[BurpetheadX]

I took a picture of the WWDC Tiger installation. It will supposedly require built-in Firewire, and a DVD Drive.

Screenshot

[OptimusG4]

Yea...so now 3 of the computers i help update will be unable to use Tiger because of the DVD drive and Firewire. Well, the 300MHz iBook runs fine with Panther so I can't complain too much.

[chabig]

No doubt the DVD drive is required simply because Apple will ship Tiger on a DVD disc.

Chris

[tooki]

So let's see -- how many models does this actually leave in the dust (compared to Panther):

-tray-load CRT iMacs
-Lombard PowerBooks
-the short-lived lowest-model slot-load iMac (which is architecturally identical to the other slot-load models, so it might work anyway)
-the earliest iBooks

Yeah, I think that's it.

Well, no offense, but upgrades notwithstanding, none of those models is fast enough to run any version of OS X well -- sure, it works, but it gets bogged down really quick.

I say it's no big loss -- all of those machines are better off running OS 9 anyway, IMO.
tooki

[Catfish_Man]

Since Apple currently ships computers with no DVD drive, I'm willing to bet it's just the developer previews that require it.

[mikemako]

Originally posted by Catfish_Man:
Since Apple currently ships computers with no DVD drive...

which ones? All the base models I see come at least with Combo Drive.

[Corys]

the DVD Requirement seems like a big deal..

there were a lot of Quicksilver G4's that were configured with a CD/CDRW drive only... before the combo drive was an option.

[Moose]

Originally posted by Corys:
the DVD Requirement seems like a big deal..

What part of "Developer Preview" is it that you do not understand? Is it "Developer" or "Preview" that's throwing you a curveball?

Apple has not yet (publicly) disclosed the requirements for Tiger (or, as I like to call it, the non-Developer Preview). Until they do, complaining about perceived requirements is the apex of retardation.

[OptimusG4]

Originally posted by Corys:
the DVD Requirement seems like a big deal..

there were a lot of Quicksilver G4's that were configured with a CD/CDRW drive only... before the combo drive was an option.

Dont forget the early PB G4's...

[Moose]

Originally posted by OptimusG4:
Dont forget the early PB G4's...

Earliest PBG4s (400/500) came with a DVD-ROM. CD-RW was added that fall as an option with the speed bump that took it from 400/500 to 500/667. Combo Drive was added as an option a month or so after that.

[tooki]

Note that the requirements specify built-in FireWire (that is, no PCI cards). It does NOT specify built-in DVD drive, so it's quite possible that, like every other version of Mac OS (9 or X), it can be installed from a FireWire DVD drive. (The only FireWire Macs this would not work on is the Blue and White G3, which cannot boot from FireWire or USB.)

tooki

[bradoesch]

Well, if these requirements are true then my good 'ole iMac won't be able to run the latest version of OS X for much longer. It was the first iMac with FireWire and DVD-ROM drives.

[Moose]

Originally posted by bradoesch:
if these requirements are true

Repeat after me:

"Tiger exists now only as a Developer Preview. The hardware requirements for the shipping product will probably be announced at MWSF 2005."

You'll still have five months or so to complain after they're announced. Why start now? The requirements have already been finalized�just not announced�so complaining isn't going to do any good anyway.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by mikemako:
which ones? All the base models I see come at least with Combo Drive.

Education only eMac has (or had until really really recently, anyway, I haven't checked in a bit) a CD drive.

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Originally posted by bradoesch:
Well, if these requirements are true then my good 'ole iMac won't be able to run the latest version of OS X for much longer. It was the first iMac with FireWire and DVD-ROM drives.

And the requirements are DVD-rom and built-in firewire?

[djohnson]

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch:
And the requirements are DVD-rom and built-in firewire?

Does anyone even bother reading the thread before posting?

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Moose:
What part of "Developer Preview" is it that you do not understand? Is it "Developer" or "Preview" that's throwing you a curveball?

