TBH I’m kind of glad the new CEO is a “Product” guy and not a “Numbers” guy (Tim was the COO for years under Steve, John was the SVP of HW engineering). If there’s any reason to be cool with this transition it’s that, Apple got real greedy under Tim.
This maps change was probably started under Tim; John just got the keys yesterday. I don’t not blame him for it as the new guy in charge but I’m still curious to see how he impacts Apple over the next few months to years (Apple generally has an ~18-ish month pipeline so it’s gonna take a little time to see the full scope).
If he fails us though, pls make John Turdus a thing 🤡
Like I mentioned above, if the hardware isn't allowed to run the latest OS, it becomes significantly handicapped, which greatly increases the likelihood that it will end up in the trash. I also feel that this is nearly entirely driven by profit motive.
Also totally valid. However, this concern is less of an “Apple doesn’t feel like letting me install whatever OS I want” problem and more of a “we don’t require tech companies to allow us the permissions necessary to do whatever we want on the devices we buy from them” problem.
Apple is absolutely guilty here, I just think it’s symptomatic of something larger and not entirely on their shoulders. But it seems they get all the attention whenever the discussion of planned obscelence appears, and that bothers me not because I think Apple’s some perfect entity, but because when you pick apart their rationale for doing so they are usually comparable or better in this respect to their peers, and we shouldn’t be hyperfixating on only one of them when trying to identify the issue.
I’m not trying to give Apple a pass by any means, merely bringing up the fact that the complaints posted here in this thread are not unique to them. There are plenty of reasons to be unhappy with them, I just haven’t seen any here yet that are specific to them or are indicative of them being measurably worse.
Windows 11 absolutely dropped support for hardware (TPM2.0?) , and is 5 years old at this point. If it were an Apple product it would just now be getting “vintage” status but still continue to get updates and where possible, repairs.
You can also install macOS on older (10+ years old) hardware as I’ve already covered.
iOS app compatibility is largely up to the app developer, not Apple. And for the past few years since I want to say ~2020 (I could be a little off there), you also have the option of installing an older version of an app if you’re on an old version of iOS that’s no longer supported by that developer. But again, that depends on the dev.
A large part of the problem rests on Apple’s shoulders
You know what? You’re absolutely right. They don’t make it easy for app devs to continue supporting legacy iOS versions in their latest app versions because each major iOS dev kits often introduce breaking changes specific to that version of iOS. Typically you might see the average app support N-2 (latest iOS and 2 major revisions back).
But here’s the cool part, that means my 9 year old iPad stuck on iOS 17 is still able to use almost all of the apps I typically have installed and use daily, and still gets updates for those apps. That’ll probably change soon, but even then I expect it to keep getting security updates for a few years.
In other words, I’m about to have a 10 year old iOS device still getting updated. Which is exactly in line with the benchmark we’ve both given now with Windows and macOS.
I’m struggling to see through all of this how Apple is materially worse at forced obsolescence than the competition. There’s totally improvement to be had, but most people do not use a device for longer than a decade anyway. If it can comfortably hit (and often exceed) that timeframe before support is fully revoked, then the average user will never experience it. To a major degree anyway.
I’ve said it before and will say it again: There are plenty of legitimate things Apple does to be pissed off at them about. Feel free to ask me if you want a few examples. I just don’t see how, compared to the rest of the market, this is one of them or how they’re so much worse to have to be called out, but the other guys either get a pass or no mention either.
Oh it’s not ideal and it’s totally fine to not agree with their practices for sure, I just wanted to add some context as there seems to be a lot of knee-jerk reactions around these kinds of subjects sometimes.
Very much agreed, a minimum supported timeframe would be awesome.
I do think calling it anti-consumer and anti-environment is a bit of a stretch, though. Just because the manufacturer no longer officially supports a device receiving major OS updates doesn’t render the device useless. I would actually argue their continual push of major security updates to vintage and obsolete machines to keep those still around secure is the exact opposite.
This is not specific to Apple by any means. Microsoft has repeatedly left hardware behind throughout Windows’ development, just not on a predictable schedule like Apple and instead whenever they feel like the hardware’s inability to support ‘x’ feature is reason enough to pull support.
Even certain Linux distros or package maintainers will drop support for hardware in newer major versions when it no longer makes sense to devote resources to maintaining that support.
