Editorial: Could Apple's lock on premium luxury be eclipsed by an era of good-enough gear?...

123457

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 148
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,953member

    Good article. “Good enough” will always be popular with the budget crowd, which uses price as the primary purchase consideration. Affordable luxury brands like Apple will continue to do fine with those who do not select based on price alone, and consider the value derived from better built systems and devices. 

    This is fine. There will always be both, likely in any product category from smartphones to hammers. Tho only in this product category will we see the price people creating accounts and posts to spin the narrative of decreasing sales to somehow imply their knockoff brands are “winning”. 
    I'm not at all sure that "good enough" is only popular with the "Budget Crowd". 
    No responsible person should want to pay more for something they don't need or want.
    ...  Although I could afford a Rolls, Bentley or Porsche, I'm happy with my Honda.  It serves my needs well.

    In the case of laptops or smart phones, why would a person who sits at a table and  browses the internet or checks email or facebook need or want an expensive, high powered, high end product?  In the case of laptops, a $2,000 laptop would simply be a waste of money.
    If you drive a Honda I doubt whether you were ever in the market for a Rolls Royce. Please. Being able to get the money together for one isn't the same as being in the market for it.

    Regardless, none of which you said counters what I said -- "good enough will always be popular with the budget crowd". Note that this doesn't mean ONLY with the budget crowd, but that it will ALWAYS be popular with the budget crowd. See the difference there? Yeah, I do. 


    I'm glad you clarified your statement.
    elijahg
  • Reply 122 of 148
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,953member
    kruegdude said:
    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    You lost the argument when you said “Windows”.
    The argument was about lifespan.  The fact that you don't like Windows has no bearing on it.
    muthuk_vanalingamelijahg
  • Reply 123 of 148
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,953member
    kruegdude said:
    elijahg said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    How well are all those security updates installing for you?
    You’re touting Microsoft’s security updates? Really? They people that made possible a billion dollar virus scanning ecosystem possible? 
    I think you missed the context of his remark:   In terms of lifespan, Apple cuts off updates after a certain point.  That doesn't happen with Windows.   I just got a notice that the Windows 7 on one of my desktops (a 1990's era Compaq D530 CMT) will come off of support (after 10 years) in January 2020.  But, it will be easy enough for me to upgrade to Windows 8.1 or maybe Windows10 and continue the support and security updates.   That would not be possible were it a Mac.
    elijahg
  • Reply 124 of 148
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 988member
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:

    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    Nonsense. The capabilities of a machine depends on the CPU. You cannot override CPU’s physical limitations with the OS, no matter how modern it is. Windows support of earlier machines is because those were crap in terms of security. This a just a burden on Microsoft, not progress.
    Not quite. At a cost of speed, "physical limitations" of CPUs apart from speed can oft be "overridden" with software emulation. If the CPU is 64 bit, and it's running Windows 10, it can run pretty much all modern software, albeit much more slowly than a modern CPU. Oh, and it gets security updates. 

    To increase your signal to noise ratio please go to ark.intel.com, find Intel Core Duo under Legacy Intel Processors, compare it to today’s 9th generation Intel. Then please tell us what capabilities can you implement via software emulation to make it run as 9th gen Intel !...

    A Core Duo will always run as Core Duo regardless of the OS or whatever software emulation you implement. In most cases a legacy machine will run faster under its native OS, XP Vista or whatever, not to mention also the legacy driver support. Windows 10 forums are full of people screaming because of the lack of legacy driver support and reverting back to their legacy OS for that reason. Yes you get a modern OS and most probably better security but you lose the fingerprint reader or the sound card...

    To decrease your ignorance level, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator .

    You'll note I said 64-bit. Core Duos are not 64 bit. But in any case, it is possible for a 32-bit CPU to do 64-bit calculations, but they are much slower as they're done in software. Like I said, if an older CPU doesn't support an extension of x64 that a modern piece of software uses, the missing extension is emulated in software. It is much slower, as I said, but it allows modern software to run on older CPUs. If this wasn't the case, it would mean software would always have to be written for the lowest target CPU that the developer thinks may be used. Otherwise the software would crash as soon as an unsupported instruction was encountered. No developer would specifically target a 9th gen i9, as it would only be supported on a tiny subset of systems. 

    Driver support is a different beast entirely, that's up to the manufacturer of the peripheral on a PC. If a manufacturer keeps the peripheral updated, even a 15 year old peripheral will run just fine in Win 10. Apple supplies all the drivers for Macs and could keep old drivers updated to ensure they worked on newer OSs, so your point is moot; the same issue would not pertain to Macs.

