Whoops, I'm wrong, the original iPad was announced in January 2010, it wasn't released until April. So make it 2 years 1 month.
Just a guess, but easy to validate; iOS 11 support on all devices with 64 bit processor, ie, A7 on up, and likely continuing that support with iOS 12. iOS 7 was the first 64 bit version, so that would make five versions of iOS support to date.
Your iPad is limited to iOS 5.x, though I would have thought that it had the iOS 6.x update.
If rumors are true, you can look forward to a $300 iPad 9.7 inch coming soon, should you want to upgrade that 8 1/2 year old iPad.
This article is dishonest by omission. It makes some fair points but the lack of honesty betrays the core point.
1) No mention of Project Treble. For those not aware, Project Treble is Google's development of a stable HAL between the vendor implementation (Qualcomm, Samsung/Exynos, Mediatek, Huawei/Kirin) and the system (Android). All devices launching on Android 8 or higher are required by Google to be able to boot a generic AOSP system image (GSI). Moving forward, this means that even if the chip maker obsoletes their drivers, it won't matter, because Android the OS will have a robust HAL that allows the new OS to talk to the old vendor implementation. As part of this, Google got the Linux Kernel LTS maintainer to agree to provide six (6) years of security patches to the kernel instead of the current two (2) year support. How can Google or any other manufacturer be expected to provide security updates to the Linux kernel when the Linux kernel maintainers themselves aren't? This is now fixed. Google couldn't provide long term security or update support in large part because of the Linux kernel, but now they can.
2) it's been discussed ad-nauseaum, but Apple OS updates and Google OS updates are very different. Google releases its core apps as store updates, not bundled with the OS, whereas Apple you need the new version to get the new core apps. While Android devices should run the latest software (see #1), an 'outdated' Android device is very different from an outdated iOS device.
Are these excuses? No, not at all, they are/were very real problems inside of the Google ecosystem. But for someone writing an article on Google device obsolescence and completely leave out all that Google has been doing (and succeeding at) over the last year to fix the problems?
Dishonest, very dishonest.
This article is dishonest by omission. It makes some fair points but the lack of honesty betrays the core point.
1) No mention of Project Treble. For those not aware, Project Treble is Google's development of a stable HAL between the vendor implementation (Qualcomm, Samsung/Exynos, Mediatek, Huawei/Kirin) and the system (Android). All devices launching on Android 8 or higher are required by Google to be able to boot a generic AOSP system image (GSI). Moving forward, this means that even if the chip maker obsoletes their drivers, it won't matter, because Android the OS will have a robust HAL that allows the new OS to talk to the old vendor implementation. As part of this, Google got the Linux Kernel LTS maintainer to agree to provide six (6) years of security patches to the kernel instead of the current two (2) year support. How can Google or any other manufacturer be expected to provide security updates to the Linux kernel when the Linux kernel maintainers themselves aren't? This is now fixed. Google couldn't provide long term security or update support in large part because of the Linux kernel, but now they can.
2) it's been discussed ad-nauseaum, but Apple OS updates and Google OS updates are very different. Google releases its core apps as store updates, not bundled with the OS, whereas Apple you need the new version to get the new core apps. While Android devices should run the latest software (see #1), an 'outdated' Android device is very different from an outdated iOS device.
Are these excuses? No, not at all, they are/were very real problems inside of the Google ecosystem. But for someone writing an article on Google device obsolescence and completely leave out all that Google has been doing (and succeeding at) over the last year to fix the problems?
Dishonest, very dishonest.
Can you be sure a hardware abstraction layer will not reduce the efficiency of the stack? Look back at Android’s disk encryption, forever switched off by default due to Google recognizing its drag on system performance. iOS has been doing full disk encryption for how long, without even a setting to turn it off? These two OSes are fundamentally different in their performance and support for their customer bases, with Google now creating a hardware abstraction layer to deal with 10 years of hack development. Yeah, I’ll stick with iOS, thanks.
Whoops, I'm wrong, the original iPad was announced in January 2010, it wasn't released until April. So make it 2 years 1 month.
Just a guess, but easy to validate; iOS 11 support on all devices with 64 bit processor, ie, A7 on up, and likely continuing that support with iOS 12.
I'm not claiming Apple always have a 2 year, 1 month support schedule for their products. That would obviously be false.
