Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Can I install *TIGER* on a new (Montevina - 2008) iMac??

glossywhite

glossywhite

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 28, 2008
1,120
3
Hi there. I'm thinking of buying one of the second gen aluminium iMacs (the latest ones, just released this year - generation 2). I cannot bear the thought of having to Beta test Leopard and all it's unfixed problems (no mail sound, anyone?!). Anyhow, please would someone confirm that it is possible to install Tiger on the new iMac (and please don't tell me that the restore DVDs are machine specific - I *KNOW* this already, but there are ways round it, believe me).

I just want to know this:

1/ Is the hardware contained within the latest aluminium iMac, the same hardware (except graphics, naturally, on the higher end models) that was present when the first generation ALUMINIUM iMac was released with Tiger pre-installed, last year?.

2/ I repeat again - PLEASE... I don't need to be told that the DVDs are machine specific; I'm well aware of this, and also aware that there was no INTEL RETAIL TIGER DVD. This can be hacked, to work on other models.

3/ I'm thinking maybe the processor could be a problem??.

Thanks guys - I anticipate an accurate response!
 
Eidorian said:
1. It's not Montevina

2. Yes you can install Tiger on it.

3. You're going to need to image or clone from a Late 2007 Aluminium iMac's installer media. You'll also be limited to the Mobility HD2600 XT models as well.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/481248/

Remember to search first.
Click to expand...

@ http://www.apple.com/uk/imac/specs :



Graphics and video support

20-inch model with 2.4GHz processor
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT graphics processor with 128MB of GDDR3 memory
20-inch model with 2.66GHz processor
ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR3 memory
24-inch model with 2.8GHz or 3.06GHz processor, one of the following:
ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR3 memory <--- *** this one?? ***
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS graphics processor with 512MB of GDDR3 memory

PS: My bad - Penryn NOT Montevina - sorry! :p
 
Eidorian said:
That model is fine. Just make sure you have the ATi graphics.
Click to expand...

Thankyou my friend. Just goes to show that the 'experts' at my local reseller, don't have a clue in some aspects of their role as advisors. I was told that "The firmware prevents this - you CANNOT install Tiger" - defies logic, but it didn't defy laughter from me LOL!.

Just changing the sysctl hw.model ID etc huh? ;)
 
No you cannot install Tiger on any current Mac. You can't install a build of the OS that came out previous to the one the iMac came with. Just want clarify before you go and buy it then be all pissed off.
 
Hmm, well here's how it works.

Every release of Mac OS has drivers and a specific configuration for every machine Apple has shipped prior to its release. Every time Apple releases new hardware, they release an OS update to add any extra hardware support.

When new hardware comes out, Apple stops updating the old OS for the new hardware as it can be assumed the new hardware comes with the new OS that has the appropriate hardware support.

So yes, you can install Tiger on the newer Macs...but if something doesn't work right, it's your problem.

I'd use Leopard myself. Reports of buginess have been exaggurated- Leopard's been perfectly stable for me, moreso than Tiger.
 
gershwin27 said:
Hello,

MacAficionado is correct. Trying to install an older OS than what previously came with you machine usually doesn't work.

Refer to:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=25497

In my experience, you most often encounter an error saying that the installation is unsupported. Your reseller is mostly correct in saying that there is something in the firmware that prevents it.

Thanks,

James
Click to expand...

No, that is patently INCORRECT, in many cases. The installer DVD is not some scientific instrument, detecting various flavours of Koolade dude - it's a simple script which queries machine ID:

Code: 
sysctl hw.model

...and often queries processor speed.

I have found MANY of the "machine specific" DVDs of which we are speaking, contain drivers for devices that are not even used by the machine for which the DVD was "customised". I think this is where people get confused. It's easier to write a detection script, per-machine than to add/remove driver packs from the DVDs.

Considering the only difference is the logic board (and chipsets for them) I can only Google what chipset is used, and see if Tiger DVDs use that chipset driver. Believe me, I have cross-installed Intel versions of Tiger AND Leopard, using restore DVDs that were pressed for different models to the one upon which I was installing it.
 
The new iMacs are still using Santa Rosa (GM/PM965) chipsets albeit with Penryn derived processors. The drivers from Tiger already exist for the chipset and the processors are Intel just like the previous models.

You can bypass the hardware check many different ways. I just stick to imaging since I have to handle a department full of machines.
 
Eidorian said:
The new iMacs are still using Santa Rosa (GM/PM965) chipsets albeit with Penryn derived processors. The drivers from Tiger already exist for the chipset and the processors are Intel just like the previous models.

You can bypass the hardware check many different ways. I just stick to imaging since I have to handle a department full of machines.
Click to expand...

Yeah, see - that's what I'm talking about maannnnnn!! :)

Most of the so-called 'experts' haven't a clue how to do this. Makes me chortle.
 
I had thought that this was not possible. Maybe it is with come coding. Maybe it's not. I haven't tried, and I don't see why you want to try either. Leopard is a superior operating system. Period.

The only reason why I haven't installed it on my G4 is that I still use classic on the odd occasion. But on my iMac, I've had Leopard on it since Leopard was introduced. It was a little buggy at first, but updates have made it a stable operating system.
 
ribbonthecat said:
I had thought that this was not possible. Maybe it is with come coding. Maybe it's not. I haven't tried, and I don't see why you want to try either. Leopard is a superior operating system. Period.

The only reason why I haven't installed it on my G4 is that I still use classic on the odd occasion. But on my iMac, I've had Leopard on it since Leopard was introduced. It was a little buggy at first, but updates have made it a stable operating system.
Click to expand...

