Hello.


I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its 
small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install 
disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix, 
etc.? I only got these items:

1. Mac Mini
2. DVI to HDMI adapter
3. Power adapter
4. White Apple stickers
5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)

If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already 
set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.

Thank you in advance. :)
-- 
"Cheerios: Hula-hoops for ants." --unknown
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

In article <Y6OdnZl1D-1blUHSnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant
<ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> Hello.
> 
> 
> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its 
> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install 
> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix, 
> etc.? I only got these items:

nope. there's a recovery partition on the hard drive and it can
reinstall lion over the net from apple's servers if necessary.

On 6/15/2012 9:32 PM PT, nospam typed:

>> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
>> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
>> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix,
>> etc.? I only got these items:
>
> nope. there's a recovery partition on the hard drive and it can
> reinstall lion over the net from apple's servers if necessary.

Oh! So how does one get to those? Is this happening on all new Apple 
computers or just Mac Minis? Is there way to make a installer disc/USB 
flash media like with IBM PCs? Physical medias would be faster than 
downloading especially for those with crappy Internet connections and/or 
with caps. :(
-- 
"I got worms! That's what we're going to call it. We're going to 
specialize in selling worm farms. You know like ant farms. What's the 
matter, a little tense about the flight?" --Lloyd Christmas (Dumb and 
Dumber movie)
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 2012-06-15 10:17 PM Ant wrote:
> Hello.
>
>
> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its small box. Is it 
> supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install disc/USB flash drive or something in case I 
> ever need to reinstall, fix, etc.? I only got these items:
>
> 1. Mac Mini
> 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
> 3. Power adapter
> 4. White Apple stickers
> 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
>
> If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already set it up, installed a 
> bunch of software, copy my data, etc.
>
> Thank you in advance. :)

 From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
Lion Recovery
OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the Recovery HD, a new 
feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a physical disc. Learn more 
about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In article <qeednaqApeIzkEHSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant
<ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> >> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
> >> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
> >> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix,
> >> etc.? I only got these items:
> >
> > nope. there's a recovery partition on the hard drive and it can
> > reinstall lion over the net from apple's servers if necessary.
> 
> Oh! So how does one get to those?

cmd-r

> Is this happening on all new Apple 
> computers or just Mac Minis?

all new macs

> Is there way to make a installer disc/USB 
> flash media like with IBM PCs? Physical medias would be faster than 
> downloading especially for those with crappy Internet connections and/or 
> with caps. :(

how often do you expect to be installing lion?

anyway, the really cool thing is you can network boot the mini with a
totally blank hard drive from apple.com and install lion. just be sure
you have a fast connection.

On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
>
> From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> Lion Recovery
> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/

Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
-- 
"We ants are runnin' the show! We're the lords of the earth!" --ANTZ
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 6/15/2012 9:45 PM PT, nospam typed:

> In article<qeednaqApeIzkEHSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant
> <ant@zimage.comANT>  wrote:
>
>>>> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
>>>> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
>>>> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix,
>>>> etc.? I only got these items:
>>>
>>> nope. there's a recovery partition on the hard drive and it can
>>> reinstall lion over the net from apple's servers if necessary.
>>
>> Oh! So how does one get to those?
>
> cmd-r

Thanks! :)


>> Is this happening on all new Apple
>> computers or just Mac Minis?
>
> all new macs

Dang.


>> Is there way to make a installer disc/USB
>> flash media like with IBM PCs? Physical medias would be faster than
>> downloading especially for those with crappy Internet connections and/or
>> with caps. :(
>
> how often do you expect to be installing lion?

You never know! What happen if the HDD goes bad?


> anyway, the really cool thing is you can network boot the mini with a
> totally blank hard drive from apple.com and install lion. just be sure
> you have a fast connection.

Yeah and no caps! That's not always the case. Hence, I still prefer the 
physical media. :( BTW, how big is Lion download and need for HDD space?
-- 
"What reason, like the careful ant, draws laboriously together, the wind 
of accident sometimes collects in a moment." --Friedrich von Schiller
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

In article <C5-dnZDUvrEViUHSnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant
<ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> >> Is there way to make a installer disc/USB
> >> flash media like with IBM PCs? Physical medias would be faster than
> >> downloading especially for those with crappy Internet connections and/or
> >> with caps. :(
> >
> > how often do you expect to be installing lion?
> 
> You never know! What happen if the HDD goes bad?

restore from a backup.

> > anyway, the really cool thing is you can network boot the mini with a
> > totally blank hard drive from apple.com and install lion. just be sure
> > you have a fast connection.
> 
> Yeah and no caps! That's not always the case. Hence, I still prefer the 
> physical media. :( BTW, how big is Lion download and need for HDD space?

the installer is about 4 gig.

In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
 Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> >
> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> > Lion Recovery
> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> > Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> > Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> 
> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(

that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.

I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
add a recovery partition.  How does one 'recover' from _that_ situation?

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]

Larry Gusaas wrote:

> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the Recovery HD, a new 
> feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a physical disc. Learn more 
> about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/


You still need to copy that partition to another physical media. If your
hard disk dies (hardware failure), then you lose that recovery partition
as well as your real partition.

In article <C5-dnZDUvrEViUHSnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
 Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> > anyway, the really cool thing is you can network boot the mini with a 
> > totally blank hard drive from apple.com and install lion. just be sure 
> > you have a fast connection.
> 
> Yeah and no caps! That's not always the case. Hence, I still prefer the 
> physical media. 

You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

On 2012-06-15 11:20 PM Michael Vilain wrote:
> In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
>   Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>
>> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
>>>  From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
>>> Lion Recovery
>>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in =
the
>>> Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS=
 X
>>> Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
>>> http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
> that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the
> AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
>
> I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I hav=
e
> 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to
> add a recovery partition.  How does one 'recover' from _that_ situation=
?

If you had followed the second link in my previous post you would have se=
en:

    Internet Recovery.
    Help is everywhere.

    If your Mac problem is a little less common =E2=80=94 your hard drive=
 has failed or you=E2=80=99ve
    installed a hard drive without OS X, for example =E2=80=94 Internet R=
ecovery takes over
    automatically. It downloads and starts OS X Recovery directly from Ap=
ple servers over a
    broadband Internet connection. And your Mac has access to the same OS=
 X Recovery features
    online. Internet Recovery is built into every newly-released Mac star=
ting with the Mac mini
    and MacBook Air.


--=20
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind thei=
rs." - Edgard Varese

On 2012-06-15 11:33 PM JF Mezei wrote:
> Larry Gusaas wrote:
>
>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in t=
he Recovery HD, a new
>> feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a ph=
ysical disc. Learn more
>> about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> You still need to copy that partition to another physical media. If you=
r
> hard disk dies (hardware failure), then you lose that recovery partitio=
n
> as well as your real partition.

Obviously you did not read the link I gave above. If you had you would ha=
ve seen this:

    If your Mac problem is a little less common =E2=80=94 your hard drive=
 has failed or you=E2=80=99ve
    installed a hard drive without OS X, for example =E2=80=94 Internet R=
ecovery takes over
    automatically. It downloads and starts OS X Recovery directly from Ap=
ple servers over a
    broadband Internet connection. And your Mac has access to the same OS=
 X Recovery features
    online. Internet Recovery is built into every newly-released Mac star=
ting with the Mac mini
    and MacBook Air.



--=20
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind thei=
rs." - Edgard Varese

In article <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net>, Michael
Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:

> I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
> 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
> add a recovery partition.  How does one 'recover' from _that_ situation?

nonsense. any drive can be formatted with a recovery partition. i have
lion on two external drives and both have recovery partitions.

In article <michelle-985A47.22361715062012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.

you can, but macs that are introduced after next month won't be able to
boot lion anymore (unless the changes are very minor which is not
likely). mountain lion will not be available on a flash stick because
demand for the lion stick was very low.

On 2012-06-16 12:02 AM no spam wrote:
> mountain lion will not be available on a flash stick because
> demand for the lion stick was very low.

And how do you know that? Did Steve tell you?

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In article <jrh7lr$5ab$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
<larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> > mountain lion will not be available on a flash stick because
> > demand for the lion stick was very low.
> 
> And how do you know that? Did Steve tell you?

yes he did, in a seance. 

and for those who don't believe in seances,
<http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/44422/mountain-lion-mac-app-store-only>

  Apple has confirmed to Pocket-lint though that its concerns weren't
  justified with customers not remotely interested in the USB drive
  offering:

  "It was an interesting test, but it turns out the App Store was just
  fine for getting the new OS."

On 2012-06-16 12:11 AM nospam wrote:
> In article <jrh7lr$5ab$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
> <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> mountain lion will not be available on a flash stick because
>>> demand for the lion stick was very low.
>> And how do you know that? Did Steve tell you?
> yes he did, in a seance.
>
> and for those who don't believe in seances,
> <http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/44422/mountain-lion-mac-app-store-only>
>
>    Apple has confirmed to Pocket-lint though that its concerns weren't
>    justified with customers not remotely interested in the USB drive
>    offering:
>
>    "It was an interesting test, but it turns out the App Store was just
>    fine for getting the new OS."

And where is the actual statement from Apple?

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In article <160620120202316551%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.
> 
> you can, but macs that are introduced after next month won't be able to 
> boot lion anymore (unless the changes are very minor which is not 
> likely). mountain lion will not be available on a flash stick because 
> demand for the lion stick was very low.

True, but he was asking specifically about Lion.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In message <Y6OdnZl1D-1blUHSnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@earthlink.com> 
  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> Hello.


> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its 
> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install 
> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix, 
> etc.?

No.


-- 
If you [Carrot] were dice, you'd always roll sixes.  And the dice don't
roll themselves. If it wasn't against everything he wanted to be true
about the world, Vimes might just then have believed in destiny
controlling people. And gods help the other people who were around when
a big destiny was alive in the world, bending every poor bugger around
itself... 
'Why?' he [Rincewind] said.  The world is going to end.  'What, again?'

In message <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net> 
  Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
>  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

>> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
>> >
>> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
>> > Lion Recovery
>> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
>> > Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
>> > Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
>> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>> 
>> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(

> that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
> AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.

> I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
> 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
> add a recovery partition.

Why not?


-- 
Beware of the Leopard!
he'd moved like music, like someone dancing to a rhythm inside his head.
And his face for a moment in the moonlight was the skull of an angel...

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net> 
>   Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> > In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> >  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> 
> >> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> >> >
> >> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> >> > Lion Recovery
> >> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> >> > Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> >> > Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> >> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> >> 
> >> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
> 
> > that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
> > AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
> 
> > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have
> > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to
> > add a recovery partition.
> 
> Why not?

Indeed.

Lion Recovery Disk Assistant will copy the recovery partition to an
external disk. It will definitely work if the external disk is
partitioned using GUID Partition Table, not sure if it works for Apple
Partition Map drives.

http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1433

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

In article <slrnjtof93.1vaf.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net> 
>   Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> > In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> >  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> 
> >> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> >> >
> >> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> >> > Lion Recovery
> >> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> >> > Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> >> > Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> >> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> >> 
> >> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
> 
> > that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
> > AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
> 
> > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
> > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
> > add a recovery partition.
> 
> Why not?

Because doing so would destroy the data on them.  I could buy another 
1TB drive to back the existing ones, one at a time.  But suppose for 
arguments sake that this isn't possible.  How do you recover from Lion 
installed in this environment?

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]

In article <160620120200198604%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net>, Michael
> Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> 
> > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
> > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
> > add a recovery partition.  How does one 'recover' from _that_ situation?
> 
> nonsense. any drive can be formatted with a recovery partition. i have
> lion on two external drives and both have recovery partitions.

Yes, the _can_ (as in are able to be) but they may not be able to be 
restored (as in If you do you destroy my data by repartitioning the 
disk).  If I can or won't by another 1TB disk to backup my others, so I 
can reformat a disk to install a recovery partition on it, how can I 
recover if there's no boot DVD or internet (yes, classified environment, 
no internet, Tempest cleared vault--just go with it).

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]

Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:

> In article <slrnjtof93.1vaf.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> > In message <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net> 
> >   Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> > > In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> > >  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> > 
> > >> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> > >> >
> > >> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> > >> > Lion Recovery
> > >> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac
> > >> > in the Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or
> > >> > reinstall OS X Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion
> > >> > Recovery
> > >> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> > >> 
> > >> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
> > 
> > > that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
> > > AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
> > 
> > > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have
> > > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to
> > > add a recovery partition.
> > 
> > Why not?
> 
> Because doing so would destroy the data on them. 

Are you not aware that Disk Utility on Mac OS X has had the ability to
do a non-destructive repartition since Leopard?

The only requirements are that the drive is partitioned using Apple
Partition Map or GUID Partition Table (not the Windows-compatible Master
Boot Record), that it has enough free space, and that there are no open
files located in the region near the end of the drive which you want to
use for the new partition.

The last point is generally only an issue for your startup drive, and
the usual way around it is to boot from a different drive in order to do
the repartition. For example, boot from the Lion recovery partition or
your OS install DVD, and use Disk Utility there.

The installation process of Snow Leopard and Lion even makes use of this
mechanism to create a temporary partition while installing the OS. If
you have installed Snow Leopard directly to an external drive, it has
undergone a non-destructive repartition.

> I could buy another 1TB drive to back the existing ones, one at a time.
> But suppose for arguments sake that this isn't possible.  How do you
> recover from Lion installed in this environment?

Setting aside the option of buying Lion on a USB thumb drive (which is
expensive, and is rumoured to be going away as an option for Mountain
Lion)...

And setting aside the option of creating a Lion install DVD or USB flash
drive yourself from the Lion installer (not documented by Apple but the
details are out there for anyone who cares to look)...

If the only recovery partition was on your main hard drive and the drive
died or the recovery partition got wiped somehow, then you would
typically use Internet Recovery, which is built into the firmware of
every Mac introduced since mid 2011 (when Lion was released) and Apple
added via a firmware update to many older models:

iMac (Mid 2010, Early 2011)
MacBook Pro (Early 2010, 13" Mid 2010, Early 2011)
MacBook (Mid 2010)
MacBook Air (Late 2010)
Mac Mini (Mid 2010)

If your model doesn't have Internet Recovery support in firmware and was
upgraded to Lion, then it must have had Snow Leopard in order to install
Lion. In this case, reinstalling Lion from scratch involves first
reinstalling Snow Leopard from your DVD, updating to 10.6.8 and then
redownloading the Lion installer from the App Store.

The only case I can see where there might be a problem is a Mac Pro
bought after Lion was introduced, which came with Lion preinstalled.
Unless the Mac Pro has had a firmware update which Apple didn't push out
to Mid 2010 models sold prior to Lion being preinstalled, a Mac Pro
which came with Lion preinsatlled might have no way to recover if the
hard drive died.

Anyone here bought a Mac Pro which came with Lion preinstalled? Did it
include a Snow Leopard DVD? What Boot ROM Version is reported by System
Profiler/Information?

The last EFI update Apple published for the mid 2010 Mac Pro is EFI
Firmware Update 1.5. The firmware it installs should be shown as version
"MP51.007F.B03". Can someone with this Mac Pro model who installed this
update confirm this detail?

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

On 6/15/2012 10:36 PM PT, Michelle Steiner typed:

> In article<C5-dnZDUvrEViUHSnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
>   Ant<ant@zimage.comANT>  wrote:
>
>>> anyway, the really cool thing is you can network boot the mini with a
>>> totally blank hard drive from apple.com and install lion. just be sure
>>> you have a fast connection.
>>
>> Yeah and no caps! That's not always the case. Hence, I still prefer the
>> physical media.
>
> You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.

69 bucks? Ick. I'd rather make my own from the HDD it comes with.
-- 
"Don't step on ants... they're people too." --a quote from ANTZ movie.
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 6/16/2012 12:04 AM PT, Michelle Steiner typed:

> In article<160620120202316551%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>   nospam<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote:
>
>>> You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.
>>
>> you can, but macs that are introduced after next month won't be able to
>> boot lion anymore (unless the changes are very minor which is not
>> likely). mountain lion will not be available on a flash stick because
>> demand for the lion stick was very low.
>
> True, but he was asking specifically about Lion.

Well, future versions would be interesting too.
-- 
"You feel the faint grit of ants beneath your shoes, but keep on walking 
because in this world you have to decide what you're willing to kill." 
--Tony Hoagland from "Candlelight"
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 6/15/2012 10:44 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:

>>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in
>>> the Recovery HD, a new
>>> feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a
>>> physical disc. Learn more
>>> about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>> You still need to copy that partition to another physical media. If your
>> hard disk dies (hardware failure), then you lose that recovery partition
>> as well as your real partition.
>
> Obviously you did not read the link I gave above. If you had you would
> have seen this:
>
> If your Mac problem is a little less common — your hard drive has failed
> or you’ve
> installed a hard drive without OS X, for example — Internet Recovery
> takes over
> automatically. It downloads and starts OS X Recovery directly from Apple
> servers over a
> broadband Internet connection. And your Mac has access to the same OS X
> Recovery features
> online. Internet Recovery is built into every newly-released Mac
> starting with the Mac mini
> and MacBook Air.

What happens to those with crappy Internet connections or capped? I 
assume one has to buy it? I assume there is a feature to make your own 
discs/USB drive on a working Mac in advance like on those OEM IBM PCs?
-- 
"To the gods I am an ant, but to the ants, I am a god." --unknown
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 6/16/2012 12:57 AM PT, Lewis typed:

>> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
>> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
>> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix,
>> etc.?
>
> No.

Thanks. :)
-- 
"It doesn't matter what your D&D manual says, you did not get 5 
experience points for killing the giant ant in your kitchen." --BBspot's 
Geek Horoscopes (7/30/2004)
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

In article <jrharg$iog$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
<larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>> mountain lion will not be available on a flash stick because
> >>> demand for the lion stick was very low.
> >> And how do you know that? Did Steve tell you?
> >>
> > yes he did, in a seance.
> >
> > and for those who don't believe in seances,
> > <http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/44422/mountain-lion-mac-app-store-only>
> >
> >    Apple has confirmed to Pocket-lint though that its concerns weren't
> >    justified with customers not remotely interested in the USB drive
> >    offering:
> >
> >    "It was an interesting test, but it turns out the App Store was just
> >    fine for getting the new OS."
> 
> And where is the actual statement from Apple?

read it again.

or just keep believing apple will release mountain lion on usb sticks.

In article <vilain-EEC77E.03481116062012@news.individual.net>, Michael
Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:

> > > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
> > > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
> > > add a recovery partition.  How does one 'recover' from _that_ situation?
> > 
> > nonsense. any drive can be formatted with a recovery partition. i have
> > lion on two external drives and both have recovery partitions.
> 
> Yes, the _can_ (as in are able to be) but they may not be able to be 
> restored (as in If you do you destroy my data by repartitioning the 
> disk). 

have you even tried? the lion installer will create a recovery
partition without destroying anything. 

if for some reason it can't do a live partition, it won't even try.
boot camp has been doing live partitions for several years and i don't
see anyone complaining about data loss.

> If I can or won't by another 1TB disk to backup my others, so I 
> can reformat a disk to install a recovery partition on it, how can I 
> recover if there's no boot DVD or internet (yes, classified environment, 
> no internet, Tempest cleared vault--just go with it).

there will be a recovery partition on it, unless you clone it and don't
clone that partition.

In article <vilain-E90774.03450616062012@news.individual.net>, Michael
Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:

> > > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
> > > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
> > > add a recovery partition.
> > 
> > Why not?
> 
> Because doing so would destroy the data on them.  I could buy another 
> 1TB drive to back the existing ones, one at a time.  But suppose for 
> arguments sake that this isn't possible.  How do you recover from Lion 
> installed in this environment?

what are you talking about? installing lion on an external drive works
fine and a recovery partition is created without any problems and no
data is lost. it doesn't matter if it's internal or external.

In article <Y6OdnZl1D-1blUHSnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
 Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its 
> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install 
> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix, 
> etc.? I only got these items:
> 
> 1. Mac Mini
> 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
> 3. Power adapter
> 4. White Apple stickers
> 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)

Thass right.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net>,
 Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:

> In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
>  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> 
> > On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> > >
> > > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> > > Lion Recovery
> > > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> > > Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> > > Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> > > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> > 
> > Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
> 
> that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
> AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
> 
> I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
> 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
> add a recovery partition.  How does one 'recover' from _that_ situation?

Much easier than you might imagine.  Here's how I did it when I had a 
new drive put into my iMac recently.

1.  booted off my Lion clone disk (made with SuperDuper!)
2.  Ran SuperDuper! to restore that to the internal drive.
3.  Then went to the App Store and downloaded the latest Lion and 
installed it Lion over Lion.  During that the recovery partition was 
created with no problems and no reformatting.

Larry Gusaas wrote:
>
> On 2012-06-15 10:17 PM Ant wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>>
>> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
>> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
>> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall,
>> fix, etc.? I only got these items:
>>
>> 1. Mac Mini
>> 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
>> 3. Power adapter
>> 4. White Apple stickers
>> 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
>>
>> If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already
>> set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.
>>
>> Thank you in advance. :)
>
>  From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> Lion Recovery
> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>
Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more to 
work decent.
But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with 
un-interrupted Connection to re-download

nospam wrote:
> In article<qeednaqApeIzkEHSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant
> <ant@zimage.comANT>  wrote:
>
>>>> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
>>>> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
>>>> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix,
>>>> etc.? I only got these items:
>>>
>>> nope. there's a recovery partition on the hard drive and it can
>>> reinstall lion over the net from apple's servers if necessary.
>>
>> Oh! So how does one get to those?
>
> cmd-r
>
>> Is this happening on all new Apple
>> computers or just Mac Minis?
>
> all new macs
>
>> Is there way to make a installer disc/USB
>> flash media like with IBM PCs? Physical medias would be faster than
>> downloading especially for those with crappy Internet connections and/or
>> with caps. :(
>
> how often do you expect to be installing lion?
>
> anyway, the really cool thing is you can network boot the mini with a
> totally blank hard drive from apple.com and install lion. just be sure
> you have a fast connection.
  On 3Mb DSL which is average about 36 hours non breaking non stop.

Ant wrote:
> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
>>
>> From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
>> Lion Recovery
>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
>> Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
>> Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
>> http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>
> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(

I would download The Install Application and burn to a DVD
Dumb Companies don't take into account such contingencies They think 
Parts never fail.

For me to upgrade mean I go to drive 60 miles to nearest apple store 
just to borrow their fios Connect just to do so.

In article <jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
 PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> Larry Gusaas wrote:
> >
> > On 2012-06-15 10:17 PM Ant wrote:
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >>
> >> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
> >> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
> >> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall,
> >> fix, etc.? I only got these items:
> >>
> >> 1. Mac Mini
> >> 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
> >> 3. Power adapter
> >> 4. White Apple stickers
> >> 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
> >>
> >> If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already
> >> set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.
> >>
> >> Thank you in advance. :)
> >
> >  From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> > Lion Recovery
> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> > Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> > Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> >
> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more to 
> work decent.
> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with 
> un-interrupted Connection to re-download

I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a 
12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times 
longer, say 4 hours.

Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> On 6/15/2012 10:44 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> 
> >>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in
> >>> the Recovery HD, a new
> >>> feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a
> >>> physical disc. Learn more
> >>> about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> >> You still need to copy that partition to another physical media. If your
> >> hard disk dies (hardware failure), then you lose that recovery partition
> >> as well as your real partition.
> >
> > Obviously you did not read the link I gave above. If you had you would
> > have seen this:
> >
> > If your Mac problem is a little less common — your hard drive has failed
> > or you've installed a hard drive without OS X, for example — Internet
> > Recovery takes over automatically. It downloads and starts OS X Recovery
> > directly from Apple servers over a broadband Internet connection. And
> > your Mac has access to the same OS X Recovery features online. Internet
> > Recovery is built into every newly-released Mac starting with the Mac
> > mini and MacBook Air.
> 
> What happens to those with crappy Internet connections or capped?

Assuming you are talking about how to restore Lion on a computer which
came with it preinstalled (and no install media):

(a) Restore from the backup you should have anyway.

(b) Take the computer to somewhere with a better Internet connection.

(c) Buy a Lion installer on a thumb drive from Apple (US$65).

(d) There are also options around buying a copy of Lion from the App
Store on a Mac which has a better Internet connection (US$29.99), but in
the case where your hard drive is hosed and you have no other installed
bootable Lion systems, it would need another Mac to assist with the
reinstall, since you need to run the Lion installer application from a
Snow Leopard or Lion system.

