Posts: 11,240
Threads: 1,205
Joined: Jun 2024
Agreed with SteveO on just about all points. If there's a technical reason it'll only work with 10.4.whatever then there you go, but they are getting a bit convoluted.
Maybe it's the fact that the new Nano does coverflow, which requires the newer version of iTunes, which requires 10.4.whatever to run. I'm not saying that's it, but everything is getting pretty cross-dependent in the system these days, which reminds me of a great quote:
"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain." (Scotty, after sabotaging the EXCELSIOR in Star Trek III)
Posts: 5,086
Threads: 1,283
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
[quote MacArtist][quote Gareth]
That is hard to buy into. If Apple can make a new Nano work on XP; then why can't it make it run on a newer (than XP) operating system?
What is it about the new Nano that will not run under 10.3.9?
It's a USB device. As long as works with iTunes and iCal (contact syncing); what else is there?
This is something that ALWAYS bugged me. Apple was still supporting Windows 2000 up until about a year or so ago. There is really no reason or excuse for Apple to NOT support 10.3.9 "IF" iTunes still runs on it. I mean, it's a F-ing USB device.
Who knows, maybe everything will work but Video on the iPod Phatty under 10.3.9.
I was on 10.3.9 up until mid/late last year. I went to the MacSwap site and located a copy of 10.4 for a G5 Tower for around $20-$30. Everyone told me to wait and buy 10.5 but it was time for me to upgrade my OS but as cheap as possible. I suggest you check out the swap site and try and locate a copy specifically for your sisters computer.
I know it's not legal or morally right... However, "IF" 10.3.9 does EVERYTHING your sister needs it to and "YOU" have a copy of 10.4 why not just load it... I'm sure I'll take tons of $h*t even suggesting that however I'm just suggesting and NOT TELLING you to do it.
Bill
Posts: 4,930
Threads: 69
Joined: May 2025
I was going to write that the OS requirement is driven by the need for a recent version of iTunes and that requires Tiger, but a little research says differently.
3rd Gen Nano requires iTunes 7.4 or later.
iTunes 7.5 requires Mac OS X 10.3.9+ or Mac OS X 10.4.7+ .
That's a puzzle to me then why the 3rd Gen Nano can't be used (at least mostly used) under 10.3.9.
How exactly did you discover that you have to use Tiger?
As mikebw asked already but was not answered, did you try to use the device and fail or are you just reading the requirement specs and not attempt to use the Nano on 10.3.9?
Posts: 7,301
Threads: 463
Joined: Jan 2022
Reputation:
0
"It's a bit of a stretch to not update a computer in three years and then expect it to run the latest and greatest releases. One can only dodge the bullet for so long unless you're content to run an older iPod connected to an older machine. "
I agree.
Posts: 13,934
Threads: 1,261
Joined: May 2025
Look at the release date on Tiger - April of '05. That means Panther was the current OS less than 2 and 2/3 years ago, not five years (the Nano was released in September so Panther was less than 2 and 1/2 years old at that time). If I buy just about any Mac compatible printer out there it has drivers that work with Panther. If the printer manufacturers can manage to support Panther, it's hard to imagine that it is too much of a burden for Apple to do with its own iPods. Sorry, but I think this is ridiculous. I bought my wife a Nano for Christmas not having it occur to me that it wouldn't be compatible with and OS that isn't that old. Fortunately I have Tiger on my Mac Pro so we set up her up as a separate User and copied her iTunes over to that account. I just don't think we should have had to do that, though.
Posts: 31,028
Threads: 2,688
Joined: May 2025
[quote guitarist]"It's a bit of a stretch to not update a computer in three years and then expect it to run the latest and greatest releases. One can only dodge the bullet for so long unless you're content to run an older iPod connected to an older machine. "
I agree.
You miss the point of the original post.
Posts: 8,279
Threads: 628
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Please understand I also think the current iPods should run with 10.3.9 if in fact iTunes 7 runs under 10.3.9. I could see if iTunes 7 required 10.4.
It seems to be Apple forcing Mac users to spend money, either on an OS (which you can no longer buy), or on new hardware. I guess it's the latter, and all the better for their bottom line.
Once again, screw the end-user, Apple knows what's best for you.
Posts: 6,923
Threads: 399
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
I don't think the Nano is dependent on 10.4.x for Cover Flow. Cover Flow was a feature in iTunes before it became a feature in the OS.
The Nano has its own OS on the device.
The computer syncs with the device to transfer files and charge the battery. The device is not dependent on the computer for operation other than initially setting up an iTunes account.
This is just an example of forced upgrading.
Yes, one should read the fine print before buying but this is another example of having to do things Apple's way.
I would try a bit of googling to see if anyone has circumvented the requirement.
Posts: 8,245
Threads: 902
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
>How exactly did you discover that you have to use Tiger?
Plugged in the Nano to the iMac. Got error message saying 10.4.x was needed.
I've been googling on it, haven't had any luck. Thanks for the suggestion, though.
Posts: 4,930
Threads: 69
Joined: May 2025
I Googled also and the best sites for this kind of thing... (e.g.
http://www.macfixit.com/,
http://www.macosxhints.com/) failed to provide a workaround.
Since Windows XP SP2 and later are supported, my only guess is that the support is there on Windows due to the iPod being FAT formatted in Windows. When used on the Mac, the filesystem for the iPod is different (hfs?). It is even possible that the new Nanos use a different filesytem than previous Nanos when used on a Mac and they would thus need a different filesystem driver which is unavailable for Panther.
If Apple would have had to disable some of the Nano's features to permit it to work in a limited way under Panther, I can see why they would chose to have it not work at all. From Apple's point of view, it is better to have the device work perfectly for al of the supported configurations than imperfectly and have the device look bad and harm word-of-mouth advertizing.
It would be better, of course, if they could have found a way to make it work for all customers with a recent iTunes installed, but I think the reason it doesn't work has a technical foundation behind it.
