Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #72012 > unrolled thread

JR: My walled in garden just shrunk!

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-03-24 20:28 +0000
    Re: JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-03-24 19:10 -0400
      Re: JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-24 23:26 +0000
        Re: JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-03-24 19:38 -0400
      Re: JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-03-25 13:18 +1300
        Re: JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-03-30 16:08 -0400
          Re: JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-30 21:09 +0000
          Re: JR: My walled in garden just shrunk! dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-03-31 11:43 +1300

#72012 — JR: My walled in garden just shrunk!

Due to last week's family crisis(my 85yr old Mother fell, had to have hip 
surgery, and is going into a 20 day rehab facility, then hopefully, back 
to her Alzheimer's facility), my iMac has shrunk.
I was going to get a refurbed Apple iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Core i3 (Mid 
2010) MC508LL/A for $650 from Mac of All Trades.
Now, with all the recent expenses, I am having to downgrade to a Apple 
iMac 20-inch 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo (Early 2009) MB417LL/A for $399.
Since this machine will be basically an iTunes machine to replace my old 
2002 iMac G4, this will have to do!
I know, JR, you said to stay away from the "Core 2 Duo", but financially, 
it is my only option. I read good reviews about this model from several 
Mac sites and looked up all the specs on everymac.com.
I will still be in that walled in garden with Sarah Lane and JR, but now 
might not have enough room for Jason Snell, Andy Ihnatko and others!
Forgive me, JR!

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#72024

On 2015-03-24 16:28, sctvguy1 wrote:
> Due to last week's family crisis(my 85yr old Mother fell, had to have hip
> surgery, and is going into a 20 day rehab facility, then hopefully, back
> to her Alzheimer's facility), my iMac has shrunk.
> I was going to get a refurbed Apple iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Core i3 (Mid
> 2010) MC508LL/A for $650 from Mac of All Trades.
> Now, with all the recent expenses, I am having to downgrade to a Apple
> iMac 20-inch 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo (Early 2009) MB417LL/A for $399.
> Since this machine will be basically an iTunes machine to replace my old
> 2002 iMac G4, this will have to do!
> I know, JR, you said to stay away from the "Core 2 Duo", but financially,
> it is my only option. I read good reviews about this model from several
> Mac sites and looked up all the specs on everymac.com.
> I will still be in that walled in garden with Sarah Lane and JR, but now
> might not have enough room for Jason Snell, Andy Ihnatko and others!
> Forgive me, JR!

There is nothing wrong with the Core 2 Duo except that it isn't the 
latest intel processor .. which of course are faster/better/more.

My SO's MBA has a Core 2 Duo as did my prior iMac.  Both are doing fine 
with Mavericks.  Haven't updated my SO's MBA to Yosemite yet but it 
should be okay.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72025

On 2015-03-24, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2015-03-24 16:28, sctvguy1 wrote:
>> Due to last week's family crisis(my 85yr old Mother fell, had to have hip
>> surgery, and is going into a 20 day rehab facility, then hopefully, back
>> to her Alzheimer's facility), my iMac has shrunk.
>> I was going to get a refurbed Apple iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Core i3 (Mid
>> 2010) MC508LL/A for $650 from Mac of All Trades.
>> Now, with all the recent expenses, I am having to downgrade to a Apple
>> iMac 20-inch 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo (Early 2009) MB417LL/A for $399.
>> Since this machine will be basically an iTunes machine to replace my old
>> 2002 iMac G4, this will have to do!
>> I know, JR, you said to stay away from the "Core 2 Duo", but financially,
>> it is my only option. I read good reviews about this model from several
>> Mac sites and looked up all the specs on everymac.com.
>> I will still be in that walled in garden with Sarah Lane and JR, but now
>> might not have enough room for Jason Snell, Andy Ihnatko and others!
>> Forgive me, JR!
>
> There is nothing wrong with the Core 2 Duo except that it isn't the 
> latest intel processor .. which of course are faster/better/more.
>
> My SO's MBA has a Core 2 Duo as did my prior iMac.  Both are doing fine 
> with Mavericks.  Haven't updated my SO's MBA to Yosemite yet but it 
> should be okay.

