[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Comparing Apple to "Microsoft and Linux" is like comparing a soda machine to a bottlecap. Apple's entire premise is controlling "the whole widget," as it's generally put. You don't use a Microsoft computer. You don't use a Linux computer. Similarly, you don't run a Dell OS. Apple's pitch is that their products are designed for each other and thus work well together. Making a product with the explicit guarantee that it won't work well is pretty much diametrically opposite to that. I can understand (well, kind of understand) why you want to do this, but I hope you can see why Apple isn't going to make it pseudo-supported.

Do you think corporate IT buyers and big education institutions care about that argument ?

Trust me, they don't. They use Windows, because it offers better backwards compatibility.

Apple needs to decide if they are serious about the enterprise and edu market or not.

-t

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Do you think corporate IT buyers and big education institutions care about that argument ?

Some will, most won't. Much like how some will look at products that aren't the market leader, but most won't. I think it would be a mistake on Apple's part to abandon its current (successful) business plan to try and become Microsoft.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Do you think corporate IT buyers and big education institutions care about that argument ?

Trust me, they don't. They use Windows, because it offers better backwards compatibility.

Apple needs to decide if they are serious about the enterprise and edu market or not.

Apple has already decided that they are serious about security and not falling for the same mistakes Microsoft did.

In the long run, it's *enterprise* that will have to reconsider, as Microsoft has shown that it's no longer a viable option: Saying that Microsoft is doing right by being backwards-compatible completely ignores the fact that compatibility issues are the LEAST of Vista's problems, and that the current trend is actually to remain at an officially obsolete system - XP - indefinitely. Until when?

The reason Vista sucks and Microsoft couldn't really fix any of the fundamental problems and add REAL new functionality is precisely BECAUSE Microsoft has spent the last twenty years in the bind of knowing that the ONLY reason your corporate customers stick with you is because you guarantee them you will stick with every boneheaded and ill-advised technology decision you've made in the past TWENTY-FIVE YEARS.

Apple cannot and will not compromise their development to pander to that attitude.

If at some point enterprise becomes desperate enough for an alternative, maybe Apple will be one. If not, Apple's doing quite well in the small business/creative/home user market, and will continue to do so.

[0157988944]

Originally Posted by tridentinecanon 

Ok fine. But I bet you don't have System 2.0 running on any iMacs.

Yup, and 1.1

[turtle777]

analogika, Chuckit, Yes, I agree, Apple doesn't and shouldn't have to become like M$. And we are NOT talking about years and years backwards compatibility.

But for Pete's sakes, offer *SOMETHING*.

Big companies don't care as much about security as they do about money and compatibility. It's a sad fact. Giving them the "Apple is btter and more secure blabla" alone won't help.

-t

[mduell]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

They could use a Volume License program like Microsoft, then Apple can upgrade their OS and computers all they want, so long as I can still use the older versions while still buying newer licenses.

This would do nothing for the OP's issue. He wants to run Tiger on new machines, not Leopard on existing machines.

[carterx]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

analogika, Chuckit, Yes, I agree, Apple doesn't and shouldn't have to become like M$. And we are NOT talking about years and years backwards compatibility.

But for Pete's sakes, offer *SOMETHING*.

Big companies don't care as much about security as they do about money and compatibility. It's a sad fact. Giving them the "Apple is btter and more secure blabla" alone won't help.

-t

At least a year would be great for backwards compatibility with the hardware would be great.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Our school is in the same boat. Getting an older version of OS X and/or retrograding off new purchases wasn't a problem before. It's only recently that changes were made to Apple's EULA (as of January '08) that they no longer allow you to install an older version of the OS even if you purchase a newer version regardless if the computer meets the requirements.

Might I suggest that you go find the "More Bunnies" thread in the Lounge?

I recently acquired two new Mac minis off Apple. I phoned them up to ask for Tiger because I wasn't getting on with Leopard and they sent me some Tiger install discs. Free of charge, I might add.

While I was on the phone to them I also asked about my soon-to-be-arriving Mac Pro:

"Can I install Tiger off the install discs I have from my old Mac Pro?"
"Yes"
"Any legal issues?"
"No"
"Any technical issues?"
"No"

This was no more than three weeks ago.

[Art Vandelay]

Sadly, Tiger is going to crash and burn on your new Harpertown Mac Pro. Even sadder still is that Apple's first tier tech support agents aren't the most knowledgeable.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

Sadly, Tiger is going to crash and burn on your new Harpertown Mac Pro. Even sadder still is that Apple's first tier tech support agents aren't the most knowledgeable.

New Mac Pro runs Tiger! - Topic Powered by eve community

[Art Vandelay]

I'm quite surprised by that. I'd be leery of doing it though.

[Hal Itosis]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

I'm quite surprised by that. I'd be leery of doing it though.

 
Where would the greatest risk(s) lie... technically speaking?

