Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.

bobr1952

macrumors 68020
Jan 21, 2008
2,040
39
Melbourne, FL
Watch and see how this goes down. If they don't solve this problem I will become an advocate for everyone that got screwed over. It will be far more to their advantage to make me happy and fix this problem than for me to turn into an advocate and raise total hell. I am not going away.

You like everyone else has the right to sue if you feel wronged--people have sued for less important issues. The problem with your back up plan is that you will find that most people won't even understand what you are advocating and even if they do, they won't care. Personally, I wouldn't expect a 6yo system to able to run the latest OS.
 

amoulay

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2012
33
0
dark side of the moon
It's an obsolete machine, not a current model. Every computer has an end-of-support date. This model is long past it, so what do you expect?

In essence, you're saying you want to sue Apple because they won't support a model that is past its support date.

Says Who? obsolete, EOL, says who? I never buy something that $$$BIG if I know it will be obsolete within 6 years, I am not like you, I am not a slave of the machines or the system. You must be one of the 1000 who stay overnightS near an apple store, to buy their latest gizmo.

I deserve to be respected as a customer and satisfied with the products I buy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

rendevouspoo

macrumors regular
Jul 3, 2012
235
2
A laptop that costs a whopping 2400 dollars should NEVER become obsolete. The 400 dollar HP's? Of course, but even they support the latest software.
 

chromafile

macrumors member
Jul 18, 2009
51
10
I'm not an expert on the hardware and the claims that were made, nor am I an expert on the law, but just as a layman... I don't see anything "laughable" about this hypothetical lawsuit.

OP is stating that Apple made a claim that the product they sold him was one thing and the OP is now claiming that was not the case. If that is true, Apple might have a problem. It is up to the OP to prove it.

Keep us posted.

I haven't read the entire thread, but the people who are posting things like "the system is 6 years old, you were never guaranteed hardware support for this long anyways" clearly don't get it. That's not what the lawsuit is about. If he was promised 10 years of OS upgrades, then that'd be a separate issue. The issue is he is claiming he was sold a fully operational 64 bit system that is not a fully operational 64 bit system. The number of years of support Apple offers is irrelevant.

http://bit.ly/Nx3nuE
To me, Apple emphasized that Xeon is 64-bit, not Mac Pro itself is a fully operational 64 bit system.
 

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
Says Who? obsolete, EOL, says who? I never buy something that $$$BIG if I know it will be obsolete within 6 years, I am not like you, I am not a slave of the machines or the system. You must be one of the 1000 who stay overnightS near an apple store, to buy their latest gizmo.

I deserve to be respected as a customer and satisfied with the products I buy.

Personal attacks don't add to your credibility.

Apple is the company who supports it and they say its EOL. The hardware support is obviously long gone.

What guarantee did you receive that stated you would be able to run an OS that was released 6 years later?

http://bit.ly/Nx3nuE
To me, Apple emphasized that Xeon is 64-bit, not Mac Pro itself is a fully operational 64 bit system.

True. The only 64-bit piece I can find on their page is this:

64-bit Quad Xeon. Up to 3GHz.
 

alleycat

macrumors regular
Mar 23, 2008
121
0
I hope you stick it to them.

I'm still very angry about Apple locking us out just to get OS X 10.7. When OS software meant something (on disc), you could always wait and see the kinks worked out before you bought it. With this downloadable garbage, they can pull the rug out, and force you into a new piece of hardware in a short amount of time. Mac Pro 1,1 users are totally denied an upgrade from Snow Leopard.

I am very close to switching to Windows both to save hardware and software capability. And I've been a Mac supporter since 1988.

They are probably too busy to care about the serious users anyway. They want to appeal to snot nosed teenagers so you'll iPad and iPod everything from Daddy Warbucks. Those of us who are industry professionals expect a better lifespan when we invest in hardware…not just a device we can throw away in a few years time.
 

roadbloc

macrumors G3
Aug 24, 2009
8,784
215
UK
LOL. Alright pal. My brother happens to be a very successful attorney of 25+ years that now has a large firm with over 40 lawyers working for him.

