PCs last longer than Macs

[840quadra]

Typing on a late 2008 MacBook pro while watching video off my NAS in 4K using my 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 on my livingroom TV. The 2008 3,1, my 2009 flashed 4,1 / 5,1 run Ventura without issue.

I remember when I first got back into Mac in 2001 / 2002, I picked up a B&W G3 300 that ran circles around my Pentium 3 450 in photo editing and web development. Upgraded it to a G4 and daily drove it for a couple years until I built a G4 Digital Audio within an apple spares Quicksilver case. Still have both systems.

There are enthusiasts on both sides ( I have old PC gear not in my signature ) but feel running MacOS on older machines is a far better experience than doing the same with Windows instances.

Can put Linux on both platforms, the only one that really is limited is really old Power PC systems, simply because they are such a minority in the overall world of vintage computing.

 

[Alameda]

I don’t use any features of Microsoft Office which it didn’t have twenty-five years ago. The colors are nicer. It handles big documents better. And it crashes way less.

 

[Minghold]

I would have no hesitation in saying that you'll have a better time on a Mac.

It truly is a shame that Apple has now committed itself to abandoning them at regular intervals....

Also, their desktops are genuinely worlds apart in functionality so please don't suggest that Windows and macOS are essentially the same. Your argument can't simply be "they both have desktops, hence they're the same". There is a simplicity in using macOS that doesn't exist for one second in Windows, which has simply become an accumulator of ancient code and keeping their corporate customers happy.

...to the point that retrofitting a supposedly "obsolete" Mac with Windows (or Linux, or whatever) is frequently the easiest path forward. I.e., toss Endeavor OS on a 2007 iMac, and immediately run the latest versions of Chrome and Firefox without issue. Apple withholds Safari security updates from old versions of the OS, then uses that as a marketing ploy to cajole users into upgrading. --It's like the travails of Internet Explorer, except deliberate.

In relation to design, Apple cares about the user (mostly),

Apple truly "cares about the user" when "Upgrade your OS!" blares at klaxon volume from every access-media portal as the ostensible panacea, when it knew that doing so will destroy user-owned software via incompatibility, and in many cases also degrade hardware (e.g., APFS OSes on rotational-drives, which they were still selling in some 2020 models being marketed as "new" as late as early 2022).

Apple arguably hasn't cared about the user since at least 2009, when glass edge-to-edge iMacs replaced the prior models with a protective metal rim. From that point onward, they were firmly in the mode of a happy-merchant stereotype gleefully rubbing their hands in anticipation of users cracking their screens. (It had learned quickly from the launch of the gravity-prone iPhone a few years prior, and introduced fragility to other product lines.)

Microsoft cares about appeasing their big contracts and their demands.

Microsoft and Apple (and Google) care about appeasing the data-harvesting intelligence combines that wear them as skin-suits, and little else.

These exercises are worthless. Most people don’t want to use a Windows 11 PC with 4 GB of RAM.

Most people (including most Windows users) would rather not use Windows 11 with any amount of ram. (Which is why Windows 10 is still the most-used OS half-a-decade after W11's launch. Astonishing as it may seem, most people prefer that their personal computer not double as an ankle-monitoring system.)

They don’t want to use a ten year old Mac either. I’m talking about for a daily driver, not for having nostalgic moment. I have a twenty five year old Windows PC that I use occasionally for FreeCell, but I sure wouldn’t want to use as my main computer.

A 25 year-old PC has 512mb ram and a 640p CRT monitor with 16-bit graphics. Good for "Monkey Island II", I guess.

A 10 year-old mid-2014 i7 Macbook Pro Retina had user-upgradeable ram and SSD, and is a perfectly good daily-driver today. In fact, at the rate Apple is bloating the OS (e.g., Sequoia clean-install wanting to gobble 10gb ram without a single app open), a noob user can easily be led to assume that the older machine is faster/newer than a more recent one.