    And to prove my point, the Church-Turing thesis corroborates exactly what I said above.
    What is the point of “emulation” in this? We are not talking about the emulation of a few missing instructions among processors of a couple of generations old, we are talking about decade old architectural differences. You cannot emulate a higher architecture in a decade-old lower architecture, that is the opposite. Theoretically you can as an undergraduate homework, or you can emulate this and that, but the industry has yet to see a “i9 emulator” for Core Duos.
    As IrineW said, the point is Windows 10 can run with almost all features on the 10 year old Core 2 Duo, but Apple generally refuses to offer software support for Macs older than 7 years. And as I said, which you seem to be struggling to understand, the point of emulation is that the hardware features in the later CPUs are emulated on older CPUs such that newer software can continue to run on the older hardware.
  • Reply 125 of 148
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 988member

    IreneW said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:

    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    Nonsense. The capabilities of a machine depends on the CPU. You cannot override CPU’s physical limitations with the OS, no matter how modern it is. Windows support of earlier machines is because those were crap in terms of security. This a just a burden on Microsoft, not progress.
    Not quite. At a cost of speed, "physical limitations" of CPUs apart from speed can oft be "overridden" with software emulation. If the CPU is 64 bit, and it's running Windows 10, it can run pretty much all modern software, albeit much more slowly than a modern CPU. Oh, and it gets security updates. 

    To increase your signal to noise ratio please go to ark.intel.com, find Intel Core Duo under Legacy Intel Processors, compare it to today’s 9th generation Intel. Then please tell us what capabilities can you implement via software emulation to make it run as 9th gen Intel !...

    A Core Duo will always run as Core Duo regardless of the OS or whatever software emulation you implement. In most cases a legacy machine will run faster under its native OS, XP Vista or whatever, not to mention also the legacy driver support. Windows 10 forums are full of people screaming because of the lack of legacy driver support and reverting back to their legacy OS for that reason. Yes you get a modern OS and most probably better security but you lose the fingerprint reader or the sound card...

    To decrease your ignorance level, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator .

    You'll note I said 64-bit. Core Duos are not 64 bit. But in any case, it is possible for a 32-bit CPU to do 64-bit calculations, but they are much slower as they're done in software. Like I said, if an older CPU doesn't support an extension of x64 that a modern piece of software uses, the missing extension is emulated in software. It is much slower, as I said, but it allows modern software to run on older CPUs. If this wasn't the case, it would mean software would always have to be written for the lowest target CPU that the developer thinks may be used. Otherwise the software would crash as soon as an unsupported instruction was encountered. No developer would specifically target a 9th gen i9, as it would only be supported on a tiny subset of systems. 

    Driver support is a different beast entirely, that's up to the manufacturer of the peripheral on a PC. If a manufacturer keeps the peripheral updated, even a 15 year old peripheral will run just fine in Win 10. Apple supplies all the drivers for Macs and could keep old drivers updated to ensure they worked on newer OSs, so your point is moot; the same issue would not pertain to Macs.

    And to prove my point, the Church-Turing thesis corroborates exactly what I said above.
    What is the point of “emulation” in this? We are not talking about the emulation of a few missing instructions among processors of a couple of generations old, we are talking about decade old architectural differences. You cannot emulate a higher architecture in a decade-old lower architecture, that is the opposite. Theoretically you can as an undergraduate homework, or you can emulate this and that, but the industry has yet to see a “i9 emulator” for Core Duos.
    But, what is your point? Windows 10 runs on these old processors, obviously not as fast and smooth as on a modern CPU, but it works and get regular updates.
    What’s your point? Windows 10 will also run on the same generation old Mac.  Hahaha
    Hahaha you obviously aren't reading what you're replying to. Try running Mojave on that same 2011 Mac that'll run Windows 10.
    muthuk_vanalingamavon b7
  • Reply 126 of 148
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 988member

    IreneW said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:

    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    Nonsense. The capabilities of a machine depends on the CPU. You cannot override CPU’s physical limitations with the OS, no matter how modern it is. Windows support of earlier machines is because those were crap in terms of security. This a just a burden on Microsoft, not progress.
    Not quite. At a cost of speed, "physical limitations" of CPUs apart from speed can oft be "overridden" with software emulation. If the CPU is 64 bit, and it's running Windows 10, it can run pretty much all modern software, albeit much more slowly than a modern CPU. Oh, and it gets security updates. 

    To increase your signal to noise ratio please go to ark.intel.com, find Intel Core Duo under Legacy Intel Processors, compare it to today’s 9th generation Intel. Then please tell us what capabilities can you implement via software emulation to make it run as 9th gen Intel !...

    A Core Duo will always run as Core Duo regardless of the OS or whatever software emulation you implement. In most cases a legacy machine will run faster under its native OS, XP Vista or whatever, not to mention also the legacy driver support. Windows 10 forums are full of people screaming because of the lack of legacy driver support and reverting back to their legacy OS for that reason. Yes you get a modern OS and most probably better security but you lose the fingerprint reader or the sound card...

    To decrease your ignorance level, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator .

    You'll note I said 64-bit. Core Duos are not 64 bit. But in any case, it is possible for a 32-bit CPU to do 64-bit calculations, but they are much slower as they're done in software. Like I said, if an older CPU doesn't support an extension of x64 that a modern piece of software uses, the missing extension is emulated in software. It is much slower, as I said, but it allows modern software to run on older CPUs. If this wasn't the case, it would mean software would always have to be written for the lowest target CPU that the developer thinks may be used. Otherwise the software would crash as soon as an unsupported instruction was encountered. No developer would specifically target a 9th gen i9, as it would only be supported on a tiny subset of systems. 

    Driver support is a different beast entirely, that's up to the manufacturer of the peripheral on a PC. If a manufacturer keeps the peripheral updated, even a 15 year old peripheral will run just fine in Win 10. Apple supplies all the drivers for Macs and could keep old drivers updated to ensure they worked on newer OSs, so your point is moot; the same issue would not pertain to Macs.

    And to prove my point, the Church-Turing thesis corroborates exactly what I said above.
    What is the point of “emulation” in this? We are not talking about the emulation of a few missing instructions among processors of a couple of generations old, we are talking about decade old architectural differences. You cannot emulate a higher architecture in a decade-old lower architecture, that is the opposite. Theoretically you can as an undergraduate homework, or you can emulate this and that, but the industry has yet to see a “i9 emulator” for Core Duos.
    But, what is your point? Windows 10 runs on these old processors, obviously not as fast and smooth as on a modern CPU, but it works and get regular updates.
    The point was “Windows 10 runs, macOS doesn’t run” nonsense. If Windows 10 runs, that is not better than XP or Vista and to what expense? According to the forums to the expense of losing legacy driver support for parts of your machine. Church-Turing thesis doesn’t resolve the missing driver issue.
    Except it's not nonsense. Windows 10 runs, and most peripherals from the last 10 years have a Windows 10 driver. So your made up driver problem isn't actually a problem for most PCs from the last 10 years.
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 127 of 148
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 988member
    jcs2305 said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    I thought the OP said Apple devices, not laptops specifically when referring to the longest lifespan in the business. Most of the planned obsolescence claims I have seen refer to iPhones and not Apple,s other hardware. You have to admit more folks are using older Mac laptops than they are 12 year old Thinkpads. 

    So yes a non Mac can have a long service life but it isn’t as likely in my opinion. My two macs at home are both late 2011 ( Mini & Air ) and they both ares still running strong. This is possible, but not typical for windows machines of the same age in my experience. Just my 2c ... 
    Huh?   You compare a 2011 machine to a 2006 machine to say it's service life is as long?    Let's talk in another 5 years.

    But, again, I am not trashing the Macs.   Merely contesting the statement that Macs have the longest service life of all.  They do if you compare them to crappy HPs, but not other, high end, well made machines.
    A look at the second hand markets will disprove you. It is well known that the Macs have better second hand value because they last longer. A PC too may last even longer than a Mac provided that you can live with continuous DIY tinkering. At these fringe cases the issue becomes more of a sentimental one than a technical one. We cannot come to a conclusion by continuously autopsying dead models, we just have to respect people’s sentimental ties with their legacy investments. Meanwhile I have a gut feeling that the trend is towards a shortened lifecycle regardless of the model or brand: as long as the processors become more powerful the Heat emerges everywhere and controlling the heat becomes the first and foremost engineering task. “Cold” devices are the mainstream practical solution (smartphones, tablets) and for “hot” devices designing to dismiss the heat first (thinner, lighter) is the starting point in this war against Physics.
    Yes, you are correct.   Macs do have higher resale values than PCs -- even high end ones like Thinkpads.
    But, that is not due to the hardware.   It is due to OS, software and Apple Ecosystem (which is the main reason why Macs cost more to begin with).   But, that doesn't mean that the hardware is any better or lasts any longer -- and particularly with Apple's increasing move to non-repairable & non-upgreadeable hardware that is more true than ever. 

    But, even with the Apple OS, what happens when Apple no longer supports it  And, Apple drops support long before Microsoft does and, even if they were the same, you can almost always upgrade the Microsoft OS to the latest version.  The truth is:   A "T series" Thinkpad is simply more sturdy, more easily repaired if needed and more easily upgraded (both hardware and software wise) than any Mac (particularly the newer ones) and that provides them with the potential for longer life.

    Added:   As for heat:   The Lenovo "T Series" Thinkpads have robust, well designed cooling -- unlike the thin, light minimalist MacBooks.   So, heat is much less of an issue.
    Yes, those damn thin, minimalist MacBooks have the worst cooling ever: NONE...  B) 
    Sorry what?
  • Reply 128 of 148
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    kruegdude said:
    elijahg said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    How well are all those security updates installing for you?
    You’re touting Microsoft’s security updates? Really? They people that made possible a billion dollar virus scanning ecosystem possible? 
    I think you missed the context of his remark:   In terms of lifespan, Apple cuts off updates after a certain point.  That doesn't happen with Windows.   I just got a notice that the Windows 7 on one of my desktops (a 1990's era Compaq D530 CMT) will come off of support (after 10 years) in January 2020.  But, it will be easy enough for me to upgrade to Windows 8.1 or maybe Windows10 and continue the support and security updates.   That would not be possible were it a Mac.
    So what? What is the point? Support for Mac OS Classic ended around 2004s or so, following the eMacs. No one is asking Apple to run OS X or any UNIX on a 90s era Macintosh and no one is interested in how durable your 1990 Compaq is. Here is a list of Apple security updates

