computer upgrades with the Mac OS ugh!!!!

[pucho812]

I'm afraid that's the only real fix with APFS.

My latest is about as crazy.

New El Capitan installer downloaded. Can't install on a machine that's currently running EC. Go figure...

I have the feeling Apple is doing that on purpose purely for  getting people to buy a new machine...

 

[Whoops]

I have the feeling Apple is doing that on purpose purely for  getting people to buy a new machine...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdh7_PA8GZU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z1XYM7bC4k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVAmnV65_zw

 

[shabtek]

i updated osx on 3 machines about a year ago and it took more than 24 hrs to download update on each one via the uber rural connection I was on...thought it was what you are experiencing-- at the time.
I was just admiring my 09 macbook with audio line in and out, superdrive, 2 usb, firewire, ethernet/rj45? & some kindof display.
and also the macbookpro that trades the line in audio for a sd card slot.
vintage apple; still more than adequate 10 years later

 

[Whoops]

vintage apple; still more than adequate 10 years later

Definitely,
it would be even more adequate if constant "update" attacks limiting the functionality of a complete capable system were not the norm.

 

[cyrano]

You'll only see that "update attack" once on a system that doesn't support the latest and greatest. I'm running El Capital on most of my machines and no update pub at all. Of course, these machines are all of 2008 or 2009 vintage, ao they don't support anything newer.

And as for that machine not wanting to install I mentioned before, it was because I forgot to expand the ram to 4 GB. EC doesn't install on a 2008 with only 2 GB ram.

 

[Whoops]

You'll only see that "update attack" once on a system that doesn't support the latest and greatest. I'm running El Capital on most of my machines and no update pub at all. Of course, these machines are all of 2008 or 2009 vintage, ao they don't support anything newer.

The "update attack" run by Apple is not  "update pub",  it's a well outlined strategy that works in a lot of different ways with the sole goal of making your equipment obsolete before time, ot giving the impression to the owner that the equipment is obsolete.
"update pub" is one of those ways for sure, but theres much more and more devastating, like making your battery discharge more rapidly after an update, or overheat your Graphics card after an update (it happened to various iMACs and Macbook Pros), or making your different devices not-compatible one with the other, or not allowing a perfectly working app not work any longer even if technically it was 100% possible.

It's really agressive Apple strategy, it started to be hardcore agressive after 2010.

I don't think I will buy another MAC from Apple, I will build an Hackintosh myself in the future

 

[Winston OBoogie]

I foolishly updated my 2010 and 2012 MacBook Pro's to Catalina.  I haven't downgraded them yet as it's a major pain but, ASAP, I'm going backwards. 

 

[cyrano]

The only thing that forced me to upgrade was the availability of a current browser. As long as the system has that, I haven't seen any reason to upgrade for the last decade.

I once was forced to upgrade to pay for software via the appstore too. Payment went through, but my account wasn't updated. It was a browser issue too, as the appstore uses Webkit to render it's pages.

 

[Whoops]

I foolishly updated my 2010 and 2012 MacBook Pro's to Catalina.  I haven't downgraded them yet as it's a major pain but, ASAP, I'm going backwards.

I would not go above Mavericks on those computers.

But the best would in terms of performance for the 2010 machine would be Snow Leopard, with an SSD hardrive it would fly with 10.6.9, althoug it's not practical to use any longer since most of the apps don't support Snow Leopard.
If I didn't use UAD and Focusrite RED soundcard, I would use Snow Leopard for sure.

I would just install apps like office, photoshop, etc etc from 2010, still do everything I need as an user.

 

[Whoops]

The only thing that forced me to upgrade was the availability of a current browser. As long as the system has that, I haven't seen any reason to upgrade for the last decade.

There's a lot of different Browsers out there.
I'm still able to use Firefox in all my systems, even my 2005 PC with Windows XP

 

[cyrano]

For the latest Chrome or FF on Mac, you need at least El Capitan, atm.

There sure are a lot of browsers out there. But that won't last. The built-in DRM that W3C accepted, will make it very hard for the smaller dev groups.

One I like a lot, is TenFourFox. A build for G4 and G5 Macs of a recent FF.

Another one is Brave. AD blocking built-in. And the devs have enough clout to sue if needed. They're currently suing Google, fi.

 

[Whoops]

For the latest Chrome or FF on Mac, you need at least El Capitan, atm.

There's no reason to think you need the latest Firefox. That's exactly the problem, that the attack, making the end use think they need the latest version of whichever software.
There's no reason to use El Capitan in a computer older than 2013 besides being obliged

You can use a previous Firefox versions in any MAC OS, and works perfectly.

I'm writing this reply in an 2008 iMAC running Mavericks and using Firefox. Perfect
I also have Chrome installed, runs perfectly
I also have Safari installed, runs perfectly

I only have Mavericks and not Snow Leopard because of my Focusrite Red 4 pre software and UAD software, but I might change to Snow Leopard in the Future, and guess what that will be an Upgrade!
Ironic isn't it?

 

[cyrano]

I need at least two, preferably three of the latest browsers for testing. Impossible on Mavericks. Sure you can run viable versions, but not the latest. Certainly not if you need Safari. But I don't. Chrome + FF and Brave will do.

I was on Mavericks. It was the reason I updated to EC.

If it was up to me, I'd be running Snow Leopard...

 

[Whoops]

If it was up to me, I'd be running Snow Leopard...

+1