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

GimmeSlack12

macrumors 603
Apr 29, 2005
5,403
12
San Francisco
Timepass said:
Apple seems to have a history of dropping support for there older stuff.
I can't help but ask, where do you get that idea from? How long have you used Macs anyway? I've never experienced this and I've been using a Mac for 20 years now. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here guys, Apple will take care of us [PPC users] into the next decade easily.

I really find this claim to be quite inaccurate, as Apple has support on its website dating back to System 7.
 

Timepass

macrumors 65816
Jan 4, 2005
1,051
1
GimmeSlack12 said:
I can't help but ask, where do you get that idea from? How long have you used Macs anyway? I've never experienced this and I've been using a Mac for 20 years now. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here guys, Apple will take care of us [PPC users] into the next decade easily.

I really find this claim to be quite inaccurate, as Apple has support on its website dating back to System 7.


Really. I not talking about keep old update around on a web site. I am more talking about updating the OS it self. Once 10.4 came out the only updates add to 10.3 where security updates not bug fixes or things like that (basicly major support dropped). New apps by apple, not dont support the older OS. Like I find it hard to believe that iChat could work on 10.1 and why 10.2 had to pay for it. Then adding more stuff they just dont support there OS as very long. There OS get major support for 1.5 years. Once major support is dropped delevpers stop programing for it. Apple drops it so quickly delevpers stop supporting it when the new on comes up.

Compare this to windows world where it was just in the past year windows 2000 lost major support so new programs where no long support by it. 98 lasted until summer 2003 (5 years).

Apple has a history of dropping major support for there older OS. What you listed is just support. I stated MAJOR support. There is a difference in the meaning.
 

SC68Cal

macrumors 68000
Feb 23, 2006
1,642
0
I think that there is a slight difference between support for an OS that has a regular update schedule versus an entire architecture change. I say probably two or three years down the line, PowerPC support will start undergoing consideration for support. I doubt that they'll drop PowerPC support for a decent amount of time.

Frankly, we might end up with a similar situation between the "Classic" environment and the Carbon API, in regards to PowerPC, where it'll be tooth and nail to get people to move onward.
 

alw4416

macrumors member
Jul 10, 2006
78
0
Kansas City
how do they do it

just wondering...how do they get away with more or less forcing people to buy new machines if they want to run the latest os..?? isnt that kinda like stealing...stupid question im sure. i will apologize in advance.
 

ChrisA

macrumors G5
Jan 5, 2006
12,537
1,644
Redondo Beach, California
ccroo said:
Does anyone know when Apple will shut down Power PC Support the way they shut down Classic support?

R

Apple is still selling PPC machine and three ywear apple care support for them. So I'd say they will support PPC for at least five years.
I'll bet you will be able to find 3rd party hardware support for many, many years just as there are today some small outfits who will sell you parts for M68K powered macs. When will OSX drop support for PPC? maybe in 5 years.

But then Linux will run on your old Mac and it will suport then current software.

At some point you look at the cost of the electric power and decide it is now worth running the machine.
 

GimmeSlack12

macrumors 603
Apr 29, 2005
5,403
12
San Francisco
Timepass said:
There OS get major support for 1.5 years. Once major support is dropped delevpers stop programing for it. Apple drops it so quickly delevpers stop supporting it when the new on comes up.
Ok, fair enough that supporting System 7 from 1991 isn't exactly what you were talking about.

Well the only thing I can say about the updates of OS X are particular from the transition to OS X. So from that perspective, I guess that Apple updates a lot, but they're technology has moved so quickly from 10.1 to 10.4 that supporting all versions of OS X doesn't even make sense. Considering that most people these days are on 10.3 or 10.4, allows for fairly consistent updates, and compatibility, for nearly all Mac programs and comptuers.

