No surprise there... CS2 was a powerPC application that ran under Rosetta on Intel Macs. Since Snow Leopard doesn't support PowerPC, I wouldn't expect it to be compatible. A bigger issue is CS3. Adobe doesn't officially support it or claim compatibility, but I would expect it to run. There are reports of some bugs, though. Intel versions of Elements (particularly the current version) should be fine.
From TUAW: "Applications which run under Rosetta provide slower performance than their universal binary counterparts because the CPU has to translate Intel instructions into PowerPC, so developers definitely had an incentive to switch to universal binaries. With four years having passed since the Intel transition, almost all applications for the Mac now run under a universal binary, which makes Rosetta largely unnecessary-hence its inclusion in OS X Snow Leopard as an optional installation.
So, why not save some space on your hard drive and leave Rosetta out? Well, if you do that, any applications you have that still have PowerPC only code won't run at all. (Update: Apparently Rosetta will download on demand if you try to run a PowerPC-only application.)"
This surprises me as CS3 isn't really all that old and with the cost of updating it seems like a cheap way out for Adobe (read money making) and an expensive way for the user.
I was surprised with Elements though since it seems to be widely used.
So, why not save some space on your hard drive and leave Rosetta out? Well, if you do that, any applications you have that still have PowerPC only code won't run at all. (Update: Apparently Rosetta will download on demand if you try to run a PowerPC-only application.)"
I was wondering how they managed to cut down the install size of the OS by so much...
Rosetta is actually not that big and the savings did not come from from making that an optional install. Most of the footprint savings is down to file-system compression of read-only system files.
I appologize for the noob question, but I'm on my first mac and haven't yet been through and OS upgrade.
Will installing the new mac OS result in needing to re-install everything, i.e. cs3, lightroom, setting up boot camp again, etc etc? Or is it fairly seamless?
On my old PC, any new OS install resulted in a reformat.
just curious - we have one mac in the house ( running fine on the originally installed OS i forget which animal it is ) - but why does apple release a new OS every year ?
and charge a fair bit for it.
it seems with each release people jump all over it ( top spot on amazon this past week... ) like it's the best thing ever ( sort of like ipods ).
just curious - we have one mac in the house ( running fine on the originally installed OS i forget which animal it is ) - but why does apple release a new OS every year ?
and charge a fair bit for it.
it seems with each release people jump all over it ( top spot on amazon this past week... ) like it's the best thing ever ( sort of like ipods ).
then complain about compatibilty issues...
i don't get it.
Every 2 years, roughly. Compatibility issues also often stem from attempting to run newer software in old operating systems. Novelty, especially as far as the Mac OS is concerned, extends to functionality and stability. While the introduction of new features might appear to be aesthetically motivated, the apparent emphasis on aesthetics we have come to expect from Apple is, in fact, the result of a rigorous focus on functionality or, if you like, our experience of functionality. This is reminiscent of Bauhaus ("Form is Function") and, in my view, the secret and pervasive ingredient in the myth. Of course, innovation needs to also address the pace at which technology changes. Systems are becoming increasingly more open and accessible. Vulnerabilities and compatibility issues, unknown yesterday or within relatively closed systems, can either be patched or, to some degree, prevented. The ideal time to do this is yesterday, which is too late. If Apple does it now, hey, I can only appreciate the effort.
Snow Leopard, more so than its predecessors, has very little novelty in terms of features and GUI changes. Most changes are under the hood. I would expect greater functionality, greater speed, improved stability and a timely prepping of the OS for tomorrow's challenges.
i guess you're right about trying to run new software on old operating systems ( which is usually not a matter of the OS but the hardware running it, and the newer software requiring more resources than the machine has ), at least from my experience with windows OS's. it's unfortunate you can't run old software on new operating systems though...
my opinion on that point, is that the function part of your theory is sort of non-functional...
maybe it's a matter of apple not having much of a market share, keeping their OS to only their machines, and trying to drum up revenue with a bunch of hype about nothing because of those facts... ?
just a thought.