If you already bought a copy of Lion to upgrade another computer, you
don't need to buy it again but you will need a copy of the installer
application so might need to download it again if you didn't keep one.

There are also complexities with version compatibiity for options (c)
and (d), if your computer came with Lion preinstalled you need a version
of the Lion installer which is new enough for that model. This may
require re-downloading Lion from the App Store if your existing copy of
the installer is too old.

For example, the mid 2011 MacBook Air and Mac Mini were the first models
with Lion preinstalled, and they originally came with a special build of
10.7.0. You need the full installer for 10.7.1 or later to install on
those models.

The mid 2012 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro which were just released will
have come with a special build of either 10.7.3 or 10.7.4. They will
need a full installer for 10.7.5 or later, which isn't available yet, so
the only way to restore those models at present is methods (a) or (b).

> I assume one has to buy it?

If you have no backups and have no access to a reasonable broadband
connection (or can't move your computer for some reason) then yes.

> I assume there is a feature to make your own discs/USB drive on a working
> Mac in advance like on those OEM IBM PCs?

No. Apple's official method of reinstalling Lion is to download it. They
don't provide any way to create a bootable installer in the manner of
the DVD that came with pre-Lion Macs.

You can of course make a backup of the computer using a variety of
tools, but that won't be an installer, just an image which can be used
to restore the system.

Note that if you use Time Machine to back up your system, a Time Machine
backup is not bootable. Restoring it requires booting from another drive
which has an installed copy of Lion, or from the Lion Recovery
partition.

If you don't have either of these, you can use Internet Recovery to
re-download the Lion Recovery partition (about 1 GB), then boot from
that and use it to restore the Time Machine backup.

It would be prudent to make sure you have a bootable Lion system on
another drive, e.g. a clone backup.

It is worth noting that Apple has a "Lion Recovery Disk Assistant" tool
to copy the Lion Recovery partition. You could put it on a USB flash
drive or SD card (I think 1 GB would be big enough but haven't tried it
myself yet), or even copy it to your Time Machine backup drive (assuming
that drive is directly connected to the computer via USB, Firewire or
Thunderbolt - you couldn't boot from a Time Capsule, for example).

<http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1433>

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 05:22:02 -0700, Ant wrote:

> On 6/15/2012 10:36 PM PT, Michelle Steiner typed:
> 
>> You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.
> 
> 69 bucks? Ick. I'd rather make my own from the HDD it comes with.

I can get rather a lot of USB sticks for 69 bucks :-)

On 6/16/2012 6:40 AM PT, PhillipJones typed:

> On 3Mb DSL which is average about 36 hours non breaking non stop.

Also, some people can't get fast speeds and still use dial-ups. Or 
capped and slow like satellite Internet services. :(
-- 
"Be thine enemy an ant, see in him an elephant." --Turkish Proverb
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 08:52:41 -0500, Lloyd wrote:

> In article <jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
>  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> 
>> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more
>> to work decent.
>> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
>> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
> 
> I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a
> 12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times
> longer, say 4 hours.

I believe he's either blowing smoke or getting his megabits and megabytes 
mixed up.

How big is the download?  I have a 3000 Kbit cable service and given a 
non-busy server at the other end I regularly get 3.1 Megabytes/sec 
download speeds (according to Firefox - not sure how accurate that is).

In article <5qiua9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
 Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 08:52:41 -0500, Lloyd wrote:
> 
> > In article <jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
> >  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more
> >> to work decent.
> >> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
> >> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
> > 
> > I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a
> > 12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times
> > longer, say 4 hours.
> 
> I believe he's either blowing smoke or getting his megabits and megabytes 
> mixed up.
> 
> How big is the download?  I have a 3000 Kbit cable service and given a 
> non-busy server at the other end I regularly get 3.1 Megabytes/sec 
> download speeds (according to Firefox - not sure how accurate that is).

That doesn't seem right.  3 Megabytes is 24 Megabits. Even with 
technologies like PowerBoost, I wouldn't expect to be able to squeeze 24 
Mbps through a 3 Mbps connection. So either FF's throughput report is 
wrong, you're wrong about the connection speed, or you're also getting 
bits and bytes mixed up.

Actually, another possibility is that compression is taking place during 
the transfer, but FF is reporting the througput in terms of the 
decompressed data.  What do you see in Activity Monitor's network 
statistics when you're doing one of these transfers?

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

Lloyd wrote:
> In article<jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
>   PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>
>> Larry Gusaas wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2012-06-15 10:17 PM Ant wrote:
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
>>>> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
>>>> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall,
>>>> fix, etc.? I only got these items:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Mac Mini
>>>> 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
>>>> 3. Power adapter
>>>> 4. White Apple stickers
>>>> 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
>>>>
>>>> If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already
>>>> set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you in advance. :)
>>>
>>>    From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
>>> Lion Recovery
>>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
>>> Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
>>> Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
>>> http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>>>
>> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more to
>> work decent.
>> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
>> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
>
> I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a
> 12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times
> longer, say 4 hours.

I said you need at least a Cable connection or FOIS Connection.

It took me 12 hr to download Office2011 when it first come out.

I tried to download LibreOffice update yesterday  said it would take 15 
hrs to download.
I have a 3MB DSL Connection.

Unless you have Cable/FOIS forget it.

You have a Cable Connection. I'm sure you were able to download in 45 
minutes.  Not Blowing Smoke.

David Empson wrote:
> Ant<ant@zimage.comANT>  wrote:
>
>> On 6/15/2012 10:44 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
>>
>>>>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in
>>>>> the Recovery HD, a new
>>>>> feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a
>>>>> physical disc. Learn more
>>>>> about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>>>> You still need to copy that partition to another physical media. If your
>>>> hard disk dies (hardware failure), then you lose that recovery partition
>>>> as well as your real partition.
>>>
>>> Obviously you did not read the link I gave above. If you had you would
>>> have seen this:
>>>
>>> If your Mac problem is a little less common — your hard drive has failed
>>> or you've installed a hard drive without OS X, for example — Internet
>>> Recovery takes over automatically. It downloads and starts OS X Recovery
>>> directly from Apple servers over a broadband Internet connection. And
>>> your Mac has access to the same OS X Recovery features online. Internet
>>> Recovery is built into every newly-released Mac starting with the Mac
>>> mini and MacBook Air.
>>
>> What happens to those with crappy Internet connections or capped?
>
> Assuming you are talking about how to restore Lion on a computer which
> came with it preinstalled (and no install media):
>
> (a) Restore from the backup you should have anyway.
>
> (b) Take the computer to somewhere with a better Internet connection.
>
> (c) Buy a Lion installer on a thumb drive from Apple (US$65).
>
> (d) There are also options around buying a copy of Lion from the App
> Store on a Mac which has a better Internet connection (US$29.99), but in
> the case where your hard drive is hosed and you have no other installed
> bootable Lion systems, it would need another Mac to assist with the
> reinstall, since you need to run the Lion installer application from a
> Snow Leopard or Lion system.
>
> If you already bought a copy of Lion to upgrade another computer, you
> don't need to buy it again but you will need a copy of the installer
> application so might need to download it again if you didn't keep one.
>
> There are also complexities with version compatibiity for options (c)
> and (d), if your computer came with Lion preinstalled you need a version
> of the Lion installer which is new enough for that model. This may
> require re-downloading Lion from the App Store if your existing copy of
> the installer is too old.
>
> For example, the mid 2011 MacBook Air and Mac Mini were the first models
> with Lion preinstalled, and they originally came with a special build of
> 10.7.0. You need the full installer for 10.7.1 or later to install on
> those models.
>
> The mid 2012 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro which were just released will
> have come with a special build of either 10.7.3 or 10.7.4. They will
> need a full installer for 10.7.5 or later, which isn't available yet, so
> the only way to restore those models at present is methods (a) or (b).
>
>> I assume one has to buy it?
>
> If you have no backups and have no access to a reasonable broadband
> connection (or can't move your computer for some reason) then yes.
>
>> I assume there is a feature to make your own discs/USB drive on a working
>> Mac in advance like on those OEM IBM PCs?
>
> No. Apple's official method of reinstalling Lion is to download it. They
> don't provide any way to create a bootable installer in the manner of
> the DVD that came with pre-Lion Macs.
>
> You can of course make a backup of the computer using a variety of
> tools, but that won't be an installer, just an image which can be used
> to restore the system.
>
> Note that if you use Time Machine to back up your system, a Time Machine
> backup is not bootable. Restoring it requires booting from another drive
> which has an installed copy of Lion, or from the Lion Recovery
> partition.
>
> If you don't have either of these, you can use Internet Recovery to
> re-download the Lion Recovery partition (about 1 GB), then boot from
> that and use it to restore the Time Machine backup.
>
> It would be prudent to make sure you have a bootable Lion system on
> another drive, e.g. a clone backup.
>
> It is worth noting that Apple has a "Lion Recovery Disk Assistant" tool
> to copy the Lion Recovery partition. You could put it on a USB flash
> drive or SD card (I think 1 GB would be big enough but haven't tried it
> myself yet), or even copy it to your Time Machine backup drive (assuming
> that drive is directly connected to the computer via USB, Firewire or
> Thunderbolt - you couldn't boot from a Time Capsule, for example).
>
> <http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1433>
>

There is a way to create a bootable DVD install disk. Describe either on 
MacWorld or MacLife.
1. You use download the installer
2. Then immediately move it out of Applications.
3. Next you Hold control key down and click on the application
4. Choose Show Package contents.
5. Look for an Installer .dmg File
6. Move a Copy of this to desktop.
7. Open Disk Utility and locate the installer dmg
8. choose to create DVD from the dmg file.

you can also use the same to install on a USB stick. as well . The USB 
stick or jump drive has to be double the size of the contents of the dmg 
so there will be enough working space for the installer to work. If 
There is not enough room your newly created installer will corrupt the 
USB stick immediately.

On 2012-06-16 00:17 , Ant wrote:
> Hello.
>
>
> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix,
> etc.? I only got these items:
>
> 1. Mac Mini
> 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
> 3. Power adapter
> 4. White Apple stickers
> 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
>
> If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already
> set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.

Apple are in Phase 2 of eliminating physical media.  No more distributed 
disks or flash drives.  I'd bet the "next" Mini's will not have CD/DVD 
drives.

But you can also, when the next major update rolls around, make your own 
bootable install disk at that revision.  Don't let App store complete 
the install.  Then make an ISO of the install (ESD) file:

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13727_7-20080989-263/how-to-create-an-os-x-lion-installation-disc/

You'd have to pay $29 for that now - so just wait until (if) you update 
to Mountain Lion.
-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

Paul Sture wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 05:22:02 -0700, Ant wrote:
>
>> On 6/15/2012 10:36 PM PT, Michelle Steiner typed:
>>
>>> You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.
>>
>> 69 bucks? Ick. I'd rather make my own from the HDD it comes with.
>
> I can get rather a lot of USB sticks for 69 bucks :-)

You don't get it: X.7 (Lion only comes as a download from the Internet. 
or on USB Stick.)
Mountain Lion will be download only you'll be SOL unless you have a very 
high speed connection. Mountain Lion X.8  will be download only no 
provision for people with slow Internet will be made.

They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.

In article <1klt962.106b40v5gfd0uN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
 dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:

> Note that if you use Time Machine to back up your system, a Time Machine
> backup is not bootable. Restoring it requires booting from another drive
> which has an installed copy of Lion, or from the Lion Recovery
> partition.

Really? If I boot with option held down, my TM backup shows up as a boot 
choice (as does EFI, mind you).

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <5qiua9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
 Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 08:52:41 -0500, Lloyd wrote:
> 
> > In article <jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
> >  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more
> >> to work decent.
> >> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
> >> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
> > 
> > I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a
> > 12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times
> > longer, say 4 hours.
> 
> I believe he's either blowing smoke or getting his megabits and megabytes 
> mixed up.
I suspect what you said. Took me an hour or so, perhaps two, to download 
the "extra components" of Lion when I reinstalled it. That was several 
GB. My ADSL connection speed is <consults router> 7.6Mbps. Certainly not 
12 or 36 hours.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

Paul Sture wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 08:52:41 -0500, Lloyd wrote:
>
>> In article<jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
>>   PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more
>>> to work decent.
>>> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
>>> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
>>
>> I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a
>> 12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times
>> longer, say 4 hours.
>
> I believe he's either blowing smoke or getting his megabits and megabytes
> mixed up.
>
> How big is the download?  I have a 3000 Kbit cable service and given a
> non-busy server at the other end I regularly get 3.1 Megabytes/sec
> download speeds (according to Firefox - not sure how accurate that is).

No the listed speed for the connection is 3MB is what the phone describes.
I have used a couple of Speed test sites. and it has been as low as 
850KB and been as high as 4.1 MB  Averages  about 1.5-2 MB.

In article <tsCdnSiKooMqMkHSnZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-06-16 00:17 , Ant wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> >
> > I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
> > small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
> > disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall, fix,
> > etc.? I only got these items:
> >
> > 1. Mac Mini
> > 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
> > 3. Power adapter
> > 4. White Apple stickers
> > 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
> >
> > If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already
> > set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.
> 
> Apple are in Phase 2 of eliminating physical media.  No more distributed 
> disks or flash drives.  I'd bet the "next" Mini's will not have CD/DVD 
> drives.

Wakey wakey: they already don't and haven't for a year. Mine (bought Jan 
2012) doesn't.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

Barry Margolin wrote:
> In article<5qiua9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>   Paul Sture<paul.nospam@sture.ch>  wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 08:52:41 -0500, Lloyd wrote:
>>
>>> In article<jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
>>>   PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more
>>>> to work decent.
>>>> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
>>>> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
>>>
>>> I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a
>>> 12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times
>>> longer, say 4 hours.
>>
>> I believe he's either blowing smoke or getting his megabits and megabytes
>> mixed up.
>>
>> How big is the download?  I have a 3000 Kbit cable service and given a
>> non-busy server at the other end I regularly get 3.1 Megabytes/sec
>> download speeds (according to Firefox - not sure how accurate that is).
>
> That doesn't seem right.  3 Megabytes is 24 Megabits. Even with
> technologies like PowerBoost, I wouldn't expect to be able to squeeze 24
> Mbps through a 3 Mbps connection. So either FF's throughput report is
> wrong, you're wrong about the connection speed, or you're also getting
> bits and bytes mixed up.
>
> Actually, another possibility is that compression is taking place during
> the transfer, but FF is reporting the througput in terms of the
> decompressed data.  What do you see in Activity Monitor's network
> statistics when you're doing one of these transfers?
>
Never used activity Monitor for that purpose.  I'm using the terms my 
ISP and and The Phone company quote.  And the  actual time shown by FF 
or SeaMonkey quotes as time it takes to download.

The one time I downloaded Office2011 FF said it would take 12Hr. I 
started at 8:AM and actually finished up at 9:30 PM

Note that earlier Macs stull have the ability to boot from network, via
TFTP (netbook is how Apple calls it).

Not sure if you are required to have a server version to create the boot
environment that is fed to a boot client.

In article <jrib8c$1hb$1@news.albasani.net>,
 PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.

If you live near an Apple Store, you can take the computer there and 
download using its internet connection.  Sure, it's not as convenient as 
doing it at home, but it is possible.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

On 2012-06-16 13:03 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <jrib8c$1hb$1@news.albasani.net>,
>   PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
>
>> They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.
>
> If you live near an Apple Store, you can take the computer there and
> download using its internet connection.  Sure, it's not as convenient as
> doing it at home, but it is possible.

Define "near".


-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

On 2012-06-16 7:01 AM nospam wrote:
> In article <jrharg$iog$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
> <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> And where is the actual statement from Apple?
> read it again.

There is not reference to an actual Apple statement, only the claim that "Apple confirmed".

> or just keep believing apple will release mountain lion on usb sticks.

I never said I believed that nor do I believe that. You should quit reading things into what 
people write.

You have not provided an actual statement from Apple. Or Apple stating the reason for not 
having USB sticks is because of low demand for them.

An article claiming that Apple confirmed something is not an Apple statement.

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

On 2012-06-16 12:17 , Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <tsCdnSiKooMqMkHSnZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-06-16 00:17 , Ant wrote:
>> > Hello.
>> >
>> >
>> > I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
>> > small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
>> > disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall,
>> fix,
>> > etc.? I only got these items:
>> >
>> > 1. Mac Mini
>> > 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
>> > 3. Power adapter
>> > 4. White Apple stickers
>> > 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
>> >
>> > If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already
>> > set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.
>>
>> Apple are in Phase 2 of eliminating physical media.  No more
>> distributed disks or flash drives.  I'd bet the "next" Mini's will not
>> have CD/DVD drives.
>
> Wakey wakey: they already don't and haven't for a year. Mine (bought Jan
> 2012) doesn't.

So my bet was right.  (I didn't realize they'd made the change already). 
  Sigh.

-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

On 2012-06-16 6:28 AM Ant wrote:
> I assume there is a feature to make your own discs/USB drive on a working Mac in advance like 
> on those OEM IBM PCs? 
The link I gave you before has a section "The Do-It-Yourself Recovery Tool".

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In article <1klt1gw.157u36b1bw1sw3N%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
 dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:

> Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> 
> > In article <slrnjtof93.1vaf.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > 
> > > In message <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net> 
> > >   Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> > > > In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> > > >  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> > > 
> > > >> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> > > >> > Lion Recovery
> > > >> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac
> > > >> > in the Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or
> > > >> > reinstall OS X Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion
> > > >> > Recovery
> > > >> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> > > >> 
> > > >> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
> > > 
> > > > that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
> > > > AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
> > > 
> > > > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have
> > > > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to
> > > > add a recovery partition.
> > > 
> > > Why not?
> > 
> > Because doing so would destroy the data on them. 
> 
> Are you not aware that Disk Utility on Mac OS X has had the ability to
> do a non-destructive repartition since Leopard?
> 
> The only requirements are that the drive is partitioned using Apple
> Partition Map or GUID Partition Table (not the Windows-compatible Master
> Boot Record), that it has enough free space, and that there are no open
> files located in the region near the end of the drive which you want to
> use for the new partition.
> 
> The last point is generally only an issue for your startup drive, and
> the usual way around it is to boot from a different drive in order to do
> the repartition. For example, boot from the Lion recovery partition or
> your OS install DVD, and use Disk Utility there.
> 
> The installation process of Snow Leopard and Lion even makes use of this
> mechanism to create a temporary partition while installing the OS. If
> you have installed Snow Leopard directly to an external drive, it has
> undergone a non-destructive repartition.
> 
> > I could buy another 1TB drive to back the existing ones, one at a time.
> > But suppose for arguments sake that this isn't possible.  How do you
> > recover from Lion installed in this environment?
> 
> Setting aside the option of buying Lion on a USB thumb drive (which is
> expensive, and is rumoured to be going away as an option for Mountain
> Lion)...
> 
> And setting aside the option of creating a Lion install DVD or USB flash
> drive yourself from the Lion installer (not documented by Apple but the
> details are out there for anyone who cares to look)...
> 
> If the only recovery partition was on your main hard drive and the drive
> died or the recovery partition got wiped somehow, then you would
> typically use Internet Recovery, which is built into the firmware of
> every Mac introduced since mid 2011 (when Lion was released) and Apple
> added via a firmware update to many older models:
> 
> iMac (Mid 2010, Early 2011)
> MacBook Pro (Early 2010, 13" Mid 2010, Early 2011)
> MacBook (Mid 2010)
> MacBook Air (Late 2010)
> Mac Mini (Mid 2010)
> 
> If your model doesn't have Internet Recovery support in firmware and was
> upgraded to Lion, then it must have had Snow Leopard in order to install
> Lion. In this case, reinstalling Lion from scratch involves first
> reinstalling Snow Leopard from your DVD, updating to 10.6.8 and then
> redownloading the Lion installer from the App Store.
> 
> The only case I can see where there might be a problem is a Mac Pro
> bought after Lion was introduced, which came with Lion preinstalled.
> Unless the Mac Pro has had a firmware update which Apple didn't push out
> to Mid 2010 models sold prior to Lion being preinstalled, a Mac Pro
> which came with Lion preinsatlled might have no way to recover if the
> hard drive died.
> 
> Anyone here bought a Mac Pro which came with Lion preinstalled? Did it
> include a Snow Leopard DVD? What Boot ROM Version is reported by System
> Profiler/Information?
> 
> The last EFI update Apple published for the mid 2010 Mac Pro is EFI
> Firmware Update 1.5. The firmware it installs should be shown as version
> "MP51.007F.B03". Can someone with this Mac Pro model who installed this
> update confirm this detail?

This will work for a highly fragmented disk with lots of files that are 
fragmented?  I tried making a TechTool eBoot disk and it failed when I 
had over 200GB free space until I "defragmented" the disk.

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]

On 2012-06-16 9:47 AM PhillipJones wrote:
> I tried to download LibreOffice update yesterday  said it would take 15 hrs to download.
> I have a 3MB DSL Connection.

If it takes that long complain to your Internet Provider.
I have downloaded OpenOffice.org (LibreOffice is a fork) on a 1.5 Mbps connection and it took 
about 18 minutes.

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In article <keadnUFzU9pDXEHSnZ2dnUVZ_tydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> >> They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.
> >
> > If you live near an Apple Store, you can take the computer there and 
> > download using its internet connection.  Sure, it's not as convenient 
> > as doing it at home, but it is possible.
> 
> Define "near".

That's for each of us to decide for herself or himself.  For me, it's a 
20-minute drive; I have two Apple Stores within that limit.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:11:55 -0400, PhillipJones wrote:

> Paul Sture wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 05:22:02 -0700, Ant wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/15/2012 10:36 PM PT, Michelle Steiner typed:
>>>
>>>> You can buy a Lion installer USB Flash drive from Apple for $69.
>>>
>>> 69 bucks? Ick. I'd rather make my own from the HDD it comes with.
>>
>> I can get rather a lot of USB sticks for 69 bucks :-)
> 
> You don't get it: X.7 (Lion only comes as a download from the Internet.
> or on USB Stick.)

No, what I am really saying is that at 69 bucks, folks will find other 
ways to get hold of the installer.  At 20 bucks or less I wouldn't 
hesitate to buy one if needed; at 69 bucks I would look for a friend 
who could create one for me (and I'd buy them drinks or lunch in return. 
whatever).

> Mountain Lion will be download only you'll be SOL unless you have a very
> high speed connection. Mountain Lion X.8  will be download only no
> provision for people with slow Internet will be made.
> 
> They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.

They priced the USB option high enough to say "We don't really want to do 
this".  When I was on slow dial up we found local user groups, friends 
and friendly dealers who would take the pain out of heavy downloads.  I 
am sure the same will happen again.

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:52:53 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> Note that earlier Macs stull have the ability to boot from network, via
> TFTP (netbook is how Apple calls it).
> 
> Not sure if you are required to have a server version to create the boot
> environment that is fed to a boot client.

Here's how to set up OS X Server for booting Linux clients over the 
network.

<http://www.shawnhogan.com/2011/05/pxe-network-boot-linux-with-mac-os-x-
server.html>

I am sure I came across a method for setting up OS X non-server to do 
this several months ago, but cannot find the link.

In article <jrig18$v76$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
<larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> And where is the actual statement from Apple?
> > read it again.
> 
> There is not reference to an actual Apple statement, only the claim that
> "Apple confirmed".

what do you think confirmed means?

On 2012-06-16 12:33 PM nospam wrote:
> In article <jrig18$v76$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
> <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> And where is the actual statement from Apple?
>>> read it again.
>> There is not reference to an actual Apple statement, only the claim that
>> "Apple confirmed".
> what do you think confirmed means?

I know what confirmed means. Unless there is a reference to an actual statement from Apple, 
saying it is confirmed means diddly-squat.

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:22:21 -0400, Barry Margolin wrote:

> In article <5qiua9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> How big is the download?  I have a 3000 Kbit cable service and given a
>> non-busy server at the other end I regularly get 3.1 Megabytes/sec
>> download speeds (according to Firefox - not sure how accurate that is).

I missed a zero out there and for a bonus got the number wrong too :-( 

I've just looked at my latest bill and I am on what they now call "Fiber 
Power Internet 25".  It used to have  "25000" in the name.

