# 10.5:   clean, archive or upgrade?



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 14, 2007)

i'd rather just upgrade to 10.5.

but i know that clean is the best way to do these things....  is the upgrade improved in Leopold?


----------



## MisterMe (Oct 14, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> i'd rather just upgrade to 10.5.
> 
> ...


Well, do it that way. It is how Apple intends for you to install your new OS. This is why _Upgrade_ is the default.


----------



## icemanjc (Oct 14, 2007)

I plan on clean installing, even though it is a hassle, its always better in the long run.


----------



## Mario8672 (Oct 14, 2007)

I plan on seeing the features of Leopard before I buy. 

I'd probably clean install.


----------



## eric2006 (Oct 14, 2007)

While in theory, you should be ok to update & install, I will be doing a clean install because I find things build up over the years, and I don't have a lot of extra space on a 60 GB drive.


----------



## icemanjc (Oct 14, 2007)

eric2006 said:


> While in theory, you should be ok to update & install, I will be doing a clean install because I find things build up over the years, and I don't have a lot of extra space on a 60 GB drive.



Yep, I had an 80 gig in my iMac G5 and it was hardly enough for 10.4.

Also I thought of another reason, leopard for sure will have some bugs, and clean install will make the risk of having more bugs smaller.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 14, 2007)

If I remember correctly, I upgraded from 10.0 to 10.1 to 10.2, and also from 10.3 to 10.4. I've never had problems.

That said, I will probably do a clean install, because like Eric I have a relatively small HD (40GB), so I'll want to clean out any unnecessary remnants of 10.4 (and 10.3, for that matter). If Leopard's disk requirements are significantly larger than Tiger's, I'll probably need to repartition, too.


----------



## icemanjc (Oct 14, 2007)

Well, just because the disc is big, doesn't mean there will be a lot to put on your hard drive, only about 1/4 of the data on the DVD will be put on your computer/


----------



## g/re/p (Oct 14, 2007)

MisterMe said:


> Well, do it that way. It is how Apple intends for you to install your new OS. This is why _Upgrade_ is the default.



You are mistaken - where do you get your information from??  

Apple does not specify or "intend" for you to do anything of the sort.

The Mac OS X Help Desk Essentials training manual lists the three different 
methods to install OS X and the pros and cons of each method,leaving the 
decision up to you and your specific needs.


*Erase and Install:*

*Pros* - Provides a clean start, allows you to reset your partitions, can install on any partition

*Cons* - All data on selected partitions will be erased


*Update:*

*Pros* - Installer will update Mac OS X 10.x or later, maintaining preferences, fonts,
applications, and files.

*Cons* - Requires that Mac OS X 10.x or later is installed


*Archive and Install:*

*Pros* - Same as update except creates archive of current /System directory and 
installs a new /System directory.

*Cons* - New /System directory will not have any custom files from current /System directory.


----------



## MisterMe (Oct 15, 2007)

g/re/p said:


> You are mistaken - where do you get your information from??
> 
> ...


Oh, come on. You know better than that. Simple upgrade has been the default behavior for every shipping version of the Macintosh System Software, MacOS, or MacOS X. When you insert an install disc and press [enter], it does a simple upgrade. That is the default by definition. This is how it has worked for the 19 years that I have used Macs and the five years of the Mac before that. Perhaps your have been different, but I doubt it.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 15, 2007)

he's right.  the default, and obviously preferred way, is upgrade.  you have to _want_ a clean/archive and specify it.


----------



## nixgeek (Oct 15, 2007)

MisterMe said:


> Oh, come on. You know better than that. Simple upgrade has been the default behavior for every shipping version of the Macintosh System Software, MacOS, or MacOS X. When you insert an install disc and press [enter], it does a simple upgrade. That is the default by definition. This is how it has worked for the 19 years that I have used Macs and the five years of the Mac before that. Perhaps your have been different, but I doubt it.



Is that always the case though?  What if the drive was wiped clean or if the drive is a brand new unformatted drive?  Does the default end up being the Upgrade option anyway or does it detect for a System folder on the hard drive in order to give you the proper option by default?

