: Snow Leopoard for leopard users only?


Pelao
Aug 7th, 2009, 01:10 PM
Hi

On another forum I read that if you run Tiger on a Mac with the correct specifications for Snow Leopard, you will have to upgrade to Leopard first. In other words, you can't jump from Tiger to Snow leopard. Is this the case?

Just doesn't seem to make sense.

biovizier
Aug 7th, 2009, 01:24 PM
I think after partnering with Rogers in Canada, Apple learned a few tricks.

My understanding is that Tiger users can't just upgrade to Leopard. With the official upgrade path, they have to also buy the bundle that comes with iLife and iWork.

If you happen to want all of those things anyway, it turns out to be a pretty good deal. But if you want just the OS, you end up paying extra for something you didn't want.

The other way, which you mentioned, is to buy Leopard (second hand once Snow Leopard is released), then upgrade.

monokitty
Aug 7th, 2009, 01:41 PM
I doubt this is true. Snow Leopard is to ship in 2 forms as far as I know:

1) Snow Leopard Upgrade, $30; for Leopard owners.
2) Snow Leopard Retail; $120; for Tiger owners.

Snow Leopard of course requires an Intel-based Mac.

biovizier
Aug 7th, 2009, 01:53 PM
Upgrading from Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger.
If your Intel-based Mac is running Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger, purchase the Mac Box Set (when available), which is a single, affordable package that includes Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard; iLife ’09, with the latest versions of iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iWeb, and iDVD; and iWork ’09, Apple’s productivity suite for home and office including Pages, Numbers, and Keynote.
Apple - Mac OS X Snow Leopard - Technical specifications (http://www.apple.com/macosx/specs.html)

FeXL
Aug 7th, 2009, 02:50 PM
I've never needed to use any of the iLife software, so it's lost on me. I've never used Pages & rarely use Numbers. I may learn Keynote at some point, maybe.

If this is all included in the $120 or so upgrade price from Tiger and Snow Leopard proves its worth, fine.

If not, ain't interested...

I think after partnering with Rogers in Canada, Apple learned a few tricks.

If Apple wants to PMO as a customer, then emulating anything from Robbers business model is the way to do it...

monokitty
Aug 7th, 2009, 04:01 PM
Apple - Mac OS X Snow Leopard - Technical specifications (http://www.apple.com/macosx/specs.html)

I find it hard to believe that's the only option for Tigers users. I'll wait and see it out when Snow Leopard is finally released.

Pelao
Aug 7th, 2009, 09:10 PM
I find it hard to believe that's the only option for Tigers users. I'll wait and see it out when Snow Leopard is finally released.

Agreed. I feel that the box set is good value for those that need it, but I would be surprised if you can't just upgrade straight from Tiger to SN if that were your choice. It would suck especially hard, for example, in the case of a business (like ours) where neither iLife or iWork are used or needed.

biovizier
Aug 7th, 2009, 10:37 PM
For what it's worth, I hope you're right (if you can find a link, it would sure make me feel better).

I'm just going on what I have seen officially. Here's another:
Apple Unveils Mac OS X Snow Leopard - Apple Canada (http://www.apple.com/ca/press/2009_06/08macosx.html)
Mac OS X version 10.6 Snow Leopard will be available as an upgrade to Mac OS X version 10.5 Leopard in September 2009 through the Apple Store®, Apple’s retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers. Snow Leopard will be available as a single user license, as a Family Pack for a single household, five-user license, for Tiger® users with an Intel-based Mac and within the Mac Box Set with iLife® ’09 and iWork® ’09. Details of pricing will be available at launch.

Actually, the comma is in a weird place, but I guess that does look like the single user licence applies to Tiger...

