Staying With Snow Leopard

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Andrew92, Mar 15, 2013.

  1. Andrew92 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2013
    #1
    Hi.

    Since I cannot upgrade my Mac Mini, (Core Duo) I'm seriously thinking about forgetting the whole Lion/Mountain Lion idea, and just staying with Snow Leopard as my main OS over the next couple of years. My computers seem to like it, and it's clean and stable.

    I'm wondering, though, whether SL will be supported enough to be okay to use, once Mountain Lion comes out. Does anyone have any idea how well the older OS'es hold up after the newer ones are released? :confused:
     
  2. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #2
    snow is okay on my 2010 c2d mini as of 2013. the mini has mountain and lion and it can run all three. this mini hangs in there for surfing and an eyetv dvr. also has a dvd player built in. I hope to use it for 18 more months. It has applecare unitl aug 2014 . I will sell it with a year of apple care on it.
     
  3. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #3
    As time goes on more apps will require the latest OS. I just upgraded my 2009 Mac Mini to ML. The reason being I wanted the features that ML had (I also upgraded the ram and storage).

    I was content for the most part on SL, except that I got used to some of the ML features as I also have that on my MBP.
     
  4. OLDCODGER macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Location:
    Lucky Country
    #4
    I'm staying on SL for as long as I can with Mac machines, since I can run Intel, PPC, and Classic (in Sheepshaver). I can still run all of my software, in a stable environment, and without "features" that I do not want/need.

    Once I run out of suitable Macs, I will move to Linux or hackingtosh.
     
  5. benwiggy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    #5
    Mountain Lion has been out since July 2012.
    10.6.8 was released in July 2011. Since then, there have only been security fixes.

    Each new release of OS X brings new APIs for developers to use in their software, and it frequently also removes older frameworks. So new software must use the newer code, which makes it unable to work on older systems.

    I'm not sure I know what you mean by "clean", but Lion and Mountain Lion are certainly no less stable than Snow Leopard. There are bugs, sure, as there were in Snow Leopard. Most of the complaints against them relate to changes in interface or user experience, rather than anything else.

    If you have a Core Duo Mac, then that's a good six years old. Mac hardware can last a long time, so you may get a few years more out of it, running Snow Leopard and contemporary software. The release of a new OS version does not render your computer obsolete and ineffective. (I know people still using Beige Macs running OS 9 as their work computers!)

    But you will increasingly find a problem running newer software.
     
  6. blanka macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    #6
    Every serious program that comes out runs on Snow, as it is the last serious OSX. Only programs that I run into that I can't install are casual games and fancy social network shït.
     
  7. dbroncos78087 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #7
    As long as your happy, that's the important thing. Just check before running any updates. Make sure they're SL compatible and you're good.
     
  8. thestickman macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    #8
    If it were possible, I would be running SL on my Mini. <sigh>
     
  9. Angelo95210 macrumors 6502a

    Angelo95210

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    Location:
    Paris, France
    #9
    Same for me, SL is a great system I want to stay on it as long as possible.
     
  10. Beau Nash macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    Location:
    York, UK
    #10
    I've resorted to a dual boot (10.8.3 and 10.6.8) setup on my 2009 MBP because ML is so slow (and it seems to be getting slower). But I need ML for my iCloud stuff now.

    I've ended up developing an elaborate Evernote-iCloud-SugarSync-DropBox system to keep everything in sync.
     
  11. SoCalReviews, Mar 17, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2013

    SoCalReviews macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    #11
    I missed SL but I heard it was a great OS. I just got on board with my Mini and Lion last year. ML was an ok update. Backwards compatibility is one of my key interests...not necessarily with Macs because I just started using them.... but with MS Windows. I jumped on the Mac bandwagon because I was tired of upgrading Windows every three years and feeling pushed to buy new applications when the new versions came out...Vista, 7, 8...and in three years...9. MS XP security update support expires next year in early 2014 and I have still have twelve year old self built PC desktops that have been upgraded to the max that still run XP Pro and could be upgraded to Windows 7 or 8...but they are slowing down and their years are numbered...maybe three to six more years.

    Enter... my new Mac Minis and Parallels 8... I can run OS X ML, virtualized XP Pro, Windows 7 Pro, Windows 8 Pro and Linux on the time tested and secure Mac BSD based Unix. I can't even run XP Pro on a new Windows PC system because there are no XP 32bit drivers for most of the new computer hardware. Many of the older 32bit programs that ran on XP Pro don't run on the new 64bit Windows machines. Therefore my new Mac Minis running ML are becoming my dual and quad core high speed Windows XP Pro, 7 and 8 machines via USB and Ethernet port converters that...through persistence and great effort...I made retro compatible with old parallel port HP Laserjet printers, serial port based external fax modems and other older equipment.