The web page describing it is here:

<http://www.upc-cablecom.ch/en/b2c/internet/fiberpower25.htm>

Hmm, I see that double the speed is just another 10 bucks a month...

> That doesn't seem right.  3 Megabytes is 24 Megabits. Even with
> technologies like PowerBoost, I wouldn't expect to be able to squeeze 24
> Mbps through a 3 Mbps connection. So either FF's throughput report is
> wrong, you're wrong about the connection speed, or you're also getting
> bits and bytes mixed up.

25 Megabits sounds right then.  The 3.1 MB/s figure is not just what I 
see regularly in Firefox but what command line SCP reports for downloads.

> Actually, another possibility is that compression is taking place during
> the transfer, but FF is reporting the throughput in terms of the
> decompressed data.  What do you see in Activity Monitor's network
> statistics when you're doing one of these transfers?

So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP 
account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers of 
each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so network 
latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.

With a 160 MB file scp reported 3.0 MB/s overall and Activity Monitor 
reported peaks of 3.31 MB/s, sometimes dropping as low as 2.7 but for 
most of the time at or above 3.0.

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:54:13 -0600, Larry Gusaas wrote:

> On 2012-06-16 9:47 AM PhillipJones wrote:
>> I tried to download LibreOffice update yesterday  said it would take 15
>> hrs to download.
>> I have a 3MB DSL Connection.
> 
> If it takes that long complain to your Internet Provider.
> I have downloaded OpenOffice.org (LibreOffice is a fork) on a 1.5 Mbps
> connection and it took about 18 minutes.

Seconded.  When I was on a 64 Kbps ISDN connection I could get close to 
7KB/s, which approximates to 25 Megabytes per hour.  A 100 MB download 
was perfectly feasible as long as I chose to do it at cheap overnight or 
weekend telephone rates.

Phillip, you should really complain to your ISP.

In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
 Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:

> So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP 
> account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers of 
> each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so network 
> latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.

Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs interconnect. 
You should do a traceroute to find that out.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <160620121433016883%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > >> And where is the actual statement from Apple?
> > > read it again.
> > 
> > There is not reference to an actual Apple statement, only the claim 
> > that "Apple confirmed".
> 
> what do you think confirmed means?

Problem is that *they said* that Apple confirmed it; that's second-hand 
information, or what is commonly known as hearsay.  One would have to trust 
them in order to believe that Apple actually said it.

Thus far, no one has shown a statement directly from Apple.

Of course, this doesn't mean that Apple didn't say it, only that we haven't 
seen Apple's direct statement.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In article <michelle-E8954B.13060116062012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > >> And where is the actual statement from Apple?
> > > >
> > > > read it again.
> > > 
> > > There is not reference to an actual Apple statement, only the claim 
> > > that "Apple confirmed".
> > 
> > what do you think confirmed means?
> 
> Problem is that *they said* that Apple confirmed it; that's second-hand 
> information, or what is commonly known as hearsay.  One would have to trust 
> them in order to believe that Apple actually said it.

do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement
from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.

> Thus far, no one has shown a statement directly from Apple.

not everything requires a formal press release.

> Of course, this doesn't mean that Apple didn't say it, only that we haven't 
> seen Apple's direct statement.

apple confirmed it. apparently that's not sufficient for some people,
but the reality is, mountain lion will *not* be available on a usb
stick.

In article <timstreater-E1E960.20561616062012@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> 
> > So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP 
> > account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers of 
> > each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so network 
> > latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
> 
> Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs interconnect. 
> You should do a traceroute to find that out.

Yeah, on the Internet it's not uncommon to take a trip around the corner 
by way of the airport.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

In message <vilain-E90774.03450616062012@news.individual.net> 
  Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnjtof93.1vaf.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net> 
>>   Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
>> > In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
>> >  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>> 
>> >> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
>> >> >
>> >> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
>> >> > Lion Recovery
>> >> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
>> >> > Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
>> >> > Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
>> >> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
>> 
>> > that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the 
>> > AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
>> 
>> > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
>> > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
>> > add a recovery partition.
>> 
>> Why not?

> Because doing so would destroy the data on them.

No. That's not correct at all.

-- 
I DO NOT HAVE DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY Bart chalkboard Ep. 9F20
Lister: What d'ya think of Betty? Cat: Betty Rubble? Well, I would go
with Betty... but I'd be thinking of Wilma. Lister: This is crazy. Why
are we talking about going to bed with Wilma Flintstone? Cat: You're
right. We're nuts. This is an insane conversation. Lister: She'll never
leave Fred, and we know it.

In message <vilain-EEC77E.03481116062012@news.individual.net> 
  Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <160620120200198604%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> In article <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net>, Michael
>> Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
>> 
>> > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.  I have 
>> > 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be reformatted to 
>> > add a recovery partition.  How does one 'recover' from _that_ situation?
>> 
>> nonsense. any drive can be formatted with a recovery partition. i have
>> lion on two external drives and both have recovery partitions.

> Yes, the _can_ (as in are able to be) but they may not be able to be 
> restored (as in If you do you destroy my data by repartitioning the 
> disk).

No. You are wrong. Completely, utterly, totally,
living-in-the-last-century, WRONG.


-- 
"Oh damn", said Maladict.
I mistook thee for thy better Hamlet Act III scene 4

In message <jrib8c$1hb$1@news.albasani.net> 
  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.

You can also walk into any Apple store with your USB drive and have them
put the current System on it. You might have to make a genius
appointment. They might let you just stick a USB drive into a handy
macbook and login to the Apple Store.


-- 
I WILL NOT PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO BART Bart chalkboard Ep. 7F09
Far away, across the fields, the tolling of the iron bell calls the
faithful to their knees to hear the softly spoken magic spells.

In message <jriath$p0$1@news.albasani.net> 
  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> 1. You use download the installer
> 2. Then immediately move it out of Applications.

Not necessary.

>8. choose to create DVD from the dmg file.

(I prefer to restore the image onto a USB thumb drive, it's faster to
create, faster to boot, and faster to install).

>you can also use the same to install on a USB stick. as well . The USB
>stick or jump drive has to be double the size of the contents of the
>dmg so there will be enough working space for the installer to work. If
>There is not enough room your newly created installer will corrupt the
>USB stick immediately.

I don't know about that. How large is the installer? (I've only ever
restored it to an 8GB stick as those are the ones I have. Perhaps it is
under 4GB?)


-- 
Mos Eisley spaceport. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum
and villainy. We must be cautious.
'Detectoring is like gambling,' said Vimes, putting down the clove. 'The
secret is to know the winner in advance.' 

In message <jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net> 
  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more to 
> work decent.
> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with 
> un-interrupted Connection to re-download

Your math skills are pathetic.

36 hours at 3Mbps is 47GB. Nearly 47 1/2. The OS X Lion installer is
under 4GB in size and at 3Mbps would take about 3 hours to download.

-- 
The PSP could have voice recognition too, so when you go
"nyuuurrrrrrrr-uuuuuurrrrrrrrrrr-uuuuuuurrrrrrrrr" you go faster, an
when you go "Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii" you stop
Vampires are [...] by nature as co-operative as sharks.  Vampyres are
just the same, the only real difference being that they can't spell
properly. --Carpe Jugulum

In message <jri9pv$u1d$1@news.albasani.net> 
  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> I said you need at least a Cable connection or FOIS Connection.

And you have been proven wrong with simple math. Even my Mom's very slow DSL could easily download Lion over night with time to spare.

> It took me 12 hr to download Office2011 when it first come out.

Bully for you.

> I tried to download LibreOffice update yesterday  said it would take 15 
> hrs to download.
> I have a 3MB DSL Connection.

Either "No you don't" or you ISP really sucks. a 3MB connection would be
25Mbps (fast cable or fios speeds). Even a 3Mbps connection would
download Lion in about 3 hours. My mom has a 1.5Mbps dsl, and she can
download Lion overnight (about 7 hours for her)

> Unless you have Cable/FOIS forget it.

"Math is hard."</Mattel's Barbie>

-- 
"There will always be women in rubber flirting with me."
I thought that they were angels, but to my surprise, we climbed aboard
their starship, we headed for the skies.

On 2012-06-16 2:49 PM nospam wrote:
> do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement
> from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.

Do you have any evidence that Apple actually told them that. Good journalistic (and academic) 
practice requires sources for statements like that otherwise they are nothing but hearsay.


-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In article <jrj2o5$gia$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
<larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> > do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement
> > from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.
> 
> Do you have any evidence that Apple actually told them that. Good
> journalistic (and academic) 
> practice requires sources for statements like that otherwise they are nothing but hearsay.

they cited their source. what more do you want? a personal phone call
from tim cook?

feel free to contact them and ask them for proof. post any replies here.

not that it matters since your mind is made up and nothing is going to
convince you otherwise, no matter how convincing it may be. same for
the audiophile nonsense.

In article <160620121649167335%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > Problem is that *they said* that Apple confirmed it; that's 
> > second-hand information, or what is commonly known as hearsay.  One 
> > would have to trust them in order to believe that Apple actually said 
> > it.
> 
> do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement 
> from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.

I didn't say they can't be trusted.  I don't know whether they can be 
trusted.

> > Of course, this doesn't mean that Apple didn't say it, only that we 
> > haven't seen Apple's direct statement.
> 
> apple confirmed it.

They said that Apple confirmed it; I have not seen any confirmation from 
Apple, nor have I seen any corroborating reports from other sources.

They may very well be telling the truth, but I have no way of knowing 
whether they are, and neither do you.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

On 2012-06-16 5:00 PM nospam wrote:
> In article <jrj2o5$gia$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
> <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement
>>> from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.
>> Do you have any evidence that Apple actually told them that. Good
>> journalistic (and academic)
>> practice requires sources for statements like that otherwise they are nothing but hearsay.
> they cited their source. what more do you want? a personal phone call
> from tim cook?

There is no citation or link to anything from Apple. Saying "Apple has confirmed" isn't a 
citation. There needs to be an actual link to an Apple statement for it to be a citation. That 
is what good journalists provide. Otherwise it is hear-say.

> feel free to contact them and ask them for proof. post any replies here.

It the the writer of the article (and yours since you are defending it) to provide verifiable 
citations for the supposed statement from Apple

> not that it matters since your mind is made up and nothing is going to
> convince you otherwise, no matter how convincing it may be.

And I am only asking for a verifiable citation. Why don't you try publishing an academic  
paper, or even a paper for an university class without proper citations?

> same for the audiophile nonsense.

Hey! I am not an audiophile. You should quit making assumptions. It just makes an ass out of 
you. I am a professional who has been working with music and sound for all my adult life. What 
experience do you have?

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In article <jrj2o5$gia$1@dont-email.me>,
 Larry Gusaas <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> > do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement 
> > from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.
> 
> Do you have any evidence that Apple actually told them that. Good 
> journalistic (and academic) practice requires sources for statements 
> like that otherwise they are nothing but hearsay.

Same thing in the intelligence field.  Reports are assigned confirmations 
based on the reliability of the source and degree of confirmation of the 
information.

Source:
A.  Completely reliable (given only to trained US intelligence officers)
B.  Has a history of providing reliable information.
C.  Has generally provided reliable information.
D.  Usually has provided unreliable information.
E.  Never has provided reliable information.
F.  Reliability unknown and undetermined.

Information:
1.  Confirmed
2.  Probably true
3.  Possibly true
4.  Probably false
5.  Proven to be false
6.  Unknown.

I would rate the source and information under discussion as F3.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:

> In article <1klt1gw.157u36b1bw1sw3N%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
>  dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
> 
> > Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <slrnjtof93.1vaf.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> > >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In message <vilain-3F5EC7.22205015062012@news.individual.net> 
> > > >   Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> > > > > In article <KN6dnXoIMKFXj0HSnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> > > > >  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > >> On 6/15/2012 9:38 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> > > > >> > Lion Recovery
> > > > >> > OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac
> > > > >> > in the Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or
> > > > >> > reinstall OS X Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion
> > > > >> > Recovery
> > > > >> > http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Thanks. That would suck if its HDD goes bad with the recovery! :(
> > > > 
> > > > > that's why you have it on AppleCare, so you can take it into the
> > > > > AppleStore to get it's disk replaced.
> > > > 
> > > > > I don't know how this will work for 3rd-party, non-Apple Drives.
> > > > > I have 5 of them, all either data or with 10.6.8.  None can be
> > > > > reformatted to add a recovery partition.
> > > > 
> > > > Why not?
> > > 
> > > Because doing so would destroy the data on them. 
> > 
> > Are you not aware that Disk Utility on Mac OS X has had the ability to
> > do a non-destructive repartition since Leopard?
> > 
> > The only requirements are that the drive is partitioned using Apple
> > Partition Map or GUID Partition Table (not the Windows-compatible Master
> > Boot Record), that it has enough free space, and that there are no open
> > files located in the region near the end of the drive which you want to
> > use for the new partition.

I missed one: file system must be HFS+ (Mac OS Extended) and it must be
Journaled. (I haven't tried Case-sensitive, but I expect that wouldn't
make any difference.)

> > The last point is generally only an issue for your startup drive, and
> > the usual way around it is to boot from a different drive in order to do
> > the repartition. For example, boot from the Lion recovery partition or
> > your OS install DVD, and use Disk Utility there.
> > 
> > The installation process of Snow Leopard and Lion even makes use of this
> > mechanism to create a temporary partition while installing the OS. If
> > you have installed Snow Leopard directly to an external drive, it has
> > undergone a non-destructive repartition.

[...]

> This will work for a highly fragmented disk with lots of files that are
> fragmented?

Disk Utility does a defrag, but I'm not sure how hard it tries. It can
certainly move files out of the area at the end of the partition.

DU doesn't let you use all the free space on the existing partiiton, but
it lets you get quite close to it (I haven't done a recent test so can't
give you a figure).

If the disk was highly fragmented and the partition size you wanted to
create was close to the current free space, it might not be able to
defrag sufficiently.

That might be indicated initially to show a greater minimum size for the
existing partition.

If DU claimed to let you reduce the size of the existing partition and
you actually tried it, I'd expect it to either succeed with the
defragmentation, or report that it was unable to repartition and leave
the original partition map unchanged, either after having done a partial
defrag, or before it moved anything.

> I tried making a TechTool eBoot disk and it failed when I 
> had over 200GB free space until I "defragmented" the disk.

Different tools involved, and I don't know if TechTool Pro tries to
defrag in that case.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> David Empson wrote:
> > Ant<ant@zimage.comANT>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 6/15/2012 10:44 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
> >>
> >>>>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in
> >>>>> the Recovery HD, a new
> >>>>> feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a
> >>>>> physical disc. Learn more
> >>>>> about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> >>>> You still need to copy that partition to another physical media. If your
> >>>> hard disk dies (hardware failure), then you lose that recovery partition
> >>>> as well as your real partition.
> >>>
> >>> Obviously you did not read the link I gave above. If you had you would
> >>> have seen this:
> >>>
> >>> If your Mac problem is a little less common — your hard drive has failed
> >>> or you've installed a hard drive without OS X, for example — Internet
> >>> Recovery takes over automatically. It downloads and starts OS X Recovery
> >>> directly from Apple servers over a broadband Internet connection. And
> >>> your Mac has access to the same OS X Recovery features online. Internet
> >>> Recovery is built into every newly-released Mac starting with the Mac
> >>> mini and MacBook Air.
> >>
> >> What happens to those with crappy Internet connections or capped?
> >
> > Assuming you are talking about how to restore Lion on a computer which
> > came with it preinstalled (and no install media):
> >
> > (a) Restore from the backup you should have anyway.
> >
> > (b) Take the computer to somewhere with a better Internet connection.
> >
> > (c) Buy a Lion installer on a thumb drive from Apple (US$65).
> >
> > (d) There are also options around buying a copy of Lion from the App
> > Store on a Mac which has a better Internet connection (US$29.99), but in
> > the case where your hard drive is hosed and you have no other installed
> > bootable Lion systems, it would need another Mac to assist with the
> > reinstall, since you need to run the Lion installer application from a
> > Snow Leopard or Lion system.
> >
> > If you already bought a copy of Lion to upgrade another computer, you
> > don't need to buy it again but you will need a copy of the installer
> > application so might need to download it again if you didn't keep one.
> >
> > There are also complexities with version compatibiity for options (c)
> > and (d), if your computer came with Lion preinstalled you need a version
> > of the Lion installer which is new enough for that model. This may
> > require re-downloading Lion from the App Store if your existing copy of
> > the installer is too old.
> >
> > For example, the mid 2011 MacBook Air and Mac Mini were the first models
> > with Lion preinstalled, and they originally came with a special build of
> > 10.7.0. You need the full installer for 10.7.1 or later to install on
> > those models.
> >
> > The mid 2012 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro which were just released will
> > have come with a special build of either 10.7.3 or 10.7.4. They will
> > need a full installer for 10.7.5 or later, which isn't available yet, so
> > the only way to restore those models at present is methods (a) or (b).
> >
> >> I assume one has to buy it?
> >
> > If you have no backups and have no access to a reasonable broadband
> > connection (or can't move your computer for some reason) then yes.
> >
> >> I assume there is a feature to make your own discs/USB drive on a working
> >> Mac in advance like on those OEM IBM PCs?
> >
> > No. Apple's official method of reinstalling Lion is to download it. They
> > don't provide any way to create a bootable installer in the manner of
> > the DVD that came with pre-Lion Macs.
> >
> > You can of course make a backup of the computer using a variety of
> > tools, but that won't be an installer, just an image which can be used
> > to restore the system.
> >
> > Note that if you use Time Machine to back up your system, a Time Machine
> > backup is not bootable. Restoring it requires booting from another drive
> > which has an installed copy of Lion, or from the Lion Recovery
> > partition.
> >
> > If you don't have either of these, you can use Internet Recovery to
> > re-download the Lion Recovery partition (about 1 GB), then boot from
> > that and use it to restore the Time Machine backup.
> >
> > It would be prudent to make sure you have a bootable Lion system on
> > another drive, e.g. a clone backup.
> >
> > It is worth noting that Apple has a "Lion Recovery Disk Assistant" tool
> > to copy the Lion Recovery partition. You could put it on a USB flash
> > drive or SD card (I think 1 GB would be big enough but haven't tried it
> > myself yet), or even copy it to your Time Machine backup drive (assuming
> > that drive is directly connected to the computer via USB, Firewire or
> > Thunderbolt - you couldn't boot from a Time Capsule, for example).
> >
> > <http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1433>
> >
> 
> There is a way to create a bootable DVD install disk. Describe either on
> MacWorld or MacLife.
> 1. You use download the installer

You can't do this for a computer with Lion preinstalled, unless you had
also bought Lion from the App Store.

The recovery partition's mechanism for downloading Lion don't give you
an opportunity to intercept the download and create a bootable disk.

(I think I saw someone mention a way to intercept that download and copy
it, but it required a fair degree of hackery.)

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article <1klt962.106b40v5gfd0uN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
>  dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
> 
> > Note that if you use Time Machine to back up your system, a Time Machine
> > backup is not bootable. Restoring it requires booting from another drive
> > which has an installed copy of Lion, or from the Lion Recovery
> > partition.
> 
> Really? If I boot with option held down, my TM backup shows up as a boot
> choice (as does EFI, mind you).

Mine doesn't (on a locally connected drive). You must have a bootable
system installed on your Time Machine drive, as well as it containing a
Time Machine backup.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> Lloyd wrote:
> > In article<jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>,
> >   PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> Larry Gusaas wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2012-06-15 10:17 PM Ant wrote:
> >>>> Hello.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I just got a new Mac Mini at work today. I noticed something from its
> >>>> small box. Is it supposed to come with a Mac OS X 10.7.x install
> >>>> disc/USB flash drive or something in case I ever need to reinstall,
> >>>> fix, etc.? I only got these items:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. Mac Mini
> >>>> 2. DVI to HDMI adapter
> >>>> 3. Power adapter
> >>>> 4. White Apple stickers
> >>>> 5. A manual (didn't see any disc and USB flash drive in it?)
> >>>>
> >>>> If I am missing it, then I hope I don't have to return since I already
> >>>> set it up, installed a bunch of software, copy my data, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you in advance. :)
> >>>
> >>>    From http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
> >>> Lion Recovery
> >>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in the
> >>> Recovery HD, a new feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X
> >>> Lion without a physical disc. Learn more about Lion Recovery
> >>> http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
> >>>
> >> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more to
> >> work decent.
> >> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
> >> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
> >
> > I believe you are blowing a bit of smoke.  Took me 45 minutes with a
> > 12Mbit Cable modem, if DSL is at 3Mbit, then it would take about 4 times
> > longer, say 4 hours.
> 
> I said you need at least a Cable connection or FOIS Connection.
> 
> It took me 12 hr to download Office2011 when it first come out.
> 
> I tried to download LibreOffice update yesterday  said it would take 15
> hrs to download.
> I have a 3MB DSL Connection.

LibreOffice is 170 megabytes.

If your browser claimed that it would take 15 hours to download, that is
11.3 megabytes per hour, or 0.188 megabytes per minute, or either 3.15
or 3.22 kilobytes per second (depending on whether the software counts a
megabyte as 1000 or 1024 kilobytes).

That's about 24 kilobits per second, which is slow by dialup internet
standards. It certainly isn't broadband. If you really have a broadband
connection and it is that slow, complain to your ISP.

Typical ADSL1 download speeds are in the order of 4 megabits per second,
or about 0.4 megabytes per second, which is in the order of 100 times
faster than dialup. Modern ADSL (2+) may be up to about 20 megabits per
second.

At 0.4 megabytes per second (moderate speed ADSL1), Lion (4 GB or about
4000 MB) would take about 10000 seconds to download, which is a little
under 3 hours.

At 2 megabytes per second (fast ADSL2+), Lion would take about half an
hour to download.

The actual maximum speed depends on the wire length between your modem
and the DSLAM (either in an exchange or a cabinet).

> Unless you have Cable/FOIS forget it.
> You have a Cable Connection. I'm sure you were able to download in 45
> minutes.  Not Blowing Smoke.

I don't know about what sort of speeds these get in the US, but here in
New Zealand the best cable plans offer 100 Mbps. At that speed, Lion
would take about 7 minutes to download.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

In article <160620121900430600%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> they cited their source. what more do you want? a personal phone call
> from tim cook?

I emailed, asking when the next iPhone would be released; he replied that 
the next iPhone will be released on October 5, 2012, and will be called 
"The New iPhone".

> not that it matters since your mind is made up and nothing is going to 
> convince you otherwise, no matter how convincing it may be.

That can be said about you, but when said about you is factual.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In article <1kltxyi.ocao8hjingyjN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
 dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:

> I don't know about what sort of speeds these get in the US, but here in
> New Zealand the best cable plans offer 100 Mbps. At that speed, Lion
> would take about 7 minutes to download.

Gawd. I wish I could get 100 Mbps in Canada. We're frog-throttled to 
about 5 Mbps here (600k); but I have an unlimited plan, I don't care how 
long it takes whilst I'm asleep.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child

In article <jrj5jv$51k$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
<larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>> do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement
> >>> from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.
> >> Do you have any evidence that Apple actually told them that. Good
> >> journalistic (and academic)
> >> practice requires sources for statements like that otherwise they are
> >> nothing but hearsay.
> > they cited their source. what more do you want? a personal phone call
> > from tim cook?
> 
> There is no citation or link to anything from Apple. Saying "Apple has
> confirmed" isn't a 
> citation. There needs to be an actual link to an Apple statement for it to be
> a citation. That 
> is what good journalists provide. Otherwise it is hear-say.

no there doesn't need to be an actual link. you're delusional.

journalists don't normally provide transcripts of phone calls or
emails. in fact, some journalists go to jail over not revealing their
sources.

if you want to audit them, by all means go ahead and try to prove that
they made it up. that would be quite the revelation, since that web
site reports on quite a bit of stuff. you could be famous.

> > feel free to contact them and ask them for proof. post any replies here.
> 
> It the the writer of the article (and yours since you are defending it) to
> provide verifiable 
> citations for the supposed statement from Apple

absent any proof it's been falsified or that they have a questionable
track record, there's absolutely no reason to think it's bogus,
particularly since common sense tells you it's true.

> > not that it matters since your mind is made up and nothing is going to
> > convince you otherwise, no matter how convincing it may be.
> 
> And I am only asking for a verifiable citation. Why don't you try publishing
> an academic  
> paper, or even a paper for an university class without proper citations?

what does that have to do with journalism?

