[whitedog]

My main reservation about Leopard is installing it on my two G4 machines cuts off my occasional use of Classic unless I create a Tiger boot partition. I wish Apple would have managed to keep Classic alive through one more big cat so we wouldn't have to reboot into Tiger just to run Classic.
I'm sure any cost-benefit analysis could show that providing Classic support in Leopard would cost Apple way too much for too little benefit. Most G4s are less than prime candidates for Leopard anyway. And Intel Macs can't run Classic even in Tiger. Classic has been entirely off Apple's radar for some time now. This will undoubtedly leave some folks in a bind, but there's simply no up side for Apple in continuing Classic support.

[whitedog]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

This raises the interesting issue of just how many copies of OS X are in use. Microsoft has strict activation requirements that keep track of every legally installed version of their OS. Since Apple has no such system to track OS X, it is probable that there are many more copies being used then can be accounted for through their sales figures alone. Literally an Apples and oranges comparison challenge - or rather Apples and lemons. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

---

And look how fast it was for hackers to break the Windows Activation scheme. So how many copies of Windows are actually activated vs. the number of hacked copies bypassing the activation?

---

There may be Windows activation hacks available for those willing to search them out. But that hardly makes them commonplace. Getting a hacked version of Windows to run on a PC is one thing - I suspect fooling Microsoft's "Genuine Windows" program in order to keep it up to date is quite another.
There is simply no comparable barrier to usability and support on the Mac, simply because Apple has chosen not to erect one. As someone who does Mac tech support for a living, this makes it much easier for me to service my clients than is the case when I occasionally do Windows. I am grateful for Apple's generosity and consumer friendly attitude in this matter and hope they continue the practice.

[clayshima]

I definitely agree with you, and on top of all that, I still have "one more thing":
Why on earth did they get rid of the marquee selection when selecting items in the Finder windows (in list view)?
Before Tiger, in a list view of a folder full of folders, you could select them all, expand the little triangle to show the contents (commandright arrow), press shift and, with the marquee, invert the selection. Not having that anymore is just a BIG pain in the buttocks! I must say that I get frustrated EVERY time I try to do it and am not able. Not to mention that, before, you could also select lots of files of the samee type that were mixed with other types in a given folder without having to rearrange the view by type, just making the marquee touch the text of the file type you wanted (or, shouldn't that type be the one you wanted, you could just press shiftdrag a marquee to invert the selection).
That and also the fact that, when pressin the shift+up/down arrows in a list view, it just goes expanding the selected items, instead of retract the selection.... argh!
Apple, PLEASE fix that!

[Machound]

Quote:

---

Most G4s are less than prime candidates for Leopard anyway.

---

How do you have that figured? Most G4s seem to fit Apple's minimum CPU requirements for Leopard. Time Machine promises to be a boon to those of us who feel challenged to back up weekly. Some of us may not have the full Leopard eye candy experience, but that hardly makes Leopard unfit for G4s.
I understand Apple's motives for dropping Classic. It saddens me to see ties to the past cut forever. Apple's decision means most of the great educational software our kids love won't work under Leopard. That's going to be tough for G4 Mac based elementary schools that have a curriculum based on Classic software. OS X eduware alternatives aren't always available, so I doubt many schools will switch to Leopard.
Fortunately, in our four-Mac-household we can leave two Macs on the older OS and upgrade the two other machines. The difficult decision will come in about two years when shareware developers gradually drop Panther support. We'll have to decide whether the kids' needs trump our needs. Probably the right answer at that time will be to buy a fifth Mac. I hope quad core iMacs, or the often requested Mac mini tower (Cube v.2), will be out by then.

[edmetric]

This thread will give some suggestions why not. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[whitedog]

How do you have that figured? Most G4s seem to fit Apple's minimum CPU requirements for Leopard. Time Machine promises to be a boon to those of us who feel challenged to back up weekly. Some of us may not have the full Leopard eye candy experience, but that hardly makes Leopard unfit for G4s.
There are a number of features in Leopard, in addition to graphics, that require resources not available in most G4s. From Apple's Leopard spec page:

"DVD Player requires a 1.6GHz processor or faster for improved de-interlacing."

"Photo Booth and backdrop effects require an Intel Core Duo or faster processor."

"Some iChat features offer better performance and quality with higher system capabilities."

"Boot Camp requires a Mac with an Intel processor...."

In the case of features like Boot Camp that require an Intel processor, no G4, nor even a G5, will do. While none of these limitations is necessarily a deal breaker - if you don't need the excluded functionality - they do, as I said, render most G4s "less than prime candidates for Leopard."

If there are features in Leopard that make the upgrade desirable - like Time Machine - then getting it for your G4s may be worthwhile. Note, though, that even Time Machine uses Leopard's upscale graphics (see the Leopard video for a preview of Time Machine in action). How well it operates with inadequate graphics support has yet to be demonstrated. So you will be gambling a bit if you buy Leopard before the reviews are in.
For most anyone with a G4 Mac, being an early adopter with Leopard is a risky proposition. At a minimum you should back up your G4 system before upgrading to Leopard, just in case the results of the upgrade don't meet your expectations. Of course, backing up their system is a good idea for everyone doing the upgrade, on whatever Mac, but without doubt there will be many people who neglect to do so. And we will read some of their sob stories on MacFixIt and Macworld.

[bastion]

If the Apple Store gets you down, price wise, go to Amazon instead. It's $109 there with free shipping and NO California Sales Tax!!
Just because Amazon doesn't collect it doesn't mean you're not liable for it.

[bastion]

But upgrades for the Mac OS have cost $129 at least as far back as OS 7.6, if I recall correctly.
You don't. Off-the-shelf copies of System 7 (point-oh, btw) through Mac OS 9.x were $99. At least in the US.
But your point's still valid, IMO.

[amigasteve]

Quote:

---

From today forward, a copy of Leopard should be included either pre-installed or as a disk in the package. <a href="/news/2007/10/16/leopard/index.php">[more]</a>

---

Can anyone tell me the basis of that quote? I'd like to order an iMac with Leopard, but MacMall says 2nd week of November and even the Apple Store says they won't know until Friday if at least the Leopard DVD is in the box.
TIA,
Steve