[CharlesS]

Either the system not booting at all, or some aspect of the hardware not working probably due to some driver being missing.

OTOH, if you try it, and it works, then great! You can always archive and install Leopard back on it if it doesn't.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

I'm quite surprised by that. I'd be leery of doing it though.

I'm not so surprised. I don't recall any major changes in the newest Mac Pro that would definitely require updated drivers.

[Art Vandelay]

It has a new logic board and new video cards. That alone would normally be enough to kernel panic an older OS release.

[The OSX Guy]

Originally Posted by chabig 

You got me! I was thinking small. Now I understand better the original poster's position. But I am unclear on one issue. I know the Tiger installer won't let you install Tiger on new hardware, but will a disk that already has Tiger boot the new machine?

Yes it will work. I have 40 brand new iMac's in my school district that we purchased in November of 07 that had 10.5.1 installed on them. I cloned the drivers over from older iMac with 10.4.11 and all the latest updates using Netboot. You can even use a Firewire drive to do this as well using Carbon Copy CLoner. It works like a charm and you can carry you harddrive with you and use your operating system!!!

[hbone]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Apple has never in its history allowed customers to downgrade to a previous milestone of the OS on new hardware. Perhaps that should be made clearer to new customers, but that's just the way it is. Apple is not M$, and even M$ wants to move everyone to its new release as soon as it can - it just can't do so as quickly or as authoritatively as Apple does with its platform.

One of the reasons I switch to a Mac was that I could switch between OS9 and OSX. Back then you could do that (downgrade). I still do that on one of my Macs. Why upgrade when it works? In Leopard, there are a lot of things you can't do eventhough Apple's website says you can. What happened to syncing your phone with Address? SMS texting? iPhones don't work in all areas Tiger IMO is a lot better than Leopard. Leopard only introduced 3/4 features.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by hbone 

SMS texting? iPhones don't work in all areas Tiger IMO is a lot better than Leopard. Leopard only introduced 3/4 features.

Yes, downgrading your iPhone from Leopard to Tiger will make it get MUCH better reception in "all areas".

-t

[CharlesS]

He was referring to Apple's not-great support of third-party phones these days. It is conceivable that they have been worsening support for third-party phones because they want you to get an iPhone, but what he's saying is that there are a lot of areas where you can't get an iPhone, so it's just a straight loss of functionality.

[TETENAL]

SMS texting doesn't even work with the iPhone afaik. So it's just a straight loss of functionality. Period.

[turtle777]

I still don't understandt what this has to do with Leopard.

Did Tiger have SMS text messaging integrated, and Leopard doesn't ?

-t

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by mduell 

This would do nothing for the OP's issue. He wants to run Tiger on new machines, not Leopard on existing machines.

Microsoft's Volume License program allows you to purchase licenses for the latest version of Windows, but gives you the option of installing an older version of Windows instead.

So yes, that would address his problem if Apple implemented a system similar to that.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I still don't understandt what this has to do with Leopard.

Did Tiger have SMS text messaging integrated, and Leopard doesn't ?

Exactly.

The Tiger Address Book could be tethered with a mobile phone via Bluetooth, and you could then use Address Book to dial a number with the phone, or send an SMS, and incoming calls and SMS messages would throw up a dialog box on your Mac and allow you to respond via SMS (and SMS would be automatically saved in the contacts' comments).

Great functionality - thrown overboard in Leopard.

[carterx]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Microsoft's Volume License program allows you to purchase licenses for the latest version of Windows, but gives you the option of installing an older version of Windows instead.

So yes, that would address his problem if Apple implemented a system similar to that.

That would work if they allowed the OS to be installed but they do not want un pure OS's installed on new hardware ... wait, that's their own OS... hmmm

[mduell]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Microsoft's Volume License program allows you to purchase licenses for the latest version of Windows, but gives you the option of installing an older version of Windows instead.

So yes, that would address his problem if Apple implemented a system similar to that.

Licensing isn't his problem. Tiger will not run on some of the newer hardware.

[carterx]

There is a rumor that there could soon be an update release of 10.4.12 .... would be interesting to see because it's an OS update if it would work on any new model computers.

Macenstein | Apple set to release OS X 10.4.12

Probably not, but would be a good wish as there are many still that want to stick with Tiger.

[Art Vandelay]

Considering that there aren't any 10.4.12 seeds on ADC, there isn't a 10.4.12 release about to come. I highly doubt there will ever be one either.

[carterx]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

Considering that there aren't any 10.4.12 seeds on ADC, there isn't a 10.4.12 release about to come. I highly doubt there will ever be one either.

Again, a rumor, so no idea. Just stating it as a possible rumor.

[Art Vandelay]

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you were stating fact. I was debunking the linked rumor.

[carterx]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you were stating fact. I was debunking the linked rumor.

No Prob.
When I did post it, I did checkout MacRumors.com and they have nothing.... but would be interesting if they did.

