Do you think we'll ever get PPC era quality again?

[z970]

By this point, this was possible because they had become a cult thanks to the iDevices and the public has never cared about soldered-on components, port selection, or durability anyway.

It often strikes me that the (usually ill-informed) general public wants what it wants and has a serious obsession with instant gratification. I get the large feeling this is the sole reason Apple in its current state presently exists.

This, as we've seen in many other examples, is doing us no good as a society.

-

It makes me want to sleep.

 

[mzs.112000]

IMO Apple quality(while it has gone way down), is still better than a large portion of the non-Apple products on the market today.
Example, I have an old LG G2(that was built in 2013. No it's not my main phone anymore), at this point, GPS no longer gets signal, NFC has stopped working, simply downloading an app or using the internet browser is enough to overheat the device, and the battery only holds 50% of it's original capacity. Sounds bad right? An iPhone from 2013(iPhone 5S), assuming it's been taken care of as well as the LG G2, will probably not have any of those problems, apart from the battery, which Apple Store will still replace for a fee. In addition, in order to update the OS past Android 5.1, the G2 requires a custom ROM to be installed, whereas the iPhone from the same period still has iOS 12.2 which is the newest iOS at the time of this writing.

So, even though it no longer has the quality it used to, Apple is still leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else in terms of quality and user experience....

 

[z970]

So, even though it no longer has the quality it used to, Apple is still leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else in terms of quality and user experience....

"Cook says that Jobs taught him the value of intellectual honesty — that, no matter how much you care about something, you have to be willing to take new data and apply it to the situation." (https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ceo-tim-cook-on-steve-jobs-and-power-mac-g4-cube-2017-10)

 

[timidpimpin]

IMO Apple quality(while it has gone way down), is still better than a large portion of the non-Apple products on the market today.
Example, I have an old LG G2(that was built in 2013. No it's not my main phone anymore), at this point, GPS no longer gets signal, NFC has stopped working, simply downloading an app or using the internet browser is enough to overheat the device, and the battery only holds 50% of it's original capacity. Sounds bad right? An iPhone from 2013(iPhone 5S), assuming it's been taken care of as well as the LG G2, will probably not have any of those problems, apart from the battery, which Apple Store will still replace for a fee. In addition, in order to update the OS past Android 5.1, the G2 requires a custom ROM to be installed, whereas the iPhone from the same period still has iOS 12.2 which is the newest iOS at the time of this writing.

So, even though it no longer has the quality it used to, Apple is still leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else in terms of quality and user experience....

You base the quality of android on one old phone? With all due respect... that's very narrow minded of you.

I would say that Android, and Android phones are a great option now. Android 7 and up is a fantastic mobile OS. Even 6 was much better than 5. You also pay a lot less for Android phones.

I'm a longtime Mac user, but I would take my Motorola Z2 Play over any iPhone.

 

[mzs.112000]

You base the quality of android on one old phone? With all due respect... that's very narrow minded of you.

I would say that Android, and Android phones are a great option now. Android 7 and up is a fantastic mobile OS. Even 6 was much better than 5. You also pay a lot less for Android phones.

I'm a longtime Mac user, but I would take my Motorola Z2 Play over any iPhone.

I wasn't saying all Android phones had lower quality than iPhone, I was simply using the G2 as an example because of my own personal experience, and I figured the G2 is an example of the typical flagship Android device from 6 years ago.

I know there are many Android devices with higher quality and some with lower quality. In fact, I just got an LG V20, to replace my Stylo 3 Plus. Stylo 3 Plus was a lower-mid-range phone, had really bad build quality and a bad screen. The LG V20 has excellent build quality(I like it because of it's all-metal construction, removable battery, 5.7" 2560x1440 LCD + 1.2" second screen, has a 16MP + 8MP rear camera, and it also has FM Radio and IR blaster, 4GB RAM and 64GB internal storage and a microSD slot. Hardware-wise, it's IMO better than current-gen iPhones.

I considered myself a die-hard Android user for a long time, but it's recently that I really decided to go in on Apple products(I opted not to get an iPhone for this phone upgrade, because I don't want any screen smaller than 5.7" and I only buy used phones. I'm not going to pay $750 for a used iPhone XS or XR, because for that price, I could have bought a new one).

I do agree with you, Android 6 and 7 were way better than Android 5, Oreo(Android 8) is the best IMO. Android 5(Lollipop) was a sh!tshow at first(remember the memory leaks?), I suspect that was because it was the first release to switch from Dalvik to ART by default, so there were still some bugs that needed to be fixed, along with the fact that Google completely overhauled the UI.


