Back to LeopardAssist page
LeopardAssist free download for Mac

LeopardAssist Reviews

3.0
06 February 2014

Install OS X 10.5 Leopard on some unsupported Macs.

Bonbons
28 September 2008

Most helpful

Used the previous version to install 10.5 on a Powerbook G4 800/1GB RAM, installation went fine, 10.5 was usable but compared to 10.4 very slow, I think that's a main problem with Leopard. And the 10.5.4 update made it slower once again. To my surprise new software from Apple needs new hardware from Apple... ;-) I saw tests were Leopard was called "much faster" than Tiger, well maybe, maybe on Intels, but on my G5 the Tiger runs faster, not to speak from the many G4s around. If youl think you can't survive without 10.5, this is the way to install it on older Macs, but if you see your Computer as a tool to get your work done or to have some fun, I think Tiger is just fine.
Like (2)
Version 2.2

Read 21 LeopardAssist User Reviews

Rate this app:

DanieleFox8970
01 June 2013
Please Help! After executing leopardassist witch checked "Verbose" the OS 10.4 on my HD don't starts anymore! On Boot there is the Apple Icon and i can hear the HD loading, but after 1 Minute the Powermac shuts down. What can i do? please help!
Like
Version 2.3.3
1 answer(s)
DanieleFox8970
DanieleFox8970
01 June 2013
Sorry, the HD bocomes Broken. But the Installation application says, that the installation isn't possible.
Like
Charneca36
01 January 2012
Obrigada! Funcionou. Consegui instalar o Leopard no meu iBook G4 800. Thanks!
Like
Version 2.3.3
Mbrice
08 December 2009
The server was revoked some time ago, after I decided to back down from maintaining the project. I'm surprised this listing is even still here, but because it's lasted for so long i'll turn a copy of 2.3.3 over to MacUpdate for hosting. LeopardAssist doesn't normally have a problem with CPU upgrades, but since most of the CPU upgrades available on the market push the system past the required 867MHz barrier anyway, there's simply no need for this tool on those systems. The software was and still is only a frontend to compile and execute a shell script to be deployed into the system NVRAM at boot time, and considering just how little there is to work with in the way of faking a CPU clock speed, it's been developed to the best of my abilities. Now with the release of Snow Leopard, there's not much more that can be done to push LeopardAssist into the future.
Like (1)
Version 2.3.3
Micg
02 December 2009
Poor documentation, the Server's been down for an age. No support for CPU upgrades that is cleared out in any documentation and it did not work after many attempts. Luckily I had a Leopard compatible eMac and installed it on a FW 400 PATA drive and booted up on my G4 DA 800MHz and it runs super fast too even on the FW 400 Drive that I still use. I'm disappointed that Mac utilities for Mac OS X like LeopardAssist can be so cheesy. o_O
Like
Version 2.3.3
Macfenton
21 June 2009
Will LeopartAssist work for an older Mac using a processor upgrade card, such as a Sonnet Crescendo PCI 1GHz? I seem to recall that it might, but am not 100% on this. I'd gladly buy a new Mac with Leopard on it IF I had the extra cash laying around, but it seems the wife AND I want to continue to eat and live indoors, for some strange inexplicable reason. Hopefully LA will fill the void. Thanks.
Like
Version 2.3.3
1 answer(s)
Anonymous
Anonymous
09 July 2009
LeopardAssist probably won't be able to correct limitations on this system due to the lack of support for the hardware in Leopard itself. As far as I know, Leopard can be forced onto machines as early as the Beige Power Macintosh G3 (using kernel extensions from the Leopard Developer Preview) but considering it's using a Crescendo PCI, the highest this Mac would be is a 9600 series.
Like
Version 2.3.3
Bob-vicktor
31 March 2009
Obviously OSX supports multiple processors, and obviously have more processors helps things run faster, but I was wondering if anybody had any first hand experiences they could share? I have a Dual 533 Mhz G4 (digital audio) and was planning on installing 10.5 and was wondering if it would be worth it.
Like
Version 2.3.2
1 answer(s)
Mbrice
Mbrice
17 May 2009
Leopard seems to respond well to multi-processor systems. The key to remember is that Leopard benefits from decent amounts of RAM (768mb-1GB) and will also run quite a bit faster with a 32mb graphics card that supports Quartz Extreme at the very least. Turning off the 3D dock also helps performance. It should run quite well on your Digital Audio 533, but it's not about to set the world of fire with its performance. If you need it to work at peak performance then Tiger 10.4 is still the champion, but if your main concern is running the very latest browsers or other software, then 10.5 should work well enough to handle thst.
Like (2)
Version 2.3.2
Astrodude18
06 October 2008
Would this work on installing Leopard on a non-supported computer not built by apple?
Like
Version 2.3.1
1 answer(s)
Mbrice
Mbrice
08 October 2008
LeopardAssist only supports Apple manufactured hardware with a G4 processor.
Like
Version 2.3.1
Bonbons
28 September 2008
