Apple got hooked on money. Behead everyone at the helm, let some fresh air in.
Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
231–240 of 801 posts
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand that you're doing it on principle, but for a software development team, 99$/year is a really minuscule price to pay to be able to build / notarise / distribute software. Developers pay exorbitant amount of money for much lesser value, and the idea of putting your teammates at risk to stick it to apple is kind of sad bordering with negligence from a business POV.
The principle is what matters. The amount is not the issue. The issue is that there is a cost at all. "It's so cheap" is never an excuse for charging for something that should be free. In this case, running software you have no intent to charge for, on your computer. It's as if someone started charging $0.01/month for breathable air. "But $0.01 is trivial," would not excuse it.
It costs money, and isn't free, for a reason you're not acknowledging. I don't think it's a major profit center for Apple.
It's about setting a higher floor for malicious actors than "random botnet residential IP + a captcha solving service". It's about proving some semblance of identity through a card number and a transaction that goes through without a chargeback.
As the case upthread shows, there's plenty to dislike about a system that inhibits running code built for personal use. And it's obviously neither foolproof nor without collateral damage. Reasonable people can debate if it's worth it. But it still ought be acknowledged that the motivations are closer to the reason you have to identify yourself and pay a nominal fee to drive a vehicle on public roads.
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#233Snow Leopard was macOS moving so slowly people thought Apple were abandoning the Mac. Apple changed how they tied OS updates to hardware sales in this era and this left a lot of Macs on Snow Leopard for half a decade. So people remember that last point update – which was as close to a low-term-stability release as Apple has ever had. But to get there, Snow Leopard received 15 updates over 2 years and it was really ju…
It didn’t have anything to do with Sarbanes-Oxley (that was iPhone/iPod touch updates), Apple just charged for OS updates back then.
Snow Leopard was notably cheaper than Leopard ($30 vs $130), Lion was $30 on the App Store, Mountain Lion was $20, then Mavericks and everything after have been free.
Snow Leopard did have a long life though, it was the last OS that could run PowerPC apps, also the last to run on the original 32-bit Core Duo Intel Macs.
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you sure about that? Look for the trashcan symbol on the upper-right of the context menu. I agree that having "more options" to begin with was a jarring experience coming from windows 10 though.
Except for when the placement of the icon strip with the trashcan symbol changes to the bottom of the context menu because of the location of the context menu on the screen. Bonkers. No idea why the UI committee would’ve okayed that one.
Oh that's so weird :\
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, if we're already complaining about Microsoft products, can someone explain why the Bedrock and Java versions of Minecraft have not been made cross-compatible in the TEN YEARS since the Mojang acquisition? (... speaking as another dad just trying to play with my kid.)
What does cross compatible mean in this context? They are two different games written in two different languages. I mean, they look like they are the same game, but they are not. Making one compatible with the other is a Herculean task. If not impossible.
I'm talking about network compatibility, so that a Bedrock client can join a Java server and vice versa. It's clearly somewhat possible because GeyserMC[1] exists. It's just ridiculous that it's a third-party addon.
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
That rationalization ignores a lot of confounding evidence, such as other search engines being able to deliver great results and adequately keep the SEO garbage out.
That’s kinda the SEO equivalent of security by obscurity though, right? SEO spam puts a lot less effort into optimizing for other search engines, whereas Google is dealing with being the primary target of every adversarial SEO spam site.
This is a great theory but it isn't the reason. Google management made a conscious decision about five years ago to prioritise profit over search quality.
We know this because the emails came out in discovery for one of the antitrust suits.
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#237…and speaking of Snow versions, bring back those cool welcome videos when you first purchase a Mac! I miss those. Unfortunately, since Apple doesn't do the whole space theme anymore, you'd probably get some really boring drone shots of California at best before a Setup Assistant faded into view from behind a Redwood or something.
World be cool if they commissioned artists to make music for them again. The fact that they secured Royksopp and Sofa Surfers is still impressive
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#238Not just their software, the hardware is beginning to be get pretty unwieldily complicated. From an OS / software perspective: Have a "core" macOS that has none of the apps / integrations are baked in at an OS level. You install the things you want, how you want - eg iMessage, Mail, and then iCloud if you want to sync it, and Photos etc. Have a slim, fast, stable OS that I can just turn on and get going with. From th…
Why do you want to destroy computing for everybody else just to make a very small group of hackers pleased? Can't you be satisfied with Linux or Windows or BSD? Let normal people have at least one platform that is usable for them.
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#239> moving the Mac to a new processor architecture (for the second of three times)
Four times kinda — maybe five if you want to count PPC32 and PPC64 separately but I usually don't since the Intel transition happened so soon afterward that there is really no PPC64 lineage to speak of.
I definitely count 32-bit and 64-bit Intel separately though due to the number of years taken to transition, all of the annoying early-Intel-Mac 32-bit EFI issues, and the need to manually opt in to the 64-bit kernel on many machines. In fact Snow Leopard was the first OS to let you do so! The “no new features” tagline was snappy but it's really not true at all :p
https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/261749/in-which-ve... sez —
“Mac OS X Snow Leopard and above could only be installed on Macs with Intel processors, and introduced a number of fully 64-bit Cocoa applications (e.g. QuickTime X), and most applications were recreated to use the 64-bit x86-64 architecture (although iTunes was a notable exception to this!) This meant these applications could run in 32-bit mode on machines with 32-bit processors, and in 64-bit mode on machines with 64-bit processors. And yes, the kernel was updated so that it could run in 64-bit mode on some limited hardware, and only by default on Mac Pros, while other newer Macs were capable of running the kernel bit did not do so by default.”
Relevant articles:
- “Mac OS X v10.6: Macs that use the 64-bit kernel” https://web.archive.org/web/20121024223751/https://support.a...
- “OS X: Starting up with the 32-bit or 64-bit kernel” https://web.archive.org/web/20121024194635/http://support.ap...
Re: Apple needs a Snow Sequoia
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most of the other examples in the article also apply, but to be honest I've been using GNOME in parallel for years now and I consider it to be my "forever desktop" if PC hardware can ever match Apple Silicon (or, most likely, if I want something that is _just a computer_). I'm there as well. I've been really enjoying desktop Linux lately, but I can't go back to a non-Apple laptop at this point. There's just nothing…
As a former Mac user, I'm really happy with my System76 linux laptops. The only tradeoff is the terrible built-in speakers. My Lemur is lighter and has better battery life than my Macbook Air and has been bulletproof despite my ill treatment. Each of my Macs, however, have had various hardware failures or the famous keyboard recall on the horrible touchbar Macbook Pro. I also prefer matte screens to glossy, so that's…
The screen quality is why I didn't get a system76 laptop the last time I did a refresh a couple years ago.