Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Holte139

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 26, 2012
123
13
Birmingham, England
I've heard a few rumours that this OS will need at least 10.7 to be installed. Has this been confirmed yet or will you be able to 'jump' from 10.6 like you could with Mountain Lion last year?
 
Thank you, I do wonder when 10.7 will be made the minimum though considering how fast things are moving hardware-wise. I probably won't buy another OS update until we reach that point, or I might even wait until 10.8 is the minimum providing my Mac is still supported at that point. In the early days I wasn't very impressed with 10.8 but since 10.8.3 onwards I've seen big improvements in terms of stability.
 
Snow Leopard will be the base requirements so that you can purchase the OS via the App store for at least the next 2-3 years as Snow Leopard didn't come out until 2009. At the rate system requirements are going for the OS, I won't expect Snow Leopard to be the default installed OS until 2015 for all systems (iMac, Mac Pro, Macbook Pro).
 
Thank you, I do wonder when 10.7 will be made the minimum though considering how fast things are moving hardware-wise. I probably won't buy another OS update until we reach that point, or I might even wait until 10.8 is the minimum providing my Mac is still supported at that point. In the early days I wasn't very impressed with 10.8 but since 10.8.3 onwards I've seen big improvements in terms of stability.

Why would anyone base their OS purchase decision based on what's the minimum OS required for upgrading? :confused::confused:

Apart from any obscure app requiring an old OS X version I see no reason to stay on an old version.
 
Why would anyone base their OS purchase decision based on what's the minimum OS required for upgrading? :confused::confused:

Apart from any obscure app requiring an old OS X version I see no reason to stay on an old version.

So I can maximise the OS's life without spending money that I don't need to. I'm just trying to get a balance between using a relatively up-to-date OS but not spending silly amounts every year to do so. Maybe the best thing to do would be to treat it like I do my iPhones when my contract expires - upgrade every 2 years!
 
I've heard a few rumours that this OS will need at least 10.7 to be installed. Has this been confirmed yet or will you be able to 'jump' from 10.6 like you could with Mountain Lion last year?
Every installer for OS X is a complete standalone package. It does not "update" an existing OS, or require an OS to be present. (You can do a clean install on a new disk without installing a previous OS.)

(OK, There have been a few exceptions to this -- there have been a couple of particular disks that were updaters, requiring an installed earlier version, but not since 10.6 at least. And they weren't the usual disks.)

The only SOFTWARE requirement is 10.6.6, because that gives you access to the Apple Store.

There are of course hardware requirements.
 
Last edited:
So I can maximise the OS's life without spending money that I don't need to. I'm just trying to get a balance between using a relatively up-to-date OS but not spending silly amounts every year to do so. Maybe the best thing to do would be to treat it like I do my iPhones when my contract expires - upgrade every 2 years!

I think you're misunderstanding what the minimum requirements are all about. It has nothing to do with the OS really, to some degree it is but it's really about the system your OS came preinstalled on. For example, systems that came with Panther 10.3 will not be eligible to run the latest version of OS X (other than someone hacking which isn't worth it) therefore you won't be able to install it.

Ex. if the minimum upgrade requirements for Mavericks were Lion and you're on Snow Leopard it doesn't mean you have to install Lion first, then Mountain Lion before you can install Mavericks.
 
Last update costed like 19 USD. Assuming the price is similar for forthcoming updates, is this considered as silly amount of money to spend every year ?

To some degree I would argue yes, especially in the case of computer OSs. My view on the situation is that I was aware of the OS my Mac ran when I bought it, and it still runs fine now. As it runs fine, and can perform all the tasks I need it to, I have no desire to upgrade, therefore it would be 'silly' to buy an upgrade that I don't need when I could put that money towards something I do need.

I think you're misunderstanding what the minimum requirements are all about. It has nothing to do with the OS really, to some degree it is but it's really about the system your OS came preinstalled on. For example, systems that came with Panther 10.3 will not be eligible to run the latest version of OS X (other than someone hacking which isn't worth it) therefore you won't be able to install it.

Ex. if the minimum upgrade requirements for Mavericks were Lion and you're on Snow Leopard it doesn't mean you have to install Lion first, then Mountain Lion before you can install Mavericks.

So in your example I'd be able to just upgrade to Mavericks from Lion? In that case though I'd still have to buy Lion. If I wanted instant access to Mavericks I'd essentially be buying Lion just as a 'host' OS so I could use it to access the upgrade to Mavericks. That's the type of situation I'd try to avoid, but thank you, as I understand things a little better now.
 
