Well, yeah, companies work differently, but over here every company (that are our customers) just rent computers anyway and most that use Macs are still on Big Sur.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
PCs last longer than Macs
- Thread starter iHorseHead
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Kind of hard to have any sort of discussion if you only read the first part of a post. Apple hardware already gets security updates for longer than 5 years.
My first MacBook didn't get updates longer than for 5 years…
Also many PowerPC Macs didn't receive updates for more than 5 years.
Fairly disingenuous of you to post an article from 2008 about a Safari exploit and say that "the same goes for Macs these days"...
And the remote access tools are ENORMOUSLY more available in the Windows world than on macOS (due to the sheer larger numbers of PCs than Macs, and the incredibly permissive nature of Windows, the old unchanging architecture and NT kernel that has never been rewritten in a million years because "business" relies so heavily on compatibility from 25 years ago). No OS will be exploit free, they're too complex to be perfect. One exploit is not an example of poor security - just a backdoor of probably numerous that someone has found, that needs a fix just like Windows needs fixes too.
Yeah, but this discussion is truly silly because a machine from 2002 will barely run a modern web browser well, will suffer immensely with anything remotely intense like a YouTube video (obviously good luck running even 1080p), might be OK for Notepad or Solitaire on Windows 11 (which might work but would be utterly unsupported, and we could say the same for hackintosh) but any normal person will very quickly hit a road block when one day they want to use it for something even basically serious. It's a curiosity at best but ir proves nothing about longevity.
If you're the sort of person who likes to justify running a car from the 1970's for the pure nostalgia of it but you overlook entirely the fact that its ridiculously inefficient engine, its need for leaded fuel and total lack of catalytic converter will mean an absolute hazard for anyone that's within 25 metres of it, and the fact that to get it to roadworthy would cost 4 times more than the price of the car today - fine, I won't stop you. But virtually NO ONE could properly use a PC built in 2002 for typical usage today.
Apple is a device manufacturing company, so to keep the older hardware running for longer is not profitable, as Apple needs to keep on selling the production every few months. This is done by all the device manufacturing companies. Microsoft had also become a laptop, tablet making company, but it also sells the OS, which is universal, which can be installed in PCs made by hundreds of manufacturers. Even though, MS says it is not recommended to install Windows 11, it had found that it is not worth to block those "unsupported" devices. Most would use MS Office 365 and OneDrive, massive source of money.
My MBP is also an "unsupported" device for Windows 11, but it runs it. It is not activated, but MS doesn't go after it.
My MBP is also an "unsupported" device for Windows 11, but it runs it. It is not activated, but MS doesn't go after it.
If you're comparing Apples with Apples (excuse the pun) a 2002 Windows laptop was as easily repairable as any PowerBook from the time which were highly modular. Today, I agree that that is different and that Apple are to blame for that. I'd also say that good luck finding upgrades for a 2002 machine today considering how much CPU's, RAM and storage technology has changed and advanced. The video is clear - the thing is a pain in the ass to upgrade or modify - so again this whole subject is just a curiosity for someone who loves to keep around bits of computers from the 2000's.
Apple Silicon is still way on top for the moment, until we see official benchmarks that equally account for performance per watt. We're talking laptops here, so no use if an Intel gets 400 points more while burning a hole in the laptop and emptying the battery in 35 minutes.
Windows is more secure? Where do you get this from ? What's the source of this information ? The most common OS in history for which there is a 20:1 ratio of malware, viruses, pups compared to the competition and the absolute necessity to run an anti-virus tool at all times. Numerous articles I've researched using the title "Security Windows Mac comparison" - there isn't single one that suggests that Windows is better, in fact all show from studies and security firms evaluations that Windows come out worse every time. All articles were from 2023.
Yeah, I agree with you that its supported longer, however its support period is just around the time I'd probably consider a new machine anyway and sell my old one.
A laptop is a computer with a battery, so one can use it for some simple work, while away from a electrical socket, and the battery is not there for heavy work, but just to keep it going while away from a electrical socket. It should be plugged in, whenever it has an access to electrical power.
I would disagree with you - I worked for 4 years in computer repair / upgrades in the late 2000's and about the only decent PC producer was Dell, and that was only their business machines like Latitudes et Dimensions etc. I genuinely found them strong, robust and relatively well thought out, if not very plastic. The amount of pure sh7t I saw everyday from other manufacturers like Acer, Asus, Hewlett Packard, Compaq, MSI and that stupid fad "netbooks" which were so poorly made, so flexible and non rigid that an MB replacement was very frequently on the cards - was unbelievable. For sure the Windows world is cheaper than the Apple world but in many cases its NEVER worth it for what you get (considering the cheapest stuff may have a 1 year life in reality) and for the low level of engineering that you support with your money.
Nice but rare moments for me where when I'd get in a plastic white MacBook or a Pro and while the insides were a mix of unbelievably well engineered internals (a sight to behold with the all black circuit boards and incredibly tight tolerances for components) and horrifically complicated screw placements and differing screw types, they were pure quality. That's what pushed me to get a MacBook Pro eventually and I haven't looked back since - regardless of the less customisable machine, the shorter update cycles (which really aren't a problem, we're all IT enthusiasts here who probably upgrade more often than most folks) - Macs are still pure quality and they push the others to up their game.
Please give it up on the individual problems you find about dust ingress causing failures - you can take that issue and multiple it by 20 in the Windows world for a raft of idiotic problems that should never cause failures but are just down to the fact that a company wants to sell a Windows machine for 300€. We can all find a little thing that goes nowhere to explaining a bigger picture. I've had failed screens and failed screen cables and going back 4 years after the warranty expired, they've been replaced for free under a program. I wouldn't even bother my bum talking to any other manufacturer about a replacement as I know I'd be wasting my sweet breath.
