This post does seem to have attracted quite a lot of attention. Many on the fence, many defending Apples drive to push out new hardware. Some of my comments may have been a bit broad, and attracted criticism. The min specs for Windows 7 was posted to raise a few eye brows and was more of a generalisation than a hard fact. Fact is majority of desktop machines 10 years old will run Windows 7 albeit a little slow (not running on a G4 mac is a given as the posted spec said x86). Deckyon for instance seems to be missing the point of my post a little and doesn't seems to understand the difference between business model and technical innovation.
Sure not all computers will run Win 7 at this spec. If they do, they will indeed be a little on the slow side. Thing is were talking about machines built over 10 years ago (often at half the cost) and the hundreds of thousands of different hardware designs will of course mean that some hardware is not supported. With apple were not even talking of hundreds of different hardware architectures.
Apple are actively choosing to not support systems more than 5 years old not because of technical limitations, but because at some time in the past it was said that a computer should give 5 years of use. There will of course be 'hacks' which allow older machines to bypass 'technical checks', but these only go to show that this is for financial purposes and NOT technical.
Apple has a very small repertoire of hardware which they need to support and they of course want you to buy new hardware. If I have a piece of hardware I'd prefer to upgrade/replace it when I feel it is too long in the tooth, not when apple decide to pull the plug. Sure running Snow Leopard instead of Mountain Lion is not going to make my machine unusable, but the tweaks in the OS which make it nicer to use certainly make the experience more enjoyable. I'm not sure how long it would take for developers to drop support for Snow Leopard and I'm sure that's a good few years off, but if Apple had there way they'd certainly make it happen.
Apple has become very successful because of its innovation and its business model. Its innovation is certainly admirable. However its business model seems to overstep the mark. I don't like to be treated as a cash cow.
I also feel the ecological consequences of this '5 year lifecycle' is highly questionable! I love OSX. The fluidity and usability of it makes it my favourite OS. My issues has more to do with principal than serious practicalities. Legacy support should not be used as an excuse to drive sales in the way it has. Do you really want to defend this practice on Apples behalf?
Can I live with Linux Mint or some other variant if it saves me money and and gives me freedom as a matter of principal? For my use, I'm sure I could quite easily step out of my comfort zone a little. The only products I might miss would be a few of Adobe's perhaps (Creative Suite for Linux is hopefully in the pipeline). Linux has come a long way, it's not OSX, but it's certainly got a fair box of tricks and shouldn't be immediately dismissed. I'm not saying bye to OSX just yet, but I'm certainly going to be giving Linux a bit more of my time now.
Sure not all computers will run Win 7 at this spec. If they do, they will indeed be a little on the slow side. Thing is were talking about machines built over 10 years ago (often at half the cost) and the hundreds of thousands of different hardware designs will of course mean that some hardware is not supported. With apple were not even talking of hundreds of different hardware architectures.
Apple are actively choosing to not support systems more than 5 years old not because of technical limitations, but because at some time in the past it was said that a computer should give 5 years of use. There will of course be 'hacks' which allow older machines to bypass 'technical checks', but these only go to show that this is for financial purposes and NOT technical.
Apple has a very small repertoire of hardware which they need to support and they of course want you to buy new hardware. If I have a piece of hardware I'd prefer to upgrade/replace it when I feel it is too long in the tooth, not when apple decide to pull the plug. Sure running Snow Leopard instead of Mountain Lion is not going to make my machine unusable, but the tweaks in the OS which make it nicer to use certainly make the experience more enjoyable. I'm not sure how long it would take for developers to drop support for Snow Leopard and I'm sure that's a good few years off, but if Apple had there way they'd certainly make it happen.
Apple has become very successful because of its innovation and its business model. Its innovation is certainly admirable. However its business model seems to overstep the mark. I don't like to be treated as a cash cow.
I also feel the ecological consequences of this '5 year lifecycle' is highly questionable! I love OSX. The fluidity and usability of it makes it my favourite OS. My issues has more to do with principal than serious practicalities. Legacy support should not be used as an excuse to drive sales in the way it has. Do you really want to defend this practice on Apples behalf?
Can I live with Linux Mint or some other variant if it saves me money and and gives me freedom as a matter of principal? For my use, I'm sure I could quite easily step out of my comfort zone a little. The only products I might miss would be a few of Adobe's perhaps (Creative Suite for Linux is hopefully in the pipeline). Linux has come a long way, it's not OSX, but it's certainly got a fair box of tricks and shouldn't be immediately dismissed. I'm not saying bye to OSX just yet, but I'm certainly going to be giving Linux a bit more of my time now.