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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #74531 > unrolled thread

?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5?

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

Contents

  ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-04-30 14:14 -0400
    Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-30 14:44 -0400
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 12:19 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <Warren.Oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-01 12:35 -0400
    Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-01 05:47 +0000
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-05-01 02:22 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 12:15 -0400
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-05-01 12:39 -0400
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 13:33 -0400
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2015-05-02 05:34 -0700
                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-02 14:32 -0400
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-01 23:26 +0000
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 12:12 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-01 23:28 +0000
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-05-02 11:55 +1200
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-02 16:40 +0000
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-05-03 16:20 +1200
                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-03 20:35 +0000
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-02 12:30 -0400
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-02 15:19 -0400
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-02 16:30 -0400
                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-02 17:49 -0400
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-02 22:37 +0000
                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-02 19:47 -0400
                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-03 07:43 -0400
                  Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-03 20:36 +0000
                    Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-04 11:27 -0400
                      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-05 03:25 +0000
                        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-05 07:28 -0400
                          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-05 14:40 +0000
                            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-05 11:20 -0400
                              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-05 19:53 +0000
                                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-05 16:01 -0400
                                  Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-06 01:52 +0000
                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? kevin.shirley1966@gmail.com (Kevin Shirley) - 2015-05-04 10:24 +0100
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-04 12:09 -0400
    Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Andreas Rutishauser <andreas@macandreas.ch> - 2015-05-01 09:17 +0200
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 12:25 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-05-02 11:40 +1200
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-05-01 19:51 -0400
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-02 12:22 -0400
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-05-03 16:20 +1200
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-04 11:49 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Andreas Rutishauser <andreas@macandreas.ch> - 2015-05-02 07:14 +0200
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-02 08:00 -0400
    Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-05-01 08:36 -0400
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 12:29 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-01 12:44 -0400
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 13:28 -0400
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-01 15:04 -0400
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-01 16:10 -0400
                Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-01 16:21 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-05-03 09:07 -0400
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-03 09:12 -0400
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-03 20:39 +0000
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-05-04 11:59 +1200
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-04 11:58 -0400
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-05-04 12:04 -0400
              Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-04 17:17 -0400
    Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2015-05-02 00:06 -0400
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-05-02 00:14 -0400
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-02 07:57 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-02 12:37 -0400
          Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-05-02 15:17 -0400
            Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-02 15:45 -0400
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-05-02 16:41 +0000
      Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-05-03 09:08 -0400
        Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-05-04 12:00 -0400
    Re: ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5? Electric Comet <electric-comet@mail.invalid> - 2015-05-02 20:33 -0700

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#74531 — ?Best Upgrade System for Old iMac 8,1 w/10.5?

I have some friends who have an iMac 8,1 early 2008 Intel, 4GB RAM (the 
max), and running OS 10.5. According to MacTracker, the machine will run 
up to to 10.9. They are having problems with some websites not working 
properly and demanding later versions of Safari, Flash, and other apps 
which won't run on 10.5

My question is what is the latest OS to upgrade to that won't produce a 
dead slow user experience? I'd love to recommend 10.9, but not if they 
have to take a coffee break at every webpage load or simple graphics 
operation. So 10.6, 10.7, 10.8 or 10.9?

Also, what are the mechanics of upgrading. Do they have to buy 10.6 from 
Apple for $20, install it, and then use the App Store from there for 
higher versions?

The other alternative is to just buy a new machine. Do you think this OS 
upgrading is not worth the effort?

TIA Your assistance is very much appreciated.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#74535

In article <mhtrd2$k48$1@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> 
wrote:

> My question is what is the latest OS to upgrade to that won't produce a 
> dead slow user experience? I'd love to recommend 10.9, but not if they 
> have to take a coffee break at every webpage load or simple graphics 
> operation. So 10.6, 10.7, 10.8 or 10.9?

That machine should run Yosemite. I have a 2008 MacBook Pro 4,1 with a 
2.5 GHz processor (Core 2 Duo) runs Yosemite quicker n' spit. The 
browsers (Firefox and Safari) are fast, Photoshop's fast, Office works 
just fine, networking's up to "line speed," Xtools builds stuff quickly, 
Apple Mail still sucks, and so on. If you're having slowdown problems, 
something else is wrong. I just had a terabyte HDD put in. 

You will need to install Snow Leopard

http://www.apple.com/osx/how-to-upgrade/#previous-versions

from somewhere. You could buy it from Apple.