I will take his opinion over yours any day.

You do realize that in the case of a non-class action suit there is a 99% chance they will just settle out and fix the problem (their deception when they sold this to me) by providing me a new machine (or motherboard to fix the problem) then litigate this matter? They will have to hire a firm in Florida to represent them (or send an internal attorney) and the costs to do that will way exceed the costs of simply fixing this problem BY FAR.

One way or another I will be made whole. Laugh all you want, but they WILL address this issue. Why do you think most businesses insurance companies will just step up to offer slip and fall folks $8,000-$10,000 to "just settle". It is way more cost effective then to litigate, bear the costs and then on top of it possibly have a $25-50K ruling.

Trust me, Apple will just want this to go away. All I want is what I paid for and that is a "Fully Functional 64-Bit System". Easy.

Actually, I have a fair expectation that will respond intelligently to the letter my brother is sending them in ADVANCE of us having to file. We are giving them the opportunity to address this PRIOR to use having to file a suit against them. If they choose not to address it directly we will use the courts to do it. I doubt they would like to go through the discovery process where will will ask for their engineering notes and such. Can you imagine the costs here for them?

I will be enjoying my replacement Mac Pro or Mac Pro motherboard soon where I will then have received what I paid for AND will be able to use the newest operating system and not be stuck on an obsolete platform (that was intentionally made so for marketing reasons).

Mounting Liar, looks like this might be the new Apple mode of operation.

I sympathized with you until this post. Are you 12 or something?
 

quagmire

macrumors 604
Apr 19, 2004
6,984
2,488
I hope you stick it to them.

I'm still very angry about Apple locking us out just to get OS X 10.7. When OS software meant something (on disc), you could always wait and see the kinks worked out before you bought it. With this downloadable garbage, they can pull the rug out, and force you into a new piece of hardware in a short amount of time.

Wait? What are you talking about?

You can still wait and see what kinks there are before you buy it. I have never heard Apple of removing a Mac that supported Lion at release, but then later removed it in a 10.7.x release. I know they did that with iOS 4 and the iPhone 3G, but not for a Mac.
 

alleycat

macrumors regular
Mar 23, 2008
121
0
Wait? What are you talking about?

You can still wait and see what kinks there are before you buy it. I have never heard Apple of removing a Mac that supported Lion at release, but then later removed it in a 10.7.x release. I know they did that with iOS 4 and the iPhone 3G, but not for a Mac.

10.7 is no longer available for download at the app store.
 

Darth.Titan

macrumors 68030
Oct 31, 2007
2,906
753
Austin, TX
So if I understand the premise of this lawsuit correctly, you're claiming that Apple lied to you when they advertised the first gen Mac Pro as a 64 bit machine.

The problem with this premise is that there was no lie. The Mac Pro is a 64 bit machine that is fully capable of running 64 bit OS's. 64 bit Linux and 64 bit Windows 7 are both running on my Mac Pro. OS X 10.6 and 10.7 are 64 bit as well, I just have to run a 32 bit kernel due to the EFI limitation on my machine. I can still access the full theoretical amount of RAM that any other "fully" 64 bit machine can, and I can run 64 bit applications.

Another part of the premise here is that Apple has said that the reason our machines cannot upgrade to Mountain Lion is because they are not fully 64 bit. Please show me where Apple said that. I've heard that statement from several sources, but Apple is not one of them. Our machines cannot be upgraded due to hardware compatibility. It's as simple as that.
  • The original video cards shipped with the 1,1 have no drivers in 10.8, and are not up to the task of running it in any event.
  • Our 32 bit EFI cannot boot a 64 bit kernel (without hacks) and 10.8 no longer includes a 32 bit kernel.
Come to think of it, the G5 Power Macs were advertised as 64 bit machines as well. They stamped it on those boxes too. Are G5 owners expecting to install Mountain Lion? Of course not, because of hardware compatibility.

