Most authenticated HTTP downloads don't either since the site operators disable the range headers to force authentication before downloading.
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 OS X Lion Set for July Debut Priced at $29.99, Mac App Store Exclusive
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Most authenticated HTTP downloads don't either since the site operators disable the range headers to force authentication before downloading.
Unlikely i will be downloading due to size, but nice to know that it will have resume support if i do get tempted
Resume? Frequently not incorporated
I am afraid that many downloads do not incorporate resume, including some Mac upgrade and other Apple products. I generally go direct to the Apple Downloads on the support page and download using either Speed Downloader or Folx, which give me seamless resume and multithreading. Before doing this, I would frequently find a update download had frozen and had to start from scratch again.
I very much hope that, if Apple maintain their idiotic "No DVD" approach prior to the launch of Lion, they either allow you to use external downloader software or like Adobe do, incorporate a mini-download manager, which starts prior to the main download.
Luckily I will be in France when it releases and have a very stable 2.2 mbps PPPOE/ADSL2 connection there. If therefore, I get a net average 200 KBps over a long download, if my maths are correct, that is 20,000 seconds for a 4 GB download (roughly 5 1/2 hours). I bet however it would take longer than that.
I am afraid that many downloads do not incorporate resume, including some Mac upgrade and other Apple products. I generally go direct to the Apple Downloads on the support page and download using either Speed Downloader or Folx, which give me seamless resume and multithreading. Before doing this, I would frequently find a update download had frozen and had to start from scratch again.
I very much hope that, if Apple maintain their idiotic "No DVD" approach prior to the launch of Lion, they either allow you to use external downloader software or like Adobe do, incorporate a mini-download manager, which starts prior to the main download.
Luckily I will be in France when it releases and have a very stable 2.2 mbps PPPOE/ADSL2 connection there. If therefore, I get a net average 200 KBps over a long download, if my maths are correct, that is 20,000 seconds for a 4 GB download (roughly 5 1/2 hours). I bet however it would take longer than that.
The fact that you think that everyone is in your shoes is weird. You didn't pay 129$ for an OS X upgrade, and from your writings here I assume you are thinking to upgrade to Lion. How are you planning on doing that "without upgrading"? Are you going to buy a new mac when Lion gets released? That's more cheaper to you?
I have paid 5 times 129$ for OS X upgrades. People who have been using OS X since day one have paid 129$ for each upgrade, unless they timed their new mac purchase with OS X upgrades.
The fact that they lowered OS X price means everything, because now it's 95$ cheaper for "most" people. Simple as that. The fact that they didn't attach a price tag to XCode before means squat. XCode always had a price. It came with a 129$ priced OS X, or couple thousand dollars priced mac. It was never for free. It was as free as your RAM inside your mac or mail inside your OS X. The price was added into OS X itself, and now it's separate and the whole thing is cheaper.
And the funniest thing is, it's cheaper for you too. With the old model, you'd pay 129$ for Lion and get XCode. Now you'll pay 29$ for Lion and get XCode for 4$.
Apple doesn't have to incorporate a separate downloader, because App Store has resume. I typed it twice in this thread now.
Well, 3rd party download managers can resume authenticated http downloads even if the browser doesn't though. I have downloaded all Apple ADC stuff using download managers which had resume, and they are all authenticated.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not. I'm discussing my own case and the issues I see with Apple's way. The issues as I see them might not apply to everyone. Why is it that you assume I'm talking for more than just myself ?
Useless debating with you as always, as you will always just take the opposite side as I do. It seems you're rather found of hearing yourself type and of targeting posts that are pointing out issues you don't seem to have. What makes you think everyone is in your shoes or even cares that you find all this wonderful ?
Last edited by a moderator:
My mistake. I was assuming from the posts you write that you'd prefer Apple would do things the way you wanted. And now that it's clear you are simply saying that it'd be better for "you" but may not be better for the majority of users.
Not really. 3 minutes ago I said that I'd also prefer it if the recovery partition could be scrapped. I remember many other cases where I partly agreed with you. The fact that I disagree with you most of the time is because I simply disagree with you. There's no hidden agenda. You preferring ISO distribution and me preferring App Store distribution isn't something against you. For my workflow, App Store install is faster and simpler. For you, it's not. Simple as that.
I try to differentiate if something is best for the majority or simply best for me. I think that 4$ XCode together with 29$ OS X is best for the majority of developers compared to 129$ OS X with free XCode. That's not just best for me.