I can see the anti-environment argument applying more towards the hardware side of things but again, at some point it makes more sense from
that perspective for them to cut off support than it does to continue providing parts or repair services for obsolete hardware. For example, legacy models that contained mercury and lead or used less sustainable materials. Why would it be anti-environment of a stance for them to no longer provide replacement parts for those devices?
If Apple locked you out of your device when it became labeled obsolete and your only realistic recourse was to buy a new computer, then I would 100% agree. As it stands, it’s just a status that means (on the OS side) Apple can no longer guarantee the minimum usable user experience you would expect from that hardware, and it makes no sense to continue devoting resources to supporting it compared to newer hardware. You can see this yourself by using the earlier mentioned patcher. You can run Tahoe on a ton of legacy hardware and it will work, but you’re gonna hate the experience.
On the hardware side, the supply and logistics chain needs to remain operational for those spare parts to continue to be produced. But there is limited physical space, equipment, raw materials, licensing periods, strategic partnership timelines, and probably many other considerations that have to align for production of these parts to continue. It’s not entirely profit based, and instead usually depends most on whether the scale of that manufacturing makes sense anymore, if they need the physical space for another component in higher demand, or if they can no longer acquire a component from another manufacturer necessary to continue production.
One stance I will absolutely agree with you on is how against repairs they can be about specific components that could be more repairable. While I get that they really care about good design with tight tolerances, they could do a better job of balancing that with reparability. Not counting on it, but hopefully the new CEO being a product guy leads to a trend in the right direction there.
The 5 year vintage / 7 year obsolete is more hardware-oriented. While it typically corresponds to software, there have been exceptions when a particular model sells very well or has a specific niche and reason to stick around (example: 2012 13” MBP supported for a full decade, from Lion -> Catalina).
Even after this period they will usually push major security updates from time to time to legacy OS versions.
Does it suck that there’s any kind of block with installing later macOS versions? Sure, but that’s mitigated easily enough by tools like Opencore Legacy Patcher , which will let you install a current macOS version on unsupported hardware. You may not like the performance, which is partially why there’s any OS upgrade restrictions on Mac hardware at all.
Get another Mac in 10 years, or use a patcher to upgrade (at the cost of reduced performance). Or install Linux on it. It’s really not that big a deal when you consider most consumer PC’s aren’t even kept for that long as the primary machine.
Anecdotally, I just bought a used “vintage” iMac from 2017. It’s stuck on Ventura, which is fine for the use case I bought it for. Brought it home yesterday and it had some security updates ready to install, even though it’s 3-4 major macOS versions behind.
Luigi. Growing up I usually played Nintendo games only on a friend’s console, and was usually player 2. As I got my own consoles and games, I stuck with him out of loyalty and because he has a longer jump in some games. :D
Check them out again around Black Friday! If you’re ok paying annually they usually have some pretty deep discounts then.
My first year was on a Black Friday discount and I got their high end plan (usually $45 a month) for $225 for the whole year (made it cheaper than the low end plan)! It renews at like $450 but that’s still so much cheaper than other carriers in the long term.
Sounds like you have multiple lines on TMo. Visible is a 1 line per account setup but with inner circle you can pay them all together and get another $5 a month off.
The ATT reps at Costco HATE me because they can’t offer a good enough deal to switch 😂
I’ve been very happy with Visible. They’re owned by Verizon and in the long term, it’s the best value I’ve been able to find. They have a 2 week free trial period and frequently have awesome deals during Black Friday and in the Spring. Even without a discount though, plans start at $25/month with a plan that is probably enough for most people. Their highest tier (of 3) is $45.
Moved off T-Mobile for Visible after getting sick of their constant data breaches and haven’t been this happy with a cell carrier since Jump On-Demand was a thing.
The only real catches are:
Support is basically a chatbot and social media teams. However, human support reps do exist if you’re insistent enough, and I’ve only needed them maybe once in the past 3 years or so
Plans are for smartphones (and smartwatches with an existing smartphone line) only. No tablets or other devices.
You’re right, this is why what we really need to do is tax the rich and make them pay their fair share while also moving off a car-dependent infrastructure.
This shitpost is a real Poopship Destroyer
TBH I’m kind of glad the new CEO is a “Product” guy and not a “Numbers” guy (Tim was the COO for years under Steve, John was the SVP of HW engineering). If there’s any reason to be cool with this transition it’s that, Apple got real greedy under Tim.