Tiger had ELEVEN revisions. Leopard has only had THREE. Do you think updates are released for fun alone?. Heard of the (STILL UNFIXED) Mail sound bug? No?. ok ;)

How is it superior... please do enlighten me, because it's not a matter of 'superior'. It's a matter of which is most stable, and does what it says on the tin. Leopard has a LONG way to go - dig through Google a little, and see for yourself. Eleven vs three revisions... now tell me that the NEWER OS is more stable and mature. Ignorance is an internet epidemic with no cure, except knowledge.
 
So, your huge and hard reason to go back to Tiger is just because of some ruddy Mail sound?

Thanks like saying - "I don't want to read this book, the front cover is red. I only like books with blue covers."
 
glossywhite said:
No, that is patently INCORRECT, in many cases. The installer DVD is not some scientific instrument, detecting various flavours of Koolade dude - it's a simple script which queries machine ID:

Code: 
sysctl hw.model

...and often queries processor speed.
Click to expand...

Hello,

Then what is incorrect? You just stated yourself that there is a script what queries the Machine ID. I'm not saying that there is something in the firmware. I was simply explaining why the retailer might have told glossywhite what they said. If you refer to Apple's support pages, they agree.

Thanks,

James
 
So, your huge and hard reason to go back to Tiger is just because of some ruddy Mail sound?

Thanks like saying - "I don't want to read this book, the front cover is red. I only like books with blue covers."
 
The issue here is not wether you can cross install OSs between different models, trust me I installed 10.5 on a 700 MHz iMac. It is about wether you can install 10.4 on a computer that shipped with 10.5 installed.

To the original poster, please let us know how it goes.
 
glossywhite said:
Tiger had ELEVEN revisions. Leopard has only had THREE. Do you think updates are released for fun alone?. Heard of the (STILL UNFIXED) Mail sound bug? No?. ok ;)

How is it superior... please do enlighten me, because it's not a matter of 'superior'. It's a matter of which is most stable, and does what it says on the tin. Leopard has a LONG way to go - dig through Google a little, and see for yourself. Eleven vs three revisions... now tell me that the NEWER OS is more stable and mature. Ignorance is an internet epidemic with no cure, except knowledge.
Click to expand...

Just look at all the revisions that Windows 2000 has had. It's not made it any better. That sort of argument is working under the assumption that the original releases are equal, which they are not.

There are all kinds of so-called "under-the-hood" improvements that have been made to 10.5 that make it better and faster than 10.4 (when I installed 10.5 on my G4, it seemed a lot faster than 10.4). Time Machine, especially for a desktop, is a huge difference. Quicklook is really useful. The added eye candy of the dock is not only eye candy, but it is also has a lot of functional use. Like I said, it was buggy at first, but the revisions, especially 10.5.3, have cleared those up, and it seems pretty flawless to me.

By all means, install whatever the hell you like on your computer. I don't care. Just don't go around criticizing other people for how ignorant they are just because they prefer to use an operating system that was released in 2007, not 2005, and think that you are silly for hacking a Mac to run an unsupported and outdated operating system just because the new one doesn't beep.
 
By 10.5.4, nearly all of the commonly encountered bugs will be worked out. Apple will be well on the way to 10.6, and will release occasional updates fixing minor problems.

I don't get why you're so afraid of bugs; Tiger is by no means bug-proof. Also, many bugs won't cause a total system crash, causing you to lose any work or anything.

Seriously dude, get over it.
 
You could just get a refurb/end of line Aluminium 2007 iMac. Would save you a lot of money for hardly any speed difference, and you could sleep safe knowing that Tiger will run fine.

God knows why you'd want to go back to Tiger though, Leopard is pretty much worked out, and Leopard is just much nicer.

glossywhite said:
Tiger had ELEVEN revisions. Leopard has only had THREE. Do you think updates are released for fun alone?. Heard of the (STILL UNFIXED) Mail sound bug? No?. ok ;)
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but it doesn't work like that completely, alot of the bug fixes in the 11 updates to Tiger will be carried over into Leopard. And the 3 updates to Leopard have fixed all of the significant problems.

I can also tell you that my machine feels much smoother, my friends Geekbench scores are higher after upgrading to Leopard, and my other friend is generally having fewer problems with his machine.
 
glossywhite said:
Heard of the (STILL UNFIXED) Mail sound bug? No?. ok ;)
Click to expand...

"It's simple really; some people will NEVER be happy, and are always LOOKING
for flaws to moan about, even if said flaw is barely perceptable at all. Point
something out - no matter HOW small, and soon you'll all be noticing it more
and more, and creating pointless rant posts in their thousands!.

Some people are never EVER happy - the rest of us get on with our lives.
Keyword here: LIFE, as in get one."

...sound familiar?

LK
 
Heard of the (STILL UNFIXED) Mail sound bug? No?. ok ;)
Click to expand...

Uh, no I haven't. I'm running Leopard on 4 machines (all came with Tiger) and not one of them has problems with sounds in Mail.

Could you enlighten us with your internets knowledge??

But here's the true answer your looking for...
As you said, it can be hacked, so the answer is yes. You could hack the software on my cordless phone to run on that iMac too. Why would you bother to ask if you can do something and answer yourself in the same post?
 
rdhazrd said:
Uh, no I haven't. I'm running Leopard on 4 machines (all came with Tiger) and not one of them has problems with sounds in Mail.

Could you enlighten us with your internets knowledge??

But here's the true answer your looking for...
As you said, it can be hacked, so the answer is yes. You could hack the software on my cordless phone to run on that iMac too. Why would you bother to ask if you can do something and answer yourself in the same post?
Click to expand...

Google it for yourself - that's what Google is for. It is a WELL KNOWN BUG. Just because you don't have the bug yourself, no matter how many Macs YOU have, doesn't make it not so. It DOES exist, it IS a real problem, and a very well known one. Are you the entire Leopard user base? nope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back