open All Channels
seplocked Macintosh
blankseplocked Lion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Ami Nia
Posted - 2011.05.31 15:16:00 - [1]
 

Apple officially announced what will be unveiled at WWDC. Lion is included. WWDC is next week. There are reasonable expectations that Lion could be available immediately or very soon after that.

Has anyone tested EvE on Lion? (I'm asking to both players and people in TG and CCP).

Hagis McBree
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.31 21:02:00 - [2]
 

Due to Apple's NDA with any pre release software, people are not allowed to discuss it on-line.
So don't expect CCP, TG or any one who got it legally to talk about it here.

then again there are way to get it with out signing the NDA, but that is for you to look for.


Ami Nia
Posted - 2011.05.31 23:09:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Ami Nia on 31/05/2011 23:10:15
As an Apple developer I do have Lion. Legally. The reason I'm not testing EvE on Lion myself is that I'm currently down to only have access to one machine, and that's a machine where I cannot install Lion (for reasons too long to explain here related to privacy and security laws).

The NDA does not cover non-Apple applications that may or may run on Lion. You CAN say if a non Apple application is Lion-ready or not and how far from being ready it is, as long as you do not say anything, about Lion and Lion APIs, that has not already been published.

Edit: punctuation

Jumer Athonille
Posted - 2011.06.01 06:42:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Ami Nia
Edited by: Ami Nia on 31/05/2011 23:10:15
As an Apple developer I do have Lion. Legally. The reason I'm not testing EvE on Lion myself is that I'm currently down to only have access to one machine, and that's a machine where I cannot install Lion (for reasons too long to explain here related to privacy and security laws).

The NDA does not cover non-Apple applications that may or may run on Lion. You CAN say if a non Apple application is Lion-ready or not and how far from being ready it is, as long as you do not say anything, about Lion and Lion APIs, that has not already been published.

Edit: punctuation


I'll second everything in the post, and add in that from what I've seen, I would seriously doubt that Lion will have an immediate availability after WWDC, as there are still too many bugs and issues that need to be resolved.

Amaroq Dricaldari
Amarr
Vengeance Industrial Militia
Posted - 2011.06.01 06:49:00 - [5]
 

Is Lion an OS, or an application?

Ami Nia
Posted - 2011.06.01 07:49:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Jumer Athonille
I'll second everything in the post, and add in that from what I've seen, I would seriously doubt that Lion will have an immediate availability after WWDC, as there are still too many bugs and issues that need to be resolved.
Last I tested was early Developer Preview 2 (two months ago, in early april). From what I've read on the internet It was my understanding that DP3 was "almost done" and that a lot of people expect a gold candidate to be available for WWDC, but if you are testing it and say it's not there yet then I guess we'll have a late summer/autumn release once again (not surprising: Leopard and Snow Leopard both were released a few months after WWDC).

If that's the case I'll probably be able to test it more myself before they go gold candidate.

Still I hope TG (and maybe CCP too) to be working on it.

Originally by: Amaroq Dricaldari
Is Lion an OS, or an application?
An OS. Os X 10.7 to be exact. Currently available in beta if you are a registered developer (Developer Preview 3 was seeded a fortnight ago). Publicly available information as of today is here.

da go
Posted - 2011.06.07 02:11:00 - [7]
 

Lion officially in July. EvE better work on it as any new Mac sold past July will have Lion and at less than $30 for an upgrade from Snow Leopard a lot of people will upgrade.

Tea Leaves
Posted - 2011.06.07 09:03:00 - [8]
 

Yes, eve runs fine. I can say nothing more on this subject.

Alpine 69
Rubbish Superheroes
Posted - 2011.06.07 10:26:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Tea Leaves
Yes, eve runs fine. I can say nothing more on this subject.


Thank you. I'm currently running on Leopard (not Snow Leopard), and I intend to upgrade as soon as Lion is released.

lasterax
Minmatar
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.06.07 14:02:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Tea Leaves
Yes, eve runs fine. I can say nothing more on this subject.


So you have a new improved EVE client if it runs fine? Laughing

Here in the Mac forum we say "EVE runs".

da go
Posted - 2011.06.07 15:37:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Alpine 69
Originally by: Tea Leaves
Yes, eve runs fine. I can say nothing more on this subject.


