Unless Apple used their 64-bit modifications to enable certain security features they mention as being in SL now that 64-bit is here (they mention a few of these on their snow leopard page). Sure, my laptop only has 2 gigs of RAM and can only use.. what is it, 3.2gigs max? But I was kind of looking forward to them catching up with Vista and having complete ASLR, more use of the NX bit, and other esoterica. I'm not *concerned* - i just want to know what I'd really be getting in Snow Leopard for my 2-year-old macbook.
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 Snow Leopard Build 10A432 Designated 'Golden Master'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unless Apple used their 64-bit modifications to enable certain security features they mention as being in SL now that 64-bit is here (they mention a few of these on their snow leopard page). Sure, my laptop only has 2 gigs of RAM and can only use.. what is it, 3.2gigs max? But I was kind of looking forward to them catching up with Vista and having complete ASLR, more use of the NX bit, and other esoterica. I'm not *concerned* - i just want to know what I'd really be getting in Snow Leopard for my 2-year-old macbook.
The stuff coming out of Apple is really weird. They have announced that Leopard users can upgrade to Snow Leopard for $29. They have also announced that users who have purchased a new Mac since June 8 can upgrade to Snow Leopard for $9.95.
But they have been conspicuously silent about the intended upgrade path for Tiger users. Some have speculated that the intended upgrade path for such users is to separately purchase Leopard for $129 and the Snow Leopard upgrade for $29. However:
1) If this is in fact the intended upgrade path, Apple has not said so.
2) It would mean that Tiger users would have to pay $158 to bring their OS up to date, which is considerably more expensive than it has ever been in the past.
3) Historically, Apple stops selling 10.X when 10.(X+1) is released.
So while it is possible that "buy Leopard for $129 and Snow Leopard separately for an additional $29" is the intended upgrade path, it's quite a leap of logic to assume that it must be the case, considering that Apple has not said so and that it would inconsistent with past Apple practices.
All we can really say is that Apple is so far keeping Tiger users in the dark about what it will take for them to upgrade.
I suppose it's worth noting that we are talking about a relatively small number of users. Snow Leopard requires an Intel-based Mac. The first Intel-based Mac was the iMac Core Duo released on January 10, 2006. Leopard was released on October 26, 2007. So all we're talking about are people who bought Intel-based Macs during that 21-month period and have not since upgraded.
But they have been conspicuously silent about the intended upgrade path for Tiger users. Some have speculated that the intended upgrade path for such users is to separately purchase Leopard for $129 and the Snow Leopard upgrade for $29. However:
1) If this is in fact the intended upgrade path, Apple has not said so.
2) It would mean that Tiger users would have to pay $158 to bring their OS up to date, which is considerably more expensive than it has ever been in the past.
3) Historically, Apple stops selling 10.X when 10.(X+1) is released.
So while it is possible that "buy Leopard for $129 and Snow Leopard separately for an additional $29" is the intended upgrade path, it's quite a leap of logic to assume that it must be the case, considering that Apple has not said so and that it would inconsistent with past Apple practices.
All we can really say is that Apple is so far keeping Tiger users in the dark about what it will take for them to upgrade.
I suppose it's worth noting that we are talking about a relatively small number of users. Snow Leopard requires an Intel-based Mac. The first Intel-based Mac was the iMac Core Duo released on January 10, 2006. Leopard was released on October 26, 2007. So all we're talking about are people who bought Intel-based Macs during that 21-month period and have not since upgraded.
question: will the mac box set be out the same day as the regular sl, or will there be a delay between the two? and will that sl be the full version?
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ster_seeded_to_apple_developer_community.html
They have seeded it to the whole dev community. Wow that's nice. won't be long before it's on the net.
OS X 10.6 Details:
Build: 10A432
Size: 6.1GB
OS X Server 10.6 Details:
Build: 10A433
Size: 5.5GB
Misc Info:
Quicktime Pro 7.6.4 is included
They have seeded it to the whole dev community. Wow that's nice. won't be long before it's on the net.
OS X 10.6 Details:
Build: 10A432
Size: 6.1GB
OS X Server 10.6 Details:
Build: 10A433
Size: 5.5GB
Misc Info:
Quicktime Pro 7.6.4 is included
All the 8800s have the same basic architectural features. I don't see why it wouldn't be included. The GS is indeed a modified GT or GTS, depending on the specific model, both of which are supported.
Silent? Hardly. Per Apple's website, Snow Leopard is available to Tiger users in the $169 box set with iLife and iWork. There's no need for speculation.
It's $30 more expensive, but you get far more than the OS.
Only those who didn't bother to look for an answer.