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222

    Every machine is either covered by a security update or by an OS update so there is no gap in support continuity. Everything is documented by Apple on this matter, probably by Microsoft too, so what are we trying to prove?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 129 of 148
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:

    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    Nonsense. The capabilities of a machine depends on the CPU. You cannot override CPU’s physical limitations with the OS, no matter how modern it is. Windows support of earlier machines is because those were crap in terms of security. This a just a burden on Microsoft, not progress.
    Not quite. At a cost of speed, "physical limitations" of CPUs apart from speed can oft be "overridden" with software emulation. If the CPU is 64 bit, and it's running Windows 10, it can run pretty much all modern software, albeit much more slowly than a modern CPU. Oh, and it gets security updates. 

    To increase your signal to noise ratio please go to ark.intel.com, find Intel Core Duo under Legacy Intel Processors, compare it to today’s 9th generation Intel. Then please tell us what capabilities can you implement via software emulation to make it run as 9th gen Intel !...

    A Core Duo will always run as Core Duo regardless of the OS or whatever software emulation you implement. In most cases a legacy machine will run faster under its native OS, XP Vista or whatever, not to mention also the legacy driver support. Windows 10 forums are full of people screaming because of the lack of legacy driver support and reverting back to their legacy OS for that reason. Yes you get a modern OS and most probably better security but you lose the fingerprint reader or the sound card...

    To decrease your ignorance level, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator .

    You'll note I said 64-bit. Core Duos are not 64 bit. But in any case, it is possible for a 32-bit CPU to do 64-bit calculations, but they are much slower as they're done in software. Like I said, if an older CPU doesn't support an extension of x64 that a modern piece of software uses, the missing extension is emulated in software. It is much slower, as I said, but it allows modern software to run on older CPUs. If this wasn't the case, it would mean software would always have to be written for the lowest target CPU that the developer thinks may be used. Otherwise the software would crash as soon as an unsupported instruction was encountered. No developer would specifically target a 9th gen i9, as it would only be supported on a tiny subset of systems. 

    Driver support is a different beast entirely, that's up to the manufacturer of the peripheral on a PC. If a manufacturer keeps the peripheral updated, even a 15 year old peripheral will run just fine in Win 10. Apple supplies all the drivers for Macs and could keep old drivers updated to ensure they worked on newer OSs, so your point is moot; the same issue would not pertain to Macs.

    And to prove my point, the Church-Turing thesis corroborates exactly what I said above.
    What is the point of “emulation” in this? We are not talking about the emulation of a few missing instructions among processors of a couple of generations old, we are talking about decade old architectural differences. You cannot emulate a higher architecture in a decade-old lower architecture, that is the opposite. Theoretically you can as an undergraduate homework, or you can emulate this and that, but the industry has yet to see a “i9 emulator” for Core Duos.
    As IrineW said, the point is Windows 10 can run with almost all features on the 10 year old Core 2 Duo, but Apple generally refuses to offer software support for Macs older than 7 years. And as I said, which you seem to be struggling to understand, the point of emulation is that the hardware features in the later CPUs are emulated on older CPUs such that newer software can continue to run on the older hardware.
    When you talk about a decade old machine, you are more restrained by the capabilities of the CPU than the capabilities of the OS. You cannot override those restraints by emulation or whatsoever, stop wasting your time. Updating Windows won’t make that machine “like new” it will just make your modern Windows like running on an old machine. Apple’s OS support on older hardware is well documented and considering that Mac users update their macOS more frequently than Windows users update their Windows, every working Mac has an optimum hardware/OS combo and no one is complaining, so what are you trying to prove?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 130 of 148
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,114moderator
    IreneW said:

    IreneW said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:

    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    Nonsense. The capabilities of a machine depends on the CPU. You cannot override CPU’s physical limitations with the OS, no matter how modern it is. Windows support of earlier machines is because those were crap in terms of security. This a just a burden on Microsoft, not progress.
    Not quite. At a cost of speed, "physical limitations" of CPUs apart from speed can oft be "overridden" with software emulation. If the CPU is 64 bit, and it's running Windows 10, it can run pretty much all modern software, albeit much more slowly than a modern CPU. Oh, and it gets security updates. 

    To increase your signal to noise ratio please go to ark.intel.com, find Intel Core Duo under Legacy Intel Processors, compare it to today’s 9th generation Intel. Then please tell us what capabilities can you implement via software emulation to make it run as 9th gen Intel !...