So then what is your point? That one time a first gen apple product didn’t get as many updates eight years ago as newer apple products do? what happened almost 10 years ago doesn’t matter...Google is doing this today. And today, ipads get great shelf life.
This article is dishonest by omission .... Dishonest, very dishonest.
I thought the CORE point was that Google was saying that 2-year-old devices will not be supported by Android P?
Your point about apps on the Play Store would be interesting... except that said apps are limited by the APIs provided by the OS. If a new app feature depends on a new system API, then that feature won't be supported when said app is downloaded on an older device.
So yeah, I can get "new" apps that may or may not have new features. Wow.
Google's upcoming release of the next version of Android OS will abandon support for all Nexus-branded phones and its sole remaining tablet product, Pixel C, ending future updates for products that were sold two years ago.
Not entirely accurate as they will still receive monthly security updates. They'll also receive continue to receive updates to the Google core apps. They won't receive the Android P operating system tho as you properly pointed out. In fairness, and as the author likely knows, this is less impactful on an Android device than it would be on an iDevice not receiving an OS update as Google has increasingly separated new features announced with new OS versions as well as current security updates from needing a full OS update to receive them.
Of course it would still be better to receive the full OS, advantage Apple here to no surprise. The rumors of Google creating their own chips could certainly be due in part to Qualcomm and their reported lack of ongoing support for older processors.
It is entirely acccurate because software patches (if Google actually maintains them; it has a history of forgetting about hardware it sold that has serious security flaws) are not “future updates of products.”
Do you get paid to make excuses for Google, or are you just volunteering your time?
We've been hearing about Google potentially building its own chips, but how will it fund such a massive undertaking when it can barely sell 4.5m Pixel phones across two years, and can’t sell tablet despite a decade of trying?
Pull some magic answer out of your butt because there’s no rational answer in the real world.
I'm new here and was hoping for a better experience than what's taken over Macrumors and the other tech sites. Maybe there's bad blood I'm not aware of but wow! Daniel, why the snark and insults? Nothing Gatorguy said seemed to be inciteful. In my brief time here, I've found your articles in-depth and informative but sprinkled with a little too much attitude, cynicism and a touch of superiority. Why all the hate?
I have never met anyone who bought an Android phone with the idea of keeping it for more than two years. That is an important detail.
Resale value isn't that important as all Android phones get discounted with age (many at a young age too), making it pretty much unnecessary to buy a second hand phone in the first place. You are guaranteed to find a new phone at your preferred price point. If you want to sell it on you can, but you would be selling into a market full of new phones at prices for all budgets. If you are selling a current phone it will have excellent resale value.
iOS updates are not always a blessing and Apple has got increasingly agressive in getting users to install major updates.
Case in point iOS 11 update for iPhone 6. You get an update notification. You say NO in the dialogue and get presented with a message asking you to input your passcode. If you read the small greyed out text at the bottom it says that the update will be installed during the early hours of the morning if a WiFi connection is present. Below that is an option to really say NO to the install. That is deliberate and underhand and there is no easy way back if your device is stealth updated.
Having used both systems it's inconvenient not to get the latest Android system update but I far prefer the combination of security updates and Google services. Not least because you can often downgrade installs on a per app basis and you get to decide which ones you actually want to install.
Not being on the latest and greatest isn't all that important for many and is sometimes impossible for iOS users.
My iPad Mini II is stuck on iOS 8 as I didn't want to upgrade the Mac it syncs to, to accommodate the minimum Tunes version that iOS9 required, so fragmentation exists on iOS devices too even if it isn't directly related to the device and iOS.
Google sells a garbage experience because most Android customers can’t afford to pay for a better one. They need a smartphone because of reasons, so they get in at the cheapest point possible. Being completely honest Googles strategy gets the job done, which is to be available to highest number of possible users (the poor greatly out number the well to do). Problems with taking this approach are threefold:
1) Android users who increase their economic condition are likely to leave the platform. Why? First, Android is the providence of the poor (which is often times roughly associated with low intelligence/poor life decisions), outside of social circles that glorify poverty, like IDK Juggalos?, most people like to be view as successful by others. Second, as a persons income rises and an an extra $20-30/m is not longer the difference between meeting basic necessities or not ... most will choose a better experience because time is starting to become more valueable to them than money.
