Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Here's my theory... Apple is going to try to destroy the internet by having millions download a 4.7 GB download.


Then, they will rebuild the internet with their North Carolina Data Center and completely own everything on the internet.:rolleyes:
 
I install Windows 7 x64. I click "software update". I reboot. I have OpenGL 4.1.

Your point? The fact that OpenGL 1.4 was on the DVD and I didn't get OpenGL 4.1 until I ran Windows software update?

Lame.




Ummm - the WAN is per store. The idea of "size the store WAN network to accommodate 300 stores simultaneously downloading a 50GB+ image" is nonsensical.

Now don't read too much into this, but how do you know it's 50gb+. What if it's 100gb+, you would need a big hard drive for that of course. But you have to remember these drives could have music, pictures, Apps, videos (lots of videos, machine specific you never know. How many machines to the Apple store have out?), and demos (I guess that would go with videos some what.).

100gb+ is lot to send over WAN, wouldn't you agree?

Now I'm not saying your wrong and I'm right. Just something to think about, we don't know how big these drives are that are being sent out. :/



Hugh

EDIT: Been already said as I was typing up my message.
 
Here's my theory... Apple is going to try to destroy the internet by having millions download a 4.7 GB download.


Then, they will rebuild the internet with their North Carolina Data Center and completely own everything on the internet.:rolleyes:

Very nice. Right after releasing new MacBooks Air with Lion pre-installed, a week before releasing Lion itself - so that the entire world will have bought the new hardware to run the new software and the New Internet idea you put forward. 1984 will not be like 1984, indeed!
 
The repetitiveness only comes from the people saying he is wrong though. What he is saying makes plenty of sense, if people would simply agree and move on, he wouldn't have to repeat it ad nauseum as someone else tries to make an argument proving otherwise, utterly failing in their grasp of bits coming in vs machine imaging.

Well I guess as looong time Mac user, I should be used to arguments like this. Heaven knows I've been told for years by the masses (Windows users) that I have been using the wrong computer. ;)
 
On top of all this speculation of how much data it is, how difficult distribution may be, what it shows for confidence in iCloud, etc... What does it even matter? I just mean, out of all the possible arguments that could be valid about Lion and its release: missing features, it's not free, why no Hypercard and MacPaint, why won't it make me filthy rich.. Why are people focusing on the one thing that has absolutely no effect on anybody here (unless of course you're the retail monkey who gets the joy of imaging all the machines)? Just.. why?
 
What are the requirements to run lion.

From http://www.apple.com/macosx/how-to-buy/

"Make sure your Mac can run Lion.
Your Mac must have an Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, or Xeon processor to run Lion. Find out if your current Mac has one of these processors by clicking the Apple icon at the top left of your screen, then choosing About This Mac."

So basically you need a Mac with a 64-bit processor. I'm not sure if they've released RAM requirements, but I would suggest you have at least 2GB to run any modern desktop OS.
 
We are about to see posts shifting from, i bet its released on X day, to lion is taking 3 days to download, to lion is the worst OS i have ever used, i bet the patch is released on X day. Cycle repeats.
 
It's not like each store gets their own switch port in some WAN closet plugged directly into the Cupertino LAN. The stores' connections get concentrated into far fewer than 300 individual pipes before they drop into the network there.

And to where are the millions of customers who want to download 10.7 going to connect?

If Apple have a network to support the 10.7 release, then it should be a minor blip on the network traffic to download stuff to the stores.

But instead, they're sending hot chicks in brown uniforms to deliver hard drives to the stores.


So people who disagree with you lack basic intelligence?

Not at all. I pointed out that people are replying "without" reading the discussion in context. Something far different.


I think Apple is reducing the risk of embarrassment should any of their stores screw up the download / imaging process, knowing it's a lot easier to just stick an HDD into a Mac. Plain and simple, it's both hypocrisy and image management. Apple knows people will forget these little details, and goo themselves over Lion in the long run. :)

They could screw up copying the files from the FedEx delivered images as well. Irrelevant whether the images come over the network or delivered by hot women in brown shorts.


The ultimate irony is that they normally do distribute these images electronically. Stores have downloaded and done the image process for years. Like I said, the images are usually done days in advance.

LOL


Sigh. Without knowing what is on the "hard drive" how can you even have an intelligent discussion on using a network vs. shipping media.

I can have a very intelligent discussion, because "bits is bits". If Apple puts DMG files on a hard drive and ships them by FedEx, it's no different than Apple putting the same DMG files on a network server and letting the stores download them.

People who understand that "bits is bits" aren't arguing with me - people who blindly defend Apple are. Simple, obvious, techniques like SIS and checksums take care of issues of duplicate files and network errors. (And checksums are needed with USB drives as well, ***** happens.)