> > same for the audiophile nonsense.
> 
> Hey! I am not an audiophile. You should quit making assumptions. It just
> makes an ass out of 
> you. I am a professional who has been working with music and sound for all my adult life. What 
> experience do you have?

you've done no such thing and it's not about my experience or your
experience for that matter.

the facts are that in repeated properly executed double-blind tests,
listeners have consistently *not* been able to tell the difference
between a quality mp3/aac and an original cd recording.

the only times they can is when the mp3/aac is low quality or the test
was biased. obviously, a crappy quality mp3 is going to sound worse
than an original recording. that's because it's crap quality, not
because it's mp3. only those with an agenda try to pawn it off as the
fault of mp3.

the reality is that people *think* they can tell but when the rubber
meets the road, they *can't*.

and as i said before, even test equipment can't measure a difference in
some cases. people claim they can hear a difference between different
wires but if you put those wires on the bench, there's no measurable
electrical difference, thus there *can't* be any difference in sound.

In article <michelle-99EC94.16375316062012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > Problem is that *they said* that Apple confirmed it; that's 
> > > second-hand information, or what is commonly known as hearsay.  One 
> > > would have to trust them in order to believe that Apple actually said 
> > > it.
> > 
> > do you have any evidence they can't be trusted? or maybe a statement 
> > from apple saying they didn't confirm any such thing? didn't think so.
> 
> I didn't say they can't be trusted.  I don't know whether they can be 
> trusted.

do you have any evidence they can't be trusted, such as other falsified
reports? didn't think so.

> > > Of course, this doesn't mean that Apple didn't say it, only that we 
> > > haven't seen Apple's direct statement.
> > 
> > apple confirmed it.
> 
> They said that Apple confirmed it; I have not seen any confirmation from 
> Apple, nor have I seen any corroborating reports from other sources.

call apple yourself. 408-996-1010. ask for tim.

> They may very well be telling the truth, but I have no way of knowing 
> whether they are, and neither do you.

feel free to prove it's false. absent any evidence to the contrary, it
stands on its own.

In message <160620122035583446%nospam@nospam.invalid> 
  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> feel free to prove it's false.

LOGIC 101 FAIL.

You do not prove something is false. You prove it's true. Only. Exclusively.

> absent any evidence to the contrary, it stands on its own.

No, absent any evidence it doesn't stand at all.

-- 
Some people are like a Slinky toy - not really good for anything, but
you still can't help but smile when you shove them down the stairs.
So now you know the words to our song, pretty soon you'll all be singing
along, when you're sad, when you're lonely and it all turns out wrong...

In article <slrnjtqase.2u43.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> > feel free to prove it's false.
> 
> LOGIC 101 FAIL.
> 
> You do not prove something is false. You prove it's true. Only. Exclusively.

some people are claiming that pocket-lint fabricated the story about
what apple said how mountain lion will be distributed.

prove they fabricated it.

> > absent any evidence to the contrary, it stands on its own.
> 
> No, absent any evidence it doesn't stand at all.

they provided the evidence in the article. they said apple confirmed it.

anyone who believes they made that up is welcome to provide evidence
proving they lied.

call apple. get an official statement.

In article <160620122035583446%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > I didn't say they can't be trusted.  I don't know whether they can be 
> > trusted.
> 
> do you have any evidence they can't be trusted, such as other falsified
> reports? didn't think so.

I'll type this slowly for you, so you can have a chance to read it for 
comprehension:  I didn't say they can't be trusted; I said that I don't 
know whether they can be trusted.  Now I'll shout it so it might get 
through your blinders:  I DIDN'T SAY THEY CAN'T BE TRUSTED; I SAID THAT I 
DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY CAN BE TRUSTED!!!

> > They said that Apple confirmed it; I have not seen any confirmation 
> > from Apple, nor have I seen any corroborating reports from other 
> > sources.
> 
> call apple yourself. 408-996-1010. ask for tim.

It's not up to me to corroborate it.  You claim that it's true, so you 
provide the corroborating evidence.

> > They may very well be telling the truth, but I have no way of knowing 
> > whether they are, and neither do you.
> 
> feel free to prove it's false. absent any evidence to the contrary, it 
> stands on its own.

Without corroborating evidence, it is questionable; neither proven nor 
disproven.  I don't have to prove that it's false because I'm not claiming 
that it is false.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In article <160620122116440216%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > No, absent any evidence it doesn't stand at all.
> 
> they provided the evidence in the article. they said apple confirmed it.

That is not evidence.

As I wrote before, Tim Cook said in his reply to my email that the next 
model of the iPhone will be released on October 5, 2012, and it will be 
called simply "The New iPhone".

> anyone who believes they made that up is welcome to provide evidence
> proving they lied.

If you believe that I made it up, you're welcome to provide evidence 
proving that I lied.

> call apple. get an official statement.

Ditto.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <1kltxyi.ocao8hjingyjN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
>  dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
> 
> > I don't know about what sort of speeds these get in the US, but here in
> > New Zealand the best cable plans offer 100 Mbps. At that speed, Lion
> > would take about 7 minutes to download.
> 
> Gawd. I wish I could get 100 Mbps in Canada. We're frog-throttled to 
> about 5 Mbps here (600k); but I have an unlimited plan, I don't care how
> long it takes whilst I'm asleep.

Unfortunately cable is only available in New Zealand from one supplier
and in two cities (Wellington and Christchurch, and you may recall the
latter has had major earthquakes in the last couple of years, which has
caused all sorts of problems for the cable network there).

The high end plans are 100 Mbps down, 10 Mbps up. The mainstream plans
are 15 Mbps down, 2 Mbps up. I'm on the latter, and as long as the
network isn't too congested I can get around 1 to 1.5 MB/s downloads
from fast enough servers (e.g. local Akamai mirror of Apple).

New Zealand has data caps on broadband plans. I'm on a 20 GB per month
plan (about the middle of the range of plans for the mainstream speeds
on cable), but would like to go up to the next plan (40 GB). The high
end plans get up to 150 GB per month. Once you hit the cap on cable, you
pay for additional data in units of 500 MB, 1 GB or 2 GB.

Most broadband in New Zealand is ADSL (usually 2+ these days), and the
dominant provider has recently improved their data caps on some
packages, making my current plan look rather weedy by comparsion (I
could get 120 GB per month for $10 more than I'm paying now to get 20
GB), but probably a little slower for downloads and a lot slower for
uploads. I think my cable provider will have to do something to improve
their plans, or they will lose a lot of customers.

ADSL plans deal with exceeding the cap by either charging per gigabyte
or slowing down to roughly dialup speeds until the end of the billing
cycle (some let you pick either method).

New Zealand is having a fibre optic network rollout over the next few
years, initially concentrating on schools and businesses, then moving
into residential areas, initially areas not covered by a high-speed
network. In Wellington that means residential areas covered by the
competition's cable network are NOT getting fibre soon, so I'm stuck
with cable if I want better speed, unless I move to a different area.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

On 2012-06-16 7:16 PM nospam wrote:
> In article <slrnjtqase.2u43.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>> feel free to prove it's false.
>> LOGIC 101 FAIL.
>>
>> You do not prove something is false. You prove it's true. Only. Exclusively.
> some people are claiming that pocket-lint fabricated the story about
> what apple said how mountain lion will be distributed.
>
> prove they fabricated it.

I haven't seen anyone say pocket-lint fabricated the story. However I have not seen the story 
corroborated by citations to actual sources in the story. I do not know anything about 
pocket-link and have never seen any of their articles before.

>>> absent any evidence to the contrary, it stands on its own.
>> No, absent any evidence it doesn't stand at all.
> they provided the evidence in the article. they said apple confirmed it.

That is not evidence. Without substantiation it is hear-say.

> anyone who believes they made that up is welcome to provide evidence
> proving they lied.
>
> call apple. get an official statement.

Why don't you find corroboration for the story? You are the one insisting it is factual. 
Otherwise it just another rumour about Apple, which are a dime a dozen. Occasionally, one of 
them is true.

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

On 2012-06-16 6:22 PM Warren Oates wrote:
> Gawd. I wish I could get 100 Mbps in Canada.

Yes you can. In Saskatchewan, Sasktel is now laying out fiber optic lines in some centres with 
up to 200 Mbps.
Shaw Cable offers up to 250 Mbps, depending on location.

I have 25 Mbps

-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

PhillipJones wrote:
> David Empson wrote:
>> Ant<ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/15/2012 10:44 PM PT, Larry Gusaas typed:
>>>
>>>>>> OS X Lion includes a built-in set of tools for repairing your Mac in
>>>>>> the Recovery HD, a new
>>>>>> feature that lets you repair disks or reinstall OS X Lion without a
>>>>>> physical disc. Learn more
>>>>>> about Lion Recovery http://www.apple.com/osx/recovery/
>>>>> You still need to copy that partition to another physical media. If
>>>>> your
>>>>> hard disk dies (hardware failure), then you lose that recovery
>>>>> partition
>>>>> as well as your real partition.
>>>>
>>>> Obviously you did not read the link I gave above. If you had you would
>>>> have seen this:
>>>>
>>>> If your Mac problem is a little less common — your hard drive has
>>>> failed
>>>> or you've installed a hard drive without OS X, for example — Internet
>>>> Recovery takes over automatically. It downloads and starts OS X
>>>> Recovery
>>>> directly from Apple servers over a broadband Internet connection. And
>>>> your Mac has access to the same OS X Recovery features online. Internet
>>>> Recovery is built into every newly-released Mac starting with the Mac
>>>> mini and MacBook Air.
>>>
>>> What happens to those with crappy Internet connections or capped?
>>
>> Assuming you are talking about how to restore Lion on a computer which
>> came with it preinstalled (and no install media):
>>
>> (a) Restore from the backup you should have anyway.
>>
>> (b) Take the computer to somewhere with a better Internet connection.
>>
>> (c) Buy a Lion installer on a thumb drive from Apple (US$65).
>>
>> (d) There are also options around buying a copy of Lion from the App
>> Store on a Mac which has a better Internet connection (US$29.99), but in
>> the case where your hard drive is hosed and you have no other installed
>> bootable Lion systems, it would need another Mac to assist with the
>> reinstall, since you need to run the Lion installer application from a
>> Snow Leopard or Lion system.
>>
>> If you already bought a copy of Lion to upgrade another computer, you
>> don't need to buy it again but you will need a copy of the installer
>> application so might need to download it again if you didn't keep one.
>>
>> There are also complexities with version compatibiity for options (c)
>> and (d), if your computer came with Lion preinstalled you need a version
>> of the Lion installer which is new enough for that model. This may
>> require re-downloading Lion from the App Store if your existing copy of
>> the installer is too old.
>>
>> For example, the mid 2011 MacBook Air and Mac Mini were the first models
>> with Lion preinstalled, and they originally came with a special build of
>> 10.7.0. You need the full installer for 10.7.1 or later to install on
>> those models.
>>
>> The mid 2012 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro which were just released will
>> have come with a special build of either 10.7.3 or 10.7.4. They will
>> need a full installer for 10.7.5 or later, which isn't available yet, so
>> the only way to restore those models at present is methods (a) or (b).
>>
>>> I assume one has to buy it?
>>
>> If you have no backups and have no access to a reasonable broadband
>> connection (or can't move your computer for some reason) then yes.
>>
>>> I assume there is a feature to make your own discs/USB drive on a
>>> working
>>> Mac in advance like on those OEM IBM PCs?
>>
>> No. Apple's official method of reinstalling Lion is to download it. They
>> don't provide any way to create a bootable installer in the manner of
>> the DVD that came with pre-Lion Macs.
>>
>> You can of course make a backup of the computer using a variety of
>> tools, but that won't be an installer, just an image which can be used
>> to restore the system.
>>
>> Note that if you use Time Machine to back up your system, a Time Machine
>> backup is not bootable. Restoring it requires booting from another drive
>> which has an installed copy of Lion, or from the Lion Recovery
>> partition.
>>
>> If you don't have either of these, you can use Internet Recovery to
>> re-download the Lion Recovery partition (about 1 GB), then boot from
>> that and use it to restore the Time Machine backup.
>>
>> It would be prudent to make sure you have a bootable Lion system on
>> another drive, e.g. a clone backup.
>>
>> It is worth noting that Apple has a "Lion Recovery Disk Assistant" tool
>> to copy the Lion Recovery partition. You could put it on a USB flash
>> drive or SD card (I think 1 GB would be big enough but haven't tried it
>> myself yet), or even copy it to your Time Machine backup drive (assuming
>> that drive is directly connected to the computer via USB, Firewire or
>> Thunderbolt - you couldn't boot from a Time Capsule, for example).
>>
>> <http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1433>
>>
>
> There is a way to create a bootable DVD install disk. Describe either on
> MacWorld or MacLife.
> 1. You use download the installer
> 2. Then immediately move it out of Applications.
> 3. Next you Hold control key down and click on the application
> 4. Choose Show Package contents.
> 5. Look for an Installer .dmg File
> 6. Move a Copy of this to desktop.
> 7. Open Disk Utility and locate the installer dmg
> 8. choose to create DVD from the dmg file.
>
> you can also use the same to install on a USB stick. as well . The USB
> stick or jump drive has to be double the size of the contents of the dmg
> so there will be enough working space for the installer to work. If
> There is not enough room your newly created installer will corrupt the
> USB stick immediately.

Another Poster has  posted a link to instructions. IF you download it 
through Apple and not the store you'll end being able to control the 
download and opening of correct Dmg file to  make  the install disk.

Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012-06-16 13:03 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
>> In article <jrib8c$1hb$1@news.albasani.net>,
>> PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.
>>
>> If you live near an Apple Store, you can take the computer there and
>> download using its internet connection. Sure, it's not as convenient as
>> doing it at home, but it is possible.
>
> Define "near".
>
>
Nearest for me is 60 miles south. Original it would have been a 5 minute 
ride up town a few years nearest Store in VA is about 3.5 hours away.

-- 
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net/       mailto:pjones1@kimbanet.com

Paul Sture wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:22:21 -0400, Barry Margolin wrote:
>
>> In article<5qiua9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>>   Paul Sture<paul.nospam@sture.ch>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> How big is the download?  I have a 3000 Kbit cable service and given a
>>> non-busy server at the other end I regularly get 3.1 Megabytes/sec
>>> download speeds (according to Firefox - not sure how accurate that is).
>
> I missed a zero out there and for a bonus got the number wrong too :-(
>
> I've just looked at my latest bill and I am on what they now call "Fiber
> Power Internet 25".  It used to have  "25000" in the name.
>
> The web page describing it is here:
>
> <http://www.upc-cablecom.ch/en/b2c/internet/fiberpower25.htm>
>
> Hmm, I see that double the speed is just another 10 bucks a month...
>
>> That doesn't seem right.  3 Megabytes is 24 Megabits. Even with
>> technologies like PowerBoost, I wouldn't expect to be able to squeeze 24
>> Mbps through a 3 Mbps connection. So either FF's throughput report is
>> wrong, you're wrong about the connection speed, or you're also getting
>> bits and bytes mixed up.
>
> 25 Megabits sounds right then.  The 3.1 MB/s figure is not just what I
> see regularly in Firefox but what command line SCP reports for downloads.
>
>> Actually, another possibility is that compression is taking place during
>> the transfer, but FF is reporting the throughput in terms of the
>> decompressed data.  What do you see in Activity Monitor's network
>> statistics when you're doing one of these transfers?
>
> So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP
> account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers of
> each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so network
> latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
>
> With a 160 MB file scp reported 3.0 MB/s overall and Activity Monitor
> reported peaks of 3.31 MB/s, sometimes dropping as low as 2.7 but for
> most of the time at or above 3.0.

The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they 
depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the 
infrastructure was first put in in 1947.

-- 
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net/       mailto:pjones1@kimbanet.com

Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
> Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
>
>> So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP
>> account. Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers
>> of each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so
>> network latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
>
> Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs interconnect.
> You should do a traceroute to find that out.
>

here is some info about my connection as of now the best its been almost 
a week:
https://skitch.com/pjonescet/ebeiu/speed-test-bandwidth-broadband-internet-services
https://skitch.com/pjonescet/ebei2/speedtest.net-the-global-broadband-speed-test
https://skitch.com/pjonescet/ebesf/pingtest.net-the-global-broadband-quality-test


-- 
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net/       mailto:pjones1@kimbanet.com

Lewis wrote:
> In message<jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>
>    PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more to
>> work decent.
>> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
>> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
>
> Your math skills are pathetic.
>
> 36 hours at 3Mbps is 47GB. Nearly 47 1/2. The OS X Lion installer is
> under 4GB in size and at 3Mbps would take about 3 hours to download.
>
Wasn't my math It was the time FireFox or SeaMonkey said it would take 
to download. Usually they are accurate. I downloaded the Office2011 
Trial from Microsoft and FF said 8 hours ended up being 9.5 hours.

-- 
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net/       mailto:pjones1@kimbanet.com

On 2012-06-16 10:18 PM Phillip Jones wrote:
> here is some info about my connection as of now the best its been almost a week:
> https://skitch.com/pjonescet/ebeiu/speed-test-bandwidth-broadband-internet-services

You have a download speed of 2.47 Mbps (308.3 KB/s transfer rate)

I recently downloaded LibreOffice (169.7 MB) at a transfer rate of 1201.4KB/s  which took 2 
minutes and 24 seconds.

It should take you about 9 minutes and 22 seconds to download LibreOffice.


-- 
_________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

In message <jrjkr5$83c$1@dont-email.me> 
  Phillip Jones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they 
> depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the 
> infrastructure was first put in in 1947.

Rocky Mountain Bell changes its name every few years to try to get away
from its well-earned and well-deserved reputation as the worst phone
company in America. The Have gone through US West, Qwest, and now
Century Link. Still the same shit company.

I guess this time was a merger/takeover with the existing company, but I
am confident their track record of terrible service, hostile phone
operatores, nearly-criminally negligent technical support, and their
habit of digging through competitor's data lines will continue as it has
for the last 30 years. 

The best thing about dropping my land line was never having to deal with
RMB/USW/QW again.

-- 
What if there were no hypothetical questions?
Oh never resist an impulse, Sabrina. Especially if it's terrible.

In article <jrjntc$jf2$1@dont-email.me>, Larry Gusaas
<larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2012-06-16 10:18 PM Phillip Jones wrote:
> > 
> > here is some info about my connection as of now the best its been almost 
> > a week:
> > https://skitch.com/pjonescet/ebeiu/speed-test-bandwidth-broadband
> > -internet-services
> 
> You have a download speed of 2.47 Mbps (308.3 KB/s transfer rate)
> 
> I recently downloaded LibreOffice (169.7 MB) at a transfer rate of 
> 1201.4KB/s  which took 2 minutes and 24 seconds.
> 
> It should take you about 9 minutes and 22 seconds to download LibreOffice.

For me it would take about 8.5 hours via my dial-up connection ...
assuming my ISP doesn't disconnect me every three hours as their rules
state (but rarely happens).

Helpful Harry  :o)

In article <jrjq55$pm6$2@dont-email.me>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <jrjkr5$83c$1@dont-email.me> 
>   Phillip Jones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> > The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they 
> > depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the 
> > infrastructure was first put in in 1947.
> 
> Rocky Mountain Bell changes its name every few years to try to get away
> from its well-earned and well-deserved reputation as the worst phone
> company in America. The Have gone through US West, Qwest, and now
> Century Link. Still the same shit company.
> 
> I guess this time was a merger/takeover with the existing company, but I
> am confident their track record of terrible service, hostile phone
> operatores, nearly-criminally negligent technical support, and their
> habit of digging through competitor's data lines will continue as it has
> for the last 30 years. 
> 
> The best thing about dropping my land line was never having to deal with
> RMB/USW/QW again.

Century Link.

Interesting.  My mom got phone slammed and her long distance bill was 
converted from AT&T to Century Link.  Their sales point was that AT&T's 
Long Distance usage fee is $4.99/month while Century Link's fee is 
$1.99/month.  But if you dial 0, you don't get an AT&T operator.  Is it 
worth $36/year for that?  That's mom's call.

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]

In article <jrjdan$8d1$1@dont-email.me>,
 Larry Gusaas <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes you can. In Saskatchewan, Sasktel is now laying out fiber optic lines in 
> some centres with 
> up to 200 Mbps.
> Shaw Cable offers up to 250 Mbps, depending on location.

Well, okay, I could move to Saskatcheberry. I think not.

To be fair, Eastlink offer 20 Mbps where I live, but when I deal with 
their (mostly savvy) customer service, they get all waffley about 
whether I can use my router for wireless and gigabit around the house.

Some parts of Ontario can get Eastlink 100 Mbps; mostly little towns 
halfway to Saskatcheberry for some reason. I don't even know where 
Espanola is.

I was looking to replace our phone and tv and internet with one of 
Eastlink's "bundles" but the waffling is  too much to deal with. "How 
bloody MUCH?" doesn't get a clear answer.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child

In article <jrjm5r$d0k$1@dont-email.me>,
 Phillip Jones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> Wasn't my math It was the time FireFox or SeaMonkey said it would take 
> to download. Usually they are accurate. I downloaded the Office2011 
> Trial from Microsoft and FF said 8 hours ended up being 9.5 hours.

Then you should contact your ISP. You're not getting 3 Mbps.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:01:40 -0400, Phillip Jones wrote:

> The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they
> depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the
> infrastructure was first put in in 1947.

Have you had your phone line checked out?

When I was on dial up and again later with DSL I ended up calling out the 
phone company and they replaced wiring.  The first time it was wiring 
from the house to a telegraph pole, the second time internal wiring in 
the building.

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 07:31:41 -0400, Warren Oates wrote:

> I was looking to replace our phone and tv and internet with one of
> Eastlink's "bundles" but the waffling is  too much to deal with. "How
> bloody MUCH?" doesn't get a clear answer.

I went through that with mobile phones back in the UK in the 1990s.  
There were so many plans that I became convinced that they were purposely 
trying to make you choose the wrong one.

They also all assumed that if you wanted coverage at less than 
extortionate rates outside your local area, you had a rich employer who 
would be picking up the bill.  A year's lock in to any given area was 
simply not suitable for me at that time.  I did without.

On 2012-06-16 20:22 , Warren Oates wrote:
> In article <1kltxyi.ocao8hjingyjN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
>   dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
>
>> I don't know about what sort of speeds these get in the US, but here in
>> New Zealand the best cable plans offer 100 Mbps. At that speed, Lion
>> would take about 7 minutes to download.
>
> Gawd. I wish I could get 100 Mbps in Canada. We're frog-throttled to
> about 5 Mbps here (600k); but I have an unlimited plan, I don't care how
> long it takes whilst I'm asleep.

Suburb of Montreal: On my street we have 60 Mbps (cable), with 120 
available in some areas.

200 in the near future (they've been laying new fiber) in my area.

The price for that service is high however.
And bandwidth is still capped.
(120 Mbps:170 down/30 up, $150/mo),
(200 Mbps:200 down/50 up, $200/mo)

I don't need more than the 8 Mbps I have (and I get that consistently). 
  The company does not throttle (policy) except on the upload side of 
the 120 cable service and only when needed to assure all clients have 
upload quality of service.

I'm sometimes tempted to dump the landline and HD cable (same company) 
and go with the 60 Mbps service (less cost and all the television 
bandwidth that I'd need).  Do all my television that way instead.  But 
from what I've seen to date the quality of video delivered that way is 
crap compared to the HD cable.

-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

On 2012-06-16 17:23 , Lewis wrote:
> In message <jri29e$97c$1@news.albasani.net>
>    PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
>> Good thing its at your work. Requires a Cable connecton 15 MB or more to
>> work decent.
>> But if your on 3MB DSL which is typical Then it may take you 36 hr with
>> un-interrupted Connection to re-download
>
> Your math skills are pathetic.
>
> 36 hours at 3Mbps is 47GB. Nearly 47 1/2. The OS X Lion installer is
> under 4GB in size and at 3Mbps would take about 3 hours to download.

Your comprehension skills are worse.  Having 3 Mbps "service" does not 
mean he's getting 100% bandwidth.  Typical for DSL.


-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

On 6/16/2012 2:13 PM PT, Lewis typed:

>> They taken the attitude if you don't have high sped GO F yourself.
>
> You can also walk into any Apple store with your USB drive and have them
> put the current System on it. You might have to make a genius
> appointment. They might let you just stick a USB drive into a handy
> macbook and login to the Apple Store.

