Installing Jaguar C106

Discussion in 'Mac Help/Tips' started by daPhil, Jul 29, 2002.

  1. daPhil macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    #1
    Im trying to install Jaguar C106 on my Dual G4 800 but when the "select destination HD" screen comes up there are no discs to choose from. This problem does not happen whan booting the C87 CD on the same computer (NOTE: Its currently running 10.1.5).

    How can i install C106 over 10.1.5?

    Thanks for any help!
     
  2. FelixDerKater macrumors 68000

    FelixDerKater

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    #2
    ok

    Wait for the final release... You are now officially added to the list of people pissing off Apple by using Jaguar beta releases you are not even supposed to have.:rolleyes: :eek: :cool:
     
  3. spuncan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Location:
    Detroit
    #3
    hey he could have it legally because he could be a paying member of adc.
     
  4. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #4
    You're probably going to have to format the HD first, use the Disk Utility from the boot CD...or if that doesn't work, boot up with 9 disk and do it from there.
     
  5. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #5
    Then he would have the information he needs and could contact ADC for help with the problem as well.
     
  6. daPhil thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    #6
    I got it to work and it rocks.

    Its a good thing people are pirating Jaguar i think. More people using it = more beta testers = Jaguar is being tested on 100 times more system combinations prior to release.

    Im pretty sure Apple monitors these and other forums to get unofficial bugreports, otherwise they would have made it impossible to pirate a long time ago. Thanks Steve!
     
  7. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #7
    There's no good reason for pirating software. It costs time and money to secure software to keep thieves out, so the cost will probably be $149 next time instead of $129.
     
  8. SilvorX macrumors 68000

    SilvorX

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    'Toba, Canada
    #8
    at this rate it sounds like the official release of osx might be the biggest warezed version (of course) :S
     
  9. daPhil thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    #9
    Of course im not talking about all software, just operating systems.
     
  10. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #10
    most people i know who have betas have already preordered jaguar. the myth that people who use shared software dont buy software is the same as the people who listen to mp3s dont buy cds. i do not think jaguar will suffer much from file sharing. people who know enough to figure out how to get shared software are also the type of people who are ver enthusiastic about computers, and therefore typically spend much more money on software and hardware than the average consumer.
     
  11. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #11
    Oh, that is real intelligent. I am not going to steal from M$ or Adobe, but, man, I will rob Apple like I am a 12 year old bully kicking the hell out of an 8 year old. Grow up. Stealing is stealing. If you don't have a license for it it is theft, and if you do it, you do it, but two things.

    1) Only OS's. That is just stupid.
    2) DON'T TALK ABOUT STUFF LIKE THAT ON THESE BOARDS!

    Think about other people.
     
  12. M_T_Air macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Manitoba, Canada
    #12
    I don't think it will be warez'd alot...

    I have the feeling that the people that are doing the file sharing and testing out Jaguar right now will probably buy the full version when it comes...It's the people that are very excited about 10.2 that are downloading it and testing it out. Most of them are extremely happy with the performance and will probably buy the Full licence when it comes out! I'm buying it for sure because of the speed improvements and the new features...plus I want to have a legal copy running on my computer... pirating doesn't pay in the end. :D
     
  13. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #13
    I understand about enthusiasm but I'm also a software developer. I've seen way too many people lose their incomes because people decided that the software was so great, it should be free.
     
  14. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #14
    that statement reminds me of statements made by big recording labels who claim that mp3s are hurting bands (funny thing is is that it is usually the small bands that pour the most money into fighting the record labels' blocking of mp3 distribution).

    it is the type of statement purpetuated that does not stand up well to thought. the problem is that many people are locked into an old way of thinking that does not mix well with the nature of software. never before has mankind had a product quite like software. something that, though costly to produce the original, can after creation, can be reproduced infinitely at zero cost. a product that can be distributed at zero cost. it takes some time to wrap your mind around that and realize that systems of the market place designed around physical goods does not work well for software markets.

    am i saying software designers shouldnt be paid? no. am i saying people shouldnt buy software? no. but what i am saying is that things need to change, and any developer trying to employ archaic distribution methods will ultimately run into trouble. open source developement, shareware, demoware, and freeware is all still finding its place in the garnd scheme of things and it can be difficult to choose liciencing and distribution methods that suite your software's needs, but any developer who ignores the changes in the market is going to be out of buisiness in short order. and blaming piracy is often what people do when they do not plan their software's liciencing well. choosing one method and sticking to it to the bitter end is never a good idea.

