Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Person Man · Mar 3, 2011, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

So buying a $139 OS update will require also require buying a $200+ Office upgrade, even though newer versions of Office aren't worth the money to most people? But I'm sure Adobe and Microsoft are gleefully rubbing their hands together as we speak.

It may not be worth it to YOU, but going from Office 2004 to 2011 may be worth it to SOME. You don't speak for everyone.

Then there's the stuff you can't upgrade. Lots of people keep older games on their machines, too. Those games will suddenly die forever. Looking on my system, there's only one PowerPC game there, Oni, which I've considered playing again. But in the past, I wasn't a big gamer. I'm sure lots of greybeards will be bitter about losing games forever in the name of saving Apple a few pennies.

Oh yeah? You mean that once 10.7 is released all current copies of the OS with Rosetta support will suddenly self-destruct? Nobody is forcing you to upgrade, and if you do, I outlined SEVERAL scenarios above that would let you continue to use your PPC apps just fine. Yes, there would be a few hoops to jump through, but only you can make the determination if it's worth it or not.

I think it's simply insane that Apple will put more effort into running Windows on your Mac than keeping actual Mac software running. That's why I called this a pointless d!ck move.

I'm not happy about it either, but I don't think the move was "pointless" or that Apple is being a dick about it, either.

lpkmckenna · Mar 3, 2011, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by Person Man

It may not be worth it to YOU, but going from Office 2004 to 2011 may be worth it to SOME. You don't speak for everyone.

Uh, if it was worth their money, people still using Office 2004 would have upgraded, right? So obviously they don't feel it's worth the money.

You mean that once 10.7 is released all current copies of the OS with Rosetta support will suddenly self-destruct? Nobody is forcing you to upgrade...

You know what would be nice: if Apple didn't require making such an unnecessary choice.

I'm not happy about it either, but I don't think the move was "pointless" or that Apple is being a dick about it, either.

We disagree.

Spheric Harlot · Mar 3, 2011, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Uh, if it was worth their money, people still using Office 2004 would have upgraded, right? So obviously they don't feel it's worth the money.

No Office upgrade since Word 5.1a has been worth the money.

imitchellg5 · Mar 3, 2011, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

I think it's simply insane that Apple will put more effort into running Windows on your Mac than keeping actual Mac software running. That's why I called this a pointless d!ck move.

But Apple really haven't put any effort into running Windows on your Mac at all since the last Bootcamp update which was way back in 2008.

CharlesS · Mar 3, 2011, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Here's a novel thought: What if Apple provided virtualization for older OS X 10.6 in the way VMWare and Parallels provide Windows ?
Then you could run all your old software, albeit, a bit more disruptive than Rosetta.

-t

That is essentially what Classic was. Unfortunately, Apple killed it in 10.5, even on PPC machines where it would have continued to work fine.

CharlesS · Mar 3, 2011, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by Person Man

Oh yeah? You mean that once 10.7 is released all current copies of the OS with Rosetta support will suddenly self-destruct?

I hate this argument so much. Yes, older systems don't immediately stop working when a new OS is released. Yes, when Classic was dropped in 10.5 I was able to keep an iBook around to run Classic in 10.4. However, that iBook just did suddenly self-destruct this month, in that the motherboard has apparently become faulty to the point that I can't get the thing to stay running for more than 3 minutes or so before getting a kernel panic (plus, the AirPort card doesn't work). And now none of my other hardware is capable of running 10.4 anymore. Computer hardware deteriorates over time, as do all things under the sun, so in short, the answer to your question is yes, all current copies of the OS will suddenly self-destruct.

Person Man · Mar 3, 2011, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I hate this argument so much. Yes, older systems don't immediately stop working when a new OS is released. Yes, when Classic was dropped in 10.5 I was able to keep an iBook around to run Classic in 10.4. However, that iBook just did suddenly self-destruct this month, in that the motherboard has apparently become faulty to the point that I can't get the thing to stay running for more than 3 minutes or so before getting a kernel panic (plus, the AirPort card doesn't work). And now none of my other hardware is capable of running 10.4 anymore. Computer hardware deteriorates over time, as do all things under the sun, so in short, the answer to your question is yes, all current copies of the OS will suddenly self-destruct.

I was being sarcastic. Yes, given enough time copies of the operating system will self destruct (well, actually the machines they run on will), but not all at once, and certainly will give people time to transition to using something different.

I was responding to lpmckenna's assertion that

Originally Posted by lpmckenna

Then there's the stuff you can't upgrade. Lots of people keep older games on their machines, too. Those games will suddenly die forever. Looking on my system, there's only one PowerPC game there, Oni, which I've considered playing again. But in the past, I wasn't a big gamer. I'm sure lots of greybeards will be bitter about losing games forever in the name of saving Apple a few pennies.

