is it a trap to software update?
 

i think apple should show much more patience to their users eithor those using apple or try mac on vmware. as all know,majority pc users are using windows or linux os .and if apple want to attract more users, it should not set so much constraints. it is a joke apple boost mac is open source. i am just a common user who got great interested in mac and want to learn it. it is no doubt once more and more people use mac, apple will get more and more reception.but maybe it a pitty that i said in a message that i use mac on vmware. so forum admininstrator led me to the trap of system collapse . i feel very much disappointed.

In that thread upgrading was suggested before hayne realised you were running a pirated copy of OS X. Installing the latest OS updates is good advice.

And for what it's worth, Apple only wants legitimate users, not pirates. Same goes for this forum. If you want to "try out" OS X, then I suggest you buy a cheap second hand Mac - any Intel-based Mac will run Snow Leopard (I think) and you'll be able to install XCode 3.2.

They generally don't.

You can always download Darwin for free and install it on any computer you want. Darwin is the open source core of OS X.

Of course, Darwin doesn't look anything like OS X, because none of the attractive OS X GUI is open source.

http://developer.apple.com/Darwin/
http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/download.php

Trevor

I installed a cracked OS X on a Dell at work, just to prove I could.
A few people were very confused.

Personally, I think it would be good business for Apple to release a legal trial/demo version for non-Apple users to install on supported hardware. Just so help increase the visibility a bit. Several very common intel chipsets are supported right out of the box.

I have been requesting VM of OS X for a few years now, don't think Apple even cares. I even add it to the suggestion box on their site. I have many many reasons why I would want to virtualize OS X on a Mac even. It would be awesome for package deployment and testing. I would no longer need a base machine and a test machine and I could do everything from one machine and multiple VMs.

I suppose this is a reason why software piracy is a stupid idea.

Well, you do have a valid point. Not about the piracy but there is no system roll back in OS X. I remember back in the days of 10.4 where ever other update will kill your airport card. That sucked and I could never roll back after updating, unless I did an archive and install or wipe and install. I am not sure if you can even downgrade on an archive and install?

If Apple did implement some sort of roll back system, like MS does with system restore, that would be nice.

And this would benefit Apple (a hardware manufacturer) how?

yesterday i am too impetuous perhaps. since i have tasted failure in mac for too many times. it made me somewhat sensitive. but i still doubt the bundling behavior of apple to sell hardware and software together.

Opens the doors for more enterprise networks to be more interested in integrating them into their deployments. There is plenty of money to be made and plenty of money for other companies to make as well. Think about if they had the market share and Autodesk started releasing CAD software for Macs?

A lot of what holds a Mac back in that market is the lack of tools they provide for those types of environments. I know that Jobs has said Apple is not an enterprise company, but in reality they are. I run 30 Xserves and Open Directory at work and it has some very promising and great tools.

I would just like to see something other than Microsoft at every job I go to. I enjoy writing shell scripts and configuring Unix side things for OS X. I find it more fun and more challenging than when I worked with the MS and Novell stuff.

There is a lot of money to be made. We bought 6,000 laptops for 6 million dollars. Sure we got free Apple Care with them, but at that bulk they were still selling each Macbook to use at $1,000 each. It is not like they are taking huge cuts when selling to enterprise companies.

You make your product more desirable and people will want to integrate them into their networks, and start deploying them to their users.

Apple knows this and that is why they just recently allowed for virtual servers. No IT person in the world wants to buy an Xserve or another Mac to run an extra server when they have a powerful Xserve that can run multiple virtual servers. The same for the client OS. They still make the money on the license of the server OS, but not the hardware sale I suppose. Either way, more attractive product will gain you more business.

It's a safe bet that Apple has considered the option and doesn't do it because selling operating systems isn't a business model that's as profitable as selling hardware.

You're proving its worth to Apple! If they didn't bundle it with the hardware, it would be even easier to steal it.

Doesn't Time Machine fit this requirement?

I am not sure if you can roll back system updates with TM or not. From my understanding it is more of a data back up than it was a whole system back up. I know you can back up the /System folder with it, but I have also read that there are issues with that?

I only use time machine to back up user data and for that it works fine. I wouldn't really trust TM to back up my whole system. Plus, it is not a true snap shot like system roll back is.

There is an option in the installer to 'Restore from Time Machine'.

yes, but there are problems restoring back ups since it is saved to sparse image file. I don't remember the specifics but even apple recommends you use it to back up user data. At least that is how it was, unless it vastly improved in 10.6?

We are talking about something else here, but I am very cautious with upgrades as well. So often vital processes for me stopped working. I have been doing CarbonCopyCloner last few years every time I upgrade something important - like Quicktime, security, airport, OS X.
So I have a working state recoverable.
TimeMachine is weird, I feel that I do not know what does it backup really.

I'm not sure why you would even say this. Apple is not simply a hardware manufacturer. Dell and HP are hardware manufacturers. Apple is in company such as Sun and Silicon Graphics as a platform. They have been in the operating system business for the same 30 years they've made hardware. They don't write ads saying "Buy the new Mac Pro, now with Windows 7!"
Their custom OS is part of the platform and selling point. It's the entire point of the line of "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" commercials.

With that in mind, anything that helps or eases developers to write software and drivers for your platform will encourage them to do so--which will increase marketshare and profit.

I wonder if Bill Gates would agree with that.

I read recently that Apple gets a better return on investment than Microsoft, so Gates might very well agree with my statement.

Let's not forget that Apple has previously tried licensing their OS to clone makers. It turned out to be a bad business decision.