    A Core Duo will always run as Core Duo regardless of the OS or whatever software emulation you implement. In most cases a legacy machine will run faster under its native OS, XP Vista or whatever, not to mention also the legacy driver support. Windows 10 forums are full of people screaming because of the lack of legacy driver support and reverting back to their legacy OS for that reason. Yes you get a modern OS and most probably better security but you lose the fingerprint reader or the sound card...

    To decrease your ignorance level, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator .

    You'll note I said 64-bit. Core Duos are not 64 bit. But in any case, it is possible for a 32-bit CPU to do 64-bit calculations, but they are much slower as they're done in software. Like I said, if an older CPU doesn't support an extension of x64 that a modern piece of software uses, the missing extension is emulated in software. It is much slower, as I said, but it allows modern software to run on older CPUs. If this wasn't the case, it would mean software would always have to be written for the lowest target CPU that the developer thinks may be used. Otherwise the software would crash as soon as an unsupported instruction was encountered. No developer would specifically target a 9th gen i9, as it would only be supported on a tiny subset of systems. 

    Driver support is a different beast entirely, that's up to the manufacturer of the peripheral on a PC. If a manufacturer keeps the peripheral updated, even a 15 year old peripheral will run just fine in Win 10. Apple supplies all the drivers for Macs and could keep old drivers updated to ensure they worked on newer OSs, so your point is moot; the same issue would not pertain to Macs.

    And to prove my point, the Church-Turing thesis corroborates exactly what I said above.
    What is the point of “emulation” in this? We are not talking about the emulation of a few missing instructions among processors of a couple of generations old, we are talking about decade old architectural differences. You cannot emulate a higher architecture in a decade-old lower architecture, that is the opposite. Theoretically you can as an undergraduate homework, or you can emulate this and that, but the industry has yet to see a “i9 emulator” for Core Duos.
    But, what is your point? Windows 10 runs on these old processors, obviously not as fast and smooth as on a modern CPU, but it works and get regular updates.
    What’s your point? Windows 10 will also run on the same generation old Mac.  Hahaha
    Yes, that is exactly the point! Because macOS will not..  Did you even bother to read the thread?
    The point is, that older Windows system is not somehow better than an older Mac.  Apple moves on sooner than others, from dropping floppy drives to deprecating legacy ports to requiring more modern hardware for new Mac OS releases.  Um, that’s a good thing, it means those who invest in a new machine are going to get an operating system that takes more full advantage of its capabilities.  Did you ever stop to ask why that old Wintel machine will run the latest Windows release?  It’s because of fragmentation and a huge number of OEMs that are building new boxes of widely varying capability.  So MS needs to move [read innovate] slower, otherwise they’ll leave even new systems behind. I’d rather ride with Apple toward any technology destination, thanks. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 131 of 148
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,114moderator

    jdw said:

    Could Apple's lock on premium luxury be eclipsed by an era of good-enough gear?


    Expanding on the above question is this second question: 

    Is your existing Apple gear "good enough" to you because you would be losing functionality by purchasing the newest Apple gear?

    To which I answer: YES

    My mid-2015 top-end 15" MBP is "good enough" because to purchase a newer MBP would mean lose of "Pro" features important to me.  SD Card slot, USB-A ports, MagSafe, a good keyboard, extension power cord in the box, the list goes on.  

    So Apple is not merely in danger of good enough gear from rivals, but it is also in danger of losing sales to the Mac faithful if they don't start remembering the practical day-to-day needs of The Rest of Us.
    Another way of posing your question is,

    Where should you get off the legacy train and get on the bullet train?

    Clearly Apple was correct in moving on from the internal floppy diskette drive, etc, etc.  not everyone is ready to make the jump, but as surrounding tech also moves forward the legacy stuff Apple leads in moving on from will fall away for all computer users.  

    For example, when I purchased my MacBook Air a bunch of years ago the GoPro cameras didn’t have wireless transfer capabilities.  My GoPro HERO 7 Black, however, can transfer files wirelessly to the GoPro app running on my iPhone.  And when I want to transfer via cable directly to my new MacBook Pro, well, guess what cable the GoPro uses...  yup, USB-C.  

    Time will come when those legacy ports on your older Mac will seem antiquated.  Apple is usually leading the way in this regard.  
    An analogy to your argument is:   Should GM stop producing vehicles with gasoline engines and go strictly with fully electric only power trains -- (even though they can't meet the needs of most users) just because that is where the industry is headed?
    Sure.  Because... there are other brands that can serve the ICE market.  Why does every manufacturer have to include all the legacy features?
    edited April 22 watto_cobra
  • Reply 132 of 148
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,953member
    kruegdude said:
    elijahg said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    How well are all those security updates installing for you?
    You’re touting Microsoft’s security updates? Really? They people that made possible a billion dollar virus scanning ecosystem possible? 
    I think you missed the context of his remark:   In terms of lifespan, Apple cuts off updates after a certain point.  That doesn't happen with Windows.   I just got a notice that the Windows 7 on one of my desktops (a 1990's era Compaq D530 CMT) will come off of support (after 10 years) in January 2020.  But, it will be easy enough for me to upgrade to Windows 8.1 or maybe Windows10 and continue the support and security updates.   That would not be possible were it a Mac.
    So what? What is the point? Support for Mac OS Classic ended around 2004s or so, following the eMacs. No one is asking Apple to run OS X or any UNIX on a 90s era Macintosh and no one is interested in how durable your 1990 Compaq is. Here is a list of Apple security updates

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222

    Every machine is either covered by a security update or by an OS update so there is no gap in support continuity. Everything is documented by Apple on this matter, probably by Microsoft too, so what are we trying to prove?
    What am I trying to prove?   I am responding to allegation that Macs have a longer lifespan than Windows machines.
     I'll stand by that statement.

