KALLO

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Nov 5, 2013
1
0
Hello everyone. Haven't written here before, but I had to get this matter off of my chest. Earlier today I read an interesting article at Tom's Hardware about Apple's possible abandonment of users using pre-Mavericks OSX versions.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/apple-mavericks-security-update,news-17819.html Hope I got it right... :confused:

As a longtime Mac user this sounds really questionable if it's true. I thankfully had no compatibility issues with Mavericks or/and any of my equipment, but if it would have been so...

Is this really the way of the new Apple? I surely hope not. I shudder at the thought. I have several Macs (and iOS devices) at my disposal and in regular use, and for the first time I'm actually doubting about getting the new MBP. What if there comes a day when I can't upgrade to the latest version of OSX because of some job-related software or equipment? What then?

Sorry if my English seems a bit off to some of you, but it's not my native language. Thanks fellas. Any confirming opinions/actual knowledge on the matter at hand? This seems a bit rude to say the least even though it's a free upgrade...
 

ivnj

macrumors 65816
Dec 8, 2006
1,362
81
Well you are not going to be using the same mavericks 50 years from now. So things have to keep moving forward.
 

SakuraSuki

macrumors 6502
Jul 18, 2013
469
0
Well you are not going to be using the same mavericks 50 years from now. So things have to keep moving forward.

But leaving old OS unsupported is not really right thing to do. There are lots of people still using older Macs, leaving them behind does not show Apple cares about them.

Same argument can be made by Microsoft, but Microsoft still proving updates to Windows Vista and Windows 7.

Maybe there aren't as many mac users as Windows users, so leaving people behind does not have as huge impact as Microsoft abandoning Windows 7.
 

talmy

macrumors 601
Oct 26, 2009
4,721
277
Oregon
Nothing new here. Apple seems to have always have limited to no support for systems and their software older than 3 years (the limit of AppleCare, coincidentally). Apple is fast to drop old technologies and applications that don't fit with their vision of the future. I'm sure Microsoft would like to do the same but their major business customer base forces them to keep old OSes supported.
 

Sital

macrumors 68000
May 31, 2012
1,940
554
New England
All companies do this as newer versions of their products are released. Some are more aggressive than others, but Apple is not in some special category.

Dogs are loyal....multibillion dollar companies, not so much.
 

SakuraSuki

macrumors 6502
Jul 18, 2013
469
0
Nothing new here. Apple seems to have always have limited to no support for systems and their software older than 3 years (the limit of AppleCare, coincidentally). Apple is fast to drop old technologies and applications that don't fit with their vision of the future. I'm sure Microsoft would like to do the same but their major business customer base forces them to keep old OSes supported.

But Mountain Lion is only about a year old... dropping a year old OS is other way to force user upgrade and irresponsible...
 

petvas

macrumors 601
Jul 20, 2006
4,975
1,130
Munich, Germany
I don't understand how Apple isn't supporting Mountain Lion. Of course the focus goes on Mavericks and that applies to developers too.
My father has a 2006 iMac and his system can only run Lion. He has no issues whatsoever with it, despite the fact that Lion doesn't support photostreams and other iCloud features.
Having to support many older versions of an OS is a problem for every company and it makes sense to move on...
The whole OS landscape has changed and now we are getting a new OS version every year. Mavericks runs on 6 years old hardware and is a free upgrade. I see no reason not to upgrade, unless important apps that you use aren't compatible to Mavericks.
 

SarcasticJoe

macrumors 6502a
Nov 5, 2013
607
221
Finland
I don't see anything that different from what they've previously done...

No company has the resources to keep supporting every old version of their software forever and Apple has simply had the habit of killing support for their old OS's early. Microsoft has had XP hanging by a thread for years (probably due to a lot of corporate customers still using it after Vista jumbled around all of the API's and killed support for a metric ton of hardware and software) and terminated security updates for anything older. Not even Long Term Service, or LTS, versions of Linux distributions last forever (in the case of Ubuntu 3 years for personal use and 5 years for server use versions).

In my opinion this is simply an inevitable result of living in a world where software is never perfect and always evolving. Couple this with hardware being stale in the the sense that it doesn't really change after leaving the factory floor, we have a type of built in "planned obsolescence" caused by it.

I personally hope that as time goes on, Apple keeps new versions of OSX free, doesn't kill support for any more hardware (they genuinely don't have any reason to do this any more) and doesn't mess with the more basic non-volatile API's (meaning that if developers know what they're doing, their programs will work across versions with zero modifications).
 

kappaknight

macrumors 68000
Mar 5, 2009
1,585
83
Atlanta, GA
The title of this thread is misleading... "Loyal" can be defined a number of ways. However, someone who bought something 6 years ago and nothing new is hardly "loyal" to Apple.

You may be loyal to your machine, similar to someone who is loyal to their classic car; but that's not the same as being a good customer for the brand.
 

doug in albq

Suspended
Oct 12, 2007
1,449
244
I am not sure I completely believe the article in the first post. Seems to be a lot of assuming occurring in that article.
 

drew627

macrumors regular
Jun 26, 2013
190
3
Things that worked on Mountain Lion will most likely work on Mavericks without a hitch. In a way Mavericks is just Mountain Lion 10.8.6. I wouldn't have been surprised and would completely understand if they had decided to drop support for 10.8.5 as soon as Mavericks launched. It's free and supports the same hardware. Why wouldn't people upgrade?...
 