But I'm sure that the next round of "modern" browser specs will include a requirement to play 8K/120fps video ads or something equally ridiculous so as to artificially obsolesce already fast-enough hardware that's not failing to engineered-in defects (*cough* butterfly keyboard ribbon-cables *cough*) quickly enough for manufacturer liking.

 

[XboxEvolved]

Well considering every other version of Windows is garbage, takes years to make usable (Vista, 8, 11) and will mess with current hardware when it comes out, sure go ahead knock yourself out and try to prove to yourself you can run 11 on a system that came out 5 years before Vista. Of course like everyone here it's just person experience but in almost all cases but one, my Macs far outlast any PC I've had.

 

[Minghold]

go ahead knock yourself out and try to prove to yourself you can run 11 on a system that came out 5 years before Vista.

Vista came out in 2007, so five years before that would be 2002. --Has anybody anywhere (let alone in this thread) suggested that Windows 11 could be made to work on a 2002 computer, or that such a thing would even make a decent daily-driver using any other OS?

 

[Corefile]

What are most people's requirements for a computer? Really, is it just a supported web browser to handle youtube videos? If so then the majority of folk could get by running Linux Mint on their older hardware. I am not sure what non-techies think of W11 requiring you to toss your old HW. Most will probably keep using their old OS even if unsupported until it dies. As long as they keep doing what they need it to then any replacement will be a W11. Microsoft OS PCs are all that you can buy in stores for regular folk. Mac people are weird brand loyalists who expect to pay extra money and have the HW obsolete after a few years. PC buyers are the volume buyers are cheap price.

 

[johnmacward]

Apple withholds Safari security updates from old versions of the OS, then uses that as a marketing ploy to cajole users into upgrading. --It's like the travails of Internet Explorer, except deliberate.

And I mentioned that in my previous post, but you seem to have missed it. Here's the quote:

"You're right that Apple could continue to release security updates to older machines, probably without much of a performance impact as security updates are not typically monolithic architecture rebuilds (however in some cases they are), they're often just simple changes to code which address poorly though out data movements in memory and CPU treatment. However for Apple, OS and hardware advancements are tied tightly to their business model - when they release a new OS they typically release new hardware and no doubt they want sales of this hardware hence pushing people generally in the direction of new sales is their model - am I in agreement with this, no, but its how most companies operate and it wont change tomorrow."

Apple truly "cares about the user" when "Upgrade your OS!" blares at klaxon volume from every access-media portal as the ostensible panacea

I have no idea what you're talking about here, personally you just sound irate and irrational. Are you not talking about Windows which just about shoves updates down our throats?

Apple arguably hasn't cared about the user since at least 2009, when glass edge-to-edge iMacs replaced the prior models with a protective metal rim.

The computer market is as close to a duopoly as you can get, hence our choices are limited between Microsoft and Apple (Linux is wonderful in its own way but still cannot stand up to this duopoly, not necessarily always its fault). When that choice is limited we need to do a comparison between offerings, and as far as I'm concerned there is a lot MORE going for Apple products and macOS than Microsoft's Windows.

I'm not in disagreement that the lack of up-gradability in recent years has been a problem, then again if your comparing it with the average Windows computer customer with their Acer laptop for 600$ who actually can upgrade their RAM and other components but never actually do (because the average user is utterly unaware of this) and they'll just replace their system after a few years when updates render the machine too slow. A very rare few will attempt or ask a tech shop to put another 8GB of RAM into their machine.

Microsoft and Apple (and Google) care about appeasing the data-harvesting intelligence combines that wear them as skin-suits, and little else.

Again, your theatrics don't win you any fans. You sound personally very tabloidy, paranoid. Out of the three companies you talk about, the one that concerns me the least in data-harvesting (and its demonstrable) is Apple. The other two have made it the core of their business to suck in as much data out of me as possible, but come on, we pay a premium in the Apple ecosystem in order to avoid that stuff. What's insane in the Windows world is that you pay a hefty price for the OS if you buy it outright and regardless, they do their best to turn you into a data cow. They're objectively worse than Google as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Minghold]

And I mentioned that in my previous post, but you seem to have missed it. Here's the quote:

"You're right that Apple could continue to release security updates to older machines, probably without much of a performance impact as security updates are not typically monolithic architecture rebuilds (however in some cases they are), they're often just simple changes to code which address poorly though out data movements in memory and CPU treatment. However for Apple, OS and hardware advancements....

I reject the premise that Apple's recent OSes, or ticking-timebomb security-chips, represent "advancements".

are tied tightly to their business model

"(t)heir business model" being euphemism for unvarnished artificial obsolescence.

when they release a new OS they typically release new hardware and no doubt they want sales of this hardware hence pushing people generally in the direction of new sales is their model

Since we appear to be in full and complete agreement regarding Apple's "business model", I'm not tracking your rational for arguing with me.

- am I in agreement with this, no, but its how most companies operate and it wont change tomorrow."

Because "most" incorporated entities are just an duplicitous in their artificial-obsolescence tactics as the next.

Apple truly "cares about the user" when "Upgrade your OS!" blares at klaxon volume from every access-media portal as the ostensible panacea

I have no idea what you're talking about here,

"Access media" definition.

Are you not talking about Windows which just about shoves updates down our throats?

No. (To Microsoft's credit, they actually prevent W11 from running on many machines it's clearly capable of, and also haven't changed their NTFS file-system to murder rotational-drives. Meanwhile, Apple sent out Catalina to every 2012+ iMac to cripple their drives and kill off most of their users' paid-for software.)

The computer market is as close to a duopoly as you can get, hence our choices are limited between Microsoft and Apple (Linux is wonderful in its own way but still cannot stand up to this duopoly, not necessarily always its fault).

You'd be surprised. -- The biggest computer market that they'd rather you didn't know about is the used market. I live in a moderate-sized metro area (~2 million pop), and visit an electronics recycler every week. Multiple pallets of perfectly good laptops run through that place every day, going either straight overseas or to tear-down.

If everybody knew that they could get a *working* computer from a recycler for twenty bucks or less, Apple and the other OEMs would collapse. There's enough stuff out there right now (despite continuous scrapping) for every person on earth to fill a closet.And virtually all of it is no more than ten years old.

Again, your theatrics don't win you any fans. You sound personally very...

As if walls-of-text and ad-hom do?

 

[Project Alice]

Vaio from 2008 running Windows 11, thus getting more security updates, is more usable than any Mac from 2008. The PC my father built in 2003 is way more usable than a Mac from 2003.
What he says at the end is true. I'd rather have an upgradable Mac, Apple provide at least 5 years of security updates to each OS than a "faster" RAM and SSD.
Lately I've been thinking moving back to PC and Android in the future. I don't know. Apple has lost its charm and especially with iOS 18, considering my Huawei from 2011 was able to do the same things as iOS 18 when it comes to customisation. It even had a dark theme.
I don't know. Lately I feel like Apple products are not worth it anymore. Especially since new iPhones are one year behind of Pro models. Apple is behaving like Samsung lately. The same goes for Macs. I've just lost it. I remember back in 2007-18 I used to love Apple so much and the Keynotes etc, but now I've looked around and realised that PCs are better than Macs and more secure. The pricing is better as well.Nothing still beats the iPad though.

I mean, I have a 2008 Mac on Ventura. It'd be on Sequoia but I've been too lazy to upgrade it. My main Mac is technically from 2009 and its on Sequoia, and Windows 11.

This post is mostly dumb, though I do slightly agree with the sentiment. Apple does drop software support for Macs for adherently no reason. There are very few times there's actually a legitimate reason to.

I have lots of 2003 Macs. I also have a couple 2003-era PC's. Define useable. The Macs are absolutely usable. Fast? No. Neither are the PCs. Supported? That depends. Debian works on my Pentium M thinkpad from 2004, it also works on PowerPC Macs from around that year. So do most the BSD's.

All of these machines will do exactly what they were designed to do when they were new. I was in a school program in 2018, and my laptop of choice to use was a 2004 PowerBook G4, running Leopard. I could've installed something newer but I like Leopard. It did great at taking notes, and viewing any materials for the classes, most of which were PDFs. I can also check my email on it.