    And, nobody that I have seen is even trying to say or hint that WIndows machines are superior to Macs.   Simply that it is not accurate to make a blanket statement that Macs have a longer lifespan.


    gatorguyelijahgmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 133 of 148
    IreneWIreneW Posts: 164member
    IreneW said:

    IreneW said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:

    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    Nonsense. The capabilities of a machine depends on the CPU. You cannot override CPU’s physical limitations with the OS, no matter how modern it is. Windows support of earlier machines is because those were crap in terms of security. This a just a burden on Microsoft, not progress.
    Not quite. At a cost of speed, "physical limitations" of CPUs apart from speed can oft be "overridden" with software emulation. If the CPU is 64 bit, and it's running Windows 10, it can run pretty much all modern software, albeit much more slowly than a modern CPU. Oh, and it gets security updates. 

    To increase your signal to noise ratio please go to ark.intel.com, find Intel Core Duo under Legacy Intel Processors, compare it to today’s 9th generation Intel. Then please tell us what capabilities can you implement via software emulation to make it run as 9th gen Intel !...

    A Core Duo will always run as Core Duo regardless of the OS or whatever software emulation you implement. In most cases a legacy machine will run faster under its native OS, XP Vista or whatever, not to mention also the legacy driver support. Windows 10 forums are full of people screaming because of the lack of legacy driver support and reverting back to their legacy OS for that reason. Yes you get a modern OS and most probably better security but you lose the fingerprint reader or the sound card...

    To decrease your ignorance level, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator .

    You'll note I said 64-bit. Core Duos are not 64 bit. But in any case, it is possible for a 32-bit CPU to do 64-bit calculations, but they are much slower as they're done in software. Like I said, if an older CPU doesn't support an extension of x64 that a modern piece of software uses, the missing extension is emulated in software. It is much slower, as I said, but it allows modern software to run on older CPUs. If this wasn't the case, it would mean software would always have to be written for the lowest target CPU that the developer thinks may be used. Otherwise the software would crash as soon as an unsupported instruction was encountered. No developer would specifically target a 9th gen i9, as it would only be supported on a tiny subset of systems. 

    Driver support is a different beast entirely, that's up to the manufacturer of the peripheral on a PC. If a manufacturer keeps the peripheral updated, even a 15 year old peripheral will run just fine in Win 10. Apple supplies all the drivers for Macs and could keep old drivers updated to ensure they worked on newer OSs, so your point is moot; the same issue would not pertain to Macs.

    And to prove my point, the Church-Turing thesis corroborates exactly what I said above.
    What is the point of “emulation” in this? We are not talking about the emulation of a few missing instructions among processors of a couple of generations old, we are talking about decade old architectural differences. You cannot emulate a higher architecture in a decade-old lower architecture, that is the opposite. Theoretically you can as an undergraduate homework, or you can emulate this and that, but the industry has yet to see a “i9 emulator” for Core Duos.
    But, what is your point? Windows 10 runs on these old processors, obviously not as fast and smooth as on a modern CPU, but it works and get regular updates.
    What’s your point? Windows 10 will also run on the same generation old Mac.  Hahaha
    Yes, that is exactly the point! Because macOS will not..  Did you even bother to read the thread?
    The point is, that older Windows system is not somehow better than an older Mac.  Apple moves on sooner than others, from dropping floppy drives to deprecating legacy ports to requiring more modern hardware for new Mac OS releases.  Um, that’s a good thing, it means those who invest in a new machine are going to get an operating system that takes more full advantage of its capabilities.  Did you ever stop to ask why that old Wintel machine will run the latest Windows release?  It’s because of fragmentation and a huge number of OEMs that are building new boxes of widely varying capability.  So MS needs to move [read innovate] slower, otherwise they’ll leave even new systems behind. I’d rather ride with Apple toward any technology destination, thanks. 
    So, you won't even try to understand? I give up...
    elijahg
  • Reply 134 of 148
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,532member
    Rembert said:
    interesting article. Apple seems to be loosing ground by their appearant stubborn focus on exclusive and fashionable high-tech which does actually function close to perfectly. Just like in Steve Jobs' time, Apple doesn't listen to their customers. With Jobs this seems to have been a good idea as he had a pretty good vision on what people needed even before those people realized they needed this. With Cook it's different. There's no real innovation, it's mostly evolution. People want stuff in the Apple family which is good enough to run within the Apple family. Yes, a market exists for those sensitive to exclusive and fashionable gear. But that market will definately fail if Apple fails to answer to the demands of people who require gear which is good enough. For me, this involves an iPhone-SE-sized phone or even the continuation of the current SE as it's good enough already. And a MBP which is a continuation of the 2015-model as that one is good enough already. Everything beyond the SE and the 2015 MBP is indeed exclusive and fashionable but it's way beyond what a lot of people need (I deliberately refrain from making remarks regarding the newer MBPs regarding touchbar and keyboard). I feel Apple is currently using use-cases which do not sync with reality. If Apple doesn't review these use-cases, I fear Apple will loose ground very quickly, just like in the 90s. I'm already checking-out Android phones and Linux laptops, wondering when I will jump ship.
    I always get a good laugh at posts like this one.  It starts off with the "Apple is not innovative enough" argument - that all they do is refine products instead of build the future.  And then they bring up what they want - a refined older Mac that has all of the ports of the last 10 years, and an updated SE.  Somehow this is innovation.