My view on the situation is that I was aware of the OS my Mac ran when I bought it, and it still runs fine now. As it runs fine, and can perform all the tasks I need it to, I have no desire to upgrade, therefore it would be 'silly' to buy an upgrade that I don't need when I could put that money towards something I do need.

Then why in god's name did you start this thread if you have no intention of upgrading? :confused:
 
To some degree I would argue yes, especially in the case of computer OSs. My view on the situation is that I was aware of the OS my Mac ran when I bought it, and it still runs fine now. As it runs fine, and can perform all the tasks I need it to, I have no desire to upgrade, therefore it would be 'silly' to buy an upgrade that I don't need when I could put that money towards something I do need.

In don't think you have to upgrade every year, however you won't save any money that way since as far as I know once you upgrade you will have to pay Nx19 where N equals number of upgrades you have skipped so far.

Then why in god's name did you start this thread if you have no intention of upgrading? :confused:

He wants to upgrade, just not every year to save some money. However, the upgrade program does not work that way as far as I know.
 
To some degree I would argue yes, especially in the case of computer OSs. My view on the situation is that I was aware of the OS my Mac ran when I bought it, and it still runs fine now. As it runs fine, and can perform all the tasks I need it to, I have no desire to upgrade, therefore it would be 'silly' to buy an upgrade that I don't need when I could put that money towards something I do need.



So in your example I'd be able to just upgrade to Mavericks from Lion? In that case though I'd still have to buy Lion. If I wanted instant access to Mavericks I'd essentially be buying Lion just as a 'host' OS so I could use it to access the upgrade to Mavericks. That's the type of situation I'd try to avoid, but thank you, as I understand things a little better now.

No, he was saying that you don't need to use Lion as a "host" OS. I think you read it wrong. He is saying you can upgrade from snow leopard no problem.
 
In don't think you have to upgrade every year, however you won't save any money that way since as far as I know once you upgrade you will have to pay Nx19 where N equals number of upgrades you have skipped so far.
Not True. You can be on 10.6 and buy 10.9 for the same price as if you had 10.8.

Of course, you don't have to upgrade, and there is a lot to be said for keeping a stable system running the same software and leaving it alone. However, new OS versions bring many new features, and new capabilities for other software, or for new versions of software. You may need a new OS if you need to use the latest version of a third-party app, for instance.

New OS versions also bring security fixes that may be lacking on earlier systems, and, sad to say, some bug fixes don't make it into point updates but only get fixed in a new major release.
 
To some degree I would argue yes, especially in the case of computer OSs. My view on the situation is that I was aware of the OS my Mac ran when I bought it, and it still runs fine now. As it runs fine, and can perform all the tasks I need it to, I have no desire to upgrade, therefore it would be 'silly' to buy an upgrade that I don't need when I could put that money towards something I do need.



So in your example I'd be able to just upgrade to Mavericks from Lion? In that case though I'd still have to buy Lion. If I wanted instant access to Mavericks I'd essentially be buying Lion just as a 'host' OS so I could use it to access the upgrade to Mavericks. That's the type of situation I'd try to avoid, but thank you, as I understand things a little better now.

Exactly, most people that were on Leopard and wanted to upgrade to Lion had to upgrade to Snow Leopard first because Snow Leopard has the Mac App Store. You had to buy Lion through the Mac App Store. The App Store doesn't necessarily detect which OS you're running an only offers the next upgrade first, it should offer Mavericks to anyone running Lion or Snow Leopard. You can simply download and install without issue. Now whether or not your machine will run it well is a different story. :)
 
The App Store doesn't necessarily detect which OS you're running an only offers the next upgrade first, it should offer Mavericks to anyone running Lion or Snow Leopard.

But it does check that the hardware requirements are fulfillef. If you are running SL, there is a good probability you won't be able to install the latest OS because of this.
 
Last edited:
But it does check that the hardware requirements are fulfillef. If you are running SL, there is a good probability you won't be able to install the latest OS because of this.

LOL, I'd sure like to know how you took MY quote and used it under another member's username? :D. Those were my words, not his/her's.

But I did also say this, "Now whether or not your machine will run it well is a different story. :)
 
But it does check that the hardware requirements are fulfillef. If you are running SL, there is a good probability you won't be able to install the latest OS because of this.
Just being on Snow Leopard currently is not a good indicator. Many machines that shipped with Snow Leopard (and earlier) are still supported by Mavericks.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.