Only 7 years of support from release date is unacceptable for a $2000+ personal computer.

[maflynn]

That is correct. I will not be able to use it safely, as it was intended to be used.

We all have to make decision on how best to use our computers, its clear that you want one thing, and I can respect that.

Of the various platforms you have the following options

• Apple 7 years (though at times may run longer)
• Microsoft 10 years
• Ubuntu 5 years (LTS version only)
• Fedora 13 months
• PopOS 5 years standard version, 10 years for the LTS version

The various computer makers years of support (as found on google)

• Apple 7 years
• Lenovo 5 years
• Dell 5 years
• HP 5 to 7
• System 76 (makers of PopOS) 1 to 3

So in every case, you will need to buy a new computer (since the computer maker drops support in about 7 years), and most operating systems are supported between 5 to 10 years.

You're not losing anything by sticking with apple but if you change platforms, you'll be buying new hardware every 5 years even if windows of PopOS is supported for 10 years.

tl;dr while you want increased longevity, the entire industry is geared towards 5 years on hardware and 5 to 10 on the operating systems.

 

[Nudelpalm]

For the prices of these devices?

Support it for it's "entire life"... which of course opens the question of how long that really is.

More than seven years at least.

I heard a few years back that the expected lifespan of electronics is usually the guarantee time x2. One year guaranty = 2 years expected lifespan and so on.

But Mac’s are a different beast so I’m not sure it’s valid in this case.

 

[Abazigal]

I can empathise with the OP. My 2017 5k iMac is still a fantastic piece of hardware, despite it no longer getting any software updates (it's basically supported for 6 years). My dad has pretty much taken charge of it where he uses it for browsing the web and watching YouTube, and I don't find the need to have it replaced (a Mac mini is cheap, but I still get to get a monitor, webcam, speakers and deal with cable management). The display remains gorgeous, Apple at least continues to support it with security and Safari updates, and Office / Chrome still runs.

I did run Boot Camp on my previous 2011 iMac (for running games), and my overall experience (at least my memory of it) was that Windows quickly became laggy and buggy and I just lost interest with dealing with it any further). Maybe I could reconsider Windows, but the reality is that I really don't have much time for gaming these days, and I have a Switch for that as well. So not a priority.

I do feel like a lot of it is directly tied to Apple's business model. They give you a great user experience, made possible by their control over hardware and software, and this is paid upfront when you buy their products. If Apple discontinues support too quickly, most users will probably move on. But support their products for too long, and people upgrade less often, and Apple makes less money in return. And the reality is that supporting older products does cost Apple, and unlike iOS, Apple is not able to monetise their services since most developers do not use the Mac App Store.

I agree with earlier posters that it ultimately comes down to picking your poison. It's like flying in first class vs economy. Do you want to pay more for a better experience upfront, or pay less for an experience you know won't be as good? Like sure, maybe a windows laptop will be supported longer, but then I won't have apple silicon or that trackpad, and I will have to deal with frequent software updates and well, windows is still windows at the end of the day.

 

[tonmischa]

Perfectly good computers are going to waste… and you like it that way, I suppose.

People's reaction is based on the huge flaw in your initial argument.
You argue that "no more security updates" = "unusable/bricked computer". Which is simply not true.

As long as you are not willing to accept your error, you will not be able to grasp why people are disagreeing with you so strongly.

Also:
The point you are so desperately trying to make is valid (at least in my opinion - i reluctantly oclp'd a 2013 Air and will drive it until it falls apart), but by insisting again and again on your flawed argument, you are not helping your case.

 

[maflynn]

i reluctantly oclp'd a 2013 Air and will drive it until it falls apart)

I used a 2012 MBP well into the 2020s, it wasn't my main laptop near the end, but it was still getting used on a daily basis. I'm currently using an M2 MBP but I'm leaning heavily towards getting a Mac Mini as my needs are such that a desktop (headless one at that) fits my needs better.

 

[Mr_Brightside_@]

Safari does not receive updates on any unsupported version of macOS. So, macOS Monterey and older.

Where are the reports of those compromises?

 

[Wahlstrm]

EU is already pushing for the environment to improve and now also pushing hard for Cybersecurity.

I wouldn’t be surprised if manufacturers who’s actively working against these two things just to improve margins will be in the regulators crosshairs in the near future.

 

[harmonthe3rd]

For the prices of these devices?

Support it for it's "entire life"... which of course opens the question of how long that really is.

More than seven years at least.

I spent $73,000 on a car last year and $487,000 on a house the year before that. Neither came with a lifetime warranty.

 

[BaldiMac]

That’s what I’m saying. They currently support for around 8 years (some models less). I believe it should be a *minimum* of 2 extra years, for a total of 10.

What's the logic here? "10 should be the minimum because its more than 8, and we have 10 fingers?"

Safari does not receive updates on any unsupported version of macOS. So, macOS Monterey and older.

