Yosemite ???

[ExXB]

Well, it's been a couple of days that the new Mac OS has been in the wild ...

Not much in the media about it.

I'm following SOP and will be waiting another week, or so, before updating my iMac/Macbook but curious to hear of any experiences from other PPRuNers.

Good? Bad? Indifferent?

[multis81]

Updated my mbp 2010 with no problems. Actually running a little faster than under mavericks for now.
Quite happy

[mixture]

I'm thinking about upgrading on the weekend.

I think it should be a pretty solid upgrade, and the iOS integration should be interesting to see.

[Mad Monk]

I risked Yosemite last Saturday morning.
Best update ever, I started with OS 6, only the Wacom driver needed renewing.
To my surprise everything really is running faster, best I have seen on this MacBook Pro 6,1.
The green button function has changed, but cntrl + button does what used to be just button to fill screen.

[rgbrock1]

I've installed Yosemite on our MacBook Air, Mac mini and iMac, all without a hitch. I personally think this is the best iteration of OS X that Apple has ever done. All 3 machines are working just fine. And the iOS integration with out iPod Touch(s), Ipads and iPhones is superb.

[Trim Stab]

I've installed it and generally very happy with it.

The much-vaunted handoff is not very reliable so far and only works sporadically. I daresay that will be sorted out soon. But when it works, it is excellent - really cool to be able to answer a call from computer if you've left the mobile downstairs, or reply to texts direct from computer instead of messing around on iphone keyboard. The new iCloud drive is a big improvement too.

I guess the reason that there has not been much reaction in the press is that generally it is very good.

[ExXB]

Thanks very much everyone, I'll likely do it over the weekend.

[Aubrey.]

I installed it on my iMac and it runs perfectly, better than before and a superb OS.

However I put it on my 2010 Macbook Pro and it's now running so slowly and badly it's unusable. Currently investigating!

[mixture]

However I put it on my 2010 Macbook Pro and it's now running so slowly and badly it's unusable. Currently investigating!

Some general (not Yosemite specific) troubleshooting ideas here.....

http://www.pprune.org/computer-internet-issues-troubleshooting/548937-blind-leading-blind.html

[SpringHeeledJack]

I read somewhere that although being designed for new and newer steeds, the OS can operate on older computers, but 'might' be a bit heavy on the RAM, with a figure of 2GB's needed, but 4GB's being recommended.


SHJ

[Booglebox]

I deployed Mavericks to 5 Macs last week, trouble-free apart from some printing issues.
Good upgrade. Finder in particular is much faster at accessing Windows SMB fileshares :cool:

[mixture]

Finder in particular is much faster at accessing Windows SMB fileshares

Out of interest, how does it compare to DAVE or haven't you used that ?

[ExXB]

I have an iPhone that cannot be upgraded to iOS8, I'm guessing that none of these bells and whistles will apply ...

[mixture]

I'm guessing that none of these bells and whistles will apply ...

Well, there are various other changes in Yosemite, but you're probably right that many (not all) of the major new features relate to integration with iOS.

So although it would be worthwhile you upgrading eventually, you could happily wait a few months if you like...

[Booglebox]

Haven't used DAVE, sorry Mix...

[SpringHeeledJack]

Whilst passing an Apple Store today, I decided to dive in and ask a quick question from one of the bods there. I started my spiel and then the bloke gave me a strange look and said " I might be wearing a blue tee shirt, but I don't work here!"….He was wearing a perfect pantone matched blue tee shirt, just that his said 'Greece' and all the others had an Apple logo on theirs :hmm::} Anyway, when I did find someone to ask about upgrading to Yosemite on an older steed, they said that whilst a bit more engrossing than previous OS's, one could "upgrade the firmware to accept more RAM" and said that they had a 2ghz MacBook that they had done this to and all was well with Yosemite….I'm intrigued, can you upgrade firmware on a mac ?


SHJ

[mixture]

"upgrade the firmware to accept more RAM" and said that they had a 2ghz MacBook that they had done this to and all was well with Yosemite….I'm intrigued, can you upgrade firmware on a mac ?

Are you sure you understood them correctly ? Maybe they were just saying you could open it up and put more RAM in there ?

You can't just magically flash a computer motherboard (mac or PC) to accept more RAM ... the amount of RAM supported will depend on a combination of CPU, motherboard and operating system constraints....so its not just limited to some arbitrary number picked out of a hat by the manufacturer, its determined by system engineering constraints.

Yes you can upgrade firmware on a Mac, and Apple have in the past released such upgrades for various reasons ranging from Bluetooth issues to sleep problems.... but AFAIK there have never been any updates that magically increase the RAM because that's simply not possible in system engineering terms.

[SpringHeeledJack]

I'd be inclined to agree with you mr mixture. Perhaps they meant that the max RAM recommended by Apple at the time could, when component upgrades allowed be increased without detrimental effects (but obviously limited to technical limitations) ? Maybe like the electronic limiters on modern cars that can be 'hacked' to allow a larger range of performance to those so inclined ?


SHJ

[mixture]

SpringHeeledJack,

Well, to be honest I've never really put much thought into RAM limits until this question came up !