[ApeInTheShell]

Honestly, there is not that much difference between Mac OS X 10.4 and Mac OS X 10.5 other than some internal and interface features. The problem is you are over thinking this matter. The fact is if you buy a new Apple Mac computer than Leopard will come pre-installed on it. Now you have to upgrade your older computers to run the new operating system.

Have you contacted the software companies and let them know you are moving over to Mac OS X Leopard? I am sure they have compatible versions of their software to run with the new operating system.

[ApeInTheShell]

Your thread title suggests upgrading is a bad thing. I have started from Mac OS X Public Beta all the way to Mac OS X 10.5.2. I have no problem with upgrading my machine to the latest operating system unless it does not meet any of the hardware requirements.

[analogika]

Did you RTFT?

This thread, according to the actual post that goes with the title, is not about single machines.

It is about deployment across dozens, if not hundreds, of machines, where a mixed-version environment is *somewhat* more of a hassle than in your average household.

[carterx]

Originally Posted by ApeInTheShell 

Your thread title suggests upgrading is a bad thing. I have started from Mac OS X Public Beta all the way to Mac OS X 10.5.2. I have no problem with upgrading my machine to the latest operating system unless it does not meet any of the hardware requirements.

Not saying at all that 10.5 is bad at all. I use i myself on my laptop and like Leopard, the issue is that I think when it comes to large environments such as Colleges, Universities etc. that there should be a choice of what OS you want/need rather than have no choice but to move.

We are in the deal with making a deal with Apple for getting OS X Leopard Site Licenses for across the province, 14 Campus's which is a very large change over but should be there come September for the new school year.

[alex_kac]

Originally Posted by ApeInTheShell 

Honestly, there is not that much difference between Mac OS X 10.4 and Mac OS X 10.5 other than some internal and interface features.

You mean besides the greatly changed OS itself? The new major APIs? The redo of half the AppKit and CoreFoundation classes? Yeah - not much difference. Just the whole underlying OS. The apps are mostly unchanged.

Remember its an OS. The apps that come with it are gravy, but the OS is what makes it good.

[Hal Itosis]

Originally Posted by alex_kac 

You mean besides the greatly changed OS itself? The new major APIs? The redo of half the AppKit and CoreFoundation classes? Yeah - not much difference. Just the whole underlying OS. The apps are mostly unchanged. Remember its an OS. The apps that come with it are gravy, but the OS is what makes it good.

 
If I'm still following correctly, you may have misinterpreted his meaning (or maybe I am).
I believe the gist was: not so much has changed, such that it would prevent Tiger from
working on the new hardware.

I'm not *arguing* one way or the other (though it'd be nice if ApeInTheShell was right),
just trying to keep the thread on its intended track.

[forumhound]

Hi, we just got a new iMac for our studio and it has leopard 10.5 installed, but Protools only works in Tiger. How can I go back to tiger on this box? I have a tiger install cd from a macbook pro, but it says it cant install. So what to do? Thanks!

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by forumhound 

Hi, we just got a new iMac for our studio and it has leopard 10.5 installed, but Protools only works in Tiger. How can I go back to tiger on this box? I have a tiger install cd from a macbook pro, but it says it cant install. So what to do? Thanks!

Call Apple, and ask if they would provide you with 10.4 that would run on your machine. It worked for Doofy.

-t

[forumhound]

thanks turtle, we dont do much calling around here being in Nepal, but there is a local dealer we can ask...they usually have old stuff. But I am reading that perhaps Tiger will not run on an imac that was shipped with Leopard installed. How would I know? thx...
ccfccp

[Chuckit]

If I recall, iMacs haven't been updated since Leopard, so it should be the exact same setup that had Tiger before.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by forumhound 

thanks turtle, we dont do much calling around here being in Nepal, but there is a local dealer we can ask...they usually have old stuff. But I am reading that perhaps Tiger will not run on an imac that was shipped with Leopard installed. How would I know? thx...
ccfccp

Yes, what Chuckit said.

Doofy bought two Mac minis, and had problems with Leopard. Apple gave him a free copy of Tiger, which worked w/o a hitch.

-t

[forumhound]

thanks all ur right. the new imacs are called Mid-2007 by some. Trying to get a DVD from local dealer today and all should be well...

[carterx]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Yes, what Chuckit said.

Doofy bought two Mac minis, and had problems with Leopard. Apple gave him a free copy of Tiger, which worked w/o a hitch.

-t

From what I have been told by Apple, the iMac's will run Tiger right now until the new updated iMac which should be along this summer/fall. I too have had that question given to me by instructors, and the last I have seen is that the latest version of Pro Tools will for on 10.5.1. Now if your under this version, than ya, this is where people will get stranded if they have a new computer that will only run leopard. But ya, as they were saying, if you can not get a hold of Apple, a local dealer should be able to help you out.