Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple to Open Massive $850M Solar Farm in Monterey, California

seriously?

AnsonX10 said:
If Apple really wanted to be friendly to the environment, they would support their devices for more than a couple generations.
Click to expand...

Who has better legacy support than apple?

My 2007 MacBook Pro runs yosemite like a champ and iOS 8 supports the 4S which will be a 4 year old device in October....
 
ArtOfWarfare said:
At one point it was possible to down vote through the UI.

I'm suddenly curious if it's possible to just run my own JS to down vote whatever, or if it's blocked on the server side.
Click to expand...

It certainly seems like a possibility as vBulletin isn't the most secure or best forum software out there.
 
mgipe said:
Strange. Why foggy Monterey? Why not cheaper, sunnier, Central Valley?
Click to expand...

Based on the town listed in the First Solar press release (Cholame, CA) this is not in "foggy Monterey" the city, but rather the extreme southeast of Monterey county, which is pretty much in the Central Valley:

Google maps link
 
DanielSw said:
Nope. The technology changes too fast for that to be viable. At least they're serious about recyclability.

You're just gonna have to pony up for the new toys.
Click to expand...

So what is the technology changes to fast? You dont have to have the latest and greatest all the time
 
opriagr said:
As a lifelong apple user and shareholder, the "right thing" for Apple to do is make the best products on earth and make money doing it. When does this $850M project break even and start to be a smart investment for the shareholders?
Click to expand...

130 mW/h equal 130 000 kW/h. (130 000 * 0.08$) * 24 hours, 249 600$ of free energy per day. 91 104 000$ per years. Repay itself in 10 years
 
opriagr said:
As a lifelong apple user and shareholder, the "right thing" for Apple to do is make the best products on earth and make money doing it. When does this $850M project break even and start to be a smart investment for the shareholders?
Click to expand...

If you want them to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.
 
AnsonX10 said:
If Apple really wanted to be friendly to the environment, they would support their devices for more than a couple generations.
Click to expand...

Huh? An iPhone keeps working whether it is "supported" or not. And many, many iPhones continue being used after the original owner buys something new.

----------
opriagr said:
As a lifelong apple user and shareholder, the "right thing" for Apple to do is make the best products on earth and make money doing it. When does this $850M project break even and start to be a smart investment for the shareholders?
Click to expand...

To quote Tim Cook, if you don't like it, you know where the door is. Nobody forces you to buy Apple shares.
 
critter13 said:
Who has better legacy support than apple?

My 2007 MacBook Pro runs yosemite like a champ and iOS 8 supports the 4S which will be a 4 year old device in October....
Click to expand...

You do realize that's hardly impressive.

I have a 2006 Mac Pro that won't run beyond OS X 10.7.5.

Meanwhile I have an old Windows PC that originally ran Windows ME back in 2000. And that machine will run Windows 10 quite well (as it still exceeds the requirements for Windows 10) despite the fact that Windows 10 isn't even officially released yet.

So obviously, Apple's legacy support is pathetic by comparison.

What really highlights Apple's unnecessary abandonment of legacy support, is the fact that the 2006 Mac Pro is quite capable of actually running Yosemite. It's just that Apple chooses to prevent it from installing. Call it choosing to artificially obsolete machines so that they can sell new ones.

It only takes changing a fee lines of code in Yosemite, and providing drivers for the video card to enable it to run on the old Mac Pro. Yet they choose to obsolete machines instead by abandoning support.

Apple is hardly a model of legacy support. Apple is about pushing new sales. Not supporting machines that could still easily meet the task.
 
flyinmac said:
You do realize that's hardly impressive.

I have a 2006 Mac Pro that won't run beyond OS X 10.7.5.

Meanwhile I have an old Windows PC that originally ran Windows ME back in 2000. And that machine will run Windows 10 quite well (as it still exceeds the requirements for Windows 10) despite the fact that Windows 10 isn't even officially released yet.

So obviously, Apple's legacy support is pathetic by comparison.

What really highlights Apple's unnecessary abandonment of legacy support, is the fact that the 2006 Mac Pro is quite capable of actually running Yosemite. It's just that Apple chooses to prevent it from installing. Call it choosing to artificially obsolete machines so that they can sell new ones.

It only takes changing a fee lines of code in Yosemite, and providing drivers for the video card to enable it to run on the old Mac Pro. Yet they choose to obsolete machines instead by abandoning support.

Apple is hardly a model of legacy support. Apple is about pushing new sales. Not supporting machines that could still easily meet the task.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the machine in question lack a 64-bit EFI?
 
Michael Goff said:
Doesn't the machine in question lack a 64-bit EFI?
Click to expand...