Used the previous version to install 10.5 on a Powerbook G4 800/1GB RAM, installation went fine, 10.5 was usable but compared to 10.4 very slow, I think that's a main problem with Leopard. And the 10.5.4 update made it slower once again. To my surprise new software from Apple needs new hardware from Apple... ;-) I saw tests were Leopard was called "much faster" than Tiger, well maybe, maybe on Intels, but on my G5 the Tiger runs faster, not to speak from the many G4s around. If youl think you can't survive without 10.5, this is the way to install it on older Macs, but if you see your Computer as a tool to get your work done or to have some fun, I think Tiger is just fine.
Like (2)
Version 2.2
1 answer(s)
Horatio
Horatio
29 September 2008
I agree, Tiger seems to be better for older macs, so I wouldn't install it on my quicksilver 800. Even on a supported powerbook 1,25, 1,5 GB RAM, leopard is slow. It could be an illusion, but even slower from update to update. Actually under 10.5.5 I'm considering downgrade. It's a pain every time when I'm changing from last generation iMac to my powerbook.
Like
Version 2.2c
Mbrice
19 August 2008
I picked up an eMac G4 and decided to do a bit of extra work on LeopardAssist. Did away with boot.txt as requested by beta testers, now writing the 867mhz script directly into the Parameter RAM. This should correct problems on many systems which previously had issues finding boot.txt on restart (a majority of cases).
Like (1)
Version 2.0
Justingraziano
24 July 2008
A great app. Works excellent, it would be nice if there was an option to mod the OS X install DVD so that it doesn't have to be installed everytime you reinstall OS X but it's still nice.
Like
Version 1.2
Mbrice
07 July 2008
Leopard sure won't speed on these older machines, although some of them have been upgraded, particularly those with aftermarket graphics cards which will allow Leopard's video acceleration. Cheers to everyone who showed support, I really do wish I could have continued working on this but unfortunately my G4, my only testing machine had a logic board failure which severely damaged the progress of the project.
Like
Version 1.2
Brian Kendig
03 April 2008
Running Leopard on an unsupported machine still means it'll be a lot slower than Tiger because Leopard dropped support for the video acceleration in unsupported Macs, right? For example, if you put Leopard on a Sawtooth G4, the graphics will be painfully slow?
Like
Version 1.2
Hurz
26 March 2008
Nonetheless you ceased you business I feel its time to say a BIG THANKYOU for your effort and generosity (to share the code). Thankyou!
Like
Version 1.2
Mbrice
11 March 2008
LeopardAssist's parent development group has ceased development of its entire product line, but LeopardAssist in its entirety has been open sourced and relocated to SourceForge. Full details at the former website. http://mac.profusehost.net
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
Lmp
04 March 2008
I get a 404 error on the download link.
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
Gijsraggers
03 February 2008
Great. My old PowerMac G4 466 is now running Leopard. Just as smooth as Tiger.
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
Xypher
10 January 2008
I don't have enough memory to install Leopard. Does this bypass the Ram check also?
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
2 answer(s)
Mbrice
Mbrice
10 January 2008
Unfortunately no, for 2 reasons. First being that Leopard screams out for at least 512, and second being that you can't fake the RAM count through Open Firmware like the CPU can.
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
Xypher
Xypher
10 January 2008
Thanks for that!
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
a friggin awesome job… albeit let's hope this doesn't make the old G4 prices go up, can you say Cube running Leopard?, whoa !!
Like
Version 1.1
Gummibearlab
26 December 2007
this app is great, now i'm running leopard on my 800mhz ibook and it's fast as tiger but with a lot of new features. Thank you!!
Like
Version 1.1
@timi
22 December 2007
Apple sets minimum system requirements for a reason...
Like
Version 1.0
13 answer(s)
Rc
Rc
22 December 2007
Yup! And basically that is to sell more machines. Admittedly, Apple is conservative with their requirements but it is not set in stone. If this were the case, I would not be running 10.4.11 on a souped-up original iMac. Yes it is slow but I get to use it with software that will only work with Tiger Apple should post recommended specifications but not put hardware checks in the software.
Like
Version 1.0
John-Sawyer-CJS
John-Sawyer-CJS
23 December 2007
RC: By souped-up, do you mean it contains a G4 processor? I don't remember any G4 processor upgrades for the original iMacs, but correct me if I'm wrong. Many things in Leopard won't work properly, and will outright crash, including Safari, if you run it on any G3. The author of LeopardAssist states this too
Like
Version 1.0
Holypoly
Holypoly
26 December 2007
Oh yes, there was a 500mhz G4 (7410) upgrade for the original "fruity" iMacs made by Powerlogix. It ran absolutely stable for at least 4 years inside my revD iMac, until I replaced that mac with a Mini.
Like
Version 1.1
resuna
resuna
27 December 2007
Wonder if it will work on my "Beige G4". :)
Like
Version 1.1
Rc
Rc
28 December 2007
