A Buddhist Monk's Nightmare with Apple

[lmalave]

Originally posted by catalyst
hey... lay off dell.. I still have my 486 running linux and W2K (all original parts)... Would you be able to run the latest MacOs and ALL new apple apps on your brand new PB a year from now?

I started dropping by on this forum while waiting for the PB update, however after reading the postings, I want to switch less and less.

My friend still runs a beige G3, running Jaguar and all the new Apple apps, not to mention the latest versions of Adobe apps like Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. In that same time I've gone through 2 PCs: a Pentium desktop (lifespan: 3 years) and a Dell Laptop (lifespan: 2 years), before finally buying my iBook last November. I fully expect my iBook to keep me happy for several more years, at least until the G5s make it all the way down to the iBooks, in which case I'll be too tempted to upgrade even though I'm quite certain that my trusty ol' iBook would be perfectly fine running OS 12, Safari 3, iTunes 6, or whatever they have by that point...

 

[themadchemist]

Originally posted by GeeYouEye
You're lying. It takes a 586-based processor (possibly a PII) to run Win2k. And if it is all original parts, that means it came with no more than 16 MB of RAM. Win2k can't run on less than 128 MB RAM, and even most linux distros require at least 32 or 64. To say nothing of the fact that you would have, at most, a 2 GB hard drive (since a 486 would not have come with anything higher than Win95, and Win95 could only support FAT16 drives, with a maximum of 2 GB). Which means you might have room for Win2k alone, and nothing (not Linux, no other programs) else. Which leaves it effectively useless. Assuming you're telling the truth at all, which I seriously doubt.

And to answer your question, yes, and quite well at that.

I applaud your splendid retort.

I think this poster fails to remember that it has always been Macintosh that has been applauded for longevity.

Obviously, a newcomer to Macintoshes that witnessed the OS 9 to OS X changeover and thinks he knows everything. The last time anything nearly that bad happened was with System 6 to 7, if I recall correctly.

Although his point is that Macs from a year ago can't run software written today, his specific example may actually be somewhat accurate.

With another momentous change (this time not software, but hardware), a lot of software will have to change to adapt. In a couple of years (probably less than 4), the Mac OS, and every other OS, may become exclusively 64-bit. The same may eventually become true of other software, as well.

But I trust Apple and Mac developers to keep compatability for the longest time processor. Remember all the 68k and PPC versions of software packed together?