App Store only Lion purchase may not be best for the majority, but it may as well be, in case the reason for price drop is simply digital distribution. It depends on broadband availability of mac user base. My gut instinct is saying that it's for the best and most people do have broadband who use macs, or have access to some kind of broadband at school or work even if they don't have at home. I may be wrong on this, but I live in a 3rd world country and even here everyone has 8mbit unlimited broadband in major cities.
I'm sure there will be a physical option. Apple would be silly not to do this for the reasons mentioned. The fact that they are still hell bent on doing digital distribution for EVERYTHING now, its silly.
Personally I'd like a disk or USB drive.
If Apple are silly, then we just rely on other sources to do a rip and provide it so it can be burned onto DVD or USB.
Personally I'd like a disk or USB drive.
If Apple are silly, then we just rely on other sources to do a rip and provide it so it can be burned onto DVD or USB.
Free XCode is better than 5$ XCode. Free XCode included with every Mac purchase is better than No XCode with every Mac purchase. There hasn't been 129$ OS X in close to 2 years, so it's a moot point.
And by the looks of this thread, it would seem I'm not the only one that is not quite fond of "Mac App Store" only.
What makes you think the majority of users can and will upgrade using this limited distribution model ? Broadband isn't quite as ubiquitous as some would think it is. But unlike you thinking you're talking for a majority of people, I don't pretend to hold that kind of knowledge or wisdom.I'm pretty sure they either already have a physical distribution channel planned or that one will be post haste once they see lower than expected adoption numbers (if really people do have problems with the Mac App Store method).
PERFECT! Thanks... I found the press release here - http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/06/06lion.html . Gotta love the inconsistent message from support.
I think the key to this upgrade is patience. I am just going to wait for a few days after the release to see what options there are for installation.
I'm impressed that $30 will allow me to install Lion on all of the Macs in the building, but am hopeful that I'll need to download it only once.
I know the knee jerk reaction is to assume that each machine will be required to individually download Lion, but somehow I doubt that is how it will play out. I'm confident that either Apple will allow Lion installation via a USB Thumb Drive or a burned DVD, or that an enterprising early adopter will figure out how to do it.
My bigger concern is potentially upgrading my SL Server to Lion Server. The two step installation process seems bizarre and I will certainly wait to make sure all of the services I need still exist on Lion Server.
I'm impressed that $30 will allow me to install Lion on all of the Macs in the building, but am hopeful that I'll need to download it only once.
I know the knee jerk reaction is to assume that each machine will be required to individually download Lion, but somehow I doubt that is how it will play out. I'm confident that either Apple will allow Lion installation via a USB Thumb Drive or a burned DVD, or that an enterprising early adopter will figure out how to do it.
My bigger concern is potentially upgrading my SL Server to Lion Server. The two step installation process seems bizarre and I will certainly wait to make sure all of the services I need still exist on Lion Server.
Really? You don't think the App Store is the reason Lion is 29$ and not 129$?
And by the looks of this thread, it would seem I'm not the only one that is not quite fond of "Mac App Store" only.
Certainly you are not the only one. But as you know (I hope) that looking at the "angry" posts in threads like these are never a safe and sound method to estimate the percentage of unhappy people. Happy people don't feel the need to post that they are ok with this. So you'll always see more hate threads. If you followed this site when the first iPod was released, more than 80% of the replies were negative. I wonder how many of those 80% have owned more than 5 iPods until today. Estimating if something is good for the majority is Apple's job. Not ours.
"Broadband isn't quite as ubiquitous as some would think it is."
Isn't that sentence an indication of that kind of knowledge or wisdom?
That's not a knee jerk reaction. That's the reaction of people who have not read anything about App Store in the last 3 months. We have posted hundreds of times that like any other App Store app, you need to download Lion installer once, and you can copy it to any computer you like.
Last edited by a moderator:
Take it to an Applestore where they will happily run those tools of an ipod and charge you for the privalige
Apple, taking your money, one upgrade at a time.
And this is supposed to be easier than getting a dvd ?
I will admit i dont know much about the app store, but i thought it was supposed to make things simpler
now people have to download the app, find the app, burn it to dvd
as far as i can remember, snow leopard was sold on dvd for $29, if so why cant the same be done with Lion, why would it cost more to supply this on dvd as apposed to SL
the more i hear about the app store, the more un user friendly it sounds
Nope, I think the success they had with Snow Leopard's 29$ price tag is. Let's face it, writing UI code or writing back-end code is the same as far as costs go. There was no reason Snow Leopard should be cheaper than previous OSes.
The whole "but there's less apparent features" thing was a bull excuse to try out a new price point. Apple doesn't make money on software, it's less than 10% of their revenue. Their money comes from hardware, the software they do make helps boost those hardware sales.
