OS X Snow Leopard Installation Process Changes Described?

[brad.c]

Looking forward to Snow Leopard. My Macbook Pro is awaiting for it. Many of my colleagues have purchased new Macs so we are looking forward to the arrival of Snow Leopard. Got so many things to do, back up my software, figure out which ones I want to keep and update my ignore filter on MR.

I hope you don't mean me. How can I apologize to you if you guess right?

 

[mvasilakis]

You certainly don't know what you're talking about. Apple HAS in fact done this on every OS upgrade since 10.2. Each upgrade disc which qualifies as a drop-in disc or up-to-date disc checks for Mac OS X to be preinstalled. Just by you making that statement shows that you have no experience with Apple's upgrade discs.

I've been an Apple user since the Apple IIe. Ive have Macs since OS 7 and every version of OSX. And at some point in every release I've done a clean install with no other systems present and not once has the Upgrade disk asked me for proof of a preexisting system. Not once.

I highly doubt this time will be any different.

 

[Burnsey]

I hope they've made it easy to do an erase and install, I just want to do a clean install of this and hopefully breathe some new life into my MBP.

 

[HLdan]

I've been an Apple user since the Apple IIe. Ive have Macs since OS 7 and every version of OSX. And at some point in every release I've done a clean install with no other systems present and not once has the Upgrade disk asked me for proof of a preexisting system. Not once.

I highly doubt this time will be any different.

Well you must've had the bewitched versions of Mac OS X upgrade discs. They don't ask you anything, they auto-check for a previous install of Mac OS X. If it's not there (such as you installing a brand new empty drive) a message will appear saying something to the effect of, "This version of Mac OS X cannot be installed on this volume, no current installation found".
The only discs that qualified for what was referred to as an "upgrade" disc was the up-to-date discs or the drop-in discs that were placed inside boxes of new Macs that didn't come shipped with the latest OS on the drive image. If you had any of these discs and they did not perform a check for a preinstalled version of OS X then as I said earlier you had the bewitched versions.
You're certainly welcome to doubt all you want but tell us please, why do you think Apple said the $29 version was for Leopard users? If it didn't perform a check then why would Apple require you to be a Leopard user? Answer that if you will.

 

[brad.c]

I've been an Apple user since the Apple IIe. Ive have Macs since OS 7 and every version of OSX. And at some point in every release I've done a clean install with no other systems present and not once has the Upgrade disk asked me for proof of a preexisting system. Not once.

I highly doubt this time will be any different.

How much did you pay for these upgrade disks in the past? $9.95 for the up-to-date disks that HLDan has experience with, or the ~$129 packages that you would see in the stores?

 

[Stridder44]

I've been an Apple user since the Apple IIe. Ive have Macs since OS 7 and every version of OSX. And at some point in every release I've done a clean install with no other systems present and not once has the Upgrade disk asked me for proof of a preexisting system. Not once.

I highly doubt this time will be any different.

This is good to know, I was worried it wasn't the case. Because the I completely DESPISE the "upgrade" option. Upgrading is the lazy man's way out (except not really because you end up doing more work fixing compatibility issues and app bugs).

Any true geek knows to backup and do a clean install.

 

[ortuno2k]

If I cannot do a clean install from the $29.00 "upgrade" DVD (I own Leopard), then I will wait until iWork and iLife '10 so purchase the bundle pack.
'cause you know that's coming...or expected to come in the months ahead.

I can live without SL for a few months if it could save me that hassle of having to repurchase an old version of software that I already own plus having to purchase the software again when the updated version comes out.

This is still very, very confusing.

 

[brad.c]

If I cannot do a clean install from the $29.00 "upgrade" DVD (I own Leopard), then I will wait until iWork and iLife '10 so purchase the bundle pack.
'cause you know that's coming...or expected to come in the months ahead.

I can live without SL for a few months if it could save me that hassle of having to repurchase an old version of software that I already own plus having to purchase the software again when the updated version comes out.

This is still very, very confusing.

I already have iLife 09, for all that I use it, but will wait to see what value the '10 box set will bring.

And the confusion will subside shortly after the release date.

 

[KurtangleTN]

I'm a bit weary about that "dot update" bit, one Leopard update (I believe 10.5.4.. maybe 10.5.5.. I forgot) somehow caused kernal panics and I ended up having to do an archive and install to fix it, skipped the update after that and went directly to the next one.

 

[Poll Smoker]

Looking forward to Snow Leopard. My Macbook Pro is awaiting for it. Many of my colleagues have purchased new Macs so we are looking forward to the arrival of Snow Leopard. Got so many things to do, back up my software, figure out which ones I want to keep and update my ignore filter on MR.

Fascinating.

 

[RED™]

Sorry if I bring QT on the table again - but I don't get it:

I have QT Pro, and so will the SL disc detect it before installation. Does that mean I will stick with QT 7 Pro and will not be able to install QT X or if I remove my QT Pro license key and the SL disc will not detect it before installation, I will be able to install QT X?

 

[JFreak]

Isn't it more like XP-->Win7 is a Jaguar-->SnowLeopard transition?

There is no such thing; Tiger is the earliest Intel-OSX and because SL requires Intel you can only upgrade from Tiger or Leopard.