Should be out same day, since it is the only way for Tiger users to upgrade. At least it would be STUPID to delay the box.
Just as stupid would be not update the box once new iWork/iLife versions are out. Many $29 upgraders would probably upgrade again once Apple offered new versions for everything.
I thought they said during the keynote the Tiger users would need to get the new "box set" for ~160, I think. That's the one with iWork and iLife in it, too.
There has been nothing official yet, it's still listed as a "preview build" when you download it.
Also, note to users downloading it. Apple also states that you wont be able to install the final build over any pre-release builds to keep this in mind. If this is true or not we don't know but something to consider.
Also, note to users downloading it. Apple also states that you wont be able to install the final build over any pre-release builds to keep this in mind. If this is true or not we don't know but something to consider.
+100! I haven't had a single Leopard problem in a long time. I also seem to remember 10.5.0 being really good.... but everyone else was complaining... perhaps I was just lucky.
Yeah, it's easy, just restore the dmg to your flash in Disk Utility:
Insert Flash disk
Open disk utility.
Format Flash disk to HFS+ Journaled. You might wanna make it GUID to but I don't think that's essential
Double click the .dmg to mount it
Click "restore" tab
Right Click on the dmg IMAGE not the dmg itself (just below the dmg, indented slightly). Select "set as source"
Right Click on your flash disk. Select "set as destination"
Boom! Restore that Dmg to your flash and you can boot from it.
Insert Flash disk
Open disk utility.
Format Flash disk to HFS+ Journaled. You might wanna make it GUID to but I don't think that's essential
Double click the .dmg to mount it
Click "restore" tab
Right Click on the dmg IMAGE not the dmg itself (just below the dmg, indented slightly). Select "set as source"
Right Click on your flash disk. Select "set as destination"
Boom! Restore that Dmg to your flash and you can boot from it.
Well, when one installs third party hackware like so many here do - what does one expect? application enhancers, tweakers, modifiers - all using private frameworks that were NEVER designed to be used by third parties. I look at all the complaints about Safari and 99% of them relate to either plugins (I'm looking at you Adobe Flash) and third party hackware that use private frameworks which are unsupported, unstable and never meant for third party developers which result in the instability. But hey, I can keep saying it till I'm blue in the face but apparently there are Nobel prize winners who think they are smarter.
Regarding the release date, I am wondering whether they'll get 10.6 out early, push out 10.6.1 before Windows 7 is released to coincide with the release of hardware and iPod release. The 10.6.1 update being used to hide new hardware they're working on (don't want it to leak out through info in the 10.6 release).
Piraters remind me of shop lifters; they either fall into two categories; they're either doing it to make a profit (big time counterfeit ring) or they can afford it but get a thrill by not paying for it (or they simply don't respect someone else's property).
I ended up returning my 20" iMac because of the great color shift at different vertical viewing angles, opted for the 24" with ATI Radeon HD 2600 in it and keeping my fingers crossed the GPU will be supported for OpenCL somewhere down the line but not having my hopes up too high.
I tend to sit in front of my computer instead of hanging from the ceiling at a weird angle - which probably explains why I don't get a colour shift.
You can easily find out whether X3100 is supported by going to /System/Library/Extensions, listing the 3 x 3100 directories then going 'file' on each of the binaries in each of the directories.
I assume if they have 64bit GMA950 drivers, they must also have X3100 ones too.
I assume that this information wasn't from 10A342?
Depends on the information - miscommunication can happen. 4.0.3 of Safari is in Snow Leopard - maybe the source said, "Snow Leopard is almost ready", it was a lot sexier to report it as 'Snow Leopard is ready'. I don't believe it is GM simply on the basis of a new seed - at the most we might, however, see some very minor updates for show stopper bugs and driver updates. Lets say it is 99.999% of the way there.
Also, is it kosher to install the HFS+ driver on a non-Mac? say a friends computer so he can read my HFS+ USB drive?
All I have seen is Nvidia and high failure rate; I'd sooner have something that is reliable and not on the bleeding edge than 'huge speed' in a product that dies within 6months.
The reason I am angry is simply because I feel as though Apple has pissed in my cornies; I bought a MacBook Santa Rosa with a Core 2 under the belief that in the future Apple will deliver a 64bit operating system to take advantage of it - I bought it so that I was future proofed. Now Apple has turned around and stated, "no 64bit for you!"; so how the hell else am I meant to feel?
Regarding OpenCL, I don't really care about - its the 64bit status or there lack of when it comes to supporting my hardware; hardware that is capable but not being delivered on.
Yes, it only matters that you get a 64 bit kernel. 64bit support for apps (which you get) is totally worthless, although it is almost certainly where you need the extra RAM.