111–120 of 185 posts
This upgrade is going to cost me a lot of money. They've dropped support for my beefy 2016 MBP. Soon enough the latest version of XCode is going to require Ventura and I won't be able to build my app. Meanwhile, Linus is only just starting the discussion to drop the 486 from the Linux kernel.
Is there any legit reason Apple is hastening the drop of support for older computers when they can be upgraded just fine with the OpenCore Legacy Patcher? It seems wrong to me in an age of excessive e-waste that seemingly arbitrary thresholds is set that has zero hardware links. I generally really like Apple, and is planning on retiring my 2014 Macbook Pro for an M2, but it's still working absolutely great. But i cou…
I explain it simply - they will haste to ger rid of all Intel laptops and don't have to maintain x86 version of macOS. That is them becoming evil.
Actually there isn’t an x86 version of the current macOS; it’s a single operating system that runs on multiple processor architectures. During the PowerPC to Intel transition back in the day, I could boot a PowerPC or Intel Mac from the same hard drive.
The same is true today with Intel and ARM-based Macs.
I have a 2017 Intel iMac running macOS Ventura but there’s plenty of ARM code on it. Here’s the output from running the file command on ls:
/bin/ls: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures: [x86_64:Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 [arm64e:Mach-O 64-bit executable arm64e]
/bin/ls (for architecture x86_64): Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64
/bin/ls (for architecture arm64e): Mach-O 64-bit executable arm64e
I suspect these machines will be supported for the foreseeable future.
BTW, my 2017 iMac is running its 7th major operating system:
- macOS 10.12 Sierra
- macOS 10.13 High Sierra
- macOS 10.14 Mojave
- macOS 10.15 Catalina
- macOS 11 Big Sur
- macOS 13 Monterey
- macOS 14 Ventura
I think Apple will support Intel Macs for a good while. They’re not going to get all of the same features as ARM-based Macs (due to these machines having Apple’s custom silicon the Intel Macs don’t have) but they will get the same core features for the foreseeable future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so it has to go in the dumpster with a great battery, a fine screen and a processor that could easily be used as a server, video player, browser etc. Why would it have to go in the dumpster if it still works well? This reasoning is why we have exessive e-waste, not the lack of upgrades...
It works well only in theory. Almost no apps works on ios9 anymore, so you can't run netflix, hbo, even browsers are useless because certificates aren't updated - that's why i wanted to just use it as a homekit server, but you can't do this either. ie, the processor is just fine for doing all of the above, but slowly all functionality has been lost.
Is there any legit reason Apple is hastening the drop of support for older computers when they can be upgraded just fine with the OpenCore Legacy Patcher? It seems wrong to me in an age of excessive e-waste that seemingly arbitrary thresholds is set that has zero hardware links. I generally really like Apple, and is planning on retiring my 2014 Macbook Pro for an M2, but it's still working absolutely great. But i cou…
Apart from selling more hardware, which is their one and only goal ?
I hate System Preferences, have hated System Preferences for years and years. I cannot seem to get used to where things are, no matter how often I use it. The order doesn't make sense to me, the grouping doesn't make sense to me, and the icons aren't visually distinct enough for me. I might be the only one, but it's hard to imagine any overhaul of System Preference not resulting in an improvement. I'm sure it's just…
System Preferences can hide individual preference panes from the list. System Settings can't.
System Preferences search field is focused on launch. System Settings is not.
System Preferences is fully keyboard navigable. System Settings is not.
System Preferences uses tabs where System Settings in many cases uses a modal window hidden behind a button.
The list goes on and on...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Lightning is some obscure connector, though. In terms of the quantity of devices shipped and still in use since Apple introduced it on the iPhone 5? This is flatly false; and it’s not just iPhones but also: iPods, iPads, AirPods, Magic Mice, Keyboards, and Trackpads. Apple moves massive amounts of product, and their biggest sellers tend to be supported for longer than their direct competitors. Lightning is propriet…
Type C will not be the last cable we see, but even if it staves off a new standard for only 5 years, it will be massively effective at reducing cable waste. Again, maybe you don't see the benefits if you're fully-entrenched in Apple's ecosystem. As someone who only has one or two of their peripherals, Lightning is the worst part of their products. Even for people in the Apple ecosystem, switching from Lightning to US…
And as someone with a few things around that still take microUSB: that is by far the worst thing about those products. I also know that if I had bought those same products 5 years earlier than I had, each one of them would take a different cable standard from each other and none of it would be compatible with anything else in my house. So the worst thing here is an inconvenience now that was a solid upgrade at the time.
> It only becomes infuriating when you realize that Apple's omission of USB-C is entirely arbitrary and not held up by technical limitation.