It really doesn't take all that much effort to keep an installation of 10.6 around on a current machine if you want to run a PPC app. Yes, as newer machines get released that can't run 10.6 natively that will become a problem but even that can be solved with a virtual machine and a cheap used copy of 10.6 server.

And who knows? If enough people write to Apple and POLITELY express their concerns they may change their mind. They may not, of course, but immediately proclaiming the move to be "dickish" or angrily saying you'll never upgrade the OS again or buy another machine from them is certainly a quick way to get them to ignore you, even if you have valid reasons to be upset. That is what I'm objecting to. The anger and the childish "proclamations."

CharlesS · Mar 3, 2011, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by Person Man

Yes, as newer machines get released that can't run 10.6 natively that will become a problem but even that can be solved with a virtual machine and a cheap used copy of 10.6 server.

I don't suppose you'd have a link to these cheap used copies of 10.6 server? (Is selling used software even legal?)

A new copy of 10.6 Server costs a whopping $500...

Oisín · Mar 3, 2011, 06:16 PM

(Is selling used software even legal?)

Why wouldn’t it be? Do EULAs normally state that your licence to use a piece of software is intransferable?

CharlesS · Mar 3, 2011, 07:16 PM

IANAL, but it seems like Section 3 of the EULA for the 10.6 client installer, at least, would prohibit it.

Person Man · Mar 3, 2011, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

IANAL, but it seems like Section 3 of the EULA for the 10.6 client installer, at least, would prohibit it.

Originally Posted by Mac OS X 10.6 Client SLA

3. Transfer. You may not rent, lease, lend, sell, redistribute or sublicense the Apple Software. Subject to the restrictions set forth below, you may, however, make a one-time permanent transfer of all of your license rights to the Apple Software (in its original form as provided by Apple) to another party, provided that: (a) the transfer must include all of the Apple Software, including all its component parts (excluding Apple Boot ROM code and firmware), original media, printed materials and this License; (b) you do not retain any copies of the Apple Software, full or partial, including copies stored on a computer or other storage device; and (c) the party receiving the Apple Software reads and agrees to accept the terms and conditions of this License. You may not rent, lease, lend, redistribute, sublicense or transfer any Apple Software that has been modified or replaced under Section 2H above. All components of the Apple Software are provided as part of a bundle and may not be separated from the bundle and distributed as standalone applications. Apple Software provided with a particular Apple-branded hardware product may not run on other models of Apple-branded hardware.

Updates: If an Apple Software update completely replaces (full install) a previously licensed version of the Apple Software, you may not use both versions of the Apple Software at the same time nor may you transfer them separately.

NFR (Not for Resale) and Evaluation Copies: Notwithstanding other sections of this License, Apple Software labeled or otherwise provided to you on a promotional or not-for-resale basis may only be used for demonstration, testing and evaluation purposes and may not be resold or transferred.

Apple System Restore Copies: Restore CDs or DVDs that may accompany an Apple hardware bundle, or are otherwise provided by Apple in connection with an Apple hardware bundle, contain a copy of the Apple Software that is to be used for diagnostic and restorative purposes only. These CDs and DVDs may be resold or transferred only as part of the Apple hardware bundle.

Academic Copies: If the Apple Software package has an academic label or if you acquired the Apple Software at an academic discount, you must be an Eligible Educational End User to use the Apple Software. "Eligible Educational End Users" means students, faculty, staff and administration attending and/or working at an educational institutional facility (i.e., college campus, public or private K-12 schools).

Relevant text bolded. Provided you sell the complete retail package you can transfer a license to someone else. I don't see Apple shutting down eBay sales of the complete retail packages.

Looking on eBay I see that a couple sellers have new in box copies of Snow Leopard Server (unlimited license) for $299. Not exactly "cheap" but cheaper than retail.

CharlesS · Mar 3, 2011, 10:14 PM

But what about the first sentence which explicitly states that you can't sell the software?

Also: $300 isn't even near an appropriate price range.

Person Man · Mar 3, 2011, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

But what about the first sentence which explicitly states that you can't sell the software?

Also: $300 isn't even near an appropriate price range.

Yeah, that first sentence would seem to preclude it, but as long as the transfer adheres to the rules outlined (that I bolded), it would appear that you can at least give someone the software. I don't think the "may not sell" part would hold up if tested in court, as long as you can prove the rest of the transaction adheres to the transfer rules.

And I know that $300 is not nearly appropriate, but it is also the current version of the software. You can also buy 10-client versions of Tiger server for $125 on eBay. The price of Snow Leopard Server will fall once 10.7 is released.

CharlesS · Mar 3, 2011, 10:36 PM

Tiger Server is two versions old, though. Leopard Server is going in the $250-$400 range on eBay right now. It's scarcely cheaper than SL server is right now.