The modern internet has become a bloated cesspool of javascript and ads, so, yeah, the internet doesn't work great in general on these things but there are ways around that.

 

[Minghold]

The modern internet has become a bloated cesspool of javascript and ads, so, yeah, the internet doesn't work great in general on these things but there are ways around that.

Agreed. Literally the only thing I care now about an OS is its friendly applicability toward browsers with unthrottled adblocking.

 

[lowendlinux]

Well this thread went predictably, maybe next year we can re-litigate this again.

 

[pshufd]

Agreed. Literally the only thing I care now about an OS is its friendly applicability toward browsers with unthrottled adblocking.

I use Firefox for everything except for YouTube since 133.0. There is a bad memory leak in Firefox with YouTube - some say that it's with UBlock Origin running. So I run YouTube on Brave to work around the problem. There is a bugzilla entry but they've not made a lot of progress on diagnosing it because the developers don't have an easily reproducible case. It is reproducible but it takes a while.

 

[throAU]

Yeah because that’s what I want out of terrible user experience. To prolong it

 

[iHorseHead]

Apple does drop software support for Macs for adherently no reason.

That is my main issue. Mac OS X El Capitan is pretty unusable these days, yet Windows 10 is fully up to date. It wouldn't be so bad if Apple didn't drop the security updates that fast and if they were more predictable.

 

[Project Alice]

That is my main issue. Mac OS X El Capitan is pretty unusable these days, yet Windows 10 is fully up to date. It wouldn't be so bad if Apple didn't drop the security updates that fast and if they were more predictable.

It's the yearly releases. I hate that. In my head, an OS should last years. The amount of time between XP and Vista comes to mind.
But also, they drop support for the actual hardware for no reason. I have an 08 and an 09 on the latest OS and it works fine.

 

[Minghold]

I use Firefox for everything except for YouTube since 133.0. There is a bad memory leak in Firefox with YouTube - some say that it's with UBlock Origin running. So I run YouTube on Brave to work around the problem. There is a bugzilla entry but they've not made a lot of progress on diagnosing it because the developers don't have an easily reproducible case. It is reproducible but it takes a while.

""The problem with Firefox is that it's Mozilla, and Mozilla is a corporation. They may not be a four-inch fang vampire (yet), but they are an irritating horsefly. Firefox forks that I recommend: Waterfox and Orion. Chrome forks: Chromium-legacy. And as always, install uBlock Origin or AdNauseum on all of them. Disable (in Terminal) ReportCrash.

 

[Minghold]

It's the yearly releases. I hate that. In my head, an OS should last years.

There are a couple that can last essentially forever: Lion to El Capitan (for 2006-08 machines), ElCap or High Sierra (2009-11), and Mojave/HFS+ (2012-19). Install Chromium-legacy on all of them. Disable SIP, MRT, ReportCrash, Notifications, and Spotlight Indexing. Disable system update on Mohave systems. Install Parallels 18 on Mojave systems.

The amount of time between XP and Vista comes to mind. But also, they drop support for the actual hardware for no reason.

Of course they have a reason: using their own failure to support Safari ransomware as an excuse to prompt you to buy another computer because you need the latest gollygeewhiz $1,500 piece of hardware from them to get updated malware filters for the built-in browser. If Microsoft had tried this sort of chutzpah ten years ago with Internet Explorer, corporate American would have burned Redmond to the ground.

I have a n 08 and an 09 on the latest OS and it works fine.

Sequoia ("the latest OS") "works fine" on a 2008 core2duo? ...No. No it doesn't. Sequoia doesn't work fine on a 2019 i9. In fact, it runs like total horseflop even after shutting off a half-dozen things in Terminal.

 

[pshufd]

""The problem with Firefox is that it's Mozilla, and Mozilla is a corporation. They may not be a four-inch fang vampire (yet), but they are an irritating horsefly. Firefox forks that I recommend: Waterfox and Orion. Chrome forks: Chromium-legacy. And as always, install uBlock Origin or AdNauseum on all of them. Disable (in Terminal) ReportCrash.