Thank you. I'm currently running on Leopard (not Snow Leopard), and I intend to upgrade as soon as Lion is released.


@Tea Thank you.

@Alpine You may need to upgrade to Snow Leopard before you can upgrade to Lion, unless something changes in what Apple have announced. But we'll see.

Alpine 69
Rubbish Superheroes
Posted - 2011.06.08 11:16:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Alpine 69 on 08/06/2011 11:16:35
Originally by: da go
Originally by: Alpine 69
Originally by: Tea Leaves
Yes, eve runs fine. I can say nothing more on this subject.


Thank you. I'm currently running on Leopard (not Snow Leopard), and I intend to upgrade as soon as Lion is released.


@Tea Thank you.

@Alpine You may need to upgrade to Snow Leopard before you can upgrade to Lion, unless something changes in what Apple have announced. But we'll see.


Now that would be rather annoying, seeing that upgrading to SL would cost me around $30 as well before being able to upgrade to Lion. If that's the case I'll probably just use a "less-than-entirely-legal" version of SL only to upgrade to a legal Lion. I'm not a fan of such practices but I won't let Apple extort me any more than they do already.

da go
Posted - 2011.06.08 15:00:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: da go on 08/06/2011 15:00:48
Originally by: Alpine 69
Now that would be rather annoying, seeing that upgrading to SL would cost me around $30 as well before being able to upgrade to Lion. If that's the case I'll probably just use a "less-than-entirely-legal" version of SL only to upgrade to a legal Lion. I'm not a fan of such practices but I won't let Apple extort me any more than they do already.
How is $30 for a major operating system upgrade an extortion? It's normal that upgrades are only available from previous versions.

OsX upgrades historically costed around $120 from a version to the next one for each machine. The server version was $499 for 10 client connections, $999 for unlimited with no upgrade possible.

Leopard to Snow Leopard is $30 per client. Snow Leopard to Lion is $30 and valid for up to 10 clients. Lion to Lion Server is $40. These are not ripoffs. They cost less than any other officially supported OS.

Alpine 69
Rubbish Superheroes
Posted - 2011.06.08 15:34:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: da go
Edited by: da go on 08/06/2011 15:00:48
Originally by: Alpine 69
Now that would be rather annoying, seeing that upgrading to SL would cost me around $30 as well before being able to upgrade to Lion. If that's the case I'll probably just use a "less-than-entirely-legal" version of SL only to upgrade to a legal Lion. I'm not a fan of such practices but I won't let Apple extort me any more than they do already.
How is $30 for a major operating system upgrade an extortion? It's normal that upgrades are only available from previous versions.

OsX upgrades historically costed around $120 from a version to the next one for each machine. The server version was $499 for 10 client connections, $999 for unlimited with no upgrade possible.

Leopard to Snow Leopard is $30 per client. Snow Leopard to Lion is $30 and valid for up to 10 clients. Lion to Lion Server is $40. These are not ripoffs. They cost less than any other officially supported OS.


You're absolutely right about the price for the operating system itself and I'll gladly pay the $30 for the upgrade to Lion. However, the fact that you can't upgrade from Leopard to Lion (if that's the case at all) in one go does not appear to have any particular reason other than getting more money out of me. Being charged for a product that I do not want nor intend to use is where my problem lies, not the price of the product itself.

Hopefully this makes my point clear enough. Wink

Manssell
Posted - 2011.06.08 19:38:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Alpine 69
Originally by: da go
Edited by: da go on 08/06/2011 15:00:48
Originally by: Alpine 69
Now that would be rather annoying, seeing that upgrading to SL would cost me around $30 as well before being able to upgrade to Lion. If that's the case I'll probably just use a "less-than-entirely-legal" version of SL only to upgrade to a legal Lion. I'm not a fan of such practices but I won't let Apple extort me any more than they do already.
How is $30 for a major operating system upgrade an extortion? It's normal that upgrades are only available from previous versions.

OsX upgrades historically costed around $120 from a version to the next one for each machine. The server version was $499 for 10 client connections, $999 for unlimited with no upgrade possible.

Leopard to Snow Leopard is $30 per client. Snow Leopard to Lion is $30 and valid for up to 10 clients. Lion to Lion Server is $40. These are not ripoffs. They cost less than any other officially supported OS.