By the time Type-C was a realistic consideration, Apple had already sold large quantities of Lightning connectors in their products to a customer base that was still complaining about the transition from the 30-pin Dock connector. Not immediately rushing to replace Lightning when there were still large numbers of products using 30-pin in-use was a good business decision, not an arbitrary one.
> Apple designed the Thunderbolt spec with their own two hands to ensure this isn't an issue.
Apple and Intel collaborated. Don’t give them too much credit. Also: Type-C != Thunderbolt != USB.
> Apple has always been on the forefront of technical adoption - their refusal to abandon Lightning is product negligence, plain and simple.
There’s a lot of things I can point to at Apple under Tim Cook’s tenure and call “product negligence”. This isn’t one of them. I think the negligent part is in not upgrading the transfer rates at some point in the last 10 years, but not immediately abandoning Lightning for Type-C isn’t one of them, and the e-waste concerns are way overblown. People will buy as many cables as they think they need. If you can swap cables around from other products, that’s actually pretty great, but it’s a fringe benefit because if you’re maintaining a ratio of cables to devices anyway, the most likely outcome isn’t that there will be fewer cables manufactured and thrown away, but that there will be more cables of a particular variety manufactured and thrown away. You might save on one or two cables, but the moment the ratio of devices that need a charge to cables tips too high, you’re just going to buy another cable. Which cable? Whichever one you need for whatever you want to use it for, but if its primary purpose is to deliver electricity and not bits (the most common application for even data cables), the shape of the connector is basically just a detail because the other end is probably going to be Type-C or Type-A USB, chosen based on what bricks you have available or are willing to purchase.
My only hope with an upcoming iPhone connector transition is that we’ll see transfer rates of at least 5 Gbps, and I dare not hope for more lest I be disappointed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A screen only has so many pixels, every pixel matters. Further, is System Settings the only window open at the time? When are you usually entering the panel? Is it to achieve a specific aim when other windows are also open? or to browse and learn features? ... list goes on ... I attribute System Preference's failure to be not creating additional icons and groupings that were properly descriptive and respectful of use…
System Settings only uses half of my 13" MacBook's screen width. That seems entirely reasonable. There's no shortage of pixels here... And why would you have to mentally put the sidebar together with the left side of the screen? Do you complain about tabbed dialogs not having the tabs align with the top of your physical screen? When you have more "tabs" than can fit horizontally (e.g. more than 5-7), the best solutio…
Focused Panes of action to me in a desktop environment is correct for the context. Trackpad and MagicMouse environments to me are primary click/twitch, not 'tap thing under glass' based UIs. Click/twitch means back like UIs are easily accessed, while 'tap thing under glass' means vertical scrolls and the like are easier.
System Settings are made as if the cursor doesn't exist on the Mac, which is plain wrong. Just look at the iCloud pane: it has so much wasted real estate to the table cell space from title to toggle switch, why?? God forbid you actually just click the 'Contact' cell itself, nope! you must click the smaller toggle switch all the way to the right!! And this is after you just swiped down to see the rest of the page. Oh yeah, and the whole consistent paradigm of swipe-to-edge to go back -- nah, that doesn't exist either [0].
You could fit n-times the number of settings if you removed the left bar and the horrible tableview style for settings. If you're familiar, these should be collection views with as many large icon settings just like Finder's icon view, where a click on the icon or the label will toggle the preference for iCould.
I guess too I'm just looking for consistency from all of Apple's software. These interactions should all be standard subclasses to the whole organization
[0] Safari's swipe to go back should be made available to notes, settings, etc
>But unlike minimizing or maximizing an app from the Dock, each "stage" can contain multiple app windows from multiple apps; switch from one stage to another, and every window on that stage will pop back up on your screen in exactly the arrangement you were using before. How does this new feature perform with external monitors? One of my gripes with macOS is how awful it's at managing windows. For example except for…
I'm French Canadian and because of this I have two keyboard languages. French Canadian and English (Canada). Before, when I'd press FN to change my keyboard language, I used to see "French Canada" and "English Canada". Now I just see "Canada" and "Canada - CSA". This is a weird change.
User: not really
Is there any legit reason Apple is hastening the drop of support for older computers when they can be upgraded just fine with the OpenCore Legacy Patcher? It seems wrong to me in an age of excessive e-waste that seemingly arbitrary thresholds is set that has zero hardware links. I generally really like Apple, and is planning on retiring my 2014 Macbook Pro for an M2, but it's still working absolutely great. But i cou…
Put ChromeOS Flex on it. It’s a flavor of ChromeOS/Neverware meant for old PCs and Macs that can’t keep up with Windows and macOS. https://chromeenterprise.google/os/chromeosflex/