If you're using PPC apps, they won't work. Newswatcher won't work with 
Yosemite because Open Transport is gone. There's been much moaning in 
the newsgroups and discussions of CLI alternatives. I'm moving over to 
Gnus eventually.
-- 
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing  room scene.
  -- notes for Blade Runner

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

#74601

On 4/30/15 2:44 p, Warren Oates wrote:
> In article <mhtrd2$k48$1@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org>
> wrote:
>
>> My question is what is the latest OS to upgrade to that won't produce
>> a dead slow user experience? I'd love to recommend 10.9, but not if
>> they have to take a coffee break at every webpage load or simple
>> graphics operation. So 10.6, 10.7, 10.8 or 10.9?
>
> That machine should run Yosemite. I have a 2008 MacBook Pro 4,1 with a
> 2.5 GHz processor (Core 2 Duo) runs Yosemite quicker n' spit. The
> browsers (Firefox and Safari) are fast, Photoshop's fast, Office works
> just fine, networking's up to "line speed," Xtools builds stuff quickly,
> Apple Mail still sucks, and so on. If you're having slowdown problems,
> something else is wrong. I just had a terabyte HDD put in.
> You will need to install Snow Leopard
>
> http://www.apple.com/osx/how-to-upgrade/#previous-versions
>
> from somewhere. You could buy it from Apple.

Thanks, Warren, for your very prompt response. I am quite surprised, but 
very pleased, that your MacBook Pro is still speedy under 10.10. I'll 
likely encourage them to upgrade the OS rather than buy a new one.

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

#74605

Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> writes:

:On 4/30/15 2:44 p, Warren Oates wrote:
:Thanks, Warren, for your very prompt response. I am quite surprised,
:but very pleased, that your MacBook Pro is still speedy under
:10.10. I'll likely encourage them to upgrade the OS rather than buy a
:new one.

They will get another 2 to 3 or more years out of the machine. Until
Apple decide not to support Core2 Duo machines.

Hmm. Posting on the MBP now, from Gnus.

-- 
Still Crazy

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

#74571

In message <mhtrd2$k48$1@dont-email.me> 
  Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> I have some friends who have an iMac 8,1 early 2008 Intel, 4GB RAM (the 
> max), and running OS 10.5. According to MacTracker, the machine will run 
> up to to 10.9.

It will run 10.10.

> They are having problems with some websites not working 
> properly and demanding later versions of Safari, Flash, and other apps 
> which won't run on 10.5

Update to 10.10

> My question is what is the latest OS to upgrade to

10.10

> that won't produce a dead slow user experience?

10.10

> I'd love to recommend 10.9,

No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.

> Also, what are the mechanics of upgrading. Do they have to buy 10.6 from 
> Apple for $20, install it, and then use the App Store from there for 
> higher versions?

Apple will send them 10.6.3 on a DVD which they can install, then update
to 10.6.8, then use the Mac App Store to download 10.10. There is no way
to get 10.7, 10.8, nor 10.9.

When a friend of mine called Apple, they sent him the disk for free.

They can also take the machine in to an Apple Store and get 10.6.8
installed on it, then download 10.10 if they are bandwidth starved. They
would need to make an appointment. I don't know if Apple will charge for
this or not.

> The other alternative is to just buy a new machine. Do you think this OS 
> upgrading is not worth the effort?

I always recommend a new machine, but that machine will be just fine
with 10.10.

-- 
“An idea isn't responsible for the people who believe it.” 
   ― Don Marquis

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

#74572

In article <slrnmk64tm.8m1.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> > Also, what are the mechanics of upgrading. Do they have to buy 10.6 from 
> > Apple for $20, install it, and then use the App Store from there for 
> > higher versions?
> 
> Apple will send them 10.6.3 on a DVD which they can install, then update
> to 10.6.8, then use the Mac App Store to download 10.10. There is no way
> to get 10.7, 10.8, nor 10.9.

10.7 and 10.8 are still available on the app store.

10.9 is only available on the app store if someone previously
downloaded it.

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

#74599

On 5/1/15 2:22 a, nospam wrote:
> In article <slrnmk64tm.8m1.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>> Also, what are the mechanics of upgrading. Do they have to buy 10.6 from
>>> Apple for $20, install it, and then use the App Store from there for
>>> higher versions?
>>
>> Apple will send them 10.6.3 on a DVD which they can install, then update
>> to 10.6.8, then use the Mac App Store to download 10.10. There is no way
>> to get 10.7, 10.8, nor 10.9.
>
> 10.7 and 10.8 are still available on the app store.
>
> 10.9 is only available on the app store if someone previously
> downloaded it.

