Aperture 1.5 Update WASTE of Internet Bandwidth!

[electronboy]

Secondly - my mistake, completely brained that it's a 9600. oops. brain went to some odd place and thought you were talking the stock graphics card it'd come with.

Sorry, guess I could have been more specific. The ATI 9600 PRO with 256MB of RAM does support Core Image. That should be enough horsepower for Aperture to run well (enough).

See, I'm not asking to run all the bells and whistles that a Quad G5 or Quad Core Intel is capable of. Why didn't Apple make it more of a sliding scale? Final Cut works that way. You can turn off certain effects or not even have access to them based on your hardware. The decision to totally cut off PM G4 owners is wrong. Here is why: If Apple will not support computers a few years old--even with high end upgrades--then they will put an end to the future MacPro market. Listen for a moment.

Why spend the extra money on a Mac Pro for all the upgradeability if Apple decides 2-3 years down the road that your system will be exluded from softare support--regardless of the upgrades or computing power it has? People will just get iMacs and throw them away when they are 3 years old and buy a new one.

I have always liked the traditional tower form factor and with this policy Apple has essentially put us on notice that the upgradeability of these systems has a very finite and time limited function.

Ok, its getting late and I still have not fixed up that Jack and Coke. If I'm not banned from the site I'll log on tomorrow. Cheers.

 

[bousozoku]

Ok, Ok. Nice to know the Apple marketing machine has got to you all. How could I forget, this is the site that posted pictures of COVERED banners prior to WWDC.

Actually, I have used very little Internet bandwith, not like I uploaded a 125MB file that someone could not use.

I have every right to be angry, a $3,000 machine from 2002 that has been upgraded and has the juice should not be excluded while other machines are given the green light.

No. I don't buy into any company's marketing. When they say system requirements, they're saying that it will barely run on the machines specified. The recommended required are closer to reality but they're really saying that you need to buy the best machine possible.

If you had a 4 year old x86 machine running Windows, this wouldn't even be an issue. People would laugh at you for trying to run current software on it.

No, I used to run it on my PowerBook and it wasn't fun. However, I've actually just done a test or two on the dual core 1.83 Mini and it's fast. A lot faster than I thought it would be.

Isn't that what I said?

 

[bigandy]

Isn't that what I said?

yes, i was backing your claim up with my experiences.

 

[amemoryoncelost]

I had to do the little hack trick thing on my G4 ibook and it worked, also had to do it on my stock powermacG5. Kind of sucks to have to do that stuff, but at least it's somewhat simple to get around it.

dustin

 

[Frogurt]

If you are sure that 1.5 will work on your computer, why don't you just buy a new copy of 1.5 and sell your old copy on eBay? You won't make back 100% of your money, but it won't cost you much (I'd bet at most $50). And afterwards you'll have a functioning Aperture 1.5 instead of $300 coasters.

 

[timnosenzo]

If you are sure that 1.5 will work on your computer, why don't you just buy a new copy of 1.5 and sell your old copy on eBay? You won't make back 100% of your money, but it won't cost you much (I'd bet at most $50). And afterwards you'll have a functioning Aperture 1.5 instead of $300 coasters.

That wouldn't really solve the problem, his G4 doesn't meet the stated requirements for v1.5 either, so he would still have to hack the installer.

 

[Abstract]

The PowerBook is supported because it is newer. You may notice that Apple's Pro Apps support for older systems tails off sooner than OS X, to get people to upgrade. So they want to make people buy new systems? *Shocker*! They're a business wanting to make money! Hold the phone!

I actually agree with the OP, even though he seems a bit off his head.

The restrictions are self-imposed. It's not about hardware limitations. If it was, the software wouldn't run on either a PowerBook 1.25 Ghz G4, or a Dual 1.25 GHz G4 PowerMac. It shouldn't anyway since it'll run like crap, but don't put a restriction on installation. Let them install it and have it run like crap. Its not anybodys job to limit what I should and should not do to my own stuff anyway. I've never had software that refused to install before when I knew my system was perfectly capable of running the software well --- not until I switched over to using Macs. I forget what software this was, but it was years ago, and there was a way around it.

I wouldn't be upset if I tried to install it on my old PM and my hardware couldn't handle it. However, I'd be mad if a company made an artificial, self-imposed restriction via software that didn't allow the software from being installed.