Would that be free?
-- 
"Don't stop to stomp ants when the elephants are stampeding." --unknown
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 6/16/2012 4:46 PM PT, David Empson typed:

>> There is a way to create a bootable DVD install disk. Describe either on
>> MacWorld or MacLife.
>> 1. You use download the installer
>
> You can't do this for a computer with Lion preinstalled, unless you had
> also bought Lion from the App Store.
>
> The recovery partition's mechanism for downloading Lion don't give you
> an opportunity to intercept the download and create a bootable disk.
>
> (I think I saw someone mention a way to intercept that download and copy
> it, but it required a fair degree of hackery.)

Sheesh, that's retarded! Ugh! Why is Apple making this hard/difficult 
for us?
-- 
"While an ant was wandering under the shade of the tree of Phæton, a 
drop of amber enveloped the tiny insect; thus she, who in life was 
disregarded, became precious by death." --Martial, Epigrams (c. 80-104 
AD), Book VI, Epistle 15.
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 6/17/2012 6:22 AM PT, Alan Browne typed:

> Your comprehension skills are worse. Having 3 Mbps "service" does not
> mean he's getting 100% bandwidth. Typical for DSL.

And other services. I don't always max out my Internet speeds either. 
Many things can affect the speeds. Slow servers, routings, number of 
people using the shared bandwidth (e.g., cable), etc.
-- 
"Why would you want a glow in the dark ant farm?" --Leonard; "They do 
some of their best work at night." --Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory 
S4E4 (The Hot Troll Deviation).
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 6/16/2012 10:37 AM PT, Alan Browne typed:

>>> Apple are in Phase 2 of eliminating physical media. No more
>>> distributed disks or flash drives. I'd bet the "next" Mini's will not
>>> have CD/DVD drives.
>>
>> Wakey wakey: they already don't and haven't for a year. Mine (bought Jan
>> 2012) doesn't.
>
> So my bet was right. (I didn't realize they'd made the change already).
> Sigh.

Interesting. My work's one has a disc drive slot on the front. I think 
my employer customized the order since it has 4 GB of RAM, a big HDD 
(forgot its size), etc.

[sighs on Apple and other companies removing physical stuff] Not 
everyone is online! :(
-- 
"Oh, look what Kyle got me, it's a red Mega... Ants in the pants? Ants 
in the pants?! Ants in the Pants?!! ..." --Eric Cartman in South Park's 
Damien Episode (Season 1; Episode 8)
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

Warren Oates wrote:
> In article<jrjm5r$d0k$1@dont-email.me>,
>   Phillip Jones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>
>> Wasn't my math It was the time FireFox or SeaMonkey said it would take
>> to download. Usually they are accurate. I downloaded the Office2011
>> Trial from Microsoft and FF said 8 hours ended up being 9.5 hours.
>
> Then you should contact your ISP. You're not getting 3 Mbps.

That the same if everything is almost perfect you get close. On the 
other hand, if weather conditions are too dry. You fart the wrong 
direction, any thing you'll luck iI you get 1 MB  a have seen it get 
down as low as 750K Download.

Paul Sture wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:01:40 -0400, Phillip Jones wrote:
>
>> The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they
>> depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the
>> infrastructure was first put in in 1947.
>
> Have you had your phone line checked out?
>
> When I was on dial up and again later with DSL I ended up calling out the
> phone company and they replaced wiring.  The first time it was wiring
> from the house to a telegraph pole, the second time internal wiring in
> the building.

The put connections underground 5 years ago. The line itself is quiet. 
no static. Actual Phone line from box on side of house is Cat % cable.

In article <PoedncZGMt_4dEDSnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant
<ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> On 6/16/2012 2:13 PM PT, Lewis typed:
> > You can also walk into any Apple store with your USB drive and have them
> > put the current System on it. You might have to make a genius
> > appointment. They might let you just stick a USB drive into a handy
> > macbook and login to the Apple Store.
> 
> Would that be free?

the wifi in apple stores is open, so bring your own computer and
download it. they're not going to do it for you, genius appointment or
not, but they might let you use one of their macs to use.

In article <38v0b9-0e1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
 Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:01:40 -0400, Phillip Jones wrote:
> 
> > The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they
> > depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the
> > infrastructure was first put in in 1947.
> 
> Have you had your phone line checked out?
> 
> When I was on dial up and again later with DSL I ended up calling out the 
> phone company and they replaced wiring.  The first time it was wiring 
> from the house to a telegraph pole, the second time internal wiring in 
> the building.

1) Your router will tell you the *linespeed* between your house and the 
local exchange.

2) Mine is showing 7616 kbps (exchange is about 1.5 miles away).

3) www.broadbandspeedchecker.co.uk says I'm getting about 5.5Mbps. So a 
raw line speed of some 7.5Mbps gives about 5.5Mpbs of useful speed to 
some random Internet destination

4) Linespeed here used to be around 3.5Mbps, but I had the bell wire 
removed at the master socket and linespeed jumped up to its present value

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <1kltxq2.1t9nuh2wi6aqxN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
 dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:

> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> > In article <1klt962.106b40v5gfd0uN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
> >  dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
> > 
> > > Note that if you use Time Machine to back up your system, a Time Machine
> > > backup is not bootable. Restoring it requires booting from another drive
> > > which has an installed copy of Lion, or from the Lion Recovery
> > > partition.
> > 
> > Really? If I boot with option held down, my TM backup shows up as a boot
> > choice (as does EFI, mind you).
> 
> Mine doesn't (on a locally connected drive). You must have a bootable
> system installed on your Time Machine drive, as well as it containing a
> Time Machine backup.

Hmmm. I should try booting from it, and see what I get. If I boot from 
the EFI option, I get a kernel panic immediately.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

Alan Browne wrote:

> Suburb of Montreal: On my street we have 60 Mbps (cable), with 120 
> available in some areas.
> 
> 200 in the near future (they've been laying new fiber) in my area.


Upping speeds in DOCSIS3 isn't a question of adding fibre, it is a
question of allocating more channels to data (docsis3 allows up to 8 as
I recall, canadian cablecos use only 4 because cheaper DOCSIS3 modems
support only 4 channels for bonded streams).

In fairness to Bell, their Fib TV offering is h.264 and higher quality
than the MPEG2 feeds on cable.  They can pack a lot more detail/quality
in the 6mbps for HD than Videotron does when it packs multiple channels
into a 36mbps channel.

Tim Streater wrote:

> 1) Your router will tell you the *linespeed* between your house and the 
> local exchange.


With PPPoE on legacy DSL lines, you need to factor:

1452 bytes of payload
40 bytes of TCP and IP overhead
8 bytes of PPPoE overhead
18 bytes of Ethernet packet overhead. (brings to 1518 bytes).

This then gets split into 32 packets, each with 48 bytes of data and 5
bytes of overhead. Last packet is also 53 bytes long.

So to transmit 1452 bytes of payload, you end up transmitting 1696 bytes
total. And that is what fits into the actial DSL speed.

in essence, the design is such that your effective data throughput (as
measured in those speedtest.net tests) is just over 14% below the actial
line speed once you factor in the necessary overhead for this ancient
technology.

Note that for VDSL2 service (such as U-Verse for AT&T), there is no ATM
overhead and this gets you a big boost in efficiency.

For cable, the speed is throttled by the DOCSIS modem at the LAN side,
so the DOCSIS overhead does not slow your line down (the docsis side
operates at much higher speed than your service speed).

In message <170620121141304477%nospam@nospam.invalid> 
  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <PoedncZGMt_4dEDSnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant
> <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:

>> On 6/16/2012 2:13 PM PT, Lewis typed:
>> > You can also walk into any Apple store with your USB drive and have them
>> > put the current System on it. You might have to make a genius
>> > appointment. They might let you just stick a USB drive into a handy
>> > macbook and login to the Apple Store.
>> 
>> Would that be free?

> the wifi in apple stores is open, so bring your own computer and
> download it. they're not going to do it for you, genius appointment or
> not, but they might let you use one of their macs to use.

They certainly have done so in the past. I had a firend of a friend who
went in and got Lion and XCode downloaded onto a USB stick he brought in
because his home Internet was offline for something like 2 weeks because
of a construction accident in the area. (He lived kind of out in the
boonies, so a 2-week outage didn't seem all that out-of-line to him).

I don't know if they actually did it for him, or if he was able to
simply do it himself with one of their computers.

-- 
Yes, I do happen to believe that love is mainly about pushing chocolate
covered candies and, y'know, in some cultures, a chicken. You can call
me a sucker, I don't care, because I do believe in it. Bottom line: it's
couples who are truly right for each other that wade through the same
crap as everybody else, but the big difference is they don't let it take
them down. One of those two people will stand up and fight for that
relationship every time. If it's right, and they're real lucky, one of
them will say something.
Quis custodiet opsos custodes

In message <I_adnevVAflXdEDSnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@earthlink.com> 
  Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> On 6/16/2012 4:46 PM PT, David Empson typed:

>>> There is a way to create a bootable DVD install disk. Describe either on
>>> MacWorld or MacLife.
>>> 1. You use download the installer
>>
>> You can't do this for a computer with Lion preinstalled, unless you had
>> also bought Lion from the App Store.
>>
>> The recovery partition's mechanism for downloading Lion don't give you
>> an opportunity to intercept the download and create a bootable disk.
>>
>> (I think I saw someone mention a way to intercept that download and copy
>> it, but it required a fair degree of hackery.)

> Sheesh, that's retarded! Ugh! Why is Apple making this hard/difficult 
> for us?

They aren't making it Hard/Difficult for US. It might be hard/difficult
for YOU, but for the vast majority of users, this is actually far more
convenient.

-- 
Up the airy mountains, down the rushy glen...  From ghosties and bogles
and long-leggity beasties...  My mother said I never should...  We dare
not go a-hunting for fear...  And things that go bump...  Play with the
fairies in the wood... --Lords and Ladies
THE DEATH OF A WARRIOR OR THE OLD MAN OR THE LITTLE CHILD, THIS I
UNDERSTAND, AND I TAKE AWAY THE PAIN AND END THE SUFFERING. I DO NOT
UNDERSTAND THIS DEATH-OF-THE-MIND. --The Light Fantastic

Lewis wrote:

> They aren't making it Hard/Difficult for US. It might be hard/difficult
> for YOU, but for the vast majority of users, this is actually far more
> convenient.


Apple is targetting affluent customers who have broadband. Whether this
is a desired move to exlcude the rest because they are thought to not be
profitable enough, or whether it is because Apple thinks in its own
Cuppertino bubble and doesn't realise that broadband isn't available
everywhere for such large downloads, I don't know.

My guess is that just for Lion, while Apple will initially say "no
media", it will eventually relent and offer some sort of hardware
distribution for Mountain Lion especially in countries with
insufficiently deployed broadband.


In terms of a UBB fight, this move is actually good because it shows
that large telcos are hampering adoption of new tech with their limiting
UBB schemes. And it also shows how their claims that wireless can
replace wired internet are so bogus because very few could afford to
download 4gig of software over a wireless service unless they have a
package that is greater than 4gigs.

In message <4fde1d5d$0$1524$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com> 
  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> Lewis wrote:

>> They aren't making it Hard/Difficult for US. It might be hard/difficult
>> for YOU, but for the vast majority of users, this is actually far more
>> convenient.


> Apple is targetting affluent customers who have broadband.

Affluent? I don't think so.

> doesn't realise that broadband isn't available
> everywhere for such large downloads, I don't know.

They certainly know that for some small segment of the computer buying
public, broadband is not available. It is a small enough segment that
the advantages to online digital distribution easily out weighs the
inconvenience to some small percentage of users. The underwhelming sales
of the Lion USB stick certainly bare out Apple's position.

> My guess is that just for Lion, while Apple will initially say "no
> media", it will eventually relent and offer some sort of hardware
> distribution for Mountain Lion especially in countries with
> insufficiently deployed broadband.

Seriously doubt it. The lion USB stick did not sell.

-- 
Generalizations are always inaccurate.  
I WILL NOT FAKE RABIES Bart chalkboard Ep. 8F07

In message <slrnjtserg.12ck.g.kreme@krismbp.local> 
  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> of the Lion USB stick certainly bare out Apple's position.

bear.

-- 
"Whose motorcycle is this?" "It's chopper, baby." "Whose chopper is
this?" "It's Zed's." "Who's Zed?" "Zed' dead, baby. Zed's dead."
Tragic heroes always moan when the gods take an interest in them, but
it's the people the gods ignore who get the really tough deals. --Mort

In article <38v0b9-0e1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>, Paul Sture
<paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:01:40 -0400, Phillip Jones wrote:
> > 
> > The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they
> > depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the
> > infrastructure was first put in in 1947.
> 
> Have you had your phone line checked out?
> 
> When I was on dial up and again later with DSL I ended up calling out the 
> phone company and they replaced wiring.  The first time it was wiring 
> from the house to a telegraph pole, the second time internal wiring in 
> the building.

Yep. I've had a few customers with phoneline problems, mostly with
overhead lines since they often have issues due to weathering, especially
if you're near the ocean (the salt in the wind can corrode the electrical
contacts, as well as you car, very quickly).

Helpful Harry  :o)

In article <jrkrcn$44g$1@news.albasani.net>, PhillipJones
<pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> Paul Sture wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:01:40 -0400, Phillip Jones wrote:
> >
> >> The Main Office of my ISP is across the road from my house. However they
> >> depend on Phone Company connections Century Link. and some of the
> >> infrastructure was first put in in 1947.
> >
> > Have you had your phone line checked out?
> >
> > When I was on dial up and again later with DSL I ended up calling out the
> > phone company and they replaced wiring.  The first time it was wiring
> > from the house to a telegraph pole, the second time internal wiring in
> > the building.
> 
> The put connections underground 5 years ago. The line itself is quiet. 
> no static. Actual Phone line from box on side of house is Cat % cable.

Underground cables can still have problems, and since you don't have a
direct link, there could well be an overhead line somewhere or more likely
issues at the exchange / roadside cabinet.

Helpful Harry  :o)

On 2012-06-17 10:32 , Ant wrote:
> On 6/17/2012 6:22 AM PT, Alan Browne typed:
>
>> Your comprehension skills are worse. Having 3 Mbps "service" does not
>> mean he's getting 100% bandwidth. Typical for DSL.
>
> And other services. I don't always max out my Internet speeds either.
> Many things can affect the speeds. Slow servers, routings, number of
> people using the shared bandwidth (e.g., cable), etc.

Most DL's I do come down at 100% (8 Mb/s).  Occasionally hit a far ender 
that's slow.  Of course torrents are variable (don't do much of that).

The other day I updated two Macs at the same time (iTunes IIRC), each 
Mac was getting about 1/2 the BW.

Nobody I know gets consistent service from A/DSL.  Cable (at least here) 
is very good and very fast.

-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

On 2012-06-17 12:53 , JF Mezei wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Suburb of Montreal: On my street we have 60 Mbps (cable), with 120
>> available in some areas.
>>
>> 200 in the near future (they've been laying new fiber) in my area.
>
>
> Upping speeds in DOCSIS3 isn't a question of adding fibre, it is a
> question of allocating more channels to data (docsis3 allows up to 8 as
> I recall, canadian cablecos use only 4 because cheaper DOCSIS3 modems
> support only 4 channels for bonded streams).
>
> In fairness to Bell, their Fib TV offering is h.264 and higher quality
> than the MPEG2 feeds on cable.  They can pack a lot more detail/quality
> in the 6mbps for HD than Videotron does when it packs multiple channels
> into a 36mbps channel.

1. Videotron have been laying fibre where I live.  When the trucks were 
laying it (contractor) 2 weeks ago I asked.  Answer: Videotron.  This 
does not mean fibre to the house but to the little boxes that break out 
to cover 8 or 12 homes.  From there it's copper.

2. Service here is 60 Mb/s at present but will be going up to 200 in the 
near future.  Ya don't think the two issues are related do you?

3. I have Illico and the picture is great in HD.  If Bell can do better 
I doubt very much that many people will notice.  IAC, there is no FibTV 
where I live.  Videotron are laying fibre - maybe they'll rent it to 
Bell?  Yeah!  Right!

4. Bell sucks.  When they rolled out DSL here they measured the 
impedance of all the lines and assigned the best to DSL.  My dial up 
went from a good chunck over 30 kb/s to about 28 kb/s on a good day.  I 
signed up to Videotron and haven't looked back.

5. Everyone I know who has (had) Bell A/DSL has had poor download rates 
v. the bandwidth offering.  I've always had consistently high data with 
Videotron.

The only complaint with Videotron is it is expensive and capped a little 
too tightly (50 GB down+up @ 8 Mb/s for $46/Mo).  You can buy a 60 GB 
extension to that for $12.50.

-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

Lewis wrote:
> The underwhelming sales
> of the Lion USB stick certainly bare out Apple's position.

That number alone isn't the full story. One would need to also know what
percentage of Snow Leopard users did not upgrade to Lion.  And since
Apple didn't brag about the success in adoption of LION compared to
previous releases (it compared only against Windows 7), one could
*assume* that adoption of lion wasn't as high as Apple would have expected.

And the fact that Mountain Lion will be upgradable from Snow Leopard
also seems to indicate that Apple will try to nudge more users from SL
to ML.

When a company does not brag about a number, it is usually because the
number isn't good.

So the uptake of physical media for Lion might be low as a raw number,
but it may be simply because those people didn't have an interest to
downgrade to Lion from Snow Leopard. Remember that Apple was quite loud
in annoucing no physical media for Lion and very quiet when it relented
and offered USB media for it, but that quiet announcement may not have
reached a large portion of the user base who had been told there would
be no physical media.


And Apple is once again doing it, but announcing there will be no
physical media for ML when we all know that Apple will eventualy offer a
USB stick with it.

Alan Browne wrote:

> 1. Videotron have been laying fibre where I live.  

Yes, cable companies lay fibre to do node splits. Because coax is
shared, to increase capacity you reduce the number of homes on each coax
segment, thus there are fewer customers per node and more bandwidth per
customer, especially in the costrained upload. Their physical equipment
only retransmits 42mhz for upload (7 channels of 6mhz) and within this,
they need some control channels for illico, the voiP service and the
internet access service). There is also a control channel for the SDV
(switched digital video where some channels (frequency range)
dynamically carry some channels (TV stations) depending on what people
want to watch in that neighbourhood.

> 2. Service here is 60 Mb/s at present but will be going up to 200 in the 
> near future.  Ya don't think the two issues are related do you?

Nop. They could offer 200mbps today if they wanted. This is a software
config.  But you would need to change modem to get one that supports
more than 4 bonded channels.

The node splits are general network maintenance that is done a number of
customers grow. Videotron may have changed it standards on maximum
number of customers per node and is doing the node splits to meet the
new standard before advertising 200mbps service in your area. In that
case, yes, it would be related. But node splits happen frequently.


> 3. I have Illico and the picture is great in HD.  If Bell can do better 
> I doubt very much that many people will notice.  IAC, there is no FibTV 
> where I live. 

Bell's FibTV is noticeably better in image quality than Videotron.
Videotron is saddled with the duplication of analogue and digital
signals which means a lot less bandwidth available for the digital
channels and that means higher compression rations and less picture
quality, especually because they are MPEG2 based while Bell uses the
Microsoft "Media Room" IPTV product which is based on H.264 which is far
better compression for better image quality.

But FibTV is only available in VDLS2 areas of Bell's old DSL network.


> 5. Everyone I know who has (had) Bell A/DSL has had poor download rates 
> v. the bandwidth offering.  I've always had consistently high data with 
> Videotron.

Coax is far superior to DSL because they can garantee your speed just
about everywhere on thir network footprint. Bell's old DSL stuff can
only offer good speed if you are within 500m of a new VDSL2 DSLAM.

However, in Qu�bec City and "greenfields" (new housing neighbourhoods)
Bell rolled out real fibre to the home and offers over 100mbps service
which is very competeitive with Videotron. They are working on getting
municipal approval to upgrade Outremont (this went to the CRTC because
the undemocratic republic of Montreal purposefully dragged it feet on
ths issue).


> The only complaint with Videotron is it is expensive and capped a little 
> too tightly (50 GB down+up @ 8 Mb/s for $46/Mo).  You can buy a 60 GB 
> extension to that for $12.50.

This is why there was a big fight at the CRTC to get indie ISPs to not
be bound to those limits. If you look at ISPs like Electronic Box or
Distributel, they can offer far better deals on the videotron network.

In article <4fde7a9a$0$1502$c3e8da3$92d0a893@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Apple didn't brag about the success in adoption of LION compared to
> previous releases (it compared only against Windows 7),

right, because that's the important statistic.

> And the fact that Mountain Lion will be upgradable from Snow Leopard
> also seems to indicate that Apple will try to nudge more users from SL
> to ML.

Wow, that took tremendous insight.  In the past, any version of OS X could 
be upgraded to from any previous version, so long as the hardware could 
support the new version.  The only reason you can't upgrade to Mountain 
Lion from earlier than 10.6.8 is that 10.6 is the earliest version that can 
run the Mac App Store, and Mountain Lion will initially (and maybe always) 
available only from the Mac App Store.

> When a company does not brag about a number, it is usually because the
> number isn't good.

Or because the number is irrelevant.

> And Apple is once again doing it, but announcing there will be no 
> physical media for ML when we all know that Apple will eventualy offer a 
> USB stick with it.

That is entirely unknown outside of Apple, and maybe within Apple as well.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In article <michelle-664B8B.19492717062012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > And the fact that Mountain Lion will be upgradable from Snow Leopard
> > also seems to indicate that Apple will try to nudge more users from SL
> > to ML.
> 
> Wow, that took tremendous insight.  In the past, any version of OS X could 
> be upgraded to from any previous version, so long as the hardware could 
> support the new version.  The only reason you can't upgrade to Mountain 
> Lion from earlier than 10.6.8 is that 10.6 is the earliest version that can 
> run the Mac App Store, and Mountain Lion will initially (and maybe always) 
> available only from the Mac App Store.

actually, 10.6.6 was the first for the mac app store and the minimum
requirement for lion. i don't know why 10.6.8 is required for the
mountain lion upgrade, other than someone arbitrarily setting the
minimum version at 10.6.8. there's no reason for it, since it's going
to overwrite pretty much everything anyway.

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Lewis wrote:
> > The underwhelming sales
> > of the Lion USB stick certainly bare out Apple's position.
> 
> That number alone isn't the full story. One would need to also know what
> percentage of Snow Leopard users did not upgrade to Lion.  And since
> Apple didn't brag about the success in adoption of LION compared to
> previous releases (it compared only against Windows 7), one could
> *assume* that adoption of lion wasn't as high as Apple would have expected.

Based on web usage stats from Net Applications, Lion was the most
commonly used version of OS X as of May 2012 (43.8% Lion vs 40.2% SL).
Lion and Snow Leopard were neck and neck in April (both around 41.5%).

The transition point from Snow Leopard to Lion being most common was
about nine months after the release of Lion. The transition point from
Leopard to Snow Leopard being most common was about eight months after
the release of Snow Leopard.

Uptake of Lion is a little slower, but not enough to worry Apple.

> And the fact that Mountain Lion will be upgradable from Snow Leopard
> also seems to indicate that Apple will try to nudge more users from SL
> to ML.

Two factors there:

1. Traditionally Apple let you upgrade to a new version of Mac OS X from
several prior versions (e.g. 10.6 Snow Leopard can directly upgrade 10.4
Tiger and probably a clone of 10.3 Panther).

Lion was an aberration, only supporting in-place upgrades from one prior
version (Snow Leopard). That was mainly due to the App Store delivery,
which was only supported on SL. The USB thumb drive was clearly an
afterthought and Apple didn't want to do more development to add support
for directly upgrading from Leopard or Tiger.

There is no technical reason for Mountain Lion to require Lion for
upgrades. Apple only needs to tweak the SL to Lion upgrade code as
required to deal with further changes in ML, and implement Lion to ML
upgrades.

2. Installed base.

(All figures based on Net Applications data unless noted otherwise.)

At the point Lion was introduced, Snow Leopard had been out for almost
two years, and had reached about 70% of the installed base. Leopard was
about 22%, Tiger 6%. A fair proportion of the Leopard systems and most
of the Tiger systems would have been PowerPC or early Intel, not able to
upgrade to Lion (Apple would have a reasonable estimate of those numbers
based on "phone home" checks from Software Update, but I don't.)