Apple are sending a boatload of bits to the stores. Send the boatload over the net, or have hunky guys in brown shorts deliver hard drives. The same bits are in the stores either way.

If you claim that the "boatload" is too big, well do the math and figure out that the downloads for 10.7 from millions of customers will be far, far larger.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's what's going to happen. Apple is releasing Lion on the app store. They sent images to the stores to push said images to machines rather than have employees individually do clean installs and install all the showroom apps overnight.

The end.
 
You're still in complete denial that Apple needs to send other marketing materials that can't be downloaded (signage, staff apparel, etc.).

It's cheaper to get some summer tech marketing intern to clone the drives; those drives can be kept in the manager's office until the green light is given.

Tossing a drive in the box with the window signage, price placards, and Lion t-shirts is not a big deal.
 
The topic is about Apple not trusting the network to deliver demo images to Apple stores, and instead FedEx'ing USB hard drives to the stores.

That's a *theory* of yours. A theory based on zero knowledge of the actual situation. But that's OK because no one else here actually knows why they're allegedly switched to delivering it via hard drive when the stores usually download the retail demonstration images.

What you're saying is that, despite the stores usually downloading the images, they're now worried that the network won't allow them to download *ahead* of the public launch. Ahead - so there's no fighting for bandwidth.

I don't buy it. There is indeed a reason for FedEx'ing the harddrives, but network performance and security is probably not it.
 
Here's what's going to happen. Apple is releasing Lion on the app store. They sent images to the stores to push said images to machines rather than have employees individually do clean installs and install all the showroom apps overnight.

The end.

I believe its possible for an over night release of Lion. So Tuesday, July 19th, 2011 would be the release as was MOST RUMORED Last week.

And expect Hardware on Wednesday.

No Matter what thought, I see Lion by Friday, and hardware 2-3 days later.
 
If you claim that the "boatload" is too big, well do the math and figure out that the downloads for 10.7 from millions of customers will be far, far larger.

Not to mention the fact that Apple also told customers to show up in the store to download Lion. Imagine if 10-15 people show up at any given store the morning of the release, that Apple store's internet connection is going to have to be fast enough to get those customers the image quickly. They can't reasonably expect the client to stay there standing in the store supervising their computers for 5 hours while the software downloads to their machines. Well, if the stores can accomplish that, it certainly can download the kinds of images people have been talking about over night. Why rely on fed-ex then?

Perhaps Apple is smart enough to have a usb drive that can simply copy the image over to clients who show up to download Lion. Hopefully they don't actually have to download it but only need to confirm they have purchased in it MAS. Then an Apple tech can install it for them on the spot from a firewire drive.
 
You're still in complete denial that Apple needs to send other marketing materials that can't be downloaded (signage, staff apparel, etc.).

It's cheaper to get some summer tech marketing intern to clone the drives; those drives can be kept in the manager's office until the green light is given.

Tossing a drive in the box with the window signage, price placards, and Lion t-shirts is not a big deal.

I'm not in denial, but you're refusing to parse what I'm saying.

Many pages ago I said

You're not thinking differently.

But, the installation images are volatile until the last minute, whereas signage and print material and clothing needs to be created weeks before the event.

It's much more flexible to keep the floor model images on a network server so that the physical marketing package isn't tied to the product bits. If there's a last minute software problem (which some rumours suggest), you don't have to rebuild the marketing shipments and re-clone hundreds of hard drives.

Unlike signage, brochures and T-shirts - the product bits can be sent over the network. And, you only have to make one copy of the ISO file for the network image, not spend hours or days making hundreds of disks.

If the "Golden Master" turns out to be made of pewter or lead, a new "GM2" can be put on the network server quite quickly. (And one would assume that there's an automated script to remake images for floor models rather quickly.)
 
Perhaps Apple is smart enough to have a usb drive that can simply copy the image over to clients who show up to download Lion. Hopefully they don't actually have to download it but only need to confirm they have purchased in it MAS. Then an Apple tech can install it for them on the spot from a firewire drive.

Or, Apple are smart enough to have a DMG or ISO file on the store server from which to copy the 10.7 image - so nobody has to wait for a network download.

But again, irrelevant to the discussion of whether the DMG/ISO image on the server came from a network download to the store server, or was on a USB hard drive that a hot guy in brown shorts delivered to the store.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I wonder what Mac OS 11 will be like...
 
Given that a lot of people pronounce "OS X" as "Oh Es Eks", that would mean that they would pronounce "OS XI" as "Oh Es Exy" which rhymes with "oh it's sexy" say it with me now. :D

OK, I had to sign up for these forums JUST to lol at this post.

No joke, I literally lol'd.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.