Every company does not have a $2.8 trillion market cap. Every company is not hoarding cash. Apple has far more than enough resources to hire more people to fix bugs. But Tim Cook is an MBA suit who doesn't care about user experience anywhere near as much as he cares about pleasing his beloved shareholders.
My q6600 from 2006 runs windows 10 just fine. Same with my phenom 2 CPUs from 2009. No hacks needed. Also don’t confuse the supported CPU list with what will actually run win10. That last bit is no different than macOS requiring m1 for Monterey as anything below it is not enough to support the full feature set.
The problem is, Apple don't want you using nine year old computers. They stopped charging for OS updates in 2013, consequently they have to force you to upgrade your hardware by making it obsolete. I saw this coming in 2013 when they made Mavericks free, because I remember thinking, so who's paying the devs if the OS updates are free? Of course, the answer is it's still you and me, but via a different method.
As an owner of such a Mac (late 2013 MacBook Pro, now stranded on Big Sur although I do now also have a 2021 14" M1 Pro MacBook Pro) I do understand that eventually there has to be a cut off for support somewhere, however arbitrary that decision might be. What I find most aggravating are the semi regular popups on the 2013 MBP inviting me to update to Monterey even though it isn't supported on that hardware!
No one is making excuses for Apple. When a product whether it's made by Apple, Google, Microsoft, Samsung, reaches end-of-support / end-of-life status, the company is not obligated to provide any updates. As consumers, if we choose to use products that have reached end-of-life / end-of-support status, we accept that risk.
Interesting take. I wonder why this is not done with iOS 14 and previous versions as well...,MacOS uses gatekeeper to protect you from most issues.
Gatekeeper and runtime protection in macOS
macOS offers the Gatekeeper technology and runtime protection to help ensure that only trusted software runs on a user’s Mac.support.apple.com
Apple has around 200 billion sitting in a bank. There is no excuse for limited engineering resources.
If Gatekeeper worked all the time there wouldn't need to be security updates. iOS doesn't use Gatekeeper because everything is sandboxed and apps have much less access to the system than in macOS.
I’m with Mojave and I need the update. Thanks Apple
With the release of macOS Monterey 12.3.1 on Thursday, March 31, Apple addressed two critical vulnerabilities that may have been actively exploited in the wild, but as Intego pointed out this week, Apple left macOS Big Sur and macOS Catalina users vulnerable.
The macOS Monterey 12.3.1 update fixed a pair of security flaws, including an AppleAVD issue that could allow an application to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges and an Intel Graphics Driver issue that could allow an application to read kernel memory. Apple said that it was aware of reports that these vulnerabilities "may have been actively exploited," aka there are attacks that use these specific security holes.
Apple often provides security updates for macOS Catalina and macOS Big Sur users alongside macOS Monterey updates to make sure that Mac users who continue to run older operating systems remain protected. Apple has not done so in this case, and there are no security fixes for macOS 11 Big Sur or macOS 10.15 Catalina.
macOS Big Sur and macOS Catalina are still being supported with updates for notable vulnerabilities, so it is not clear why security fixes have not been released. According to Intego, this is the first time that Apple has not released simultaneous security patches for Big Sur and Catalina alongside fixes provided for macOS Monterey.
Big Sur remains vulnerable to CVE-2022-22675 (the AppleAVD bug), while CVE-2022-22674 (an Intel Graphics Driver bug) likely impacts both Big Sur and Catalina, based on research conducted by Intego.
There are some Mac users who choose to remain on Big Sur or Catalina who could install Monterey to get security fixes, but other Mac users have older hardware that is not able to be updated to Monterey, and these users have no way to address the security flaws that are now publicized.
Intego estimates that around 35 percent of Macs in use today could be affected by one or both vulnerabilities, and Apple has not responded to the site's request for an update on when security fixes might come out for Big Sur and Catalina.
Article Link: Apple Fixed Two Actively Exploited Vulnerabilities in macOS 12.3.1 Monterey, But Hasn't Released Updates for Big Sur or Catalina
Well gee - I must've not gotten that memo. I have multiple machines currently running Windows 10 21H2 in my household, including a desktop running a 2nd Gen Core i7 and a Dell M3800 laptop (circa 2011 and 2013 respectively).
That statement is true, as long as you don't count that little-known "other" OS company called Microsoft as a member of "the industry".
Yep, my Lenovo Thinkcentre I've been running in my family business since 2013 runs W10 21H2. I get security updates and it's had a SSD swapped in and 16GB of ram added to it. I'll probably replace it when W10 finally gets put out to pasture but until then its more than fine.
That last part of your statement is true only IF you are running the latest OS/OSes. I still run Mojave on my 2018 Mac Mini at home because I rely on older 32-Bit applications and plug-ins for my art practice. I don't see the point in spending money or losing access to external hardware because Apple decided to no longer supports 32-Bit.
As Fred Brooks points out (in The Mythical Man Month) nine women can't have a baby in one month. There's a limit to how effective more personnel are when it comes to solving a software problem and a real point at which more people is a hinderance. Money allows for higher caliber engineers but productivity is always limited.
Right. Because more money wouldn't at all mean that you could have one set of engineers identify the security problem (which has already happened), and then four more groups of engineers to apply the solution to the last four major versions of the software.
Well, it's a little like giving birth. Some problems just aren't divisible. (Also, there's often a lot of screaming and drugs involved.)
"Doing the work" is updating the libraries affected by the security vulnerability. Unless Apple's software engineering has gone completely off the reservation in the last ten years, these vulns are all part of the same section of code in the same set of libraries (different versions, maybe, but still effectively the same codebase). You don't need multiple groups of engineers who understand the problem. You need one set of engineers who do, and several sets of engineers to find the relevant code in the libraries and update it.
Apps apps apps? What about external hardware? What about plugins?Good luck with that.
Also, while it comes with problems if you rely on specific old apps that don’t get updates, Apple dropping 32bit support was an important move. Windows’ main problem has always been the business requirement to keep backward compatibility - trust me, Microsoft engineers are not too happy about this and it’s definitely holding Windows back.
Apple has announced the 32bit transition a long time ago and developers had several years to update their apps. Honestly, at this point, this is on the devs of the apps you’re using, not Apple.
Why should anyone buy expensive peripherals from companies that won't update their drivers? Having said that, I have a pen plotter that predates the Mac that still works fine with a usb to serial dongle. So it is possible.
