Thank you. Rookie question, will SL start up discs wipe any new OS upgrade, should i want to at any point?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
From Snow Leopard to ?
- Thread starter Peter Franks
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, the SL disks will erase the entire drive, so make sure you have all your data backed-up. I loved SL, but now I am on El Cap. It works great, and should be a safe upgrade for you. I would definitely stay away from High Sierra because there are so many problems.
Yes. But the best would be to clone your current SL installation onto a spare external drive, which you can than either boot from or reclone from should you ever need to revert.
Alternatively - even better - clone onto a new SSD (that you intend to install in the MBPro) via a USB>SATA cable (Crucial), then upgrade to El Cap over this. Once you are happy with El Cap, you can swap the location of the two drives (keeping the original internal HD as your SL "backup"). But note that booting from an external SSD over USB will be lower performance than when you install it on an internal SATA connection.
Thanks, I back up TM monthly, I actually couldn't even tell you what it backs up, I just assume it's done the whole deal. I hope so anyway, My offline email folders are the most important, and only assume they're backed up.
Thanks, good advice, Can I use either the 850 or 860 Samsung EVO for that, and is the SATA cable standard for all, And what casing is needed if it's used externally?
Yes, yes, and none. I think spectrum was referring to an external USB-to-SATA cable that is meant for exactly this purpose, i.e. transfer via USB to a SATA drive that you are going to mount elsewhere once it's set up. As long as you don't have the bare drive sitting on something that will short something out, you're OK.
Thanks yes. Exactly that. I meant if I wanted to use as external about needing the case. Thanks again
Yes, I keep a 2009 17" MBP handy as a traveler, and after spending a few months on El Cap, went up to Sierra (patched), then back to SL for a bit, then up to High Sierra (patched), then back to Sierra again, and though I'm surprised at its ability to run current software (the extra gpu must be a big help) the next time I get a chance, I'll restore to Snow Leopard again once and for all. The speed, efficiency, stability and clean design of Snow Leopard makes it the high water mark for OS X. Just need to find a decent browser that actually runs. Opera? Perhaps an older version.
But if you're concerned about security (prudent for anyone with an older OS, or really anyone on a computer period at this point) consider usage practices. While it's a convenience to always leave your system online, it is not necessary, and has not always been like this. Recall how we connected to the internet when the internet was new, over your phone line, and you paid by the minute. You worked offline, until you needed something, then connected, found it, downloaded it, and disconnected again. ...thus not leaving your computer online and exposed to the world like an open barn door swinging in the wind. Try it out. At first it can seem like an unnecessary extra step in opening your browser, but, after a week or so, it becomes second nature again, and is accompanied by a nice feeling of closing the door on the worst of the internet every time you close your browser. Doing most of our internet access from iOS, means only about once a week I'll actually have a need to connect a computer to the net for something, switch to the internet network, download it, and switch back to our home intranet network again afterward.
Could probably write that into a script and stick a safari icon on it, and do it automatically.
It's interesting that most people feel that SL is still the best one. And it's so far removed from where it's at now. iOS hasn't changed that significantly, or maybe it has and we're just used to it. I know 'Finder' got the most criticism when SL died off with many of the later OS. Chrome was good, although I was quite happy with Safari on it till it became unusable, and it's amazing how slow it is now, and as you know Chrome stopped updates on 10.6.8 ages ago. Opera I really don't like, same as Firefox. Never got on with them, and the pinch/zoom that is on Chrome was something you're used to after Safari. Firefox didn't have that.
Dial up days... That seems like another lifetime away. We always switched that off, because it stopped calls on the line, plus it was costing us per minute!. Good advice though, thank you.
Dial up days... That seems like another lifetime away. We always switched that off, because it stopped calls on the line, plus it was costing us per minute!. Good advice though, thank you.
FYI, as we were talking about online banking, this morning I can't even log into my bank online. 'Privacy Error', and that's now Safari and Chrome.
Is that with 10.6.8? If so, that is not a surprise. The reason I retired my 10.6 and 10.7 Macs ages ago was because of website incompatibility as the browsers are out of date.
If a more recent OS with current browsers then it could be your bank.
Basically I consider both of those OSes unusable in 2018.
Yes. 10.6.8. Safari I retired years ago on it. Now Chrome and Firefox. Unable to online bank, so can’t stay on Snow Leopard now. Waiting on the parts and will have to change. End of an era
Firefox and Chrome haven’t been updated for Snow Leopard or Lion since 2016. Consider yourself lucky for being able to last this long with Snow Leopard.
I still feel cheated! 
So the Apple spec says the early 2011 MBP cab only handle 8GB RAM but other sites 16GB. Will that stretch it out too much and put strain on CPU, and make the fan even noisier than It already is on every HD YouTube video, or would it ease that problem instead and help that problem?
So the Apple spec says the early 2011 MBP cab only handle 8GB RAM but other sites 16GB. Will that stretch it out too much and put strain on CPU, and make the fan even noisier than It already is on every HD YouTube video, or would it ease that problem instead and help that problem?
16 GB or not is completely irrelevant for that. Even 4 GB is fine for YouTube HD.I still feel cheated!
So the Apple spec says the early 2011 MBP cab only handle 8GB RAM but other sites 16GB. Will that stretch it out too much and put strain on CPU, and make the fan even noisier than It already is on every HD YouTube video, or would it ease that problem instead and help that problem?
If you want a quiet Mac for YouTube, stick with Safari. Do not use Chrome.
