[cacruden]

Roll your own computer - is a very niche area - most people don't want to worry about putting together their computer - worrying about whether the computer is not working because they blew something on the motherboard and wasted money

I don't know how many times I ended up with enough leftover pieces that I eventually broke down and bought some more pieces - just to make another working computer - just because it seemed a waste to have leftover pieces sitting around.

 

[syn]

Snow Leopard has to be treated as more of a developer release, which updates a bunch of APIs that can be used in the future. It tweaks the performance (but only on newer hardware anyways), it has a few UI changes - but not BIG for end-users - and thus was priced that way. If you have an older computer - Leopard for that platform is not that much different - there would be no reason to upgrade it anyways.

What does that matter? That's like someone arguing that it's okay if Vista didn't work on older systems since those users could still run XP.

The fact is, Apple and its fans constantly go on about how new operating systems enhance old hardware...now we have a new version of the OS that won't work on systems just 3 years old.

 

[MetroMan]

^ That's not a valid comparison. XP and Vista are a world apart.

Leopard and Snow Leopard are virtually identical to the end user with very few user features or UI changes. Snow Leopard was designed to leverage the technology of the most recent Mac's by harnessing the power of multiple cores and often idle GPUs.

I left Leopard on my 3 year old MacBook Pro which is running solid and put Snow Leopard on my new MacBook Pro which has definitely seen a bump in speed with the new OS.

 

[syn]

^ That's not a valid comparison. XP and Vista are a world apart.

Leopard and Snow Leopard are virtually identical to the end user with very few user features or UI changes. Snow Leopard was designed to leverage the technology of the most recent Mac's by harnessing the power of multiple cores and often idle GPUs.

I left Leopard on my 3 year old MacBook Pro which is running solid and put Snow Leopard on my new MacBook Pro which has definitely seen a bump in speed with the new OS.

Fine, it's like suggesting that it's okay a user can't upgrade to Windows 7 because they can still use Vista.

The point is that their latest OS release abandons an entire set of users who may have computers only 3 years old. It doesn't matter if there aren't many obvious new features...Apple touts it as a significant upgrade in many respects. If this was Microsoft releasing an update that wouldn't work on an entire group of systems that were 3 years old we'd never hear the end of it.

 

[cacruden]

If this was Microsoft releasing an update that wouldn't work on an entire group of systems that were 3 years old we'd never hear the end of it.

That might have been better than let people think Vista would work fine on their computer - when it would only hinder the performance of that hardware. Not only did it run on existing hardware - reducing performance significantly over existing XP installations because they were not built with the specs needed for Vista - Microsoft changed their specifications required to allow hardware vendors to sell substandard hardware - thinking that Vista could just be installed on it and it would work fine. Yes, Microsoft is a fine example of that.

 

[syn]

That might have been better than let people think Vista would work fine on their computer - when it would only hinder the performance of that hardware. Not only did it run on existing hardware - reducing performance significantly over existing XP installations because they were not built with the specs needed for Vista - Microsoft changed their specifications required to allow hardware vendors to sell substandard hardware - thinking that Vista could just be installed on it and it would work fine. Yes, Microsoft is a fine example of that.

Right. So you agree Apple made a poor move eliminating a whole collection of users who've had their computers for just 3 years in this update?

 

[GraphicMatt]

Right. So you agree Apple made a poor move eliminating a whole collection of users who've had their computers for just 3 years in this update?

Um, no? Microsoft would do much better if they would eliminate backwards compatibility and drop support for older architectures. As long as you're up front about the hardware requirements for your new software, what does it matter?

Microsoft's big issue with Vista is that they pushed it even for users with hardware that really couldn't handle it. Plus, the UI changes were very unpopular.

If, instead of Vista, Microsoft had released a cheap (~30 dollar) OS that dropped some backwards compatibility, added true 64-bit support and - for any computers made in the last 3 years - made things run faster, I don't think anyone would have complained. It would have been a far smarter move than Vista turned out to be, for sure.

 

[cacruden]

Right. So you agree Apple made a poor move eliminating a whole collection of users who've had their computers for just 3 years in this update?

Just more than 3 years ago was the last of the power pc's, but if you bought one 3 years ago - you would have been buying it knowing full well that it was at the end of the line for power pc products. Apple first announced the move to Intel in 2005, the first intel computer was released the following January, there were still some computers being sold with power pc - but mainly because the refreshed model was not available yet.

No, since I do not agree that Apple has "eliminated" them - did thing suddenly stop working - are they missing out on some cool new UI update? No. Can they get the latest "service pack" (as some have put it) - no. Can you get them repaired - yes.

Maybe in a year there might be some cool new app that I could only run on the Intel box - under snow leopard - and at that time I would have to decide whether to upgrade (if I was in that situation) - and if I did that I would probably just give the old computer to someone that does not need that new app.

I still have XP on my machine at work (which work provides) - Vista would kill that computer (it still does it's job fine).

 

[syn]

Just more than 3 years ago was the last of the power pc's, but if you bought one 3 years ago - you would have been buying it knowing full well that it was at the end of the line for power pc products. Apple first announced the move to Intel in 2005, the first intel computer was released the following January, there were still some computers being sold with power pc - but mainly because the refreshed model was not available yet.

No, since I do not agree that Apple has "eliminated" them - did thing suddenly stop working - are they missing out on some cool new UI update? No. Can they get the latest "service pack" (as some have put it) - no. Can you get them repaired - yes.

