Granted, this interpretation would make for a boring thinkpiece and would not get me to #1 on HN.
Compelling reason why I had to upgrade my iPhone 3G, iPhone 4 and original iPad after less than 3 years? Painfully slow and unusable.
Well if the compelling reason to upgrade is "painfully slow and unusable", then maybe a >= 5 year old PC that still works isn't a bad thing. If I'm not mistaken, my 2011 MBP's quad core i7 can still outperform the CPUs in today's Macbook Airs (the most popular Mac notebooks) in terms of pure processing power.
Exactly. Upgrading is a cost; not just money but also time. I upgraded my 1st gen iPad's OS exactly once (5 -> 6 I think) and it was a completely horrendous experience, involving PC iTunes.
The main driver of PC upgrades, apart from improved games, is bloat and the slow deterioration of Windows installations. It's not as bad as it used to be but reinstalling the OS and cleaning the fans can often substantially improve an old PC.
I still have my original iPad, but it's used for a very limited set of things as the browser is crashy and many apps aren't available for its OS.
Users want neither forced upgrades, manufactured obsolescence, nor bogus SaaS rentalware like Adobe Creative Cloud.
Is this slowness//clunkiness liveable for what I'm doing? When the answer is "no" more days than "yes", it's time for me to go shopping. Until then, I'm ok with typing on something you might find on the Millennium Falcon.
(My six year old PC laptop is an incredibly heavy piece of junk that crashes all the time due to the combination of corrupted hard disk and Vista, and it actually is sad that I still occasionally find a cause to use it, not least because it's still the least unreliable device for running Skype that I own)
He didn't mean to but this is the general reflection of the culture that permeates Apple as a company and the bubble in which they live.
I remember once one of my wealthy friends saying "I don't understand why people live in one bedroom apartments". I stared at her for a solid minute to determine if she was joking but no, she was dead serious. She genuinely did not understand. She was born and raised in a wealthy family and she just had lost track of the rest of the world.
Schiller and the Apple execs have similar blinders on and once in a while, the mask drops in a public speech because the speech writers and their proofreaders have similar blinders on and didn't realize the enormity of the implication.
1. "Great! Our products are so well-made, stable and backwards-compatible that users do not have to upgrade."
2. "This is terrible. We have failed so thoroughly to innovate that people are content with using five-year-old technology."
It's not like Apple is unaware of virtues of #1, but as a company they are clearly in bucket #2. In five years, if 600MM users are still using the iPhone 6, I'm certain they would also consider that "very sad". I don't think Schiller and the exec team have blinders, they are just holding the rest of the PC industry to the same standard to which they hold themselves.
Unfortunately the real problem with Apple is that they are still somewhat on track of losing the "functional high ground" as "it just works" doesn't apply as much as it used to only some years ago.
I hear that MS Surface is actually quite usable these days, I don't have first-hand experience with it though. I would be interested to know as I'm feeling more and more inclined of not recommending Apple products to that cohort anymore.
This controversy ranks right up there with the 'let's make her smile' bit from the iPad Pro announcement. Manufactured to create a story, but not impactful in any way.
Also, if you have a 5 year old PC that's genuinely not serving your needs any more, sure, you could pay $600 for an iPad Pro that also probably won't serve your needs, or you could pay around $400 for a new PC that will serve your needs.
Or maybe the PC world did so well 5 years ago that Apple hasn't provided them a compelling reason to switch to an iPad?
CPU performance is largely "good enough" for most users. OS bloat has finally stopped: Win8.1 is just as fast as Win7 (and is more stable) and Win10 is faster and skinnier. Most users don't do anything intensive and probably wouldn't even notice if you substituted in a low-end processor. For those that do have big needs, GPU offloading has taken off in a big way.
This is kind of unfortunate in other respects. CPU performance (especially single-threaded) is extremely important for high refresh rates. At 144hz there's no margin for any weak link in the system. But I recognize that I'm kind of a niche user in that regard.
