Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 4th Feb 2009 07:05 UTC
Apple Apple has always been about moving forward, about pressing customers to buy the latest and greatest. Product pacing has been high in Cupertino (except for the Mac Mini, obviously), and this is obviously a good thing if you're an Apple bean counter. Most Apple fans more or less accept this planned obsolescence without question, but the company may have just gone a little too far.
Thread beginning with comment 347198
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Snow Leopard
by Clinton on Wed 4th Feb 2009 20:04 UTC in reply to "Snow Leopard"
Member since:

Well, I suppose these will be the requirements for Snow Leopard as well. Bye, bye iBook G4, you served me well last few years.

Isn't that kind of the point of Snow Leopard, to cut down the footprint? How could Apple do that if they still had code in there to support both the G4s and the Intel chips? The G4 support code is huge.

The Universal Binary was just a stepping stone to bridge the gap between the old CPU architecture and the new. I don't think any reasonable person expected Universal Binaries to be the standard from here on out. I think the Universal Binaries have served their purpose and it is now time for them to start saying goodbye.

I don't know why anybody is upset by this move either. At least Apple provided great support during the transition (through two major OS releases), unlike Microsoft, who releases an OS that is incompatible in many ways from their old OS and provides no transition support whatsoever.

Edited 2009-02-04 20:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Snow Leopard
by obi_oni on Sun 8th Feb 2009 22:55 in reply to "RE: Snow Leopard"
obi_oni Member since:

It's not as if a few GB (if that much) on disk mattered - it never gets loaded in memory, so it doesn't make a difference to startup speed or runtime performance.

Reply Parent Score: 1