Maybe in a year there might be some cool new app that I could only run on the Intel box - under snow leopard - and at that time I would have to decide whether to upgrade (if I was in that situation) - and if I did that I would probably just give the old computer to someone that does not need that new app.

I still have XP on my machine at work (which work provides) - Vista would kill that computer (it still does it's job fine).

This is hilarious. One of the main things we repeatedly hear as a benefit of the Mac OS is how well it makes older hardware work. Now we have a version that won't even work for an entire group of computers, and that is somehow being made into a positive.

Windows 7 on my 5 year old system runs better than it did with XP. If I had a 3 year old Power PC Mac I couldn't even run Snow Leopard. But that's a great thing!

No matter what Apple does, it gets a thumbs up from Mac fans.

 

[cacruden]

This is hilarious. One of the main things we repeatedly hear as a benefit of the Mac OS is how well it makes older hardware work. Now we have a version that won't even work for an entire group of computers, and that is somehow being made into a positive.

Windows 7 on my 5 year old system runs better than it did with XP. If I had a 3 year old Power PC Mac I couldn't even run Snow Leopard. But that's a great thing!

No matter what Apple does, it gets a thumbs up from Mac fans.

Well, this is not the first time that Apple's OS has not run on "old hardware" - but macs tend to be useful longer (maybe because they don't kill it with an operating system that it cannot handle). Well, if you have old mac hardware that is no longer useful - like 3 yr old hardware - I can make a bid of $10

Did not say not being able to run Snow Leopard was a good thing, but it is not a really really horrible thing either.

Not everything is great with Apple - I still don't like the concept of an iMac (and I hate phones - all phones)

 

[AGTO]

but macs tend to be useful longer

Uh, no, not quite....but keep trying.

 

[cacruden]

Uh, no, not quite....but keep trying.

Well, I would not know anyways - I purchased one computer (for my use) in 2007 (macbook pro), 2 in 2008 (mac pro; self-assembled linux box), 2 (mac mini's) in 2009 - and tossed 5 older computers earlier this year (windows and Linux 3+ years old). This is obviously still my favourite (4TB, 10GB, 8 Core).

 

[afransen]

If you're going to splash out that kinda dough on a computer, buy yourself a decent desk, man!

 

[interchange42]

This is hilarious. One of the main things we repeatedly hear as a benefit of the Mac OS is how well it makes older hardware work. Now we have a version that won't even work for an entire group of computers, and that is somehow being made into a positive.

Windows 7 on my 5 year old system runs better than it did with XP. If I had a 3 year old Power PC Mac I couldn't even run Snow Leopard. But that's a great thing!

No matter what Apple does, it gets a thumbs up from Mac fans.

No matter what Apple does, it gets a thumbs down from Mac haters.


I have an half year old MacBook Pro, and a 6 year old PowerBook. The machine has taken quite the licking over the years, but keeps on ticking... It arrived with 10.2 installed, and when 10.3 came out a month later, I got a free upgrade. 10.4 was another improvement, but 10.5 - Leopard - is both the zippiest and most feature laden OS it has ever run. I can't see a need for a new operating system on it, and neither do I expect it.

Apple has successfully addressed backwards compatibility for 32 bit Power PC G4 and 64 bit Power PC G5 based machines since the Intel machines appeared in January 2006... but no-one expects to be able to indefinitely upgrade their older computers, do they? You just want your older machine to perform well until it's time to retire it, and Leopard certainly has my 6 year old machine performing well.

Can the same be said of Vista for the average 6 year old PC laptop? Not if this paragraph from Wikipedia's Vista article is any indication:

Hardware requirements
While Microsoft claimed "nearly all PCs on the market today (2005) will run Windows Vista", the higher requirements of some of the "premium" features, such as the Aero interface, have had an impact on many upgraders. According to the UK newspaper The Times in May 2006, the full set of features "would be available to less than 5 percent of Britain’s PC market", however, this prediction was made several months before Vista was released. This continuing lack of clarity eventually led to a class action against Microsoft as people found themselves with new computers that were unable to use the new software to its full potential despite the assurance of "Vista Capable" designations. The court case has made public internal Microsoft communications that indicate that senior executives have also had difficulty with this issue. For example, his laptop's lack of an appropriate graphics chip so hobbled Vista features that vice president Mike Nash (Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management) commented "I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine."

So while Apple has had two entirely different families of processors to take into account when designing its OSes, (which it has managed it very well), with Vista, Microsoft bungled the launch of its first new operating upgrade in 5 years, for its single family of processors.

With its legacy machines running (the very good) Leopard just fine, I have no trouble accepting that Snow Leopard will be the first Mac OS to only run on Intel machines. Apple has moved on from PowerPC compatibility because they can, without leaving PowerPC owners in a lurch.

42

 

[doady]

I probably used my Windows-based computer 2 years before the hard drive died. And probably 4 years before that with an older hard drive before it died. And 2 years before that with an even older hard drive... before it died. So that 8 years total life span for the computer.

No not really 8 years, because if I bought another hard drive I could still use the computer. But it is just too old, so I didn't bother. But that didn't mean I threw the computer away! Goodness no, throwing entire computers away because of the failure of one component is such a waste. I think of all the components, other than the fans, only the hard drive has ever failed me. But they are cheap, and easy to replace, so why throw the computer away?

BTW, I am about to upgrade my new comp to Windows 7, and I can get both the 32-bit and 64-bit version for free thanks to my brother being an IT student. Which version should I use?