• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

"Mac OS X cannot be installed on this computer"

wheresmybacon

wheresmybacon

Diamond Member
I bought my fiancée a new Macbook Pro the weekend before last, so I inherited her Macbook 1.1. It's got the Intel Core Duo 2ghz proc, but I added some RAM and a new hard drive (2GB/500GB) about a year ago. Anyway, in preparation of me assuming ownership, I wiped the drive and installed the OS that came with it, OS X 10.4. It worked great, although being the geek that I am, I had to push the envelope and try to get Snow Leopard on it...

Using the install DVD that came with my fiancée's new Macbook Pro, I booted up while holding down the "C" key, but just after selecting the language for the installer, I get a yellow exclamation mark and the message "Mac OS X cannot be installed on this computer".

I reformatted the drive and made sure it had the GUID option ticked, but still no dice. Same error.

Is the disc that came with her new Macbook Pro somehow "tied" to that model of computer?
 
The disk that came with her MacBook Pro is tied to her system. That is what you get for trying to sneak past Apple's completely unenforceable EULA.
 
I'm not opposed to buying Snow Leopard, I just want to see how well it works relative to Tiger on this hardware. If the only way to try it is to buy it @ $170 I'll just continue to use Tiger. I'm not spending $170 for an OS I might want for a 4-year old machine.
 
wheresmybacon said:
I'm not opposed to buying Snow Leopard, I just want to see how well it works relative to Tiger on this hardware. If the only way to try it is to buy it @ $170 I'll just continue to use Tiger. I'm not spending $170 for an OS I might want for a 4-year old machine.
Click to expand...

Leopard and Snow Leopard both will work better on that system than Tiger, at least it did on my almost identical one.

However, you do not need to get the $170 copy, you can get the $30 copy and still do a clean install with it. You cannot upgrade with that copy, you will have back up your data and do a clean install. It might be do an Archive and Install, but don't hold me to that.

You also could try cloning your fiancee's drive to yours and test out Snow Leopard that way.

Just run a firewire cable betwixt the two and clone away
 
Oh the $30 copy will work? I'll just go that route. For some reason I thought I had to get the full $170 version.

Thanks!
 
the family pack/single upgrade 10.6.3 work fine. thats what most folks use. of course mind your legality.

otherwise the discs are system specific in some ways - sorta. so full retail is best
 
That just backs up what I said earlier. You cannot UPGRADE, but you can do a clean install. So backup your files, and do a clean install.
 
wheresmybacon said:
Oh the $30 copy will work? I'll just go that route. For some reason I thought I had to get the full $170 version.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I believe the aforementioned EULA requires you to buy the more expensive version ($30 version is only for upgrading from Leopard), but Apple doesn't make an effort to enforce that.
 
mugs said:
I believe the aforementioned EULA requires you to buy the more expensive version ($30 version is only for upgrading from Leopard), but Apple doesn't make an effort to enforce that.
Click to expand...

Unlike Windows 7 Upgrade Edition, Snow Leopard does not check if you have an existing version of Leopard or Snow Leopard on your disk yet, nor does it use license keys. It's up to you to uphold to the EULA or not. Not that I'm suggesting that you go straight from Tiger to SL without Leopard. I'm just saying the facts.
 
There were some early Intel MacBooks that are unable to run any 64-bit OS, even though the CPU might ordinarily support. The bios firmware simply doesn't allow for it.
In which case: Leopard (32-bit) can be installed, but Snow Leopard (64-bit) cannot.
 
vailr said:
There were some early Intel MacBooks that are unable to run any 64-bit OS, even though the CPU might ordinarily support. The bios firmware simply doesn't allow for it.
In which case: Leopard (32-bit) can be installed, but Snow Leopard (64-bit) cannot.
Click to expand...

I had a first generation 1.83GHz Core Duo MacBook. It is currently running Snow Leopard at my sister's house.
 
snow leopard is 32bit and 64bit - depending on which hardware you have.

truth is snow leopard can run 64bit apps with either kernel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top