I'm afraid you've already moved the goalposts, yourself! Let me help you put them back: > a common 5-year-old laptop doesn't mean 'a 5-year-old Mac laptop'.

I'm afraid you've already moved the goalposts, yourself! Let me help you put them back: > a common 5-year-old laptop doesn't mean 'a 5-year-old Mac laptop'. The point isn't about macOS, but the proposed standard. It's this: if working on whatever random piece of hardware you happen to have lying around is a requirement for being a viable desktop operating system, macOS is not a viable desktop operating system... but of course, macOS is not only viable as a desktop OS but quite successful in its niche. So this tells us that the proposed standard is no standard at all— running without any tweaks or compromises on random hardware which was not designed, marketed, or sold as compatible is not necessary for a desktop OS to viable or a reasonable choice or whatever. (And as a sibling poster to you points out, in the case of older hardware, it's a test that Windows may sometimes fail as well, if for entirely different reasons.)