-Dave- Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 HFS+ read only support isn't to stop viruses. its because its bloody difficult to get working correctly in windows! just a fob off excuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L0u1s Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 If you order a new MPB say tomorow, will your update to Snow Leopard be free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the evn show Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Any virus that has code for OS X - is not a "PC Virus"? :p I just feel it is an unwanted dig at Windows (err PC) by Apple..again. Modern worms don't work the way they used to - 90% start out as just a "spread to everything you can" bit of code coupled with a "get some instructions from here" block. It isn't until the malware has had a while to become established and sold that it becomes a spam network, used in a ddos, etc. It would be trivial to add some code to the next Storm upate that looks for HFS+ mounted partitions (about 12 lines of code) and writes a 20-line shell script to the appropriate location and have it look up instructions appropriate for Mac OS X. Their reason Apple gives is reasonable: we don't want <Operating System Y> infecting Mac OS X. The problem is that their solution is completely ineffective at stopping the real problem. It's as bad as Vista's "Are you really sure?" warnings: they annoy you when you're doing something you intend to, and they do nothing to stop you from accidently ****ing up the works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giga Veteran Posted June 8, 2009 Author Veteran Share Posted June 8, 2009 If you order a new MPB say tomorow, will your update to Snow Leopard be free? $10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
null_ Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I believe Windows 7 includes "Problem Steps Recorder" that lets you record your screen, although its usage is a little different.Snow Leopard is what I thought it would be, and that's a very good thing. They are also bundling some new fonts, too. But one thing that throws me off. Leopard was promoted as being "64-bit top to bottom," and now it seems that it really wasn't? Because now Snow Leopard is also proclaiming to be 64-bit ready. I'm very confused. Did Apple basically lie about Leopard being 64-bit? Essentially, yes. As far as I know, only certain parts of the OS were 64-bit, the rest of it was 32-bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 If you order a new MPB say tomorow, will your update to Snow Leopard be free? No, but I believe you can get it for a discounted $9.95. I must say the price is right for Snow Leopard. $29 is more than acceptable, and if you consider that is has no product keys or activation, then you also don't need to waste money on the $49 "family pack." But, again, some confusion. Is $29 considered a "full" or "upgrade" price? In other words, what if you are running Tiger? Do you have to buy the $169 bundle, which I assume would be considered a "full" Snow Leopard price? Or, must you first upgrade to Leopard and then Snow Leopard? Also, Apple's product literature seems to confirm that Snow Leopard is Intel-only, which means it looks like PowerPC users are officially dead to Apple. Essentially, yes. As far as I know, only certain parts of the OS were 64-bit, the rest of it was 32-bit. Wonderful. So, is Apple being truthful this time? Is Snow Leopard truly 64-bit top to bottom, like they proclaimed Leopard was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Wonderful. So, is Apple being truthful this time? Is Snow Leopard truly 64-bit top to bottom, like they proclaimed Leopard was? yes, 64 bit drivers and all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
null_ Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Wonderful. So, is Apple being truthful this time? Is Snow Leopard truly 64-bit top to bottom, like they proclaimed Leopard was? Supposedly, although I don't have a Mac (nor a build of Snow Leopard) to find out. I've screen shots of having both 32-bit and 64-bit System Preferences split, which looks messy. And yes, Snow Leopard is Intel-only. PPC is dead to Apple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Supposedly, although I don't have a Mac (nor a build of Snow Leopard) to find out. I've screen shots of having both 32-bit and 64-bit System Preferences split, which looks messy. And yes, Snow Leopard is Intel-only. PPC is dead to Apple. Well, at least they supported them for nearly four years. I figured sooner or later they would cut off support. Although, the high-end G5 workstations still aren't all that bad, as many had two physical processors and could probably still compete with even the Core 2 Duo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabron Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Well, at least they supported them for nearly four years. I figured sooner or later they would cut off support.Although, the high-end G5 workstations still aren't all that bad, as many had two physical processors and could probably still compete with even the Core 2 Duo. and the beautiful thing about these high end g5 workstation is that you can buy it for less than $800 dollars, originally cost $2999 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 And yes, Snow Leopard is Intel-only. PPC is dead to Apple. That's actually a good thing, why bother supporting PPC? They've had enough time to upgrade, and it's not like Snow Leopard would bring much to PPC that Leopard doesn't have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I don't think we'd see these huge improvements as big as they are now if they had to code for PPC as well. Now they just had to focus on Intel's part of the code. Should make code much cleaner, easier to understand, and smaller. Everyone's the winner at Apple, everyone with an intel iMac too, the rest who have G5... upgrade or stay with Leopard, it's not because something better is out that Leopard is a bad OS ! It had to happen someday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Although, the high-end G5 workstations still aren't all that bad, as many had two physical processors and could probably still compete with even the Core 2 Duo. As far as I know the latest high-end G5 already scored much lower than the white Core 2 Duo iMacs. Let alone the current aluminium ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Hey, does anyone have the new wallpaper that seems to be the Snow Leopard default? It's similar to Aurora, but looks a bit better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calum