Mac OS X Snow Leopard Discussion

[suspiria]

Let me get this straight, the "Erase & Install" option is still available via Disk Utility on the 10.6 install disk?

[KoL Veteran]

Anyone know if its going to be on retails stores like Best Buy this Friday too??

[Elliott]

I don't think it is. The quicktime preference is missing from that build and also the bootcamp drivers. Also a few other things

Yea, the Bootcamp drivers do exist, and I think QuickTime X might just not have preferences. QuickTime X is supposed to be very simple: watch movies and simple video editing (trimming).

[Phantom Helix]

Yea, the Bootcamp drivers do exist, and I think QuickTime X might just not have preferences. QuickTime X is supposed to be very simple: watch movies and simple video editing (trimming).

Which is why quicktime 7 is included in the install disc and current PRO keys still work, and that is why i also think windows will never see quicktime X, it may get the UI but nothing from under the hood

[Astra.Xtreme]

Maybe it's just something I'm doing wrong, but I installed Win7 64-bit under BootCamp 3 and I can't get bluetooth and sound to work. Bluetooth I don't really care if it works or not, but sound really stumps me. I've installed drivers multiple times and even manually downloaded the driver online, but when I restart, it still says "no driver installed".

Hopefully with time it will get figured out. ;)

[Phantom Helix]

Maybe it's just something I'm doing wrong, but I installed Win7 64-bit under BootCamp 3 and I can't get bluetooth and sound to work. Bluetooth I don't really care if it works or not, but sound really stumps me. I've installed drivers multiple times and even manually downloaded the driver online, but when I restart, it still says "no driver installed".

Hopefully with time it will get figured out. ;)

Did they ever say Windows 7 was supported?

i understand that technically Vista drivers work 90% of the time for 7 wich is what we have all been using for 7 but originally only XP was supported under bootcamp,

vista came later, and most machines except for MBP's,Mac Pro's and Xserves didn't have official 64bit bootcamp driver support wether they are 64bit processors not,

so i can't immagine that apple would support 7 before its official release

[PyX]

I swear to God it was a footprint of 6GB less, and now it's 7. Same for Time Machine, pretty sure it was up to 50% faster, now it's up to 80% faster. :)

The rest has also been updated, I didn't remember all those statistics by heart unfortunately.

[thefarewellnote]

I swear to God it was a footprint of 6GB less, and now it's 7. Same for Time Machine, pretty sure it was up to 50% faster, now it's up to 80% faster. :)

The rest has also been updated, I didn't remember all those statistics by heart unfortunately.

You are correct on both of those. I just noticed them too!

[Cldmani]

Yea, the Bootcamp drivers do exist, and I think QuickTime X might just not have preferences. QuickTime X is supposed to be very simple: watch movies and simple video editing (trimming).

Ah I see, that would explain it. Thank you for correcting me, and I apologize for being wrong. =(

[saxondale.]

Will they stock the upgrade copy in shops?

[Phantom Helix]

maybe apple stores

the installed footprint for 10a421a with all install options turned off has grown from around 6gb to around 8gb+ with 10a432, i don't remember what the smallest size you could get 10.5 down to was

[Quillz]

maybe apple stores

the installed footprint for 10a421a with all install options turned off has grown from around 6gb to around 8gb+ with 10a432, i don't remember what the smallest size you could get 10.5 down to was

With 10A432, the only extra items I installed were local printer drivers. The total install came to around 9.3 GB, which I presume is still 6+ GB smaller than what it would have taken for a Leopard installation.

[giga Veteran]

maybe apple stores

the installed footprint for 10a421a with all install options turned off has grown from around 6gb to around 8gb+ with 10a432, i don't remember what the smallest size you could get 10.5 down to was

10A432 with everything unchecked is 3.81GB for me. With popular printer drivers, 4.49GB.

[AltecXP]

10.5 says it is 6GB with all install options off.

[Quillz]

10A432 with everything unchecked is 3.81GB for me. With popular printer drivers, 4.49GB.

On both my iMac and MacBook, it came out to 9.3 GB, and I have the exact same configuration as you.

Any idea why my installation is so much larger? Maybe it depends on whether you're doing a clean install or an upgrade from Leopard.

[Brendando]

4.49GB? That'll do. That'll do nicely :).

And, for what it's worth, I'm doing a clean install- I just think everything will be that much leaner/meaner/faster/snappier :). Pumped that it's out on the 28th- I think I'll pre-order from Apple and hopefully be installing it on the day :D.

[Xero]

^ Likewise. Although you don't HAVE to clean install with OSX. It's more convenient than it is for Windows users, I still prefer a clean install. Call me old fashioned but thats the way a new OS has got to be :)

[Phantom Helix]

On both my iMac and MacBook, it came out to 9.3 GB, and I have the exact same configuration as you.

Any idea why my installation is so much larger? Maybe it depends on whether you're doing a clean install or an upgrade from Leopard.

yes it is because of clean install vs upgrade, OS X installer only calculates the data size compared to what you have now even when updating apps it never calculates the total just how much more space you need than currently used

[Quillz]

yes it is because of clean install vs upgrade, OS X installer only calculates the data size compared to what you have now even when updating apps it never calculates the total just how much more space you need than currently used

Ah, that explains it. On both machines, I did a clean install (as always, I never trust upgrades.) So that's why it's 9+ GB. I guess when doing a Leopard upgrade, you already have all the kernel and system files in place.

[Cldmani]

Just to let everyone know, I did a bit of digging and found out that the Mac Mini come with Snow Leopard Build 10A436. so it looks like 10A432 wasn't the final build.

Source: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php...356&page=15

EDIT: This is a rumor, not a fact.....yet.

[thefarewellnote]

Just to let everyone know, apparently the Mac Mini come with Snow Leopard Build 10A436. so it looks like 10A432 wasn't the final build.

Source: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php...356&page=15

I call fake on that. There has been numerous claims that 10a435 was the final build as well. Nothing but fakes

There is a great article over at ZDNet about it right now here it is

There has been a lot of speculation that build 10A432 was declared as the Golden Master (a.k.a. GM) of Snow Leopard. The problem is that no one seems to know for sure.

A tweet by John Reid (later deleted) states that 10A435 is GM and that it will be available on the Apple Developer Connection Web site Monday (today). According to Reid the 10A435 build has a new intro movie.

9-to-5 Mac has posted alleged SL screen shots that show it as build 10A435 ? with social media integration in Address Book to boot.

A Japanese user that appears to have received legit silk-screened Snow Leopard install media doesn?t know what build it is, although a MacRumors forum member claims that the final build is 10A436.

As of post time a new build hasn?t been posted to Apple?s ADC site (it still has 10A432), so I guess that we?ll have to wait and see.

Update - a poster on the MacNN forums notes that this type of build speculation has happened with every release of Mac OS X.

A build gets seeded that rumors say is GM. In every single case, people have brought up a newer build that is the supposed ?real GM.? In every single case the originally rumored build is the GM and not the newer build.

OS X 10.0: GM was 4K78. People swore that 4K83 would be it. Nope. In the box was 4K78.

OS X 10.1: GM was 5G64. Then 5G68 popped up in rumors. In the box was 5G64.

OS X 10.2: GM was 6C115. But rumors spoke of a ?6C115b? (?b?? Really? Apple never used those little letters in official releases). In the box was 6C115. No ?b.?

OS X 10.3: GM was 7B85. Rumors had it that the 7Cxx branch was going to be GM. Nope. In the box was 7B85.

OS X 10.4: GM was 8A428. Rumors said it?s really 8A432. In the box was 8A428.

OS X 10.5: GM was 9A581. I?m not aware of a newer build that people said was the ?real? GM. In the box was 9A581

OS X 10.6: GM was 10A432. And now we have 10A435. But what?s in the box will be 10A432.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=4747

[Cldmani]

I figured as much but I figured it would be worth the discussion. Thanks for the link thefarewellnote

[cabron]

Does anyone know if the retail disc that Apple will sell of SL require Leopard Install disc? Because it is suppose to be an upgrade retail disc.

[LingeringSoul]

$35 CDN is a lot lower than I expected it to be. I just bought a new MacBook Pro last week, and so I have the voucher to get Snow Leopard for $13 CDN. As it turns out, that's not as much money saved as I anticipated.

Hopefully the upgrade goes smoothly. I just finished installing all of my programs, restoring all of my music, and organizing all of my documents. I don't have the patience to go through it all again with a clean install :).

[rajputwarrior]

i just ordered it, 39 bucks total with tax canadian, how could i not? Reading all over the web peoples experience with it so far and it seems pretty positive.

A lot of people seem to be having issues booting with the 64 bit kernel, mainly because their EFI doesn't support it.

To see if you mac will go into terminal and type in

ioreg -l -p IODeviceTree | grep firmware-abi

If it says EFI64 bit you are good to go, if it says EFI32 then it's not going to work for you.