Sorry, can you elaborate on this? Is Skylake somehow performing multiple instructions per core per clock cycle somehow?
Imho smart phone tech is plateauing and I get the feeling Apple is going to struggle more and more to justify the prices they charge for iPhones and other products. My iPhone 5 (4/5 years of use) broke 3 weeks ago, and after reviewing prices of phones I just couldn't bring myself to spend 3/4 times the amount on a phone when I can get one "just as good", but Android.
In fact I was chatting to a friend who recently also went from iPhone to Android, something he said that I took to heart was that spending more than R3500 (about $230) on a cellphone is an unnecessary luxury. I am willing to bet that limit could be pushed down too.
That as the technology plateaus, and the upgrade cycle becomes longer, there's much more reason to spend more on a handset because you're not going to feel like replacing it a year later?
Spending a bit more doesn't seem like an issue for something that will last 4/5 years.
Your friend may say spending more than an R3500 is an unnecessary luxury on a cellphone. I say that the cellphone is the single most important piece of technology I own and so isn't the area I want to be stingy on.
Apple isn't necessarily the best choice even with that in mind, but that's a separate argument.
I understand this is sad for Apple, but I don't see how it's sad for me?
It's the shocking fact that (especially if cash strapped) you can live your life, without constantly buying more and newer things.
Of course Apple's stance is, you must buy our new products every year. But I can get on Facebook and email and whatever else on my $200 PC just fine - the value isn't there for alot of people.
"Based on my experience with Apple hardware newer than my laptop, I’m guessing it’s the former. Since 2011, I’ve bought a couple of iPhones (both dead), numerous connectors and power cords (all dead; I’ve switched to knockoffs), and a replacement laptop battery (currently half-dead and in need of replacement)."
[0] https://www.techinasia.com/awkward-moment-apple-mocked-good-...
What if instead a Mercedes representative had said:
> People with cheap 5 year old cars is sad
Just before presenting its new car?
Would you think the same?
An alternative way to read this is that Apple themselves don't believe their own products will be worth using after 5 years, and will therefore fail to support them properly in the long term. Anyone in the market for a computer to last longer than that (eg most home users, and many corporate users who don't lease) might have to look elsewhere.
This is not an offhand throwaway comment. This speaks to the absolute heart of Apple's strategy.
I think you got the gist of this thread! It's not actually about the poor but about competing products lasting longer than their product planned lifespan, and that's a bad thing for them.
My late 2008 Aluminum Macbook is still supported on their current OS (El Capitan). That's a 7.5 year old device. This is par for the course for Apple.
The current iOS supports iPad2's - a 5+ year old device.
Didn't he say Windows PC's?
Also OS X supports Core2Duo hardware, which is nearly 10 years old.
"The old products suck. Buy our shiny new products!"
If advertising offends you, fine. But don't watch an hour-long ad and then get irritated because they try to sell you shit.
27" 1440P monitors are fantastic though, they strike the perfect balance between resolution, size, and price. If you're used to 22-24" monitors I really encourage you to give it a try, it's very nice for productivity. You can get a cheap Korean VA/IPS monitor for $200 on eBay or a very nice one for $300 or so (the nicer ones have DC backlights which help prevent eyestrain from PWM flickering). Definitely worth it.
- Intel Core i5 2500K, 3.3 GHz, quad-core (200 USD)
- 8B (2x4GB) DDR3 1600MHz C9 (100 USD)
- 120GB 2.5" SSD Intel X25-M G2 (200 USD)
- GeForce GTX 460 1GB (200 USD)
It's sad that a full five years later, CPU performance/USD has barely moved at all. RAM is half the cost now, SSDs a quarter the cost. Not sure about how GPUs have developed?
(Edit: The GTX 960 which today also costs 200 USD seems to be about twice as fast as the GTX 460.)
The average person goes to Walmart/Bestbuy/BJ's/Staples and spends $475 on some shitbox laptop. The 25th percentile user (ie. millions of people) probably spent $275-325.
That average person who bought that average PC in 2011 has an aging HP/Dell/Asus laptop with a failing battery, $30 Celeron or AMD processor, 2GB memory, integrated graphics, a 500GB 5400rpm disk and integrated graphics.
I had the pre-release Win 10/64 on it for a while, and it actually ran faster than OSX did on that machine (in my experience, Windows runs faster on Mac than OSX itself, but ymmv). And keep in mind that my Macbook pretty much got left behind by OSX after Lion.
The only thing wrong with that computer today is that it has a 7200 RPM mechanical hard drive. Even then it's not slow, it's just noticeably slower than a SSD.
Only in the last year or two has anything better than that become remotely common.
If I had to upgrade one component it would be my 22" monitor which is 6 or 7 years old but even for this there is no need.
And replacing my PC with an iPad Pro? lol, wtf? No TeX, no Python/matplotlib, no SublimeText/vim/emacs, no real filesystem, ...
btw, I think you can drop a SSD into almost any shitty PC/Laptop and make it usable again. Before SSDs I had to update my PC quite often because it always felt slow, but SSD have been an absolute game changer for me. I even revived my old trusty T61s by adding a SSD and now it is good again.
We've gone from "Won't somebody think of the children" to "Won't somebody think of every single possible group that is possible to somehow offend in some way"
What apple is saying today is something that it has always said - but its only recently that people in america are too poor to buy american products.
I grew up around windows and linux, and whenever I tell that in a job interview - people think I am not being serious since "real developers" use mac.
In my first software job - I was told to abandon my personal cheap linux and use the company's brand new expensive apple - even though I was more productive on my cheap linux.
Apple has always been like that, its just that most people who come from money do not hear it.
Edit:
Also you will notice this in poorer countries - a strong ecosystem for recycling exists everywhere outside of the US/UK. When I brought my first bike in the UK, I wanted to repair it and was told to just ditch it and get a new one !
It was extremely odd to me since I expected that bike to last at-least 20 years.
When my 3 year old laptop stopped working - I had it repaired rather than buy a newer one - even though repairing was almost as expensive as getting a new one. It just fell really wrong ditching a laptop rather than repairing it.
Maybe you are right - western societies do worship materialism.
I'd call the US, UK poor for lacking a system of recycling. And indeed in many ways they are poorer than the most well functioning societies.
How true is this? I have noticed the proliferation of Macs in the developer community and I was wondering how much it would hurt me professionally by not owning one. Do devs really make snap judgements based on your platform of choice and could this impact me professionally in the long term?
American products, like Apple?
Or like other PC manufacturers, who are quite able to sell cheaper (yes, less featured, maybe less cool) computers at more affordable pricing?
It's that we live in a world that systemically vilifies and denigrates poor people for not lifting themselves up by their bootstraps, learning programming, and starting a company and solving income inequality on their own.
And while our culture is collectively shitting on poor people, we are lauding the great entrepreneurs and business people at apple and the likes for being objectively better.
That is why it's offensive. Not because poor people are offended, but because is SHOULD offend you at how obtuse it is.
I'm pretty sure that is part of the job description of marketers.
Of course for web browsing in general it's pretty unusable.
Not replacing something that still works is way better than replacing it even if you recycle the old unit.
That said, it was an obviously stupid stat for Schiller to cite. But now we're going to be subjected to a long series of Apple-bashing articles that overreach in the opposite direction. By the end of today we'll see multiple "actually, I'm proud to be running 5-year-old PC" posts.
Why? Because when mining for pageviews, there are few veins as rich as bashing Apple.
Edit to add: If we want to talk about the tech industry and poor people, let's do so. How many new companies are variations of "let us bring things to your door for you for an extra fee" or "let's give you personalized service so you don't have to go shopping/ride a bus/interact with a human"?
Of course, they could also be running something like Ubuntu (Linux counter puts the number at 73 million, W3Counter at 2.58% of all devices, or just under half OSX's numbers in that counting method), in which case they'd also likely be running a recent OS, one which is arguably more secure than either Windows or OSX.
I don't think it's 'offensive' what Schiller says. But it does speak to Apple's mentality, where planned obsolescence and profit trumps all, and the faithful buy into it...
Windows 7 came out 7 years ago, is still reasonably supported, and you get a free upgrade to Windows 10 for it.
> And if a person wants a new computer but can't afford it, that is sad too.
And an iPad Pro for 600$-1200$ is very likely not the answer for them.
I agree, it's a lot of talk about a single stupid statement, but I think it is a really stupid statement, on multiple levels.
Windows 7 was released in 2009, and all official owners of Windows 7 were offered the Windows 10 upgrade. I'd be surprised if many PCs that are 5 years old aren't running one of these 2 OSs
But I also get a little peeved at overzealous marketing that takes advantage of people's ignorance. Convincing people that their 5 year old PC no longer meets their needs (when it probably does) is pretty similar to convincing some poor sucker to switch to your super duper maximum strength 4G Long Term Evolution wireless network because you can have 20G of data per month, when you actually only use 0.5G of data per month.
providing "upgrades" to previous models incapable of truly supporting them is kind of an Apple trademark
And in that time, I've upgraded the processor, doubled the memory, upgraded the hard drive to an SSD, switched the video card twice, upped the number of connected monitors from one to three, and upgraded the OS from 32-bit Vista to 64-bit Windows 10.
It was pretty leading edge when I built it, and it's still pretty leading edge today. What's sad is the expectation that I should throw my computer away every 18 months.
I loved the Macbook Pro unibodies because they were expandable. My 2011 MBP had its memory upgraded and maxed out as prices came down, and its storage upgraded to larger and faster drives and SSDs as prices came down.
If it weren't for one thing, it would have still been my main computer and delayed my switch to Windows.
The infamous overheating problem with my model of MBP turned it into a brick a few months before Apple acknowledged the defect and announced a repair program. The replacement part was known to have the same defect (I already had my logic board replaced once), and being out of AppleCare, there was no way in hell I was paying >500 out of pocket for yet another defective board. So I just switched to a Windows machine since nothing I did was OS dependent anyways.
Granted I would have switched when the Macbook Pro got unusable (unibodies are gone and don't like the new soldered on approach), but I think that wouldn't have happened until at least 2018.
It's odd when people say "my computer is a decade old and I've only had to replace every single part multiple times over look at how green I'm being". It's the exact same thing as buying a new computer a couple times, just in smaller increments and with parts that are less likely to be recycled on their own.
Also, there's the larger narrative of people buying tablets and putting off PC upgrades, so the PC ages. Don't worry Apple, you're still getting their money. Its just people aren't ready to replace a general purpose computer that they control and can run pretty much everything with a walled garden mobile device designed to get ad impressions and consume media.
If anything, this is Apple's frustration. They have all this success but people and businesses keep buying PCs. They'll never crack this market. They're too invested in the Jobsian "closed" ecosystem philosophy to be as agile as the PC platform. Mocking those who don't drink their kool-aid just makes them look like sore winners.
edit: I'm aware I can buy a newer chip, but from a single core vs single core perspective its not that much faster. Very little consumer software is properly multi-threaded so this is why my expensive work computer with the newest i7 doesnt feel any faster than my 5 year old desktop at home. Most things are pegged to one core and at the end of the day single core performance is what's going to matter.
> Its incredible how the x86 world really hasn't had any huge performance bumps and how a Q1 2011 CPU is still competitive.