Not supporting direct Leopard to Lion upgrades may have inconvenienced
and increased upgrade costs for something in the order of 10% of Mac
users (my estimate).

At the point Mountain Lion is being introduced, Lion will have been out
for almost exactly one year. It looks like it will reach about 45% of
the installed base, and Snow Leopard will be about 38%.

At least half of the Macs still running Snow Leopard will be able to
upgrade to Lion, so if Apple didn't support direct SL to ML upgrades, it
would inconvenience and increase costs for more like 20% of Mac users
(my estimate). There are more Mac users now than there were a year ago,
so the absolute increase is more than double the number of users who
would be affected.

> When a company does not brag about a number, it is usually because the
> number isn't good.

More likely that the number was close enough or slightly worse, so not
worth reporting, compared to the dramatic difference in upgrade rate for
Lion vs Windows 7.

> So the uptake of physical media for Lion might be low as a raw number,
> but it may be simply because those people didn't have an interest to
> downgrade to Lion from Snow Leopard.

Or it might be that Apple priced the Lion USB thumb drive so high that
people were encouraged to find a way to download Lion from the App Store
rather than buying the thumb drive.

It could therefore be a self-defeating pricing policy aimed at providing
a convenient excuse to not bother with a thumb drive edition for ML.

> Remember that Apple was quite loud in annoucing no physical media for Lion
> and very quiet when it relented and offered USB media for it, but that
> quiet announcement may not have reached a large portion of the user base
> who had been told there would be no physical media.
> 
> 
> And Apple is once again doing it, but announcing there will be no
> physical media for ML when we all know that Apple will eventualy offer a
> USB stick with it.

We don't know that. It might happen, but I doubt it.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 19:37:17 +1200, David Empson wrote:

> Or it might be that Apple priced the Lion USB thumb drive so high that
> people were encouraged to find a way to download Lion from the App Store
> rather than buying the thumb drive.
> 
> It could therefore be a self-defeating pricing policy aimed at providing
> a convenient excuse to not bother with a thumb drive edition for ML.

That is my take on it.  As I inferred in a post over the weekend if the 
USB stick had been sufficiently cheap I might have bought one just to 
have as a convenient backup.

The more I think about it, at a cheap enough price point I would be 
inclined to purchase one just to avoid the download delay, particularly 
if I had multiple systems, and I am sure I am not alone.

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 20:56:16 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

> In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> 
>> So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP
>> account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers
>> of each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so
>> network latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
> 
> Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs interconnect.
> You should do a traceroute to find that out.

I intended to indicate that I shouldn't be going across the Atlantic and 
back...

Traceroute done, and once it got out of my ISP it showed a pretty direct 
route. 

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:49:40 -0400, Barry Margolin wrote:

> In article <timstreater-E1E960.20561616062012@news.individual.net>,
>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
>> In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>>  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
>> 
>> > So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP
>> > account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50
>> > kilometers of each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home
>> > one, so network latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
>> 
>> Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs
>> interconnect.
>> You should do a traceroute to find that out.
> 
> Yeah, on the Internet it's not uncommon to take a trip around the corner
> by way of the airport.

Uncannily spot on!  Part if the traceroute gave me this:

84.116.134.142 (ch-zrh01b-ra1-ae-1.aorta.net)

CH is the code for Switzerland.  ZRH is the code for Zurich airport.

<http://wwp.international-airports.com/city/zrh/>

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 17:29:37 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

> Nobody I know gets consistent service from A/DSL.  Cable (at least here)
> is very good and very fast.

I did have consistent service when I was on ADSL, but I was reasonably 
close to the exchange _and_ paying for a business line.

On 12-06-17 10:24 PM, nospam wrote:

> actually, 10.6.6 was the first for the mac app store and the minimum
> requirement for lion. i don't know why 10.6.8 is required for the
> mountain lion upgrade, other than someone arbitrarily setting the
> minimum version at 10.6.8. there's no reason for it, since it's going
> to overwrite pretty much everything anyway.

I believe that there were important App Store integration changes that
happened between 10.6.6 and 10.6.8. Some having to do with some
codesigning verification, but others may have had to do with how things
get registered and launched.

Cheers,

-j


-- 
Jeffrey Goldberg          http://goldmark.org/jeff/
I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts
Reply-To address is valid

In message <fqc3b9-322.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch> 
  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> The more I think about it, at a cheap enough price point I would be 
> inclined to purchase one just to avoid the download delay, particularly 
> if I had multiple systems, and I am sure I am not alone.

So download it once and save the dmg, or put it on a USB drive you get
for $5 at the local grocery store. OK, maybe $10.

You HAVE to download it once, and that download is certainly going to be
faster than ordering physical media for delivery would be, and likely
faster than driving to the nearest Apple Store to pick up physical media
would be.

And once you've downloaded it once, it's good for all your computers (I
store the DMG in my Admin account's Public folder just in case I need
it, but I usually have the latest install on a USB thumb drive somewhere
in my desk).

-- 
Battlemage? That's not a profession. It barely qualifies as a hobby.
'Battlemage' is about impressive a title as 'Lord of the Dance'. <PAUSE>
I'm adding Lord of the Dance to my titles.
THERE'S JUST ME, said Death. THE FINAL FRONTIER. --Moving Pictures

In message <2ld3b9-322.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch> 
  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 20:56:16 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

>> In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>>  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
>> 
>>> So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP
>>> account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers
>>> of each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so
>>> network latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
>> 
>> Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs interconnect.
>> You should do a traceroute to find that out.

> I intended to indicate that I shouldn't be going across the Atlantic and 
> back...

You would think. A lot of traffic seems to get routed over the Atlantic
though. I remember the last time I ran a traceroute from my iphone (AT&T
data connection) to my local server, it was routed through Europe. Why?
No idea.

-- 
'You're wizards!' she [Esk] screamed. 'Bloody well wizz!' --Equal Rites
<Athene> we all have our moments when we lose it 
<Slyspy> the key is though, to conceal the evidence before the police arrive

In article <a48q9jFjlhU1@mid.individual.net>, Jeffrey Goldberg
<nobody@goldmark.org> wrote:

> > actually, 10.6.6 was the first for the mac app store and the minimum
> > requirement for lion. i don't know why 10.6.8 is required for the
> > mountain lion upgrade, other than someone arbitrarily setting the
> > minimum version at 10.6.8. there's no reason for it, since it's going
> > to overwrite pretty much everything anyway.
> 
> I believe that there were important App Store integration changes that
> happened between 10.6.6 and 10.6.8. Some having to do with some
> codesigning verification, but others may have had to do with how things
> get registered and launched.

if lion can be installed on 10.6.6, which it can, so can mountain lion.
the installer is the same, the payload is different.

In article <slrnjtuctq.lf7.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> > The more I think about it, at a cheap enough price point I would be 
> > inclined to purchase one just to avoid the download delay, particularly 
> > if I had multiple systems, and I am sure I am not alone.
> 
> So download it once and save the dmg, or put it on a USB drive you get
> for $5 at the local grocery store. OK, maybe $10.
> 
> You HAVE to download it once, and that download is certainly going to be
> faster than ordering physical media for delivery would be, and likely
> faster than driving to the nearest Apple Store to pick up physical media
> would be.

if you buy a mac with lion, you don't download anything. in fact, it's
$30 *more* to do so.

In article <slrnjtud0s.lf7.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <2ld3b9-322.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch> 
>   Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> > On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 20:56:16 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:
> 
> >> In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
> >>  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP
> >>> account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50 kilometers
> >>> of each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home one, so
> >>> network latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
> >> 
> >> Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs interconnect.
> >> You should do a traceroute to find that out.
> 
> > I intended to indicate that I shouldn't be going across the Atlantic and 
> > back...
> 
> You would think. A lot of traffic seems to get routed over the Atlantic
> though. I remember the last time I ran a traceroute from my iphone (AT&T
> data connection) to my local server, it was routed through Europe. Why?
> No idea.

If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact your 
ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.

It's quite possible and not that unusual to see problems with routing. 
If a farmer in Idaho (wherever that may be) or the Gas Co. in South 
London puts a backhoe through a cable run, that may fuck up routing for 
a lot of people.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

Paul Sture wrote:

> Uncannily spot on!  Part if the traceroute gave me this:
> 
> 84.116.134.142 (ch-zrh01b-ra1-ae-1.aorta.net)
> 
> CH is the code for Switzerland.  ZRH is the code for Zurich airport.


Many networks use airport codes to denote the city. But not always. And
it does not mean that the wires/routers go anwhere near the actual
airport. Just means somewhere in that city. (usually one of the few
central carrier hotels).

For instance, for routers in Toronto Canada, you will often see "yyz"
but the routers are likely at 151 front street, right downtown next to
the railways tracks (formerly a telegraph switching building).

nospam wrote:

> if lion can be installed on 10.6.6, which it can, so can mountain lion.
> the installer is the same, the payload is different.

You are making many assumptions here.

When you upgrade an OS, it isn't just a question of copying a bunch of
files over old ones. It needs to preserve your environment, upgrade a
bunch of plist and other config files, NOT touch files which you have
customized (such as unix config files for postfix, apache etc), etc.

And you have to do this, you need some logic to determine what
processing is needed. When you alllow snow leopard to mountain lion, it
means the updater must have portions of the SL to Lion updater to
process certain files, but when doing Lion to Mountain lion, because
those files have already been processed, you don't need to do that
processing.

It also means you need to do testing and validation of the update
scripts from multiple source OS versions and different configs to ensure
it works.

Yes, it is doable. Yes, they alreayd have much fo the logic, but they
still need to integrate and test it all.

In message <180620121015132368%nospam@nospam.invalid> 
  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnjtuctq.lf7.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> > The more I think about it, at a cheap enough price point I would be 
>> > inclined to purchase one just to avoid the download delay, particularly 
>> > if I had multiple systems, and I am sure I am not alone.
>> 
>> So download it once and save the dmg, or put it on a USB drive you get
>> for $5 at the local grocery store. OK, maybe $10.
>> 
>> You HAVE to download it once, and that download is certainly going to be
>> faster than ordering physical media for delivery would be, and likely
>> faster than driving to the nearest Apple Store to pick up physical media
>> would be.

> if you buy a mac with lion, you don't download anything. in fact, it's
> $30 *more* to do so.

You DO download it if you do an Internet restore, which all machines
that shipped with Lion can do.

-- 
she [Esk] was already learning that if you ignore the rules people will,
half the time, quietly rewrite them so they don't apply to you. --Equal
Rites
He felt as if he'd been shipwrecked on the Titanic but in the nick of
time had been rescued. By the Lusitania. 

In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
> traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact your 
> ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.

Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.

-- 
Over 3,500 gay marriages and, what, no hellfire? I was promise hellfire.
And riots. What gives? -- Mark Morford
It's like looking for the farmer's daughter in a haystack, and finding
the needle.

In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact your 
> > ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
> 
> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.

D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What kind 
of shitty ISP is that?

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
>>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> 
>> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
>> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact your 
>> > ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
>> 
>> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
>> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.

> D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What kind 
> of shitty ISP is that?

They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
carriers in the US.

-- 
'Never trust a ruler who puts his faith in tunnels and bunkers and
escape routes. The chances are that his heart isn't in the job.'
Forever was over. All the sands had fallen. The great race between
entropy and energy had been run, and the favourite had been the winner
after all.  Perhaps he ought to sharpen the blade again?  No.  Not much
point, really. 

On 2012-06-18 00:47:20 +0000, JF Mezei said:

> Lewis wrote:
>> The underwhelming sales
>> of the Lion USB stick certainly bare out Apple's position.
> 
> That number alone isn't the full story. One would need to also know what
> percentage of Snow Leopard users did not upgrade to Lion.

One might also consider asking *why* folks didn't upgrade to lion.

In my experience, the vast majority of people simply don't update their 
operating systems at all until they get their next computer.  And that 
has nothing to do with the cost (pretty damned cheap for Macs - pretty 
damned expensive for Windows) - or with the media (folks who have 
broadband, access to CDs/DVDs, memory sticks).

It has to do with the fact that people simply don't update their OSs.

Now if you're going to start talking about percentage who didn't 
upgrade to Lion from Snow Leopard, before you use those numbers as 
evidence of anything, you have to factor out all the other things first.

Frankly, the thing that's finally pushed a few folks I know to go from 
SL to Lion was the phasing out MobileMe.  Else I know of several who'd 
never have bothered.  For all that we, the enthusiasts who hang out in 
usenet newsgroups and discuss these things, the fact is that most 
people just don't care.  They just want to turn on their computer and 
do their work/browsing/whatever and only worry about upgrades when they 
are either forced to do so (ie. MobileMe) or because their friendly 
geeky family member encourages them (that'd be us), or because they got 
new hardware.

In article <slrnjtuv82.14j4.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> >> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
> >> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact your 
> >> > ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
> >> 
> >> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
> >> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
> 
> > D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What kind 
> > of shitty ISP is that?
> 
> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
> carriers in the US.

Wine choo find someone else then?

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <4fdf6995$0$1474$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> > if lion can be installed on 10.6.6, which it can, so can mountain lion.
> > the installer is the same, the payload is different.
> 
> You are making many assumptions here.
> 
> When you upgrade an OS, it isn't just a question of copying a bunch of
> files over old ones. It needs to preserve your environment, upgrade a
> bunch of plist and other config files, NOT touch files which you have
> customized (such as unix config files for postfix, apache etc), etc.
> 
> And you have to do this, you need some logic to determine what
> processing is needed. When you alllow snow leopard to mountain lion, it
> means the updater must have portions of the SL to Lion updater to
> process certain files, but when doing Lion to Mountain lion, because
> those files have already been processed, you don't need to do that
> processing.

upgrading from snow leopard is supported. 

how much of that do you think changed between 10.6.6 and 10.6.8? 

> It also means you need to do testing and validation of the update
> scripts from multiple source OS versions and different configs to ensure
> it works.

that's likely the reason. they can't be bothered.

> Yes, it is doable. Yes, they alreayd have much fo the logic, but they
> still need to integrate and test it all.

true. testing is not something they do much of lately. just ask the
people who installed the recent thunderbolt update.

In article <slrnjturd1.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> > The more I think about it, at a cheap enough price point I would be 
> >> > inclined to purchase one just to avoid the download delay, particularly 
> >> > if I had multiple systems, and I am sure I am not alone.
> >> 
> >> So download it once and save the dmg, or put it on a USB drive you get
> >> for $5 at the local grocery store. OK, maybe $10.
> >> 
> >> You HAVE to download it once, and that download is certainly going to be
> >> faster than ordering physical media for delivery would be, and likely
> >> faster than driving to the nearest Apple Store to pick up physical media
> >> would be.
> 
> > if you buy a mac with lion, you don't download anything. in fact, it's
> > $30 *more* to do so.
> 
> You DO download it if you do an Internet restore, which all machines
> that shipped with Lion can do.

which you can't easily save, if you can at all.

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:49:40 -0400, Barry Margolin wrote:
> In article <timstreater-E1E960.20561616062012@news.individual.net>,
>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> In article <192va9-oe1.ln1@mint-hp.chingola.ch>,
>>  Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
>> > 
>> > So let's try that with a download of a tar.gz dump of my hosting ISP
>> > account.  Both my home ISP and my hosting ISP are within 50
>> > kilometers of each other, and I am within 30 kilometers of the home
>> > one, so network latency shouldn't be too much of an issue.
>> 
>> Mmm, you can't be sure of that. Depends where the two ISPs
>> interconnect. You should do a traceroute to find that out.
> 
> Yeah, on the Internet it's not uncommon to take a trip around the corner
> by way of the airport.

Ahh, the Internet obviously uses GPS navigation devices too.  ;o)

Helpful Harry  :o)

Lewis wrote:
> In message<timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net>
>    Tim Streater<timstreater@greenbee.net>  wrote:
>> In article<slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>>   Lewis<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>  wrote:
>
>>> In message<timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net>
>>>    Tim Streater<timstreater@greenbee.net>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your
>>>> traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact your
>>>> ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
>>>
>>> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
>>> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
>
>> D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What kind
>> of shitty ISP is that?
>
> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
> carriers in the US.
>
Verizon treats customers have way decent.

In our area AT&T is so bad two people standing side by side in the local 
mall one calling the other would drop the call.  AT&T is a Joke. Since 
I've been with verizon I've only had one drop Call I was with Altel and 
Verizon took over Alltel equipment and I never had a Drop call with them 
a combined time 10 years.  The only reason the call was dropped was the 
person calling was in a car driving and in a Valley that didn't have 
tower anywhere close.

In article <jro122$dnb$1@reader1.panix.com>,
 Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> They just want to turn on their computer and 
> do their work/browsing/whatever and only worry about upgrades when they 
> are either forced to do so

.... that's me! Though Warren Oates's recent experience, a sort of  
Lion in place of Our Lady of Lourdes revelation, is making me think 
about it.

-- 
dorayme

Bread wrote:
> On 2012-06-18 00:47:20 +0000, JF Mezei said:
>
>> Lewis wrote:
>>> The underwhelming sales
>>> of the Lion USB stick certainly bare out Apple's position.
>>
>> That number alone isn't the full story. One would need to also know what
>> percentage of Snow Leopard users did not upgrade to Lion.
>
> One might also consider asking *why* folks didn't upgrade to lion.
>
> In my experience, the vast majority of people simply don't update their
> operating systems at all until they get their next computer. And that
> has nothing to do with the cost (pretty damned cheap for Macs - pretty
> damned expensive for Windows) - or with the media (folks who have
> broadband, access to CDs/DVDs, memory sticks).
>
> It has to do with the fact that people simply don't update their OSs.
>
> Now if you're going to start talking about percentage who didn't upgrade
> to Lion from Snow Leopard, before you use those numbers as evidence of
> anything, you have to factor out all the other things first.
>
> Frankly, the thing that's finally pushed a few folks I know to go from
> SL to Lion was the phasing out MobileMe. Else I know of several who'd
> never have bothered. For all that we, the enthusiasts who hang out in
> usenet newsgroups and discuss these things, the fact is that most people
> just don't care. They just want to turn on their computer and do their
> work/browsing/whatever and only worry about upgrades when they are
> either forced to do so (ie. MobileMe) or because their friendly geeky
> family member encourages them (that'd be us), or because they got new
> hardware.
>
I'd love to update, I like to keep up with times. but, when you lack 
resources to do so. Plus with all the complaints for features added that 
were not needed, and plan out Dumbass ideas. leaves one to decide maybe 
you have a good thing to stick.

Ideas such as there no Save As...
When you open the Application it automatically opens to last file you 
worked.
It puts backed up files on the desktop. In Office2011 if you intend to 
open one file All files Open.  You turn off Resume and restore in 
Generals Control Panel.

Then there is that system where the applications show up on desktop as 
buttons. If you accidentally delete that Button say for Office 2011 
(word, excel, PowerPoint) you actually delete the application instead of 
the button. (Like  on iPad) I've either read of many others or help 
people as a MCC on Microsoft Answers help figure out. Its  a mess.

If I wasn't as experienced with Mac's (My first Mac was SE/30), moving 
to 7 from 6 I'd be scared shitless. (Pardon The Italian.)

In article <jro122$dnb$1@reader1.panix.com>,
 Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> One might also consider asking *why* folks didn't upgrade to lion.

I have a friend who wouldn't upgrade from Tiger because she was used to it; 
she didn't know what Leopard or Snow Leopard had to offer, only that they 
were different from Tiger.  She finally upgraded to Snow Leopard, three 
months before Lion was released, because she wanted Time Machine.  She's 
still using SL because she's used to it and doesn't want to change.

I take the credit for converting her to Mac back in 2002, and she in turn 
converted her mother to Mac in 2006.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In article <jroaq9$5gf$1@news.albasani.net>,
 PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> Ideas such as there no Save As...

So there's Duplicate... instead.

> When you open the Application it automatically opens to last file you 
> worked.

Only if you didn't close the file before quitting the application.  Oh, and 
because of that feature, you don't have to have a dialog reminding you to 
save a document if you quit an app without saving the document.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In message <timstreater-186993.21091218062012@news.individual.net> 
  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnjtuv82.14j4.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
>>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> > In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> 
>> >> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
>> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
>> >> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact your 
>> >> > ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
>> >> 
>> >> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
>> >> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
>> 
>> > D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What kind 
>> > of shitty ISP is that?
>> 
>> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
>> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
>> carriers in the US.

> Wine choo find someone else then?

The other is no different.


-- 
If you could do a sort of relief map of sinfulness, wickedness and
all-round immorality, rather like those representations of the
gravitational field around a Black Hole, then even in Ankh-Morpork the
Shades would be represented by a shaft. In fact the Shades was
remarkably like the aforesaid well-known astrological phenomenon: it had
a certain strong attraction, no light escaped from it, and it could
indeed become a gateway to another world. The next one. 
'Never build a dungeon you wouldn't be happy to spend the night in
yourself,' said the Patrician (...). 'The world would be a happier place
if more people remembered that.' --Guards! Guards!

In message <jroaq9$5gf$1@news.albasani.net> 
  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> Ideas such as there no Save As...

It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.

> When you open the Application it automatically opens to last file you 
> worked.

No. It automatically opens any documents you left open last time you
quit the application. If no documents were open, no documents are opened.

> It puts backed up files on the desktop.

What? It does no such thing.

>In Office2011 if you intend to open one file All files Open.

What?

>You turn off Resume and restore in Generals Control Panel.

So?

> Then there is that system where the applications show up on desktop as 
> buttons. If you accidentally delete that Button say for Office 2011 
> (word, excel, PowerPoint) you actually delete the application instead of 
> the button.

You are completely wrong. You cannot 'accidentally delete the button for
say Office 2011". The only apps you can delete from Launchpad are apps
that you purchased in the Mac App Store (that is to say, ones that can
trivially be replaced). And if you don't like Launchpad, don't use it.


-- 
Honesty may be the best policy, but insanity is a better defense.
Would you say you worship Satan, or do you simply respect his
no-nonsense approach to discipline?

In article <slrnjtvicc.1crj.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> > Ideas such as there no Save As...
> 
> It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.

it is, because duplicate works differently than save as.

In article <180620122043233689%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > > Ideas such as there no Save As...
> > 
> > It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.
> 
> it is, because duplicate works differently than save as.

Minor differences.  Big deal.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

On 12-06-18 7:36 PM, Lewis wrote:

> No. It automatically opens any documents you left open last time you
> quit the application. If no documents were open, no documents are opened.

What this means is that if you have a document open that you don't want
other people to see, you should remember to close it before shutting
down or never restart your machine in front of other people.

Cheers,

-j

-- 
Jeffrey Goldberg          http://goldmark.org/jeff/
I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts
Reply-To address is valid

In article <michelle-FBDFF2.17594718062012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > > Ideas such as there no Save As...
> > > 
> > > It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.
> > 
> > it is, because duplicate works differently than save as.
> 
> Minor differences.  Big deal.

it's a different workflow. you have to decide ahead of time to
duplicate versus save as whenever you have an alternate version.

it was enough of a big deal that apple added back save as due to
complaints, although with a four-finger command key equivalent.

On 12-06-18 6:00 PM, Michelle Steiner wrote:

> I have a friend who wouldn't upgrade from Tiger because she was used to it; 
> she didn't know what Leopard or Snow Leopard had to offer, only that they 
> were different from Tiger.  She finally upgraded to Snow Leopard, three 
> months before Lion was released, because she wanted Time Machine.  She's 
> still using SL because she's used to it and doesn't want to change.

There are plenty of cases where there is good reason not to upgrade.
Particularly when it requires spending big bucks on new hardware. But
Warren Oats has also provided another example. (When something you need
is severely broken in the newer version.)

But unless you have one of those compelling reasons not to upgrade, then
you really ought to upgrade. Apple typically provides security fixes for
only the current and previous version. So if you are on Leopard today
you haven't been getting security fixes since July 2011. (The one
Flashback "emergency" fix for Leopard was exceptional and it didn't
patch the boatload of other things that have been fixed in SL and Lion.)

So once ML is out, I hope that you can encourage your friend to at least
move to Lion. The "well it works fine for me as it is" reason to avoid
an upgrade is not good enough to justify foregoing security fixes.