biovizier
Aug 7th, 2009, 11:02 PM
...but then that was the Canadian version, whereas the US version of the press release from the same day is worded so:Mac OS X version 10.6 Snow Leopard will be available as an upgrade to Mac OS X version 10.5 Leopard in September 2009 through the Apple Store® (Apple (http://www.apple.com)), Apple’s retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers. The Snow Leopard single user license will be available for a suggested retail price of $29 (US) and the Snow Leopard Family Pack, a single household, five-user license, will be available for a suggested price of $49 (US). For Tiger® users with an Intel-based Mac, the Mac Box Set includes Mac OS X Snow Leopard, iLife® ’09 and iWork® ’09 and will be available for a suggested price of $169 (US) and a Family Pack is available for a suggested price of $229 (US).Apple Unveils Mac OS X Snow Leopard (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/06/08macosx.html)

pm-r
Aug 7th, 2009, 11:57 PM
I guess I'll be able to save $30.00± on 10.6 as my G4 PPC apparently won't even support it, but even if I had a supported Intel Mac I don't think I'd go there as apparently 10.6 Snow Leopard has zero support for AppleTalk we need for our current wireless/ethernet network printing etc. that works just fine with some of our old printer and peripherals thanks Apple.

Patrick Mead-Robins
Mac Solutions
250-652-1860
-----------------------------

chas_m
Aug 8th, 2009, 01:13 AM
I don't think I'd go there as apparently 10.6 Snow Leopard has zero support for AppleTalk we need for our current wireless/ethernet network printing etc. that works just fine with some of our old printer and peripherals thanks Apple.

It is not Apple's fault that you want to run 20-year-old printers that use a protocol that was obsolete 10 years ago.

Apple (and every other printer company on the planet) stopped using "AppleTalk" as you're describing it in the early 90s in favour of IP networking ... for very good reasons.

If you want to hang on to obsolete equipment, that is of course your right ... but don't expect the technological world to continue to support it indefinitely.

You may find that Canadian Tire no longer carries fringe for the surrey on your horse-drawn carriage, either.

MacGYVER
Aug 8th, 2009, 01:33 AM
I don't understand what is so hard to understand?

If you own Tiger and want to upgrade to Snow Leopard, first make sure you have an Intel Mac, and second you will be paying FULL price and not the upgrade price. Why wouldn't you? You skipped Leopard right? So it only makes sense that you pay full price. If Apple wants to THROW IN a few extras, stop whining, accept them, and move on. You can always trash the iLife suite and all the other stuff that comes with Snow Leopard Full Install.

Apple has made it pretty simple for most Mac users:

Have Leopard and want Snow Leopard, just pay a small upgrade price.

Have Two generations ago Tiger and want to upgrade, sorry but just like in the past, you're paying full price.

Man Mac users are picky, Apple hands out free software and they complain ;). Think Apple should exempt Canadians then with just supplying Snow Leopard for Tiger upgrades at full price and nothing else, geesh ;)

EvanPitts
Aug 8th, 2009, 11:12 AM
^^^
The OP just thinks that Apple should have a regular retail release of Snow Leopard, without all of the extra frills they don't need, like iWork and iLife. Forcing people to have software they don't want is the same thing that got the Evil Empire into trouble some years ago. I see no problem with Apple marketing a proper retail product that is just Snow Leopard - since if Micro$loth can market over 20 versions of Fi$ta - Apple can easily market 3 versions of Snow Leopard...

biovizier
Aug 8th, 2009, 11:47 AM
Man Mac users are picky, Apple hands out free software and they complain
Canadian pricing for "Snow Leopard" isn't out yet, as far as I know. But looking at Leopard for comparison:
Apple Software - Apple Store (Canada) (http://store.apple.com/ca/browse/home/shop_mac/software/apple?n=osx)
$129 Single Licence
$219 Box Set.

Do you really consider a 70% premium for things you don't want to be "free software"?

It looks pretty bad - Apple may be using the PPC phase out to cover the introduction of this new pricing model, where single-version upgraders pay one price, but those wanting a "reference release" have to pay more. It is clear that the $29 price this round is a one-time thing. Don't be surprised if 10.7 comes with a $129 price for 10.6 users and a $219 forced bundle price for 10.4-10.5 users, effectively eliminating the option of skipping versions to save cash, or just because they don't need the new features. And make no mistake - given Apple's habit of releasing security updates only for the current and previous OS X versions, when the time comes users will be forced to upgrade - they won't be able to hold off and skip two versions.

If this goes through, using a Mac will turn into being locked in to an OS X subscription model, another lesson from the iPhone experience, on keeping the money flowing after the initial sale.

Forcing people to have software they don't want is the same thing that got the Evil Empire into trouble some years ago.

