6 ms·

macOS very clearly is not designed to be long-term, legacy software, sitting on a machine for a decade like old servers did. That's just not the model they have

macOS very clearly is not designed to be long-term, legacy software, sitting on a machine for a decade like old servers did. That's just not the model they have. It’s not what they’re offering. I don't know why you'd attempt it therefore.

ghusto 4y ago
> It’s not what they’re offering. I don't know why you'd attempt it therefore I'm not saying you're wrong, but how did you conclude that? Not from the marketing ("And one more thing; we're not going to support this long-term!" — to rapturous applause), not from their specs, website, release notes, or anything like that. No, my guess is you read between the lines that Apple is a disposable-consumer-product company. Of course they'd never admit this, and _that's_ the problem here. It is not unreasonable to expect long-term support for software, and brushing that under the carpet with "ah well, you know what Apple's like", just gives them license to never have to _admit_ what they are.
- msh 4y ago
  Ehmm, from the article: Evidence from version numbers of APFS, a critical sub-system in macOS, is entirely consistent with Apple’s claimed support policy, of only fully maintaining the current version of macOS, and only providing security updates to superseded macOS for two years after that.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  Apple's support policy is I believe explicitly to only fully support the current version. But I can't find anything to quote right now. I know this, so I update immediately, and get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality. > It is not unreasonable to expect long-term support for software It is unreasonable to expect that, if that is not what has ever been promised to you or delivered in practice.
  - ghusto 4y ago
    > But I can't find anything to quote right now And you never will. Part of my point was that they want all the benefits of saying they're not going to provide long-term support, with none of the downsides of saying it. Hence you _know_ this to be true, but can't find it written down. > I know this, so I update immediately, and get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality. "My boss treats me like badly / my internet service is poor / none of the software I paid for works two years from now / [any other endless examples of being treated like a shmuck]. I know this, and just get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality" > It is unreasonable to expect that, if that is not what has ever been promised to you or delivered in practice. I don't need to be explicitly promised reasonable terms to find the way I'm being treated unreasonable. "Well, we never _said_ it would still work in a few years" is not going to cut it. People, we used to have standards. Some of you are too young to remember — and I do _not_ mean to sound condescending, it's just true that some of you weren't around back then — but people had expectations of products, and they were high (in comparison to today). You bought things for life. We've been frog-boiled through iterations by companies like Apple to accept throwaway culture.
  - vbezhenar 4y ago
    I'm not sure about support policy, but they definitely release security updates for old operating systems.
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      Yeah, hence 'fully'. Getting a new file system version isn't security (unless it's specifically a security flaw.)
highwaylights 4y ago
Yeah this argument is getting more and more tenuous every time it's rolled out. "It's just the Apple way" has been used to defend just about everything at this point. Unclear support terms and unsupported software for machines that were sold brand new at retail just a couple of years ago at premium prices is just plain wrong. EDIT: I've changed "a few months" to "a couple of years" as I can't find the link that explains which of the languished SKUs was still being sold on the Apple.com site as new shortly before being axed in Ventura. It also doesn't include refurb Macs or those that are still in retail channels which would make the support life even shorter from new. This is a far cry from Windows 10 to Windows 11, where blocking old machines (while still allowing a workaround) due to genuine security enhancements was met with uproar. Thankfully no T2 Macs have been dropped yet but I suspect despite having great hardware and being perfectly capable (and supporting enclave security and encryption hardware), they'll be axed unceremoniously in a couple of years anyway.
- petemir 4y ago
  Obviously. Yet people keeps buying from them.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    There are benefits to getting on with version updates. When I do software for macOS I know that the culture is I don't have to test on 10 old versions that people might be running. It's reasonable in macOS to just say 'you obviously have to be running the latest version' which simplifies so much, and allows me to get on with more of what matters.
    - highwaylights 4y ago
      But the rest of that sentence is “.. unless your machine is slightly older in which case just throw it in the Bin and drop another $2k on a new one like it’s no big deal.”
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
harha 4y ago
Then they shouldn't sell at all, only rent out.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  You’re not forced to do either. Everyone knows their approach to support. If it’s not for you pick something else.
urthor 4y ago
MacOS is designed for the point and click majority. You can see this in the lack of any functionality for such a simple task as window tiling. Power users should decamp, rapidly, to Vivaldi + Linux Distro.
- least 4y ago
  There is built in window tiling in MacOS, it's just not very good. There's also competent third party applications that can tile windows for you that aren't baked into the operating system. Window tiling on fully DEs on linux are not very good. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, Cinammon don't have very good window tiling, either. They're very basic and tend to mimic Windows. The automatic tiling WMs lack even very basic functionality, like a login manager, a status bar, a clock, or volume controls, so I don't see how that's acceptable when compared to MacOS.
- acdha 4y ago
  > MacOS is designed for the point and click majority. You can see this in the lack of any functionality for such a simple task as window tiling. It also has more complete and consistent keyboard shortcuts than most of the alternatives since that’s been part of the HIG for decades. Similarly, I do most of my window management using the keyboard so I’m skeptical that you’ve done enough research to speak so authoritatively, or considered that possibly power users might have more than a relatively minor feature factoring in to such a big decision.