I still think Apple does a decent job of giving support for many years after a system (or sometimes an OS) is updated. Back to the topic at hand though, I do believe it won't be until 2010 that PPC computers begin to really dwindle on the Support from Apple.
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
I am sure I am going to get berated by some for asking this, but am I foolish for thinking about picking up a G4 iBook? I like the Macbook but with some of the possible Rev. A issues, coupled with the fact that Office isn't UB yet, I am considering holding off. I have no need or desire to run XP, and while I know many of these Rev. A issues are pretty rare, the later revisions of the G4 iBook are a bit more stable. Many of the G4's are going for 650-800 on EBay and from time to time Apple has G4 refurbs on the refurb site.
I know this is a pretty wordy post, but I would like to hear everyone's thought on this. Thanks! :)
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
Care to expand upon your thoughts. While I am not trying to be rude, I am wanting some actual reasons, not just the blind belief that newer always equates better. I feel I see this a lot on here, sadly I am not as well off as many on these boards, and $1,000-$1,500 is a lot of money for a graduate student. I am just seeing if it is a waste of money to drop $650.00 or so on a G4 iBook.
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
Just to make clear my intended uses for my new computer:
Office
iTunes
iCal
iChat
Firefox
iPhoto
Mostly I use my computer for notetaking in class, Office for papers, projects and reports.
I love iTunes and use it daily. I use AIM (iChat) and Yahoo Messager quite often. I use iCal and iPhoto several times a week. I also am on the internet many times a day.
I just feel spending $1,000 or $1,500 on a computer that doesn't have all the bugs (possibly) worked out concerns me. If this was a 12 or 18 months down the road I would jump on a new Macbook today. I will be done with my Master's in May 2008, after that I would be able to get a new system. I need something to hold me over until then as my iBook G3 500 is getting a bit aged for my tastes.
 

OldSkoolNJ

macrumors 6502
Jul 10, 2006
381
0
If where you can get said iBook from gives you the right price there is no reason why its not a good idea to get it. WHat you described is use that the iBook would more than be able to handle. I still have a 12 in iBook that I am doing the same things on day in and day out. I work for Apple in the field and have to send all kindsa of reports and spread sheets and such and of course listen to music and mess with photos and watch DVDs on many flights back and forth from Cupertino to NJ. So if your on a budget and thats the use you have intended then go for it. Just remember Apples have one of the best resell values out there and you can always sell it in a year or two and be close in what you need to buy a new model.

Kevin
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
Thanks Kevin for the advice. How much do you feel is too much for a G4 iBook? I have seen them range from $600 (800-933 MHz), with $650-700 for the 1.0-1.2 GHz machines, to $800 plus (1.33 GHz). My G3 is still a great machine, it is just beginning to show its age. I believe 10.5 will support the G4's (might be the last one to support them) but I only see using my new system for 2-3 years. Thanks for the input and any other thoughts would be greatly welcomed. :)
 

RacerX

macrumors 65832
Aug 2, 2004
1,504
4
It was about 2 years and 4 months between the last shipped 68k system and the release of Mac OS 8.5 (first version to not run on 68k Macs), and exactly 3 years between the last professional 68k system (Quadra 950*) and the release of 8.5. It was 3 years between the last pre-G3 Macs and the release of Mac OS X v10.0 (first release not to support 601/603/604 based Macs). It was 4 years and 9 months between the last old world G3s and the first version of Mac OS X to not support them (Mac OS X v10.3).

Given that, I'd guess that from the date that Apple discontinues the PowerMac line that they will continue to make operating systems for them for another 3-4 years.



Timepass said:
Really. I not talking about keep old update around on a web site. I am more talking about updating the OS it self. Once 10.4 came out the only updates add to 10.3 where security updates not bug fixes or things like that (basicly major support dropped). New apps by apple, not dont support the older OS. Like I find it hard to believe that iChat could work on 10.1 and why 10.2 had to pay for it. Then adding more stuff they just dont support there OS as very long. There OS get major support for 1.5 years. Once major support is dropped delevpers stop programing for it. Apple drops it so quickly delevpers stop supporting it when the new on comes up.
Developers don't drop support for older operating systems just because Apple releases a new one... I still use Mac OS X v10.2 as my main OS, which I wouldn't be able to do if developers stopped making apps for it in Oct of 2003.

What happens is that Apple adds features into each new version of Mac OS X that the previous version didn't have, and when developers start writing to take advantage of those features those apps won't work on systems released before those features existed.

There is nothing sinister about that, it is just the way things work.

Compare this to windows world where it was just in the past year windows 2000 lost major support so new programs where no long support by it. 98 lasted until summer 2003 (5 years).
The last update to Windows 2000 was Service Pack 4 in June of 2003. So unless you've been a sleep for two years, I think you are mistaken.

And Microsoft has never released any service packs for Windows 98 or ME. What Microsoft has to do (constantly) is fix holes they ship with their operating systems. Consequently, it seems like Microsoft is taking care of their customer longer, when in fact they are fixing issues that should never have been there to begin with.

Apple has a history of dropping major support for there older OS. What you listed is just support. I stated MAJOR support. There is a difference in the meaning.
Fortunately, unlike the Windows world, this isn't much of a problem.