I'm asking genuinely because it's been a while since I've done an installation of OS X and I don't remember off hand.


----------



## Rhisiart (Oct 15, 2007)

As far as I can remember, if you install MacOS X onto a newly formatted drive, it defaults to 'new install'. 

If you insert the start up disc on a drive that already contains a version of MacOS X it will offer 'upgrade' as a default option.


----------



## MisterMe (Oct 15, 2007)

nixgeek said:


> Is that always the case though?  ...


Clearly you cannot upgrade the OS on a clean hard drive because it doesn't exist. The thing that some don't seem to understand is that the Apple OS installers are smart installers. They install only what is needed to bring your old software up to the new OS. Apple also provides the ability to for its installers to perform more radical surgery at the user's request.


----------



## fryke (Oct 15, 2007)

I'm all for backup, then clean install and bring only back what you really need.  Like a good spring cleaning.


----------



## Captain Code (Oct 15, 2007)

The upgrade route may be the easiest with Leopard.  Doing an archive and install doesn't keep any applications and I'm pretty sure that it used to with Tiger.  Your applications will be in the previous systems folder and you can just drag them back.  This is how it is so far with the beta.  I hope they will change it back to how it was where it will leave all your applications where they are.


----------



## fryke (Oct 15, 2007)

I thought it was the same with Tiger, actually... But I have to admit I've only done it once and it was a long, long time ago.  I know reinstallation of apps can be a drag, but I think it's really healthy to _do_ the spring cleaning when moving on to a new OS, because you've quite probably got things installed that you really don't miss when they're gone. And a leaner system is always better, isn't it.


----------



## Mario8672 (Oct 15, 2007)

^Key word: healthy. You know you should do it. It would most likely free up many gigabytes of space from your machine (even with the Leopard install). I'm all for it (if I can find/borrow an External HDD) .


----------



## fryke (Oct 15, 2007)

External harddrives aren't that expensive anymore, and one of the main reasons you want to upgrade to Leopard should be TimeMachine, which without a backup harddrive doesn't make much sense.  So go, find a nice harddrive.


----------



## Mario8672 (Oct 15, 2007)

Oh, that's true! I didn't even think of TimeMachine. Which HDD would be better? FireWire or USB?


----------



## eric2006 (Oct 15, 2007)

Firewire is faster for moving large amounts of data, but a USB drive would work too.


----------



## WinWord10 (Oct 15, 2007)

Generally speaking, firewire 400 is a little bit slower than USB 2.0, although it is better at sustaining transfer speed for large files. Firewire 800 is definitely the way to go if it's available on your machine. Otherwise, it's a toss-up.


----------



## fryke (Oct 16, 2007)

Of course USB 2.0 has the advantage of being compatible with basically any computer out there. Although a little more expensive, those with FW _and_ USB are the way to go. If they have FW800 as well, the better.


----------



## Veljo (Oct 16, 2007)

I agree with Fryke, I'll definitely be going for the clean install. I haven't formatted my MacBook Pro once since I got it last December, so I'm thinking once I back up everything I need a total clean install of the OS and reinstallation of the apps is the best way to go. Better in the long run, too.


----------



## chevy (Oct 16, 2007)

If you have time and want to control your environment, go for clean install. You will then have to re-install each of your applications (get all your registration keys ready). You will end up with a cleaner system, and often a slightly faster system.

If you are not sure, if you don't know what I am saying or if you want to be fast, just upgrade. That's what I am doing for years. I only clean install when I have an issue.


----------



## chevy (Oct 16, 2007)

fryke said:


> Of course USB 2.0 has the advantage of being compatible with basically any computer out there. Although a little more expensive, those with FW _and_ USB are the way to go. If they have FW800 as well, the better.



Yeah, USB 2.0 is very compatible on the hardware level... but the format of the disk is system dependant.