2) Those who never improve there economic condition are not a market anyone wants to sell to. Taking a marketers prospective, this person just opted to buy a piece of junk for the device they are going to interact with most on a routine basis. Why did they do that? Answer, they are likely extremely price sensitive. If they are that hard up on disposable income, what are the odds they will buy the profitable products I sell vs the cheapest possible option. Google knows the answer to that which is why they pay so much to have access to Apples base.
3) Stupidity. Some people can’t be reasoned with even in the face of overwhelming evidence, some people are unwilling to ever admit they are wrong (even to themselves). Less intelligent/uniformed people tend to rely on sales peoples opinions when making purchases, Apple offers almost no incentives to sell their products. This means most sales people (Apple stores excluded) will push what makes them money (or makes their employer money), thus most sales people suggest Android products. This means these type of consumers are likely to start with Android or be bamboozled into switching to one. This in turn often leads back to the start of this point, I like to call it the circle of dumb.
Of course there are always exceptions to the rule. I have a brother who is intelligent and very well off, he prefers Android because he earns his living as an programmer for Windows and Android based platforms. He will likely never switch so long as his job requires him to be familiar. Those he works with use them for the same reasons and thus their is no negative stigma attached in this specific situation.
Some posters here like to spend time sourcing counterpoints to every negative Android post (see point 3). 99% of Google solutions put forth to address the issues with their platform either never happen, or do happen and then quickly let to languish or are implemented so poorly that a decent idea becomes worthless.
Bottomline the phone a user chooses to use is becomeing a fairly good indication of there competency. When I am looking to hire a person if they have an AOL email, I know up front I will have to spend a good deal of time and money showing them how to use technology so they end up getting hired for a lowere salary or as is more often the case, I just hire someone who I won’t have to spend those resources on. If they have an Android phone, I know that I have to limit their autonomy as it relates to using company funds for purchasing because low cost today trumps value with these people every single time. Typically, they also lack a sense of aesthetics since this rarely factors into their decisions. Many Android employees I have hired have personal financial issues YMMV, and this is a concern for me as this often effects an individuals ability to accomplish basic work tasks like pay for a last minute flight out of pocket or having a hard time waiting till the end of the month to be reimbursed for significant amount of mileage or other incedential expense. The list of issues goes on. All this is to say Android discontinuing support for championed products is right in line with what their base in willing to accept and their business model. I liked the article, but there we really no shockers here.
I have never met anyone who bought an Android phone with the idea of keeping it for more than two years. That is an important detail.
You call it a detail i call it a bloody waste. You can spinn it any way you want but this is just bad. My daughter has an iPhone 5 and it runs the latest iOS version just fine. No waste here.
I have never met anyone who bought an Android phone with the idea of keeping it for more than two years. That is an important detail.
Resale value isn't that important as all Android phones get discounted with age (many at a young age too), making it pretty much unnecessary to buy a second hand phone in the first place. You are guaranteed to find a new phone at your preferred price point. If you want to sell it on you can, but you would be selling into a market full of new phones at prices for all budgets. If you are selling a current phone it will have excellent resale value.
iOS updates are not always a blessing and Apple has got increasingly agressive in getting users to install major updates.
Case in point iOS 11 update for iPhone 6. You get an update notification. You say NO in the dialogue and get presented with a message asking you to input your passcode. If you read the small greyed out text at the bottom it says that the update will be installed during the early hours of the morning if a WiFi connection is present. Below that is an option to really say NO to the install. That is deliberate and underhand and there is no easy way back if your device is stealth updated.
Having used both systems it's inconvenient not to get the latest Android system update but I far prefer the combination of security updates and Google services. Not least because you can often downgrade installs on a per app basis and you get to decide which ones you actually want to install.
Not being on the latest and greatest isn't all that important for many and is sometimes impossible for iOS users.
My iPad Mini II is stuck on iOS 8 as I didn't want to upgrade the Mac it syncs to, to accommodate the minimum Tunes version that iOS9 required, so fragmentation exists on iOS devices too even if it isn't directly related to the device and iOS.
Well, since the iPad Mini II can use iTunes in iCloud, it isn't fragmentation of iOS so much as obsolescence of your Mac.
You must have a really old Mac not to be able to upgrade to OSX 10, which is what the current iTunes requires.
"These simple settings enable older devices to remain useful even while running more advanced software releases that only appeared as much as half a decade after the hardware was introduced.”