Irishman

macrumors 68030
Nov 2, 2006
2,762
622
Hello everyone. Haven't written here before, but I had to get this matter off of my chest. Earlier today I read an interesting article at Tom's Hardware about Apple's possible abandonment of users using pre-Mavericks OSX versions.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/apple-mavericks-security-update,news-17819.html Hope I got it right... :confused:

As a longtime Mac user this sounds really questionable if it's true. I thankfully had no compatibility issues with Mavericks or/and any of my equipment, but if it would have been so...

Is this really the way of the new Apple? I surely hope not. I shudder at the thought. I have several Macs (and iOS devices) at my disposal and in regular use, and for the first time I'm actually doubting about getting the new MBP. What if there comes a day when I can't upgrade to the latest version of OSX because of some job-related software or equipment? What then?

Sorry if my English seems a bit off to some of you, but it's not my native language. Thanks fellas. Any confirming opinions/actual knowledge on the matter at hand? This seems a bit rude to say the least even though it's a free upgrade...

It seems like the article's author is hung up on terminology. So, just because Apple didn't label Mavericks 10.8.10 or some such continuance of that numbering scheme, that means it's NOT a patch that fixes bugs for Mountain Lion Macs? No. It doesn't mean that.

10.9 IS the patch for 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8, that's why Apple made it compatible with machines back to 2007, and made it free. There is NO technical hurdle to upgrading.
 
Last edited:

Sky Blue

Guest
Jan 8, 2005
6,856
10
10.9 IS the patch for 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8, that's why Apple made it compatible with machines back to 2007, and made it free. There is NO technical hurdle to upgrading.

If you have a Mac that's running 10.6 or 10.7, but can't run 10.8/10.9.
 

dumastudetto

macrumors 68040
Aug 28, 2013
3,641
4,587
If you have a Mac that's running 10.6 or 10.7, but can't run 10.8/10.9.

In that case it's time to buy a new Mac and support the work of the company we all love. Nobody should expect Apple to support Macs older than 18 months with new OS upgrades, and they are still easily doing better than 18 months atm.
 

Irishman

macrumors 68030
Nov 2, 2006
2,762
622
If you have a Mac that's running 10.6 or 10.7, but can't run 10.8/10.9.

Were there security fixes that 10.6 or 10.7 haven't gotten in recent years??

Is there any reason Apple won't offer vital updates to these versions of OSX?
 

TheBacklash

Suspended
Oct 23, 2013
387
147
I am not sure I completely believe the article in the first post. Seems to be a lot of assuming occurring in that article.

Exactly.

Mountain Lion, a year old OS.. tossed aside? Users are abandoned?

Now watch, Apple will release patches tomorrow to fix something on 10.6-10.8 and Tom's Hardware will claim "Victory" by forcing Apple to support stuff other than Mavericks.
 

Luap

macrumors 65816
Jul 5, 2004
1,215
565
Apple OS's down to OS 10.6 still get security updates currently. Not so for 10.5 and older. Are those older OS users getting the living daylights hacked out of them? Apparently not.
I don't see how that is going to change now, or any time soon.

Of my concerns with OS X these days, security isn't even nearly one of them.
 

talmy

macrumors 601
Oct 26, 2009
4,721
277
Oregon
But Mountain Lion is only about a year old... dropping a year old OS is other way to force user upgrade and irresponsible...

All systems that run Mountain Lion will also run Mavericks. It's free. There is virtually no reason not to upgrade. Just consider it to be a "point release."

Microsoft does the same thing with their point releases -- you need to move to the latest to get full protection (and often to run the latest software).

In any case, Apple has been known to change their corporate minds. They used to only support the current OS for Mac App Store downloads. Now they will download older versions if you don't have the current OS.
 

bigpoppamac31

macrumors 68020
Aug 16, 2007
2,304
354
Canada
I think Apple releasing a "new" OS every year is a bit much. Every two years maybe would be better. Each time they release a "major" release they claim to have "hundreds" of new features. Many of those features aren't really that major. I think if they spaced it out more like every two years or so it gives them time to really make it rock solid and more likely have much less issues for those who upgrade right away. I haven't upgraded to Mavericks and do not plan to until a least a few updates have been issued. Which is what I do now for each "major" release.
 

Sky Blue

Guest
Jan 8, 2005
6,856
10
Apple OS's down to OS 10.6 still get security updates currently.

Do they? Before Mavericks was released, Apple released security updates for 10.6 - 10.8. Since then, they haven't released updates for anything pre-10.9, despite detailing many security flaws pre-10.9
 

vistadude

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2010
1,423
1
Lol, the last major update for OS X (snow leopard, lion, mountain lion) was Sept 16. That's less than 2 months ago! Apple hardly updates their OS, and when they do once or twice a year, it's a huge security update. They will continue to provide bug fixes and security updates for mountain lion. For those on snow leopard and lion, your security update is to download mavericks for free. You can certainly stay with your older OS for another year or two, but eventually you either upgrade the OS or upgrade your antivirus software. Mac OS X is pretty secure, most of these vulnerabilities requires you to click something or fall for some trick.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.