ETA: i'm running windows vista on two machines, and have no plans to upgrade to windows 7 when it's released later this year. why ? it's $200+ x2 i have no need to spend to allow my software to run properly.
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Every 2 years, roughly. Compatibility issues also often stem from attempting to run newer software in old operating systems. Novelty, especially as far as the Mac OS is concerned, extends to functionality and stability. While the introduction of new features might appear to be aesthetically motivated, the apparent emphasis on aesthetics we have come to expect from Apple is, in fact, the result of a rigorous focus on functionality or, if you like, our experience of functionality. This is reminiscent of Bauhaus ("Form is Function") and, in my view, the secret and pervasive ingredient in the myth. Of course, innovation needs to also address the pace at which technology changes. Systems are becoming increasingly more open and accessible. Vulnerabilities and compatibility issues, unknown yesterday or within relatively closed systems, can either be patched or, to some degree, prevented. The ideal time to do this is yesterday, which is too late. If Apple does it now, hey, I can only appreciate the effort.
I don't have experience with boot camp, but I believe most applications should be fine post-upgrade of the OS.
Personally, I typically upgrade a week or two after the release, if not later on – I'll let other people find the kinks rather than me.
Originally posted by Pipe_Dream:
I appologize for the noob question, but I'm on my first mac and haven't yet been through and OS upgrade.
Will installing the new mac OS result in needing to re-install everything, i.e. cs3, lightroom, setting up boot camp again, etc etc? Or is it fairly seamless?
On my old PC, any new OS install resulted in a reformat.
maybe it's a matter of apple not having much of a market share, keeping their OS to only their machines, and trying to drum up revenue with a bunch of hype about nothing because of those facts... ?
There's more to this upgrade than hype. Leopard was already a superior OS, and Snow Leopard represents a major optimization, with significant speed increases and 7GB less disk space. Plus, it's only $29.
Will installing the new mac OS result in needing to re-install everything, i.e. cs3, lightroom, setting up boot camp again, etc etc? Or is it fairly seamless?
If your software is fairly current, it will be seamless. You shouldn't have to reinstall or configure anything.
Yes, I was running CS3 on Windows 7 before I upgraded to CS4. It ran great, as does CS4.
It not whether or not in runs in the new OS, the issue is does Adobe support their product in the new OS.
CS3 does run in Snow Leopard, as it does in Windows 7. But if you have an issue that requires you to call tech support, will Adobe refuse to help you if you are running CS3 in Snow Leopard or Windows 7?
Will installing the new mac OS result in needing to re-install everything, i.e. cs3, lightroom, setting up boot camp again, etc etc? Or is it fairly seamless?
If your software is fairly current, it will be seamless. You shouldn't have to reinstall or configure anything.
That's good to know ... I'm a brand new Mac user also!
it sounds like a service pack they are charging you for... it's 1/2 the size and $30 because you need the last OS installed ( which you purchased ).... otherwise it's $170...
it sounds like a service pack they are charging you for... it's 1/2 the size and $30 because you need the last OS installed ( which you purchased ).... otherwise it's $170...
i dunno. whatever.
If reworking almost everyting from 32 bit to 64 bit is just a service pack, then that's one heck of a service pack.
must be why it's $170 unless you already bought the previous one...
like i said - whatever, you all can make you're own choices.
form and function, i guess, if you're willing to succumb to apples' version of function, and are hip on form.
about three years ago, for $500 i got a desktop PC ( core2 duo, 2 gigs dual channel memory, 800mhz FSB, 500gig HD, memory card reader, dvd burner... etc ) that has performed flawlessly for over two years without another penny spent on OS stuff. at the same time ( in our house ) a macbook was purchased for $1200... six months later i bought a laptop PC with faster specs than my desktop for $550... those specs matched the macbooks...
it would be cheaper for me to just by a windows 7 PC with new hardware than try to keep up with apples OS BS...