This maps change was probably started under Tim; John just got the keys yesterday. I don’t not blame him for it as the new guy in charge but I’m still curious to see how he impacts Apple over the next few months to years (Apple generally has an ~18-ish month pipeline so it’s gonna take a little time to see the full scope).
If he fails us though, pls make John Turdus a thing 🤡
Missed chance to coin “John Turdus” OP
Also totally valid. However, this concern is less of an “Apple doesn’t feel like letting me install whatever OS I want” problem and more of a “we don’t require tech companies to allow us the permissions necessary to do whatever we want on the devices we buy from them” problem.
Apple is absolutely guilty here, I just think it’s symptomatic of something larger and not entirely on their shoulders. But it seems they get all the attention whenever the discussion of planned obscelence appears, and that bothers me not because I think Apple’s some perfect entity, but because when you pick apart their rationale for doing so they are usually comparable or better in this respect to their peers, and we shouldn’t be hyperfixating on only one of them when trying to identify the issue.
I’m not trying to give Apple a pass by any means, merely bringing up the fact that the complaints posted here in this thread are not unique to them. There are plenty of reasons to be unhappy with them, I just haven’t seen any here yet that are specific to them or are indicative of them being measurably worse.
Windows 11 absolutely dropped support for hardware (TPM2.0?) , and is 5 years old at this point. If it were an Apple product it would just now be getting “vintage” status but still continue to get updates and where possible, repairs.
You can also install macOS on older (10+ years old) hardware as I’ve already covered.
iOS app compatibility is largely up to the app developer, not Apple. And for the past few years since I want to say ~2020 (I could be a little off there), you also have the option of installing an older version of an app if you’re on an old version of iOS that’s no longer supported by that developer. But again, that depends on the dev.
You know what? You’re absolutely right. They don’t make it easy for app devs to continue supporting legacy iOS versions in their latest app versions because each major iOS dev kits often introduce breaking changes specific to that version of iOS. Typically you might see the average app support N-2 (latest iOS and 2 major revisions back).
But here’s the cool part, that means my 9 year old iPad stuck on iOS 17 is still able to use almost all of the apps I typically have installed and use daily, and still gets updates for those apps. That’ll probably change soon, but even then I expect it to keep getting security updates for a few years.
In other words, I’m about to have a 10 year old iOS device still getting updated. Which is exactly in line with the benchmark we’ve both given now with Windows and macOS.
I’m struggling to see through all of this how Apple is materially worse at forced obsolescence than the competition. There’s totally improvement to be had, but most people do not use a device for longer than a decade anyway. If it can comfortably hit (and often exceed) that timeframe before support is fully revoked, then the average user will never experience it. To a major degree anyway.
I’ve said it before and will say it again: There are plenty of legitimate things Apple does to be pissed off at them about. Feel free to ask me if you want a few examples. I just don’t see how, compared to the rest of the market, this is one of them or how they’re so much worse to have to be called out, but the other guys either get a pass or no mention either.
Oh it’s not ideal and it’s totally fine to not agree with their practices for sure, I just wanted to add some context as there seems to be a lot of knee-jerk reactions around these kinds of subjects sometimes.
Very much agreed, a minimum supported timeframe would be awesome.
I do think calling it anti-consumer and anti-environment is a bit of a stretch, though. Just because the manufacturer no longer officially supports a device receiving major OS updates doesn’t render the device useless. I would actually argue their continual push of major security updates to vintage and obsolete machines to keep those still around secure is the exact opposite.
This is not specific to Apple by any means. Microsoft has repeatedly left hardware behind throughout Windows’ development, just not on a predictable schedule like Apple and instead whenever they feel like the hardware’s inability to support ‘x’ feature is reason enough to pull support.
Even certain Linux distros or package maintainers will drop support for hardware in newer major versions when it no longer makes sense to devote resources to maintaining that support.
I can see the anti-environment argument applying more towards the hardware side of things but again, at some point it makes more sense from that perspective for them to cut off support than it does to continue providing parts or repair services for obsolete hardware. For example, legacy models that contained mercury and lead or used less sustainable materials. Why would it be anti-environment of a stance for them to no longer provide replacement parts for those devices?