    sorry for you old folks but im going to use a high school metaphore here. piracy and the like reminds me of cheating in high school. there was always some students who would cheat. but the interesting thing i found is that these students would not cheat in certain classes. this is not because they didnt need to cheat (as if you ever NEED to cheat), but because they had respect for the instructor. i liken this to software piracy because if you speak to people in the piracy community you will find there are developers they have respect for, and will gladly pay for the products. in fact i have found that pirates tend to purchase far more software than the average consumer. the careful balance for the developer then becomes trying to find a liciencing scheme and distribution model that is best for their software. choosing to blame your failure on software piracy is simply a cop out, and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the market and the software community. this is not to say that failure is always a result of this poor liciencing, but using piracy as an excuse does not speak well to your knowledge and understanding of the market. there are many well respected developers producing high quality products that are distributed for free. the market is changing and if you do not recognize this and adapt then, yes, you are likely to find yourself witha dwindling income, but if you do adapt you might find yourself in quite the opposite situation. people are not choosing different liciencing schemes, because they have to, but because it is the best financial option for them.
     
  15. mnkeybsness macrumors 68030

    mnkeybsness

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2001
    Location:
    Moneyapolis, Minnesota
    #15
    AmbitiousLemon....

    i must say that was a very well said post you just had...and you are right about the whole high school thing...if a person can respect the developer, then they won't pirate the software...

    though there are extenuating circumstances...such as microsoft office X...i know that the office package was quite complicated for programming and is very extensive, but microsoft is truly charging too much for the software, which in turn is leading to people creating mass quantities of the program illegally...it's just so easy since they have spent no time and NO MONEY on anti-piracy for it...i believe microsoft could try and not be so greedy and offer this at a lower cost...have you ever seen the "student/teacher" edition? it's available on windows and is the exact same thing as office standard, except comes in a smaller box and is only $149.99...for the FULL version....i can see a lot more people paying that price that don't even have office...and those who have illegal copies...except i also see a lot of people buying it who aren't students or teachers and just click the "yes, i certify that i am a student/teacher"....that's the only difference in the software...


    as for operating systems....

    they shoudl definately not be pirated....it just makes me sick to see people do that...even if it is winblowz
     
  16. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #16
    thanks monkey.

    interesting thing regarding microsoft (the people who invented the term software piracy, and also people who have been convicted of piracy) is that they encourage piracy of windows and office throughout asia so saturate the market.

    also of note is that ms is now reevaluating their pricing office v.x.
     
  17. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #17
    AmbitiousLemon:

    mp3s aren't hurting bands as much as the record labels are but music sharing can hurt if people never buy the CDs.

    I'm glad you've met respectful pirates. Whether at school or at work, the majority of people I've met believe it's okay to share software. They don't like calling it piracy. Even the good "Thou shalt not steal" people share software. One of my uncles was in a software club. They paid their dues and once a month they would buy one copy of something and share it with all 30 or so members.

    Given that almost anyone can buy a CD duplicator and design a Jewel Case insert to physically market their software, costs are minimal, though never zero.

    I like the try-before-you-buy way of doing things. I've gotten too much software over the years that isn't as great as it should have been. As a software developer though, I'd like to secure the software so it can't just be downloaded from Kazaa and someone generates a random key and it works. Adobe has this problem. So do the makers of LightWave.

    You've got some good points, and I appreciate you idealism. I would like to agree with you on all of it, but I can't.
    It's nice to be idealistic. I was. Old or young, stealing is stealing.
     
  18. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #18
    perhaps five years ago i would have bowed my head and said "yes i am just being idealistic," but not here and now. what i was discussing is no longer an ideal, but a market reality that software developers for the most part are embracing. Open source projects HAVE proven themselves, and calling them idealists does not discount the fact that they proved superior products at reasnable prices. I am not saying that people should pirate software. in fact i specifically said i wasnt encouraging this, what i am saying is that software developers who blindly refuse to change with the changing market will have problems, and simply blaming piracy is simply an easy excuse. What is more to blame is poor liciencing and poor distribution.

    Every software product is different, so no one liciencing scheme can be used for all, but if your product is not selling and you know that people are illegally using your product (ie your product must be good) then you should try to find a liciencing scheme that better suites your products needs. I am not suggesting you through your hands up in the air and say 'ill let them pirate my software, and ill keep writing it for free! woohoo!' what i am suggesting is that instead of sticking to the old paradigm of creating a boxed cd on a store shelf perhaps you should try another form of liciencing and distribution.