(but if you compare XP to a version of OSX, it would be Jaguar)

 

[mZex]

One thing that has been niggling on my mind about this is that Snow Leopard is supposed to be a super fast / efficient install that only takes 2 seconds and is as simple as a daisy chain.

Yet if you have to install Leopard first - doesnt that mean you have that whole process first - which is still slow and really really hard with those 2 options of archive and erase standing there

Just seems weird to me - I assume the new Macs will have like a combined install disk or something - a box set just seems ... clumbersome

​

 

[myuserid08]

A reinstallation will not affect your Mac OS X version number. In other words, reinstallation of Mac OS X 10.6 on a Mac that contains Mac OS X 10.6.1 (when it becomes available) will not overwrite any new components delivered by 10.6.1. So when the re-install is complete, you will still be running Mac OS X 10.6.1. This will save users considerable time.

Bad idea, isn't the whole point of reinstallation to remove the OS files and start again (most of the time due to bad/corrupt OS files)?
Wont you have the same OS files as before, if you do wont you have the same problem which is the reason why you decided to reinstall in the first place

 

[Bjohnson33]

I would suspect the rumor about SL reaching GM is in fact true. If you go to Apple's website and go to the Mac OS X page, it defaults to Snow Leopard now, not Leopard.

Good catch!

 

[Macminiintel]

I have 4 intel macs, I have my developer copy installed on two of themi, when I got the developer seed I was confused as to why there was no erase option, and I assumed that it was because it still in developer stage however, I did managed to install it on a blank hard drive on my Mac mini system with no problem what so ever, I assumed it would be similar to a Leopard install upgrade, you know when the upgrade for leopard scanned the hard drive for OS X 10.4 being present, but it worked fine installing it on a blank partition, we'll just have to wait and see what happens

 

[iAlexG]

What is rosetta and will i need to install it?

 

[rotlex]

Insert Snow Leopard
Eject Snow Leopard
Insert Leopard
Eject Leopard
Insert Snow Leopard
Install

That much?

Heck of a lot better than having to install a version of the OS I'm not going to use on a blank drive, just so I can install the copy I want to use. I hate that they do not allow you to do what you list above. My HDD died on me a few months back, and when I put the new one in, I had to install Tiger before my "upgrade" version of Leopard would allow an install. THAT is a ridiculous procedure to have to go through just to install an operating system.

 

[haravikk]

Why all the mentions of Quicktime 7? What happened to Quicktime X?

 

[cal6n]

Why all the mentions of Quicktime 7? What happened to Quicktime X?

As I understand it, a lot (and I do mean a lot) of third party software calls Quicktime for its functionality. Quicktime X is a massive rewrite and will require these apps to be rewritten. If one of these apps is essential to you, then you'll need Quicktime 7 to run it.

Anyone with a better understanding, feel free to shoot me down. Just make sure I understand why!

 

[AidenShaw]

There is no such thing; Tiger is the earliest Intel-OSX and because SL requires Intel you can only upgrade from Tiger or Leopard.

(but if you compare XP to a version of OSX, it would be Jaguar)

LOL - good catch.

I guess that's one way of making sure that OSX is simpler to install - eliminate many of the combinations .

 

[RichardI]

The Snow Leopard installer will also sequester existing applications known to be incompatible with the updated operating system, allowing for more reliable system behavior upon upgrading.

What, exactly does sequester mean in this context? I have lots of little programs (and some big ones) that I have no idea if they are cocoa, carbon, or whatever. Is there any way to tell what the list of incompatible programs is ahead of time?

Rich

 

[mckyvlle]

Late to the party, but there's a couple of things I noticed:

"However, if Mac OS X 10.6 is being installed on a Mac that contains a registration a key for Quicktime 7 Pro, the installer will install Quicktime 7 automatically."

"To prevent the Blue Screen error that plagued some users when upgrading to Mac OS X 10.5, a software compatibility check is included that has a list of known "bad" apps, and disables them. Those programs are moved to an "Incompatible Software" folder."

"Installation initially triggers a large chunk of data to be copied from the installation DVD to the user's primary hard drive. "

Wouldn't all of these mean that Leopard need to be already installed? Of course this could just be sugar for those who are upgrading from Leopard. Installing Snow on a blank disk might just be like how it is with Leopard.

 

[Chekote]

Wouldn't all of these mean that Leopard need to be already installed?

No.

Of course this could just be sugar for those who are upgrading from Leopard. Installing Snow on a blank disk might just be like how it is with Leopard.

That's exactly what it is.

Of course it's not going to require an existing OS to install on top of. One of the features hyped in Snow Leopard is a reduced install size. Dumping Snow Leopard on top of Leopard is not going to accomplish that.

There is *no* benefit to apple or the end user to require Leopard for an install of Snow Leopard, and there are plenty of negatives for both. I can guarantee 100% that Snow Leopard is *not* going to require any previously installed OS.

 

[brad.c]

LOL - good catch.

I guess that's one way of making sure that OSX is simpler to install - eliminate many of the combinations .

I think you're exactly right. Add in the dropping of PPC support by both Adobe and Apple, it seems the planned upgrade path for Tiger users will be through new hardware purchase.