Core 2 Duo minimum

Posted by: John Rougeux

Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/25/11 07:17 PM

Mac OS X Lion requires a minimum of an I...Duo processors.

Wow...seems rather steep in the processor requirements.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/25/11 07:30 PM

Trim support..finally. Now it's ok to buy an SSD... well, it's better.
Posted by: scottyb

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/25/11 09:40 PM

Yeah, the march of progress...

I noticed that my oldest Mac is the first MacBook to get the Core *2* Duo, from late '06. So, a 5 year old machine will still be able to run the very latest OS, which isn't too bad in my opinion. In comparison, a 5 year old PC would struggle, at best, to digest Windows 7.
Posted by: WolfFan

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/26/11 02:27 AM

The only intel Macs which have less than a C2D are some Mac minis and early intel iMacs. At least 90% of all Intel Macs qualify for Lion, so no, this isn't a steep requirement.
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/26/11 05:22 AM

Originally Posted By: WolfFan
The only intel Macs which have less than a C2D are some Mac minis and early intel iMacs. At least 90% of all Intel Macs qualify for Lion, so no, this isn't a steep requirement.


Not to mention that this is just the first dev release. It's not a final release by a long shot.
Posted by: zwei

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/26/11 06:53 PM

Looks like they are cutting off 32-bit processor support. Core 2 Duo and later are x64. I always thought it was kinda weird they bothered with the Core Solo and Core Duo processors at all.
Posted by: WolfFan

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 02:29 AM

yeah, it looks as though 32-bit CPUs are history. Along with Rosetta (which is gonna hurt, I still have multiple older apps which will never be updated 'cause the vendors are either bust or no longer interested) and Java. Although Java can be downloaded if necessary.

It also seems as if OS X Server, as a separate product, is toast. As I understand it, Server features will now be part of the standard install. Is the world really ready for a few million amateur UNIX server admins roaming loose? 'Cause that's want's gonna happen when the Lion roars.
Posted by: musicalmarv7

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 03:58 AM

The core 2 duo processor used in the 2010 MBP is this a 64 bit? Thanks
Posted by: zwei

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 09:27 AM

Yes, Jerry. Even my 4yr old iMac is 64-bit.

@wolfan guess they feel they have given enough time to transition away from PPC. I've got one PPC app at work that we must have, hopefully that will be updated soon.
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 12:51 PM

My wife's Mini is a Core Duo, so I still won't be able to get her off AppleWorks. cry
Posted by: DLC

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 04:31 PM

When do they expect this puppy . . . er Cat to be released ?? wink
Posted by: carp

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 05:24 PM

As soon as it gets de-flea laugh

I read somewhere mid 2012. This give developers time to prepare, report bugs and security issues. So little over a year.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 05:59 PM

IN a discussion about Lion and as usual the dialgoue diatribe breaks down into Mac vs Windows.. as usual... but every once in a while I find a nugget that makes me laff.


EvetsSboj 8 hours ago
Apple still makes computers?

I thought they only made 3 size different iPods now. I haven't seen a Mac in years, then again I work a job and Macs are banished from the workplace.
REPORT
+ 2
REPLY

strychnine- 4 hours ago in reply to EvetsSboj
Yeah, I don't know how you would see a Mac next to the fryer at McDonalds. <<<<LOL
REPORT
+ 9
REPLY

Charles Wagoner 35 minutes ago in reply to strychnine-
Win.
REPORT
+
REPLY

Illwillpbn 5 hours ago in reply to EvetsSboj
Obvious you don't get out much.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 06:02 PM

Quote:

I read somewhere mid 2012. This give developers time to prepare, report bugs and security issues. So little over a year.


Errr.. no..

Coming Soon to an Apple Store near you...


"Lion"
Starring Steve jobs as "Bait"
Summer 2011


In about 90 days....
Posted by: carp

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 06:10 PM

Thats quick.
I mean 90 days for the developers to preview and report back ?
Posted by: iBookmaster

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/27/11 08:03 PM

Full screen apps will be worth the upgrade for me. Other nice stuff I've seen is Mail's mailbox's will be listed across the top like browser's bookmarks bars, Migration Assistant will migrate from Macs or PCs, QuickTime will be able to record specific areas of the screen, Finder will be able to merge folders, asking if you want to keep both like Time Machine if folders are named the same. Ooh man, it's looking good.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/28/11 03:32 AM

Originally Posted By: carp
Thats quick.
I mean 90 days for the developers to preview and report back ?


Hey... I'm not making this stuff up...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Lion

http://osxdaily.com/2010/10/20/mac-os-x-10-7-lion-release-date-summer-2011/
Posted by: DLC

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/28/11 03:51 AM

Originally Posted By: carp
Thats quick.
I mean 90 days for the developers to preview and report back ?

Well Macs have gotten SO much FASTER lately !! laugh

I thought this year... but wasn't sure summer or fall.
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/28/11 04:17 AM

This is not the first dev build. There have been several already.
Posted by: John Rougeux

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/28/11 07:02 AM

Hehe are you correcting yourself? laugh
Posted by: carp

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 02/28/11 02:16 PM

Well thats because your a power user - I do not even use what there is now for those similar features. laugh

I don't even have Snow - maybe I'll get Lion, just because I don't want to be to far behind. but is Lion a resource hog ?
Posted by: scottyb

Re: Core 2 Duo minimum - 03/01/11 12:51 PM

Originally Posted By: carp
but is Lion a resource hog ?


Yes, absolutely. It will bring any existing computer to it's knees. It will be almost completely unusable by mere mortals.