DVDs cost pennies to duplicate and dollars to ship out. I'd bet the costs aren't much different when you factor in networking equipment and ISP charges to host the Lion downloads. Certainly not 100$ different per copy.
"Broadband isn't quite as ubiquitous as some would think it is."
Isn't that sentence an indication of that kind of knowledge or wisdom?
Nope, it's an indication of my personal experience with broadband in Canada and it seems it's also close to a statement of fact since according to the ITU, less than half of Internet users in the United States do so on broadband :
http://www.internetworldstats.com/am/us.htm
Personally, I have no issues with broadband. As I've stated, I've been installing my OSes over the Internet for the last 12 or so years. Apple is quite late in the game on this regard. But I see where a single distribution channel like this could hurt adoption of the new OS.
And you stated yourself that that leaves a big question as far as the validity of the EULA goes. I don't do pirated software. Until Apple officially documents this as a supported method, then it is unofficial. You can also burn the image to USB/DVD and boot off that by extracting the proper files, it's been done. But again, not an official method. All this is more confusing and convoluted than simply buying a disc, inserting it in X numbers of Macs as authorized by your license, and installing away.
You don't need to burn it to dvd. It installs OS X by booting itself. No external media needed to install. Oh and, finding the app is easier than finding the dvd
You can't search for a dvd using spotlight.SL was sold for 29$ because it was a "better Leopard". Apple couldn't charge full fee for an OS X they admitted didn't have any major features. Lion is not Snow Snow Leopard. So it was supposed to have a full fee, but thanks to digital distribution the full fee is 29$.
Well maybe you should stop hearing about it and start using it.
Coolio, not entirely convinced about Lion trying to make my new iMac a big iPad but for £20.99 I'm happy to take a punt. I hope they organise for DVDs etc too - I've got 100Meg and it'll take me under 5 minutes but I'm in a real minority here in the UK.
Snow Leopard had tons of major new features. It took the same amount of work to make and release as Lion did. Again, that excuse was bull to try out a new price point for OS releases. It paid off and now they are applying it to Lion.
no thanks, tried it on a couple of apple apps and dont like it
its very rare i download apps so will just stick to getting them straight from internet (or dvd if they are large)
I agree 200% It's one thing if you just have a sole or maybe even 3 computers but not when you have 7 alone in your household and 40+ at your job.
I hope that Apple gives us more options besides direct download of the OS multiple times through the App Store. I was expecting a flash drive sole option ala the Air.
They could have simply sold a license and ISO image too. You know, something you can write to USB/DVD yourself. Nope, they had to go with the Mac App Store "an app is a single file bundle" thing.
I personally the Mac App Store is not a good concept for an Operating System.
Sadly, Apple doesn't cater to you. They cater for the consumer who has one or two machines, not the businesses. :-( ( party joking, partly serious ).
I'd be very very surprised if Apple don't offer an alternative to Mac AppStore download. There are too many reasons why digital download via Mac AppStore is too limited / practical, for consumers and businesses alike....
I can't speak for that. We don't know how much time and effort went into SL compared to other major OS releases. It might be the same, but even if it's the same, since the end user can't see anything new, it's harder to justify a full fee.
No, the software they do makes possible to sell any hardware at all. People only buy Apple devices because it runs Apple software. There are always other devices with faster hardware and cheaper prices available. Without OS X Apple wouldn't be able to sell a single mac.
The networking equipment and ISP charges are zero. Apple didn't set up all those server farms to distribute Lion only. But since they already spent those billions, why not distribute Lion through those as well.
The amount of broadband usage overall is irrelevant. What matters is the usage among mac users.
Oh certainly, I'm all for several distribution channels. But if I had to pick one over the other, I'd pick the cheaper one.
I don't think there's anything wrong with copying something to another mac, as long as that method is not used for selling new macs.
Optical media is worse for me (although I think most of the people wouldn't care about this issue) because optical installs take forever. I install my OS X in under 6 minutes thanks to using the installer disc from a very fast SATA. So whenever I have a disc image, I restore it to a SATA partition, or if I have an optical media I restore it to a SATA partition. Now that is convoluted for me. And I think people will really like the new install times when they start using the Lion installer from App Store, especially people who have always installed their OS's from optical or other slow bandwidth media.
Last edited:
Snow Leopard did have tons of major new features for developers. 2009 WWDC was all about GCD and Open CL. Those were the major new features of SL, none of which had anything to do with the end user.
You can't say we are giving developers super awesome API's to write better apps for you, which you may start noticing in 4-5 years. That's not a feature like Time Machine or Expose for the end user.
Anyway, this discussion is useless, since none of us work for Apple, it's all speculation.
Last edited: