Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #98531 > unrolled thread

Best version of OS X for an older iMac?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-11 19:58 +0000
    Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2017-01-11 15:11 -0500
    Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-11 15:15 -0500
      Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> - 2017-01-12 11:36 +0000
        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2017-01-12 05:11 -0700
        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-12 10:16 -0500
          Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-01-13 11:06 +1300
            Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-13 04:48 +0000
              Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-01-14 00:06 +1300
                Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-13 16:50 +0000
                  Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-13 11:58 -0500
                  Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-01-13 16:59 +0000
                    Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-13 18:12 +0000
                      Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-01-14 10:06 +1300
                        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-01-14 01:12 +0000
                        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-16 20:38 +0000
                          Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-01-16 21:55 +0000
                            Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-01-16 17:29 -0500
                          Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-01-17 12:18 +1300
                          Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2017-01-16 23:25 -0500
                            Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-01-17 18:25 +1300
                              Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-02-04 21:30 +0000
                                Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-02-06 14:04 +1300
                            Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-17 05:55 +0000
                  Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2017-01-14 11:35 +1100
        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-01-12 22:05 +0000
    Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-01-11 21:14 +0000
      Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-13 05:13 +0000
        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2017-01-13 18:31 +1100
        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-01-13 15:15 +0000
          Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-13 18:11 +0000
            Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-01-14 10:06 +1300
              Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2017-01-13 23:43 +0000
    Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-01-12 05:32 +0000
    Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? android <here@there.was> - 2017-01-12 08:40 +0100
      Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? Fred McKenzie <fmmck@aol.com> - 2017-01-12 11:19 -0500
        Re: Best version of OS X for an older iMac? android <here@there.was> - 2017-01-12 19:29 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#98708

John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> wrote:

> On 1/16/17 3:38 PM, Patty Winter wrote:
> > Just to verify, a TM backup made by Snow Leopard will still be fully
> > readable by El Capitan or Sierra, right? There's no index whose format
> > has changed in recent years or anything like that?
> 
> You could use CarbonCopyCloner or SuperDuper to create a 
> cloned backup instead.

As already discussed, that's a good idea anyway. Yet another reason is
that it can be booted if you need to run Snow Leopard for some reason,
whereas you can't boot into an old system on a Time Machine backup (you
have to restore it somewhere first).

> It would be "readable" and importable by any version of the 
> Setup Assistant or Migration Assistant...

Readable, yes. Importable by Setup/Migration Assistant only for OS
versions which still support the older OS version as a source for
migration.

Snow Leopard is definitely supported as a source for migration up to El
Capitan (I've done a Snow Leopard to El Capitan migration). This Apple
support article updated in December 2016 implies it still works for
Sierra (I haven't tried yet):

https://support.apple.com/HT204350

Sierra dropped support for upgrading directly from Snow Leopard (you
have to upgrade to any of Lion through El Capitan first, then to
Sierra).

At some point, a future major macOS version will probably drop support
for migrating from a Snow Leopard system.

The historic pattern (from 10.6.x to 10.9.x) was that migration only
supported the three previous major OS versions as a source, e.g. Lion
10.7 can migrate from a Tiger 10.4 system (using a directly connected
drive or Firewire target mode), but not from a Panther 10.3 system.

The minimum source OS version for migration was held at 10.6.8 for
Yosemite 10.10 and El Capitan 10.11 (and Sierra 10.12, if the Apple
article has been correctly updated). This means the migration framework
has a growing set of code variants to deal with an increasing number of
older system versions. In some future OS version, Apple will want to
stop updating/maintaining that old conversion code, which will raise the
minimum source OS version for migration.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#99482

In article <1n00cpx.1s57qtw17nq03bN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
>
>Snow Leopard is definitely supported as a source for migration up to El
>Capitan (I've done a Snow Leopard to El Capitan migration). This Apple
>support article updated in December 2016 implies it still works for
>Sierra (I haven't tried yet):
>
>https://support.apple.com/HT204350

This one says you need at least Lion to move up to Sierra:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201475

>Sierra dropped support for upgrading directly from Snow Leopard (you
>have to upgrade to any of Lion through El Capitan first, then to
>Sierra).

Oh, okay, sounded like you were saying earlier that Apple was now
saying that one could go directly from SL to Sierra.

I have downloaded the El Cap installer, so after I'm sure that I
have all of my ducks lined up (see new thread about my old apps
and files), I'll run that. (I'll back up to both Time Machine and
Super Duper first.) After the machine is up and running with El Cap, 
I'll decide about upgrading to Sierra. Sound like a plan?


Patty

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#99647

Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:

> In article <1n00cpx.1s57qtw17nq03bN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
> David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> >
> >Snow Leopard is definitely supported as a source for migration up to El
> >Capitan (I've done a Snow Leopard to El Capitan migration). This Apple
> >support article updated in December 2016 implies it still works for
> >Sierra (I haven't tried yet):
> >
> >https://support.apple.com/HT204350
> 
> This one says you need at least Lion to move up to Sierra:
> 
> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201475

That is talking about the requirements for running the installer or
upgrading an existing system, not migration.

If booted from an existing system, you can't run the Sierra installer
unless your current system is Lion or later.

If you set up a bootable Sierra installer, the same rule applies: it
will not allow installation to proceed if the target drive contains a
Snow Leopard or earlier system (it works if there is no OS on the target
drive, or the drive contains Lion or later).

Upgrading can be done in multiple steps, by installing an intermediate
version, then installing the version you want to run (e.g. Snow Leopard
to El Capitan, then El Capitan to Sierra). Obviously both systems must
support upgrades from the previously installed version.

Migration (using Setup Assistant or Migration Assistant) is different:
it doesn't involve installing software on top of an existing system. It
requires an already installed copy of the new OS, and only tries to copy
applications, data and settings from the old system on a different drive
or volume.

There are compatibility restrictions because the migration framework in
the new system needs to include code to convert files used by the
specific version of the old system. For example, the migration framework
needs to understand and be able to convert the file and database
structures used by specific older versions of Mail, Contacts (Address
Book) and Calendar (iCal). Apple only includes that code for a limited
range of previous OS versions.

There are cases where the version requirements are different for
migration and upgrade, e.g. Mountain Lion (10.8) can upgrade Snow
Leopard (10.6) or Lion (10.7), but it can also migrate from Leopard
(10.5). If you wanted to upgrade from Leopard to Mountain Lion (rather
than migrate), it would be necessary to upgrade to Snow Leopard first,
then upgrade to Mountain Lion.

> >Sierra dropped support for upgrading directly from Snow Leopard (you
> >have to upgrade to any of Lion through El Capitan first, then to
> >Sierra).
> 
> Oh, okay, sounded like you were saying earlier that Apple was now
> saying that one could go directly from SL to Sierra.

No, I said that Apple's article <https://support.apple.com/HT204350>
implied (without saying so explicitly) that it was possible to _migrate_
directly from Snow Leopard (10.6.8) to Sierra (10.12). The article says
nothing about upgrading.

The article describes migration for Mavericks (10.9) and later, doesn't
mention Sierra explicitly, but was updated after Apple released Sierra.
It says that Snow Leopard 10.6.8 is the minimum system on the source
drive.

I've now tried it, and it appears Sierra can indeed migrate from Snow
Leopard. I had a Mac running Sierra (10.12.3) connected via Firewire to
another Mac running Snow Leopard (10.6.8) in target disk mode, and
Migration Assistant in Sierra was willing to migrate from the Snow
Leopard system.

(I didn't actually proceed with the migration so I don't know if it
would have run into problems, but it goes through all the preparation
stages. My first attempt failed - for some reason, the other Mac's drive
didn't appear at all in the list of source drives, even though it was
already mounted, but it worked on a subsequent attempt.)

> I have downloaded the El Cap installer, so after I'm sure that I
> have all of my ducks lined up (see new thread about my old apps
> and files), I'll run that. (I'll back up to both Time Machine and
> Super Duper first.) After the machine is up and running with El Cap, 
> I'll decide about upgrading to Sierra. Sound like a plan?

Yes.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98709

In article <W0hfA.8517$Tc2.1720@fx38.iad>,
John Albert  <j.albert@snet.net> wrote:
>On 1/16/17 3:38 PM, Patty Winter wrote:
>> Just to verify, a TM backup made by Snow Leopard will still be fully
>> readable by El Capitan or Sierra, right? There's no index whose format
>> has changed in recent years or anything like that?
>
>You could use CarbonCopyCloner or SuperDuper to create a 
>cloned backup instead.

Thanks, I saw JR's recommendation of SD and have already downloaded it.


Patty

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98623

In article <o5b0gt$rik$1@dont-email.me>,
 Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:

> 
> In article <1mztdwq.wetz8911a7t02N%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
> David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> >
> >As always, make sure you have a full backup of your Snow Leopard system
> >before starting the upgrades, in case something goes wrong and you need
> >to roll back to where you started.
> 
> What's the best way to make a full backup that can be restored properly?

Back up to a separate external HD (using, for example, SuperDuper).

-- 
dorayme

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98572

In message <o57por$s7j$1@remote5bge0.ripco.com> Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> sierra

> Great answer but for her isn't it a two step process?

