792
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2023
792 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37800 readers
242 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Bull. Shit.
I have an 8 year old iPad that can still use Amazon video and can still run Netflix, and google drops support for these computers as early as 3 years. I’m not an Apple fanboy but that is absolutely ridiculous.
Apple does the same thing if you don't already have those installed
My 2nd gen Apple TV is garbage. Nearly all the apps fail to load now. 🤷♂️… I suppose I can try jailbreaking it but it sure feels like someone is trying to force me to upgrade my hardware.
That’s a product that hasn’t had an Apple update since 2014. What realistically do you expect hardware manufacturers to do with actually old hardware? Lose money supporting it forever? This is kind of the opposite case from the chromebooks.
I will give credit to Apple on that one because android phone manufacturers are now supporting their phone for longer because of how long Apple is supporting them.
I think the more probable reason is that EU regulators were unhappy with this for a long time and have now put 3 years of OS updates and 5 years of security updates into law. Low cost Android manufacturers don't care what Apple does.
But for their laptops the support has dropped to the lowest in years. Some intel MacBooks no longer get the latest version after 6 years.
Confused noise from people who grew up using Windows 95.
I remember back in the day when I had apple devices where they would push updates for devices long past their capability to actually run the updated software. Rather than refuse the update or get a pruned patch with security fixes only, it would force updates and bloat your phone and grind it into unresponsive unusability after a few years.
I hear that's not so much the case anymore, so that's nice. But I remember. The main reason I upgraded my phone was because of that, the hardware was great, but I could hardly use the software anymore even after clean installs.
My point being, I guess, extended support is great if managed properly but it can also become a bludgeon with which to drive you toward the new generations of devices.
Well, Apple intentionally slowed those devices down to make the users update, instead of using an insecure device, that would've provided a good experience otherwise.
And these days Apple is retiring devices arbitrarily for profits too. For example this year they are retiring the Iphone 8, which has better hardware, than the ipad 2018 that is still being supported...
That slowness was, at least officially, for the battery health. Do you have the support to prove otherwise?
These conversations bring the weirdest people out of the woodwork. I remember talking with a guy who explained to me how crap Apple laptops were because you (according to him) can’t customise them. Turns out he’d never owned or even used an Apple laptop. I was like, why do you care?! Especially about something you have no experience with!
The problem is that those people often can't read. Everyone has a biased opinion or two they forgot to back up with support, but those people can't be argued with. I want to know how to talk with them.
And then if I recall correctly (though I can’t be bothered to look) didn’t they get sued for slowing phones?
So people were mad that their phones battery wasn’t holding a charge anymore, “im being forced to upgrade”, so Apple throttled older phones to keep the battery running, aka allowing people to keep their phones longer, and then they got sued for slowing down phones lol.
I am an apple fan boy, I wont hide that. But it does seem like they tried to do a “good” and make peoples phones last longer, and then got sued.
Also the whole forced upgrade just isn’t apples game IMO. Do they want you buying the new one every year, of course. But the more important thing is that you keep using AN iPhone at all. Stay in the ecosystem, stay in the app store, stay paying for icloud, etc.
Going to a new phone gives the user a window to move away from IOS. (Though most won’t haha)
Actually yes. I bought a brand new -discounted old stock- Iphone 4s for my mum near the end of the ios 8 cycle. The day before we installed ios 9 on it, it had okay performance and good battery life. Following the update to ios9 the performance went to complete shit. (the battery remained usable for 2 more years after, but it was not a good experience for her)
How does that prove that it was not for your battery health?
Huh? I have an ipad mini and since two-three years ago it's as useful as a brick, Apple doesn't allow me to install any app because they require a newer os version (that's not available for the model)
By contrast my much older nexus 7 can still use most apps that I want
It can’t run everything obviously but the fact that my nearly 10 year old iPad can handle video streaming still and these schools have bricked laptops after 3 years is ridiculous.
Those Chromebooks aren't bricked. They simply don't get chrome updates anymore, even if it's just Linux+Chrome and updates could continue forever without any real effort from Google
For security issues they can't give to students unsupported hardware. The discontinued iPad would go in the same e-waste bin, because it's not like android where browsers will continue to get updates for years and years
For a school they functionally are. They can’t use them if they can’t get security updates.
and instead the ipad that doesn't get security updates since 2018 in your example doesn't count?
Well for starters it wasn't purchased by or for schools so no. But even if it was, it gets far more than 3 years of support. I think 5 is somewhat reasonable if we're just going to accept this sort of behavior.
Either way the comparison is not really apt. Mobile devices are far worse about this than PC's. You should instead compare a macbook (or a cheap windows machine), which gets security updates for 7-10 years. Google knows their devices are very popular for school computers, so to treat them like mobile devices and enforce the terrible standards that comes with is pernicious.
You're also not a giant customer who needs security and it services like a school district. 3 years might be early, idk, but in plenty of enterprise or institutes replace their hardware every so often.
My 2012 laptop runs windows 10 perfectly fine and has the latest security updates. We're way past the point of using hardware limitations as an excuse for companies to drop support early.
I don't see why a school should have to replace their basic computers with an equally basic computer after 3 years unless it's broken beyond repair. I don't think the OS itself is doing much more than what an enterprise copy of windows does for security.