If Apple locked you out of your device when it became labeled obsolete and your only realistic recourse was to buy a new computer, then I would 100% agree. As it stands, it’s just a status that means (on the OS side) Apple can no longer guarantee the minimum usable user experience you would expect from that hardware, and it makes no sense to continue devoting resources to supporting it compared to newer hardware. You can see this yourself by using the earlier mentioned patcher. You can run Tahoe on a ton of legacy hardware and it will work, but you’re gonna hate the experience.
On the hardware side, the supply and logistics chain needs to remain operational for those spare parts to continue to be produced. But there is limited physical space, equipment, raw materials, licensing periods, strategic partnership timelines, and probably many other considerations that have to align for production of these parts to continue. It’s not entirely profit based, and instead usually depends most on whether the scale of that manufacturing makes sense anymore, if they need the physical space for another component in higher demand, or if they can no longer acquire a component from another manufacturer necessary to continue production.
One stance I will absolutely agree with you on is how against repairs they can be about specific components that could be more repairable. While I get that they really care about good design with tight tolerances, they could do a better job of balancing that with reparability. Not counting on it, but hopefully the new CEO being a product guy leads to a trend in the right direction there.
The 5 year vintage / 7 year obsolete is more hardware-oriented. While it typically corresponds to software, there have been exceptions when a particular model sells very well or has a specific niche and reason to stick around (example: 2012 13” MBP supported for a full decade, from Lion -> Catalina).
Even after this period they will usually push major security updates from time to time to legacy OS versions.
Does it suck that there’s any kind of block with installing later macOS versions? Sure, but that’s mitigated easily enough by tools like Opencore Legacy Patcher , which will let you install a current macOS version on unsupported hardware. You may not like the performance, which is partially why there’s any OS upgrade restrictions on Mac hardware at all.
Get another Mac in 10 years, or use a patcher to upgrade (at the cost of reduced performance). Or install Linux on it. It’s really not that big a deal when you consider most consumer PC’s aren’t even kept for that long as the primary machine.
Anecdotally, I just bought a used “vintage” iMac from 2017. It’s stuck on Ventura, which is fine for the use case I bought it for. Brought it home yesterday and it had some security updates ready to install, even though it’s 3-4 major macOS versions behind.
BBANM
I’ll never forgive them for that, and neither will Luigi.
Luigi. Growing up I usually played Nintendo games only on a friend’s console, and was usually player 2. As I got my own consoles and games, I stuck with him out of loyalty and because he has a longer jump in some games. :D
My family sings “More Than a Woman” as “Bald-Headed Woman” and when you hear it, it’s impossible to unhear it.
MEGADESK
Check them out again around Black Friday! If you’re ok paying annually they usually have some pretty deep discounts then.
My first year was on a Black Friday discount and I got their high end plan (usually $45 a month) for $225 for the whole year (made it cheaper than the low end plan)! It renews at like $450 but that’s still so much cheaper than other carriers in the long term.
Sounds like you have multiple lines on TMo. Visible is a 1 line per account setup but with inner circle you can pay them all together and get another $5 a month off.
The ATT reps at Costco HATE me because they can’t offer a good enough deal to switch 😂
I’ve been very happy with Visible. They’re owned by Verizon and in the long term, it’s the best value I’ve been able to find. They have a 2 week free trial period and frequently have awesome deals during Black Friday and in the Spring. Even without a discount though, plans start at $25/month with a plan that is probably enough for most people. Their highest tier (of 3) is $45.
Moved off T-Mobile for Visible after getting sick of their constant data breaches and haven’t been this happy with a cell carrier since Jump On-Demand was a thing.
The only real catches are:
Support is basically a chatbot and social media teams. However, human support reps do exist if you’re insistent enough, and I’ve only needed them maybe once in the past 3 years or so
Plans are for smartphones (and smartwatches with an existing smartphone line) only. No tablets or other devices.
No, Linux on face.
You’re right, this is why what we really need to do is tax the rich and make them pay their fair share while also moving off a car-dependent infrastructure.
Oh agreed I’m all for making the rich pay their fair share. If they did maybe this wouldn’t even be a topic worth much discussion
Kinda figured it was something like that, in both cases lol
Personally more of a fan of a pay per mile system but this is actually a really cool sounding alternative.