Thanks, nospam. I have the installer for 10.9 which I could conceivably 
send them, but 10.10 might be easier. Lewis seems vehement that 10.9 
should not be used.

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

#74606

In article <mi08o5$4uo$2@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org>
wrote:
> >>> Also, what are the mechanics of upgrading. Do they have to buy 10.6 from
> >>> Apple for $20, install it, and then use the App Store from there for
> >>> higher versions?
> >>
> >> Apple will send them 10.6.3 on a DVD which they can install, then update
> >> to 10.6.8, then use the Mac App Store to download 10.10. There is no way
> >> to get 10.7, 10.8, nor 10.9.
> >
> > 10.7 and 10.8 are still available on the app store.
> >
> > 10.9 is only available on the app store if someone previously
> > downloaded it.
> 
> Thanks, nospam. I have the installer for 10.9 which I could conceivably 
> send them, 

you do realize it's tied to your apple id, right?

> but 10.10 might be easier. Lewis seems vehement that 10.9 
> should not be used.

he says a lot of things. sometimes they're valid, sometimes not so much.

10.9 is fine. 10.10 is better in some ways and worse in others, but
either one is ok.

in fact 10.8 is also fine (although not free), but apps are starting to
no longer support it so it's probably not the best choice going
forward.

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

#74613

On 5/1/15 12:39 p, nospam wrote:
> In article <mi08o5$4uo$2@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org>
> wrote:
>>>>> Also, what are the mechanics of upgrading. Do they have to buy 10.6 from
>>>>> Apple for $20, install it, and then use the App Store from there for
>>>>> higher versions?
>>>>
>>>> Apple will send them 10.6.3 on a DVD which they can install, then update
>>>> to 10.6.8, then use the Mac App Store to download 10.10. There is no way
>>>> to get 10.7, 10.8, nor 10.9.
>>>
>>> 10.7 and 10.8 are still available on the app store.
>>>
>>> 10.9 is only available on the app store if someone previously
>>> downloaded it.
>>
>> Thanks, nospam. I have the installer for 10.9 which I could conceivably
>> send them,
>
> you do realize it's tied to your apple id, right?

Well, evidently not entirely. I have posted instructions in a response 
to Warren. Basically either remove the _MASreceipt from the installer or 
backup at the right place in the initial account creation sequence and 
enter a new AppleID. Haven't done either myself.

>> but 10.10 might be easier. Lewis seems vehement that 10.9
>> should not be used.
>
> he says a lot of things. sometimes they're valid, sometimes not so much.
>
> 10.9 is fine. 10.10 is better in some ways and worse in others, but
> either one is ok.

Thanks, that's good to know.

> in fact 10.8 is also fine (although not free), but apps are starting to
> no longer support it so it's probably not the best choice going
> forward.

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

#74672

...
>>> Thanks, nospam. I have the installer for 10.9 which I could conceivably
>>> send them,
>>
>> you do realize it's tied to your apple id, right?
>
> Well, evidently not entirely. I have posted instructions in a response
> to Warren. Basically either remove the _MASreceipt from the installer or
> backup at the right place in the initial account creation sequence and
> enter a new AppleID. Haven't done either myself.

Can you please kindly post these instructions for those who missed them?
-- 
"What, like I had to live with all those ants? Do you know what I did to 
those ants? HoooHooo! No more ants!" --unknown
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )              Chop ANT from its address if e-mailing privately.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

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

#74703

On 5/2/15 8:34 a, Ant wrote:
> ...
>>>> Thanks, nospam. I have the installer for 10.9 which I could conceivably
>>>> send them,
>>>
>>> you do realize it's tied to your apple id, right?
>>
>> Well, evidently not entirely. I have posted instructions in a response
>> to Warren. Basically either remove the _MASreceipt from the installer or
>> backup at the right place in the initial account creation sequence and
>> enter a new AppleID. Haven't done either myself.
>
> Can you please kindly post these instructions for those who missed them?
Here you go:

I haven't tried this myself, but according to a couple of posts on 
Macintouch, after you have captured the installer:

4/29/2014
<http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/mavericks/topic5002-013.html#d29apr2014>
You can remove the Apple ID information from any App Store file by 
control-clicking the installer or the app to view the contents and then 
deleting the file "_MASReceipt", after which the Store will not ask for 
the Apple ID. The downside of doing that is that it may not recognize 
software you have purchased as yours and will not provide normal updates.

or

10/31/2014
<http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/yosemite/topic5009-003.html#d31oct2014>
However, I have found that you can change the Apple ID during the 
installation process. Once the computer has rebooted into the freshly 
installed OS, you have to go through the initial setup (select country 
and keyboard layout, create computer account, etc.). Once you get to the 
step to create your user account, click on the back button. This takes 
you to a screen to sign in with your Apple ID.