Yosemite can run on the 2006 Mac pro because it is a 64 BIT machine. Yes, it came with a 32-BIT EFI. But that only stops yosemite from running on it by Apple's choice. Many have successfully run Yosemite on the 2006 Mac Pro. It is fully within Apple's ability to support this. Yet they choose not to. EFI is really an artificial barrier. It is easily overcome and replaced in software. We're not talking about BIOS chips from the 1980's here.

Apple made a strategic choice to abandon a fully capable machine. One which has been proven to easily be made to run Yosemite. If the end user can work it out, Apple could remove the artificial barriers and permit direct installation.
 
flyinmac said:
Yosemite can run on the 2006 Mac pro because it is a 64 BIT machine. Yes, it came with a 32-BIT EFI. But that only stops yosemite from running on it by Apple's choice. Many have successfully run Yosemite on the 2006 Mac Pro. It is fully within Apple's ability to support this. Yet they choose not to. EFI is really an artificial barrier. It is easily overcome and replaced in software. We're not talking about BIOS chips from the 1980's here.

Apple made a strategic choice to abandon a fully capable machine. One which has been proven to easily be made to run Yosemite. If the end user can work it out, Apple could remove the artificial barriers and permit direct installation.
Click to expand...

And a lot of people who have flashed the EFI have likely wrecked their machines in the process. It's a hit and miss sort of thing.
 
opriagr said:
As a lifelong apple user and shareholder, the "right thing" for Apple to do is make the best products on earth and make money doing it. When does this $850M project break even and start to be a smart investment for the shareholders?
Click to expand...

When our grandkids can still go out to play. Apple didn't get to 700B market cap by calculating short term stock prices or cash flow over investment.

Fellow Apple shareholder (since 1997! Thank you Steve!) Cook has my heartfelt support for leading in this direction.

Edited to add that betting on the long hold with Apple over 17 years has paid for my kid's college tuition. I give them the benefit of the doubt on what seem like crazy ideas at the time like touch screen phones let's say. Besides, less than 1B is pocket change cheaper to raise by bond sale than touching cash on hand. It's a far more rational play than Google routinely launches. They'll be energy self sufficient in California. That's cray cray (and I don't mean supercomputers).
 
Last edited:
opriagr said:
As a lifelong apple user and shareholder, the "right thing" for Apple to do is make the best products on earth and make money doing it. When does this $850M project break even and start to be a smart investment for the shareholders?
Click to expand...

You may be disappointed to find out that this is likely a smart investment, since solar purchased from a large project like this costs about 7¢ per kilowatt-hour, with no inflation, for 25 years. So, it's the right thing, a smart thing, etc.
 
Michael Goff said:
And a lot of people who have flashed the EFI have likely wrecked their machines in the process. It's a hit and miss sort of thing.
Click to expand...


What are you on about? You're not flashing anything.
You've been told all u do is change a few lines of code and that is correct. Search for the word 'Tiamo' in this forum.
Apple don't just stop supporting old hardware, they often ACTIVELY prevent the new software from running on it. This is virtually all hit with no miss.
I’ve run my 1,1 Mac Pro on Mountain Lion, Mavericks and now Yosemite with little issue. The only case you might even remotely make in Apples favour is that of energy efficiency of the hardware and even then you have to ask yourself if the energy saved outweighs the cost of making and disposing of a new unit.

I had an old Windows box that would run Windows with below the posted min specs.
Apple are horrible in this regard.
 
Last edited:
bradl said:
And capitalists should all realize by now (especially with the Koch Brothers involved) that with money comes INFLUENCE. One has the ability to make a difference in this world, instead of just thinking about money. It is money that corrupts, yet what you do with that money could influence MILLIONS.

It's that shortsidedness that has the heads of a lot of so-called "capitalists" spinning.

BL.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it is "the love of money" that is the problem that corrupts and not money in itself or capitalism. Just like the love of control and centralised power in socialism is the problem and not socialism per say. You can disagree with or agree with a particular system, but don't distort reality of a system that you disagree with to support a system that you believe in.
 
bradl said:
Valley Fever, and not as sunny as one may think. I've seen many a day when Cessna Grand Caravans from FedEx were turned away and back to Fresno or Modesto from trying to land in Visalia.

Perhaps closer towards Kettleman City, Grapevine, or Santa Nella, possibly. But Central Valley does get socked in pretty good. Monterrey would be a good place; less than an hour's drive from Palo Alto/Sunnyvale (depending on if traffic is good down Hwy. 17 or Hwy. 101).

BL.
Click to expand...

Heck yeah, the Central Valley fog can be thick as pea soup.
 
kudos to Apple for trying to sure up their power supply against possible supply/power grid issues. A great move to hep insure Apple services don't go down!!!

but....anything beyond that is just bull sh**
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back