Actually you can have twice as fast desktop CPU today than your 2500k, and not for some number crunching you'll maybe never need (even though it's the most important thing for others) but for such common tasks like compiling the code:
http://techreport.com/r.x/skylake/legacy1-qtbench.gif
Not bad at all for the times when the hardware speedups are getting harder.
But it's good that even the newest games don't expect only the latest CPU.
Alternatively, you can overclock the 2500K to absurd levels (33% or more seems the norm, even on air cooling), which negates most of the advantage of newer models.
I just bought a "new to me" laptop.
Refurb Thinkpad T420s from 2011.
I added 16G RAM, two Intel SSDs, an Ultrabay battery, and an 802.12ac wifi card.
Grand total: less than $325.
This will be my primary portable for at least 2-3 years, and it's already four years old.
Just because I can afford Apple doesn't mean I can justify the 2x price premium, or that "old" hardware isn't capable.
I ordered this one as 4G/128SSD but already had the RAM on hand to upgrade it to 16G.
Part sources:
(if you want to upgrade from the 128G) Intel Pro 1500 180G: $55 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Pro-1500-180-GB-2-5-SSD-Intern...
(optional) Intel 310 80G mSATA SSD: $30 http://www.ebay.com/itm/INTEL-310-Series-80GB-mSATA-SSD-SSDM...
Ultrabay battery: $28 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thinkpad-Battery-43-3-Cell-Ba...
Intel 7260 802.11ac MiniPCIe wifi card: $28 http://www.amazon.com/Intel-7260-HMWG-R-Wireless-AC-Bluetoot...
An external USB3 enclosure for the Ultrabay DVDRW drive will run around $30 on Amazon.
To install the Intel 7260 card, you will need to install a modified "whitelist removed" BIOS, as Lenovo restricts what MiniPCIe cards can go in their systems by default. The system comes with an 802.11n card (mine was an Intel Centrino 6205).
My only complaint about ArrowDirect is that if they have a system model that could have different screen resolutions, you have no way of specifying / requesting certain specs; you get what they pull and send.
Every system I've ordered from them (close to ten now) has arrived in near-mint condition; this t420s would be amazingly perfect if not for a scuff of the rubberized paint/coating on the top lid (which doesn't matter to me one bit).
Most of the machines Apple sells are actually slower than this PC.
Because that is actually what most people buy.
I'm using a laptop from 2010 with an i7-720QM and an SSD, and it's perfectly snappy. I frequently let it do light encoding tasks while I'm using my desktop.
Apple didn't think it was worth making Mountain Lion running on it.
Meanwhile, I installed the newest 64 bit version of Windows 10 on it as part of the Insider program, and it generally runs faster than my Lion install.
Some stories to add some color to this: Ran a very primitive file sharing server for my university on a dual P(2 or 3, don't quite remember) machine that was probably around a decade old by the time they finally ended up retiring it. My home fileserver is a ~10 TB 4U monster, running on (conveniently) 5 year old hardware and very boring FBSD. Outside of moving apartments, it has not had unplanned downtime once, I will continue using it as long as this is true and would be sad if I didn't get another good few years out of it.
I _WISH_ I could get the same lifetime out of desktop PCs but I tend to find assorted parts failing at an asymptotic rate around 3-5 years. The world in which we all use <5 year old hardware is a sad one, to be avoided, to my eyes. (To clarify, I don't mean this in any luddite sense, I don't believe tech should stop moving forward, but I long for more robust products with longer viable lifespans, such that one can make a choice to upgrade rather than waiting for the inevitable.)
You are thinking about hardware, Apple is talking about the whole computer.
My statement addressed the "whole computer" as well, although the FS example was very much a special niche tool, I'd go so far as to say 90% of novel software features that have necessitated hardware refreshes in the last... decade? I could probably live without. This may be mildly hyperbole, but I hope the spirit of my statement comes across. I want to spend less time replacing/fixing my platforms and more time with them "just working".