Last edited:
So I can get 2 x 4GB upgrade instead of 2 x 8 then. I actually initially tried Chrome because I had that problem on Safari, all better quality video, even non HD would cause the fan to come on quite loudly.
Safari YouTube uses h.264. This is all hardware accelerated on your machine. CPU usage is minimal, and thus heat generation is low, so the fan won't be loud. The only drawback is that Safari h.264 is limited to 1440p or lower.
Chrome YouTube uses VP9. This is all software decoded on your machine. CPU usage is quite significant at higher resolutions, so heat generation is at least moderate, and the fan may ramp up. The benefit with Chrome is that there are higher resolution options available, as in 4K.
However, your screen is just 1280x800, so there is no point is using anything above 1280x720p anyway. In that context, there is no problem sticking with Safari. Even my 2008 2.0 GHz Core 2 Duo MacBook plays 720p YouTube in Safari without breaking a sweat.
If you're having the fans come on in Safari, then it might be something else, such as ads on the same page. Have you tried blocking ads? That can help browsing responsiveness greatly on old machines.
Chrome YouTube uses VP9. This is all software decoded on your machine. CPU usage is quite significant at higher resolutions, so heat generation is at least moderate, and the fan may ramp up. The benefit with Chrome is that there are higher resolution options available, as in 4K.
However, your screen is just 1280x800, so there is no point is using anything above 1280x720p anyway. In that context, there is no problem sticking with Safari. Even my 2008 2.0 GHz Core 2 Duo MacBook plays 720p YouTube in Safari without breaking a sweat.
If you're having the fans come on in Safari, then it might be something else, such as ads on the same page. Have you tried blocking ads? That can help browsing responsiveness greatly on old machines.
Thanks for that, I've honestly tried everything, It's one of my pet hates that everything and anything I watch on the MBP via the browsers usually brings the fans on, and sometimes louder than the audio. I use Flash Control, and Ad Block, which only does so much. Like, there is nothing to stop every single pop-up. But I looked into all the html5 settings and other factors. Not sure why that occurs. I know that awful 'Google Helper' is painful, but I tried all browsers, Safari, Opera, Firefox and Chrome, so just assumed it wasn't the browser and was the MBP.
It will help to upgrade to a modern OS, upgrading RAM (you can go to 16GB, by the way, I've seen it on comparable machines and it works fine) and then try watching the videos in Safari - I'm pretty sure 10.6 doesn't have support for Intel QuickSync, the hardware decoder in your processor (or if it does, it's far more rudimentary than 10.9 on)...
Snow Leopard supports hardware h.264 acceleration on NVIDIA.
That's a good point. I didn't realize that machine didn't have a dedicated GPU. That explains why his fans are revving up.
Last edited:
Thank you, I will definitely let you know what happens when I update next week.
Actually, while I have your attention, is there a snobbery on the brands of RAM. I ordered 2 x 4GB RAM 8GB kit, as it was getting a bit dearer with everything else on the 16GB. I read on here on someone else's thread that going for the dearest one was the best option, but I ended up ordering the OWC RAM, which was £90GB, and people say to pay a bit more for the Samsung, but it was exactly the same price as the Samsung. Do you think the brands makes much difference, or should I have got Samsung? Hopefully you'll tell me they're all the same?
Actually, while I have your attention, is there a snobbery on the brands of RAM. I ordered 2 x 4GB RAM 8GB kit, as it was getting a bit dearer with everything else on the 16GB. I read on here on someone else's thread that going for the dearest one was the best option, but I ended up ordering the OWC RAM, which was £90GB, and people say to pay a bit more for the Samsung, but it was exactly the same price as the Samsung. Do you think the brands makes much difference, or should I have got Samsung? Hopefully you'll tell me they're all the same?
I wouldn't go so far as to say that ALL ram is the same, but certainly as far as the well-known suppliers go, I'd buy the cheapest. That would particularly go for older spec RAM that isn't cutting edge speed; whatever crap was out there has probably failed by now, the competently built stuff is a commodity.
OWC RAM is usually fine, esp. for older RAM types, but it's a 2nd tier brand. The 1st tier brands are the manufacturers themselves, like Crucial (which is the retail arm of Micron, an actual memory chip manufacturer). Samsung is also a RAM manufacturer.
The benefit with OWC though is they sell the appropriate RAM for your Mac. With Samsung RAM it might be harder to match up the right specs. You'd have to know ahead of time exactly the specs you need to buy. OTOH, if I had a choice of spec-appropriate Samsung RAM vs. OWC RAM, at the same price I'd choose the Samsung.
However, the OWC RAM will be fine, and it sounds like you may not know exactly how to spec the RAM exactly, so you are probably better off with OWC RAM anyway. As long as the warranty is decent, I wouldn't worry too much about it.
OSX Mavericks 10.9.5 is still supported with Office 2011, Chrome, etc. It is still supported by just about everything and runs smooth af.
Chrome doesn't support 10.9 anymore. iTunes doesn't either.
IMO 10.10.5 should be considered the bare minimum in 2018, with 10.11 or 10.12 preferred.
BTW, Office 2011 is supported all the way up to 10.12 Sierra, and if you exclude Outlook does run fine on 10.13 High Sierra for the most part. I'm running Office 2011 on a 10.13 machine and it's been fine for me, but I don't use Outlook and it's only light usage and a secondary machine. Because of the lack of official support on 10.13, I wouldn't recommend Office 2011 for a 10.13 Mac for a heavy user on a primary machine though. However, 10.12 is perfectly fine for Office 2011 as it has full official support.
Last edited: