|
|
Apple updates iTunes, declares 2009 MacBook Pros obsolete
|
|
|
|
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status:
Offline
|
|
Apple has updated its iTunes music software for OS X separately of its 10.10.3 release yesterday. The new version, 12.1.2, adds support for the OS X Photos application that was included in 10.10.3, though it also still supports iPhoto. The update brings sync support for Photos to sync to iOS devices. It has also added support for syncing with iOS 8.3, and made general "refinements" to the Get Info display in iTunes, as well as improving overall stability.
Apple has been gently weaning users off needing to use iTunes as a hub for syncing information such as photos and music, preferring either iCloud syncing or other iCloud-related services, like the existing iTunes Match service -- which offers to store users' entire libraries of music (up to 25,000 non-iTunes tracks) in the cloud for streaming access -- or the newly-emerged-from-beta iCloud Photo Library, which offers to store users' entire photo libraries at full resolution, with device-optimized versions streamed on demand to devices. The two services, both of which will require users to pay modest fees, are designed to free up space from the limited capacities of iPhones, iPads, or the iPod touch.
The company also updated its official list of products it considers "vintage or obsolete" on Thursday to now include all models of the 2009 MacBook Pro. The reclassification falls into the general timeline of products becoming "obsolete" for support purposes after a period of four to five years.
The change has little meaningful effect on users of those models, as any AppleCare warranties on them would have expired at least a year ago. It may have some impact, however, on owners who have certain parts failures for which Apple will no longer make replacements, making them much harder to find in years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
...old stock & refurbs can have applecare added, so dates can shift...
The vintage list seems impressively long, leaving me asking about the sustainability claims that Apple seems to base at least some marketing on...? Where do all those rare earth metals end up, anyway...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status:
Offline
|
|
http://www.apple.com/environment/finite-resources/
http://www.apple.com/environment/toxins/
|
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
(
Last edited by bobolicious; Apr 9, 2015 at 08:47 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: West Michigan
Status:
Offline
|
|
While I'm not opposed to Apple "officially" no longer supporting older models, I admit to finding it galling when they simply pretend perfectly good hardware is "obsolete" for the purposes of selling new hardware. Sometime the product they obsolete is for valid reasons, such as certain older video-chipsets being unable to support modern graphics APIs. Often, however, the reasons are completely fictitious and solely for the sake of gouging consumers out of more money. My personal "powerhouse" Mac is still an extremely quick Mac Pro 1,1 upgraded with a modern video-card. It runs Yosemite perfectly and definitely isn't obsolete in any way, despite what Apple claims. I've also installed ML on countless older MacBook and iMac systems which were officially "obsolete" with Lion, and these systems also run extremely well and reliably with no issues. It's a shame that Apple, with all the money they have, can't hire programmers as skilled as the unpaid "hackers" who have gotten these abandoned systems to function perfectly. Way to alienate your fans Apple!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
How long do you suggest the maintain spare parts inventory for all of their machines?
AppleCare has long expired for these machines. You can still get them repaired elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Too F'ing Cold, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
What I find interesting is this:
Apple previously had an easy excuse to drop support for older models... they kept changing architectures. I really don't see them doing this again for another 5-10 years. The only possibilities would be if they adopt ARM as their main desktop/laptop architecture. Or if Intel makes a major advancement with their x86 platform (e.g. Core duo vs. Core 2 Duo, or even 128bit processors).
Now that x86 has matured, Apple has to determine where they draw the line. And how they incorporate their planned obsolescence (that started with their mobile products) into their desktop and laptop models will be interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ham Sandwich
|
|
Originally Posted by Grendelmon
Or if Intel makes a major advancement with their x86 platform (e.g. Core duo vs. Core 2 Duo, or even 128bit processors).
How fast is 128-bit going to be, and how hard would it be to implement into OS X?
Also, why 128-bit, and why not go up to 256-bit cores?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Too F'ing Cold, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by And.reg
How fast is 128-bit going to be, and how hard would it be to implement into OS X?
Also, why 128-bit, and why not go up to 256-bit cores?
Speed is essentially irrelevant when making octal leaps in architecture, it's all about memory address size.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status:
Offline
|
|
Without going into a long post about it, my impression are that:
a. Most people have a very poor understanding of what the term "obsolete" actually means. Chances are it does not mean what you think it means. Look it up.
b. As an Apple user since the late 80s, I cannot think of a single instance ever where Apple dropped support for a product "just to sell new units." Pajandrum, you're going to have to come up with specific examples and some documentation to make that charge stick. Your Mac Pro 1,1 -- or any older model -- can be quick at some specific things still, but is it safe to put on the net? Can it handle, let's say, editing 4K video (which isn't that much of a thing yet, but will be soon enough)? Is it Apple's fault that standards for games and software keep going up, or is that a function of expanded versatility and ability?
All I'm saying is that there are laws that govern, and factors beyond capriciousness, when a given device has support dropped for it, and that it doesn't become non-functional when that point happens -- or (generally) for years afterward. If you haven't gotten your money's worth out of your Mac after say five or six years, that's a comment on you more than Apple, methinks.
|
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Maryland
Status:
Offline
|
|
I had a problem with the keyboard on my "Early 2008" 17" MBP. MacMedics happened to have a brand-new replacement keyboard in stock. With the new keyboard and the 1GB SSD drive that I installed, the machine has a new lease on life. I have two newer MB Pro's, another 17" and a Retina SSD. Apple told me I had to have 17" laptops because I was a "Creative Pro." Then they told me I didn't need a 17" after all. They also told me I don't need Ethernet, FireWire, or more than two USB ports. I disagree. I keep the older machine because it contains some Mac-only astronomical software whose developer a) quit selling the software and b) will not allow it to be transferred to another Mac.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status:
Offline
|
|
Again: isn't that really a comment on the developer? As for ports -- ever heard of a hub? And as for the 17-inch model ... Apple didn't drop it out of a malicious desire to hurt you. They dropped it for the same reason most other manufacturers have stopped or limited their larger-than-15" models ... because they don't sell well.
|
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Grendelmon
What I find interesting is this:
Apple previously had an easy excuse to drop support for older models... they kept changing architectures. I really don't see them doing this again for another 5-10 years. The only possibilities would be if they adopt ARM as their main desktop/laptop architecture. Or if Intel makes a major advancement with their x86 platform (e.g. Core duo vs. Core 2 Duo, or even 128bit processors).
Now that x86 has matured, Apple has to determine where they draw the line. And how they incorporate their planned obsolescence (that started with their mobile products) into their desktop and laptop models will be interesting.
Apple has obsoleted hardware after a five-year cutoff for at leas a decade (and probably several decades).
That hardware older than that is supported by the latest OS software upgrade is a quiet sensation and hasn't happened since the 1990s.
But it makes clear that this obsoleting has nothing to do with software: it's simply a matter of not endlessly producing/stockpiling spare parts and training authorized techs to work on these machines.
Go through independent repair shops - they can still source parts, and will still work on your machines. As always.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Charles Martin
Again: isn't that really a comment on the developer? As for ports -- ever heard of a hub? And as for the 17-inch model ... Apple didn't drop it out of a malicious desire to hurt you. They dropped it for the same reason most other manufacturers have stopped or limited their larger-than-15" models ... because they don't sell well.
That, AND the fact that most of the (very few) people who bought it, did so not because of the size of the screen, but its resolution.
The retina 15" made the primary purchase criterion for the vast majority of 17" customers irrelevant.
So yeah, maybe you really saw it as Apple "telling you what you need" (which is funny: I tend to KNOW what I need, and just consider offerings according to which is best-fitting/least-inappropriate to my needs), but by and large, they've never dropped anything without an alternative being available for those who really needed it. And yes, in some cases, that meant a different model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|