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.
Why would anyone base their OS purchase decision based on what's the minimum OS required for upgrading?![]()
Apart from any obscure app requiring an old OS X version I see no reason to stay on an old version.
but not spending silly amounts every year to do so.
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.)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?
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!
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 ?
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.
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.
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.
Then why in god's name did you start this thread if you have no intention of upgrading?![]()
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.
Not True. You can be on 10.6 and buy 10.9 for the same price as if you had 10.8.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.
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.
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.
LOL, I'd sure like to know how you took MY quote and used it under another member's username?.
Then why in god's name did you start this thread if you have no intention of upgrading?![]()
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.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.