I hope I'm wrong, but it may be time to engage your "evil filters" when evaluating Apple's actions. I still love the product, but the company? I'm watching for shenanigans. Shareholders and fanboys will no doubt be overjoyed at the revenue stream; people who were loyal Apple customers through the lean years won't be fooled. They wouldn't have been able to pull this crap when they were on the edge of the precipice with 3% market share, but Apple is probably feeling comfortable enough with their current popularity to see how much they can get away with.

EvanPitts
Aug 8th, 2009, 02:33 PM
I hope I'm wrong, but it may be time to engage your "evil filters" when evaluating Apple's actions. I still love the product, but the company? I'm watching for shenanigans. Shareholders and fanboys will no doubt be overjoyed at the revenue stream; people who were loyal Apple customers through the lean years won't be fooled. They wouldn't have been able to pull this crap when they were on the edge of the precipice with 3% market share, but Apple is probably feeling comfortable enough with their current popularity to see how much they can get away with.

Apple was known at one time for supporting all kinds of older systems, but now, they seem to toss out 70 or so models of machines with every iteration. Not just that, their OS versions no longer have any longevity. I think it is sad that they have resorted to trickery, like the stunt by which Tiger wouldn't install on a non-FireWire machine, even though it will actually run on a non-FireWire machine without problems. Same with Leopard, when they arbitrarily decided that 867MHz was the minimum, which skipped a number of potent and not that old machine, and didn't factor in any of the dual processor models. Now I could see Tiger requiring FireWire, if it actually required it; and Leopard if the break point was, say, a G4 processor, rather than an arbitrary clock cycle number, picked out of the air because people have hacked installs onto all kinds of G4 machines that don't make the grade.

That said, I think it is disingenuous to force people to buy operating systems they don't want. If someone is currently running Tiger - it is obvious that they are not interested in Leopard, so they should be able to entirely "upgrade" to Snow Leopard by the same means that was previously offered, that of a retain install. I think some of this is simply because people aren't really going for iWork. And I can't blame them, and though Pages and Numbers are competent and have some features of value - it lacks those things that AppleWorks had for years, that is, a simple, flat file database, a simple drawing application, and a simple paint program.

I do not think that a person that has been a Tiger user should be punished because they didn't go to Leopard - all Apple needs to do is come out with a real version of Snow Leopard that has a real installer so that people can go to that. And if people want a bundled deal, then so be it, but at least have the option of a real version of the OS.

Apple is also making their OS far too rigid, forcing people to install stuff that they may not want, and with no way of shutting off those things without broadsiding some other functionality. They seem to be locked in a race with the Evil Empire, adding performance robbing features in order to gain check marks in the magazines, while at the same time, dropping any iota of support for those who have legacy hardware or software. Of course, I think Apple is spending too much time fooling around trying to make their systems run crappy Windoze - rather than making a superior OS with superior software...

neptune
Aug 8th, 2009, 07:34 PM
I think it's amusing that someone characterizes having to purchase iLife and iWork as punishment.

fyrefly
Aug 8th, 2009, 07:47 PM
Apple was known at one time for supporting all kinds of older systems, but now, they seem to toss out 70 or so models of machines with every iteration. Not just that, their OS versions no longer have any longevity. I think it is sad that they have resorted to trickery, like ... with Leopard, when they arbitrarily decided that 867MHz was the minimum, which skipped a number of potent and not that old machine, and didn't factor in any of the dual processor models. Now I could see Tiger requiring FireWire, if it actually required it; and Leopard if the break point was, say, a G4 processor, rather than an arbitrary clock cycle number, picked out of the air because people have hacked installs onto all kinds of G4 machines that don't make the grade.

When Leopard was released in 2007 - the only Machines that were not supported (800Mhz and below) were 5+ years old. How is that "not that old". Apple expects a 3-year lifespan for most of it's computers (that's how long it's going to warranty them for at least). So 5+ years is hardly like they just made machines purchased recently obsolete.

Snow Leopard is a little worse, as Apple was still selling PPC machines ~3 years ago (Spring 2006) and Snow Leopard will not install on those machines.