I've always just understood RAM limits to be a predominantly hardware limited thing.... combined with the occasional software limit (e.g. 32 vs 64-bit, and Microsoft/VMWare licensing limits).

Which is why I would be surprised if you can do anything to something that's as deeply engrained onto a motherboard and CPU (northbridge memory controller hub) .... but if someone lurks here who's spent time system engineering for a modern manufacturer (not really interested in tales from the computing dark ages) , I'd be happy to be shown evidence to the contrary !

I guess you may be onto something that larger RAM modules may not have existed as commonly "back then" when Apple were designing those models as they do now ? But I still think its more of a CPU/motherboard hard limit than what Apple were able to test with ?

In the mean time I'm going to spend a couple of minutes on Googoo to see if any definitive looking answers pop up ....

[mutt]

I'm running a 2011 Macbook Pro with 2.7 mhz and 8 meg of ram. I would say that I'm seeing a lot more "wait wheels" than previously. I do like some of the changes such as discrete browsing, but its coming at the price of a slower machine.

[Booglebox]

mixture, my old ThinkPad T61 from 2007 had a "limit" of 4GB of RAM. I put 8GB in it and it worked fine. Why? 4GB modules didn't really exist in 2007... :}
Also I'm posting from an x220 with 16gb RAM, while all the official documentation says only 8gb supported... same reason!

[crewmeal]

I'm running a 2011 Macbook Pro with 2.7 mhz and 8 meg of ram. I would say that I'm seeing a lot more "wait wheels" than previously. I do like some of the changes such as discrete browsing, but its coming at the price of a slower machine.

Mine's 2.4mhz with 8 meg ram as well, but I changed the hard drive to an 500 gb SSD and it really helps. I don't seem to have any problems with speed now Yosemite is installed.

[ExXB]

mixture, my old ThinkPad T61 from 2007 had a "limit" of 4GB of RAM. I put 8GB in it and it worked fine. Why? 4GB modules didn't really exist in 2007... :}
Also I'm posting from an x220 with 16gb RAM, while all the official documentation says only 8gb supported... same reason!

I don't think there is anything that physically prevents you from installing more RAM than the manufacturer says is supported. But will all that extra memory be recognised? What do your Memory Manager settings show?

Years ago, with my Macintosh LC, I was told to install double the RAM because the larger chips were cheaper. (due to oversupply or something). I was told the extra memory wouldn't be recognised, and it wasn't. But it worked fine.

I can't think of any reason why a Manufacturer would want to state a lower maximum, but there could be one.

[Booglebox]

If you install RAM that is too fast, you can start a small fire (I speak from experience :\)
And if you try to install more than 8GB in an... Ivy Bridge? -based machine, it will fail POST and beep at you. So it's not always successful. Googling helps.

[SpringHeeledJack]

This question has just popped into my head again (and I'm in front of the computer) so why did Apple decide to give away the latest two OS's for free, whereas every other preceding OS upgrade was sold for a pretty penny ? What's in it for them and how do they get the missing revenue back from the customers ? :8


SHJ

[pax britanica]

SHJ
perhaps because the last two upgrades were crap , not as bad as Windows 8, but certainly not something that justified having to buy them.I am not an Apple fan -wife's machine- but I do think it was a wise customer relations move to give away Yosemite and give them a stable platform going forward.

I upgraded a 2009 vintage iMac RAM very easily because it is designed to accept an appropriate upgrade-just undo a little panel at bottom of screen and swap out the memory modules .
PB

[Booglebox]

It's the same reason why iOS upgrades are free: there's now an "app store" ecosystem, and the hardware is overpriced which helps recoup the development cost of the OS.

[ExXB]

... And it keeps us loyal customers, loyal.

... and the hardware is overpriced which helps recoup the development cost of the OS.

From: Apple CEO Explains Why Apple's Products Are So Expensive (Sort Of) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/apple-ceo-tim-cook-expensive-products_n_2670366.html)

But Cook also addressed a question that most consumers find themselves asking regularly: Why are Apple products so expensive?

His answer -- that Apple doesn't want to sacrifice quality for price -- served mainly to reinforce his argument that Apple values great products over all else. (In typical Apple fashion, he made some half-dozen references to Apple's "magic" or "magical" products.) Yet he also suggested that Apple's innovation and product pipeline is driven at least in part by an effort to produce new gadgets at lower price-levels.

"Instead of saying, 'How can we cheapen the iPod to get it lower?' We ask, 'How can we do a great product and do it at a cost that enables us to sell it at the low price of $49?'" he explained.

Cook noted that tech observers wondered for "years" why Apple didn't offer a Mac for under $1000.

"Frankly we worked on that, but we concluded that we couldn't do a great product. And so we didn't. But what we did do is we invented the iPad," Cook explained. "Now all of a sudden we have an incredible experience that starts at $329. Sometimes you can take the issue or way you might look at an issue and solve it in different ways."

Instead of offering a cheap laptop, in other words, Apple made an expensive tablet.

[Booglebox]

Good point ExxB. When launching the MBA 11", Jobs was absolutely right to point out that netbooks were just cheap laptops.

[Vercingetorix]

You can now import ProRes files into iMovie and export in ProRes 422. Saves buying FCP X.