The souped up original iMac (Bondi Blue) has a replacement 266 Mhz processor, 512 MB of RAM, a combo drive and a 120 GB HD. This is "souped up" for this machine. I never implied that I would be running Leopard on this. What I said was that I was running the latest Tiger on this even though this machine is supposedly unsupported for that version of the OS. Although my modifications were not drastic, It still runs Tiger just fine. I did have to take out the HD, use another "supported" machine to install Tiger and re-install the HD. Tedious but now I can run the lates version of Transmission (which is Tiger only) and use this as a dedicated bittorent machine. This is all what I wanted Tiger for. I don't really care if I dont get Core Image or Core Audio, I just want my software to run. If Apple did not put hardware checks in their OS and just posted minimum requirements, I would not have to have gone through all this rigamarole just to install Tiger. And hey, if my setup acts wonky, I have no cause to complain because my machine is "not supported" but at least I have the option to try.
Like
Version 1.1
Bruce-y
Bruce-y
10 January 2008
I agree with RC, that it would just be simpler for all of those with the older less powerful machines if the Apple OS installer allowed unsupported installs. Totally fine to make it an Advanced, out of the way choice. Dearl Apple, please add something like: Advanced Installation Setting - This machine does not meet the recommended minimum CPU, RAM, etc. You may install by clicking the next three "Really Install it Anyway" buttons, but know that it is unsupported. ;)
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
dajonel
dajonel
26 January 2008
There is a reason they don't allow it -- it's to avoid lawsuits. They do it because they _can't_ guarantee that the computer is supported. In example: a user with a G3, installs it and either ruins their computer or loses their data. They could sue Apple because of the loss, AND that they weren't blocked from installing it in the first place. Some people could be lucky, and the installation would be successful. Also, someone might successfully install it, and it would run really slow (they also might sue for that). On the other hand, someone could install and have happen what I described in the previous paragraph. Also, Leopard requires a newer graphics card than most (if not all) G3s or G4s have. Those computers simply could not run Leopard. In summary, that is most likely why Apple blocked older computers.
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
resuna
resuna
27 January 2008
That's not consistent: there were a lot of machines Jaguar and even Panther were supported on that had the old Grackle bridge chips. OSX and the Grackle have never gotten along well, and there have been spectacular failures. On the other hand, Leopard is supported on systems that have the same components as unsupported systems, except for the processor clock speed. The choice of supported systems is, like much of what Apple does, all politics and marketing. How much of the user base will they lose if they dump support for this system or that system? What story will people buy? Will they remember us telling the opposite story five years, four years, two years, one year ago? Probably not. Apple does a lot of stuff really well, and that's why I use their kit, but I don't make the mistake of assuming they've got my interests in mind, or that they've even got a good technical reason for anything they do. Public companies just can't act that way. Hell, that would be a breach of their fiduciary duties to the stockholders.
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
dajonel
dajonel
27 January 2008
I wish everything wasn't about money now...
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
resuna
resuna
27 January 2008
People have been saying that for thousands of years. I'm sure there's cuneiform graffiti somewhere bemoaning the way everything is about money these days... hell, the Babylonians invented bookkeeping and bureaucracy in the first place. :)
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
dajonel
dajonel
27 January 2008
Yeah... :) LOL. It just seems that these big businesses care more about their stockholders and cash than their customers. I don't think it was like that so much years past.
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
resuna
resuna
27 January 2008
By "years past" you must mean a time long before the foundation of the British East India Company, before Dante, before the scourging of the moneylenders, before Hamurabbi, and quite possibly before recorded history. :)
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
dajonel
dajonel
27 January 2008
Whatever. :) Interesting topics come up here...
Like
Version 1.2 DR3
Clauclau
21 December 2007
Hi, Congratulations for this. This would work only from G4 with 500 mhz, not G3, right? I believe also it could work on any G4 below 500 but running 10.5 would be considerably slow.
Like
Version 0.9
3 answer(s)
Mbrice
Mbrice
21 December 2007
I think Leopard is fairly dependent on AltiVec, so this won't help get it running on G3's. The machine we tested it on was a 400mhz Sawtooth G4 which seemed to work fine (although in comparison it wasn't as fast as newer models).
Like
Version 0.9
Andres-Skl
Andres-Skl
28 December 2007
Please, did anyone test it on a TiBook G4/400MHz? I'd like to know if it's ok to install it there. Thank you VERY much. -a.s.
Like
Version 1.1
Mbrice
Mbrice
28 December 2007
So far the TiBook is on the supported list for benefit of the doubt, we have had positive reports from the original 400/500mhz models. Best way to try it is to test it out if possible.
Like
Version 1.1