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.
Planned obsolescence!
- Thread starter George Waseem
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
It may be a breath of fresh air, but windows xp is still faster.
It may not do as much, but in the context of these "conversations" xp is "faster"If you disable Aero on Windows 10,enable Classic theme and lower the resolution ,10 is just as fast as XPIt may be a breath of fresh air, but windows xp is still faster.
Windows 1 was actually released on 1986 so wintel has a 20 year on Apple to get things right and microsoft and intel worked as partners. Directx also has had a pretty good maturation period and desktop class processors can run 24x7 at 3.5ghz without batting an eye. So there is a bit of difference in all of that.
7 year old hardware brings to the introduction of the core i7 era, which coincided with the rapid introduction of 64 bit processing. So you want take your example back a generation or two.
Nope, it still has more "stuff" under the covers.
I know you are going to be surprised by this. Here is my eye candy settings.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
It may be a breath of fresh air, but windows xp is still faster.
I'm sorry but your continued negativity and combative tone of wanting to argue , i know more than you or force people to see only "your point" of view regardless of subject is starting to irk me. You appear to be just making posts that are meant solely to provoke other users and stir up anger, rather than contribute to a discussion which is in contra to the MacRumors Rules for Appropriate Debate
What is the basis for your claim of "XP is faster"... people installed it incorrectly?
Is your measure boot times? what's the CPU?, what are the other components? Your comment has so many assumptions it's unreal.
Last edited:
If I want to argue what is everyone else including you doing? If this entire thread is about does apple purposefully and knowingly build their software so that people get fed up with the performance so that they will buy new hardware, thus increasing sales and profits we are so far off field at this point. The entire proposition seems silly if you think about it.
Oddly enough, I was going to post the same link that you just did in another post.
There is a fine line being thrown around here between discussing, arguing, debating and trolling (as much as I hate to use that word.)
As far as the basis of my claim XP is faster, I still use it on a daily basis. On my main desktop I have windows xp, windows 8.1, windows 7 and windows 10 installed. In virtual machines I have windows xp, windows 7, windows 8.1, ubuntu, windows 2000 and windows nt. Windows 2000 is really the speed king here, but I didn't want to include virtual operating systems in this discussion.
The ****** iOS 9 stuttering quality has ruined the iPhone experience for me (which brought me to iOS in the first place) so much, that I enjoyed using Xperia M2 Aqua more (a used phone I paid 80€ for playing MP3 while cycling/running, drops less frames). So I posted an ad and managed to sell the iPhone in 3 days.
I hope Apple gets their **** together and starts delivering that old quality in the future.
Take care guys and gals.
I hope Apple gets their **** together and starts delivering that old quality in the future.
Take care guys and gals.
It may be a breath of fresh air, but windows xp is still faster.
So the normal windows XP home edition will run faster than windows 10 on my old Dell core2duo machine from 2006 that has 8 gig of memory? What about the memory limitations of XP?
Yes, you should give it a shot.
What about the memory limitations? Are we discussing how fast programs open, or how fast work can get done AFTER the program opens. Or how much memory we can consume on the box. A 32 bit application will still be limited, except in some specific situations, to 3gig of memory. What are we discussing on IOS? How fast apps open, or how fast we can get work done after the apps open? I can't see how performance can be measured by saying one app opens .2 seconds faster than the equivalent app on a different release. To me, it's how fast I can get work done.
I'm not debating the points you brought up as they are valid. Where this line of thinking originated from is imo older hardware tends to run older less feature filled operating system releases faster than older hardware runs newer more feature filled operating systems. And yeah, you can bring in concurrency and multi-tasking but when you get back to IOS, IOS 9 may run slower on a 4s than ios 5, but is it really crippled as some would say?
I don't really know. Is that the "new" definition of crippled and why the lawsuit was filed?
-can't open more than two tabs
-Keyboard lag
-Atrociously bad animation stutter
-Painfully long 5 second load times
Yup that's crippled alright
Lol XP doesn't even have Google Chrome or Security updates.How one has that relic even installed is beyond me.Microsoft should just give Windows 10'for free to XP users out of pityYes, you should give it a shot.
What are we discussing on IOS? How fast apps open, or how fast we can get work done after the apps open? I can't see how performance can be measured by saying one app opens .2 seconds faster than the equivalent app on a different release. To me, it's how fast I can get work done.
I don't see any of that on my ipad 2; which is essentially the same hardware and software with more pixels. Do you have a 4s or are you relying on third-party information for your facts?
I am talking about the Mini
Except Windows 10 does not cripple XP machines like iOS 9 cripples devices launched with iOS 6.Google Chrome launches and has the same capability on 10 as it did on XP.Typing is still as fast.Games load the same.Zero Difference
Wait, so you can run Windows 10 on a Windows XP machine that was purchased 8 years ago?
Except that for windows devices a desktop class processor since the introduction of the Core I7 in 2008 has a fairly decent size lifespan. So essentially you can install windows 10 on the first i7, the 920 at 2.66 and it will be okay enough for light tasks. Of course you need an lga-1366 system board, ddr3 memory, etc.
In the same way my ipad 2 is not quite the workhorse as the 6s is.
Well, this is your opinion, and not representative of every users experience. I upgraded from the iPhone 4 to a 5S for one reason only -- the home button and lock buttons had stopped working reliably. First one and then the other. Otherwise I was perfectly happy with the performance of my iP4 under iOS 7. And even with those hardware problems, I didn't upgrade until after the iPhone 6 was released. So only a little over a year ago. In fact, I still use my iP4 as an iPod Touch, despite the broken buttons, and am totally satisfied with its performance.
So maybe, the problem isn't planned obsolescence, but rather your needs have exceeded the abilities of the device, which is a totally different thing. Case in point, I wouldn't go back to an iPhone without Touch ID for any price now.
You may have noticed my screen name, and graphic. That's not just nostalgia -- I actually still have my original 128k Mac I bought used in the Spring of 1986, and I maintain and use it occasionally. And here's the thing -- it still does everything I bought it to do in 1986, and even a few things it was never designed to do thanks to industrious developers. What I have no expectations for it to do however, is something I need my current Macs to do.
But perhaps I misunderstand you -- if your complaint is solely that you wish you could go back to iOS 6, and that would make your iP4 totally usable to this day forestalling your need to upgrade to the 5S, but Apple won't let you; then I sympathize. There are ways around that however. But if you're saying you want the features afforded under iOS 7, or 8, and on the iPhone 5S along with its performance, then I don't really see this as planned obsolescence, but a failure of unreasonable expectations.
Again, I would still be using my 4 with no complaints, blissfully unaware of the convenience of Touch ID, holding out for the new 4" iPhone. Maybe you just had a bad install. But if that's not it, then I have to question the reasonableness of your expectations.
You can run it on whatever it will run on. I have it running on two machines at work that are older than that and it runs just fine.
Well said.
I have both the 4S and the iPad mini 1, both running iOS 9.2. I use them every day. Indeed, for trivial actions like flipping around the home page, or opening small apps, the mini 1 is hard to tell apart from the mini 4. Where things fall apart is with CPU-bound apps. The News app really bogs down on the mini 1.
Apple's claim of 'faster' might well deserve some criticism, but to claim these devices are crippled seems a bit over the top.
A.
Windows 10 runs great on my 2006 core 2 duo desktop which was purchased in 2006, better than XP ran on it.
- Status