No, that's not actually true. Laptops batteries these days genuinely can offer 18 hours of battery life for basic use and maybe 6 to 10 for intense use (i.e. a workday away from the socket). If you want to plug it in, go for it, if you don't - there's equally no particular recommendation that I'm aware of that obliges you to when you happen to be near a socket. Just when the battery gets low, OR when you want to.
The point I'm trying to make in my last post was that Intel efficiency is nowhere near Apples efficiency considering there now at what was considered not long ago to be an impossible architecture - 3nm and Intel are nowhere near this. Intel power consumption is still excessive for the clock cycles you get and that's a big problem for what were talking about here - laptops.
It's not true, I'm a pro Windows user to this day - my everyday work as an admin (and a Mac user at home) and for years it was the same for me. After about 6 months of use a Windows machine would slow down and begin to become annoyingly unusable and a reinstall would fix that. I have my MacBook Pro from 2020 which has at least 12 major upgrades worth of data in it as I started on Snow Leopard and its as blisteringly fast today as it was on my initial MBP. On the Windows side I don't know if its bit rot, and NTFS's inefficient organisation of bits on a drive over time, the telemetry collected through data-hoovering which has an impact on the CPU, RAM and drives, (which nobody wnats) or updates that come with fairly large performance penalties, or the fact that Microsoft doesn't make a basic range of decent quality applications out of the box unlike Mac, and so users install and try multiple types from 3rd parties that fill up the machine with crap, and run services and may contain adware and PUP's which all result in having an impact.
The Layer 8 problem (its the users fault) is the worst excuse, when we consider that people comes from multiple different levels of experience, the platforms and software we use are imperfect (poorly designed, inconsistent UIs, often buggy, designed by techs for techs, not everyday people), manipulative (data-sucking, read this 24 page legal contract, don't understand it and then click Accept) and old and in need of a rewrite (the NT kernel which remains in place just to keep old corporations happy and compatible). We then blame the new user for not knowing all of the above and not being an expert from the outset? How ridiculous is that. Imagine you're put in a cockpit of a plane and expected to land it only knowing that the hand thing to the laft turns it left and right and up and down and the other hand thing controls the engines. Naturally you'd crash into the ground (more than likely). Now, not knowing how to land it, would not make you an idiot - just inexperienced.
What you might find easy today is what might be difficult and frustrating for a new user - but you've forgotten how hard it was at the start and how you were the "problem between the chair and the screen" - you've just forgetten that. It's easy to dump the problem on the user because their lack of experience and education can make them inarticulate and seem stupid - but isn't that the problem of companies to solve as opposed to blame people for their lack of experience and education (which is highly varied across any given population). UI and UX have changed radically in recent years for better ease of use, not because users are "stupid" but because the UI / UX was bad and needs to serve a large and diverse population of people, some of which will be complexity inclined and others which wont be, some of which come from highly educated backgrounds and others that don't (and the statistics show that higher education doesn't actually provide better training for computer use). It's easy to blame the weak individual that can't stand up for themselves because they don't know what they don't know, much harder to look at ourselves from a wider vantage point and find out that we still have the really hard work to do and make PCs and Macs and software easier for everyone - that's way harder.
I was doing some research recently and it turns out there were approx 4 grams of tetraethyl lead per gallon of unleaded gas! That’s…really disgusting. And way more than I would have expected.
It is not exactly Apple's efficiency, but TMSC's efficiency. The Intel efficiency is quite alright for me atm, and for quite sometime in the future too. I am using an Intel 15" MBP with an 8gen I7 chip with dual Intel/AMD graphics, doing so well today, after 5+ years, running Sequoia Beta 3. Best not to undermine Intel's or AMD's intelligence and efficiency.
Last edited:
This here proves the point of the topic. Arc Browser now only supports an OS released less than 2 years ago and Macs above 2017. In comparison, the 2008 Vaio supports it on Windows 11 for example.
I ran an I5 760 until last year when the original power supply died and it was no longer worth repairing. So a 12 year old machine with a replaced solid state HD from the original spinning one and $100 graphic card update along the way never bottlenecked from a gaming machine when new to a home office machine for an initial purchase price with monitor for $1,100. I couldn’t even tell you what iMac specs were in 2011 but I know it would be a brick after 12 years.
Yet another Chromium-based browser I'd never even heard of, how many do we need really? Brave, Vivaldi, Edge, Opera, I've lost count of them all.
Meanwhile Chromium has been backported to as far back as 10.7 Lion.
I have a MBP that I need as a dependable workhorse to process photos in Photo Mechanic, Photoshop and Lightroom and then send files using SFTP. That's in addition to typical browser/email/slack type office communications. And I need to be able to have it do all those things off the battery, as sometimes wall power isn't available. That's more than "some simple work." It's at the core of why some of us own laptops.
Sure, I can imagine people sitting with their laptops in the park benches, coffee shops processing photos... 😏
I have a 2011 21.5 iMac upgraded over the years with an i7, 500GB SSD and 32GB RAM. It runs very well with no complaint even while running only High Sierra. I recently bought a new M3 iMac not because I needed a new computer, but wanted a new one after thirteen years.
I'm glad that doesn't stretch your imagination. Generally it's in a car immediately after some photography and before some more photography elsewhere. Deadlines don't have a lot of respect for coffee shops, though that happens as well on occasion. A coffee shop is great if one has time.
Horrendous trend
They are a frickin' web browser
There is no need to be dumping OS support that was already there
That conduct turns me off from ever even bothering with their product
On purchase my 2011 iMac had 4gb RAM, Intel i5 and 500gb HDD. My first upgrade right off was 8gb RAM. Then I added more over the years.
When Apple releases a new version of macOS they drop the security updates on older releases.