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

#74637

In message <mi08o5$4uo$2@dont-email.me> 
  Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> On 5/1/15 2:22 a, nospam wrote:
>> In article <slrnmk64tm.8m1.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>>> Also, what are the mechanics of upgrading. Do they have to buy 10.6 from
>>>> Apple for $20, install it, and then use the App Store from there for
>>>> higher versions?
>>>
>>> Apple will send them 10.6.3 on a DVD which they can install, then update
>>> to 10.6.8, then use the Mac App Store to download 10.10. There is no way
>>> to get 10.7, 10.8, nor 10.9.
>>
>> 10.7 and 10.8 are still available on the app store.
>>
>> 10.9 is only available on the app store if someone previously
>> downloaded it.

> Thanks, nospam. I have the installer for 10.9 which I could conceivably 
> send them, but 10.10 might be easier. Lewis seems vehement that 10.9 
> should not be used.

Not Should not, exactly; there is no reason to use 10.9.


-- 
Criticizing evolutionary theory because Darwin was limited is like
claiming computers don't work because Chuck Babbage didn't foresee Duke
Nukem 3.

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

#74598

On 5/1/15 1:47 a, Lewis wrote:
> No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.

Lewis, would you care to explain why this is the case? I'm still running 
10.9 because so very many folks _hate_ 10.10, both because of Yawny 
Jive's interface and as well as performance and bug issues.
Thanks.

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

#74638

In message <mi08ju$4uo$1@dont-email.me> 
  Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> On 5/1/15 1:47 a, Lewis wrote:
>> No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.

> Lewis, would you care to explain why this is the case? I'm still running 
> 10.9

Two reasons

1) All 10.9 machines cna run 10.10, and 10.10 is faster and more stable

2) 10.10 fixes a pretty severe privilege escalation bug that is NOT
fixed in previous versions of the OS.

> Yawny Jive's

Yeah, I'm done talking to you now.

-- 
National Socialism is not Socialism, any more than the Black Panthers
were actually cats. @jearl

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

#74643

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <mi08ju$4uo$1@dont-email.me> 
>   Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> > On 5/1/15 1:47 a, Lewis wrote:
> >> No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.
> 
> > Lewis, would you care to explain why this is the case? I'm still running
> > 10.9
> 
> Two reasons
> 
> 1) All 10.9 machines cna run 10.10, and 10.10 is faster and more stable
> 
> 2) 10.10 fixes a pretty severe privilege escalation bug that is NOT
> fixed in previous versions of the OS.

If you referring to rootpipe, reports indicate that 10.10.3 didn't fully
fix it. It just fixed the original form of the exploit (which is known
to affect OS X 10.10.2 and earlier, at least as far back as 10.6.8).
Another security researcher reported finding another way to invoke the
same privilege escalation, which he claimed was trivially easy, but has
only published a video demo so far.

http://9to5mac.com/2015/04/21/os-x-rootpipe-vulnerability-security/

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

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

#74682

In message <1m3slsp.1oq3ikm9g1z3eN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> 
  David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <mi08ju$4uo$1@dont-email.me> 
>>   Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
>> > On 5/1/15 1:47 a, Lewis wrote:
>> >> No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.
>> 
>> > Lewis, would you care to explain why this is the case? I'm still running
>> > 10.9
>> 
>> Two reasons
>> 
>> 1) All 10.9 machines cna run 10.10, and 10.10 is faster and more stable
>> 
>> 2) 10.10 fixes a pretty severe privilege escalation bug that is NOT
>> fixed in previous versions of the OS.

> If you referring to rootpipe, reports indicate that 10.10.3 didn't fully
> fix it.

Yes, I've seen that. I've also seen Apple say these reports are wrong
and I've yet to see any evidence that the reports are not wrong.


-- 
My biggest problem is that Steve insists on serving PURPLE Kool Aid, an
I don't like PURPLE <sip sip> Kool Aid.

