Removing Snow Leopard

Discussion in 'macOS' started by Chaney2k, Oct 31, 2009.

  1. Chaney2k macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    #1
    I have a brand new out of box Mac Book Pro with SL - it will not work with Cisco Clean Access, this makes the machine no good to use. Need help removing SL and installing Tiger. Unless someone knows a work around. I begging for help.
     
  2. r.j.s Moderator emeritus

    r.j.s

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Location:
    Texas
    #2
    I am almost sure Tiger will not work on that machine ...

    If you have a retail Leopard disc, that may work.
     
  3. Ashka macrumors 6502a

    Ashka

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #3
    You cannot downgrade a Mac
    Snow Leopard is the current Operating System so if it came out of the box with SL installed that's it. You will be able in install the next Operating System but not the previous one.

    OSX 10.3. Panther: October 24, 2003
    OSX 10.4. Tiger: April 29, 2005
    OSX 10.5. Leopard: October 26, 2007
    OSX 10.6. Snow Leopard: August 28, 2009
    S.
     
  4. macrem macrumors 65816

    macrem

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #4
    CAA is irrelevant to SL. Ask the Sys Admin to add your MAC address to the whitelist.

    Several more solutions here
     
  5. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #5
    You should be able to use the 10.5.6 retail discs for the Macbook Pro. Otherwise you'll need to clone or image from a Mac running 10.5.8.
     
  6. Azrel macrumors regular

    Azrel

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    #6
    I'm almost positive Microsoft is paying people to post on forums to bitch about Snow Leopard...

    Downgrading to Tiger because of something that's not even anything to do with Snow Leopard AND can be fixed. I LOLED.
     
  7. gorjan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 16, 2009
    Location:
    CPH
    #7
    What are you talking about? As long as you have the DVD, there's nothing standing in the way of doing an erase and install over SL? :)
     
  8. calderone macrumors 68040

    calderone

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    #8
    This is not exactly true. In cases where the hardware is the same you can indeed put a previous OS on the machine without issue. The Install DVD may not work due to the checks in the distribution file or it may be an older version than what the of similar hardware MBP shipped with. However, one could easily drop a Leopard image on a machine that ships with Snow Leopard.

    An example would be the newly released Minis. There is no reason one could not get Leopard onto them, despite the fact that they will only ever ship with Leopard.
     
  9. Cromulent macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #9
    Yes there is.

    You can not install a version of Mac OS X earlier than the one that came with your Mac (unless it is just a minor refresh to the line) because earlier versions of Mac OS X do not have the correct drivers included.
     
  10. chriszzz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    #10
    Wrong. The MBPs have not been updated since SL, so they could all run Leopard fine.
     
  11. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #11
    It's not irrelevant at all. If I were a SysAdmin and my system required CAA, why on earth would I add a user machine to a whitelist that could then be compromised? lol. Think please.

    Clean Access Agent -> Cisco, not Microsoft.

    And no, it can't be fixed until Cisco does anything about it, which means that at the moment Snow Leopard won't work for the OP. But yeah... you're not going to be able to downgrade to Tiger.
     
  12. Chaney2k thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    #12
    Thank You

    You all have given me much to think about, since I have original disk, I will attempt to downgrade to Leopard, putting the systems on whitelist is not an option. Thank you ...I will post results.
     
  13. old-wiz macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Location:
    West Suburban Boston Ma
    #13
    "original disk"?? The snow leopard disk? or what?
     
  14. macrem macrumors 65816

    macrem

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #14
    Did you miss the "SOLUTION"s in the link I posted above.
     
  15. macrem macrumors 65816

    macrem

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #15
    Your first & second sentences are non sequitur. I am not here to help sys admins of draconian programs that attempt to protect MS Windows users from viruses (the irrelevant part): 1. I am here to help SL users, 2. others have asked and successfully been put on the whitelist.

    Also why is everyone ignoring the other solutions?? :confused:
     
  16. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #16
    You are looking at it from a user standpoint, I am looking at it from a Sysadmin standpoint. Who is going to win? Smart sysadmins don't let unsecured machines onto their network. Those that managed to be put on a whitelist shouldn't feel safe about using their computer on a network since their security administrator is obviously a moron.
     
  17. Winni macrumors 68030

    Winni

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Germany.
    #17
    No. You're just overly paranoid and probably work at a place that's more like a prison than a real work place.

    And who needs a whitelist anyway when most users in a corporate environment have their passwords written on sticky notes glued to their monitors?

    Like today's ridiculous security checks at airports, your fancy Cisco security tools also only sell an illusion of safety.
     
  18. professorjay macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    #18
    Leopard will work just fine. Ashka is way off in regards to your particular case.

    Or, as it seems other people imply, you should quit your job because everything at your workplace doesn't run on Apple products. :rolleyes:
     
  19. macrem macrumors 65816

    macrem

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #19
    Well, this is the client section of an OS X forum.

    What good is a draconian security system that influences users to find ways around it by installing older, less secure software, workarounds, maybe even software that includes trojan code that they will bring behind your firewall? How good is a security system when it does that?
     
  20. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #20
    No, I work in an institution in which security policy actually matters.

    The weakness of the password as a "security" measure is well documented. I agree- weak passwords (and social engineering) are the #1 and #1a threats to computer security. Fortunately you can take measures to drastically reduce the likelihood of both.

    They're not "mine." I would never touch a Cisco product. Sometimes the illusion of security is enough.

    "It's better to have mediocre security now than perfect security never." There will never be a perfect system. Security is all about risk management, and if you're competent in setting up your network defenses none of those are going to be a serious issue.
     
  21. macrem macrumors 65816

    macrem

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #21
    Why would Cisco allow a whitelist in their software in the first place if it's less than mediocre security? As Miles pointed out, allowing someone in the whitelist opens the remote possibility (1 in a million?) for someone else to exploit it, in this case spoofing the MAC address of devices in the whitelist. It is also possible AFAIK to turn off this entire feature & still have some other security benefits that do not outrage your users. Draconian rules influence users to circumvent the system in ways that'll be out of the sys admin's control.

    Look how many users are out there sharing details about their school/work network exposing themselves to social engineers. Is that what the sys admin wants vs. the risk of a MAC address in a whitelist?
     
  22. Chaney2k thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    #22
    Did not miss your link - thought about it overnight - will try the whitelist, user is not a threat to system. Will wait a little longer for CISCO.
     
  23. Chaney2k thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    #23
    Retail Disk of Leopard.
     
  24. mr666 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    #24
    Chaney2k: Let us know if that happens. It is true that Macs cannot use a previous reference release. Sometimes a version before a minor update also won't work, as in the iMac Slot-Load that could boot to OS 8.5.1, but not to 8.5. As far as "haven't been upgraded", it isn't related to the processor or graphics set. It is the bootrom file. Did Apple change the bootrom for the first group of Macs that shipped with 10.6? Probably. They have to give free phone support for 90 days and they don't want to deal with any previous version installations.
     
  25. macrem macrumors 65816

    macrem

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #25
    Fyi, OpenVPN works great with SL, as with all versions of OS X I've tried + Linux. When my MBP wakes up from sleep, for instance, OpenVPN re-establishes the connection seamlessly. Very nice!

    OpenVPN supports Linux, Solaris, *BSD, OS X, and Win 2000/XP. IMO it is shortsighted if IT does not offer a solid solution for *nix, & I explained why earlier, above.
     

Share This Page