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

Is Apple Trying to Force Us to Upgrade?

E

ericd05

macrumors newbie
Original poster
I am trying to find Leopard For my Powerbook.... Apple no Longer Carry's IT online.. You have to call and see if they have any...

Does anyone know any safe retailers to get it from?

This just irks my Chain that you cannot Get older Software for Mac.. Same thing With Micro$*it...

Why do Computer Manufactures do this?:apple:
 
Why don't you just call Apple?

I called last week, and they've sent me Leopard for an iBook G4. They only charge $16 for the disc (but they waived the charge for me for some reason).
 
Schtumple said:
How did you manage to score it for $16?? I can't believe they willingly gave you a copy of Leopard for $16 when it's for a machine it didn't come with in the first place...
Click to expand...

I know. I was surprised as well. I didn't score it for $16 though...... they're sending it to me for no charge.

I called them because I'm giving my MB to my mother when she visits in January (I just bought a MBP). She's using my old iBook G4 that I gave to her when I got the MB. However, she can't find the system discs, and I want to wipe the iBook, reinstall the OS and sell it.

I called Apple, and told the rep that I needed new system discs for the iBook (and told him the above), and that I thought that the iBook came with Tiger. He looked it up, and told me that it actually came with Panther. However, he suggested that the iBook would have a higher resale value if I installed Leopard on it. I agreed. He confirmed my address and placed the order. I asked him how much it'll be, and he said "no charge".
 
Gregg2 said:
Well, to make money, of course. They learned it from the auto manufacturers. It's called planned obsolescence.
Click to expand...

Actually, for computers, no this isn't true. The technology is changing, and not in minor ways, in significant ways. Most people continue to upgrade, but not all. But for a company to continue to support the old hardware / software costs a lot of money, more then they are making from it. Thus at some point they have to cut off the old equipment. If you have a processor that just can't perform the operations either you have to code more complex code to detect these processors and run equivalent code to make it run, or have separate builds. Separate builds cost a fortune, and equivalent code even if not executed still has to run through the processor detect and thus slows down even more and not just on the old processor but slows down the new processors as well (just not as much).

In the case of Apple, they changed processors completely! It would be more like the auto industry switching, in one season, from gasoline to all electric (not hybrids) and then 20 years later saying that they won't make spare parts for the old gas engines anymore.

At some point you HAVE to cut off the old, it just isn't feasible to keep supporting out dated equipment.
 
ericd05 said:
I am trying to find Leopard For my Powerbook.... Apple no Longer Carry's IT online.. You have to call and see if they have any...

Does anyone know any safe retailers to get it from?

This just irks my Chain that you cannot Get older Software for Mac.. Same thing With Micro$*it...

Why do Computer Manufactures do this?:apple:
Click to expand...

You can get older software from Microsoft, at least when you're a company. And all current professional editions --always-- come with full downgrade rights. So don't call them names just because you are misinformed.
 
CylonGlitch said:
Actually, for computers, no this isn't true. The technology is changing, and not in minor ways, in significant ways. Most people continue to upgrade, but not all. But for a company to continue to support the old hardware / software costs a lot of money, more then they are making from it. Thus at some point they have to cut off the old equipment. If you have a processor that just can't perform the operations either you have to code more complex code to detect these processors and run equivalent code to make it run, or have separate builds. Separate builds cost a fortune, and equivalent code even if not executed still has to run through the processor detect and thus slows down even more and not just on the old processor but slows down the new processors as well (just not as much).

In the case of Apple, they changed processors completely! It would be more like the auto industry switching, in one season, from gasoline to all electric (not hybrids) and then 20 years later saying that they won't make spare parts for the old gas engines anymore.

At some point you HAVE to cut off the old, it just isn't feasible to keep supporting out dated equipment.
Click to expand...

obsolescent |ˌäbsəˈlesənt|
adjective
becoming obsolete

obsolete |ˌäbsəˈlēt|
adjective
no longer produced or used; out of date

And you see a difference where? Or maybe you mean it's not planned?

I'm not sure if you think you're drawing a contrast to something in my post with your "alternate" auto industry analogy. If so, I don't see what that might be. It's just semantics, I guess.

semantics |səˈmantiks|
plural noun [usu. treated as sing. ]
the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning.
 
For computer technology it is actually more beneficial for them to stay the same and not move forward. Price of components goes down, price to consumer stays the same, profit goes way up. These things are not intentionally pushed to obsolesces, it happens because consumers demand more and more for their money and the technology of old can't keep up. Thus they get obsoleted.
 
the big problem apple is facing there is different to pc makers /windows

ther is a huge amount of fans still using old mac`s and updating them if possible to a new operating system ,but leopard was the last one that supported powerpc`s , but thats now at a end with the introduction of snow leopard the updating of old mac`s came to a end , so time will run out for old mac`s with no updates so we will be forced to upgrade
but i do not want a ordinary pc, and for me everything with intel and where you can run windows on without emulation is just a pc ,
i want a new powerpc 😛 the processors are available apple would only nee to pick them up and i guess ibm would happy sell them to apple
and the new one is FAST
the new POWER7 will have these specifications:

* 45 nm process, 567mm2
* 4.04 GHz clock speed
* max 2 chips per multi chip module
o 4, 6 or 8 cores per chip

o 32 MB on-die L3 cache, shared by all cores. The cache is implemented in eDRAM, which does not require as many transistors per cell as a standard (SRAM) so it allows for a larger cache while using the same area as SRAM.

This gives the following theoretical performance figures:

* max 517.1 GFLOPS per module
o max 258.6 GFLOPS per chip
+ max 32.3 GFLOPS per core
 
MacHamster68 said:
the big problem apple is facing there is different to pc makers /windows

ther is a huge amount of fans still using old mac`s and updating them if possible to a new operating system ,but leopard was the last one that supported powerpc`s , but thats now at a end with the introduction of snow leopard the updating of old mac`s came to a end , so time will run out for old mac`s with no updates so we will be forced to upgrade
but i do not want a ordinary pc, and for me everything with intel and where you can run windows on without emulation is just a pc ,
i want a new powerpc 😛 the processors are available apple would only nee to pick them up and i guess ibm would happy sell them to apple
and the new one is FAST it makes the intel i7 look like a dinosaur
the new POWER7 will have these specifications:

* 45 nm process, 567mm2
* 4.04 GHz clock speed
* max 2 chips per multi chip module
o 4, 6 or 8 cores per chip
+ 4 SMT threads per core
+ 12 execution units per core:
# 2 fixed-point units
# 2 load/store units
# 4 double-precision floating-point units
# 1 vector unit supporting VSX
# 1 decimal floating-point unit
# 1 branch unit
# 1 condition register unit
o 32 MB on-die L3 cache, shared by all cores. The cache is implemented in eDRAM, which does not require as many transistors per cell as a standard (SRAM) so it allows for a larger cache while using the same area as SRAM.

This gives the following theoretical performance figures:

* max 517.1 GFLOPS per module
o max 258.6 GFLOPS per chip
+ max 32.3 GFLOPS per core
Click to expand...

And how many MacPros can I buy for the price of one POWER7 machine?
 
MacHamster68 said:
i want a new powerpc 😛 the processors are available apple would only nee to pick them up and i guess ibm would happy sell them to apple
Click to expand...

Will never happen. Apple's move to Intel was all about cheaper production costs for them, by using standard off-the-shelf chips with predictable production schedules. Even though it means Macs are now pretty much just regular PCs, Apple took into account the fact that some people would roll their own (hackintoshes) and judged that overall they would still be much better off going with Intel than depending on non-industry-standard chip configs.
 
yes it wont happen i know 🙁
but apple is missing a opportunity , they could make money with snow leopard if they would make it available to run on any pc ,
you can run windows 7 which is the windows counterpart of snow leopard
even on amd processors , its all about giving people a choice , ok i know there are hacks around to run snow leo on netbooks and dell will give driver support to do so on there intel machines , dont know how that effects apples eula
but when i can get a equal pc for half the price why buy a new mac , at the moment for me the only reason is osx which for me is the better operating system anyway
ok if i would live in the us that might be different as over there new macs cost far less
basically you can in the us buy a i7 imac and a base mini for the price we in uk pay for a i7 imac alone
 
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