P · Mar 4, 2011, 04:36 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

IANAL, but it seems like Section 3 of the EULA for the 10.6 client installer, at least, would prohibit it.

That bit falls afoul of the First Sale doctrine, and so is not valid even in the US. Some US States (Wikipedia has it as those in the 7th and 8th Appeals court circuits, which may be correct) subscribe to the notion that software is a licensed service rather than a sold product, which would make something like this potentially workable, but that is not the majority opinion. I am not aware of any region outside the US that consider restrictions like this one valid - in fact, many require a signature on the license agreement to even read what it says, meaning that the clickthrough agreements are completely invalid.

Short version: You can sell a used box of OS X server on a street corner just outside 1 Infinite Loop, and Apple can't do a thing to stop you - although they may try.

OreoCookie · Mar 4, 2011, 06:03 AM

EULAs are not valid as-is, the may contain provisions which are invalid. In Germany, for instance, you're allowed to sell shrink-wrapped software -- even if the license keys are personalized or you had to register. (Microsoft tried to stop a company from selling and buying licenses for older versions of Windows and Office, but they lost.) Software you buy online, however, cannot be sold.

P · Mar 4, 2011, 02:59 PM

I stumbled upon a hint that might be useful to someone. Open System Profiler and go down to Programs. Far out to the right - so far out that you may have to make the window bigger to see - there is a heading Type. Click that to see exactly which of your applications are PowerPC. There are more of mine that I'd really like - especially some games that might be nice to revisit at some point yet are too demanding to be ably to run on a cheapo secondary Mac.

jmiddel · Mar 4, 2011, 06:27 PM

Good grief, P !!!! I did just that and found over 100 Classic apps, many of which I've never heard of, and many more PPC ones, most of which are background processes, or duplicates of Intel ones. Classic??!! have never used it, never installed the drivers. Of course I've had the old OS starting with whatever version came with the first Plus, but when I went to X I upgraded everything so as not to have to work in Classic. And none of these apps show up in the app folder.

Question, should I delete them or what? I apologize for straying off topic a bit, but P's suggestion opened this weird can o' worms for me

moonmonkey · Mar 5, 2011, 04:47 AM

I suppose this kills Claris works finally.

P · Mar 5, 2011, 08:57 AM

Classic apps can probably be deleted, but I wouldn't delete the PPC app unless you know what they are.

freudling · Mar 5, 2011, 02:57 PM

Is Lion Dev. stable enough for main use? Yes! I jumped and use this full-time. It's got some bugs, but nothing major. Lots of little things but it's pretty good.

I'm in fullscreen mode right now typing this. There's lots of new gestures and effects across different applications and the Finder, you can really see where Apple is going. All in the multi-touch. And it makes sense. For example, if I gesture by pulling my thumb and three fingers together, the iOS-like application icon grid pops up. A lot less clicking things and a lot more gestures is the message.

And it's damn fast. Very fast. Safari is blazing fast. Everything. I then went into Terminal and checked. Yup, it's booting by default in 64-bit. No more 32-bit. That to me is an answer that this speed improvement could be partly attributed to 64-bit and other optimizations.

Spheric Harlot · Mar 5, 2011, 03:50 PM

10.6.6 boots in 64 bit by default on the new MacBooks.

freudling · Mar 5, 2011, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

10.6.6 boots in 64 bit by default on the new MacBooks.

Uh.... ok. But I'm not using Snow Leopard... interesting observation though.

Salty · Mar 6, 2011, 12:00 AM

Ugh! So apparently this beta won't work with the new i7 13 inch... according to things I read on the internet... thus no use for me to acquire it through illicit means. You guys have my chomping at the bit for it! Oh well, my machine will feel like a new computer again when I get Lion in the summer.

AKcrab · Mar 6, 2011, 04:24 AM

Originally Posted by Salty

... thus no use for me to acquire it through illicit means. You guys have my chomping at the bit for it!

$99 and it can be yours.. Hell, that might end up being less than retail.

ghporter · Mar 6, 2011, 09:38 AM

That's something I'm quite curious about-the retail price for Lion. Since Snow Leopard wasn't expensive at all, I'm wondering how much it'll cost me to upgrade an iMac, my MBP and my wife's MacBook. It sounds like I'll really, really want to upgrade, but can I afford to?

Big Mac · Mar 6, 2011, 09:52 AM

I doubt it will be as cheap as Snow Leopard since that was clearly recognized as a less dramatic upgrade than previous 10.X iterations, but it may not be as expensive as the upgrades previous to SL.

ghporter · Mar 6, 2011, 10:00 AM

I'm skimping on lunch money already; I hope it's not going to be hard on my. And I hope they keep the "family pack" as an option.

Big Mac · Mar 6, 2011, 10:08 AM

So I don't think anyone responded to my question about how Resume works. Is it a mandatory thing that all apps are reopened after restarting, or can it be selectively enabled?