That being said, I seriously doubt Apple will only have a Mac Box Set Snow Leopard for Tiger users. That seems weird. I bet they'll release a ~$130 Standalone installer. But even if they don't, the Mac Box Set is still cheaper than most (useful) versions of Windows 7 ;)

pm-r
Aug 9th, 2009, 03:00 AM
It is not Apple's fault that you want to run 20-year-old printers that use a protocol that was obsolete 10 years ago.
... ... ...
If you want to hang on to obsolete equipment, that is of course your right ... but don't expect the technological world to continue to support it indefinitely.

You may find that Canadian Tire no longer carries fringe for the surrey on your horse-drawn carriage, either.

Hi Chas, and I wasn't blaming Apple for any 10.6 AppleTalk exclusion, nor that 10.6 won't install nor run on my PPC G4 - now 6 yearsold, but just a statement in case any other users are in the same boat that CAN update and are also still using any AppleTalk type devices.

And yes, Canadian Tire no longer carries any fringe for any horse-drawn carriage surreys, but our horsey type neighbours seem to have found a source and it looks great when they go down the road with their various rigs.

And they also ALL still work!!!

Patrick Mead-Robins
Mac Solutions
250-652-1860
-----------------------------

Pelao
Aug 9th, 2009, 09:16 AM
Apple was known at one time for supporting all kinds of older systems, but now, they seem to toss out 70 or so models of machines with every iteration. Not just that, their OS versions no longer have any longevity. I think it is sad that they have resorted to trickery, like the stunt by which Tiger wouldn't install on a non-FireWire machine, even though it will actually run on a non-FireWire machine without problems. Same with Leopard, when they arbitrarily decided that 867MHz was the minimum, which skipped a number of potent and not that old machine, and didn't factor in any of the dual processor models. Now I could see Tiger requiring FireWire, if it actually required it; and Leopard if the break point was, say, a G4 processor, rather than an arbitrary clock cycle number, picked out of the air because people have hacked installs onto all kinds of G4 machines that don't make the grade.

That said, I think it is disingenuous to force people to buy operating systems they don't want. If someone is currently running Tiger - it is obvious that they are not interested in Leopard, so they should be able to entirely "upgrade" to Snow Leopard by the same means that was previously offered, that of a retain install. I think some of this is simply because people aren't really going for iWork. And I can't blame them, and though Pages and Numbers are competent and have some features of value - it lacks those things that AppleWorks had for years, that is, a simple, flat file database, a simple drawing application, and a simple paint program.

I do not think that a person that has been a Tiger user should be punished because they didn't go to Leopard - all Apple needs to do is come out with a real version of Snow Leopard that has a real installer so that people can go to that. And if people want a bundled deal, then so be it, but at least have the option of a real version of the OS.

Apple is also making their OS far too rigid, forcing people to install stuff that they may not want, and with no way of shutting off those things without broadsiding some other functionality. They seem to be locked in a race with the Evil Empire, adding performance robbing features in order to gain check marks in the magazines, while at the same time, dropping any iota of support for those who have legacy hardware or software. Of course, I think Apple is spending too much time fooling around trying to make their systems run crappy Windoze - rather than making a superior OS with superior software...

Interesting rant.

My take is somewhat different.

First, I do agree that there should be a retail version of Snow Leopard, without iLife and iWork. However, I will reserve judgement until SL actually ships and someone tries an upgrade from Tiger with the SL upgrade disk. Apple has not said it will not work - it may just be that they are assuming / pushing the entire suite is wanted / needed.

On some of your other points, I feel that Apple has set speed limits for recommended installations based on their view of the user experience. Sure leopard can run on older machines, but can it run well, with the user experience Apple pushes, on an average lower powered machine run and maintained by the average Mac user? I feel they have to work on that average user base, just as in copy writing you aim the copy at a particular grade base. Sure, lots of more knowledgeable people will be able to make things run, but they aim at those who want plug and play and who will not have increased the RAM, or kept sufficient empty space in their drive etc.

Apple also push the iLife experience hard, and I would say that in the broadest terms: even for those who do not use the suite, more and more people are using their Macs for photos and videos, even at a base level. Images and videos are increasingly demanding, so computers need power to handle them effectively.

treif
Aug 11th, 2009, 12:12 AM
Has anyone here checked the price of Windows lately? Or MS Office? Or MS server? In a way, Windows 7 is to Vista as Snow Leopard is to Leopard-that is to say, an optimized revision. But the day Microsoft sells it for $30, I'll eat my Pismo.