Apple has not yet (publicly) disclosed the requirements for Tiger (or, as I like to call it, the non-Developer Preview). Until they do, complaining about perceived requirements is the apex of retardation.

No kidding. The requirement of a DVD drive could just be Apple trying to save money by putting the DP on a DVD disc and only making one disc to give out free to WWDC attendees instead of three.

As for FireWire, if the final version requires it, then you may have reason to complain, but at the moment, we don't know that these are the final requirements. It may just be that they haven't coded support for the older hardware into whatever changes they've made to IOKit yet. Tiger is still in a very, very early state.

[Moose]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
As for FireWire, if the final version requires it, then you may have reason to complain

When Tiger ships, all Macs without built-in FireWire will be at least four years old.

Much like when Panther shipped, all Macs without built-in USB were at least four years old.

[Superchicken]

I think Apple plans to let OS X run on anything that came out in transparent plastic Least that's what I think. Least... they'd better. My Rev D iMac will be used by my room mate this year at College, and when Tiger comes out I BETTER be able to stick it on. There's no reason a 300Mhz G3 Yosemite (By the way did anyone else pronounce it Yose-e-might before the keynote haha never made the connection) can run Tiger while my iMac at 333Mhz couldn't.

I mean granted my 1Ghz PowerBook will be fine either way, (Core Image support for the Graphics card too yey me!) but I would rather not leave my iMac behind.

[Moose]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
There's no reason a 300Mhz G3 Yosemite [...] can run Tiger while my iMac at 333Mhz couldn't.

There's more to a computer than its CPU.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Moose:
When Tiger ships, all Macs without built-in FireWire will be at least four years old.

Much like when Panther shipped, all Macs without built-in USB were at least four years old.

The Macs with built-in USB had a completely redesigned architecture from the Old World Macs. There was a world of difference there, and Mac OS X 10.0 thorugh 10.2 had always been somewhat flaky on the Old World machines (i.e. machines with the old architecture, and thus no USB) anyway.

There's very little difference architecture-wise between the slot-loading iMacs that have FireWire and the ones that don't. I would guess that these requirements are temporary, unless Apple decides to start shipping OS X on DVD. I have been wrong before, though, so we'll see when it's announced.

[MacPino]

This must be a developer-preview only requirement. A lot of (even recent) macs shipped without a DVD drive, even some current eMacs do. A lot of the 2001/2002 quicksilvers shipped with a cd burner and no dvd drive. Same goes for the first generation of flat-panel iMacs. Even some 2003 iBooks and the xServe (!) shipped with a cd-rom.

It's simply impossible that I would be able to install tiger on my iMac DV 400 (has FireWire and has a dvd drive) or my iBook 466 (same), and my father wouldn't be able to install it on his iMac Flat Panel that is at least twice as fast, but doesn't have a dvd-drive. Apple would never do that!

Maybe the'll sell it two ways, on a single dvd and on cd's - They might even make the dvd version a few euro/dollar cheaper because it's cheaper to produce.

[Sven G]

Anyway, even in the worst scenario (besides a possible new version of XPostFacto), it would be possible to clone (CCC, ASR, etc.) an existing "canonic" installation to a non-supported computer: the OS X installation should still be rather "universal", probably...

[turtle777]

Originally posted by Moose:
Repeat after me:

"Tiger exists now only as a Developer Preview. The hardware requirements for the shipping product will probably be announced at MWSF 2005."

You'll still have five months or so to complain after they're announced. Why start now? The requirements have already been finalized�just not announced�so complaining isn't going to do any good anyway.

Ok:

"Tiger exists now only as a Developer Preview. The hardware requirements for the shipping product will probably be announced at MWSF 2005."

Happy now ?

-t

[Moose]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
There's very little difference architecture-wise between the slot-loading iMacs that have FireWire and the ones that don't. I would guess that these requirements are temporary, unless Apple decides to start shipping OS X on DVD. I have been wrong before, though, so we'll see when it's announced.

