Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is that the final beta?

KUKitch said:
Yeah, that would be my thought as well - although I don't know whether the complexity of the iMessage servers/processes is different in any way that might complicate it. But in line with that, it would be fantastic to add it to iCloud in line with the other items we can access from the web - again you'd think that could be managed...
Click to expand...
If I had to guess what the difference is between the other iCloud synching services, the traffic (for lack of a better word) would be huge as compared to adding or deleting a calendar item, photo, contact, etc. Text/iMessage bandwidth would be fast and furious.
[doublepost=1504701982][/doublepost]By the way, I am predicting another beta release today.
 
LarryJoe33 said:
If I had to guess what the difference is between the other iCloud synching services, the traffic (for lack of a better word) would be huge as compared to adding or deleting a calendar item, photo, contact, etc. Text/iMessage bandwidth would be fast and furious.
[doublepost=1504701982][/doublepost]By the way, I am predicting another beta release today.
Click to expand...

Yeah I certainly agree with that - I was just also thinking about the methods for determining whether a number is iMessage or not, stuff like that... don't really have to deal with the for email/calendars/etc.
 
KUKitch said:
Yeah I certainly agree with that - I was just also thinking about the methods for determining whether a number is iMessage or not, stuff like that... don't really have to deal with the for email/calendars/etc.
Click to expand...
The other consideration is what device get the initial synching priority/profile? For example, I keep pretty lean on my 16GB iPad and I occasionally clean up my phone. My Mac pretty much just builds. I wonder when it is available and you turn it on, what will be the logic for the sync'd devices and the history. Maybe a merge like Safari bookmarks.
 
"By the way, I am predicting another beta release today." (a few posts up).

There is a beta coming any minute.
 
Deathstroke said:
Good to install the PB and convert to AFPS?
Click to expand...
Yes, for unencrypted APFS.

No, for encrypted APFS. I clean installed the latest beta with APFS encrypted with FileVault on. And I am experiencing many issues.
 
nutmac said:
Yes, for unencrypted APFS.

No, for encrypted APFS. I clean installed the latest beta with APFS encrypted with FileVault on. And I am experiencing many issues.
Click to expand...
I just think FileVault in general causes more problems than it's worth. I have only had to wipe my drive once ever and it was due to FileVault.
 
LarryJoe33 said:
I just think FileVault in general causes more problems than it's worth. I have only had to wipe my drive once ever and it was due to FileVault.
Click to expand...
Considering the target disk functionality with non FileVault enabled disks I think that it is mandatory if you have a minimum concern on security, just my opinion...
 
nutmac said:
Yes, for unencrypted APFS.

No, for encrypted APFS. I clean installed the latest beta with APFS encrypted with FileVault on. And I am experiencing many issues.
Click to expand...

Weird, mine was already converted when I installed it. Didn't give me the option and when I checked the file system, it showed APFS.
 
redheeler said:
Usually shortly after, at the same time as iOS.
Click to expand...
I won't be able to do a usual software update from the last beta to the GM, right? IIRC, I would have to do a manual install over top.

I'm wondering if I should even bother, and just wait for 10.13.1 release. However, I also wonder if I do upgrade to 10.13.1 if I'll get all the extra little stuff (extra backgrounds, etc?).

BTW, on my 2009 MBP, the High Sierra install is 19.3 GB. My added applications are just over 7 GB. So realistically, it's under 30 GB for a basic install for me, with no user data. That's not bad. I won't bother upgrading this secondary machine from its current 120 GB SSD, which is a Samsung 840 EVO. I do have a 500 GB Samsung 850 EVO lying around but I'll keep that as a backup SSD instead. I don't keep much stuff on this secondary machine.
 
EugW said:
I won't be able to do a usual software update from the last beta to the GM, right? IIRC, I would have to do a manual install over top.

I'm wondering if I should even bother, and just wait for 10.13.1 release. However, I also wonder if I do upgrade to 10.13.1 if I'll get all the extra little stuff (extra backgrounds, etc?).

BTW, on my 2009 MBP, the High Sierra install is 19.3 GB. My added applications are just over 7 GB. So realistically, it's under 30 GB for a basic install for me, with no user data. That's not bad. I won't bother upgrading this secondary machine from its current 120 GB SSD, which is a Samsung 840 EVO. I do have a 500 GB Samsung 850 EVO lying around but I'll keep that as a backup SSD instead. I don't keep much stuff on this secondary machine.
Click to expand...
I am under the impression that the Golden Master will install as an update to my current (and last) beta? Am I mistaken?
 
Yes, please clarify? I pinged this board with the question a while ago. I am expecting GM to show up in my App store and "install".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back