The rep told me fairly unequivocally that it would be shipping tomorrow, if that means anything. I can't change my shipping address.
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.
Mac Mini Purchaser Receives Snow Leopard Restore Disc? Up-to-Date Orders "Prepared for Shipment"?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The rep told me fairly unequivocally that it would be shipping tomorrow, if that means anything. I can't change my shipping address.
I gotta be honest, I LOLed really hard when I read this.
"Mam you'll be pleased to know with Snow Leopard coming out there is a 'dik' in your box."
Whoa, check this out!
Release dates in the past
Mac OS X: March 24, 2001
10.1: September 25, 2001
10.2: August 24, 2002
10.3: October 24, 2003
10.4: April 29, 2005'
10.5: October 26, 2007
10.6: August 24??? 28???
What do you think?
Seems like all of the OSes shipped on 24th, 25th, 26th, or 29th.
August 24th or 28th wouldn't be too far off from Apple's usual release dates.
Am I onto something here?
I'm not calling shenanigans, and maybe this has already been addressed - it's late and after reading 5 pages I got tired ... however, why are the screen captures using Leopard? If the mini shipped with Snow Leopard, shouldn't that be what's in the screen captures? If, the system shipped with Leopard (which is entirely possible) the media would've been an upgrade and not a full install DVD.
It all looks believable enough and all, but something seems wrong.
It all looks believable enough and all, but something seems wrong.
Taking Screenshots in Mac OS X
Sort of. Apple often lets it be known ahead of time which month the release is targeted for. Then they push the release to close to the end of the month. It gives them more time to get a stable release while still hitting the target.
I gotta be honest, I LOLed really hard when I read this.
"Mam you'll be pleased to know with Snow Leopard coming out there is a 'dik' in your box."
LOL I wanted to say something, but just couldn't.
That's the Leopard default desktop, not the newer Snow Leopard version of the same desktop. It would ship with the newer version default, not the older.
He could have switched it before taking the pics, but that makes no sense.
He also could have placed the disc in a previous Mac to take the screenshots.
By the way... every Mac OS X has come with the previous default desktop pictures. Leopard still has the original Aqua desktop in the System Preferences. Perhaps Snow Leopard still has the old Aurora.
I think if he went to all the trouble of faking everything, he wouldn't have overlooked something as basic as a default background. I'm betting he changed it, or it's another mac as you suggested.
It does, have the old Aurora in the Snow Leopard build that is, but it makes no sense that the individual would've switched the background image and then taken the screen shots - considering everything else in the photo is in it's virgin state.
Something just doesn't add up is all I'm saying.
IIRC earlier in this thread someone claimed that the guy with the discs elected not to install SL yet as it came with Leopard. Something about being afraid of it being a pirated copy, or something.
Why would he have changed it and left everything else untouched just to take screen captures? If it's another mac, why is it a virgin install of Leopard and iWork, you'd think it was a system that had been used and slightly customized.
That makes the most logical sense, however - the DVD would've been an "upgrade" and not a full install image.
Apple is selling the $29 version as an upgrade DVD, that's what they would've included with the mini.
It's entirely possible that the media included is the "upgrade" version, but I believe the writing on the media itself would state as much, typically like "Mac OS X Upgrade DVD".
Had to go through all my videos of keynotes to find it . . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c92rhiOepI
The original Engadget guy didn't want to install Snow Leopard because he didn't know if he could revert back to Leopard once upgraded. Obviously, he could if he formatted his drive. However, he didn't seem like that advanced of a user. Seems sort of odd if he knew to send in screenshots, no?
I personally think the Mac mini restore disc is a fake. Like others have said, usually Apple just ships drop-in discs with a new OS release until stock runs out (generally one or two weeks).
True; there is also an issue if they do call something GM and a developer finds a bug inside it - there is egg all over Apple's face. Even Microsoft is pretty cagey about when they're willing to call something RTM - so its not just an Apple thing I guess.
True - although I wish Apple were more open in laying out a long term development path that includes when one should expect updates, new versions, how long the old version will be supported.
But there are many people out there who aren't as interested in computers as you and I; the people on this forum make up a very small minority. There are some clueless idiots here who smap the forum with their ignorance but the vast majority tend to have a reasonable grasp with computers.
Just a note to all who works with heavy important apps on their machines...
DO NOT UPDATE TO SNOW LEOPARD till 10.6.2 at least!!!!
Make sure ALL apps are up to date and are compatible with SL. If your work is important and you need to ensure that you are going to be able to run your apps for work, then wait.
It's not worth updating the core OS to then not have apps work well with it... Trust me, SL is great but if it causes some issues to start with then wait a bit. Get it now, just wait a bit till you've read ALL the comments from our crash test pilots who's report will give us the much needed push to tighten up the areas SL might have issues with or better yet, big companies like adobe etc.
This is just a friendly reminder that things don't always go hand in hand after such an update... Be patient and wait till the coast is clear and all the major bugs killed!
When you do experience problems, remember it is the responsibility of the third parties to provide updates free of charge to their customers. If the third party is shafting you over then then it is their fault, not Apple and the changes they made to the operating system.
For me, I'm going to purchase the box set even though I qualify for the 'upgrade'; basically I want it so I can avoid the cd checking for Leopard (if I upgrade the hard disk, I don't want to be forced to install leopard just so I can install Snow Leopard), the copy of iLife is getting long in the tooth, and iWork will be be an interesting thing to use and see how it compares to Office 2008.
It may be for us folks who live and breath technology, but for many folks that don't they may just hear a new 'update' is out for 29.00, hear that it's the latest-and-greatest, and with figure it's not a BIG update since the name is similar, the price is cheap (especially for those coming from the windows world, where a 'real update' must cost $200+
Microsoft had the gaul to charge their customers NZ$40 for a copy of a 64bit version of Windows Vista - which had no more features than the 32bit version. I find it funny that people are whining about NZ$50 for a copy of Mac OS X 10.6 which is not only 64bit capable (can run 64bit applications with everything above the kernel 64bit) but includes a whole host of enhancements.
*shrugs* no one knows yet because 10A435 screen shots are flawed and and end users have force booted into 64bit mode even though it is clear that the default mode for desktops, laptops and workstations is 32bit kernel, and no 10A436 screen shots exists showing the version in system information or via terminal.
I bet 10A436 is the GM then... with August 28th release! It makes total sense! Alert Twitter, everyone!
ROFL the funniest part are the idiots who think that QuickTime preferences have come back along with default booting into 64bit kernel by default. I swear some people are so desperate for those two things they'll deliberately lie just to prove in their mind that their desires will come true.
Ah, you do realise that SP2 + another update has been released?
Why is the lack of quicktime preferences a big deal? Quicktime X has been slimmed down to the original purpose of it - as a player/recorder and nothing more. Apple will gradually start to add more features
I wish 10A432 weren't the final but the evidence of 10A435 and 10A436 lacks specifics; all the screenshots so far have been low quality or been modified; any information coming off twitter but none of the people who start these rumours are able to point to the source of all these rumours.
True; release it on 28 August and in the hands of the consumer at the start of September. Send it out on 28 August, and is it delivered earliest on Monday the following week
Wrong, it's the installer that isn't universal. The Office apps themselves are. I posted this once before also. Basically, my disc is the one that shipped as soon as Office 2008 was released, so it's possible later discs that shipped with SP1 or even SP2 now will have a universal installer.
So then what are people who have the crazappy version with the PPC installer to do?
All of you bastards are posting install discs, but not a single damn one of you is posting the build number. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!
Install Rosetta? Like they'd be prompted to do if they hadn't already installed it prior to installing Office?