But maybe you can enlighten us with your extensive knowledge of Apple history and point out examples where this lack of MAJOR support has been an issue. Though Apple would most likely like people to start using newer stuff, the lack of support for 7.x.x, 8.x.x, 9.x.x and early versions of 10.x.x has not set off alarms warning people to abandon their older systems.

By comparison, users of Windows 98/ME have been told that they are no longer safe now that Microsoft has stopped with the security updates and should move on to something else. I have 4 systems running Mac OS 8.6 (which came out about the same time as Windows 98SE) and there are no issues that I know of with my continued use of them.

Apple doesn't need to provide years of support for their products because, frankly, they aren't flawed by design (like those by Microsoft).




* It should be noted that the Quadra 950 stayed in production more than a year longer than any other Quadra because Apple continued to use this system with A/UX well into late 1995.
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
Interesting and enlighting history lesson Racer. My feeling is that Power PC will be supported until at least the end of 2009, since I believe it will be at the earliest fall before Apple stops selling the G5 towers, and they would need to support the AppleCare customers for the next 3 years at the least.

One thing to remember is that just because a system isn't supported anymore doesn't mean it is worthless. There are still many users out there using OS 9 for everything, or almost all of their needs. Just b/c Apple doesn't release anymore updates doesn't mean their computers stop working. They can still send e-mails, surf the web, listen to iTunes, hook up a printer/MP3 player/digital camera just like somebody down the street with a brand new MBP or MB. While it may not be as fast, for the average user a 3-5 year old Mac will still suit them just fine. This is one of the many benefits some tout for using a Mac. I tend to agree, with used machines still commanding a good price in the market.

Technology companies have made their fortunes on convincing the public they must have the newest gadget or system. IMO, for most average tasks most systems today are overkill, unless you are big into streaming video and music on the web, gaming or multimedia work. But getting back to the OP's question, I wouldn't lose any sleep over Apple pulling support before 2009. While we may see pressure from Apple to switch to an Intel system in the next few years, Apple would be making a huge business mistake screwing over the millions that have a PPC system. Just my .02!
 

erikamsterdam

macrumors regular
Apr 21, 2006
183
0
amsterdam
Freeware

The reason for me to wait with a new Mac until Intel came along was Freeware.
I think in a couple of years things like VLC and Cyberduck etc. are not going to be compiled for PPC anymore in the new versions. Cos it is extra work compiling for PPC and Freeware developers do not have extra time. And no commercial incentive.
And honestly life without Freeware on a Mac would be hell for me. I like the free fullscreen option in VLC :D
 

Timepass

macrumors 65816
Jan 4, 2005
1,051
1
RacerX said:
And Microsoft has never released any service packs for Windows 98 or ME. What Microsoft has to do (constantly) is fix holes they ship with their operating systems. Consequently, it seems like Microsoft is taking care of their customer longer, when in fact they are fixing issues that should never have been there to begin with.


By comparison, users of Windows 98/ME have been told that they are no longer safe now that Microsoft has stopped with the security updates and should move on to something else. I have 4 systems running Mac OS 8.6 (which came out about the same time as Windows 98SE) and there are no issues that I know of with my continued use of them.
.[/i][/size]

Major suport does not = service packs. Service packs are mostly just a collectoin updates realses in an easier formate.

You can look up how M$ does there set up for major minor and paid support. It was I beleive last summer than 2000 had major support dropped
2003 support for 98 was drop all support by 2005
 

RacerX

macrumors 65832
Aug 2, 2004
1,504
4
Timepass said:
Major suport does not = service packs. Service packs are mostly just a collectoin updates realses in an easier formate.
Well you said:
"Really. I not talking about keep old update around on a web site. I am more talking about updating the OS it self. Once 10.4 came out the only updates add to 10.3 where security updates not bug fixes or things like that (basicly major support dropped)."
What Microsoft has done with Windows 2000 since the last service pack is basically the same as what Apple has done with 10.3 since the release of 10.3.9. The last updating of the OS in Windows 2000 was done in Service Pack 4, and by what you said that means that Microsoft dropped ("basicaly") major support back in 2003.

In the Windows NT line, service packs represent updating the OS itself. There are applications which require a minimum service pack to run. By contrast, Windows 98/ME has had no updating to the OS itself (that would effect how the OS functions and how applications run on them).

You can look up how M$ does there set up for major minor and paid support.
We really should wait for a coherent definition of what you are saying before we start attempting to figure out what Microsoft's terms mean. Less we forget, Microsoft is known for labeling things to appear as if they are really something that they are not... like Windows Genuine Advantage.

Besides, you are coming to a Mac forum attempting to say something about Apple and how it does things when you really have no experience to base anything you're saying on. Until you have worked extensively within both the Mac and Windows communities, and can figure out what you are actually wanting to say, you really don't have a leg to stand on talking about Apple's "history of dropping support for there older stuff"... or making any attempt at comparing it to what Microsoft does.
 

SC68Cal

macrumors 68000
Feb 23, 2006
1,642
0
I really just don't believe that buying a PowerPC iBook is a good idea, when the MacBook is so much faster and has many more features that the iBook never had. (Front Row, remote, bluetooth etc...)
 

atszyman

macrumors 68020
Sep 16, 2003
2,437
16
The Dallas 'burbs
I would expect the OS to support PPC until the next Major revision. The kind where the whole kernel structure is re-done. Why alienate a large install base? I expect that they will keep the OS running on whatever PPC chips are available at any given time in their labs.

If Freescale were to announce in 5 years that they had a 5 GHz 6 core, PPC with a 3 GHz FSB that blew everything out of the water, and production capacity to keep up with demand Apple would jump back. I don't think they will ever stop the dual architecture system they've been running since 10.0 just as a method of leveraging whatever the best technology is.

I would be surprised if they dropped PPC from the OS within the next decade.
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
SC68Cal said:
I really just don't believe that buying a PowerPC iBook is a good idea, when the MacBook is so much faster and has many more features that the iBook never had. (Front Row, remote, bluetooth etc...)

Thank you for that insight SC, I wasn't trying to be rude when I replyed to your first post. I am just debating if an extra 200-400 is worth saving a few seconds on loading a webpage or opening a program. I love the remote, but since the computer will always be on the move, I am not sure how often it would be used. I don't own any bluetooth devices. But on the other hand, The new MB's are pretty sweet. Hmmmm. decisions, decisions. Sorry, I might move this to a new thread, as this is a bit off topic.
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
atszyman said:
I would expect the OS to support PPC until the next Major revision. The kind where the whole kernel structure is re-done. Why alienate a large install base? I expect that they will keep the OS running on whatever PPC chips are available at any given time in their labs...

I would be surprised if they dropped PPC from the OS within the next decade.

So you think they won't drop PPC support until OS XI? Are you thinking the early 2010's (2010-2013) before they would drop support, that seems quite long, esp. given the history of Apple. Does anybody know how many new releases Apple is planning to release in the OS X line?
 

chris200x9

macrumors 6502a
Jun 3, 2006
906
0
personally

personally.....

I think they want stop supporting PPC I think around 2010 they will switch back from intel because powerPC's will be better than intel chips..... I'm going to try to find the link and edit it in here when I find it but...I read an article about cardbon nanotube technology being reaserched by PPC makers and is giving good results

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=16931&ch=nanotech

prolly a stupid post just my opinion
 

MNSUGrad07

macrumors member
Feb 18, 2006
31
0
Mankato, MN
chris200x9 said:
personally.....

I think they want stop supporting PPC I think around 2010 they will switch back from intel because powerPC's will be better than intel chips.....

Hmmm... interesting, not sure it would happen, with Apple saying they can run Windows on their commericals, it seems to me they are trying to market themselves to the PC crowd. Plus Apple I am sure has spent a lot of time and money in this switch and I am not sure they would switch back in 4-6 years. But who knows, this is only my opinion and we all know what they say about opinions, haha! :D
 

atszyman

macrumors 68020
Sep 16, 2003
2,437
16
The Dallas 'burbs
MNSUGrad07 said:
So you think they won't drop PPC support until OS XI? Are you thinking the early 2010's (2010-2013) before they would drop support, that seems quite long, esp. given the history of Apple. Does anybody know how many new releases Apple is planning to release in the OS X line?

The basic OS kernel is already fairly finalized and able to be compiled for both Intel and PPC. Why would you eliminate an entrenched source of revenue as long as you are using that kernel. It makes no sense to eliminate customers unless there is a major kernel revision that would make PPC extremely difficult to compile for. Given that they did parallel development on Intel for the entire life of OS X I'm guessing that they will continue parallel development beyond when they stop releasing PPC OSes. Since the current kernel has been proven they will probably keep releasing PPC OS as long as they use it. With a major kernel shift they will probably have an in-house PPC version but due to testing constraints will not make it publicly available unless they decide to switch back to PPC.
 

dextertangocci

macrumors 68000
Apr 2, 2006
1,766
1
Maybe a bit off topic, but :mad: MS:mad: dropped support for :mad: windoze:mad: 98 yesterday, even though their are still an estimated 70 million people still using the piece of s**t OS:rolleyes:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.