ghusto 4y ago

> It’s not what they’re offering. I don't know why you'd attempt it therefore I'm not saying you're wrong, but how did you conclude that? Not from the marketing ("And one more thing; we're not going to support this long-term!" — to rapturous applause), not from their specs, website, release notes, or anything like that. No, my guess is you read between the lines that Apple is a disposable-consumer-product company. Of course they'd never admit this, and _that's_ the problem here. It is not unreasonable to expect long-term support for software, and brushing that under the carpet with "ah well, you know what Apple's like", just gives them license to never have to _admit_ what they are.

msh 4y ago
Ehmm, from the article: Evidence from version numbers of APFS, a critical sub-system in macOS, is entirely consistent with Apple’s claimed support policy, of only fully maintaining the current version of macOS, and only providing security updates to superseded macOS for two years after that.
chrisseaton 4y ago
Apple's support policy is I believe explicitly to only fully support the current version. But I can't find anything to quote right now. I know this, so I update immediately, and get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality. > It is not unreasonable to expect long-term support for software It is unreasonable to expect that, if that is not what has ever been promised to you or delivered in practice.
- ghusto 4y ago
  > But I can't find anything to quote right now And you never will. Part of my point was that they want all the benefits of saying they're not going to provide long-term support, with none of the downsides of saying it. Hence you _know_ this to be true, but can't find it written down. > I know this, so I update immediately, and get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality. "My boss treats me like badly / my internet service is poor / none of the software I paid for works two years from now / [any other endless examples of being treated like a shmuck]. I know this, and just get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality" > It is unreasonable to expect that, if that is not what has ever been promised to you or delivered in practice. I don't need to be explicitly promised reasonable terms to find the way I'm being treated unreasonable. "Well, we never _said_ it would still work in a few years" is not going to cut it. People, we used to have standards. Some of you are too young to remember — and I do _not_ mean to sound condescending, it's just true that some of you weren't around back then — but people had expectations of products, and they were high (in comparison to today). You bought things for life. We've been frog-boiled through iterations by companies like Apple to accept throwaway culture.
- vbezhenar 4y ago
  I'm not sure about support policy, but they definitely release security updates for old operating systems.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    Yeah, hence 'fully'. Getting a new file system version isn't security (unless it's specifically a security flaw.)

highwaylights 4y ago

Yeah this argument is getting more and more tenuous every time it's rolled out. "It's just the Apple way" has been used to defend just about everything at this point. Unclear support terms and unsupported software for machines that were sold brand new at retail just a couple of years ago at premium prices is just plain wrong. EDIT: I've changed "a few months" to "a couple of years" as I can't find the link that explains which of the languished SKUs was still being sold on the Apple.com site as new shortly before being axed in Ventura. It also doesn't include refurb Macs or those that are still in retail channels which would make the support life even shorter from new. This is a far cry from Windows 10 to Windows 11, where blocking old machines (while still allowing a workaround) due to genuine security enhancements was met with uproar. Thankfully no T2 Macs have been dropped yet but I suspect despite having great hardware and being perfectly capable (and supporting enclave security and encryption hardware), they'll be axed unceremoniously in a couple of years anyway.

petemir 4y ago
Obviously. Yet people keeps buying from them.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  There are benefits to getting on with version updates. When I do software for macOS I know that the culture is I don't have to test on 10 old versions that people might be running. It's reasonable in macOS to just say 'you obviously have to be running the latest version' which simplifies so much, and allows me to get on with more of what matters.
  - highwaylights 4y ago
    But the rest of that sentence is “.. unless your machine is slightly older in which case just throw it in the Bin and drop another $2k on a new one like it’s no big deal.”
    - chrisseaton 4y ago

harha 4y ago

Then they shouldn't sell at all, only rent out.

chrisseaton 4y ago
You’re not forced to do either. Everyone knows their approach to support. If it’s not for you pick something else.

urthor 4y ago

MacOS is designed for the point and click majority. You can see this in the lack of any functionality for such a simple task as window tiling. Power users should decamp, rapidly, to Vivaldi + Linux Distro.

least 4y ago
There is built in window tiling in MacOS, it's just not very good. There's also competent third party applications that can tile windows for you that aren't baked into the operating system. Window tiling on fully DEs on linux are not very good. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, Cinammon don't have very good window tiling, either. They're very basic and tend to mimic Windows. The automatic tiling WMs lack even very basic functionality, like a login manager, a status bar, a clock, or volume controls, so I don't see how that's acceptable when compared to MacOS.
acdha 4y ago
> MacOS is designed for the point and click majority. You can see this in the lack of any functionality for such a simple task as window tiling. It also has more complete and consistent keyboard shortcuts than most of the alternatives since that’s been part of the HIG for decades. Similarly, I do most of my window management using the keyboard so I’m skeptical that you’ve done enough research to speak so authoritatively, or considered that possibly power users might have more than a relatively minor feature factoring in to such a big decision.