4 ms·

Offering 5 years of support seems to be the new standard and has been largely the trend outside of Microsoft for the last 10-15 years with the Linux Kernel bein

Offering 5 years of support seems to be the new standard and has been largely the trend outside of Microsoft for the last 10-15 years with the Linux Kernel being one of the few exceptions. Distros like Ubuntu have LTS versions that are supported for 5 years or less. Apple updates OSX annually and only supports back 5 versions or less. Windows XP is almost 15 years old and it was a burden for Microsoft to support it. Support for legacy software doesn't include back porting of new features or taking advantage of new hardware. So having a large % of users on legacy systems will effectively hold back the industry. Microsoft is trying to avoid this by putting more realistic support terms in place. They aren't saying legacy software won't run on new systems, just that they won't support it.

userbinator 11y ago
So having a large % of users on legacy systems will effectively hold back the industry. I have a feeling that's what everyone outside "the industry" wants --- while they're paying for newer hardware and software, the actual benefit of each new upgrade is diminishing (especially when features users have relied on are being removed.) More people are realising this and stepping off the upgrade treadmill. Hence the aggressive deprecation and built-in obolescence strategies companies are employing.
rz2k 11y ago
Current OS X runs on Core 2 Duo MacBook Pros from 2007. For a five year old 2011 model, the only likely disadvantages are a lack of Retina display, and probably the lack of an SSD unless upgraded. I'm pretty sure Apple hasn't make any computers obsolete since the release of 10.8 in 2013, when they stopped support for many earlier GPUs. If you were using Ubuntu or Mint on a Core 2 Duo you would have careful choice between Gnome, Cinnamon, MATE, too because of the graphics. I'm also pretty sure that 10.7 is still getting security updates, which would make it like 2012 LTS.
- cptskippy 11y ago
  I've spoken about Apple's support model before, it's pretty straight forward. They only support something as long as it suits their interests. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10074484 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10074484

userbinator 11y ago

So having a large % of users on legacy systems will effectively hold back the industry. I have a feeling that's what everyone outside "the industry" wants --- while they're paying for newer hardware and software, the actual benefit of each new upgrade is diminishing (especially when features users have relied on are being removed.) More people are realising this and stepping off the upgrade treadmill. Hence the aggressive deprecation and built-in obolescence strategies companies are employing.

rz2k 11y ago

Current OS X runs on Core 2 Duo MacBook Pros from 2007. For a five year old 2011 model, the only likely disadvantages are a lack of Retina display, and probably the lack of an SSD unless upgraded. I'm pretty sure Apple hasn't make any computers obsolete since the release of 10.8 in 2013, when they stopped support for many earlier GPUs. If you were using Ubuntu or Mint on a Core 2 Duo you would have careful choice between Gnome, Cinnamon, MATE, too because of the graphics. I'm also pretty sure that 10.7 is still getting security updates, which would make it like 2012 LTS.

cptskippy 11y ago
I've spoken about Apple's support model before, it's pretty straight forward. They only support something as long as it suits their interests. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10074484 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10074484