Half a decade - why not just say 5 years? Is it to try to make it sound longer?
You call it a detail i call it a bloody waste. You can spinn it any way you want but this is just bad. My daughter has an iPhone 5 and it runs the latest iOS version just fine. No waste here.
The iPhone 5 tops out at 10.3.3 doesn't it? How is it running the latest iOS then?
Google sells a garbage experience because most Android customers can’t afford to pay for a better one. They need a smartphone because of reasons, so they get in at the cheapest point possible. Being completely honest Googles strategy gets the job done, which is to be available to highest number of possible users (the poor greatly out number the well to do). Problems with taking this approach are threefold: (None, None and None)
There is no problem at all with Google's approach. With Android (and Chrome) they snatched the everyman-market away from Microsoft, preventing them from being the "other" primary mobile platform in addition to iOS. At the same time they've ported those Google core apps to iOS too and cover a majority of the high-end. So where's the problem? One way or another there's a Google service probably being used on 80% or more of all Western market handsets and perhaps as high a percentage on the desktop IMHO.
I have never met anyone who bought an Android phone with the idea of keeping it for more than two years. That is an important detail.
You call it a detail i call it a bloody waste. You can spinn it any way you want but this is just bad. My daughter has an iPhone 5 and it runs the latest iOS version just fine. No waste here.
And yet you see people right here saying they upgrade their iPhones every single year.
It's not an Android or iOS thing, it's an industry thing. It doesn't mean the phones go into landfill. They often get second uses, passed onto other people, recycled etc.
What if the industry moved to a two year upgrade cycle instead of yearly? Surely that would be even less of a waste.
Whoops, I'm wrong, the original iPad was announced in January 2010, it wasn't released until April. So make it 2 years 1 month.
Just a guess, but easy to validate; iOS 11 support on all devices with 64 bit processor, ie, A7 on up, and likely continuing that support with iOS 12.
I'm not claiming Apple always have a 2 year, 1 month support schedule for their products. That would obviously be false.
So then what is your point? That one time a first gen apple product didn’t get as many updates eight years ago as newer apple products do? what happened almost 10 years ago doesn’t matter...Google is doing this today. And today, ipads get great shelf life.
I think you know perfectly well what my point was, and it wasn’t directed at you.
Whoops, I'm wrong, the original iPad was announced in January 2010, it wasn't released until April. So make it 2 years 1 month.
Just a guess, but easy to validate; iOS 11 support on all devices with 64 bit processor, ie, A7 on up, and likely continuing that support with iOS 12.
I'm not claiming Apple always have a 2 year, 1 month support schedule for their products. That would obviously be false.
So then what is your point? That one time a first gen apple product didn’t get as many updates eight years ago as newer apple products do? what happened almost 10 years ago doesn’t matter...Google is doing this today. And today, ipads get great shelf life.
I think you know perfectly well what my point was, and it wasn’t directed at you.
Google sells a garbage experience because most Android customers can’t afford to pay for a better one. They need a smartphone because of reasons, so they get in at the cheapest point possible. Being completely honest Googles strategy gets the job done, which is to be available to highest number of possible users (the poor greatly out number the well to do). Problems with taking this approach are threefold: (None, None and None)
There is no problem at all with Google's approach. With Android (and Chrome) they snatched the everyman-market away from Microsoft, preventing them from being the "other" primary mobile platform in addition to iOS. At the same time they've ported those Google core apps to iOS too and cover a majority of the high-end. So where's the problem? One way or another there's a Google service probably being used on 80% or more of all Western market handsets and perhaps as high a percentage on the desktop IMHO.
Nice, there is not a problem because there isn’t. Hard to argue with that logic.
Replacing Microsoft, wow set bar of expectations high on that one. I’ll assume you have used a Windows based machine in the last 5 years. The point here is people bought Nexus and Pixel believing Google BS that a straight Android product from them (well branded by them anyway) would be a superior offering that would circumvent all the reasons their experience was poor. Then after abject failure in the marketplace, they decided it was their customers fault they bought into the bill of good that was sold and discontinued support leaving them stranded. I am fairly certain Google will happily rebrand and do the same thing again to another wave of believers, then discontinue support when it fails. In any case you are support this treatment of their base by your defense of there business methods.
I have never met anyone who bought an Android phone with the idea of keeping it for more than two years. That is an important detail.