----------



## nixgeek (Oct 16, 2007)

MisterMe said:


> Clearly you cannot upgrade the OS on a clean hard drive because it doesn't exist. The thing that some don't seem to understand is that the Apple OS installers are smart installers. They install only what is needed to bring your old software up to the new OS. Apple also provides the ability to for its installers to perform more radical surgery at the user's request.



That's what I thought.  So since it is a "smart" installer, it would detect whether a System folder is actually installed at all (I'm assuming it checks for the availability of some other "hidden" files/folders as well in case the System folder just got fubared).  So you really can't say that it defaults to one specific installation type.  The default chosen for the installation is dependent on the availability or health of an existing installation.


----------



## Rhisiart (Oct 16, 2007)

I think there was some consternation when Apple moved from 9 to X. With pre-MacOSX you knew what was under the bonnet ('hood' in North America). 

The UNIX reformation brought with it a more complex arrangement, which may have initially dis-empowered some Mac devotees (to be short-lived). 

What lived under the bonnet/hood may have seemed a little more unwieldy.  A sort of quantum world. But, unlike Windows, one that was reliable.

Favouring the reformat and clean install approach may be about system performance, but I wonder whether there is also a sub-conscious need to maintain an orderly environment (pre-MacOS X conditioning)?


----------



## fryke (Oct 16, 2007)

Actually, I'd say it's _post_ Mac OS X conditioning. Before, you could put stuff wherever you wanted on your harddrive, have two or three complete system folders merrying one or the other however you wished. OS X does _not_ allow you to be messy at all. The reformat and clean install approach for me started with OS X.


----------



## nixgeek (Oct 16, 2007)

fryke said:


> Actually, I'd say it's _post_ Mac OS X conditioning. Before, you could put stuff wherever you wanted on your harddrive, have two or three complete system folders merrying one or the other however you wished. OS X does _not_ allow you to be messy at all. The reformat and clean install approach for me started with OS X.



I'm with you on this one, Fryke.  Before OS X, I never really did fresh installs on Macs.  The upgrades were usually problem-free.  I learned the hard way that this isn't the case on Windows, especially going from a DOS-based Windows system to an NTFS-based one.  And sometimes it's the case with OS X.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 16, 2007)

Reinstalling apps isn't always such a hassle with a clean install. Usually what I do with clean installs is copy back most of my applications folder, and then copy back most of my home folder, including its Library, where all my preferences are stored. For most apps, this is enough. Not many applications require extra system components.

Most shareware/freeware apps come in a simple disk image, and you just drag it where you want it to install. These will work just the same. You'll just want to copy back your preferences, which is fairly easy. The only apps that might give you problems are those that come in .pkg files or with dedicated installers. Even for many of these, just copying over the plainly-named items in your "Application Support" folders is enough.

Last time I did a clean install I only had to go out of my way to reinstall a few apps. The rest were mass-migrated from my old system cleanly and painlessly.


----------



## g/re/p (Oct 16, 2007)

An erase and install ("clean install') tends to be more stable than an upgrade.


----------



## g/re/p (Oct 28, 2007)

g/re/p said:


> An erase and install ("clean install') tends to be more stable than an upgrade.



There are already reports of problems with Upgrade installs of 10.5:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=306857

http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.co...ms-spoil-leopards-release/?source=yahoo_quote


"Blue Screen of *Narcolepsy" (*trademark pending!) Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!


----------



## Captain Code (Oct 28, 2007)

g/re/p said:


> There are already reports of problems with Upgrade installs of 10.5:
> 
> http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=306857
> 
> ...



Yeah, Application Enhancer that injects code into running applications.  Can't see how that would cause problems on a new OS


----------



## Carl367 (Oct 28, 2007)

Iceman, having read your post that only 1/4 of the stuff on the install DVD goes on the hard drive, I'm wondering what the rest of the stuff is...
I did the upgrade on all three of my Macs, no problems so far.
Thanks,
Carl


----------



## bfowl32 (Oct 28, 2007)

So, what happens to all the information on your hard drive when you do a clean install?


----------



## g/re/p (Oct 28, 2007)

It is all overwritten - ERASED - so be damn sure to back up your boot volume before you do it!!!


----------