> She has to get El Capitan installed, then sierra?

I thought not, but I do see some comments about this on google, so
maybe?

I haven't found an official statement from Apple.

Ah, did find it on a part of a page that is not revealed by default.

<http://www.apple.com/macos/how-to-upgrade/> and click on "Have an old
version of OS X"

<<<EOT
Have an older version of OS X? Learn how to upgrade

Upgrading from previous versions of OS X
Upgrading from OS X Snow Leopard
If you’re running Snow Leopard (10.6.8) and your Mac supports macOS
Sierra, you will need to upgrade to El Capitan first. 

EOT

-- 
Reality is a curve. That's not the problem. The problem is that there
isn't as much as there should be. According to some of the more mystical
texts in the stacks of the library of Unseen University - (...) - at
least nine-tenths of all the original reality ever created lies outside
the multiverse, and since the multiverse by definition includes
absolutely everything that is anything, this puts a bit of a strain on
things. --Moving Pictures

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98534

Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
> This is long-range planning, but what version of OS X could I
> reasonably expect to run on a mid-2011 iMac? Here are the specs
> on it:
> 
> PROCESSOR	065-0248	2.7GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
> MEMORY	        065-0251	4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
> HARD DRIVE	065-0255	1TB Serial ATA Drive
> GRAPHICS	065-8998	AMD RadeonHD 6770M 512MB GDDR5
> 
> I'm currently running 10.6.8 and won't upgrade until I'm confident
> that I've satisfactorily replaced all the Rosetta apps I currently
> use. I don't care if I can't take the iMac up to 10.12; I have my
> MacBook to handle anything that needs the latest OS. I'm concerned
> that OS X might have kept getting bigger and more processor-intensive 
> and thus there might be a sweet spot with a version that has the 
> post-10.6 framework but will run better than the latest versions.
> Or maybe I'm wrong and the latest versions are lean and will run
> fine on an older iMac. Looking for guidance on that.
> 
> FYI, I have Lion available. I got it (free) just after I got the iMac.

That model can run the latest. I'd recommend upgrading. You should consider
upgrading the RAM to 8GB though, since with 4GB of RAM the machine will
swap to disk enough to impact performance. Adding RAM to iMacs is typically
very easy (open a door on the bottom, plug in new RAM, close the door). If
you get the model number you can look up instructions on iFixit.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98593

In article <ednlibFhb65U1@mid.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger  <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>That model can run the latest. I'd recommend upgrading. You should consider
>upgrading the RAM to 8GB though, since with 4GB of RAM the machine will
>swap to disk enough to impact performance. Adding RAM to iMacs is typically
>very easy (open a door on the bottom, plug in new RAM, close the door). If
>you get the model number you can look up instructions on iFixit.

Wow, even Apple's website shows how to do it!

Apparently the computer currently has two 2GB RAM chips. If I'm reading
the Apple support page correctly:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201191

I have two empty slots available. So the easiest solution would be to
add two more 2GB chips, right? Or else I could take out the two old ones 
and install four 4GB chips for 16GB? Looks like I could do that for about 
$100-130. (All four chips have to be the same size, right? E.g., I can't 
keep 2GB chips in the top slots and add 4GB chips in the bottom?)


Patty

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98597

In article <o59nm9$uds$1@dont-email.me>,
 Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:

> Apparently the computer currently has two 2GB RAM chips

I wouldn't run lemonade stall on that little.

-- 
dorayme

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98608

Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
> 
> In article <ednlibFhb65U1@mid.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger  <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>> That model can run the latest. I'd recommend upgrading. You should consider
>> upgrading the RAM to 8GB though, since with 4GB of RAM the machine will
>> swap to disk enough to impact performance. Adding RAM to iMacs is typically
>> very easy (open a door on the bottom, plug in new RAM, close the door). If
>> you get the model number you can look up instructions on iFixit.
> 
> Wow, even Apple's website shows how to do it!
> 
> Apparently the computer currently has two 2GB RAM chips. If I'm reading
> the Apple support page correctly:
> 
> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201191

Which particular model is it? You never said.

> I have two empty slots available. So the easiest solution would be to
> add two more 2GB chips, right? Or else I could take out the two old ones 
> and install four 4GB chips for 16GB? Looks like I could do that for about 
> $100-130. (All four chips have to be the same size, right? E.g., I can't 
> keep 2GB chips in the top slots and add 4GB chips in the bottom?)

