Even this framing of the statement is too generous. The complaint is that in four or more months, Apple will be adding features that some older machines will not be able to get. This is not yet released software.
The ”fix” being proposed is that Apple add a warning, so here is my proposed wording: “Apple is constantly adding features to its software and hardware. Your machine may or may not run features that have not yet been released.”
It is absolutely a false equivalency:
The App Store developer rules you mention have nothing to do with the M1-only features in MacOS Monterey. You’ve inserted your own straw man argument here and attacked it.
That is not what is being said. What people are saying is that there is no guarantee that every product (even those being sold now), will get every future feature. Just as there features that only run on the 2019 Mac Pro, there will be features that will only run on Apple Silicon based machines. This is simply a fact of hardware and software development. To expect that every future feature will run on every previous design is absurd.
If Apple makes a change to developer rules it applies to products submitted after that change (including updates). If a developer does not want to conform to the new rules, they can choose not to release updates and stop developing for the platform. When one chooses to develop for an ecosystem that one does not control, one takes risks. Google developed Project Tango devices and encouraged developers to produce products for them. Then they dropped Project Tango. That is what it is. Those developers were building a business in someone else’s sandbox and that entails risks. If one does not want those risks, develop for Linux, macOS or Windows, not for the App Store.
There is no double standard here, both of these views are completely congruent. Buying products based on the hope that some future unannounced feature that might interest you might come into existence is silly. Developing applications for an environment that a single company controls and expecting them never to make any changes is equally silly.
Apple still sells many older designs, that does not make them “new”. The machine the poster to whom you were originally replying was released in 2019, hardly a “new” design.
Are you?
How are people supposed to know that in the future there will be features that will not run on their current hardware? Well, I guess they could read any of the many articles that talk about the future OS, or just use common sense, as that is, and has always been, the case.
What would you like this proposed notice to read? “Apple, like every technology company that is a going concern, is constantly releasing new products and software. It is highly likely that at some point in the future, there will be a release that will contain features that will not be supported on any hardware you purchase today.”
Nope, I do not, as I think it is self evident that current hardware is not guaranteed to support all future features.
Nope, just as I do not think there needs to be a warning on the Apple Silicon Macintosh page that says it will not natively run Windows.
You are talking about an unreleased product. Your argument seems to be that people who are about to spend $3,500 on machines do no research on them before they purchase them. Apple does not hide this information, it puts it where it makes sense, on the page for the new product. There are also many (many, many) articles both in the tech and mainstream press explaining this specific topic.
Force people? Everyone that has a non-M1 system now absolutely must upgrade to M1? If so, that’s gonna be HUUUUGE sales for Apple!
The 3D globe may need certain aspect of M1 to do the rendering. Just because Google Earth can do it, it doesn't mean it's the same for apple.
First, that is not actually a shipping product, just a rumor. Second, even if they ship it, it is not a new machine (just a new option on a two year old design). Third, if it ships, three things are true about its purchasers:
“More likely” than what? Are you arguing that someone with the most recent Intel-based Macintosh system is more likely to upgrade than if that feature did not exist? I am sure that is true. Essentially meaningless, but true. The statement would also be true had you said: “If Apple offered anyone who had an Intel-based Macintosh purchased in 2020 $0.10 to upgrade while allowing them to keep their old machine it would make upgrades more likely” and just as meaningless.
No, if your desire for a feature that is exclusive to an Apple Silicon system is great enough to overcome the downside (cost among other things) and you can afford to do so, you might get one.
Ok. But what does that have to do with how long Alan has been a customer?
I am asking because at one time I was as in "love" with Apple, although I started to lose the love with the design changes that started to take place post 2013. My main reason for staying with Apple was security and privacy which Android or Windows is still catching up with.