    The key question - are these people stupid - or simply are so obsessed with their dislike of Apple and their own desires that they are completely clueless as to the double think spelled out within the same post?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 135 of 148
    Apple products are "premium luxury" that is affordable by anyone. Genius.

    Keep on good work!

    elijahgwatto_cobra
  • Reply 136 of 148
    Johan42Johan42 Posts: 163member
    majorsl said:
    macxpress said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    Honestly, do you ever have anything good to say about Apple or are you just here to piss all over everything Apple does? Seriously! If you don't like Apple products and services then just go somewhere's else. 
    You do realize that some of us like the products, but not so much the direction they (Apple) or some devices are taking?  You don't need blind faith and unrelenting fanboyism for everything Apple does and that shouldn't be a metric for participation here. macOS is still the best computer OS around, even if Apple appears to be disinterested in it at times over iOS.  I'll stick around and pay the $$$ just for it, even if I'm not always thrilled with the hardware - because the OS more than compensates.  OTOH, I don't like the iOS walled garden so Android with higher end hardware is my choice for mobile.
    Someone actually understands.
    elijahg
  • Reply 137 of 148
    danvmdanvm Posts: 791member
    IreneW said:

    IreneW said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:

    danvm said:
    Johan42 said:
    Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
    You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 
    My Lenovo Thinkpad T60P laptop is over 12 years old and runs like it was new -- but with a modern OS and I'm thinking swapping its main harddrive for an SSD.  How does Apple have the "longest lifespan" ?
    Same here buddy. My MacBook is from late 2008. It is 11 years old, running smoothly , and it does so looking 5 times better than your machine.
    The difference is that the good looking machine is running an old OS X 10.11 while the ugly one is capable of running the latest version of Windows 10.  Following the original post about longest lifespan, the ugly one is ahead considering it's running a modern OS.  Still, both devices are to old for modern applications.  
    Nonsense. The capabilities of a machine depends on the CPU. You cannot override CPU’s physical limitations with the OS, no matter how modern it is. Windows support of earlier machines is because those were crap in terms of security. This a just a burden on Microsoft, not progress.
    Not quite. At a cost of speed, "physical limitations" of CPUs apart from speed can oft be "overridden" with software emulation. If the CPU is 64 bit, and it's running Windows 10, it can run pretty much all modern software, albeit much more slowly than a modern CPU. Oh, and it gets security updates. 

    To increase your signal to noise ratio please go to ark.intel.com, find Intel Core Duo under Legacy Intel Processors, compare it to today’s 9th generation Intel. Then please tell us what capabilities can you implement via software emulation to make it run as 9th gen Intel !...

    A Core Duo will always run as Core Duo regardless of the OS or whatever software emulation you implement. In most cases a legacy machine will run faster under its native OS, XP Vista or whatever, not to mention also the legacy driver support. Windows 10 forums are full of people screaming because of the lack of legacy driver support and reverting back to their legacy OS for that reason. Yes you get a modern OS and most probably better security but you lose the fingerprint reader or the sound card...

    To decrease your ignorance level, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator .

    You'll note I said 64-bit. Core Duos are not 64 bit. But in any case, it is possible for a 32-bit CPU to do 64-bit calculations, but they are much slower as they're done in software. Like I said, if an older CPU doesn't support an extension of x64 that a modern piece of software uses, the missing extension is emulated in software. It is much slower, as I said, but it allows modern software to run on older CPUs. If this wasn't the case, it would mean software would always have to be written for the lowest target CPU that the developer thinks may be used. Otherwise the software would crash as soon as an unsupported instruction was encountered. No developer would specifically target a 9th gen i9, as it would only be supported on a tiny subset of systems. 

    Driver support is a different beast entirely, that's up to the manufacturer of the peripheral on a PC. If a manufacturer keeps the peripheral updated, even a 15 year old peripheral will run just fine in Win 10. Apple supplies all the drivers for Macs and could keep old drivers updated to ensure they worked on newer OSs, so your point is moot; the same issue would not pertain to Macs.

