Hmmm, I don´t know...No need for a shit storm here! But let's face it, competition what drives progress. If you want to stick with Intel—who seem to be milking 1980s processors for a ridiculous amount of money while offering zero to minimal gains in productivity—then by all means, go ahead! I, on the other hand, want a powerful yet efficient computer in 2025, not a machine from the Reagan times!
I don´t think Intel and AMD are caring a shit about any Mac CPU´s... they are beating them in a landslide anyway...
No matter if they are beating a dead horse to another death but at least they are performing far better than anything Apple came up with...
When I look at mixed CPU benchmarkes Intel and AMD are always in front...
And don´t forget for one "powerfull" (if one can name it so) Mac, I get two powerfull PC´s...
Oh, that´s quite easy to explain:And about your comment on paying for things that others get for free? I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around that one. Don’t we all chip in for Windows development too? Or are we just talking in circles here? It sounds like a game of "Who's Got the Best Excuse?" and I don’t think I’m winning!
updates both sides receive equally do not count...
But in the last 20 years Apple forced software developers at least 15 times to release new software versions to make them compatible again with the newest MacOS again...
I cannot count anymore how many complaints here on kvr were crying for "needed" fixes Apple caused with their compatibility breaks with new OS versions... the latest so far being ARM compatibility which more or less forced all 3rd party developers to nearly rewrite their software and if you believe the rumors then a bigger compatibility break is quite near with the new MacOS version coming...
How many times did that happen on Windows?? The answer is ZERO times in the same period...
So the count is at least 15 (if not more) : 0 for Mac vs. Windows...
15 times Apple has at least forced developers to make their software compatible again for their newest stunts while the lastest one was a real biggie as was the same BS when changing their ancient Motorolla chips against Intel...
What did Windows users get for compensation?? You guess it already: nada... nothing... not the least sh*t...
15 times extra work just for Mac including 2 huge ones with CPU architecture changes... 0 times extra work on Windows...
And Mac users still pay the same but delaying new features developement in all software more and more with their constant needs of fixing compatibility issues with new MacOS versions/ CPU changes while even being by far in the minority...
Do you find this fair in any way??
A smaller group of people feel the urgent need to use a less performant yet double expensive computer which constantly forces to halt new developement to fix intentionally caused compatibility breaks but get the same "small" update price the majority who not force this trouble pays...
Is it fair paying the same as a "non problem causer" but getting much less in response as the others??
Statistics: Posted by Trancit — Sun Nov 03, 2024 5:59 pm