So, to recap, I didn't mean that *all* Android phones have bad quality, or that all Android phones will have those kind of problems. I was just saying that based on my personal experience, the G2 a typical flagship Android from 6 years ago has not aged as well as a 6-year-old iPhone.

 

[Project Alice]

I wasn't saying all Android phones had lower quality than iPhone, I was simply using the G2 as an example because of my own personal experience, and I figured the G2 is an example of the typical flagship Android device from 6 years ago.

I know there are many Android devices with higher quality and some with lower quality. In fact, I just got an LG V20, to replace my Stylo 3 Plus. Stylo 3 Plus was a lower-mid-range phone, had really bad build quality and a bad screen. The LG V20 has excellent build quality(I like it because of it's all-metal construction, removable battery, 5.7" 2560x1440 LCD + 1.2" second screen, has a 16MP + 8MP rear camera, and it also has FM Radio and IR blaster, 4GB RAM and 64GB internal storage and a microSD slot. Hardware-wise, it's IMO better than current-gen iPhones.

I considered myself a die-hard Android user for a long time, but it's recently that I really decided to go in on Apple products(I opted not to get an iPhone for this phone upgrade, because I don't want any screen smaller than 5.7" and I only buy used phones. I'm not going to pay $750 for a used iPhone XS or XR, because for that price, I could have bought a new one).

I do agree with you, Android 6 and 7 were way better than Android 5, Oreo(Android 8) is the best IMO. Android 5(Lollipop) was a sh!tshow at first(remember the memory leaks?), I suspect that was because it was the first release to switch from Dalvik to ART by default, so there were still some bugs that needed to be fixed, along with the fact that Google completely overhauled the UI.


So, to recap, I didn't mean that *all* Android phones have bad quality, or that all Android phones will have those kind of problems. I was just saying that based on my personal experience, the G2 a typical flagship Android from 6 years ago has not aged as well as a 6-year-old iPhone.

I am also a long-time mac user, as well as a long-time android phone user. My main phone is an HTC 10, from 2016. I have a few problems with it now. The battery lasts about 50% as well. And it does get very hot with basic use. I WAS a diehard HTC phone user, I loved the old Hero, the old EVO series, and to this day the best phone I have ever used is my HTC One M8. I have an android 9 Pie rom on it right now, and it runs circles around my 10 with better battery life. Problem is I changed phone companies and the M8 is locked to the sprint network. As it sits, all the "good" HTC people now work at google designing pixels. I am actually temped to buy my first iPhone when I have the money. As you said, even my HTC 10 from 2016 is stuck on android 7 but is on 9 right now with a custom rom.

The only android phones I have ever had serious problems with are samsung phones. I cannot stand them. The build quality is terrible (though has gone up slightly) but their factory roms are worse than windows 10 with all the bloatware. Plus its ugly. I have owned two samsung android phones. The S4, which was the first phone I ever broke (twice) even with a thick case. And I currently have an S6 that I use for work. The S6 is just as old as my HTC. The battery literally lasts 2 hours on standby, and if I do any basic things on it like open facebook lite, or the web browser it gets super hot and I just watch the battery drain. With the lack of an HTC phone that I like, again I am tempted to try my first iPhone.

 

[mzs.112000]

I am also a long-time mac user, as well as a long-time android phone user. My main phone is an HTC 10, from 2016. I have a few problems with it now. The battery lasts about 50% as well. And it does get very hot with basic use. I WAS a diehard HTC phone user, I loved the old Hero, the old EVO series, and to this day the best phone I have ever used is my HTC One M8. I have an android 9 Pie rom on it right now, and it runs circles around my 10 with better battery life. Problem is I changed phone companies and the M8 is locked to the sprint network. As it sits, all the "good" HTC people now work at google designing pixels. I am actually temped to buy my first iPhone when I have the money. As you said, even my HTC 10 from 2016 is stuck on android 7 but is on 9 right now with a custom rom.

The only android phones I have ever had serious problems with are samsung phones. I cannot stand them. The build quality is terrible (though has gone up slightly) but their factory roms are worse than windows 10 with all the bloatware. Plus its ugly. I have owned two samsung android phones. The S4, which was the first phone I ever broke (twice) even with a thick case. And I currently have an S6 that I use for work. The S6 is just as old as my HTC. The battery literally lasts 2 hours on standby, and if I do any basic things on it like open facebook lite, or the web browser it gets super hot and I just watch the battery drain. With the lack of an HTC phone that I like, again I am tempted to try my first iPhone.