    I've only gotten started. I don't know if these Minis will last 14-18 years that I expect to squeeze out of my remaining old home built XP Pro desktop PCs (all AMD CPU based)...I have spare parts...hard drives, power supplies, etc.. and Windows 8 Pro upgrades for them when the time comes to finally retire XP Pro. If I can get 7-10 years out of the Minis before buying replacements I will be partially satisfied. I may just stay with an upgrade cycle of buying one new Mini every 4-5 years or... not more than a year or two after the two year extended Apple Care warranties run out on the oldest one. I will end up with more Mac machines in the long run but I won't have to purchase new application software as often. In the meantime I can gradually migrate to newer Mac and Windows applications and upgrade the external hardware devices...printers, scanners, fax modems, etc. at my own pace.
     
  12. benwiggy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    #12
    The slowness you experience may not be caused by "the OS" itself, but by some issue on your particular installation. That it is getting slower suggests you can fix it.

    I've found Lion and Mountain Lion both more responsive than Snow Leopard on my 2009 MacBook and even on my 2006 iMac (2Ghz C2D, 3Gb RAM).

    Try all the usual Mac troubleshooting steps: test the problem in a new user account, empty caches, verify the disk, disable third-party software, etc.
     
  13. blanka macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    #13
    So you have one that does run Snow!
     
  14. SoCalReviews macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    #14
    I suppose I could run SL on my mid-2011 Mini using Parallels 8. :apple:
     
  15. BJonson macrumors 6502a

    BJonson

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    #15
    I tell you what. I have tried 10 new macs. Every one had either Lion or Mountain Lion and the OS sucks. Crashes, does weird crap constant. I kept returning them. Only kept my mac mini server quad 2ghz. Every time I use this thing something weird would happen and I would lose all confidence in the computer and go back to my 2008 mac pro. Finally upgraded to Mountain Lion and had even more problems. Almost gave up on her until I found a thread about installing Snow Leopard on it. Bam. Installed Snow Leopard on it and it has been running perfect ever since. I frankly don't understand how there are not more complaints about Lion. It pathetic. Staying on Snow until I can't anymore.
     
  16. Beau Nash macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    Location:
    York, UK
    #16
    Thanks Ben but I'd already tried all of that. No dice. ML is, relative to SL, a dog (animal reference intended).
     
  17. benwiggy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    #17
  18. pine88 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    #18
    No problems here - and I switched over from Windows. Snow Leopard is like XP to Apple's mind, increasingly primitive and one which they really don't want to support. Eventually all apps will kill it off and you'll be forced to upgrade if you want something vaguely new, so enjoy it while you can.
     
  19. blanka macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    #19
    No, it runs Snow natively. Requires a second mac that runs a Snow install DVD to install it though.
     
  20. gregorsamsa macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Location:
    (Metamorphosing near) Staffs, 51st State.
    #20
    Snow Leopard is still an excellent OS. IMO, hardly "primitive". All my OS X software worked on SL! :rolleyes: I wish I could run it easily on my Lion Mac for Rosetta support alone.

    It's more about Apple increasing profits & gradually integrating OS X more so with iOS.

    Apple hastens obsolescence where possible, largely because they can get away with it. Microsoft offers greater backward compatibility in new versions of Windows because they're so reliant on generating maximum sales with every new release. They just daren't pi** off too many PC users who've invested heavily in Windows software. Even the controversial Metro in Windows 8 has a simple fix for those disliking that interface.

    As for being "forced to upgrade", not so for everyone. Many will find other solutions.
     
  21. benwiggy, Mar 20, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2013

    benwiggy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    #21
    That's not the reason. Apple strongly hints, or deliberately states, that something is deprecated and that you can expect to see it go. Then, they remove it because otherwise no progress will be made.

    Take Rosetta.
    Apple moved to Intel in 2006. Rosetta was something to tide you over until developers had released new versions of their software, or until users had found alternatives for their ageing unsupported software. It has been clearly stated in Developer documentation that it will be removed at some point.

    Then, in 2009, Snow Leopard makes Rosetta an OPTIONAL instal. Hmm, I wonder what that might signify.

    Then in 2011, Lion is released with NO Rosetta. Bizarrely, there were software companies caught out by this, such as Intuit and FontLab -- both still offering PPC apps as their latest versions. They have only just released Intel versions, and probably wouldn't have if Apple hadn't pulled the plug on Rosetta.

    I've moved from Motorolla 68000 to PPC, from OS 9 to OS X, from PPC to Intel. SCSI interface, zip disks and floppy drives have come and gone. Optical drives are one their way out. How much longer before 32-bit apps don't work?

