Snow Leopard UPGRADE will cost $29

[tuqqer]

I'm another Nuke and Pave fan. I like to rebuild everything from scratch, even the User account. Takes hours that first day, but I love the smell of a fresh Mac in the morning.

[M A V I C]

guitarist wrote:
If you feel you have to "Nuke and Pave" before installing an OS Update, you might have benefited from reading the instructions for the more reliable conventional methods?

I'm not really sure what you're getting at. I find that after about 18mo of heavy use, a clean install can help quite a bit.

[Bimwad]

RAMd®d wrote:
What I'm curious about if it's the *full* OS looking for a Leopard install. I'd prefer that as I'd rather not go from a .5 to .6 via an upgrade.

And though I'd probably want to do an Archive and Install, I'd settle for Nuke n Pave, as long as I didn't have to *upgrade* the installed OS.

The Puma update disc that was given away free was a full installer that only checked for an existing installation of Cheetah, and could even be hacked to be a stand-alone installer of its own.

I'm pretty sure Snow Leopard will include an option for a clean-slate install for those of us who prefer to start over with each major version change. Its space savings comes not only from stripping PPC code and code compression, but also from smart printer driver installation. I don't see why they would deny all the benefits from those who are "upgrading."

[john-o]

Thanks for the clarification RAMd®d,

I get you now...

I, for one, cannot imagine how they would pull off an updater that only worked by updating an existing 10.5.x installation. There is simply no precedent for such an approach! I suppose it's possible, but highly unlikely, imho.

Love the speculation, and I can't wait!!

[RAMd®d]

The Puma update disc that was given away free was a full installer that only checked for an existing installation of Cheetah, and could even be hacked to be a stand-alone installer of its own.

I remember that, and made the hack so I didn't have to reinstall AND upgrade.

Makes sense, Bim.

[RAMd®d]

LOL, guys, I guess I just wanted something to worry about.

Like will I be home when the FedEx guy rolls up on the 19th.

Thanks for talking me down.

[N-OS X-tasy!]

michaelb wrote:
I am shocked. Actually I can't think of another example in the past 11 years or so on this forum that Apple has so surprised on price.

10.1 was a free upgrade for users of 10.0.

[N-OS X-tasy!]

Acer wrote:
Hmm...Apple has NOT been in the habit of making two different install versions, as in "upgrade only" or "full install" on it's OSs since the pre-X days (unlike M$, but I digress). I mean, they are within their rights to, but that means supporting two different install versions, as well. What are the odds the $29 upgrade won't care?

Again I call the forum's attention to 10.1, which was released in both upgrade and full install versions. IIRC, back in the day there was quite a bit of hubbub on the internets with regard to how to convert an 10.1 upgrade CD to a full install CD.

While Apple hasn't made a habit of doing upgrade discs, there is certainly precedent.

EDIT: As Bimwad clearly stated above. Sometimes it doesn't pay to reply to a post before reading the entire thread.

[N-OS X-tasy!]

RAMd®d wrote:
I hope that the upgrade disk just looks for a valid Leopard install.

I'm betting that's all it does.

What I'm curious about if it's the *full* OS looking for a Leopard install.

That would be my guess.