Yep, these days, I don't really take issue with any Android OEM other than Samsung. I will never buy a Samsung phone(or really, anything from Samsung).

You could try a OnePlus, the OnePlus 6T is as good, if not better in some ways than than iPhone. If you buy it directly from OnePlus, it comes unlocked and has all of the US LTE bands so it should work on any carrier(Actually Sprint is still an issue, even though the phone theoretically has everything it needs to work on Sprint, it isn't whitelisted by the CDMA network used by Sprint).

Also, if you aren't a heavy data user, you could get a OnePlus 6T, then pay for an entire year of Mint Mobile service with 12GB of data per month, and still be save money compared to buying a new iPhone. Mint Mobile runs on the T-Mobile network.

HTC used to create some of the best phones on the market(HTC Thunderbolt 4G was amazing when it was new, as was the HTC One M7, even the One M8 was amazing. I wonder what happened to them that now they aren't on the top of their game anymore?)

 

[pl1984]

I wasn't saying all Android phones had lower quality than iPhone, I was simply using the G2 as an example because of my own personal experience, and I figured the G2 is an example of the typical flagship Android device from 6 years ago.

At best you could say your statement may have been accurate for phones produced six years ago. However you applied it in the context of todays phones.

 

[mryingster]

Personal anecdotal evidence of Apple Product Quality over the past decade:

Devices that Still work
1999 iBook
1999 Power Mac G3
2001 Power Mac G4
2001 Cube
2005 Mac Mini G4
2005 PowerBook G4 15
2006 Mac Pro - Still works, is used 24/7
2008 Mac Pro - Still works, is used 24/7
2009 MacBook Pro - Still works, is seldom used
2015 iPhone 6s - Works fine (after warranty replacement for battery failure)

Devices that have had failures
2001 iBook - Stopped booting
2005 iMac G5 - (Bad capacitors)
2006 iMac Core Duo - Graphics failure after 2 years
2010 MacBook Pro - Discrete graphics card has died, can only use Intel graphics. Otherwise functioning
2013 MacBook Pro - Keyboard failure, Graphics failure, Battery Failure, Screen failure
2015 iPhone 6s - Audio chip/amplifier failure

This is highly unscientific, and suffers from survivor-ship bias, but I'm going to draw conclusions anyway;
Average build year for devices that work: 2005
Average build year for devices that failed: 2008

This shows a trend that newer devices (for me) have proven to be less reliable than older devices.

 

[pl1984]

Anyone have any opinions on the longevity of a mid 2009 MacBook Pro? I'm thinking of donating it to a friend whos 2008 MacBook Pro succumbed to the GPU failure known for that model year. It's working fine right now but so was the 2008 prior to my giving it to her. I don't want a repeat if at all possible.

 

[AdamBuker]

PowerPC? It was all downhill after the oh-forty.

I'd say it was all downhill after the 6502 imho.

 

[B S Magnet]

I agree that this is why Apple became big. But that was when Apple was a niche brand competing against the titans and it made sense to market to professionals with quality, high-end gear. The success of the iPod and iPhone really changed them. They realized they can make a lot more money by targeting the public, and subsequently dumbed down their hardware and software to match this shift in strategy. By this point, this was possible because they had become a cult thanks to the iDevices and the public has never cared about soldered-on components, port selection, or durability anyway.

And yet (and yet), there is no reason, especially given how much cash the corporation pulls in, to deliver a mainstream consumer line of hardware without upgradeable parts, alongside a niche (read: smaller) market of upper-end users with both the experience and purchase history to buy higher-end products affording the long-term features of quality, longevity, and relative modularity and interchangeability.

Come to think of it, that sort of sends us back to 1999 and the four-panel quadrant of a "professional/consumer" axis and a "desktop/portable" axis, as much as it also has us observe how Apple is able to offer entry-level Apple Watches for $400 alongside $17,000, bespoke Apple Watches (now down to ::checks web site:: $1,500 for a Hermès exclusive).

In short, they have the money, the financial security, the market core of longtime users, and frankly the know-how to make the executive decision to sell quality products if they so chose. They choose not to, and that's where we are today.