Salty · Mar 6, 2011, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by AKcrab

$99 and it can be yours.. Hell, that might end up being less than retail.

Yah I totally get what you mean, I should pay a hundred dollars to join a developer program, that is running a beta that doesn't support either my 32 big Core Duo MacBook, or my band new i7 13 inch that gets here on Monday... great idea.

Besides, the point was I wanted to check out Lion for myself, doesn't mean I didn't plan on buying the retail version when it came out. Either way Apple makes the same money off me.

So what's better? Pirating a developer preview to see the hype, or joining a developer preview when you're not actually a developer? Hmmmm... (I don't know which one is better, but one makes a hell of a lot more sense!)

Do we have any word from Dropbox about how they'll be supporting Lion?

Spheric Harlot · Mar 6, 2011, 01:18 PM

I have it on Good Authority that Dropbox won't be supporting Lion.

They are focussing on a port for OS 8.1 through 9.2.2.

freudling · Mar 6, 2011, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

So I don't think anyone responded to my question about how Resume works. Is it a mandatory thing that all apps are reopened after restarting, or can it be selectively enabled?

No idea. Sorry.

Salty · Mar 6, 2011, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

I have it on Good Authority that Dropbox won't be supporting Lion.

They are focussing on a port for OS 8.1 through 9.2.2.

Actually if you google Dropbox Lion, you an see on their support site that there's a work around, you just need to change a plist file. That said the new finder doesn't appreciate injected code, so I think the little green bubbles won't show up. (Something I wouldn't mind at all)

turtle777 · Mar 6, 2011, 05:12 PM

*facepalm*

-t

Spheric Harlot · Mar 6, 2011, 05:40 PM

^ odd. I was going to post *exactly* the same response (minus the signature).

Andy8 · Mar 6, 2011, 10:45 PM

Freudling - what hardware are you running the Lion dev. preview on now?

freudling · Mar 7, 2011, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by Andy8

Freudling - what hardware are you running the Lion dev. preview on now?

2008 MBP, 2.4 GHz Core2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB 7200 RPM HD, and NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT 256 MB dedicated VRAM. Boots default in 64 Bit.

imitchellg5 · Mar 7, 2011, 05:19 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

So I don't think anyone responded to my question about how Resume works. Is it a mandatory thing that all apps are reopened after restarting, or can it be selectively enabled?

Selectively enabled.

Andy8 · Mar 7, 2011, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by freudling

2008 MBP, 2.4 GHz Core2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB 7200 RPM HD, and NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT 256 MB dedicated VRAM. Boots default in 64 Bit.

Thanks, I was just wondering what the minimum specifications will be for it to run on decently.

Salty · Mar 30, 2011, 11:46 PM

Any word on whether this supports the i7 13 incher?

Spheric Harlot · Mar 31, 2011, 02:26 AM

No.

The 13" MacBook Pros released six weeks ago will be unsupported - Lion has a 15" minimum requirement.

According to people "in the know", Apple are considering reintroducing support for our machines in 10.8 Ocelot, with a full touch-screen retrofit topcase.

imitchellg5 · Mar 31, 2011, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by Salty

Any word on whether this supports the i7 13 incher?

I hope you're joking.

P · Mar 31, 2011, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

I hope you're joking.

No. Scroll up a bit - the first Lion DP did not support the new 13" MBP.

imitchellg5 · Mar 31, 2011, 02:45 PM

This release is a GM candidate. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't ship a GM that didn't support current machines.

Art Vandelay · Mar 31, 2011, 03:26 PM

It is not a GM candidate. TechCrunch is full of crap. The known issues list in the seed note is way too long. Plus Apple doesn't call a GM seed a Developer Preview.

Art Vandelay · Mar 31, 2011, 03:30 PM

Plus, there's no way that a GM will be coming out before WWDC. Apple has never released an OS without developers having access to it at a WWDC first.

angelmb · Apr 1, 2011, 03:30 PM

Funny, DP2 comes with a new Mount Fuji desktop picture.

DP1 Mount Fuji picture:

DP2 Mount Fuji picture:

Full size.

Salty · Apr 2, 2011, 05:58 AM

So aside from some ignorant comments suggesting I'm ignorant, no solid information as to whether the new 13 inch is supported.

cgc · Apr 2, 2011, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by Salty

So aside from some ignorant comments suggesting I'm ignorant, no solid information as to whether the new 13 inch is supported.

Why would Apple release hardware that isn't supported? Makes no sense and would force customers to leave Apple in droves. Of course the new 13"er will be supported when Lion is released commercially...

turtle777 · Apr 2, 2011, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by Salty

So aside from some ignorant comments suggesting I'm ignorant, no solid information as to whether the new 13 inch is supported.

Has Apple EVER not supported hardware that came out just months before a new OS X release ?

-t