Resale value isn't that important as all Android phones get discounted with age (many at a young age too), making it pretty much unnecessary to buy a second hand phone in the first place. You are guaranteed to find a new phone at your preferred price point. If you want to sell it on you can, but you would be selling into a market full of new phones at prices for all budgets. If you are selling a current phone it will have excellent resale value.
iOS updates are not always a blessing and Apple has got increasingly agressive in getting users to install major updates.
Case in point iOS 11 update for iPhone 6. You get an update notification. You say NO in the dialogue and get presented with a message asking you to input your passcode. If you read the small greyed out text at the bottom it says that the update will be installed during the early hours of the morning if a WiFi connection is present. Below that is an option to really say NO to the install. That is deliberate and underhand and there is no easy way back if your device is stealth updated.
Having used both systems it's inconvenient not to get the latest Android system update but I far prefer the combination of security updates and Google services. Not least because you can often downgrade installs on a per app basis and you get to decide which ones you actually want to install.
Not being on the latest and greatest isn't all that important for many and is sometimes impossible for iOS users.
My iPad Mini II is stuck on iOS 8 as I didn't want to upgrade the Mac it syncs to, to accommodate the minimum Tunes version that iOS9 required, so fragmentation exists on iOS devices too even if it isn't directly related to the device and iOS.
Well, since the iPad Mini II can use iTunes in iCloud, it isn't fragmentation of iOS so much as obsolescence of your Mac.
You must have a really old Mac not to be able to upgrade to OSX 10, which is what the current iTunes requires.
What year and model do you have?
Which is why I said:
"...so fragmentation exists on iOS devices too even if it isn't directly related to the device and iOS"
However, for me it is fragmentation.
27"iMac late 2009. 10.6.8.
Yes, it's old but Apple doesn't 'get' age.
It dropped Rosetta support in 10.7. slamming the door on my upgrade options.
Ironically. When I hit the iTunes dilemma, iTunes on Windows was supporting Windows way back to XP.
Lovely! With 200 billion dollars sitting in the bank, Rosetta couldn't be updated and iOS couldn't stretch back to cover an older iTunes.
Before you ask. I have more modern MBP's and Airs running later OS versions but they have iTunes libraries for other uses/users.
Comments
iOS 7 was the first 64 bit version, so that would make five versions of iOS support to date.
Your iPad is limited to iOS 5.x, though I would have thought that it had the iOS 6.x update.
If rumors are true, you can look forward to a $300 iPad 9.7 inch coming soon, should you want to upgrade that 8 1/2 year old iPad.
Your point about apps on the Play Store would be interesting... except that said apps are limited by the APIs provided by the OS. If a new app feature depends on a new system API, then that feature won't be supported when said app is downloaded on an older device.
So yeah, I can get "new" apps that may or may not have new features. Wow.
Resale value isn't that important as all Android phones get discounted with age (many at a young age too), making it pretty much unnecessary to buy a second hand phone in the first place. You are guaranteed to find a new phone at your preferred price point. If you want to sell it on you can, but you would be selling into a market full of new phones at prices for all budgets. If you are selling a current phone it will have excellent resale value.
iOS updates are not always a blessing and Apple has got increasingly agressive in getting users to install major updates.
Case in point iOS 11 update for iPhone 6. You get an update notification. You say NO in the dialogue and get presented with a message asking you to input your passcode. If you read the small greyed out text at the bottom it says that the update will be installed during the early hours of the morning if a WiFi connection is present. Below that is an option to really say NO to the install. That is deliberate and underhand and there is no easy way back if your device is stealth updated.
Having used both systems it's inconvenient not to get the latest Android system update but I far prefer the combination of security updates and Google services. Not least because you can often downgrade installs on a per app basis and you get to decide which ones you actually want to install.
Not being on the latest and greatest isn't all that important for many and is sometimes impossible for iOS users.
My iPad Mini II is stuck on iOS 8 as I didn't want to upgrade the Mac it syncs to, to accommodate the minimum Tunes version that iOS9 required, so fragmentation exists on iOS devices too even if it isn't directly related to the device and iOS.
1) Android users who increase their economic condition are likely to leave the platform. Why? First, Android is the providence of the poor (which is often times roughly associated with low intelligence/poor life decisions), outside of social circles that glorify poverty, like IDK Juggalos?, most people like to be view as successful by others. Second, as a persons income rises and an an extra $20-30/m is not longer the difference between meeting basic necessities or not ... most will choose a better experience because time is starting to become more valueable to them than money.