They should all be the same size and speed for best performance. I'd
probably go ahead and max it out at that price.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98615

In article <eds97rFl1b8U1@mid.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger  <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Apparently the computer currently has two 2GB RAM chips. If I'm reading
>> the Apple support page correctly:
>> 
>> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201191
>
>Which particular model is it? You never said.

You mean this?

Part Number: Z0M6


>> I have two empty slots available. So the easiest solution would be to
>> add two more 2GB chips, right? Or else I could take out the two old ones 
>> and install four 4GB chips for 16GB? Looks like I could do that for about 
>> $100-130. (All four chips have to be the same size, right? E.g., I can't 
>> keep 2GB chips in the top slots and add 4GB chips in the bottom?)
>
>They should all be the same size and speed for best performance. I'd
>probably go ahead and max it out at that price.

Apparently "maxing out" on this one is 32MB, but I doubt I need that.


Patty

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98619

Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:

> In article <eds97rFl1b8U1@mid.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger  <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Apparently the computer currently has two 2GB RAM chips. If I'm reading
> >> the Apple support page correctly:
> >> 
> >> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201191
> >
> >Which particular model is it? You never said.
> 
> You mean this?
> 
> Part Number: Z0M6

That doesn't mean anything to me.

You mentioned a "Mid 2011 iMac" in the original post. The 21.5-inch and
27-inch models take the same type of memory (PC3-10600 or DDR3-1333
SO-DIMM) and have the same number of slots (4).

If you want to be precise about the model, go into Apple Menu, About
This Mac, More Info (which runs System Profiler), then tell us the
"Model Identifier".

It will be one of these for a Mid 2011 iMac:

iMac12,1
iMac12,2

The former is the 21.5-inch model, the latter is the 27-inch model.

> >> I have two empty slots available. So the easiest solution would be to
> >> add two more 2GB chips, right? Or else I could take out the two old ones
> >> and install four 4GB chips for 16GB? Looks like I could do that for about
> >> $100-130. (All four chips have to be the same size, right? E.g., I can't
> >> keep 2GB chips in the top slots and add 4GB chips in the bottom?)
> >
> >They should all be the same size and speed for best performance. I'd
> >probably go ahead and max it out at that price.
> 
> Apparently "maxing out" on this one is 32MB, but I doubt I need that.

Matched pairs of memory slots should have the same memory type for best
performance, but you can have mixed sizes in different pairs of slots
without a perforamnce penalty. (As you already have two modules, note
which slots they are in, as that will be a matched pair - for a 4-slot
iMac the matched pairs are "front" and "back", not "left" and "right".)

If two 8 GB modules are a similar price to four 4 GB modules, then
getting two 8 GB modules to add to your existing 2x2GB would max out
half the memory slots, giving you a total of 20 GB of memory and saving
some money should you later decide to upgrade to the full 32 GB.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98622

In article <1mzu67w.19qlf4j1nawocnN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
>Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
>> In article <eds97rFl1b8U1@mid.individual.net>,
>> Jolly Roger  <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Which particular model is it? You never said.
>> 
>> You mean this?
>> 
>> Part Number: Z0M6
>
>It will be one of these for a Mid 2011 iMac:
>
>iMac12,1
>iMac12,2
>
>The former is the 21.5-inch model, the latter is the 27-inch model.

Oh, well, that's easy, because it's a 27-inch Mac. 


>Matched pairs of memory slots should have the same memory type for best
>performance, but you can have mixed sizes in different pairs of slots
>without a perforamnce penalty. 

Okay, thanks.


Patty

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98542

In message <o562pd$2kq$1@dont-email.me> 
  Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
> This is long-range planning, but what version of OS X could I
> reasonably expect to run on a mid-2011 iMac?

The latest version that will run is 10.12, and that is the version you
should run.

The answer to this question is *always* "the latest possible version
supported".


-- 
If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98546

In article <o562pd$2kq$1@dont-email.me>,
 Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:

> This is long-range planning, but what version of OS X could I
> reasonably expect to run on a mid-2011 iMac? Here are the specs
> on it:
> 
> PROCESSOR       065-0248        2.7GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
> MEMORY          065-0251        4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
> HARD DRIVE      065-0255        1TB Serial ATA Drive
> GRAPHICS        065-8998        AMD RadeonHD 6770M 512MB GDDR5
> 
> I'm currently running 10.6.8 and won't upgrade until I'm confident
> that I've satisfactorily replaced all the Rosetta apps I currently
> use. I don't care if I can't take the iMac up to 10.12; I have my
> MacBook to handle anything that needs the latest OS. I'm concerned
> that OS X might have kept getting bigger and more processor-intensive 
> and thus there might be a sweet spot with a version that has the 
> post-10.6 framework but will run better than the latest versions.
> Or maybe I'm wrong and the latest versions are lean and will run
> fine on an older iMac. Looking for guidance on that.
> 
> FYI, I have Lion available. I got it (free) just after I got the iMac.
> 
> 
> Patty

