There is nothing wrong in empowering people by showing the direction with a disclaimer that there might be obstacles along the way.
That's a silly reason when we already know Apple themselves can't be bothered to back port all patches to all "supported" versions.
Can I tell you exactly what the security updates are? Not my job.
Is what just "talk to make people wonder"? The fact that security updates are issued? You're not making a lot of sense here, friend.
I can read Apple support pages, you tell us, what you think about those "security" updates. Security from whom? Their own software? Or, we forgot to correct some bugs and are trying to solve them, but making more bugs on the way?
Thank you for understanding what I'm talking about. My examples were too extreme, but it made me think how sad it is that Apple drops so many Macs (especially lately) and doesn't provide them any security updates. In that sense Windows is a lot better and years ago thesafemac.com pointed out the same. Apple doesn't even tell their users when the operating system is out of date. If you try to update High Sierra now it'd say that the software is up to date. Microsoft gives people a warning and says that the operating system is out of date. Apple doesn't do so and it's absurd that MacBook Air from 2018 will become unsupported before the iPhone XR.
LOL, no idea what you're talking about, but it kind of sounds like you're trying to just stir **** up. Not biting. Good luck to you.
The title of the thread is ’PC’s last longer than MAC’s’ (not specifically laptops).
The nice words "security updates" means their software had bugs from the beginning and they knew it, or they found out later, but had the time constraints to release the new OS variant, so some software were released without solving the bugs. In other words, read the release notes. Not everything is there, but some critical ones are. Then they keep on trying to solve those bugs, and release "security updates," in other words, correcting own mistakes. It is the same with any OS, BSD, Linux, macOS or Windows.
You realize that you quoted a ruggedized laptop, right? Do you know what those are? Do you know that Apple doesn't even make ruggedized laptops?
They are giving the impression that they support Windows 11 on "unsupported" software when they do NOT. Even people in this thread think Microsoft officially supports this when they do NOT. Yes, they are giving the wrong impression by having such an article.
And there we go exactly what I was looking for. So it IS okay to have 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage in some cases? So having a product AT THAT PRICE POINT with that atrocious RAM and SSD is fine? That is what all these RAM and SSD complaints are "at that price point.....". But the Dell is now suddenly fine?
You used a laptop designed for a very specialized niche use-case in order to try to point out that those specs at that price point are an "industry wide" thing. The only comparison that would be as equally ridiculous as yours would be if someone were to try to justify the price of a $10,000 Sony 1080p television by linking to the product page of a high-end Smartboard display.
You can get the same display quality and feature set with better RAM and storage for the same money as a base model Mac. For example the 15" OLED Asus Vivobook S has a 200+ PPI 120Hz OLED screen with a fast ARM processor with 16GB RAM and a 1TB SSD for $1300. Same as the base model 8GB, 256GB 15" MBA.
There’s no way a Sony Vaio laptop from 2008 supports Windows 11 without aftermarket upgrades (enough so that the only original part is the outer shell, in which case is it really a Sony Vaio from 2008 anymore?), at least without third party patches to Windows (or some hacks, like virtualization). And, if you’re going to count third party patches to Windows, you’d best do the same with third party patches to macOS. (Though we all know that Linux wins hands down when it comes to the “support for old hardware” bullet point.) Windows 11 is notorious for dropping support for relatively recent hardware, given its requirement for a certain type of hardware security module.
Okay, you’ve made your point. Now… what are you going to do? Given the products that are actually available to you today… are you going to buy Apple or buy Microsoft? You’ll have to make a decision one way or the other. And no decision is a decision in itself.
It’s one example out of dozens. I’m not everyone’s Google on this forum. Look at other manufacturers and they will regularly have business grade laptops that just have 1080p crappy displays and crappy trackpads.
Again it’s just one flipping example out of dozens in the industry. I’m not everyone’s Google here. Use it. Do your own research. I just got into an argument a month or two ago with a business I maintain because they purchased 20 laptops that costed $2,500 and they only had 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage. It’s an industry problem.
Apparently it does. And the folks in this thread think Microsoft supports this as well which makes this discussion not operating in good faith. Microsoft page itself says it’s not supported and could stop at any point. But people still think Microsoft supports it.
It's a bad example. You should have used one of the other "dozens" that you obviously are able to find. You can re-state your false equivalency however many times you want, but it is still a false equivalency.