Yep. It'll run fine, just slower and hotter. : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72026

On 2015-03-24 19:26, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2015-03-24, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2015-03-24 16:28, sctvguy1 wrote:
>>> Due to last week's family crisis(my 85yr old Mother fell, had to have hip
>>> surgery, and is going into a 20 day rehab facility, then hopefully, back
>>> to her Alzheimer's facility), my iMac has shrunk.
>>> I was going to get a refurbed Apple iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Core i3 (Mid
>>> 2010) MC508LL/A for $650 from Mac of All Trades.
>>> Now, with all the recent expenses, I am having to downgrade to a Apple
>>> iMac 20-inch 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo (Early 2009) MB417LL/A for $399.
>>> Since this machine will be basically an iTunes machine to replace my old
>>> 2002 iMac G4, this will have to do!
>>> I know, JR, you said to stay away from the "Core 2 Duo", but financially,
>>> it is my only option. I read good reviews about this model from several
>>> Mac sites and looked up all the specs on everymac.com.
>>> I will still be in that walled in garden with Sarah Lane and JR, but now
>>> might not have enough room for Jason Snell, Andy Ihnatko and others!
>>> Forgive me, JR!
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with the Core 2 Duo except that it isn't the
>> latest intel processor .. which of course are faster/better/more.
>>
>> My SO's MBA has a Core 2 Duo as did my prior iMac.  Both are doing fine
>> with Mavericks.  Haven't updated my SO's MBA to Yosemite yet but it
>> should be okay.
>
> Yep. It'll run fine, just slower and hotter. : )

The 'hotter' part doesn't matter so much in an iMac.  In a laptop, well ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72028

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2015-03-24 16:28, sctvguy1 wrote:
> > Due to last week's family crisis(my 85yr old Mother fell, had to have hip
> > surgery, and is going into a 20 day rehab facility, then hopefully, back
> > to her Alzheimer's facility), my iMac has shrunk.
> > I was going to get a refurbed Apple iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Core i3 (Mid
> > 2010) MC508LL/A for $650 from Mac of All Trades.
> > Now, with all the recent expenses, I am having to downgrade to a Apple
> > iMac 20-inch 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo (Early 2009) MB417LL/A for $399.
> > Since this machine will be basically an iTunes machine to replace my old
> > 2002 iMac G4, this will have to do!
> > I know, JR, you said to stay away from the "Core 2 Duo", but financially,
> > it is my only option. I read good reviews about this model from several
> > Mac sites and looked up all the specs on everymac.com.
> > I will still be in that walled in garden with Sarah Lane and JR, but now
> > might not have enough room for Jason Snell, Andy Ihnatko and others!
> > Forgive me, JR!
> 
> There is nothing wrong with the Core 2 Duo except that it isn't the 
> latest intel processor .. which of course are faster/better/more.
> 
> My SO's MBA has a Core 2 Duo as did my prior iMac.  Both are doing fine
> with Mavericks.  Haven't updated my SO's MBA to Yosemite yet but it 
> should be okay.

At this stage, my main concerns with a Core 2 Duo would be age related:

1. Older computers are more likely to have component failures due to
aging, particularly hard drives, capacitors and LCD panels.

2. How long will Apple keep supporting Macs with Core 2 Duo processors
in future OS X versions?

There aren't any obvious technical reasons to drop support for the Core
2 Duo, but the other components in the computer are another matter: at
some point Apple will want to reduce the number of older models for
which they need to maintain support and testing for components like
chipsets and GPUs only used in older Macs. This would also allow the
minimum bar to be raised on GPU capabilities.

Apple doesn't offer hardware support anywhere in the world for Macs
discontinued more than seven years earlier, so software support beyond
that point is mostly down to whether it shares enough in common with
later models.

When there is a cutoff, support is typically dropped for models
discontinued between four and seven years earlier, though there have
been several cases in the last few years where some models had as little
as three years of being able to run the latest OS X version (last
PowerMac G5). The best case ever was the PowerMac G3 (Blue & White)
which could run the latest OS X version for just over eight years after
being discontinued.

We've just passed the point where the oldest Mac still supported by
Yosemite was discontinued seven years ago (Mid/Late 2007 MacBook Pro,
discontinued February 2008). When the next OS X version is released
(probably October), the Early 2008 MacBook Pro (which has the same GPU)
will have also reached the seven year mark, as will the Mid 2007 iMac.
If OS X 10.11 drops support for those models, where does it make sense
for Apple to draw the line?

The last Mac with a Core 2 Duo processor was discontinued in August
2011, and a worst case cutoff of four years is in the right ballpark.

After any such cutoff, if the Mac is upgraded to the last version of OS
X which supports the model, it will get about two more years of Security
and Safari updates, and a further year of iTunes updates.

Therefore in the worst possible case, assuming consistent release and
cutoff patterns, a Core 2 Duo Mac upgraded to Yosemite would be able to
run iTunes versions released up to September 2018. If the cutoff comes
in a later OS X version, add another year or two.

The iTunes version is significant if there are iOS devices involved,
since you need an iTunes update to support a new major version of iOS.
Snow Leopard has had its final version of iTunes (11.4) and won't
support devices running iOS 9 later this year.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72404

On 2015-03-24 20:18, David Empson wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-03-24 16:28, sctvguy1 wrote:
>>> Due to last week's family crisis(my 85yr old Mother fell, had to have hip
>>> surgery, and is going into a 20 day rehab facility, then hopefully, back
>>> to her Alzheimer's facility), my iMac has shrunk.
>>> I was going to get a refurbed Apple iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Core i3 (Mid
>>> 2010) MC508LL/A for $650 from Mac of All Trades.
>>> Now, with all the recent expenses, I am having to downgrade to a Apple
>>> iMac 20-inch 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo (Early 2009) MB417LL/A for $399.
>>> Since this machine will be basically an iTunes machine to replace my old
>>> 2002 iMac G4, this will have to do!
>>> I know, JR, you said to stay away from the "Core 2 Duo", but financially,
>>> it is my only option. I read good reviews about this model from several
>>> Mac sites and looked up all the specs on everymac.com.
>>> I will still be in that walled in garden with Sarah Lane and JR, but now
>>> might not have enough room for Jason Snell, Andy Ihnatko and others!
>>> Forgive me, JR!
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with the Core 2 Duo except that it isn't the
>> latest intel processor .. which of course are faster/better/more.
>>
>> My SO's MBA has a Core 2 Duo as did my prior iMac.  Both are doing fine
>> with Mavericks.  Haven't updated my SO's MBA to Yosemite yet but it
>> should be okay.
>
> At this stage, my main concerns with a Core 2 Duo would be age related:
>
> 1. Older computers are more likely to have component failures due to
> aging, particularly hard drives, capacitors and LCD panels.
>
> 2. How long will Apple keep supporting Macs with Core 2 Duo processors
> in future OS X versions?
>
> There aren't any obvious technical reasons to drop support for the Core
> 2 Duo, but the other components in the computer are another matter: at
> some point Apple will want to reduce the number of older models for
> which they need to maintain support and testing for components like
> chipsets and GPUs only used in older Macs. This would also allow the
> minimum bar to be raised on GPU capabilities.
>
> Apple doesn't offer hardware support anywhere in the world for Macs
> discontinued more than seven years earlier, so software support beyond
> that point is mostly down to whether it shares enough in common with
> later models.
>
> When there is a cutoff, support is typically dropped for models
> discontinued between four and seven years earlier, though there have
> been several cases in the last few years where some models had as little
> as three years of being able to run the latest OS X version (last
> PowerMac G5). The best case ever was the PowerMac G3 (Blue & White)
> which could run the latest OS X version for just over eight years after
> being discontinued.
>
> We've just passed the point where the oldest Mac still supported by
> Yosemite was discontinued seven years ago (Mid/Late 2007 MacBook Pro,
> discontinued February 2008). When the next OS X version is released
> (probably October), the Early 2008 MacBook Pro (which has the same GPU)
> will have also reached the seven year mark, as will the Mid 2007 iMac.
> If OS X 10.11 drops support for those models, where does it make sense
> for Apple to draw the line?
>
> The last Mac with a Core 2 Duo processor was discontinued in August
> 2011, and a worst case cutoff of four years is in the right ballpark.
>
> After any such cutoff, if the Mac is upgraded to the last version of OS
> X which supports the model, it will get about two more years of Security
> and Safari updates, and a further year of iTunes updates.
>
> Therefore in the worst possible case, assuming consistent release and
> cutoff patterns, a Core 2 Duo Mac upgraded to Yosemite would be able to
> run iTunes versions released up to September 2018. If the cutoff comes
> in a later OS X version, add another year or two.
>
> The iTunes version is significant if there are iOS devices involved,
> since you need an iTunes update to support a new major version of iOS.
> Snow Leopard has had its final version of iTunes (11.4) and won't
> support devices running iOS 9 later this year.