IMO He's catering to the audience of Apple enthusiasts (who are the ones that watch Apple events generally) and not making fun of poor people.
Its sort of analogous to when Jobs said: "It's like giving a glass of ice water to somebody in hell" -- about iTunes on Windows computers
Oh so Jobs thinks Windows users are Evil since they are in hell right?
Giving iTunes to a Windows user is more like giving a massive, ugly, wooden horse to a Trojan, and it is so incredibly unwieldy that the lintel has to be removed from the city gate to even get it inside. Then a bunch of bearded maniacs come out of it and kill everybody.
I can't even tell you how many times I have been murdered in my sleep by iTunes. Okay, well, yes I can--zero. But that doesn't stop me from thinking it might happen one day.
I use VLC for most quicktime/itunes things these days.
The glass half-full response?
The industry has delivered so much value in the past 5-8 years that not many people feel compelled to upgrade!
I'll let someone else take the depreciation hit.
anyone with a computer from the last 10 years that can support an ssd and 8+gb ram, is probably fine. travel being the exception.
I don't have a compelling reason to upgrade until the launch of VR headsets.
Putting aside the hyperbole, I'm willing to bet the USB 3.0 and TB2 ports on my MBP out perform the ports on your 5-year old PC.
Talking about hyperbole, you're comparing brand new hardware vs something that was released in 1999 (so 16 years of moore's law) against the point that the hardware apple uses in it's cutting edge desktops/laptops is pretty comparable to the stuff commercially available 5 years ago, which is a valid point.
If Apple wants to shame the market for not upgrading in the last 5 years, maybe they should offer a valid reason to upgrade outside of a marketing campaign appealing to 'want' and additional software features which a recent change actually made free anyway.
The idea that I could replace my PC with an iPad pro is just plain wrong.
[1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/174672/Asus_Debut_First_USB_3...
Tinder Adds “Swipe The Vote” so you can hook up with your candidate.
You decide whether either of these are more deserving.
But if they price the part hideously expensively it makes buying a new one a no-brainer. Working in a school for a few years, I was amazed how easily and inexpensively I could replace screens and memory on 2008-era white macbooks when I had access to school channels for parts priced at cost (or close enough). I think we had access to those channels as a stipulation in a state contract to buy assloads of those machines for every kid in the state.
The innards have been upgraded regularly since 2012, and the CPUs and GPUs in the latest 15" models are pretty competitive to everything else on the market not counting machines for gamers.
The head of marketing thinks that using a competitor's product is "sad".
In response, this article calls Apple: "Insensitive". Offensive. "Hypocritical". "Insulting". And worst of all, promoting inequality by building high quality, expensive products and forgetting the needs of the poor.
It's an article designed to produce a response.
The Apple presentation stage is not the Basilica of St Peter. These are marketing pronouncements, not moral ones and analyzing them as such is such intense naval gazing that it's actually bad for your neck. If Apple hates the poor it's for no reason other than that they're outside their customer base.
Now watch as every blog tries to scramble to see who has the most outrage and who is the largest victim.
signed, people who take offense at a off-hand remark like this.
Grow some thicker skin and stop wasting my screen real estate with irrelevant non-stories like this.
My second computer is a Chromebook. My oldest daughter uses it for school work and we couldn't be happier. It's much better then our iPad (which we don't use anymore).
There are now two articles on the HN front page about this utterly pedantic topic which boils down to marketing. Unbelievable.
As a die-hard retrocomputing enthusiast with far more old computers in my basement than new, I'm biased. But I sure think that the time has come for the compute industry to start highlighting the need for lesser computing power, but yet still more productive computing.
8-bit computers are awesome. 16-bit machines superb! Get yourself set up with these systems and you can entertain yourself for hours and hours. 8-bit is a great way to learn software development - 2 hours of 8-bit coding a week will keep you sharper than sharp when the time comes to go back to the hipstertools-de-jour. (I kid, I kid.)