Cheers,

-j


-- 
Jeffrey Goldberg          http://goldmark.org/jeff/
I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts
Reply-To address is valid

On 2012-06-18 22:41:11 +0000, PhillipJones said:

>  do so. Plus with all the complaints for features added that were not 
> needed, and plan out Dumbass ideas. leaves one to decide maybe you have 
> a good thing to stick.
> 
> Ideas such as there no Save As...

There is a Save As in, pretty much, everything except for Pages, 
Numbers, and a couple of other Apple applications.

And when you don't have a Save As, you simply Duplicate and then Save.  
I agree, it's still a little wacky, but it's easy to get used to, and 
the auto-save and versions is otherwise quite transparent and you can 
just pretend it's not there - until one day you find it's really nice 
that it was there.

> When you open the Application it automatically opens to last file you worked.

Optional.  Turn it off.  I did.  As far as I can tell, most of the 
folks here did, too.

> It puts backed up files on the desktop.

Um, what?

The Versions cache is stored, hidden, at the root level of whatever 
hard drive your file lives on.  If you move the file to another drive, 
you lose the cache, but remember - it's only a cache, not a backup.  
For backups, you use what you've alwaysed used - SuperDuper, Time 
Machine, whatever.

Nothing new goes to the desktop.


>  In Office2011 if you intend to open one file All files Open.  You turn 
> off Resume and restore in Generals Control Panel.

Um?
> 
> Then there is that system where the applications show up on desktop as buttons.

You're seriously imagining things here.  Do you mean LaunchPad, which 
gives you an iPad-type application launcher?  Sure, when you install or 
upgrade to Lion, LaunchPad (itself just an application) gets added to 
your dock.  Do what I (and I imagine most of the others here) have done 
and remove it.  You never need to see or use it or care about it.

>  If you accidentally delete that Button say for Office 2011 (word, 
> excel, PowerPoint) you actually delete the application instead of the 
> button.

Um, what?

I can't say I think Lion's the best thing since sliced turkey, but it's 
certainly not been a downgrade or a hassle in any way for me and some 
of the features clearly need to improve a bit, but it's overall at 
least as good (and quick and stable) as Snow Leopard was for me.

There's a lot of typical fear, uncertainty and doubt out there about 
it, but most of it is simply unfounded usenet-ish nuttery.

That said, when I upgraded a shared machine which is used by some less 
tech-savvy folks, I wrote them a handy "what's going to surprise you - 
and how you can make things more like they were before" memo.  Mainly, 
the upside-down scrolling was going to surprise them - and the missing 
scrollbars, so I told them how to return them to pre-Lion behavior if 
they wanted.

Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> On 2012-06-18 00:47:20 +0000, JF Mezei said:
> 
> > Lewis wrote:
> >> The underwhelming sales
> >> of the Lion USB stick certainly bare out Apple's position.
> > 
> > That number alone isn't the full story. One would need to also know what
> > percentage of Snow Leopard users did not upgrade to Lion.
> 
> One might also consider asking *why* folks didn't upgrade to lion.
> 
> In my experience, the vast majority of people simply don't update their
> operating systems at all until they get their next computer.  And that
> has nothing to do with the cost (pretty damned cheap for Macs - pretty
> damned expensive for Windows) - or with the media (folks who have 
> broadband, access to CDs/DVDs, memory sticks).
> 
> It has to do with the fact that people simply don't update their OSs.
> 
> Now if you're going to start talking about percentage who didn't 
> upgrade to Lion from Snow Leopard, before you use those numbers as 
> evidence of anything, you have to factor out all the other things first.
> 
> Frankly, the thing that's finally pushed a few folks I know to go from
> SL to Lion was the phasing out MobileMe.

The demise of MobileMe was the trigger for me. I've got used to online
sync of calendars and therefore needed to move to iCloud, which required
Lion. I wasn't in any hurry to move as MobileMe worked fine. I upgraded
to Lion as my main system about a month ago. I actually bought it
straight after it was released, and had done a trial install on another
hard drive to play with it, but wasn't ready to move permanently.

Ten months after the release of Lion was a very unusual delay by my
standards. I upgraded to Leopard and Snow Leopard within a week of them
being released, and lived through the early teething problems.

PowerPC applications were a minor factor - I've used Eudora since 1996
and was reluctant to move to something else. I'm using Apple Mail now,
but having to resort to other mail clients occasionally for some things
that Mail simply won't let me do.

Another factor is that I'm supporting several other Mac users, the
significant majority of which were still on Snow Leopard, and running
the same OS myself was often helpful. I'll cope now that I'm on Lion (I
still have ways of running Snow Leopard if necessary).

A bigger nuisance is that I have Snow Leopard Server running on another
computer, and I can't run the correct version of the admin tools on
Lion. I have to VPN into the server and run the admin tools remotely,
which is uglier than running them locally.

> Else I know of several who'd never have bothered.  For all that we, the
> enthusiasts who hang out in usenet newsgroups and discuss these things,
> the fact is that most people just don't care.  They just want to turn on
> their computer and do their work/browsing/whatever and only worry about
> upgrades when they are either forced to do so (ie. MobileMe) or because
> their friendly geeky family member encourages them (that'd be us), or
> because they got new hardware.

Agreed. I'm the president of my local user group, and I reckon fewer
than 10% of our members upgraded to Lion before I did (not counting
purchases of new Macs with Lion preinstalled). Now that I have upgraded,
a few more might do so, but with Mountain Lion just around the corner,
most will probably not bother with Lion at all.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

Lewis wrote:
> In message<jroaq9$5gf$1@news.albasani.net>
>    PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>> Ideas such as there no Save As...
>
> It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.

The duplicate Command is actually different.

If you use Save as  and rename the file.
You replace the original file with the file Save As version you end up 
with a clean compacted version of the file. doing just save you tack on 
any changes to the end of the file. adding bloat and can be cause of 
document corruption because the document becomes far more complex.

The Duplicate Command does exactly what it says. it doesn't compact the 
file, it doesn't remove the complexity. It just makes a Duplicate of the 
file warts and all.

Depending upon how long you been working on a File say word file, and 
you add pictures, use Track Changes and the like it can balloon up to 
500k-to 1 mg or more. accepting tracked changed then turn it off then 
using Save As.... you might reduce the file size by 25%.

do the same with Duplicate the file will no be changed one iota.

>
>> When you open the Application it automatically opens to last file you
>> worked.
>
> No. It automatically opens any documents you left open last time you
> quit the application. If no documents were open, no documents are opened.
>
>> It puts backed up files on the desktop.
>
> What? It does no such thing.
>
>> In Office2011 if you intend to open one file All files Open.
>
> What?
>
>> You turn off Resume and restore in Generals Control Panel.
>
> So?
>
>> Then there is that system where the applications show up on desktop as
>> buttons. If you accidentally delete that Button say for Office 2011
>> (word, excel, PowerPoint) you actually delete the application instead of
>> the button.
>
> You are completely wrong. You cannot 'accidentally delete the button for
> say Office 2011". The only apps you can delete from Launchpad are apps
> that you purchased in the Mac App Store (that is to say, ones that can
> trivially be replaced). And if you don't like Launchpad, don't use it.
>
>

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<180620122043233689%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>   nospam<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote:
>
>>>> Ideas such as there no Save As...
>>>
>>> It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.
>>
>> it is, because duplicate works differently than save as.
>
> Minor differences.  Big deal.
>
Big Difference Save as Actually compacts the file as all changes 
appended to the end of the document are incorporated into the new document.

Duplicate does exactly what it says. Duplicate, warts and all.

Bread wrote:
> On 2012-06-18 22:41:11 +0000, PhillipJones said:
>
>> do so. Plus with all the complaints for features added that were not
>> needed, and plan out Dumbass ideas. leaves one to decide maybe you
>> have a good thing to stick.
>>
>> Ideas such as there no Save As...
>
> There is a Save As in, pretty much, everything except for Pages,
> Numbers, and a couple of other Apple applications.
>
> And when you don't have a Save As, you simply Duplicate and then Save. I
> agree, it's still a little wacky, but it's easy to get used to, and the
> auto-save and versions is otherwise quite transparent and you can just
> pretend it's not there - until one day you find it's really nice that it
> was there.
>
>> When you open the Application it automatically opens to last file you
>> worked.
>
> Optional. Turn it off. I did. As far as I can tell, most of the folks
> here did, too.
>
>> It puts backed up files on the desktop.
>
> Um, what?
>
> The Versions cache is stored, hidden, at the root level of whatever hard
> drive your file lives on. If you move the file to another drive, you
> lose the cache, but remember - it's only a cache, not a backup. For
> backups, you use what you've alwaysed used - SuperDuper, Time Machine,
> whatever.
>
> Nothing new goes to the desktop.
>
>
>> In Office2011 if you intend to open one file All files Open. You turn
>> off Resume and restore in Generals Control Panel.
>
> Um?
>>
>> Then there is that system where the applications show up on desktop as
>> buttons.
>
> You're seriously imagining things here. Do you mean LaunchPad, which
> gives you an iPad-type application launcher? Sure, when you install or
> upgrade to Lion, LaunchPad (itself just an application) gets added to
> your dock. Do what I (and I imagine most of the others here) have done
> and remove it. You never need to see or use it or care about it.
>> If you accidentally delete that Button say for Office 2011 (word,
>> excel, PowerPoint) you actually delete the application instead of the
>> button.
>
> Um, what?

Documented in MacWorld and MacLife when Lion first came out.
It works exactly to the tee like iPad. if you click on the button and 
wait until the buttons wiggle if you delete the button you delete the 
application. (same on the iPad) one its deleted you have to reinstall it 
to get it back

Yep documented in MacWorld and MacLife.
>
> I can't say I think Lion's the best thing since sliced turkey, but it's
> certainly not been a downgrade or a hassle in any way for me and some of
> the features clearly need to improve a bit, but it's overall at least as
> good (and quick and stable) as Snow Leopard was for me.
>
> There's a lot of typical fear, uncertainty and doubt out there about it,
> but most of it is simply unfounded usenet-ish nuttery.
>
> That said, when I upgraded a shared machine which is used by some less
> tech-savvy folks, I wrote them a handy "what's going to surprise you -
> and how you can make things more like they were before" memo. Mainly,
> the upside-down scrolling was going to surprise them - and the missing
> scrollbars, so I told them how to return them to pre-Lion behavior if
> they wanted.

David Empson wrote:

> A bigger nuisance is that I have Snow Leopard Server running on another
> computer, and I can't run the correct version of the admin tools on
> Lion. I have to VPN into the server and run the admin tools remotely,
> which is uglier than running them locally.

Are you saying that the Snow Leopard version of Server Admin and Server
Monitor will not launch on a Lion desktop ?

or just that the versions supplied with Lion (the dumbed down ones for
Lion server) don't interact with a Snow Leopard server ?

In message <jros93$no$1@news.albasani.net> 
  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> Bread wrote:
>> Um, what?

> Documented in MacWorld and MacLife when Lion first came out.
> It works exactly to the tee like iPad. if you click on the button and 
> wait until the buttons wiggle if you delete the button you delete the 
> application. (same on the iPad) one its deleted you have to reinstall it 
> to get it back

Cite where MacWorld (or anyone outside of a loony bin) said you could
accidentally delete office 2011 in this way.

-- 
Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see
What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you,
and to hear the lamentation of the women

In article <jrorkg$md3$1@news.albasani.net>, PhillipJones
<pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> Lewis wrote:
> > In message<jroaq9$5gf$1@news.albasani.net>
> >    PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
> >> Ideas such as there no Save As...
> >
> > It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.
> 
> The duplicate Command is actually different.
> 
> If you use Save as  and rename the file.
> You replace the original file with the file Save As version you end up 
> with a clean compacted version of the file. doing just save you tack on 
> any changes to the end of the file. adding bloat and can be cause of 
> document corruption because the document becomes far more complex.
> 
> The Duplicate Command does exactly what it says. it doesn't compact the 
> file, it doesn't remove the complexity. It just makes a Duplicate of the 
> file warts and all.
> 
> Depending upon how long you been working on a File say word file, and 
> you add pictures, use Track Changes and the like it can balloon up to 
> 500k-to 1 mg or more. accepting tracked changed then turn it off then 
> using Save As.... you might reduce the file size by 25%.

Yep, it is a fairly common occurrence. When editing documents in some
applications you can end up with a lot of extra garbage in the saved file
that is no longer needed.

I had a Word document today with an inserted image that was far too high a
resolution, so the filesize was nearly 500K. I changed the resolution of
the original image document, deleted the over-bloated version from the
Word document and inserted the new one. Saving the document meant it was
still 500K, while performing a Save As dropped iot down to under 100K. 

Such a difference may not be a big worry in one document (I actually had
six of them using the same image), but over hundreds of documents you can
save a lot of space ... which with Apple seemingly pushing towards Flash
memmory drives instead of hard drives, could be extremely important.

I've had PageMaker and InDesign document drop by many megabytes simply by
performing a Save As.

Helpful Harry  :o)

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> David Empson wrote:
> 
> > A bigger nuisance is that I have Snow Leopard Server running on another
> > computer, and I can't run the correct version of the admin tools on
> > Lion. I have to VPN into the server and run the admin tools remotely,
> > which is uglier than running them locally.
> 
> Are you saying that the Snow Leopard version of Server Admin and Server
> Monitor will not launch on a Lion desktop ?

Yes. Every version of the server tools can only be installed on a
matched major version of Mac OS X. (The 10.6 admin tools were deleted
when I upgraded to Lion.)

> or just that the versions supplied with Lion (the dumbed down ones for
> Lion server) don't interact with a Snow Leopard server ?

Those ones don't, but Apple provides the more fully featured server
admin tools for Lion as a separate download.

I knew about them, but didn't realise they were able to administer a
10.6 Server.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1822

This confirms that 10.6 Server admin tools cannot be used on Lion, but I
missed the line which says the 10.7 Server admin tools can be used to
administer a 10.6 Server.

I'm trying it now, but I'd be hesitant to trust this combination, since
past mixtures of later admin tools and older server major versions have
had issues (e.g. see the above article for known issues with 10.6 server
admin tools managing a 10.5 server).

At first glance, Server Admin and Workgroup Manager appear to work, but
I haven't done an exhaustive search to see what has changed. I can't
test Server Monitor as I don't have an Xserve.

I'm intending to upgrade my laptop to Mountain Lion quickly, and I
wouldn't expect Apple to support using the Mountain Lion server admin
tools to administer a Snow Leopard server, so I'll still need a way to
run older admin tools.

(I will be forced to upgrade my server at some point for security
reasons.)
-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

In article <slrnjtvhs7.1crj.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <timstreater-186993.21091218062012@news.individual.net> 
>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjtuv82.14j4.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> >> In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >> > In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
> >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
> >> >> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact 
> >> >> > your 
> >> >> > ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
> >> >> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
> >> 
> >> > D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What kind 
> >> > of shitty ISP is that?
> >> 
> >> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
> >> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
> >> carriers in the US.
> 
> > Wine choo find someone else then?
> 
> The other is no different.

No choice where you live?

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On 2012-06-19 03:39:09 +0000, PhillipJones said:
> Bread wrote:
>> On 2012-06-18 22:41:11 +0000, PhillipJones said:

>> upgrade to Lion, LaunchPad (itself just an application) gets added to
>> your dock. Do what I (and I imagine most of the others here) have done
>> and remove it. You never need to see or use it or care about it.

>>> If you accidentally delete that Button say for Office 2011 (word,
>>> excel, PowerPoint) you actually delete the application instead of the
>>> button.
>> 
>> Um, what?
> 
> Documented in MacWorld and MacLife when Lion first came out.
> It works exactly to the tee like iPad. if you click on the button and 
> wait until the buttons wiggle if you delete the button you delete the 
> application.

Even if that's true - and in my experience, it's not - even if it were, 
the solution is absurdly obvious:  Don't do that.  You already said you 
didn't want LaunchPad anyway, and nothing's making you use it, so 
don't.  I pulled it (and Mission Control) off the Dock first thing.  I 
have no use for them, apparently neither do you, and I wanted my Dock 
space back.

Jeez.  Next you're going to complain that the Finder's dangerous 
because you can use it to drag apps to the trash.  Oh, no!

There may be some valid gripes about Lion, but you've failed completely 
to bring up any of them.  The real, honest-to-goodness ones are lack of 
Rosetta (for those who have older apps that they just cannot replace - 
this was a big deal for me until Quicken got updated and it's still a 
big deal for a few other apps), apparently some broken SAMBA stuff, and 
I'm sure some of the others will come up with other things.  But you've 
not named a single honest or serious issue if the best you can come up 
with is Save As becoming Duplicate.

David Empson wrote:

> http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1822
> 
> This confirms that 10.6 Server admin tools cannot be used on Lion, but I
> missed the line which says the 10.7 Server admin tools can be used to
> administer a 10.6 Server.

Thanks. When Lion was launched, I was turned off by Apple announcing
that Server Admin had been "simplified" (aka: dumbed down) to make it
easier to run home servers.

> I'm intending to upgrade my laptop to Mountain Lion quickly, and I
> wouldn't expect Apple to support using the Mountain Lion server admin
> tools to administer a Snow Leopard server

I expect that Apple will have to provide management tools for xserves
for at least 5 years after end of sales in january 2011. That is the
cost of pulling out of a market. (HP will have to do the same with last
sales of its Itanium based servers).

Since Snow Leopard was the last version built to support the
functionality of xserves, I would expect that most businesses still on
xserves will stay at snow leopard until they migrate to Linux.

In message <4fe0bb7d$0$1811$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com> 
  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> David Empson wrote:

>> http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1822
>> 
>> This confirms that 10.6 Server admin tools cannot be used on Lion, but I
>> missed the line which says the 10.7 Server admin tools can be used to
>> administer a 10.6 Server.

> Thanks. When Lion was launched, I was turned off by Apple announcing
> that Server Admin had been "simplified" (aka: dumbed down) to make it
> easier to run home servers.

Simplified to the point of absurdity.

-- 
"I don't think the kind of friends I'd have would care."
But of course there were the rules. Everyone knew there were rules. They
just had to hope like Hell that the gods knew the rules, too. 

In message <timstreater-0E4B10.09160619062012@news.individual.net> 
  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnjtvhs7.1crj.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <timstreater-186993.21091218062012@news.individual.net> 
>>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> > In article <slrnjtuv82.14j4.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> 
>> >> In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
>> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> >> > In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>> >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
>> >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with your 
>> >> >> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact 
>> >> >> > your 
>> >> >> > ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
>> >> >> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
>> >> 
>> >> > D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What kind 
>> >> > of shitty ISP is that?
>> >> 
>> >> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
>> >> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
>> >> carriers in the US.
>> 
>> > Wine choo find someone else then?
>> 
>> The other is no different.

> No choice where you live?

The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.

Verizon and Sprint and both CDMA carriers, which meant that iPhones on
those networks were far less useful since you could not use the data
connection whilst on a phone call. That left AT&T as the only viable choice.

-- 
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
"Thank you for sending me a copy of your book; I'll waste no time
reading it." - Moses Hadas

In article <slrnju1jqi.n9f.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
> and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
> it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
> distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.

if you consider 'all sorts of issues' to mean 'the system is not
overloaded and calls go through reliably', then i guess they have
issues. more carriers should have such issues. 

sprint has enough excess capacity that there are mvnos with very
attractive rate plans.

t-mobile's issue is that it supports aws and not the usual 3g bands,
but they're in the process of deploying standard 3g so that issue will
go away. it already has right in front of moscone (see pre-wwdc reports
that incorrectly predicted a t-mobile announcement) as well as in some
other places. they are saying end of year for what they call complete.

> Verizon and Sprint and both CDMA carriers, which meant that iPhones on
> those networks were far less useful since you could not use the data
> connection whilst on a phone call. That left AT&T as the only viable choice.

verizon and sprint iphones are selling quite well, which means most
people don't care about that. 

also verizon supports cdma vora (voice over revision a) if the handset
does, however, iphones currently don't. whether the next iphone
supports vora remains to be seen. apple is no doubt focused on lte
rather than updating cdma for the few people who care about
simultaneous voice & data.

In article <slrnju1jqi.n9f.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <timstreater-0E4B10.09160619062012@news.individual.net> 
>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjtvhs7.1crj.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> >> In message <timstreater-186993.21091218062012@news.individual.net> 
> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >> > In article <slrnjtuv82.14j4.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >> In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
> >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >> >> > In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> >> >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
> >> >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with 
> >> >> >> > your 
> >> >> >> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact 
> >> >> >> > your ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
> >> >> >> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
> >> >> 
> >> >> > D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What 
> >> >> > kind of shitty ISP is that?
> >> >> 
> >> >> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
> >> >> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
> >> >> carriers in the US.
> >> 
> >> > Wine choo find someone else then?
> >> 
> >> The other is no different.
> 
> > No choice where you live?
> 
> The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
> and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
> it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
> distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.
> 
> Verizon and Sprint and both CDMA carriers, which meant that iPhones on
> those networks were far less useful since you could not use the data
> connection whilst on a phone call. That left AT&T as the only viable choice.

So are you saying that if I wanted plain old ADSL at home in the US 
using my POTS line to the exchange [1], you're stuck with whoever owns 
the exchange?

[1] AKA Central Office IIRC

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <timstreater-41823F.21565419062012@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article <slrnju1jqi.n9f.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> > In message <timstreater-0E4B10.09160619062012@news.individual.net> 
> >   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > > In article <slrnjtvhs7.1crj.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> > >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > 
> > >> In message <timstreater-186993.21091218062012@news.individual.net> 
> > >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > >> > In article <slrnjtuv82.14j4.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> > >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> >> In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
> > >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > >> >> > In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
> > >> >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> >> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
> > >> >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with 
> > >> >> >> > your 
> > >> >> >> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should 
> > >> >> >> > contact 
> > >> >> >> > your ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
> > >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
> > >> >> >> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> > D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What 
> > >> >> > kind of shitty ISP is that?
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
> > >> >> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
> > >> >> carriers in the US.
> > >> 
> > >> > Wine choo find someone else then?
> > >> 
> > >> The other is no different.
> > 
> > > No choice where you live?
> > 
> > The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
> > and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
> > it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
> > distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.
> > 
> > Verizon and Sprint and both CDMA carriers, which meant that iPhones on
> > those networks were far less useful since you could not use the data
> > connection whilst on a phone call. That left AT&T as the only viable 
> > choice.
> 
> So are you saying that if I wanted plain old ADSL at home in the US 
> using my POTS line to the exchange [1], you're stuck with whoever owns 
> the exchange?

I think he's just talking about wireless carriers.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <slrnju1jqi.n9f.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> > The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
> > and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
> > it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
> > distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.
> 
> if you consider 'all sorts of issues' to mean 'the system is not
> overloaded and calls go through reliably', then i guess they have
> issues. more carriers should have such issues. 

T-Mobile also has the "issue" that for people like my mother-in-law, who
uses the cell phone very little, but pretty badly needs it available at
least for emergencies (she has health problems, mostly related to being
82-years old), she can get service from T-Mobile for $10/year.

No, that "year" is not a typo for "month". Ok, the first year costs more
as I had to spend $100 to buy up to their "gold" status. But then I only
need to add the minimum $10 to the account each year to extend it for
another year. The 1000 minutes that the initial $100 bought will be more
than enough to last her lifetime unless she has a sudden dramatic change
in usage. She was getting screwed by Verizon for something like
$50/month before I switched her over to T-Mobile.

Not everybody is an ultra-geek who worries about monthly data limits of
a few gigabytes.

And I've pretty much decided to get a Sprint iPhone (via Virgin) for
myself at the end of this month. I'm just not willing to spend the $65
or so (hard to figure out the actual number because of all the footnotes
about extra fees) that seems to be about the minimum for ATT or Verizon.
The $30/month from Virgin is the first plan I've seen that is in a range
I would even vaguely consider. Yes, I know it means paying up front for
the iPhone, but it still comes out ahead (by a *LOT*). It appears that
the $30/month is the actual bill, with no "extra
taxes/fees/charges/whatever" tacked on. I can live with the coverage, as
my current cell (plain old ordinary cell phone with no fancy stuff like
data) also uses the Sprint system and seems mostly ok for my purposes.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain

In article <1klxwl5.spkvo787u2lqN%nospam@see.signature>, Richard Maine
<nospam@see.signature> wrote:

> > > The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
> > > and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
> > > it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
> > > distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.
> > 
> > if you consider 'all sorts of issues' to mean 'the system is not
> > overloaded and calls go through reliably', then i guess they have
> > issues. more carriers should have such issues. 
> 
> T-Mobile also has the "issue" that for people like my mother-in-law, who
> uses the cell phone very little, but pretty badly needs it available at
> least for emergencies (she has health problems, mostly related to being
> 82-years old), she can get service from T-Mobile for $10/year.

true. i didn't mention pay as you go, just the network differences.

t-mobile's paygo plans are very good for light use. you can also freely
switch to a different plan if needs change, even if it's just for a
day. what some people do is switch to the the $2/day (2g speeds) or
$3/day (3g speeds which will soon work for iphones) for unlimited
data/text/voice only on the days they need unlimited (usually for the
data), then go back to the 10c/min plan.