You could clone the system to a spinner and boot that for legacy apps 
and upgrade the existing system for your daily chores.
-- 
teleportation kills

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98554

In article <here-91F1DF.08402912012017@news.individual.net>,
 android <here@there.was> wrote:

> In article <o562pd$2kq$1@dont-email.me>,
>  Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
> 
> > This is long-range planning, but what version of OS X could I
> > reasonably expect to run on a mid-2011 iMac? Here are the specs
> > on it:
> > 
> > PROCESSOR       065-0248        2.7GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
> > MEMORY          065-0251        4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
> > HARD DRIVE      065-0255        1TB Serial ATA Drive
> > GRAPHICS        065-8998        AMD RadeonHD 6770M 512MB GDDR5
> > 
> > I'm currently running 10.6.8 and won't upgrade until I'm confident
> > that I've satisfactorily replaced all the Rosetta apps I currently
> > use. I don't care if I can't take the iMac up to 10.12; I have my
> > MacBook to handle anything that needs the latest OS. I'm concerned
> > that OS X might have kept getting bigger and more processor-intensive 
> > and thus there might be a sweet spot with a version that has the 
> > post-10.6 framework but will run better than the latest versions.
> > Or maybe I'm wrong and the latest versions are lean and will run
> > fine on an older iMac. Looking for guidance on that.
> > 
> > FYI, I have Lion available. I got it (free) just after I got the iMac.
> > 
> > 
> > Patty
> 
> You could clone the system to a spinner and boot that for legacy apps 
> and upgrade the existing system for your daily chores.

It is possible to add a partition to your hard drive without messing up 
its current system installation.  That is what I have done in order to 
run some older Apps.  The main partition has the latest system and the 
second smaller partition has Snow Leopard.  By holding down the Option 
key when booting, you can choose to boot from the secondary partition.

In your case, you could clone 10.6.8 to a smaller partition, and then 
upgrade the latest system on the larger partition as Android suggested.

Fred

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#98559

In article <fmmck-356337.11190912012017@46.sub-75-242-165.myvzw.com>,
 Fred McKenzie <fmmck@aol.com> wrote:

> In article <here-91F1DF.08402912012017@news.individual.net>,
>  android <here@there.was> wrote:
> 
> > In article <o562pd$2kq$1@dont-email.me>,
> >  Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > This is long-range planning, but what version of OS X could I
> > > reasonably expect to run on a mid-2011 iMac? Here are the specs
> > > on it:
> > > 
> > > PROCESSOR       065-0248        2.7GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
> > > MEMORY          065-0251        4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
> > > HARD DRIVE      065-0255        1TB Serial ATA Drive
> > > GRAPHICS        065-8998        AMD RadeonHD 6770M 512MB GDDR5
> > > 
> > > I'm currently running 10.6.8 and won't upgrade until I'm confident
> > > that I've satisfactorily replaced all the Rosetta apps I currently
> > > use. I don't care if I can't take the iMac up to 10.12; I have my
> > > MacBook to handle anything that needs the latest OS. I'm concerned
> > > that OS X might have kept getting bigger and more processor-intensive 
> > > and thus there might be a sweet spot with a version that has the 
> > > post-10.6 framework but will run better than the latest versions.
> > > Or maybe I'm wrong and the latest versions are lean and will run
> > > fine on an older iMac. Looking for guidance on that.
> > > 
> > > FYI, I have Lion available. I got it (free) just after I got the iMac.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Patty
> > 
> > You could clone the system to a spinner and boot that for legacy apps 
> > and upgrade the existing system for your daily chores.
> 
> It is possible to add a partition to your hard drive without messing up 
> its current system installation.  That is what I have done in order to 
> run some older Apps.  The main partition has the latest system and the 
> second smaller partition has Snow Leopard.  By holding down the Option 
> key when booting, you can choose to boot from the secondary partition.
> 
> In your case, you could clone 10.6.8 to a smaller partition, and then 
> upgrade the latest system on the larger partition as Android suggested.
> 
> Fred

One might ad that if you use a tool like "Carbon Copy Cloner" so you'll 
get rather good control over that that will be cloned so that documents 
and media can stay put on the main partition without duplications.

Edit: Repartitioning a live hard drive, with existing data is difficult 
and could possibly wipe it. I would still recommend an external drive!
-- 
teleportation kills

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web