You're absolutely right about the price for the operating system itself and I'll gladly pay the $30 for the upgrade to Lion. However, the fact that you can't upgrade from Leopard to Lion (if that's the case at all) in one go does not appear to have any particular reason other than getting more money out of me. Being charged for a product that I do not want nor intend to use is where my problem lies, not the price of the product itself.

Hopefully this makes my point clear enough. Wink



From what I understand, and yes this is based solely off my very limited computer tech knowledge and harassment of an apple rep at the store, is that Lion is not a Kernel rewrite. So while going from 10.5-10.6 was a major reworking of the OS, going to lion from SL is just adding a few more features on top of the foundation Snow Leopard did. That's why Lion is only a 4 gig download. So you actually can't go from Leopard straight to Lion since you need the new Kernel SL did as a base for Lion.

Or something like that.

da go
Posted - 2011.06.09 04:24:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Alpine 69
You're absolutely right about the price for the operating system itself and I'll gladly pay the $30 for the upgrade to Lion. However, the fact that you can't upgrade from Leopard to Lion (if that's the case at all) in one go does not appear to have any particular reason other than getting more money out of me. Being charged for a product that I do not want nor intend to use is where my problem lies, not the price of the product itself.

Hopefully this makes my point clear enough. Wink

If Apple was doing things like everybody else you would simply see different upgrade prices. You'll have Lion upgrade from Snow Leopard for $30, Lion upgrade from Leopard for $60, Lion upgrade from Tiger for $150 etc. Each upgrade will take you straight to Lion. You'll also see a Lion package that is not an upgrade at all, and that would be the priciest one.

Apple never did things like everybody else, and this time they are going to take an even more radical departure from common practice. Historically there has never been a "full package" for any OsX version, only upgrades from previous versions. Lion will do the same, but with a little twist: Lion will not be available on a physical support. The only (legal) way to get Lion will be to download it directly from Apple'a App Store servers. And the App Store servers are not accessible from Leopard or earlier versions of the OS.

In other words what you'll see is that you can only get Lion if you have a Snow Leopard or a (possibly previous) Lion version installed on your Mac. Also your Lion is no more "per machine" but "per account" (with a limit of 10 machines registered to each account). So if you have 3 Macs running Snow Leopard on one and Leopard on the other two, the "legal" way to do things is to buy two Leopard to Snow Leopard upgrades for those two machines. Once they are all Snow Leopard you'll be able to register them to the same App Store account and will need to buy only one Lion (or any other app from the store) to have them automatically licensed for all machines (all those registered to that account, that is, up to the 10 machines limit).

da go
Posted - 2011.06.09 04:37:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: da go on 09/06/2011 04:41:49
Originally by: Manssell
From what I understand, and yes this is based solely off my very limited computer tech knowledge and harassment of an apple rep at the store, is that Lion is not a Kernel rewrite. So while going from 10.5-10.6 was a major reworking of the OS, going to lion from SL is just adding a few more features on top of the foundation Snow Leopard did. That's why Lion is only a 4 gig download. So you actually can't go from Leopard straight to Lion since you need the new Kernel SL did as a base for Lion.

Or something like that.
The only "kernel rewrite" was when they went from classic OS to OsX. There has never been a complete kernel rewrite in any other release. On the other side each and every version (including most of the free "dot releases") do have some kernel changes. Beside this, the kernel is probably 5 to 10 percent of the operating system, therefore whether the kernel changed or not is irrelevant.

The real reason you need Snow Leopard is that you need to register your machine with the App Store to get Lion. And that's only possible with OsX 10.6.6 and later (current version is 10.6.7). Also the actual mechanism for the final release of Lion will only be in OsX 10.6.8 (currently in beta). So you'll in fact need that before you can upgrade.

If you are still on Leopard you'll need to upgrade to Snow Leopard, then upgrade Snow Leopard to the current version and then upgrade that to Lion.

That's what we can say putting together what is publicly known and what they told us on tuesday.
Of course they could still change something or there may be some twists that are covered by NDA (and therefore I cannot tell you about them, but you can sign the NDA and pay the $99 annual fee to find out yourself), so what will really happen is to be seen.

Alpine 69
Rubbish Superheroes
Posted - 2011.06.09 09:02:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: da go
A clear explananation.


Thanks for clearing that up. I feel significantly less screwed now actually. I guess I'll just go ahead and pay the $60 for Lion then. =)


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only