Point is this, folks: old computers never die - their users do.
I sold its battery, memory and power supply to someone still using a slightly older Powerbook.
/rant typed on a 5 year old Asus N53SV.
For the uninitiated, the ebay workstations mentioned are typically these ancient x58's. Most support hex core xeons, 24gb ram (or 48gb unofficially, more on server boards and some workstations), and a pile of PCI-express lanes. As such, you can easily add in PCI-express m.2 SSDs, USB 3/3.1, and GPU's to your heart's content. The takeaway is that old pc tech can be had at a fraction the cost of new hardware with comparable performance.
I understand the marketing nonsense from Apple, the "PC does what" consortium, and hardware vendors on the whole - but there is nothing sad about owning an old pc. The reality is that the best performance for the price lies in "obsolete" platforms.
2006 era Mac Mini Core Duo 1.66Ghz. Run Windows 7 gave it to my mom. She still uses it.
2009 era Sony Viao - Core Duo 1.66Ghz, 2Gb RAM. Windows 7. My son uses it for Office and MineCraft
2009 Dell Pentium Dusl Core 2Ghz, 4Gb of RAM. It's still my only laptop. The display is 1600x900 and is still better than many cheap laptops. The battery is crap though.
2011 Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz laptop. My wife's computer. It's still feels fast.
My workhouse is a 3Ghz I3 with 6Gb of RAM. Bought in 2012.
I am using a 2009 octo mac pro, which is now 7 years old and since that date, apple has not released a single product that is compelling enough to upgrade that system.
With PC's you can upgrade them, and make tweaks to squeeze out every bit of performance, but by and large for most people, when taking into account that mobile content consumption is on the rise, a tablet is a better upgrade than a new PC. Tasks like email, text, video, music, photography, facebook, are pretty much now done via mobile phone. For these people, PCs are anachronistic.
Phone are much better then five years ago, computers not so much. I'd much rather spend my dollars where the major improvement in computing technology is, then spending to upgrade a desktop to view thing almost the same as before.
Back in the 0s I had a policy of never rehabilitating an old PC because a new PC was better in every way.
The other day a friend brought a Macbook from 2007 to me with a busted HDD and I put an ssd I had laying around in and we got Win10 running on it with no drama and no Apple malware (iTunes, boot camp, etc.) It feel faster than a skylake machine with one of those useless hybrid hard drives and after puffing some hcfc gas through the fan it is great.
Any and or pre core 2 machine would go to the trash, I would not even donate it to the poor, but frankly broadwell and skylake are just an excuse to reduce the io slots to put manufacturers of gfx cards.
They say customers get better battery life but software screws that up if they really tried it and the most you can get is spend a lot of money on a thin and light machine that the doorman can slide under the hotel or get a 2 in 1 machine just because you need a trackpad on a touchpad machine and have a fight over if and where you stow it with the stewardess just to have another reason to get arrested at your destination.
I mean, even IBM sells 360 chips that clock over 5 that use water cooling. It is not that hard.
Most of the actual machine specs (i.e. processor and max RAM) have barely changed in 5 years. I put 16 Gb in my laptop 5 years ago and it's still the most you can squeeze into a 13" MacBook Pro.
It's sad (and somewhat telling) that Apple has not packed more power into this form factor over the past 5 years.
* Do not suffer from avarice?
* They do not need the newest shiny toy for their ego and to win recognition?
* They don't touch a good running working system?
* They want to save CO2 emissions and noble earths?
* They have a frugal live?
* The know what Eco-sufficiency means?
* They know that consumerism does not make happy?
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/apple/will-apple-make-icar-pr...
Reading related news is interesting. Imagine Apple applies its tactics on their cars: You probably need a new apple designed plugin other than the universal one, special tools to change flat tires and/or update the exterior slightly to market therefore driving a 5-year-old car is sad.
Or so I dream.
Shocked.
Runs fine.