Just to state the obvious, Safari was likely more compromised during the 8 years that it was supported. But as someone pointed out earlier, the solution is simple... download Firefox.

 

[williamofockham]

I love this thread, from my point of view the amount of time a version of code was supported was more relevant. There were many times when I produced a turnkey application only to find that another party had created an application with a different version of the coding language, ca-cling, I won the contract to write the my old application in the new version of the language. hardware specifications that change reflect in device drivers which give rise to handling multiple interface variants - a recipe for logical ambiguities , hence the need (or desire) to stop support at same level of complexity. The less progress (new software/hardware models) the longer support can be efficiently provided, but support is needed less in that case - so its lose lose

 

[nexx27]

Bad example. You only get about 5 years of support from Dell. Yes, you can keep using your Dell for 10 years. No one is stopping you from using a Mac forever as well.

As for the OS, Microsoft is ending windows 10 support this year. It seems microsoft supports their operating system for about 10 years, we're not talking about a huge difference difference between Apple and MS.

On a PC you can still install windows (OS) for long, or till the HW is capable.

On a MAC you can't. It's 5-7 years for sure then you're out. It doesn't matter if the HW is capable or not.

That's the BIG difference.

 

[maflynn]

On a PC you can still install windows (OS) for long, or till the HW is capable.

So where would you get windows XP, windows 7, or 8? Its not like Microsft sells or lets you download them. Just like Apple, there are hardware constraints that prevent old versions of windows running on new (or newer hardware)

On a MAC you can't. It's 5-7 years for sure then you're out. It doesn't matter if the HW is capable or not.

Just like trying to get a version of windows that's been EOL'd from non-official sites, you can install older versions of macOS from non-official sites.

I'm not seeing a "big difference"

Regarding PC vs. Mac, do you really want to install a windows operating system that's been EOL'd ? Seriously, you're just begging to have your pc infected with malware at that point.

 

[erkanasu]

Make more money and stop being a victim if you need support longer. I’m so sick of internet babies whining about stuff like this.

 

[weckart]

So where would you get windows XP, windows 7, or 8? Its not like Microsft sells or lets you download them. Just like Apple, there are hardware constraints that prevent old versions of windows running on new (or newer hardware)


Just like trying to get a version of windows that's been EOL'd from non-official sites, you can install older versions of macOS from non-official sites.

I'm not seeing a "big difference"

Regarding PC vs. Mac, do you really want to install a windows operating system that's been EOL'd ? Seriously, you're just begging to have your pc infected with malware at that point.

You got his point backwards. The hardware is EOLed, not the software. You can still install the latest Windows on an old heap if you want and it will run just fine. Microsoft just puts a platform check in, which is trivial to circumvent. Apple starts pulling frameworks and drivers, even if that only saves about 2MB of code, so as soon as your perfectly capable hardware is shown the door by Tim Apple, you are relying on OCLP hacks to keep it going.

 

[weckart]

Make more money and stop being a victim if you need support longer. I’m so sick of internet babies whining about stuff like this.

People should just stop being poor. Where have I heard that before?

 

[Kim Larni]

Personally I wouldn't like to use a 7 year old computer for daily use. But that's just my opinion.

 

[techno-Zen]

7 years is completely reasonable

 

[dumastudetto]

We all have to make decision on how best to use our computers, its clear that you want one thing, and I can respect that.

Of the various platforms you have the following options

• Apple 7 years (though at times may run longer)
• Microsoft 10 years
• Ubuntu 5 years (LTS version only)
• Fedora 13 months
• PopOS 5 years standard version, 10 years for the LTS version

The various computer makers years of support (as found on google)

• Apple 7 years
• Lenovo 5 years
• Dell 5 years
• HP 5 to 7
• System 76 (makers of PopOS) 1 to 3

So in every case, you will need to buy a new computer (since the computer maker drops support in about 7 years), and most operating systems are supported between 5 to 10 years.

You're not losing anything by sticking with apple but if you change platforms, you'll be buying new hardware every 5 years even if windows of PopOS is supported for 10 years.

tl;dr while you want increased longevity, the entire industry is geared towards 5 years on hardware and 5 to 10 on the operating systems.

If you use Linux, you can just install the new LTS version of Ubuntu. The Linux kernel is only now just about to drop support for Intel 486 processors that were released in 1989. Vendor support is generally unimportant in the non-Apple world. Linux usually has open source drivers that cover most of the components inside your machine and so continue to receive software updates long after manufacturers EOL'd them.

You certainly don't need to be buying new hardware every 5 years if you go the non-Apple route.

 

[seek3r]

On a PC you can still install windows (OS) for long, or till the HW is capable.