    And to prove my point, the Church-Turing thesis corroborates exactly what I said above.
    What is the point of “emulation” in this? We are not talking about the emulation of a few missing instructions among processors of a couple of generations old, we are talking about decade old architectural differences. You cannot emulate a higher architecture in a decade-old lower architecture, that is the opposite. Theoretically you can as an undergraduate homework, or you can emulate this and that, but the industry has yet to see a “i9 emulator” for Core Duos.
    But, what is your point? Windows 10 runs on these old processors, obviously not as fast and smooth as on a modern CPU, but it works and get regular updates.
    What’s your point? Windows 10 will also run on the same generation old Mac.  Hahaha
    Yes, that is exactly the point! Because macOS will not..  Did you even bother to read the thread?
    The point is, that older Windows system is not somehow better than an older Mac.  Apple moves on sooner than others, from dropping floppy drives to deprecating legacy ports to requiring more modern hardware for new Mac OS releases.  Um, that’s a good thing, it means those who invest in a new machine are going to get an operating system that takes more full advantage of its capabilities.  
    I suppose that when you mention legacy ports, you refer to USB-A.  If that's the case, you have to remember that Apple desktops still have USB-A ports.  Are you implying that macOS do not take full advantage of Apple desktops capabilities because still have USB-A ports?  IMO, that doesn't makes sense.  

    Apple could have done what Lenovo, HP and Dell did with their mobile workstations, and include USB-A.  They just push users to USB-C, instead of giving users the option.  It has nothing to do with the operating system and taking full advantage of it's capabilities.  

    Did you ever stop to ask why that old Wintel machine will run the latest Windows release?  It’s because of fragmentation and a huge number of OEMs that are building new boxes of widely varying capability.  So MS needs to move [read innovate] slower, otherwise they’ll leave even new systems behind. I’d rather ride with Apple toward any technology destination, thanks. 
    Other reason is that maybe MS has no desire to stop users from installing Windows in their old PC's.  That's excellent news for non-profit organizations, that have to work with donations that are not neccesarly modern PC's.  But at the same time, you can run Windows 10 in modern, high-end workstations with 4 physical CPU's and up to 6TB or RAM.  Now the question is, why Apple isn't capable of doing the same?  Could it be their way to push users to replace their hardware more frequently?  Maybe...
    elijahg
  • Reply 138 of 148
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,273member
    Sometimes I wonder if Daniel writes these things up, just to see what kind of reaction he gets.
    (Of course, I stopped reading after the first couple sentences, as my eyes were rolling too much.)
    muthuk_vanalingammattinoz
  • Reply 139 of 148
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,123member
    cgWerks said:
    Sometimes I wonder if Daniel writes these things up, just to see what kind of reaction he gets.
    (Of course, I stopped reading after the first couple sentences, as my eyes were rolling too much.)
    You'd think someone who makes a living writing about Apple would understand a few of the basics about where Apple plays in the "80/20 rule".
    edited April 23
  • Reply 140 of 148
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,123member
    brucemc said:
    Rembert said:
    interesting article. Apple seems to be loosing ground by their appearant stubborn focus on exclusive and fashionable high-tech which does actually function close to perfectly. Just like in Steve Jobs' time, Apple doesn't listen to their customers. With Jobs this seems to have been a good idea as he had a pretty good vision on what people needed even before those people realized they needed this. With Cook it's different. There's no real innovation, it's mostly evolution. People want stuff in the Apple family which is good enough to run within the Apple family. Yes, a market exists for those sensitive to exclusive and fashionable gear. But that market will definately fail if Apple fails to answer to the demands of people who require gear which is good enough. For me, this involves an iPhone-SE-sized phone or even the continuation of the current SE as it's good enough already. And a MBP which is a continuation of the 2015-model as that one is good enough already. Everything beyond the SE and the 2015 MBP is indeed exclusive and fashionable but it's way beyond what a lot of people need (I deliberately refrain from making remarks regarding the newer MBPs regarding touchbar and keyboard). I feel Apple is currently using use-cases which do not sync with reality. If Apple doesn't review these use-cases, I fear Apple will loose ground very quickly, just like in the 90s. I'm already checking-out Android phones and Linux laptops, wondering when I will jump ship.
    I always get a good laugh at posts like this one.  It starts off with the "Apple is not innovative enough" argument - that all they do is refine products instead of build the future.  And then they bring up what they want - a refined older Mac that has all of the ports of the last 10 years, and an updated SE.  Somehow this is innovation.

    The key question - are these people stupid - or simply are so obsessed with their dislike of Apple and their own desires that they are completely clueless as to the double think spelled out within the same post?
    Surely getting even an Xr standard phone into the casing of the SE which is only 80% the volume of the smallest phone they make currently is innovative?
    cgWerks
Sign In or Register to comment.