How much disk space to upgrade Tiger to Leopard?
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: How to change file Kind
Next: Wep pages not scrolling.
From: Chris Ridd on 3 Jun 2010 05:10 On 2010-06-03 10:01:03 +0100, J. J. Lodder said: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> On 2010-06-03 06:32:54 +0100, David Kennedy said: >> >>> Dorian Gray wrote: >>>> >>>> My iBook G4 is 1.42 GHz and has 1 GB - should I upgrade it to the >>>> maximum 1.5 GB? Crucial are selling the 1 GB that would be required for >>>> �41.11 inc. VAT. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks all! (still I have one question about memory upgrade above) >>> >>> Do it! >> >> It is worth rebooting first just to clear down any excess swapfiles. >> Might mean a little bit more disk space for the installer.. > > And also to verify that it will boot, Yes. -- Chris
From: whisky-dave on 3 Jun 2010 06:48 "Dorian Gray" <D.Gray(a)picture.invalid> wrote in message news:D.Gray-4BBDB0.18365402062010(a)nntp-serv.cam.ac.uk... > In article <8q-dnRBJneu2D5vRnZ2dnUVZ8tOdnZ2d(a)brightview.co.uk>, > David Kennedy <davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote: > >> Dorian Gray wrote: >> >> > /Library/Audio/Apple Loops/Apple Loops for GarageBand/ : 1.09 GB >> > /Library/Application Support/Garageband/ : 1.92 GB >> >> Do you use GarageBand? > > I've written one song in GarageBand, so think I want to keep it, yes. If you're not intending to use GarageBand again then there's 3GB you can save immediately, if yuo just want to listen to your song then make it in to mp3 or aiff etc... if you're not going to use iDVD then ther'es more saving there. Printer drivers 1.57GB I'm betting that could be reduced significantly. Either just install the make of printer you have or just download the printer software for yuor particualr printer rather than keeping the required software for just about every printer on the market ;-) I'd recommend a complete fresh install if you realyl want to reclaim space.
From: zoara on 3 Jun 2010 09:13 David Empson <dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz> wrote: > I'd be getting worried if I only had about 5 GB free space on my > startup > volume. I frequently get down to a gig or less free. Not on startup, but after it's been running a while and claimed a bunch of swap. No problems except it runs a bit slow. I've had free space in single-figure megabytes and it's still carried on - just very slowly, and applications refuse to save data. Not that useful, admittedly, but it didn't crash. I never have more than 10GB free. Usually about 5GB. -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: Chris Ridd on 4 Jun 2010 10:18 On 2010-06-04 13:12:34 +0100, R said: > Dorian Gray <D.Gray(a)picture.invalid> wrote: > >> Granted, we would expect 10.5 to be bigger than either 10.4 or 10.6 >> because Leopard is a Universal binary, whereas Tiger is PPC binary and >> Snow Leopard is Intel binary. > > It's not quite as simple as that, though it is true that 10.6 occupies > less space than 10.5. Snow Leopard does indeed lack universal > binaries, but it still contains many fat binaries - that is, binaries > with both 32-bit and 64-bit code inside them. In many cases, the > 64-bit code would not have been there in 10.5. The other difference is the Snow Leopard filesystem supports on-the-fly compression, which saves space and makes reading quicker. -- Chris
From: David Empson on 4 Jun 2010 19:06
R <me32(a)privacy.net> wrote: > Dorian Gray <D.Gray(a)picture.invalid> wrote: > > > Granted, we would expect 10.5 to be bigger than either 10.4 or 10.6 > > because Leopard is a Universal binary, whereas Tiger is PPC binary and > > Snow Leopard is Intel binary. > > It's not quite as simple as that, though it is true that 10.6 occupies > less space than 10.5. Snow Leopard does indeed lack universal > binaries Not exactly. All the applications that you can run are Intel-only, but most of the libraries and frameworks in Snow Leopard still contains PowerPC code, in order to support running PowerPC applications (in Rosetta). > but it still contains many fat binaries - that is, binaries > with both 32-bit and 64-bit code inside them. In many cases, the > 64-bit code would not have been there in 10.5. Counteracting that to a major degree: most of the executable files in Snow Leopard are compressed. Net result is a few gigabytes saved when upgrading from Leopard to Snow Leopard. -- David Empson dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz |