But at what point should that be? People can keep hardware running for years. I doubt that anyone should be expected to accommodate people like that. After all should Apple have continued Classic support even though people still use it? I think not. I think that the timeline should be at max, the last PPC Applecare plan. Apple disagrees and that is there call. Again, people should have been buying those last PPC's knowing that they should be thinking Intel.
You have to draw the line somewhere. No matter where that is, someone will disagree with that position.
And not a smart move? Time to grow up me thinks - or are you still complaining on a forum somewhere about lack of 10.6 for the 68000? Dropping PPC support eventually was inevitable. What would you suggest? That they keep supporting an obsolete platform until... when? The last G5 finally gurgles and dies?
Technology is moving on. Every new version of software that comes out has minimum requirements and if your machine simply isn't capable of running something, you don't get upset.
But on the other hand - you do get upset if your machine IS capable of running something but isn't allowed. If you run a 3D game and get low FPS, you realize your card is old and should be replaced if you want to run new things. But if the author of the game blocks you from installing it although you know your system would be capable of running it smoothly, you get pissed. Drop G5 support when it simply gets too weak to run things. If that's next year - fine by me. Just don't do it like this.
Really? Are Apple suddenly going to stop releasing 10.5 security updates or refuse telephone support or repairs for G5 owners? Where have they said this?
This topic is about SL not supporting PPC and that's what i was saying with that statement, as I already explained several times. It's hard to argue when people don't read your posts.
The answer is simple - Linux distros include the source code. You could compile it for your washing machine should you want to.
Well, Apple has the source code, why don't they compile it?
False bravado. If you were that supremely confident in the speed of your "late model Powermac G5" you wouldn't be on here whining about getting shut out of the party.
Of course he would be, it's precisely because he is confident in the speed of this machine yet isn't allowed to run SL that he's complaining.
Apple announced its plans to switch to intel 4 years ago this month and the first G5s debuted 6 years ago this month. I think its about time to stop catering to the Power PC with new operating systems and it is as good of a time as ever with an inexpensive OS upgrade that is designed to increase efficiency for a majority of its user base. Apple's successful growth didn't come until after the Intel transition. Not to mention that if someone really is holding out with a Power Mac G5 it's about time to move on to something more powerful.
I'm in no way arguing with the fact that the switch to Intel wasn't a good thing and that we should keep PPC for as long as possible, I'm saying we should keep it as long as it's capable of running stuff, that's only fair to the customers.
Here's the kicker though: If the machine still does what the user wants, then why would they need to do anything but keep using Tiger or Leopard and work with the machine until it doesn't meet their needs? A new OS coming out isn't going to make the machine any less usable. The G5s are still supported so what's the problem?
I already explained why this is a false argument a couple of posts up.
To add: The problem with Windows is that it has to support so much varying hardware and architectures. This is really not something anybody using Mac OS X wants to happen because we know it reduces the efficiency of the system and development can't move forward to take advantage of the newest technology when people complain that their 4 year old computer can't run all of the eye candy. Apple makes its money from the hardware and not the software.
Apart from a few strange experiments in the history of MS, Windows only supports one architecture - x86 (admittedly both 32 and 64-bit versions). But yeah, support for a huge amount of hardware is one of the things that makes Windows more problematic than OS X at times. However, OS X has supported PPC & Intel for the last two major versions and did it without problems.
The fact it will be easier to develop and optimise OS X now that PPC is gone is undoubtedly true, but this shouldn't be an excuse for throwing some people off the train this early. Just like the federal government can't say "we will stop giving money to certain states because that way the majority of USA will develop much faster", you can't tell some of your customers they will be left behind intentionally so that others may benefit from it.