I'm not going to speculate as to what the actual requirements will be.

My point was more along the lines of Apple saying, "Your computer is four years old. What have you done for me lately?"

With Apple's current push of wanting to leverage the GPU more, accommodating older hardware by still doing those operations with the CPU is going to, over time, require more developer resources.

There comes a point when software needs to stop supporting older hardware. If Apple were to drop support for pre-Firewire Macs in Tiger, that would seem perfectly reasonable to me.

[Superchicken]

Originally posted by Moose:
There's more to a computer than its CPU.

Yes there's a 34Mhz difference in the system bus. And I imagine some differences on the Mobo. But I HARDLY believe Apple is willing to drop support for older machines simply because of that. There are still lots of uses for old hardware.

[Moose]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
Yes there's a 34Mhz difference in the system bus. And I imagine some differences on the Mobo. But I HARDLY believe Apple is willing to drop support for older machines simply because of that. There are still lots of uses for old hardware.

Originally posted by Moose:
With Apple's current push of wanting to leverage the GPU more, accommodating older hardware by still doing those operations with the CPU is going to, over time, require more developer resources.

Additionally, it's not like Panther's going to stop working on July 1, 2005.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Moose:
I'm not going to speculate as to what the actual requirements will be.

My point was more along the lines of Apple saying, "Your computer is four years old. What have you done for me lately?"

With Apple's current push of wanting to leverage the GPU more, accommodating older hardware by still doing those operations with the CPU is going to, over time, require more developer resources.

There comes a point when software needs to stop supporting older hardware. If Apple were to drop support for pre-Firewire Macs in Tiger, that would seem perfectly reasonable to me.

Well, it's just that requiring a certain CPU or GPU or a certain amount of RAM or a motherboard architecture or something makes more sense. There are machines which are almost identical except for a FireWire port, and I'm having trouble thinking of a reason why FireWire should make a difference here.

Again, the machines with USB ports had the New World architecture; the USB ports were just a convenient way to tell which architecture the machines had, not really the reason the old machines were left out. I really doubt that FireWire ports will be a requirement for Tiger, but then again, who knows. It doesn't seem to make much sense to keep debating this since none of us know for sure how it will turn out. We'll see when it is announced...

[Moose]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Again, the machines with USB ports had the New World architecture; the USB ports were just a convenient way to tell which architecture the machines had, not really the reason the old machines were left out.

Bingo.

[bradoesch]

Originally posted by Moose:
Repeat after me:

"Tiger exists now only as a Developer Preview. The hardware requirements for the shipping product will probably be announced at MWSF 2005."

You'll still have five months or so to complain after they're announced. Why start now? The requirements have already been finalized�just not announced�so complaining isn't going to do any good anyway.

You read my post different than I intended it. I wasn't trying to complain, I was just stating that my revision of iMac would be the last supported if those wound up the official requirements. Now, here is my attempt at complaining:


What, Tiger doesn't support my iMac? Apple is teh suX0r.

[Some Guy []]

holy **** the first ever dev release of Tiger is causing my powerbook g4 12" to kernel panic on bootup from the dvd. does this mean that when released next year, Tiger won't support the 12" powerbook g4?!


-justin

[Moose]

Originally posted by Some Guy []:
holy **** the first ever dev release of Tiger is causing my powerbook g4 12" to kernel panic on bootup from the dvd. does this mean that when released next year, Tiger won't support the 12" powerbook g4?!

No. It means you're a goddamned pirate.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Moose:
No. It means you're a goddamned pirate.

Swoosh!!!!

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Moose:
No. It means you're a goddamned pirate.

Not necessarily; it is possible that you were at WWDC and got a legitimate copy.

Pirating dev releases is pure idiocy. Ever since Apple release the OSX Public Beta, people have somehow gotten this idea that they're entitled to developer releases.