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

#74728

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <1m3slsp.1oq3ikm9g1z3eN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> 
>   David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> >> In message <mi08ju$4uo$1@dont-email.me> 
> >>   Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> >> > On 5/1/15 1:47 a, Lewis wrote:
> >> >> No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.
> >> 
> >> > Lewis, would you care to explain why this is the case? I'm still running
> >> > 10.9
> >> 
> >> Two reasons
> >> 
> >> 1) All 10.9 machines cna run 10.10, and 10.10 is faster and more stable
> >> 
> >> 2) 10.10 fixes a pretty severe privilege escalation bug that is NOT
> >> fixed in previous versions of the OS.
> 
> > If you referring to rootpipe, reports indicate that 10.10.3 didn't fully
> > fix it.
> 
> Yes, I've seen that. I've also seen Apple say these reports are wrong

Cite? I hadn't noticed anything like that, and Apple doesn't generally
comment publically on this sort of thing.

> and I've yet to see any evidence that the reports are not wrong.

Of course not. The claim was that the details had been sent privately to
Apple so they could fix the issue (again). We won't know until the
exploit is published, Apple issues a fix, or it takes long enough for
nothing to happen that it can be debunked as a hoax.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

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

#74777

In message <1m3ukrm.1eiiok1zlc3jbN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> 
  David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <1m3slsp.1oq3ikm9g1z3eN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> 
>>   David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
>> > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> 
>> >> In message <mi08ju$4uo$1@dont-email.me> 
>> >>   Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
>> >> > On 5/1/15 1:47 a, Lewis wrote:
>> >> >> No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.
>> >> 
>> >> > Lewis, would you care to explain why this is the case? I'm still running
>> >> > 10.9
>> >> 
>> >> Two reasons
>> >> 
>> >> 1) All 10.9 machines cna run 10.10, and 10.10 is faster and more stable
>> >> 
>> >> 2) 10.10 fixes a pretty severe privilege escalation bug that is NOT
>> >> fixed in previous versions of the OS.
>> 
>> > If you referring to rootpipe, reports indicate that 10.10.3 didn't fully
>> > fix it.
>> 
>> Yes, I've seen that. I've also seen Apple say these reports are wrong

> Cite? I hadn't noticed anything like that, and Apple doesn't generally
> comment publically on this sort of thing.

Yeah, and now I can't find it again.

>> and I've yet to see any evidence that the reports are not wrong.

> Of course not. The claim was that the details had been sent privately to
> Apple so they could fix the issue (again). We won't know until the
> exploit is published, Apple issues a fix, or it takes long enough for
> nothing to happen that it can be debunked as a hoax.

It's a shame that Apple still creates the default account as an admin
account. They should create the default account as standard and then
create and Admin account with the same password.

"When you need to do Admin tasks, type in Admin for the user name and
your login password."

So may issues would simply go away.


-- 
You are in my inappropriate thoughts

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

#74677

On 5/1/15 7:28 p, Lewis wrote:
> In message <mi08ju$4uo$1@dont-email.me>
>    Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
>> On 5/1/15 1:47 a, Lewis wrote:
>>> No one. No where. Anywhere. NO ONE, should run 10.9.
>
>> Lewis, would you care to explain why this is the case? I'm still running
>> 10.9
>
> Two reasons
>
> 1) All 10.9 machines cna run 10.10, and 10.10 is faster and more stable
>
> 2) 10.10 fixes a pretty severe privilege escalation bug that is NOT
> fixed in previous versions of the OS.
>
>> Yawny Jive's
>
> Yeah, I'm done talking to you now.

Well, Lewis, I have been using Macs since OS 4 and I have _never_ heard 
as many nor as loud complaints about a new OS as with 10.10. Some of the 
gripes are technical, but the din of grief about the interface is 
deafening. From what I've read and the pictures I seen, rightly so. One 
reason I'm still on 10.9. Sir Yawny is responsible for the unreadable 
gray-on-gray and the hidden/obscure mechanics. A triumph of form over 
function.

But you're saying you like the interface and are content to use it?

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

#74716

In article <mi2u1g$u87$1@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> 
wrote:

> 'm still on 10.9. Sir Yawny is responsible for the unreadable 
> gray-on-gray and the hidden/obscure mechanics. A triumph of form over 
> function.

Could someone post a screenshot of what is supposed to be wrong? I 
honestly haven't noticed anything weird about Yosemite.
-- 
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing  room scene.
  -- notes for Blade Runner

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

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web