I've done some work for them in the past. In particular for Mike Schroepfer who was CTO at the time and then left for Facebook (Meta). I also met Eich when he was looking for people to work on the Javascript JIT. He eventually founded Brave which I like but am just used to Firefox which I've used since it was named Phoenix.

 

[Project Alice]

Sequoia ("the latest OS") "works fine" on a 2008 core2duo? ...No. No it doesn't. Sequoia doesn't work fine on a 2019 i9. In fact, it runs like total horseflop even after shutting off a half-dozen things in Terminal.

Yes, it does. It’s my main OS on my main and fastest machine which is a 2009 Mac Pro. Heavily upgraded, of course.

I have a 2008 17” MBP and it runs *fine*. It isn’t particularly fast, but it’s perfectly capable for browsing or typing. It even runs steam okay and will play whatever the hardware is capable of. IE Kotor.

 

[ChrisA]

I still own two older computers

1) A Compaq Portable PC. It has an 8088 CPU running at 4.7 Mhz and about 16 K RAM. It was bought in 1983 It still runs "good as new" and

2) A 512K Mac from about 1984. It too runs "good as new"

So there Is "proof" they both last about the same time, so far, 40 years and counting...

Now I ask, which of the two would you use for normal work? My gues is that the Compaq is 100% unusable for 99.99% of the users today because it runs DOS and you have to type at the keyboard, The Mac is still intuitive and works mostly like a current computer.

 

[schnaps]

Windows computers vary greatly in performance, regardless of the year of manufacture. And Windows is forced to support new, but weak devices.

Example:
1. 2012 laptop - i7-3630QM, 16 GB, GT650, ssh+hdd.
2. 2012 netbook eeepc Atom N270, 2 GB.
3. 2017 netbook on AMD A4-9120, 4 GB
4. 2021 mini-PC - N5095,16,1024

The new mini-PC on N5095 is supported by Windows 11.
But the old laptop from point 1 is still better for games, of what there is. And Windows 11 works great on it.
But weak netbooks are actually obsolete by the time they come out, each is weak for its time.

The same is with Macbook. Macbook Airs are quickly becoming obsolete, but more powerful models can last a very long time.

Resume: Macs and PCs become obsolete at roughly the same rate.

The difference is that the ability to install a new OS depends on drivers. But if your old Windows PC has drivers from the old 64-bit Windows 7, then there is a good chance that you can install Windows 10 and Windows 11. But there is a problem with drivers on Macs.

Resume: Software support on Mac is worse.

 

[avkills]

I am pretty sure my current PC is at least 5 years old; and still working fine for what I use it for; and running Windows 11.

 

[Project Alice]

I am pretty sure my current PC is at least 5 years old; and still working fine for what I use it for; and running Windows 11.

My Mac Pro in my sig is technically a 2009 originally, runs Windows 11 wonderfully, and macOS Sequoia.

 

[MBAir2010]

Well im leaving windows os again this time for profit!
My neighbor's relative needs my Asus ZenBook 14' ponderblue laptop BIG TIME!
as im getting $300 more than i paid in August of '24.

as far as the experience with Windows, third part programs ran better than
on the macbook air m1 using Monterey as the battery life, screen and typing
was better on the zen book but not that much.

Therefore, im back planted in that  garden, but without any vines, since im not using iCloud at all.

to sum up my windows 10 2024 experience, computers are just computers
as the less annoying the better.

have fun everyone!

 

[S.B.G]

I built a custom PC back in 2019 and it's still great today. The only changes I made since then are replacing the 1TB NVME with a 2TB one, and upgrading to an AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT recently. Otherwise, the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is running great.

Add in that I run Linux on it and I expect this PC to last me a very long time.

I have a 2010 iMac 27" that is nearly useless now. macOS updates ceased a while ago. I managed to get Linux on it, but even then, it's noticeably sluggish. I hate to get rid of the machine because physically it's in great shape, and I don't know what else to do with it.