Veteran Posted June 9, 2009 Veteran Share Posted June 9, 2009 I believe Windows 7 includes "Problem Steps Recorder" that lets you record your screen, although its usage is a little different. Thanks for that :) I'll check it out and see what it's like - I'd heard of it, but had no idea what it did :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sn00pie Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Hey, does anyone have the new wallpaper that seems to be the Snow Leopard default? It's similar to Aurora, but looks a bit better. http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/1882/74853920.png Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sn00pie Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 $29 gets you an update to Snow Leopard from Leopard, so I'm assuming each copy of Snow Leopard has its own serial that you input? If you have two Macs, then you are required to buy a family pack, correct? But how can they verify it? Like I know on PC computers you are forced to put in a Serial #, but I've never had to do that anytime I've formatted any Mac computer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 $29 gets you an update to Snow Leopard from Leopard, so I'm assuming each copy of Snow Leopard has its own serial that you input? If you have two Macs, then you are required to buy a family pack, correct? But how can they verify it? Like I know on PC computers you are forced to put in a Serial #, but I've never had to do that anytime I've formatted any Mac computer... Mac OS X has no activation. The family pack is there for the ethics; there is nothing to prevent you from taking that $29 DVD and installing it on 1,000 new Macs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell-In-A-Handbasket Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 actually i think its more Service Pack = 10.5.* Upgrade = 10.*.* 10.5.6 was a service pack to 10.5.5 10.5 is to 10.6, as vista is to 7 and 10.4/10.5 is about the same as XP/Vista, just like 10.5/10.6 is Vista to 7 Actually Microsoft charges $0 for its upgrades to its OS's unlike Apple. (Service Packs they call them)Microsoft will be charging $49 for an upgrade to Windows 7 OS from Vista (Home Premium) Sorry, I didnt mean to remove the wool from your eyes... carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike415 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 actually i think its moreService Pack = 10.5.* Upgrade = 10.*.* 10.5.6 was a service pack to 10.5.5 10.5 is to 10.6, as vista is to 7 and 10.4/10.5 is about the same as XP/Vista, just like 10.5/10.6 is Vista to 7 Call them whatever you want, but I see 6 10.x's and I see Windows XP, Windows Vista ($99 upgrade), and Windows 7 ($49 upgrade) 10.0->10.1 (16) 10.1->10.2 (80) 10.3(130) 10.4(190) 10.5(130) 10.6(29) Feel free to correct my prices, I just found them on a random site, but I think you get the picture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicane-UK Veteran Posted June 9, 2009 Veteran Share Posted June 9, 2009 Actually Microsoft charges $0 for its upgrades to its OS's unlike Apple. (Service Packs they call them)Microsoft will be charging $49 for an upgrade to Windows 7 OS from Vista (Home Premium) Sorry, I didnt mean to remove the wool from your eyes... carry on Getting so, so fed up of this. Please don't participate in this thread if you're going to post garbage like this. If all these millions Apple customers are satisfied that they're getting value for money for the major OS versions at $129 a pop, then that's all that matters. I know it hurt for the folks who stood by Vista, and watched it get railed by almost every tech journalist on the planet whilst Leopard was almost universally praised.. really, I do understand. But you need to get over it. Windows 7 looks like it will launch to much more positive reviews. What still makes me boil inside is how you can have fans of Microsoft Windows, defending how most of the changes in Vista "were under the covers" and not immediately visible to the less technically minded or less experienced with Windows. How can those same fans lambast OSX which, essentially, has been incremented in the same way for years - subtle changes to the UI but with huge improvements underneath. Can't you see the BLINDING hypocrisy of your comments?! I mean - are people really this ignorant and so blinded by their adoration for their beloved vendor? Sorry, I didnt mean to remove the wool from your eyes... carry on Ah - thanks. Seeing as I'm just a naive little kiddy who doesn't know he's being ripped off by Apple, I really needed your in-depth expertise and insight. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike415 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Getting so, so fed up of this.Please don't participate in this thread if you're going to post garbage like this. If all these millions Apple customers are satisfied that they're getting value for money for the major OS versions at $129 a pop, then that's all that matters. I know it hurt for the folks who stood by Vista, and watched it get railed by almost every tech journalist on the planet whilst Leopard was almost universally praised.. really, I do understand. But you need to get over it. Windows 7 looks like it will launch to much more positive reviews. What still makes me boil inside is how you can have fans of Microsoft Windows, defending how most of the changes in Vista "were under the covers" and not immediately visible to the less technically minded or less experienced with Windows. How can those same fans lambast OSX which, essentially, has been incremented in the same way for years - subtle changes to the UI but with huge improvements underneath. Can't you see the BLINDING hypocrisy of your comments?! I mean - are people really this ignorant and so blinded by their adoration for their beloved vendor? Ah - thanks. Seeing as I'm just a naive little kiddy who doesn't know he's being ripped off by Apple, I really needed your in-depth expertise and insight. :rolleyes: ya, u mad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PL_ Veteran Posted June 9, 2009 Veteran Share Posted June 9, 2009 10.0->10.1 (Free) Fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike415 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Fixed. Thanks, lol. Were the others pretty close? (seriously want to know because like I said I found it on a random site) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Fixed. Wasn't it only free to existing customers, though? I believe those who were new to the Mac paid $129 for Puma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts