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

Will you be upgrading to Lion?

Based on what's been shown/announced so far, probably not. With UI changes, they're trying to make it look like iOS and for me, it's something I would disable (I think you can based on the preview). Also, the new Expose where all the windows are grouped based on their app is also a downgrade. I don't like where I have to perform an extra click just to see all the windows for that app. The current expose, I think, it's pretty good as it is. As for launch pad? I already do something similar with my dock and stacks. All these things look like they can be disabled, or not be used at all which makes me ask why I would bother to upgrade if I have no need for these new features.

It's still early and I'm sure there's more but as of right now, an upgrade is out of the question until I see more that I would actually use and not disable.
 
I'll do the upgrade. If Apple does artificially declare mine as obsolete I'm sure there will be an easy hack released by the OSX86 community or perhaps a new XPostFacto.

Since my 2006 C2D Macbook is still quite fast. Speed wise it is not that much different from a current C2D Macbook. Especially with 3GB of RAM and the SSD I'm waiting to install when my generic Optibay arrives for my current 500GB HD.
 
velocityg4 said:
I'll do the upgrade. If Apple does artificially declare mine as obsolete I'm sure there will be an easy hack released by the OSX86 community or perhaps a new XPostFacto.

Since my 2006 C2D Macbook is still quite fast. Speed wise it is not that much different from a current C2D Macbook. Especially with 3GB of RAM and the SSD I'm waiting to install when my generic Optibay arrives for my current 500GB HD.
Click to expand...

(a) Core 2 Duo based Macs can run Lion. All of them can. The only Intel Macs being left out are the Early 2006 generation of iMacs, Mac minis, MacBooks and MacBook Pro based on the Core Duo (or Core Solo, in the case of that generation's lower-end Mac mini).

(b) Presumably the reason why those Macs are being left out is due to the push to have a single 64-bit kernel, at which point, even if your Mac had a Core Duo and not a Core 2 Duo, there is nothing the OSX86 community nor any sort of XPostFacto-esque solution could do to allow you to run Lion. You can't get a 64-bit OS to run on a CPU that is only 32-bit capable. Regardless, I'd imagine that a late 2006 Core 2 Duo will run Lion quite slowly and that the experience will probably be quite unenjoyable.

(c) There are two different generations of Core 2 Duo, Merom and Penryn. Penryn is much faster than Merom. Merom debuted in late 2006 as the successor to Yonah (otherwise known as Core Duo/Solo) and lasted in the Mac lines until January 2008 when Penryn took over. Penryn has lasted through to current Core 2 Duo Macs. To say that the two are not much different and that your experience won't be that different, especially given that most Penryn-based Macs have enjoyed the superior NVIDIA chipsets/IGPs, is false, sorry to say.
 
ZombieZakk said:
2.) no lion will most likely cost more snow leopard wasnt a full upgrade it was kind of a half but lion is considered more substantial so it will most likely be the price leopard was when you upgraded from tiger.
Click to expand...

I think it will be about the same price as snow leopard.

otherwise people will just register as a Mac developer and get Lion GM there.
 
Yebubbleman said:
(b) Presumably the reason why those Macs are being left out is due to the push to have a single 64-bit kernel, at which point, even if your Mac had a Core Duo and not a Core 2 Duo, there is nothing the OSX86 community nor any sort of XPostFacto-esque solution could do to allow you to run Lion. You can't get a 64-bit OS to run on a CPU that is only 32-bit capable. Regardless, I'd imagine that a late 2006 Core 2 Duo will run Lion quite slowly and that the experience will probably be quite unenjoyable.
Click to expand...
It's actually extremely easy to install the current preview of Lion on a Core Duo-based Mac. It runs, and it runs smoothly.
 
I actually waited about a year after SL was released before jumping to SL to wait for the bugs to be fixed. On my Windows computers (before I started using Macs) I was probably about 2 year behind on jumping from Windows 2000 to Windows XP, skipped Vista all together, and just recently updated my girlfriend's laptop from Vista to Windows 7, but I am still on XP at work because of controls and production software not being compatible with anything other than XP. I'll probably wait about a year before jumping to Lion. I typically don't want to the first one on the block with a new OS, but I also don't want to be more than 1 generation behind either.
 
What's with the replies about their 2007 BMP's not being able to run lion? I have a 2.33 C2D 15" early 2007 production that I'm upgrading for sure... What's the word on people saying no-go for their 2007's?
 
I will be picking up Lion for my machines and if it exists, Lion Server for my server.
 
I will upgrade on day 1. Apple is quick with any bugs that are glaring.

In terms of the Mac App store. Steve Jobs said numerous times. If you purchase an app from the store, you can share it with "ALL" your computers.

Here's how I see it working. You purchase a Mac. It comes with the OS disk (Snow Leopard). When the opti-drive goes away, the computers will probably come with the OS on thumb drives (Lion and later).

If you ever want to do a clean install from say an Erase, you'll install the OS that came with the computer (Snow Leopard), then go immediately to the Mac App store and re-download Lion before you do anything else.

If you happen to purchase a computer after this summer, it will be a moot point as all of them will ship with Lion.

But again, you should be able to share Lion with all your computers that use the same Apple ID. Apple is not out to make a fortune off Lion updates...so I don't see any licensing issues...save the Apple ID registration of said computer.

Cosmo
 
Yebubbleman said:
(a) Core 2 Duo based Macs can run Lion. All of them can. The only Intel Macs being left out are the Early 2006 generation of iMacs, Mac minis, MacBooks and MacBook Pro based on the Core Duo (or Core Solo, in the case of that generation's lower-end Mac mini).

(b) Presumably the reason why those Macs are being left out is due to the push to have a single 64-bit kernel, at which point, even if your Mac had a Core Duo and not a Core 2 Duo, there is nothing the OSX86 community nor any sort of XPostFacto-esque solution could do to allow you to run Lion. You can't get a 64-bit OS to run on a CPU that is only 32-bit capable. Regardless, I'd imagine that a late 2006 Core 2 Duo will run Lion quite slowly and that the experience will probably be quite unenjoyable.

(c) There are two different generations of Core 2 Duo, Merom and Penryn. Penryn is much faster than Merom. Merom debuted in late 2006 as the successor to Yonah (otherwise known as Core Duo/Solo) and lasted in the Mac lines until January 2008 when Penryn took over. Penryn has lasted through to current Core 2 Duo Macs. To say that the two are not much different and that your experience won't be that different, especially given that most Penryn-based Macs have enjoyed the superior NVIDIA chipsets/IGPs, is false, sorry to say.
Click to expand...

According to Anandtech's testing the Penryn is at best 9.4% faster then Merom per gigahertz and that is only in tasks utilizing the larger L2 cache otherwise it is about 6% to 7% faster. At 2.4Ghz the current Macbook could be at best about 32% faster which is not particularly significant. If it was double the speed of my current Macbook I would qualify that as significant.

Given that my Macbook snaps immediately to my uses and I have never noted an instance of 100% CPU usage even when playing HD video. I doubt that Lion will show poor performance.

Although the Penryn laptops have the benefit of the NVidia IGP's. Those are only a real benefit if one performs tasks that utilize the GPU and can not be performed by the CPU. Which is not the case with general office tasks, web browsing, e-mail, playing music in iTunes or data recovery programs. Though some GPU's can be utilized with Flash the Core 2 Duo can still handle those quite well including HD playback without maxing out the CPU. I couldn't picture needing to multitask when watching something in HD.

My concern with my Macbook being left out is since I have not been able to find specific system requirements and some concerns about the 2007 Mac's being left out. Whether founded or unfounded is a reasonable concern until the final requirements are released. Since Apple left out dual CPU 604e's and the Quad 604 Daystar Genesis MP with 10.0 though they where superior to the slowest G3's, the Beige G3's with 10.3 though some were faster than the early G3 iMacs, some G4's in Leopard though my 466mhz ran it well, or even the G5's in Snow Leopard since they decided to drop PPC support even though the Dual and Quad G5's would have been fast enough.

Also I never stated that XPostFacto or the OSX86 would get a 32bit CPU to run a 64bit OS. As I have a 64bit CPU I know Apple would have a tough time blocking my Macbook from running Lion. I would just have to wait for a workaround.
 
It might not even run on my mini late 2006 bought in 2007. So I'll wait to see how it handles and what everyone else thinks. There are always hardcore mac fans who have to upgrade right away. So wait 6 moths ans see what everyone else thinks.
 
After a bad experience with installing Tiger from day 1 of release, I will ALWAYS wait for at least a .2 release. Besides, 10.6.x won't stop working once Lion is released so I'm in no hurry.
 
I'll purchase/install Lion as soon as I get around to it or when the latest available XCode requires it, whichever comes first.
 
Capt Underpants said:
1. I will not be upgrading to Lion. I've got everything exactly how I like it on my 2007 White Macbook. My machine's x3100 GPU and lack of multitouch trackpad would probably limit my experience of Lion.

2. Lion will be $129. Snow Leopard was uncharacteristically cheap because it was an under-the-hood overhaul.

3. Technically only one. There is no serial number, though...
Click to expand...

Where have you seen the $129 figure?
 
If you're expecting Lion to be $29 you are probably wrong.
Having used Lion for awhile now, this is no small update to the OS.
 
I probably won't be upgrading to Lion. I get a bunch of UI features that I am just not interested in and lose something incredibly important like Rosetta? No thank you. I'll wait for the next OS and hope it has a lot more to offer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back