> No, that "year" is not a typo for "month". Ok, the first year costs more
> as I had to spend $100 to buy up to their "gold" status. But then I only
> need to add the minimum $10 to the account each year to extend it for
> another year. The 1000 minutes that the initial $100 bought will be more
> than enough to last her lifetime unless she has a sudden dramatic change
> in usage. She was getting screwed by Verizon for something like
> $50/month before I switched her over to T-Mobile.
> 
> Not everybody is an ultra-geek who worries about monthly data limits of
> a few gigabytes.

true. that's why blanket statements are misleading at best.

> And I've pretty much decided to get a Sprint iPhone (via Virgin) for
> myself at the end of this month. I'm just not willing to spend the $65
> or so (hard to figure out the actual number because of all the footnotes
> about extra fees) that seems to be about the minimum for ATT or Verizon.
> The $30/month from Virgin is the first plan I've seen that is in a range
> I would even vaguely consider. Yes, I know it means paying up front for
> the iPhone, but it still comes out ahead (by a *LOT*). It appears that
> the $30/month is the actual bill, with no "extra
> taxes/fees/charges/whatever" tacked on. I can live with the coverage, as
> my current cell (plain old ordinary cell phone with no fancy stuff like
> data) also uses the Sprint system and seems mostly ok for my purposes.

sprint also roams on verizon's network (and vice versa) so you actually
have very good coverage at very good prices.

ting is a new sprint mvno with a very nice plans. however, they don't
offer an iphone currently.
<https://ting.com/>

Lewis wrote:
> In message<jros93$no$1@news.albasani.net>
>    PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>> Bread wrote:
>>> Um, what?
>
>> Documented in MacWorld and MacLife when Lion first came out.
>> It works exactly to the tee like iPad. if you click on the button and
>> wait until the buttons wiggle if you delete the button you delete the
>> application. (same on the iPad) one its deleted you have to reinstall it
>> to get it back
>
> Cite where MacWorld (or anyone outside of a loony bin) said you could
> accidentally delete office 2011 in this way.
>
When Lion first hit the Market the did an article on new features, 
Pitfalls and other items in both they document the very thing I spoke 
of. That when you use the button format as in iPad and that you have to 
be careful. because it acts exactly the iPad you delete the button  you 
delete the application.

Helpful Harry wrote:
> In article<jrorkg$md3$1@news.albasani.net>, PhillipJones
> <pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>> Lewis wrote:
>>> In message<jroaq9$5gf$1@news.albasani.net>
>>>     PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>   wrote:
>>>> Ideas such as there no Save As...
>>>
>>> It's been renamed Duplicate. Big deal.
>>
>> The duplicate Command is actually different.
>>
>> If you use Save as  and rename the file.
>> You replace the original file with the file Save As version you end up
>> with a clean compacted version of the file. doing just save you tack on
>> any changes to the end of the file. adding bloat and can be cause of
>> document corruption because the document becomes far more complex.
>>
>> The Duplicate Command does exactly what it says. it doesn't compact the
>> file, it doesn't remove the complexity. It just makes a Duplicate of the
>> file warts and all.
>>
>> Depending upon how long you been working on a File say word file, and
>> you add pictures, use Track Changes and the like it can balloon up to
>> 500k-to 1 mg or more. accepting tracked changed then turn it off then
>> using Save As.... you might reduce the file size by 25%.
>
> Yep, it is a fairly common occurrence. When editing documents in some
> applications you can end up with a lot of extra garbage in the saved file
> that is no longer needed.
>
> I had a Word document today with an inserted image that was far too high a
> resolution, so the filesize was nearly 500K. I changed the resolution of
> the original image document, deleted the over-bloated version from the
> Word document and inserted the new one. Saving the document meant it was
> still 500K, while performing a Save As dropped iot down to under 100K.
>
> Such a difference may not be a big worry in one document (I actually had
> six of them using the same image), but over hundreds of documents you can
> save a lot of space ... which with Apple seemingly pushing towards Flash
> memmory drives instead of hard drives, could be extremely important.
>
> I've had PageMaker and InDesign document drop by many megabytes simply by
> performing a Save As.
>
> Helpful Harry  :o)
Duplicate is as it names implies Just duplicates the File.

Tim Streater wrote:

> So are you saying that if I wanted plain old ADSL at home in the US 
> using my POTS line to the exchange [1], you're stuck with whoever owns 
> the exchange?


Bush Jr buckled to large telco desires are removed the requirement that
they allow access to 3rd party ISPs.  There are some who did manage to
strike private deals with telcos, but nothing systematic.

Canadian telcos tried hard to get to the same part, but failed due to
rebellion by citizens.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2011/01/27/technology-internet-usage-based-billing-mezei.html

In message <190620121640206979%nospam@nospam.invalid> 
  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnju1jqi.n9f.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
>> and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
>> it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
>> distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.

> if you consider 'all sorts of issues' to mean 'the system is not
> overloaded and calls go through reliably', then i guess they have
> issues. more carriers should have such issues. 

I had T-Mo for quite  along time (pre-iPhone). The issues include, but
are not limited to:

1) Much smaller coverage area
2) Excruciatingly slow data speeds ehn compared to other carriers
   (their 3G is much slower than AT&Ts, and much more limited)
3) Non-standard GSM frequency
4) an almost 100% guarantee that any call where you moved from one
   tower to another tower would be dropped.
5) No iPhone.   

> sprint has enough excess capacity that there are mvnos with very
> attractive rate plans.

Sprint's issues are different from T-Mo, except for the similarity
that it also has a limited coverage area.

> t-mobile's issue is that it supports aws and not the usual 3g bands,
> but they're in the process of deploying standard 3g so that issue will
> go away.

Assuming T-Mobile stays in business (not a certainty since their parent
company wants rid of them), then yes, in the future t-mobile will be a
possibility in areas they have decent coverage.

>> Verizon and Sprint and both CDMA carriers, which meant that iPhones on
>> those networks were far less useful since you could not use the data
>> connection whilst on a phone call. That left AT&T as the only viable choice.

> verizon and sprint iphones are selling quite well, which means most
> people don't care about that. 

I care about that. And I do hear complaints from Verizon customers where
they have to say "Oh, I can't check that map/website/email. Let me call
you back", especially when they hear that AT&T customers do not have to
hang up to use their data connection.

-- 
"Master, what is the difference between a humanistic, monastic system of
belief in which wisdom is sought by means of an apparently nonsensical
system of questions and answers, and a lot of mystic gibberish made up
on the spur of the moment?" Wen considered this for some time, and a
last said: "A fish!"
'When you've been a wizard as long as I have, my boy, you'll learn that
as soon as you find anything that offers amazing possibilities for the
improvement of the human condition, it's best to put the lid back on and
pretend it never happened.' --The Last Continent

In message <1klxwl5.spkvo787u2lqN%nospam@see.signature> 
  Richard Maine <nospam@see.signature> wrote:
> And I've pretty much decided to get a Sprint iPhone (via Virgin) for
> myself at the end of this month. I'm just not willing to spend the $65
> or so (hard to figure out the actual number because of all the footnotes
> about extra fees) that seems to be about the minimum for ATT or Verizon.
> The $30/month from Virgin is the first plan I've seen that is in a range
> I would even vaguely consider. Yes, I know it means paying up front for
> the iPhone, but it still comes out ahead (by a *LOT*). It appears that
> the $30/month is the actual bill, with no "extra
> taxes/fees/charges/whatever" tacked on. I can live with the coverage, as
> my current cell (plain old ordinary cell phone with no fancy stuff like
> data) also uses the Sprint system and seems mostly ok for my purposes.

THe prepaid iPhone on Virgin/Sprint is very tempting. I've also
considered getting an unlocked iPhone and switching to one of the other
Sprint resellers (like Credo), but with a 4 iPhone household that is a
big outlay up front. Still might do it though.

-- 
Anybody who tells me what happens to me after I'm dead is either a liar
or a fool because they DON'T KNOW 
Let the Wookiee win.

In message <timstreater-41823F.21565419062012@news.individual.net> 
  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnju1jqi.n9f.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <timstreater-0E4B10.09160619062012@news.individual.net> 
>>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> > In article <slrnjtvhs7.1crj.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> 
>> >> In message <timstreater-186993.21091218062012@news.individual.net> 
>> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> >> > In article <slrnjtuv82.14j4.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>> >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >> In message <timstreater-64EAF0.20053418062012@news.individual.net> 
>> >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> >> >> > In article <slrnjturfh.smk.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
>> >> >> >  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> In message <timstreater-5F2651.16582618062012@news.individual.net> 
>> >> >> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> > If you see this (trips back and forth across the Atlantic with 
>> >> >> >> > your 
>> >> >> >> > traffic) or indeed any seriously weird routing, you should contact 
>> >> >> >> > your ISP - who will then sort it out with their ISP.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> Contact AT&T? Are you daft? I try to avoid even THINKING about the
>> >> >> >> horror-show that is AT&T, much less calling them.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> > D'ye mean they don't have a support email/website/telephone? What 
>> >> >> > kind of shitty ISP is that?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> They're a mobile carrier. In the US. their primary stance is, "Our
>> >> >> customers? yeah, FUCK THEM ALL." It's sort fo required by mobile
>> >> >> carriers in the US.
>> >> 
>> >> > Wine choo find someone else then?
>> >> 
>> >> The other is no different.
>> 
>> > No choice where you live?
>> 
>> The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
>> and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
>> it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
>> distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.
>> 
>> Verizon and Sprint and both CDMA carriers, which meant that iPhones on
>> those networks were far less useful since you could not use the data
>> connection whilst on a phone call. That left AT&T as the only viable choice.

> So are you saying that if I wanted plain old ADSL at home in the US 
> using my POTS line to the exchange [1], you're stuck with whoever owns 
> the exchange?

We are not talking about POTS at all.

-- 
Over 3,500 gay marriages and, what, no hellfire? I was promise hellfire.
And riots. What gives? -- Mark Morford
Say, give it up, give it up, television's taking its toll That's enough,
that's enough, gimme the remote control I've been nice, I've been good,
please don't do this to me Turn it off, turn it off, I don't want to
have to see

In message <jrr3ks$j38$1@news.albasani.net> 
  PhillipJones <pjones1@kimbanet.com> wrote:
> Lewis wrote:
>> In message<jros93$no$1@news.albasani.net>
>>    PhillipJones<pjones1@kimbanet.com>  wrote:
>>> Bread wrote:
>>>> Um, what?
>>
>>> Documented in MacWorld and MacLife when Lion first came out.
>>> It works exactly to the tee like iPad. if you click on the button and
>>> wait until the buttons wiggle if you delete the button you delete the
>>> application. (same on the iPad) one its deleted you have to reinstall it
>>> to get it back
>>
>> Cite where MacWorld (or anyone outside of a loony bin) said you could
>> accidentally delete office 2011 in this way.
>>
> When Lion first hit the Market the did an article on new features, 
> Pitfalls and other items in both they document the very thing I spoke 
> of.

No they didn't because I know the people at MacWorld and they are not
blithering idiots. No one at MacWorld ever said you could accidentally
delete Office 2011 in the manner you said.

> That when you use the button format as in iPad and that you have to 
> be careful. because it acts exactly the iPad you delete the button  you 
> delete the application.

If you download an application *from the Mac App Store* you can delete
it very easily by simply deleting its button from Launchpad. And yes,
this will delete the application. However, it *only* applies to Mac App
Store applications and you can IMMEDIATELY re-download that application
from the Mac App Store. So no, you can't delete Office 2011 like this.

-- 
Some humans would do anything to see if it was possible to do it. If you
put a large switch in some cave somewhere, with a sign on it saying
"End-of-the-World Switch. PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH," the paint wouldn't even
have time to dry.
Your letters they all say that you're beside me now. Then why do I feel
alone? I'm standing on a ledge and your fine spider web Is fastening my
ankle to a stone.

In article <4fe12bca$0$2087$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Tim Streater wrote:
> 
> > So are you saying that if I wanted plain old ADSL at home in the US 
> > using my POTS line to the exchange [1], you're stuck with whoever owns 
> > the exchange?
> 
> 
> Bush Jr buckled to large telco desires are removed the requirement that
> they allow access to 3rd party ISPs.  There are some who did manage to
> strike private deals with telcos, but nothing systematic.
> 
> Canadian telcos tried hard to get to the same part, but failed due to
> rebellion by citizens.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2011/01/27/technology-internet-usage-b
> ased-billing-mezei.html

So no unbundling of the local loop in the US of A then.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <slrnju2u52.11ot.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
> >> and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
> >> it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
> >> distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.
> 
> > if you consider 'all sorts of issues' to mean 'the system is not
> > overloaded and calls go through reliably', then i guess they have
> > issues. more carriers should have such issues. 
> 
> I had T-Mo for quite  along time (pre-iPhone). The issues include, but
> are not limited to:
> 
> 1) Much smaller coverage area

depends where you live. every carrier has good and bad coverage areas.
no carrier will cover everywhere. in some places t-mobile is excellent
and in others not so much. what matters is if a carrier covers the
areas to where you travel.

> 2) Excruciatingly slow data speeds ehn compared to other carriers
>    (their 3G is much slower than AT&Ts, and much more limited)

absolute nonsense. where do you come up with this shit?

t-mobile's hspa+ is much faster than at&t 3g, up to 42 mb/s, and will
beat at&t 3g easily.

for those who can use lte, verizon is king because of its wide lte
deployment. at&t lte deployment is still relatively limited.

for iphone users, that means a few more months until an lte capable
iphone is released.

> 3) Non-standard GSM frequency

that doesn't matter unless you are switching between carriers, such as
someone traveling internationally, and t-mobile is in the process of
deploying standard 3g so it's not going to matter anymore anyway.

there are also 3g/aws devices that work at full speed on *any* gsm
network.

> 4) an almost 100% guarantee that any call where you moved from one
>    tower to another tower would be dropped.

absolute nonsense. where in the world do you come up with this rubbish?
i've used t-mobile and calls do *not* drop any more than with any other
carrier. 

> 5) No iPhone.   

t-mobile may not sell the iphone (yet) but they definitely support it,
although it will only work at 2g data speeds until the aforementioned
3g deployment is done. voice is unaffected by this limitation, and for
casual use (e.g., checking email), 2g speeds aren't a big deal. even
streaming audio works great over 2g (i've done it).

also, not everyone wants an iphone. t-mobile has a large selection of
android phones as well as more traditional phones. all of those have
aws and will get maximum speeds on the t-mobile network.

> > sprint has enough excess capacity that there are mvnos with very
> > attractive rate plans.
> 
> Sprint's issues are different from T-Mo, except for the similarity
> that it also has a limited coverage area.

nonsense. sprint & verizon roam on each other's networks. coverage is
excellent.

if coverage area is the most important factor, then you want verizon,
not at&t.

> > t-mobile's issue is that it supports aws and not the usual 3g bands,
> > but they're in the process of deploying standard 3g so that issue will
> > go away.
> 
> Assuming T-Mobile stays in business (not a certainty since their parent
> company wants rid of them), then yes, in the future t-mobile will be a
> possibility in areas they have decent coverage.

t-mobile received a chunk of money and spectrum from the failed at&t
buyout. they'll be around for a while.

> >> Verizon and Sprint and both CDMA carriers, which meant that iPhones on
> >> those networks were far less useful since you could not use the data
> >> connection whilst on a phone call. That left AT&T as the only viable
> >> choice.
> 
> > verizon and sprint iphones are selling quite well, which means most
> > people don't care about that. 
> 
> I care about that. And I do hear complaints from Verizon customers where
> they have to say "Oh, I can't check that map/website/email. Let me call
> you back", especially when they hear that AT&T customers do not have to
> hang up to use their data connection.

not enough complaints to adversely affect sales. verizon sold more
iphones (*with* the above limitation) than *all* lte phones combined
(which don't have that limitation).

<http://www.slashgear.com/verizon-we-sold-more-iphones-in-q1-than-all-lt
e-phones-19223627/>

In message <200620121159094946%nospam@nospam.invalid> 
  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnju2u52.11ot.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> >> The US really on has two viable carriers. Well, 2 1/2, I suppose. AT&T
>> >> and Verizon. A distant third is Sprint, which has many issue that make
>> >> it a risky choice for a lot of people in terms of coverage areas. A very
>> >> distant 4th is T-Mobile which has all sorts of issues.
>> 
>> > if you consider 'all sorts of issues' to mean 'the system is not
>> > overloaded and calls go through reliably', then i guess they have
>> > issues. more carriers should have such issues. 
>> 
>> I had T-Mo for quite  along time (pre-iPhone). The issues include, but
>> are not limited to:
>> 
>> 1) Much smaller coverage area

> depends where you live. every carrier has good and bad coverage areas.

T-mobile has many more bad areas than AT&T or Verizon.

>> 2) Excruciatingly slow data speeds ehn compared to other carriers
>>    (their 3G is much slower than AT&Ts, and much more limited)

> absolute nonsense. where do you come up with this shit?

Having used t-mobile for many years.

> t-mobile's hspa+ is much faster than at&t 3g, up to 42 mb/s, and will
> beat at&t 3g easily.

T-Mobile's HSPA+ barely exists and what does exist is quite new.

>> 4) an almost 100% guarantee that any call where you moved from one
>>    tower to another tower would be dropped.

> absolute nonsense. where in the world do you come up with this rubbish?

Form having been on T-Mobile for years.

> not enough complaints to adversely affect sales.

Most people are not aware that this is a limitation unique to CDMA.

-- 
"you'd think you could trust a horde of hungarian barbarians"
'I'll tell you this!' shouted Rincewind. 'I'd rather trust me than
history! Oh, shit, did I just say that?' 

In article <slrnju3tcj.1idc.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> I had T-Mo for quite  along time (pre-iPhone). The issues include, but
> >> are not limited to:
> >> 
> >> 1) Much smaller coverage area
> 
> > depends where you live. every carrier has good and bad coverage areas.
> 
> T-mobile has many more bad areas than AT&T or Verizon.

again, it depends where. 

in the places i visit, t-mobile works fine. i have phones on t-mobile,
sprint and at&t and they're all roughly the same. in some spots one
carrier gets a signal and another doesn't, but in a different area it's
the other way around. 

no carrier is ideal everywhere.

> >> 2) Excruciatingly slow data speeds ehn compared to other carriers
> >>    (their 3G is much slower than AT&Ts, and much more limited)
> 
> > absolute nonsense. where do you come up with this shit?
> 
> Having used t-mobile for many years.

must have been a very, very long time ago. it's wrong now and has been
for years.

> > t-mobile's hspa+ is much faster than at&t 3g, up to 42 mb/s, and will
> > beat at&t 3g easily.
> 
> T-Mobile's HSPA+ barely exists and what does exist is quite new.

nonsense. this is from just one year ago,

<http://www.cnet.com/8301-17918_1-20065505-85.html>
  The additions brings the total to 55 markets where customers can
  enjoy theoretical download speeds of up to 42Mbps, and T-Mobile
  unveils its first compatible product
....
  T-Mobile showed off average speeds of 27Mbps when it demoed the
  enhanced connection at CES

also keep in mind that at&t and verizon are overloaded. a few years ago
when at&t was *really* bad, t-mobile 2g could sometimes be faster than
3g on at&t's overloaded network, nevermind t-mobile 3g or 4g.

> >> 4) an almost 100% guarantee that any call where you moved from one
> >>    tower to another tower would be dropped.
> 
> > absolute nonsense. where in the world do you come up with this rubbish?
> 
> Form having been on T-Mobile for years.

i *currently* have a t-mobile account. it's absolute bullshit. you must
have had a defective phone.

> > not enough complaints to adversely affect sales.
> 
> Most people are not aware that this is a limitation unique to CDMA.

most people don't care. verizon wouldn't be as big as it is if it
mattered. furthermore, with vora, it's no longer a limitation.

In article <200620121225319901%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > > not enough complaints to adversely affect sales.
> > 
> > Most people are not aware that this is a limitation unique to CDMA.
> 
> most people don't care. verizon wouldn't be as big as it is if it
> mattered. furthermore, with vora, it's no longer a limitation.

oh, one other point. that limitation is not unique to cdma. 

gsm edge has the same limitation, and the original iphone (which didn't
have 3g) and any iphone (or other phone) connecting to edge can't do
simultaneous voice & data.

>> T-Mobile's HSPA+ barely exists and what does exist is quite new.

> nonsense. this is from just one year ago,

That is quite new.

-- 
the nasty little sound of a sword being unsheathed right behind one at
just the point when one thought one had disposed of one's enemies [...]
It was that kind of laugh. --Equal Rites
Knowledge equals power... --...  Power equals energy...  People were
stupid, sometimes. They thought the Library was a dangerous place
because of all the magical books, which was true enough, but what made
it really one of the most dangerous places there could ever be was the
simple fact that it was a library. Energy equals matter... --...  Matter
equals mass.  And mass distorts space. It distorts it into polyfractal
L-Space. --Guards! Guards!

In article <slrnju2uak.11ot.g.kreme@krismbp.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> THe prepaid iPhone on Virgin/Sprint is very tempting. I've also
> considered getting an unlocked iPhone and switching to one of the other
> Sprint resellers (like Credo), but with a 4 iPhone household that is a
> big outlay up front. Still might do it though.

If Credo ever offers the iPhone, I'd seriously consider switching to them.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

In article <slrnju3v8v.1idc.g.kreme@krismbp.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> T-Mobile's HSPA+ barely exists and what does exist is quite new.
> 
> > nonsense. this is from just one year ago,
> 
> That is quite new.

maybe so, however, the fact is that t-mobile's hspa+ network is well
deployed and speeds are *not* 'excruciatingly slow.' in some areas
t-mobile has the fastest network available, short of lte (which an
iphone can't do).

On 2012-06-17 21:02 , JF Mezei wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> 1. Videotron have been laying fibre where I live.
>
> Yes, cable companies lay fibre to do node splits. Because coax is
> shared, to increase capacity you reduce the number of homes on each coax
> segment, thus there are fewer customers per node and more bandwidth per
> customer, especially in the costrained upload. Their physical equipment
> only retransmits 42mhz for upload (7 channels of 6mhz) and within this,
> they need some control channels for illico, the voiP service and the
> internet access service). There is also a control channel for the SDV
> (switched digital video where some channels (frequency range)
> dynamically carry some channels (TV stations) depending on what people
> want to watch in that neighbourhood.
>
>> 2. Service here is 60 Mb/s at present but will be going up to 200 in the
>> near future.  Ya don't think the two issues are related do you?
>
> Nop. They could offer 200mbps today if they wanted. This is a software
> config.  But you would need to change modem to get one that supports
> more than 4 bonded channels.

Vtron offers 120 elsewhere (now rolling out 200).  So the modem issue is 
just not hunting.  They would not be laying fibre if all they needed to 
do was change modems.


-- 
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
             -Samuel Clemens.

Alan Browne wrote:

> Vtron offers 120 elsewhere (now rolling out 200).  So the modem issue is 
> just not hunting.  They would not be laying fibre if all they needed to 
> do was change modems.


They trial higher speeds in limited areas for 2 reasons. First is that
they want to gauge marketing aspects and then they need t gauge uptake.
At those speeds, they have to limit how many customer per node can
subscribe to those speeds.

4 channels at ~38mbps yields ~150mbps. A single 120mbps customer can
monopolise much of the coax's capacity.


So they really need to upgrade the CMTS to support 8 bonded channels
before they can really roll out higher speeds. And remember that because
the analogue TV channels are not allocated the same throughout
Videorron's territory, there are some areas where it may be easier to
release NTSC channles to be used for download data while those channels
are used a lot in different towns and are harder to move.