They’re making it harder and harder to do, have you installed Win11 on older hardware these days? Also keeping it up to date means continually repeating that pain)

 

[seek3r]

If you use Linux, you can just install the new LTS version of Ubuntu. The Linux kernel is only now just about to drop support for Intel 486 processors that were released in 1989. Vendor support is generally unimportant in the non-Apple world. Linux usually has open source drivers that cover most of the components inside your machine and so continue to receive software updates long after manufacturers EOL'd them.

You certainly don't need to be buying new hardware every 5 years if you go the non-Apple route.

You can also install Linux on old macs… T2 machines still have a couple annoyances (suspend got borked by a new firmware update on several models, and built in audio has some caveats) and on M* machines thunderbolt is the biggest missing piece, but those will likely get ironed out over time

 

[dumastudetto]

You can also install Linux on old macs… T2 machines still have a couple annoyances (suspend got borked by a new firmware update on several models, and built in audio has some caveats) and on M* machines thunderbolt is the biggest missing piece, but those will likely get ironed out over time

27" iMacs are a problem because Linux can't handle the dual displays (allegedly because Apple won't let AMD release open sourced drivers) so you get a crappy resolution on a gorgeous display. I think M1s are pretty well supported, but the Linux project to support M series processors has a lot of question marks hanging over it now its leader quit.

But Linux is certainly a solid option for most Intel Macs.

 

[Lil Chillbil]

Perfectly good computers are going to waste… and you like it that way, I suppose. Again, just bizarre (to me, anyway).

I own and maintain several Macs and PCs, it’s the consumption of media and internet security that drives consumers away. But if you take a step back from the internet you’ll find your Mac just as fast as the day it was built. Just like the last of the PowerPC chips were gutted by the transition to Intel. No one comes to your house and orders you to throw your computer away. That’s a paper tiger we make up in our own head through comparison which is a thief of joy. “Never forget when you wanted what you have today” -Unknown

 

[staypuftforums]

So where would you get windows XP, windows 7, or 8? Its not like Microsft sells or lets you download them. Just like Apple, there are hardware constraints that prevent old versions of windows running on new (or newer hardware)


Just like trying to get a version of windows that's been EOL'd from non-official sites, you can install older versions of macOS from non-official sites.

I'm not seeing a "big difference"

Regarding PC vs. Mac, do you really want to install a windows operating system that's been EOL'd ? Seriously, you're just begging to have your pc infected with malware at that point.

Had I purchased a Windows PC in 2022 instead of my iMac, I wouldn’t be facing this issue of losing support for my machine in only 2 years.

That is the bottom line response to all of this “what about Microsoft” stuff.

A Windows PC manufactured in 2019 and sold in 2022 will still be supported with Windows 11 into the foreseeable future. It will easily make it to 2029, assuming the hardware holds up.

The iMac I bought is EOL roughly 2 years from now. That is a massive difference.

 

[dumastudetto]

I own and maintain several Macs and PCs, it’s the consumption of media and internet security that drives consumers away. But if you take a step back from the internet you’ll find your Mac just as fast as the day it was built. Just like the last of the PowerPC chips were gutted by the transition to Intel. No one comes to your house and orders you to throw your computer away. That’s a paper tiger we make up in our own head through comparison which is a thief of joy. “Never forget when you wanted what you have today” -Unknown

It won't feel as fast as the day it was built if you've upgraded the OS several times. In addition, the apps you run will stop receiving updates in many cases once Apple ceases software support. Microsoft Office, for example, follows Apple and only supports the current version + 2 versions back. Many indie apps require current supported versions of macOS to install updates, some even the latest version only.

The iMac 2017 I've been playing around with has 64GB RAM and 1TB SSD. It feels really fast on macOS Big Sur, broadly acceptable on Monterrey, and gets quite noticeably laggy on Ventura (its last officially supported OS update). There's no way I could put up with its performance on Ventura if I was still a macOS user, and that's probably not by accident.

 

[dumastudetto]

Had I purchased a Windows PC in 2022 instead of my iMac, I wouldn’t be facing this issue of losing support for my machine in only 2 years.

That is the bottom line response to all of this “what about Microsoft” stuff.

A Windows PC manufactured in 2019 and sold in 2022 will still be supported with Windows 11 into the foreseeable future. It will easily make it to 2029, assuming the hardware holds up.

The iMac I bought is EOL roughly 2 years from now. That is a massive difference.

Put it down as an expensive lesson and factor it into future purchasing decisions.

People who bought Intel towards the start of the M series transition were always going to be burned to some extent. I'm surprised Apple hasn't gone faster in cutting off support for Intel machines. I wasn't expecting any Intel machines to be supported with the next version of macOS given a radical redesign is a perfect cutting off point.

The thing with Microsoft Windows is there are workarounds to get Windows 11 running perfectly on pretty much any PC runnings Windows 7 or Windows 10. With macOS, you have to trust OCLP to get a working install and there are some noticeable performance penalties and shortcomings if you do that.