The only reason Windows 11 can't run on super old hardware is because of the misleading decision to require secure boot (a feature of the motherboard that stops unsigned OSes from booting). The metaphor I use is that it is like a car radio manufacturer refusing to let a car radio work in cars that don't have car alarms then calling the radio secure because of it.
The secure boot requirement can actually be circumvented pretty easily
Yeah, Windows 11 is a bad example of supporting old hardware because Microsoft stupidly and maliciously requires secure boot and TPM2 just to lock out otherwise fine hardware from using Windows 11. You can run Win11 without secure boot or TPM2 with mods, the hardware is perfectly capable.
Or just put Linux on it. Linux runs on damn near everything because it's designed to run on damn near everything. There's no profit motive to only support Linux on the newest and shiniest devices like there is for Apple, Google, Samsung, and even Microsoft (who sells most copies of Windows preinstalled on new PCs).
How do I go about running Win 11 without secure boot? I have a BIOS motherboard from 2009. Windows 10 is EOL relatively soon. I plan on getting a new computer and using some genre of Linux but I'm curious what to do about the current one.
Funny you should say this. I have a 2012 Retina Macbook Pro, and yes it is running Windows or Linux with all the latest updates. However, Apple stopped supporting it in 2020. It's too old for MacOS updates.
I've even seen a guide that will allow me to hack past the normal BIOS restrictions/allow me to put Windows 11 on it.
OpenCore Legacy Patcher, Linux, ChromeOS Flex, and maybe even Windows 10 could all be options for that Mac. As-is ot would still be perfectly safe to use offline too.
What year is the mini from? I run a Plex server off a 2010 Mac mini.
Apple devices are serviceable for far longer after the OS stops updating than windows/android devices in my experience. But regardless, Apple doesn’t discontinue support as early as 3 or 4 years. Even you have to admit that is ridiculous of google.
I have a 15 year old laptop that can still browse the web and play YouTube videos just fine because PC is a standardized platform with an open standard bootloader and a BIOS/UEFI system designed to abstract the hardware so the OS doesn't have to be tailor-made to the hardware. Mobile devices are absolute shit in this regard. Why does the OS have to be specifically built to target one particular device?
It shouldn't. End of question. This applies to Android, ChromeOS, and Apple devices equally.
I'm glad mobile Linux is starting to take off and there seem to be some standards emerging around ARM booting, even if it is still an absolute shit show compared to the standardization of UEFI/BIOS on x86/x86-64. I know some ARM systems can UEFI boot but it's few and far between still so most devices still need a tailored kernel at least. That said, ARM Linux doesn't need the entire freaking stack tailored to a device like Android and iOS do.
Couldn't agree more. Every computer I have, no matter how old, can connect and do most things fine.
Weeell "bullshit" is easy to claim but not necessarily untrue. So with android phones this is definitely a problem. Industry wide firmware support for these ARM SOC-s are often ranging from not long enough, to fucking atrocious. You get basically two years of new drivers, and a security update maybe. The way LinageOS manages to support phones like the note 3, from like android 4, to 11, is basically creating manifests, that use drivers from newer, still supported, but "similar-ish" components. And the note 3 was a flagship device, easily the fastest phone of it's generation. These Chromebooks, especially the ones schools can and do afford, are built to the penny. There is ultimately no point in pushing a software update to a device for a significant cost, that makes it so slow that no reasonable person would ever consider using it.
What is the solution to this? Hard to say. Not buying hardware so incredibly obsolete that it has to run an alternate OS, is a start. Maybe just use PC-s and deploy linux.
The solution is to let people use the device in any way they want and can. Software should not dictate hardware obsolescence.
If I'm reading this correctly (and you need to read between the lines a bit), it's not that they literally don't work, it's that they aren't capable of getting security updates. For playing Minecraft, who cares, but schools are legally obligated to keep private student information (like all their schoolwork) secure.
It's not like there's a LineageOS for Chromebooks and standardized firmware and drivers that can be easily deployed and updated. They mentioned in the article that open source alternatives were trialed, but that they lacked needed features and were very costly (in time, presumably) to get working.
This is just a shit sandwich all around.
From another perspective, several schools I've worked at have had so much vandalism and theft of Chromebooks that they won't even consider replacing them with more costly future-proof tech. It doesn't matter if they get 8 years of software support if students break most of them in years 1-3.
You can run Linux on them, it's the cost of getting a bunch of shitty ass chromebooks done that's not worth it for schools.
This is exactly the issue for me. Devices used by 10-18 yo students do not last 10 years, and so it doesn't matter if they get software support for that long.
My 12 y/o has gone through 3 Chromebooks since the pandemic, but they are $50 refurbished so who cares
Edit I have a gaming rig, and he uses the GeForce cloud gaming service on his Chromebook, and he loads into Fortnite faster than I do when we play duos
But they kinda sorta do. It is not like Chromebooks are locked down like an iPhone. I had an old Samsung Chromebook, you could just turn off trusted boot with a flick of a switch (okay it did reset your device), and just run what you wanted. It's just with arm based stuff running what you want is not trivial. You run what you can which is often nothing.
FYI Most Chromebooks are Intel CPU computers, there are a few arm based ones but majority are Intel x86_64.
Aren't most Chromebooks out there Intel CPUs and essentially PC hardware? I know there are a few arm ones but it's not most of them.
Fuck these Corporations, the only reason for this is to get the public school systems to constantly buy new chromebooks.