Well, they are after all, a corporation, which is required by law to maximise profits for shareholders’ benefit…
It’s actually a myth
I’m in the same camp re not agreeing with what Apple are doing these days which is why I’m very unlikely to ever but another Mac they are simply far too expensive and too far behind in CPU technology. Why would I pay over $1000 more for a Mac with a previous generation CPU (or even 2 generations old in some cases) when compared to a PC?
To get this thread on track, I’m glad Apple drop systems.
I recently installed 10.11.6 on my 2009 24" iMac with 8GB RAM and ATI4850 GPU. I was previously running 10.9.5 and it was quick. 10.11 has made my machine glacially slow. Boot up takes forever now. I’m sure an SSD would dramatically speed things up, but it just seems MacOS has left my trustworthy iMac behind.
I hate to think what this system would be like with 10.12 and beyond.
But thats the thing, plenty have put SSDs into these machines, which brings them well up to speed. And also supporting with updates is great because then you get the choice to roll back if you want, or update if you need it.
I’m more than happy to hand out bans, if you so desire.
Just so I’m clear: you’re talking about the environmental impact of Apple not supporting 7-year old machines that have been upgraded with an SSD?
Because that’s gotta be a pretty small slice of the pie, surely. But hey, if that’s the hill you want to die on, be my guest.
That comment was about machines that run modern MacOS versions very well with an SSD.
My earlier comments were about the impact of them not supporting capable Macs in general, especially releases like 10.12 which dropped Macs for no reason whatsoever. Or 10.8 which dropped Macs that were 3-4 years old that Apple couldn’t be bothered writing a 64 bit graphics driver for.
Where did MacGeek talk about bans?
Cool, thanks for clearing that up. I’m quite aware of your stance on Apple dropping hardware support, thanks.
He didn’t, but I read between the lines in the post I quoted and inferred that since he wasn’t going to buy any new Mac hardware, he would be revoking his membership to our discussion platform for Apple enthusiasts. If that’s not the case and this is all just a big misunderstanding, please let me know.
So if I don’t buy current hardware then I am by your own definition no longer an Apple enthusiast? How ludicrous, if that’s the case (and the attitude) then feel free to ban away
Yeah I will agree that’s a bit dumb @bennyling I think this thread has just got some passionate views on both sides of the argument. That’s generally what you want in the community.
That’s the thing with Apple users, they’re all quite passionate. Apple sets the bar incredibly high so rightly or wrongly we kind of expect more out of them. I’d no longer consider myself an enthusiast of their MBP line, and you all know my thoughts on it by now, but you’d have to pry my iPhone X and Apple TV out of my cold dead hands, I love them to bits.
I have been hesitant to return to my own thread here, because strictly speaking this was a thread about MAKING Mojave work on UNSUPPORTED Macs. If we want to have an argument on why certain Macs should be NATIVELY SUPPORTED, isn’t that another thread entirely? Perhaps @bennyling would consider a topic split.
I want to talk about potential creative solutions to Apple dropping Macs, not rehash that Apple’s Gonna Apple.
I understand both sides of the debate. Whether Apple should continue supporting older machines or not, some battles aren’t worth fighting. I stopped purchasing Apple products some time ago, and while I continue to work with them professionally, I would rather find a different career path than continue to invest time in learning and supporting the Apple ecosystem. It does nothing for me anymore.
Sometimes I want to vent my frustration and rant about something stupid Apple did, but over time I discovered that it doesn’t accomplish anything. Whether you’re an Apple faithful or firmly in the opposition, your own personal experiences drive your perception of the brand. If you’ve thoroughly enjoyed your Apple products, where does someone get the right or need to convince you otherwise? Likewise, if you’ve had repeated negative experiences with Apple, how can someone tell you that your experience is purely anecdotal and they are in fact fantastic by all accounts?
This argument is destined to go nowhere. All of them are. I’ve been in more than a few and honestly, save your breath. Or fingertips. Go outside, read a book, take a picture. Because we can argue about what Apple should or shouldn’t do, but what do we get out of it? Half a discussion forum that thinks the other half is absurd, undue stress and high blood pressure, while Apple continues to make another few billion dollars a quarter.
All that anger, that passion of wanting to convince and inform others of Apple’s flaws, was time and energy being channeled into something that I had no control over. Why lose sleep over it? Why not invest that time and energy into learning a new skill, selling my Apple products, finding a different job, or something else I would directly benefit from instead?
Sometimes, we have to let it go and come to understand that we’ll never see the perspective of the opposing argument. Our experiences have sent us in two different directions. Both views are right. They’re just not meant for each other.
All in all there were some great points made here. It would be awesome if Apple supported a bunch of older machines indefinitely. But it didn’t happen. Sometimes those older machines need to be dropped, for performance, compatibility or reliability reasons. Perhaps Apple should have built more reliable machines. But it didn’t happen. We can’t change the past. And arguments on the internet certainly don’t change the future.
So if AppleTalk wants to be a positive, constructive community for Apple enthusiasts, that’s excellent, and so it should be. They should be free to talk about how much they’re enjoying their gear without being concerned about every discussion turning into an argument. Of course everyone is free to discuss the drawbacks and flaws with Apple as well, in their own space, but remember that a discussion is all it will be.
If I had to choose a battle worth fighting, I don’t know about everyone else, but it wouldn’t be this one.
And coming back to the original question at hand, I don’t know how successful the talented few will be at adapting Mojave to unsupported systems. The Mac Pro seems doable on account of its upgradeable graphics card, but at the present time it seems that other systems are unlikely to be supported without serious compromise.
Yeah, after reading the MacRumors thread posted somewhere above it does sound like it won’t happen given Mojave’s reliance on Metal. If someone can work out how to bypass it without the UI slowing to a crawl that’ll be great, but looking at that thread it doesn’t sound hopeful.
Edit: I just revisited that MacRumors thread and they are making progress. OpenGL was baked in but disabled intentionally.
I just like to express my frustrations, I guess everyone has their own way.
Apparently someone has it booting on a Mid 2011 iMac with an upgraded GPU.
I can understand that, feels good sometimes. I think I’ve exhausted my supply of frustrations to vent and entered an unusual state of calm, where no matter how difficult technology becomes, I hold the power. One switch, and my problems disappear. It’s brilliant.
Makes sense. The graphics hardware seems to be the limitation, so if you swapped in another card, then it circumvents the problem. Of course upgrading an iMac with a newer GPU carries its own drawbacks, including lack of backlight control and EFI support, so it’ll remain an option only for a limited few.
Yes that is a problem! I guess it depends on what the person wants to do.
That is a good way to think about it
That is annoying.