https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1148527/
i want to keep the new one for 5-7 years not 2-3 years.
i want to keep the new one for 5-7 years not 2-3 years.
And when Apple released Intel Macs, the PPC Macs were still working, as they don't stop working just because a new architecture is used.
also many apps now doesn't work for ppc macs.
the minimum requirement for lion is core 2 due,what if OS XI only require ARM cpu ??
also many apps now doesn't work for ppc macs.
bo-waleed said:And when Apple released Intel Macs, the PPC Macs were still working, as they don't stop working just because a new architecture is used.
the minimum requirement for lion is core 2 due,what if OS XI only require ARM cpu ??
also many apps now doesn't work for ppc macs.
I think your problem is wanting to buy and keep a computer for more than 4 years. Even if you want to debate the contemporary relevance of Moore's law that's just fundamentally not understanding the economics of computing power.https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1148527/
i want to keep the new one for 5-7 years not 2-3 years.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1148527/
i want to keep the new one for 5-7 years not 2-3 years.
If a computer is taxed by running iTunes then it probably should have been upgraded long ago if you were actually trying to do anything even a little bit taxing (more than iTunes) with it.No offense to TheUndertow and turbobass but I generally have computers for 5 years. I do my best to future proof them as much as possible but the average user can get by for a number of years with a computer.
I just packed up an Athlon 64 X2 from 2005 and not because anything was wrong with it. It was just it's time when it came to some of the functions I required. Actually, the newer versions of iTunes were really taxing it. I just jumped to the new iMac i5 with Thunderbolt and the added bonus of super fast video encoding is a joy compared to the old dog.
Most users are casually surfing and checking email. A 5 year lifecycle is not unreasonable.
No offense to TheUndertow and turbobass but I generally have computers for 5 years. I do my best to future proof them as much as possible but the average user can get by for a number of years with a computer.
I just packed up an Athlon 64 X2 from 2005 and not because anything was wrong with it. It was just it's time when it came to some of the functions I required. Actually, the newer versions of iTunes were really taxing it. I just jumped to the new iMac i5 with Thunderbolt and the added bonus of super fast video encoding is a joy compared to the old dog.
Most users are casually surfing and checking email. A 5 year lifecycle is not unreasonable.
I can't think I've ever owned a laptop or computer that's lasted 2 years, let alone that I'd actually still want in 3 years.
Tech moves too fast - 5-7 years...computers age by "dog years".
I can't see Apple moving to ARM within the next 3 years, especially if Intel continues to keep producing better-performing processors at the same wattage and roughly the same price.
Even on the MacBook and MacBook Air, it would be a stretch to say that these chips will be more powerful than the current Core 2 Duos/Core 'i' chips. However, if Apple brings iOS to the basic MacBook/Air, there could be a possibility. But, even this doesn't make a whole lot of sense, it could a few years from now, though.
Really? I have a Late 2006 MBP (2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo) and it works perfectly fine. Doesn't even feel slow. It had some under warranty part failures, and I upgraded the hard drive myself. Any part failures would still be worth repairing, since it should still sell for more than that cost of any individual part. And that's for a computer that will be 5 years old in a couple of months.
This sounds more like an excessive consumerism "I like shiny things" problem than a computer problem.