May…
Anyway, if you want a box you can’t upgrade why don’t you just walk down the road and buy yourself a Lenovo or an Acer. Why are you spending so much money on a Mac. You clearly do not understand.
cause if i want a box i’ll put together a hacintosh! apple surely has always been something of a seduction in progress. if you ain’t feeling the draw, perhaps the romance is over and it’s time to move on.
That’s not how it works either… try again… I’m waiting.
do you think microsoft ever really had the glory? market share most certainly, but in terms of visionary it is a stretch to compare jobs and gates.
Try playing spot the difference with Windows 95 and OS 8.1. Tell me you would rather use OS 8.1. One operating system was a 32bit OS with preemptive multi-tasking, the other one had poorly implemented cooperative multi-tasking, and you had to allocate RAM yourself and if your system bombed there was no BSOD, no warning… no nothing. Go get a cup of coffee and restart your work. If there was a conflict you had to find it yourself, thats why apps like “conflict catcher” existed.
Lets be honest here. That’s where it all started… Tell me in the mid 90s why you would want to be running a Mac? Windows 95 was a god send by comparison.
i think the music has stopped, you still here? better hug something, preferably something with a heart beat, anything available? by the hour would suffice.
I’m happy man hey 
no issues here…
I would have taken a Mac any day - Windows had plenty of its own problems and Mac OS was much nicer to use. I grew up using 90s Macs and loved them 
It had problems, but they weren’t systemic of the Windows issues. Microsoft made a clean break from 16bit operating systems while Apple continued to put a fresh face on system 7.5.1 and lets not forget the “Copland” debacle of trying to turn System 7 into a modern 32bit operating system.
Apple losts years of development time while Microsoft put out Windows 95 and 98 and Windows 2000 while people were still trying to persevere with OS 9. One of the reasons why Apple brought Steve Jobs back in the first place was because Copland was a total disaster which never saw the light of day apart from internal developer previews.
If Apple continued down that pathway they would have been what Palm is today…
Whatever was going on in the background, I still dislike Windows 95 immensely. MAC OS 7 was so much better in many ways in ease of use and the areas.
Don’t get me wrong I used OS 8 through OS 9.2 when they were new. The footprint of it meant that you could run it on some crazy things like my 6100/66 I had running OS 9 which is unheard of for a Microsoft comparison, but when you look at it from under the hood, one operating system is archaic. As soon as you installed Windows 95b OSR2 there was no fair comparison. The System operating systems were designed in the 1980s, and bits were added on piecemeal over the years. Windows 95 was a new OS from top to bottom ground up and thats where Apple lost the war over the PC market.
IF you know something about code its whats called monolithic code. By comparison Windows 95 was a modern modular OS. I’m not saying this because I loved Windows 95, I don’t and I didn’t, but I was around back then and I was using these things when they were new. It got to a point where the Mac OS was seriously outdated and clunky.
I have an issue with the iPhone not having a user replaceable battery (seriously).
But adding up the positives and the negatives the iPhone 6S+ comes out more positive than negative so I bought one.
The iPhone 7 (sans headphone port) added up as more negatives than positives so I didn’t buy one.
The existence of a negative in a product isn’t in and of itself a reason not to buy a product, it just reduces the overall appeal of the product.
For example, the new Macbook Pro is looking like my next laptop despite the negative of no magsafe connector.
Look I don’t know how other people choose product, I only know how I do it…
For complicated purchases I create a spread sheet, I list the positives and negatives and I give a weighting to each factor depending upon how important that factor is to me. Then I work out the score for each potential product that fits into my price range and I base my purchase choice strictly upon the results.
As a matter of fact my entire workplace was Mac instead of win95. And I loved it. Mind you, you could see Apple had been coasting for a long time and had lost its focus. The parallels with today is quite telling.
https://support.apple.com/en-au/mac-notebooks/repair/service/pricing
Looks like it’s gone up a bit for certain models, but still not bad really.
This comes across as pretty rude. Not a good tone for this forum, which I’ve always enjoyed because everyone was pleasant.
I think this is a valid question. For me, personally, if my iPhone were my only computer I would find it very limiting. But I’m a tech consultant, I use the terminal and custom shell scripts and all sorts of things. An iOS device just wouldn’t work for me as my primary device. But for many people, that isn’t important. Fast, reliable and light are the right things to optimise for for many people. I know many people what have an iPhone and an iPad and no personal computer because they just don’t need one anymore. And for businesses, the cost of maintaining old hardware is usually not worth it as it’s written off within the 3-yr warranty anyway.
@Oldmacs - I share your ‘big picture’ environmental concerns about yearly upgrades, but I actually think the answer there is better and more efficient recycling rather than longevity of hardware. At scale, it’s more efficient to re-use the raw materials and refresh the person’s phone than to fix broken ones. I trust Apple to care about the environment in the big picture.
I don’t see it as such, if you want a non-upgradable magic box then you can go down to Office Works and buy one for about $500… A notebook is not a piece of voodoo technology we’re not allowed to see inside of, we shoudn’t be treated with the disdain of not knowing what we’re doing as end users.
At the end of the day it serves two purposes, one being the dumbing down of the community when some of us are qualified IT professionals as in my case, and two the forced prescription to a model of obligatorily having to buy a new machine all of a sudden if the end user wants more RAM, of all things, this signifies the inherent issue.
Apple is treating consumers like cretins. You should know that, by this I mean, that parameters for applications and operating systems change, as they do likewise on an iPhone, and when they do, are you going to be willing to fork out $3500 just to buy some more RAM in 2, 4 or 5 years time?
I’ll let you think about that…
I think this entirely misunderstands Apple.
Apple has always been about ‘computers as appliances’.
The loss of replaceable RAM was for thinness and lightness, and I think because with SSDs, most users won’t even notice swap files. Thinness and lightness are things that most users appreciate over being able to upgrade. I’m on record here as saying I’d love if there were more expandable machines as well but that’s just not Apple’s style, and it has never been.
It you want a non-upgradeable magic box, then a Mac is precisely the computer to buy, and always has been.
Apple ship their machines with enough RAM these days (they never used to, I agree) now for most users. If a pro user isn’t getting good advice to buy the machine with extra RAM when new these days (when it’s known that you can’t upgrade) then that’s not Apple’s fault.
I think you misunderstand the point of Apple, because Apple has never been like this… In pretty well ever, sorry, but you’re wrong… All of these machines were wonders of being upgradable. This makes me think you haven’t been using Macs for very long.
2 Likes
I think you are remembering Windows 95 through rose coloured glasses.
It most certainly was NOT a ground up rewrite to a 32 bit OS, it still loaded above DOS like Windows 3.1x did. And when you shut down (pre ATX and soft power switches) you got back to a DOS prompt, although hidden behind the orange “safe to shutdown” text, a “mode” command could be used to switch back to 80x25 text mode with a C:\> prompt.
Running Windows 95 on a Pentium Pro sucked, because that CPU was very slow at 16/32 bit context switching, Windows 95 had so much 16 bit code that moving the mouse resulted in a cursor that shuddered across the screen.
16 bit: win32s, Windows 95, 98, Me, dead.
32 bit: Windows NT, 2000, XP, …
vapourware to compete with NeXTStep: Cairo.
The BSOD was the bomb equavilent, though while on occasion you could press a key to try to recover, the first thing was always a reboot, because the state of the machine could not be trusted at that point.