up to exploitation?
Jamie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Photo Gallery
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