That said, people here will do that, so I'd like to remind people of three things:

• We will not be supporting developer releases of Tiger. Asking a support question on any versions of Tiger that have not been formally released = instant lock.
• Whether or not you have a legitimate dev release of Tiger, do not install it on your primary machine. If you must use your primary machine (the only valid excuse for legitimate copies being that you have no other machine to install it on; there is no valid excuse for pirated copies at all), then make a separate partition and boot Tiger from that, so that you can easily revert to Panther if you need to.
• Unless you obtained a developer copy from Apple, you are pirating it. The fact that it was not publicly released is utterly irrelevant; it is still piracy.

[Moose]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Not necessarily; it is possible that you were at WWDC and got a legitimate copy.

Possible, but anybody at WWDC would have resources that are, shall we say, slightly more informed and informative than MacNN Forums.

Pirating dev releases is pure idiocy. Ever since Apple release [sic] the OSX Public Beta, people have somehow gotten this idea that they're entitled to developer releases.

Yeah. That's annoying. As moki says in another thread, the point is primarily to get the APIs in the hands of developers, not to have tons of illiterate fanboys check to see if FINDER FTP@#@!# "works" yet.

Unless you obtained a developer copy from Apple, you are pirating it. The fact that it was not publicly released is utterly irrelevant; it is still piracy.

Thankyouthankyouthankyou.

[BurpetheadX]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Not necessarily; it is possible that you were at WWDC and got a legitimate copy.

Pirating dev releases is pure idiocy. Ever since Apple release the OSX Public Beta, people have somehow gotten this idea that they're entitled to developer releases.[/list]

Whats wrong with pirating software Apple isn't even selling? Half of the reason it is given to developers is so they can find problems and squash bugs. People who help pirate the dev releases are only helping Apple. It's software that's given away for testing purposes, you CAN'T really pirate it, from my perspective. Just buy the final release.

[JLL]

Originally posted by BurpetheadX:
People who help pirate the dev releases are only helping Apple. It's software that's given away for testing purposes, you CAN'T really pirate it, from my perspective.

Helping by posting whiny posts at their feedback pages?

Apple has a bug database only available to developers (for a reason).

[Moose]

Originally posted by BurpetheadX:
Whats wrong with pirating software Apple isn't even selling? Half of the reason it is given to developers is so they can find problems and squash bugs.

Care to speculate on the percentage of people who pirate pre-release Mac OS X builds and then actually report bugs using (and this is important) the proper method for doing so? I'm guessing it's in the single digits.

It's software that's given away for testing purposes, you CAN'T really pirate it, from my perspective.

Your perspective is wrong. Read the EULA of your pirated copy.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by BurpetheadX:
Whats wrong with pirating software Apple isn't even selling?

Apple openly intends to sell a later version of this software, so it's every bit as wrong as pirating the final release.

To put it another way; what would be wrong with stealing one of J.K. Rowling's drafts of the seventh and last Harry Potter book before it went on sale? If you can answer that, you can answer this.

Half of the reason it is given to developers is so they can find problems and squash bugs. People who help pirate the dev releases are only helping Apple.

Only if they actually find problems and squash bugs. If you do this through any kind of official channel -the only way Apple will hear about it- then they'll come down on you hard for pirating their software, so -horror of horrors- you don't do it. End result: you're not helping Apple at all.

It's software that's given away for testing purposes...

If by "given away" you mean "included in a bundle costing thousands of dollars". No; this may have been sold only as part of a package, but it was sold.

[stuffedmonkey]

It seems that taking something you are not supposed to take it the entire point of being a pirate... Well, that and "plundering booty" but I'll save that for another post. Yes you have something you are not supposed to have - that's the allure of having it. You have something first. For the same reason that people read previews of everything from movies, to upcoming sports seasons to articles on upcoming operating systems. It's pretty cool to be able to see the future first hand.

Arrrrrrrgh matey.


-stuffedm


"It is better to be a pirate, then to join the Navy." - Steve Jobs