Let's be realistic. The Mac Pro 1,1 is 6 years old, and was discontinued by Apple quite a while back. Mine came with Tiger installed. I went from Tiger to Leopard to Snow Leopard and then to Lion. I intend to continue to use my first gen Mac Pro for quite a while yet. The lack of an upgrade to Mountain Lion will not affect me for some time.

In my opinion your lawsuit will do nothing but waste the court's and the taxpayers' time and money.

Flame away.
 

quagmire

macrumors 604
Apr 19, 2004
6,984
2,488
10.7 is no longer available for download at the app store.

Ah.....

I am not sure if Apple ever kept the previous OS version available for sale besides Snow Leopard( so users can get Lion/ Mac App Store). Maybe someone with a better memory could tell me that......

Anyway, curious knowing Lion's updates were pretty much done with ML coming out, why did you wait so long to upgrade?

Guess lesson to learn is for now on buy the previous OS right before the next one is released..... You have a right to be angry since you didn't know Apple would remove Lion from the app store when they released ML.
 

basesloaded190

macrumors 68030
Oct 16, 2007
2,693
5
Wisconsin
So if I understand the premise of this lawsuit correctly, you're claiming that Apple lied to you when they advertised the first gen Mac Pro as a 64 bit machine.

The problem with this premise is that there was no lie. The Mac Pro is a 64 bit machine that is fully capable of running 64 bit OS's. 64 bit Linux and 64 bit Windows 7 are both running on my Mac Pro. OS X 10.6 and 10.7 are 64 bit as well, I just have to run a 32 bit kernel due to the EFI limitation on my machine. I can still access the full theoretical amount of RAM that any other "fully" 64 bit machine can, and I can run 64 bit applications.

Another part of the premise here is that Apple has said that the reason our machines cannot upgrade to Mountain Lion is because they are not fully 64 bit. Please show me where Apple said that. I've heard that statement from several sources, but Apple is not one of them. Our machines cannot be upgraded due to hardware compatibility. It's as simple as that.
  • The original video cards shipped with the 1,1 have no drivers in 10.8, and are not up to the task of running it in any event.
  • Our 32 bit EFI cannot boot a 64 bit kernel (without hacks) and 10.8 no longer includes a 32 bit kernel.
Come to think of it, the G5 Power Macs were advertised as 64 bit machines as well. They stamped it on those boxes too. Are G5 owners expecting to install Mountain Lion? Of course not, because of hardware compatibility.

Let's be realistic. The Mac Pro 1,1 is 6 years old, and was discontinued by Apple quite a while back. Mine came with Tiger installed. I went from Tiger to Leopard to Snow Leopard and then to Lion. I intend to continue to use my first gen Mac Pro for quite a while yet. The lack of an upgrade to Mountain Lion will not affect me for some time.

In my opinion your lawsuit will do nothing but waste the court's and the taxpayers' time and money.

Flame away.

You hit the nail on the head. That's what everyone has tried to explain, but it's almost like talking to a brick wall in this thread
 

astrorider

macrumors 6502a
Sep 25, 2008
595
131
That's if you have previously purchased it. If you have not like me, waiting to stay one system behind, then you're locked out. The thumb drive version has also been eliminated from the store.

Which is why I am very angry with Apple.

That link mentions the USB flash drive version of Lion is still available.
 

Rog210

macrumors regular
Mar 23, 2004
195
3
Another part of the premise here is that Apple has said that the reason our machines cannot upgrade to Mountain Lion is because they are not fully 64 bit. Please show me where Apple said that. I've heard that statement from several sources, but Apple is not one of them. Our machines cannot be upgraded due to hardware compatibility. It's as simple as that.
  • The original video cards shipped with the 1,1 have no drivers in 10.8, and are not up to the task of running it in any event.
  • Our 32 bit EFI cannot boot a 64 bit kernel (without hacks) and 10.8 no longer includes a 32 bit kernel.

So MP users need a better GFX card. 6870 present, check.

A machine advertised as "64 bit" can't run a 64 bit kernel.

Hmm.
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,566
Why respond with the same rubbish then?

Apple lied, they stated that the 1,1 was a fully 64bit capable computer. Nowhere does it mention in Apples material that it has a 32bit EFI.

It is a 64 bit capable computer. What the original poster doesn't get into his head is that the requirements for Mountain Lion go beyond "64 bit capable". It is quite possible that there will _never_ be computers that would be called "128 bit" computers, so if the bitness was all, he would think that Apple has to make new OS versions run on his hardware forever.

----------

A laptop that costs a whopping 2400 dollars should NEVER become obsolete. The 400 dollar HP's? Of course, but even they support the latest software.

The Macintosh cost $2500. By "the Macintosh" I mean the one Macintosh that was called Macintosh and nothing else. The one before the "Macintosh Plus". 128 KB RAM, 400 KB floppy disk, 8 Megahertz 68000 processor, doing a million instructions per second if you are lucky. So apparently that should NEVER have become obsolete.


Anyway, curious knowing Lion's updates were pretty much done with ML coming out, why did you wait so long to upgrade?

Same as all the people who suddenly decided they wanted to buy a 17" MBP when it was gone.
 

quagmire

macrumors 604
Apr 19, 2004
6,984
2,488
Same reason Google doesn't update phones that ICS doesn't support, but people have hacked ICS onto those phones. They don't have an obligation to do so.....

Should I go sue Google/Motorola/Samsung/etc?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

amoulay

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2012
33
0
dark side of the moon
So because it can't run the latest and greatest OS say 6 years from now makes it obsolete?

Of course it does make it obsolete. Expensive Computers such as the MacPro line should be supported at least for 10 years. Or else why pay all these lotta $$$? If I need to toss a puter after 3-6 years of use, then I 'll buy the cheap n ugly mini o imac and shut the hell up.

----------

Same reason Google doesn't update phones that ICS doesn't support, but people have hacked ICS onto those phones. They don't have an obligation to do so.....

Should I go sue Google/Motorola/Samsung/etc?

Sorry, you mixing "apples and googles" here, u are confused. Nothing to do with 1,1 issue, we talking here lotta $$$ for 1,1, compared to ~ $0-$300 smartphones.

----------

This is what Apple is about: they think they can steal from others, but feel no one should steal from them.

http://www.iclarified.com/entry/index.php?enid=23513
 
Last edited:

basesloaded190

macrumors 68030
Oct 16, 2007
2,693
5
Wisconsin
Of course it does make it obsolete. Expensive Computers such as the MacPro line should be supported at least for 10 years. Or else why pay all these lotta $$$? If I need to toss a puter after 3-6 years of use, then I 'll buy the cheap n ugly mini o imac and shut the hell up.

Because your MP can't run ML, it is no long able to do the exact same things it was two days ago? I fail to see the reason why not being able to run the latest OS limits your ability to do what you have already been doing with your computer for the last six years.
 

amoulay

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2012
33
0
dark side of the moon
I fail to see the reason why not being able to run the latest OS limits your ability to do what you have already been doing with your computer for the last six years.

That is not the point, of course I can do whatever I want with the present status of my macpro.

the point here is why does Apple feel that it's ok to drop 1,1 puters from current and future OS upgrades.
 

alleycat

macrumors regular
Mar 23, 2008
121
0
That link mentions the USB flash drive version of Lion is still available.

No it is not. Check it out for yourself.

The only way to obtain Lion is through the black market now. Which is stupid IMO. In years past retail versions of Snow Leopard, Leopard, Tiger, Panther, Jaguar, and Puma were all available on line though sold as a disc. With a non-tangible piece of software such as this, there's no way to get it once Apple pulls it offline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.