    There are many people who make good money writing free software. There are many people who make good money writing shareware. All paradigms are crumbling, and sucessful developers will be those who not only create a cgood product, but those who also find liciencing and distribution models thats are financially sound.

    Contrary to what many will have you believe pirating software is not easy. Unless you happen to have a friend who has a copy of the software he can burn for you, you are going to spend lots of time (and often money) trying to find what you need. And just like mp3s, the quality of what you get is poor. But wait, there is more, to get what you need, you have to also get lots of things you don't need, so that you can trade. You end up filling hundreds of CDs with software you will never use on the off chance that someone who has what you need will need something on one of your cds. You also have to secure a very fast broadband connection. The typical basic cable or dsl plan rarely has a fast enough upstream to be able to trase successfully. So in the end you pay more for your broadband connection, you buy extra cds, you spend time downloading and uploading things you dont need or care about, to secure something that may or may not be safe to use and that will be out of date in 6 months, requiring you to go through the whole process again. Furthermore you can never stop the process of acquiring software, because if you do you will find that all the stuff you have to trade is out of date. you have to stay in the game even if you have everything you need, because if you dont it will require even mroe time to get back into the swing of things 6 months down the road when you find you need to update your software.

    Why am i telling you all this? because some people like to have you believe that all you do is fire up some app download what you want and walk away happy 10 minutes later with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of software. And this is important, because it means that your liciencing scheme does not have to be a perfect fit. As long as it is close enough people will rather buy than go through the trouble fo stealing. Also do not forget that people are both materialistic and moral (interesting combo no?) people want the real thing in their hands (not some burnt cd). and they also feel an obligation to pay for things they use (just remember all the people who buy cds even though they could just burn a cd with mp3s, they want the real thing and they want to support the artist).

    what this means is that people generally want to purchase software that they use. what is holding them back is liciencing and distribution models that do not suit their needs. as with any product you must not only create something good but you must find the best (most financially sound) manner of delivering it to the consumer. again, i am not saying free, and i am not saying open source. but what i am saying is that freeware, shareware, open source has all been created because the developers realized that market paradigms created for physical products do not transfer well to the software market. they needed to find alternatives.

    lastly, consider mac os x. consider the complex mix of different liciencing schemes that come together to bring us osx.
     
  19. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #19
    AmbitiousLemon:

    Mac OS X is unique that way. Aqua is something that should never be free because it's too good--too unique.

    I've never had a problem with piracy of my own work, but then, most people don't want programming tools or business systems. That's probably all I'd do on Mac OS X since it can use more of each. There are definitely enough graphics tools vendors, espcially from the NeXT days. Some of the tools could be open source so they would be adopted more easily. The extra good stuff would be purchase only on whatever media.

    I'm not dragging my feet, I'm wanting to eat. :)
     
  20. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #20
    o i am certainly not suggesting that everyone should open source their software. all that i am saying is that if your current liciencing scheme is not working then 1) you should not blame piracy, and 2) you should explore alternatives.

    you mentioned that piracy put friends of yours out of work. all of this has just been my reply to that statement.
     
  21. 8thDegreeSavage macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #21
    Damn Mr Lemon....that second to last post was a thing of beauty, i commend you on your drive.
    I whole heartily agree completely.
     
  22. Geert macrumors 6502a

    Geert

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Location:
    .be
    #22
    Re: Installing Jaguar C106

    I don't get it, why are you installing a dev build, when the GM is only a few weeks away.
    Heck I don't mind waiting another 3 weeks, then screwing around with a dev seed.
     
  23. peterjhill macrumors 65816

    peterjhill

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #23
    Please refer to the Piracy and Mac OS X thread for all my comments on piracy.

    BTW, I am using a legal copy of the latest release, the only problems I am having are with software that will need to be updated to work with 10.2 and the DVD player is not working for me. I just ordered my jaguar upgrade yesterday, along with my .mac account, and my QT 6 key. Your welcome, Apple.

    So, does anyone wonder if the Address book has any exploits that will eventually allow people to write a virus that uses your addresses as targets. I would prefer if they made applications request to use the address book, with the option of just once, or forever.
     
  24. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #24
    Off topic. Lemon, damn dude, where was that tar duing the avatar contest? That rocks!

    Peter, don't even think about stuff like that. Go get a 1/5th of vodka, and drink those thoughts right out of your head.:p
     
  25. topicolo macrumors 68000

    topicolo

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Location:
    Ottawa, ON
    #25
    What a wanker. How many of those pirates actually report bugs they've found to Apple? How many bug reports have you seen on MacRumours?
    dumbnuts.
     

Share This Page