Thanks David.

In theory there should be no tie between how old a Mac is and what iOS 
it can update.  In theory, it should just be "cargo" that any computer 
could deliver to the iPhone for updating as long as the computer has a 
USB port and could run an appropriate loader program (not necessarily 
iTunes).  In theory.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72418

In message <wt6dnfkT96C7MITInZ2dnUU7-cOdnZ2d@giganews.com> 
  Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> In theory there should be no tie between how old a Mac is and what iOS 
> it can update. 

Not true.

> In theory, it should just be "cargo" that any computer could deliver to the
> iPhone for updating as long as the computer has a USB port and could run an
> appropriate loader program (not necessarily iTunes).

Wrong in every possible way.

> In theory.

Not even in theory.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72430

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2015-03-24 20:18, David Empson wrote:
> > The iTunes version is significant if there are iOS devices involved,
> > since you need an iTunes update to support a new major version of iOS.
> > Snow Leopard has had its final version of iTunes (11.4) and won't
> > support devices running iOS 9 later this year.
> 
> Thanks David.
> 
> In theory there should be no tie between how old a Mac is and what iOS
> it can update.  In theory, it should just be "cargo" that any computer
> could deliver to the iPhone for updating as long as the computer has a
> USB port and could run an appropriate loader program (not necessarily
> iTunes).  In theory.

It would be nice if Apple came up with a better way of maintaining
compatibility with newer iOS devices on older Macs, but I can see it is
difficult.

The opposite way around is not a problem: as far as I know, the latest
OS X and iTunes still support original iPods.

One of the compatibility issues is that iTunes needs to be able to
identify newly introduced iOS models, so iTunes can display the model
name and picture, and knows its capabilities. As that is just data, it
should be feasible to download that information from Apple rather than
building it into iTunes.

The main issue is likely to be new iOS device or version capabilities
requiring changes to the sync and management protocols. If that leads to
needing to develop new code for iTunes, then the OS X support cutoff is
an issue. Apple already gives old OS X versions an extra year of support
in iTunes, compared to security and Safari updates, which probably
complicates its build process.

At least iOS devices can mostly be used independently of iTunes these
days. Prior to iOS 5, iTunes was required for installing iOS updates.
The main remaining dependencies are local backups (if you don't want to
or can't use iCloud for some reason), local sync, and restoring the
device from scratch.

If you don't mind using iCloud backups, online sync (probably via
something other than iCloud) and have occasional access to a Mac or PC
able to run the latest iTunes, then someone running Snow Leopard should
still be OK with iOS 9.

Snow Leopard with iTunes 11.4 was compatible with iOS 8 (and the iPhone
6 and 6 Plus), and I haven't heard of any compatibility issues with
subsequent iOS 8.x updates. There was at least one case in the past (iOS
4.1 or thereabouts) where a minor iOS update required an iTunes update,
so there is a possibility that iOS 8.3 or the rumoured 8.4 might trigger
an increase in the minimum iTunes version and therefore drop Snow
Leopard compatibility.

According to Apple's support page, Snow Leopard is the minimum
requirement for the iPad Air 2, which implies iTunes 11.4, even though
the iPad Air 2 was released a month after iTunes 11.4.

Does anyone here happen to be running iTunes 11.4 and have an iPad Air 2
or iPad mini 3, and can confirm they are compatible?

(MacTracker says iTunes 12 is required, but I don't know where it got
that from, as Apple's support pages say Mac OS X 10.6.8 is the minimum.)

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web