    Hardware and software comes and goes. Your data should be eternal, and that can only be done by moving it to new versions or new software as time goes by. The moment you are stuck with an obsolete or unsupported software, running on emulation, then that should be a warning that you need to change.

    I don't expect my original copy of MacDraw to work on my 2012 Mini: but I've still got files from those days that I can open in other apps.
     
  22. gregorsamsa macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Location:
    (Metamorphosing near) Staffs, 51st State.
    #22
    I disagree. I'm not saying they gave no forewarning. However, is that such a big deal for a powerful business like Apple, or something worthy of credit? Fact is, it would have cost Apple relatively little to have at least added drivers in Snow Leopard to support newer Macs, esp for those who'd invested heavily in older OS X software that is reliant on Rosetta & wanted to downgrade easily. They chose not to.

    My point stands: Microsoft do the opposite. They maintain as much backward compatibility as possible for their users, despite having to support a much larger & more variable hardware user-base.

    Apple prefer to screw us financially where possible, because they can do. For eg. hasten obsolescence, try to force you into parting with more dollars buying downloads from their App Store, using their iCloud services, etc.

    Even the loss of optical drives in desktops is another example of profiteering, underscored by their over-priced superdrives. Ditto their non-upgradable RAM in the latest 21.5" iMacs, esp for anyone who in the years to come finds that 8GB isn't really enough for their changing needs.

    Can you see the general, underlying picture? It goes well beyond any one factor.

    FWIW, I greatly like some of the products (not least Macs & OS X), but not the company. Thankfully, these days I use both Macs & PCs. :) Regards.
     
  23. benwiggy, Mar 20, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2013

    benwiggy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    #23
    "Relatively little"..? Well, for the wealthiest computer company, they could do anything if they wanted.
    But they have to draw a line somewhere. Creating a new build of Snow Leopard for newer hardware would mean a separate team working on a forked branch of OS X from the "current" version. For what benefit? A few extra copies of Snow Leopard sold?
    Rosetta is a seven-year-old temporary fix.

    The removal of optical drives obviously reduces the production cost of the Mac, but that's not the only reason. Should we still have floppy drives? If you want a DVD drive (and I do), then you can buy any USB drive, not just Apple's one. But Apple makes decisions about whether everyone needs that bit of hardware, based on cost effectiveness, selling feature, and necessity.

    Windows does indeed have better backwards compatibility (though it too has drawn lines in the sand) -- and it has handicapped its ability to make progress by doing so.

    I've used plenty of old Macs long passed their sell-by date. They don't become obsolete because Apple released a new OS or new hardware. Keep using your old kit, running old software: that's fine. But don't expect new hardware to run old software. Always be prepared to move your data.
     
  24. SoCalReviews macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    #24
    Backwards compatibility doesn't seem to be a problem for Mac based OS X VMs. It's amazing what VMs will run on a new Mac. I was able to run a MS-DOS based CAD/CAM program on an XP Pro VM. I read that older OS's like IBM OS/2 will run in VMs. I believe VMWare can run many of the older x86 based OS's.
     
  25. gregorsamsa macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Location:
    (Metamorphosing near) Staffs, 51st State.
    #25
    Thanks for some VG points. But probably best to agree to disagree on some issues.

    IMO, it's debatable how many extra copies of Snow Leopard updated for newer Macs might have sold. Certainly there are many threads indicating that the number of users who relied on some form of Rosetta support is significant. That's over-looking, presumably, an even bigger number who don't usually make their views known on public forums.

    Frankly, I've never understood the floppy drive example as a reason for eliminating optical drives from desktop computers. Floppies were always extremely limited. The extra data opticals hold is huge & their use extends well beyond what the limited floppy ever managed to achieve. BTW, I too needed an external optical drive so, FWIW, I bought a cheaper Samsung. :)

    I think Apple makes decisions primarily based not on customers "needs", but on increasing profits. They know that the vast majority of users are effectively so locked in via their considerable investment in OS X, that they'll accept almost anything Apple does.

    Apple's focus now appears to be mostly on their mobile devices & gradually integrating OS X with iOS. IMO, the "think different" philosophy went out the window years ago, probably with the switch to Intel.

    I agree Macs have VG longevity, with inevitable exceptions. My iBook is still going well after 7 years. But my 2008 iMac lasted under 3 years. Regretfully, I never bought AC. Otherwise, I'd still be on Snow Leopard.

    I still do most of my serious work in Mac OS X for VG reason, not least all the valuable time it saves me over the long-term. That's likely to remain the case for years to come.
     

Share This Page