 

[z970]

Personal anecdotal evidence of Apple Product Quality over the past decade:

Devices that Still work
1999 iBook
1999 Power Mac G3
2001 Power Mac G4
2001 Cube
2005 Mac Mini G4
2005 PowerBook G4 15
2006 Mac Pro - Still works, is used 24/7
2008 Mac Pro - Still works, is used 24/7
2009 MacBook Pro - Still works, is seldom used
2015 iPhone 6s - Works fine (after warranty replacement for battery failure)

Devices that have had failures
2001 iBook - Stopped booting
2005 iMac G5 - (Bad capacitors)
2006 iMac Core Duo - Graphics failure after 2 years
2010 MacBook Pro - Discrete graphics card has died, can only use Intel graphics. Otherwise functioning
2013 MacBook Pro - Keyboard failure, Graphics failure, Battery Failure, Screen failure
2015 iPhone 6s - Audio chip/amplifier failure

This is highly unscientific, and suffers from survivor-ship bias, but I'm going to draw conclusions anyway;
Average build year for devices that work: 2005
Average build year for devices that failed: 2008

The 1999, 2001, and 2005 devices all had the same success rate, you didn't include any 2008 devices that failed, and first of all, how can an iPhone be in the same list as a Power Mac G4, and second of all, how can a single device be included in the 'works' list and 'failed' list at the same time? If it failed, then it isn't very reliable. The 2006 MacBook Pros failed, got fixed, and still work, but that doesn't change the fact they failed in the first place, and are deemed unreliable as such.

You weren't kidding when you said the following statistics were highly unscientific.

 

[mryingster]

The 1999, 2001, and 2005 devices all had the same success rate, you didn't include any 2008 devices that failed, and first of all, how can an iPhone be in the same list as a Power Mac G4, and second of all, how can a single device be included in the 'works' list and 'failed' list at the same time? If it failed, then it isn't very reliable. The 2006 MacBook Pros failed, got fixed, and still work, but that doesn't change the fact they failed in the first place, and are deemed unreliable as such.

You weren't kidding when you said the following statistics were highly unscientific.

To be fair, the 2 iPhones are two completely different iPhones. One works, one doesn't; Purchased same day.

 

[z970]

To be fair, the 2 iPhones are two completely different iPhones. One works, one doesn't; Purchased same day.

I see.

That puts us in a very confusing situation, then.

 

[2984839]

And yet (and yet), there is no reason, especially given how much cash the corporation pulls in, to deliver a mainstream consumer line of hardware without upgradeable parts, alongside a niche (read: smaller) market of upper-end users with both the experience and purchase history to buy higher-end products affording the long-term features of quality, longevity, and relative modularity and interchangeability.

Come to think of it, that sort of sends us back to 1999 and the four-panel quadrant of a "professional/consumer" axis and a "desktop/portable" axis, as much as it also has us observe how Apple is able to offer entry-level Apple Watches for $400 alongside $17,000, bespoke Apple Watches (now down to ::checks web site:: $1,500 for a Hermès exclusive).

In short, they have the money, the financial security, the market core of longtime users, and frankly the know-how to make the executive decision to sell quality products if they so chose. They choose not to, and that's where we are today.

The non-replaceable stuff is not about money; it's about thinness, which has come to dominate and constrain Apple's product design (to its detriment) ever since they shifted their target market.

But I do agree. They should just offer good laptops for those of us who care alongside their consumer offerings.

 

[bobesch]

All problems and annoyance started/starts, where screws are replaced by glue.

 

[z970]

All problems and annoyance started/starts, where screws are replaced by glue.

No truer words have been uttered.

 

[iTurbo]

I have had a few PPC macs and am now using a late '12 iMac. Honestly, the screen/glass being glued in place is a bummer when it comes to repair/upgrades.

BUT

I have to say quality and build-wise, my '12 iMac and '13 MBA are much better hands down. I would also say the software engineering of the OS is also much better than it ever has been, but that is just my opinion based on my usage.

 

[bobesch]

No truer words have been uttered.

But screws might be a hassle too and damn might screw up things sometimes!
(I have some anecdotes to tell ... - guess I'm not alone!? )

 

[z970]

But screws might be a hassle too and damn might screw up things sometimes!
(I have some anecdotes to tell ... - guess I'm not alone!? )

Screws are serviceable, you just have to be careful sometimes.

Glue, however, exists only to piss people off and exert manufacturer control.

 

[B S Magnet]

The non-replaceable stuff is not about money; it's about thinness, which has come to dominate and constrain Apple's product design (to its detriment) ever since they shifted their target market.

But I do agree. They should just offer good laptops for those of us who care alongside their consumer offerings.

The choice to use (as mentioned already) glue in lieu of screws, the choice to employ a proprietary connection interface for onboard SSD instead of mSATA or m.2, the choice to solder RAM with no possibility of upgrade, or the choice to use a closed, proprietary (and thus, costly) bus interface like Thunderbolt are ones which can be waived without sacrificing thinness (as if thinness is the principal performance metric a user is thinking about) — unless, of course, "thinness" has emerged as one of the primary selling features in a post-Moore's Law technological landscape.

Whatever the matter, these are executive decisions centred around a core commitment to disposability and embedded, planned obsolescence. Further, marketing claims by Apple (or any company, for that matter) alluding to an ecological conscience, or "greeness", should be challenged openly by consumers when the very design of their product lines assures waste disposal in far shorter time frames than predecessor products a couple of generations ago.

 

[iTurbo]

Part of me wishes that I could open my '12 iMac and service it myself (possible, but not easy). On the one hand I've upgraded my '12 iMac with 32 GB of RAM (easy), but on the other hand, it's not like I can get in and replace the hard drive or SSD or graphics card.

Here's the pickle though. I bought this machine new in late '12 and it is still rock solid, even with the latest version of Mac OS. I thought I was lucky to get 5-6 years out of my older PPC macs (a PM 6500 and a Quicksilver G4). This thing is rock solid after 7 years and counting. The thunderbolt and USB 3 interfaces are fast enough that PCI cards for specialized productivity is a thing of the past. I admit, it was pretty neat to have that self contained without external boxes/hardware, but I can't say I miss trouble.

I admit, I am no power user by any stretch, but this late '12 iMac blows away any Mac I've ever had before as far as quality and longevity. I still honestly see no reason to buy a new Mac.

 

[Project Alice]

I would also say the software engineering of the OS is also much better than it ever has been, but that is just my opinion based on my usage.

The software is horribly, HORRIBLY unstable in compared to older versions of Mac OS. In my OP, I went as far as comparing newer versions of Mac OS to Windows 10. It's that bad. I have had a near 100% stability rate with the older versions of Mac OS. 10.14 has given me quite a few issues. I cannot wake up my Mac from sleep on 10.14. 10.13 is okay, after 10.13.5. BUT 10.13 has a problem with updates never installing all the way in my experience. Amongst other things. Ever tried partitioning a drive in the new OS? It's easier using disk management in windows, unless you need an apple file system of course. Once you figure out how the new disk utility works, it almost never works "failed to erase". Setting different sizes of partitions is a chore as it always resizes the one you just sized to use the rest of the disk. It's just an absolute nightmare. If I ever partition a drive and it isn't APFS or exFAT, I almost always plug into a PPC mac, because disk utility actually works in leopard.

Aside from these annoyances, stability is way down imo. Aside from crashes here and there. The beach ball of death that APFS was supposed to solve.. Lets put it this way; My Mac Pro with mojave installed on an SSD, still beach balls a hell of a lot more than my 450Mhz PowerMac G4 with a spinner (running leopard, with a SATA HDD). True Story.

 

[iTurbo]

The software is horribly, HORRIBLY unstable in compared to older versions of Mac OS. In my OP, I went as far as comparing newer versions of Mac OS to Windows 10. It's that bad. I have had a near 100% stability rate with the older versions of Mac OS. 10.14 has given me quite a few issues. I cannot wake up my Mac from sleep on 10.14. 10.13 is okay, after 10.13.5. BUT 10.13 has a problem with updates never installing all the way in my experience. Amongst other things. Ever tried partitioning a drive in the new OS? It's easier using disk management in windows, unless you need an apple file system of course. Once you figure out how the new disk utility works, it almost never works "failed to erase". Setting different sizes of partitions is a chore as it always resizes the one you just sized to use the rest of the disk. It's just an absolute nightmare. If I ever partition a drive and it isn't APFS or exFAT, I almost always plug into a PPC mac, because disk utility actually works in leopard.

Aside from these annoyances, stability is way down imo. Aside from crashes here and there. The beach ball of death that APFS was supposed to solve.. Lets put it this way; My Mac Pro with mojave installed on an SSD, still beach balls a hell of a lot more than my 450Mhz PowerMac G4 with a spinner (running leopard, with a SATA HDD). True Story.

Wow, OK. I'm not doubting you at all. But that is contrary to my own experience. Granted, my usage of Mac OS is not totally job related. It's been very smooth sailing for me with my old '12 iMac. Much better than my experience with 8.6 on my 6500 or Leopard on my G4.