On Jan 11, 2007, at 11:15 AM, Daniel L. Taylor wrote:
Ummm, yes, that's what I meant.
PPC to 10.2.(8?), Intel starts at 10.4.something.
Although I have to admit, even the thought of supporting 10.3 now
fills my mind with dread -- and even though I do still have machines
that will run Mac OS 9, I haven't even run Classic for a couple of
years.
How times have changed.... Macintosh used to be the system with
good backwards compatibility, and its user base would brag that you
didn't have to upgrade machines, OS, or software as often.
Now if you're below 10.3.9 (Xcode UB) you're out of the loop, and
quite frankly I've replaced my Macs more often since OS X came out
than my PCs.
Oh well...maybe MS will "catch up" and force a few rounds of
upgrades with Vista :-/
I loved how long you could use Macs, and I honestly believe that the
disparity in purchasing and upgrading had a huge effect on the
"market share" argument many marketing people used to "shut down"
development of Mac products.
Personally it sucks more as a developer because you really should
have some of the newer hardware (especially with the change from PPC
to Intel), but users are generally satisfied with older hardware for
quite some time.
Vista, like Windows 95 and 2000 before it, is another "wake up call"
to most Windows users that their existing hardware means nothing to a
lot of Windows developers. In fact, the hardware developers really
*want* the software engineers to require newer hardware, so that they
can sell more hardware!
--
Glenn L. Austin <><
Computer Wizard and Race Car Driver
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://www.austin-home.com/glenn/>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
