Poll: *** The Snow Leopard Thread - All Related Posts In Here ***
- Thread starter Conrad11
- Start date
Associate
Just to point something out until we know for sure... 
http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MAC_OS_X_SNGL?mco=NzgxMDc3NA
There isn't any place where is says Leopard is required. It says it's an upgrade for Leopard users but it doesn't say anything about actually needing Leopard to be installed.
http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MAC_OS_X_SNGL?mco=NzgxMDc3NA
There isn't any place where is says Leopard is required. It says it's an upgrade for Leopard users but it doesn't say anything about actually needing Leopard to be installed.
Just to point something out until we know for sure...
http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MAC_OS_X_SNGL?mco=NzgxMDc3NA
There isn't any place where is says Leopard is required. It says it's an upgrade for Leopard users but it doesn't say anything about actually needing Leopard to be installed.
The latest seed (assumed to be the golden master) to developers installs fine, directly to a blank drive and never once asked for proof of leopard.
What is the physical difference in discs between the family pack and the "single" pack?
I know both discs are not "hardware locked" like the ones you get with a new Mac, so what is to stop someone attempting to install the single copy on multiple discs? How would the latter "stop" you installing on more than 5 macs, and the former on more than 1?
Easiest way to get this is on Friday is to just go to Apple Store I assume (high street wise).
rp2000
I know both discs are not "hardware locked" like the ones you get with a new Mac, so what is to stop someone attempting to install the single copy on multiple discs? How would the latter "stop" you installing on more than 5 macs, and the former on more than 1?
Easiest way to get this is on Friday is to just go to Apple Store I assume (high street wise).
rp2000
Soldato
Daft question:
I've ordered SL online like the rest of the interwebs, but once I'd calmed down and snatched my credit card out of my hand I realized I work opposite an Apple Store ! If my copy doesn't arrive on Friday, is there anything stopping me buying a copy from the store and then taking my delivered one back in for a refund when it turns up ? I assume not but still....
I've ordered SL online like the rest of the interwebs, but once I'd calmed down and snatched my credit card out of my hand I realized I work opposite an Apple Store ! If my copy doesn't arrive on Friday, is there anything stopping me buying a copy from the store and then taking my delivered one back in for a refund when it turns up ? I assume not but still....
Associate
In previous versions nothing. All you're paying for is the licence to use the software on the extra computers. The disc is no different.
I just decided to go into one of those Apple online chat help things to ask about the Snow Leopard installation. Apart from the person probably suspecting I was up to something dodgy (I have a full, legal, retail version of Leopard
) they did say it was an "upgrade disc not a full installation disc" and that an installation of Leopard would be required.
Soldato
Just ordered mine. £25 is a steel and I don't mind paying such a small amount for the latest Apple OS.
do you reckon the installation needs to be a working one ? mines corrupted and cant find my discs anywhere. hope i could just get away with installing SL
Associate
100% - unless they sell out :O
With leopard its only
32bit unless you have a more expensive mac
Surely that's down to the chipset in use?
Nope nothing to do with chipset, my macbook has a core2duo chip fully 64bit compatible.
You can hack the apple bootcamp driver install to run on macbook's
but not all the drivers work properly.
Apple just decided to limit 64bit windows installs to more expensive mac's.
After all, all mac owners have huge trust funds and are expected to upgrade every 3 months!.
Soldato
Is one of the requirements of the cheaper 25 pound disk AFAIK.
Deleted member 651465
D
Deleted member 651465
It's because not all machines are capable of running 64bit Kernels.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...ard-build-limits-most-macs-to-32-bit-mode.ars
In order to run true 64bit (apps & kernel) you need a recent machine, and you still have to hold "6" and "4" while booting.
Not being able to install 64bit Windows on a Mac has nothing to do with Apple. Unless of course you are referring to drivers / lack of written by Apple.
I had Vista Ultimate 64 running on a machine with all functionality.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...ard-build-limits-most-macs-to-32-bit-mode.ars
In order to run true 64bit (apps & kernel) you need a recent machine, and you still have to hold "6" and "4" while booting.
Not being able to install 64bit Windows on a Mac has nothing to do with Apple. Unless of course you are referring to drivers / lack of written by Apple.
I had Vista Ultimate 64 running on a machine with all functionality.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not that entirely correct..
Snow Leopard, like Leopard, can execute 64bit applications. Those apps run with true 64 addressable space - I've compiled 64bit apps with 3.2GB of memory used on Leopard.
More of the Apple applications are 64 bit in SL. Such as Finder etc. I'd suspect more of the libraries behind those are 64 too.
The kernel defaults to 32 bit as most drivers aren't written - things like Parallels for example may not work with 64 bit kernel.
I have a feeling my SiliconImage SATA PCI ExpressCard isn't going to work for example..
However one point that no one has mentioned yet - security. The 64 bit more provides a better security mode whereas if the system defaults to 32bit then I suspect that the security features are also going to be disabled.
My MBP is capable of 64 bit (Santa Rosa). My EFI firmware is ok with 64 bit. So I'll be a bit peeved if I'm limited to 64 bit without an option to default to 64 bit instead.
Ignore my ZFS rant.. still peeved. Only available on Server.
Last edited:
