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

Google Wants to Turn Your Old Mac into a Chromebook With Chrome OS Flex

Seanm87 said:
Why? Why would anyone do this?
Click to expand...
Because almost nothing runs on my mac from 2010 or before, not even a modern web browser.

My plan is to put Linux on it. Modern Linux runs fine on 12 year old Macs. But Most people lack the computer skills to do this. Chrome OS is a more automated and easier to use version of Linux and it can run the newest version of Goole Docs and Chrome

Actually, I bet Windows 10 would run on the 12 year old Mac.
 
chucker23n1 said:
lol
Click to expand...

You don't think so? For a kid learning computers for the first time it'd just as easy to pick up Ubuntu UI as a macOS UI, they both have their quirks and ways of working that you'd just learn.

As I said, I just command line MS-DOS when I was 6-7!
 
dannys1 said:
You don't think so? For a kid learning computers for the first time it'd just as easy to pick up Ubuntu UI as a macOS UI, they both have their quirks and ways of working that you'd just learn.
Click to expand...

In the case where everything works, Ubuntu is quite easy.

When things start failing or your choice of combination of hardware and software isn't one that particular OSS developer was into is where things get messy. "Oh, this? This only works for distros that don't use systemd. If you ask me, [ entire paragraph about how systemd is the spawn of the devil, without any guidance on what you can do ]." "Yeah, your display setup only works if you run all of them at 96ppi. Oh, that's much too small on your laptop? Well, I suppose you could also remove the external displays instead!" "Yeah, we patched support for your audio chip in PulseAudio. It's in the newest release. No, Ubuntu doesn't have that release yet. What are you asking us for, go complain to Ubuntu!"

There's many decentralized stakeholders in what ultimately makes up a Linux system. That's both a blessing and a curse. For usability, I'd argue it's mostly a curse.

dannys1 said:
As I said, I just command line MS-DOS when I was 6-7!
Click to expand...

Well, I manipulated memory with PEEK and POKE on my C64. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: dannys1
chucker23n1 said:
In the case where everything works, Ubuntu is quite easy.

When things start failing or your choice of combination of hardware and software isn't one that particular OSS developer was into is where things get messy. "Oh, this? This only works for distros that don't use systemd. If you ask me, [ entire paragraph about how systemd is the spawn of the devil, without any guidance on what you can do ]." "Yeah, your display setup only works if you run all of them at 96ppi. Oh, that's much too small on your laptop? Well, I suppose you could also remove the external displays instead!" "Yeah, we patched support for your audio chip in PulseAudio. It's in the newest release. No, Ubuntu doesn't have that release yet. What are you asking us for, go complain to Ubuntu!"

There's many decentralized stakeholders in what ultimately makes up a Linux system. That's both a blessing and a curse. For usability, I'd argue it's mostly a curse.



Well, I manipulated memory with PEEK and POKE on my C64. :p
Click to expand...

Yeah agree with all those points too. I can't say i've got extensive use of a GUI Linux as i've never really had to use one, just had the odd dabble. So I don't know what long term maintenance is like - my experience is mostly with command line Unix like Centos for managing headless servers.

But yeah, even so, look how much harder we had it compared to kids these days! 😂
 
dannys1 said:
Yeah agree with all those points too. I can't say i've got extensive use of a GUI Linux as i've never really had to use one, just had the odd dabble. So I don't know what long term maintenance is like - my experience is mostly with command line Unix like Centos for managing headless servers.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I've been doing Linux stuff on servers since the late 90s, and we also recently rolled out Raspberry Pi-derived industry IoT devices. I'm not averse to using Linux; I just don't think it's quite there on the desktop.

dannys1 said:
But yeah, even so, look how much harder we had it compared to kids these days! 😂
Click to expand...

65ox6q.jpg
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: saulinpa, dannys1, gank41 and 1 other person
ChrisA said:
Because almost nothing runs on my mac from 2010 or before, not even a modern web browser.

My plan is to put Linux on it. Modern Linux runs fine on 12 year old Macs. But Most people lack the computer skills to do this. Chrome OS is a more automated and easier to use version of Linux and it can run the newest version of Goole Docs and Chrome

Actually, I bet Windows 10 would run on the 12 year old Mac.
Click to expand...
Windows 10 runs quite well on the comparably old Dell laptop I’m using for WFH. Granted, it was a little slow, especially if I needed to reboot, then the hard drive failed. Replacing it with an SSD was something I should have done much earlier, considering how much it improved boot and restart speeds. If you haven’t yet, I’d definitely research doing an SSD upgrade for your model.
 
Apple— a multi trillion dollar company that markets itself as being all for environmentalism and social justice— refuses to provide basic security updates for OS versions that are 4 or more years old. That is ridiculous. I am on Mojave on my 2012 Mac mini, and I know that Apple has left me out in the cold as of this past fall. I will not receive any more security updates. How is this fair to people who don’t make a lot of money and can’t afford to upgrade frequently (social justice)? How is this good for the environment to make working devices unusable due to a security vulnerability? I’m not asking for Apple to shoehorn the latest OS releases into old machines, but there’s nothing stopping them from providing basic security updates to old OS versions. I get safety recall notifications from Ford for a vehicle that is over 15 years old, and Ford does the fix free of charge. Imagine if Ford didn’t do such recalls for models that were 10+ years old. Why do we excuse and accept lower expectations for software/tech companies?
 
audiophilosophy said:
Apple— a multi trillion dollar company that markets itself as being all for environmentalism and social justice— refuses to provide basic security updates for OS versions that are 4 or more years old. That is ridiculous. I am on Mojave on my 2012 Mac mini, and I know that Apple has left me out in the cold as of this past fall. I will not receive any more security updates. How is this fair to people who don’t make a lot of money and can’t afford to upgrade frequently (social justice)? How is this good for the environment to make working devices unusable due to a security vulnerability? I’m not asking for Apple to shoehorn the latest OS releases into old machines, but there’s nothing stopping them from providing basic security updates to old OS versions. I get safety recall notifications from Ford for a vehicle that is over 15 years old, and Ford does the fix free of charge. Imagine if Ford didn’t do such recalls for models that were 10+ years old. Why do we excuse and accept lower expectations for software/tech companies?
Click to expand...

Implied Warranty of Merchantability is your debate; I totally get it.

However, your $500 10-year-old Mac mini's security updates* and $25,000 Ford vehicle's legalized recall notices are oranges and every other obscure, dead, banana variety apart. Simple as that. Nothing to do with social justices.

Without warranty - if your Mac mini's HD or your Ford's engine blew apart after a decade, you're on the line either way. The fact that either of them are still trucking after a decade should be a win for the consumer.

Conversely, if you expect your home computer or personal vehicle to have the same useful lifespans, you're off your rocker. Consider the BCR ratio...

*See post above mine for a wonderful summary.
 
audiophilosophy said:
Apple— a multi trillion dollar company that markets itself as being all for environmentalism and social justice— refuses to provide basic security updates for OS versions that are 4 or more years old. That is ridiculous. I am on Mojave on my 2012 Mac mini, and I know that Apple has left me out in the cold as of this past fall. I will not receive any more security updates. How is this fair to people who don’t make a lot of money and can’t afford to upgrade frequently (social justice)? How is this good for the environment to make working devices unusable due to a security vulnerability? I’m not asking for Apple to shoehorn the latest OS releases into old machines, but there’s nothing stopping them from providing basic security updates to old OS versions. I get safety recall notifications from Ford for a vehicle that is over 15 years old, and Ford does the fix free of charge. Imagine if Ford didn’t do such recalls for models that were 10+ years old. Why do we excuse and accept lower expectations for software/tech companies?
Click to expand...

That is a 10 years old machine come on, just install Linux or this Google OS Flex
 
djgamble said:
Partly agree. However, it gets to a stage where you can't use the internet because no modern browsers work (and if they do, there's serious security/rendering issues).

I use a 2008 Mac Pro with a Vega 64 and have installed Monterey (using OpenCore). This OS supports my semi-modern GPU and all the features I want.

But yeah... I wouldn't go OpenCore'ing old Macs that doesn't support Metal in order to install Monterey. That's just silly.

Chrome? Meh. Guessing it'll give you a modern web browser, a word processing app and some Android-style games? I'll stick with Monterey on my 2008 Mac Pro thanks ;)
Click to expand...
The point is obviously lost on you.

I have a 2012 MBP that's a great paper weight and nothing more. While I personally wouldn't want a chromebook as it doesn't serve my needs, lots of people have kids, elderly parents that can barely turn things on, etc. or financially constrained families that can't afford computers for their kids learning needs.

This is recycling at its finest. Chrome OS is a super light OS that isn't eating all the system resources to run. Now the Chrome browser is another story....
 
  • Like
Reactions: gank41
Don't let Google fool you. Any one with older PC can use a plethora of FREE Linux versions that work smooth on mac intel computers. Checkout:-

Mint Mate, Xubuntu, Peppermint, Zorin Lite

If you are confused you can't go wrong really, any would work well. Just pick which one you like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kc9hzn
Minxy said:
A good move from Google that could undermine the Windows monopoly on PC OSs. I'm surprised it hasn't gone the whole hog to do a fully blown Chrome OS because so many schools, colleges and public work places pay big money for Windows and if there could be a cheaper option then it will help reduce the cost of public spending and perhaps improve education and the public sector.
Click to expand...

MacAddict1978 said:
The point is obviously lost on you.

I have a 2012 MBP that's a great paper weight and nothing more. While I personally wouldn't want a chromebook as it doesn't serve my needs, lots of people have kids, elderly parents that can barely turn things on, etc. or financially constrained families that can't afford computers for their kids learning needs.

This is recycling at its finest. Chrome OS is a super light OS that isn't eating all the system resources to run. Now the Chrome browser is another story....
Click to expand...

guys, Linux is literally free if you care about your privacy see my post above
 
  • Like
Reactions: tolejo
Many in here keep on going on about Linux. What these people fail to understand is that Linux is not an easy OS to install or use for the computer illiterate. Also, if Linux is the better OS to use on old macs and PC's then why hasn't a company come forward to do just that? Millions of old mac and pc's get thrown out because Microsoft and Apple no longer support the OS that ran on them and they end up on the scrap heap because it is not in the companies interest to keep old computers running, they want you to purchase the latest and best.

Nearly everything in todays society needs to use the internet, sending emails, online banking, watching movies and sport via web streaming services, ordering products and food. Finding information about jobs, education and they all have one thing in common, they need a working and usable web browser but the problem is many old computers are not able to use the web because the software is too old and does not support many of the features of todays web browsers. If Google is able to do this with Chrome then it is good for the masses who are unable to afford the latest computers. As others have already point out, it would benefit those who do not need powerful computer,s just a basic computer that allows them to connect to the internet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gank41
LV426 said:
Why? Everybody has heard of Google. Nobody has heard of Gentoo Linux Distribution.
Click to expand...
Still doesn't tmake much of a difference. You made this sound like this was new, different and embarrassing to Apple.

It's none of those things.
 
TiggrToo said:
Still doesn't tmake much of a difference. You made this sound like this was new, different and embarrassing to Apple.

It's none of those things.
Click to expand...
That's a healthy imagination you have there. One of the largest companies in the world has announced that it will support old Macs. That's new and - I would suggest - embarrassing. If not, it should be.

I also suppose that Google's particular installation is new and - being aimed at consumers - a trivial install.
 
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