2) Those who never improve there economic condition are not a market anyone wants to sell to. Taking a marketers prospective, this person just opted to buy a piece of junk for the device they are going to interact with most on a routine basis. Why did they do that? Answer, they are likely extremely price sensitive. If they are that hard up on disposable income, what are the odds they will buy the profitable products I sell vs the cheapest possible option. Google knows the answer to that which is why they pay so much to have access to Apples base.
3) Stupidity. Some people can’t be reasoned with even in the face of overwhelming evidence, some people are unwilling to ever admit they are wrong (even to themselves). Less intelligent/uniformed people tend to rely on sales peoples opinions when making purchases, Apple offers almost no incentives to sell their products. This means most sales people (Apple stores excluded) will push what makes them money (or makes their employer money), thus most sales people suggest Android products. This means these type of consumers are likely to start with Android or be bamboozled into switching to one. This in turn often leads back to the start of this point, I like to call it the circle of dumb.
Of course there are always exceptions to the rule. I have a brother who is intelligent and very well off, he prefers Android because he earns his living as an programmer for Windows and Android based platforms. He will likely never switch so long as his job requires him to be familiar. Those he works with use them for the same reasons and thus their is no negative stigma attached in this specific situation.
Some posters here like to spend time sourcing counterpoints to every negative Android post (see point 3). 99% of Google solutions put forth to address the issues with their platform either never happen, or do happen and then quickly let to languish or are implemented so poorly that a decent idea becomes worthless.
Bottomline the phone a user chooses to use is becomeing a fairly good indication of there competency. When I am looking to hire a person if they have an AOL email, I know up front I will have to spend a good deal of time and money showing them how to use technology so they end up getting hired for a lowere salary or as is more often the case, I just hire someone who I won’t have to spend those resources on. If they have an Android phone, I know that I have to limit their autonomy as it relates to using company funds for purchasing because low cost today trumps value with these people every single time. Typically, they also lack a sense of aesthetics since this rarely factors into their decisions. Many Android employees I have hired have personal financial issues YMMV, and this is a concern for me as this often effects an individuals ability to accomplish basic work tasks like pay for a last minute flight out of pocket or having a hard time waiting till the end of the month to be reimbursed for significant amount of mileage or other incedential expense. The list of issues goes on. All this is to say Android discontinuing support for championed products is right in line with what their base in willing to accept and their business model. I liked the article, but there we really no shockers here.
You call it a detail i call it a bloody waste. You can spinn it any way you want but this is just bad. My daughter has an iPhone 5 and it runs the latest iOS version just fine. No waste here.
You must have a really old Mac not to be able to upgrade to OSX 10, which is what the current iTunes requires.
What year and model do you have?
It's not an Android or iOS thing, it's an industry thing. It doesn't mean the phones go into landfill. They often get second uses, passed onto other people, recycled etc.
What if the industry moved to a two year upgrade cycle instead of yearly? Surely that would be even less of a waste.
Thanks for the input.
Replacing Microsoft, wow set bar of expectations high on that one. I’ll assume you have used a Windows based machine in the last 5 years. The point here is people bought Nexus and Pixel believing Google BS that a straight Android product from them (well branded by them anyway) would be a superior offering that would circumvent all the reasons their experience was poor. Then after abject failure in the marketplace, they decided it was their customers fault they bought into the bill of good that was sold and discontinued support leaving them stranded. I am fairly certain Google will happily rebrand and do the same thing again to another wave of believers, then discontinue support when it fails. In any case you are support this treatment of their base by your defense of there business methods.
"...so fragmentation exists on iOS devices too even if it isn't directly related to the device and iOS"
However, for me it is fragmentation.
27"iMac late 2009. 10.6.8.
Yes, it's old but Apple doesn't 'get' age.
It dropped Rosetta support in 10.7. slamming the door on my upgrade options.
Ironically. When I hit the iTunes dilemma, iTunes on Windows was supporting Windows way back to XP.
Lovely! With 200 billion dollars sitting in the bank, Rosetta couldn't be updated and iOS couldn't stretch back to cover an older iTunes.
Before you ask. I have more modern MBP's and Airs running later OS versions but they have iTunes libraries for other uses/users.
My Mini syncs with the iMac.