Lion on Mac App?

[CosmoPilot]

Steve himself said apps purchased on the Mac App store would be usable on ALL your computers.

So, do you think Lion will be offered as a download? If they make it a family pack (3 licenses), then Steve wasn't very forthcoming with the above statement.

If they do allow Lion to be shared across computers. How would you load it on a clean instal (say after re-partioning your HDD)?

Perhaps the main OS won't be available...but this seems counter intuitive for Apple.

Thoughts?

Cosmo

 

[bmcgonag]

Steve himself said apps purchased on the Mac App store would be usable on ALL your computers.

So, do you think Lion will be offered as a download? If they make it a family pack (3 licenses), then Steve wasn't very forthcoming with the above statement.

If they do allow Lion to be shared across computers. How would you load it on a clean instal (say after re-partioning your HDD)?

Perhaps the main OS won't be available...but this seems counter intuitive for Apple.

Thoughts?

Cosmo

Lion isn't an app, it's the codename for the 10.7 revision of the OS X operating system, and I doubt it will be available for download.

 

[GGJstudios]

If they do allow Lion to be shared across computers. How would you load it on a clean instal (say after re-partioning your HDD)?

You don't share an OS across computers. Each computer needs its own OS. As bmcgonag said, Lion is the name for the upcoming version of Mac OS X. It's not an application.

 

[S.Jobs]

like others have said you wont share the OS but you will have the same iTunes account and there is were all of your apps will be to download on probably up to 5 computers knowing apple and what they do with iTunes. seems like 5 is the magic device number for apple.

 

[CosmoPilot]

I understand Mac OS X is not an app, that is why I asked the question.

Seems the consensus thus far is it will not be available for download on the App Store when it does become available later this year.

I guess Apple will only provide it via their Apple stores (online as well).

With iOS, we download updates through iTunes. With Mac OS X we download updates through the updater. Seems logical this won't change. Was just wondering if anyone thought the much touted "all in one" shopping store for Macs would have new OS X releases as well. Would be nice, as we'd only have to pay once for all our Macs.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

So, do you think Lion will be offered as a download? If they make it a family pack (3 licenses), then Steve wasn't very forthcoming with the above statement.

What's the point of preemptively criticizing someone for something they haven't yet done and are in no way guaranteed to do?

 

[CosmoPilot]

What's the point of preemptively criticizing someone for something they haven't yet done and are in no way guaranteed to do?

Slow down ghost-rider...I'm not criticizing anyone! What I said is, IF a family pack is offered, THEN Apple wasn't very truthful. I NEVER said Apple wasn't providing a promised service. If you read my last sentence, I said perhaps the main OS won't even be offered on the app store.

Please read these threads slower without making too much out of it.

I was just sitting here today thinking about the launch tomorrow, and thought how cool it would be if Lion made its way to the App store when it launches later this year.

 

[allan.nyholm]

I also had this idea. My only Mac-using friend shot it down.

What if scenario; Lion is available on the Mac App Store. Click buy. A DMG downloads. You open it like you would any other, say a Combo update. The installer then guides you through a installation process that is setting aside your current settings, Home and perhaps Applications folder like it would on Archive&Install. All this happens after a logout like when Apple is installing updates on your computer. You've seen that sometimes when after the updates are downloaded from Software Update that OS X logs you out, preventing interference from you and the system.

Nothing technically stands in the way for an installation like this. If you need or want to format your harddrive first then you can burn a disc from the DMG or restore it to a partition, even temporary from with the installer. Deleted upon finished installation.


But. I know this is totally out of the question. Apple won't do it like that and many users will be opposed like those in this thread except for the thread starter and me.

Can or will you agree that the solution is viable?

 

[Darth.Titan]

Actually, there is a big impediment to your scenario. Point upgrades like 10.5 and 10.6 cannot be installed on the active system. In other words, you would have to either burn the downloaded .dmg to a disc or image it to a flash drive and boot from that to update your Mac to Lion.

New OS versions don't install like system updates, so the App Store just wouldn't be a feasible means of distribution for Lion.

 

[davidjearly]

I had this thought also, and it seems to fit in with Apple's move towards an optical drive-less computer.

However, isn't the whole point of the App Store that there will be no .dmg file? The user won't have to interact with installation files, but rather just browse and click 'Install', like on the iOS App Store.

It does seem logical, but I can't see how Apple will get around the need to be outside the 'active system' to install a new OS. I can't see them making it a burn to disc download system - too many steps for the end user.

 

[allan.nyholm]

Actually, there is a big impediment to your scenario. Point upgrades like 10.5 and 10.6 cannot be installed on the active system. In other words, you would have to either burn the downloaded .dmg to a disc or image it to a flash drive and boot from that to update your Mac to Lion.

New OS versions don't install like system updates, so the App Store just wouldn't be a feasible means of distribution for Lion.

Okay, I see that. But hear this. Apple has the tools to do whatever they want with regards to OS X. Apple can essentially log the user out after the installation is underway and then let the user know that a temporary installation partition has been created for the purpose of installing Lion. "Your user settings and Home folder will be preserved" Or "Decide what you want to transfer to Lion" - with multiple choices for Applications Home folder and settings.

Wishful thinking perhaps. And I'm living in a dream world. We're in the grasp of Apple on this. If Apple is deciding to rid all their laptops and desktops of optical drives and leave them as optional, then they have to do something other than shipping out flashdrives like with the MacBook Air. I would love one of those flashdrives with OS Xon it however, looked nifty.

Archive&install is something I've tried but long time ago. I admit I am not up to speed on that. Haven't Archive and Installed since Tiger.

The moving parts in any computer is the cause of much pulling of hairs.

 

[allan.nyholm]

I had this thought also, and it seems to fit in with Apple's move towards an optical drive-less computer.

However, isn't the whole point of the App Store that there will be no .dmg file? The user won't have to interact with installation files, but rather just browse and click 'Install', like on the iOS App Store.

It does seem logical, but I can't see how Apple will get around the need to be outside the 'active system' to install a new OS. I can't see them making it a burn to disc download system - too many steps for the end user.

I was only suggesting a DMG. It's how most software on the Mac is distributed that I know of other than zipping the app. Click2Flash unpacks as a package installer from a zip file. Other comes as a dmg file with an included package installer.

I'm not sure how Mac App Store apps are compressed and uncompressed once on your computer.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

Slow down ghost-rider...I'm not criticizing anyone! What I said is, IF a family pack is offered, THEN Apple wasn't very truthful. I NEVER said Apple wasn't providing a promised service. If you read my last sentence, I said perhaps the main OS won't even be offered on the app store.

I understand perfectly, and I wasn't trying to be offensive with my comment. I've just never understood why one would make a statement like "if they do this, then they weren't being truthful" when there's no indication that it's likely to happen. I know you didn't say they were doing it. But it would become a criticism if Apple did do it... that's why I called it a preemptive criticism. Maybe a better word for it would have been a conditional criticism?