61–70 of 181 posts
Even as a full time mac user, both at work and privately I have a hard time remembering which release, say Sierra was and which one Mojave was and which one came first and if any release was in between.
Isn't that... Umm good ? Windows completely rehauls everything in every major releases and makes it difficult to navigate through.
This is simply how Apple does things. They provide software support for ~10 years and then they drop it. Is it wrong? I’m not entirely sure. You can call that greedy, but take a few things into consideration. Firstly, Apple provides highly specialized software that runs extremely well and efficiently on their own hardware. Continuously providing support for old hardware while simultaneously maintaining the same level…
> We are not talking about Linux here, where if you’re lucky, things work. What percentage of the Internet is even possible due to this, if you're to be believed, barely working and then only by luck, OS? I get the Apple cultiness, but we don't need it here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no excuse for the most profitable company in the world to drop support for working hardware. It's entirely within their capability to support even PowerPC macs. And that's besides fact that Apple has an incredibly small portfolio of hardware to support; so much so that they could trivially exhaustively test every update on every possible piece of hardware.
Besides the impracticality of running new OS’s on a 2005 era Mac, what software engineer at Apple would be willing to take on that role? Also, even if the hardware were supported, what third party software company would still support PPC Macs?
One being paid to do so? People still work with COBOL. If you have trouble finding engineers to do it, offer a higher salary.
> Also, even if the hardware were supported, what third party software company would still support PPC Macs?
Some software is still supported for Windows XP, and that's considerably older than the last PPC Macs. It would certainly be a whole lot easier to support if Apple still did the same.
In any case my point is that they absolutely have the resources to do this. I don't see how that's at all controversial given how much money they have.
This is simply how Apple does things. They provide software support for ~10 years and then they drop it. Is it wrong? I’m not entirely sure. You can call that greedy, but take a few things into consideration. Firstly, Apple provides highly specialized software that runs extremely well and efficiently on their own hardware. Continuously providing support for old hardware while simultaneously maintaining the same level…
> We are not talking about Linux here, where if you’re lucky, things work. What percentage of the Internet is even possible due to this, if you're to be believed, barely working and then only by luck, OS? I get the Apple cultiness, but we don't need it here.
Of course desktop users can tailor their machines to use with Linux and also run something like Debian but it’s more likely they’re using whatever computer they happened to have and running Ubuntu (or one of its many derivatives), Fedora, or Arch which are indeed more likely on average to break. I know because I’ve seen it happen several times in my own usage.
This is simply how Apple does things. They provide software support for ~10 years and then they drop it. Is it wrong? I’m not entirely sure. You can call that greedy, but take a few things into consideration. Firstly, Apple provides highly specialized software that runs extremely well and efficiently on their own hardware. Continuously providing support for old hardware while simultaneously maintaining the same level…
>"Anyone’s that ever used macOS even once knows that things really work." I am not a regular Mac user but I was once asked by client to port my CI/CD related script so it can work for developers who use Macs. Script involved dealing with docker among other things. After dicking around for a while I've discovered deeply nested folder created by docker that was not supposed to exist after successful script completion.…
And I've basically installed chrome, vscode, and a whole bunch of little packages to make basic hardware operate normally. There's an app to allow the track pad and mouse wheel scroll directions to be set differently. There's another to allow the mouse side buttons to work. It's a basic mouse. These are settings and compatibility issues that do not need to exist.
But the most annoying is that the monitor is a bit blurry on the M1. I use vscode for a few mins before I realise there's a fuzziness to it. And apparently this is a known issue, because macs only scale properly for 4k resolutions. So there's another app to make it think its 4k or something. Helps a bit but not that well, and it's a trial. It's maddening. How the hell is anyone supposed to know that Apple has just decided that they won't be compatible with an entire category of bloody monitors, of all things.
This is simply how Apple does things. They provide software support for ~10 years and then they drop it. Is it wrong? I’m not entirely sure. You can call that greedy, but take a few things into consideration. Firstly, Apple provides highly specialized software that runs extremely well and efficiently on their own hardware. Continuously providing support for old hardware while simultaneously maintaining the same level…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tell people that I haven't looked forward to new features in the 'California' era like I did in the 'Cat' era. Now, I worry about what Apple will break or take away. If Microsoft wasn't so intent on spying and advertising to me, I might consider them. I get the feeling I will switch to a BSD eventually.
I’ve been leaning the same way. I’m curious why you also lean towards BSD instead of Linux? It’s a gut feeling for me after watching the Linux ecosystem churn a lot and seeing BSDs with well documented core systems and the “core/ports” distinction make clear what is and isn’t really supported
It’s unrealistic but a Linux distro that forked as many packages as possible to make them follow conventions and be proper desktop citizens would be interesting.
> What other actively exploited bugs are Big Sur and Monterey now vulnerable to? Actually, Apple sometimes patches actively exploited vulnerabilities in "unsupported" older versions of both macOS and iOS. The vulnerabilities that don't get quickly patched are the ones that aren't actively exploited. In any case, security researchers talk about known vulnerabilities that have or haven't been patched, but as the author…
Got to be honest I rarely get any issues with macOS for a couple of years now. The only notable one I remember was the date selection in reminders on 12.6 stopped working and that was fixed in 12.6.1. Workaround was to manually key it in. You do have to keep within the 2-3 year update cycle though. Quite frankly it pays for itself though in less eye poking than windows.
This is simply how Apple does things. They provide software support for ~10 years and then they drop it. Is it wrong? I’m not entirely sure. You can call that greedy, but take a few things into consideration. Firstly, Apple provides highly specialized software that runs extremely well and efficiently on their own hardware. Continuously providing support for old hardware while simultaneously maintaining the same level…
My ~6 year old MacBook Pro (13" late 2016 model (with touchbar), purchased new in 2017) is no longer "supported" (no Ventura). As far as I can tell, linux does not support WiFi or audio on it, so it's pretty much a piece of trash as far as being a laptop once apps stop supporting macOS Monterey.