PPC
Larry
You've got no problem supporting the antique Pentium 4s and AMD
Athlons nobody uses anymore, and you still support OS 10.5.8. So
what "resources" are needed to maintain PPC support?
Considering how many real mac users (people using PPC machines)
payed real money for your program, don't you think it would have
been a better idea to wait until 3.0.0 to give the finger to a
large majority of your paying supporters?
Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.
Support Staff 2 Posted by John on 11 Apr, 2012 05:34 AM
Hi Larry,
Thanks for your message. I understand your concern and frustration regarding the removal of PowerPC support from Geekbench 2.3.0. Unfortunately, maintaining support for PowerPC Macs is difficult. It requires a separate build on a separate machine running an older operating system with older developer tools. PowerPC support creates a larger download, which costs more to host and takes longer to download. PowerPC support also prevents me from using features introduced in Mac OS X 10.6 and Mac OS X 10.7. Maintaining support for older Pentium 4 and AMD Athlon processors is quite easy (both processors are supported by default with Microsoft's latest developer tools).
Results uploaded to the Geekbench Browser over the last six months suggest that less than 0.5% of Geekbench users still use PowerPC Macs. While these users will be affected by this change, Geekbench 2.2.7 still works (and works quite well!) on PowerPC machines so you should still be able to do everything you could before this change.
Let me know if you have any other concerns regarding this issue and I'd be happy to address them.
Best,
John
3 Posted by Larry on 11 Apr, 2012 06:28 AM
Thats not the point, its the fact you removed a major feature and all future updates from a "current" program.
People who paid for 2.0 in 2007 that have Intel and PC machines will continue to receive bug fixes and future platform support additions, while I'm stuck with an obsolete app of the same "current" series that I paid the same amount for.
If Apple had ended PPC support with 10.5.5 and issued 10.5.6-8 as Intel only, don't you think PPC owners who paid for 10.5 would be a little peeved? You've basically done that to us.
Support Staff 4 Posted by John on 12 Apr, 2012 12:26 AM
Hi Larry,
Again, I understand your concern and frustration. Unfortunately it's become difficult to provide updates for users on PowerPC hardware and for users on the latest version of Mac OS X. Removing PowerPC support was the logical choice to make in order to support the largest number of users.
Best,
John
5 Posted by Larry Newlin on 12 Apr, 2012 12:15 PM
So what are you going to do about issuing a partial refund to PPC users?
Support Staff 6 Posted by John on 12 Apr, 2012 04:37 PM
Hi Larry,
Unfortunately I'm unable to refund purchases made outside the last 60 days. Please remember that your license for Geekbench 2 is still valid and Geekbench 2.2.7 still works on PowerPC machines.
Best,
John
7 Posted by Larry Newlin on 12 Apr, 2012 04:59 PM
That doesn't matter, you removed primary features, updates and bug support from your product. You greatly decreased the value of what your PPC customers paid to receive while non-PPC customers that bought the same product at the same time will continue to get new features and support. Thats just flat-out bad business.
8 Posted by Boris Sheikman on 14 Apr, 2012 07:53 PM
Larry,
Consider this automotive analogy. How long does a car company provide parts for cars that are no longer current? Ford doesn't provide parts for it's 60's and 70's Mustangs indefinitely because it's not worth it. The customer base shrank down to near to nothing compared to the customer base of the current generation of cars. While this is a downer for people with older cars, it provides a business opportunity for others who want to fill in the void.
I feel your pain because I had a PPC iMac for 7 years before I upgraded this past month. But I have to agree with Larry here. At some point, these machines become too old to be worth significant interest. Consider your machine to be "locked in time" and enjoy it in good health! :-)
-=- Boris
9 Posted by Larry Newlin on 15 Apr, 2012 01:30 AM
Boris,
Computer software is not a car, nor is it anything like a car.
Mercedes still makes all parts for all their cars back to WWII. I can still buy any part I need from the dealer for my 1965 190Db.
If you want to treat your premium product (Apple) buyers like low-end (Ford) buyers, then you shouldn't bother to support Apple in the first place.
10 Posted by Boris Sheikman on 15 Apr, 2012 02:32 AM
You are right. Software is nowhere like a car but I thought I would use an automotive analogy since those are easy to work with.
Modern day software is even worse than a car in terms of longetivity. Consumer software is starting to become cheap and disposable. Gone are the days of $100 software packages that are meant to last 5 years. Now we have low priced apps that cycle through pretty quick.
I understand the burden of supporting old code for an ever shrinking base of users. There's a lot of regression testing that needs to be done. At some point it isn't worth it to the developer. I also understand that our older Macs still work great and should be supported. Most PCs don't last more than 3-5 years and they are falling apart after that. A balance must be struck. I figure when Apple stops supporting the platform then I would too. Time to jump ship. There was some overlap in support between PPC and Intel Mac when Apple made the switch. That would be the time to make an early switch.
-- Boris
11 Posted by al on 17 Apr, 2012 07:42 AM
This is the year 2012, and someone with an older Mercedes is griping about support for the PPC architecture? Someone who mistakenly thinks a "large majority" of Geekbench's paying customers are being "given the finger"? Cripes man, pony up for a newer computer!!!!! Let me tell you that your computer isn't going to be any faster if the latest Geekbench increases your PPC's score by a few points. Why on Earth do you need the latest Geekbench to run on a much older computer that you already know is much slower than just about anything released in the last couple years? Quit giving these guys so much guff and perhaps get off your high horse (which is probably a 30-year old nag!)
12 Posted by Larry Newlin on 18 Apr, 2012 10:51 AM
"I figure when Apple stops supporting the platform then I would too."
In that case, when are you planning to "jump ship" on Core Solo and Core Duo models?
13 Posted by Boris Sheikman on 18 Apr, 2012 08:43 PM
Larry,
I am going to sound like I am contradicting myself here a bit but I skipped those generations of iMac. My PowerPC iMac lasted me for 7 years. During that time I saw PPC support dwindle to a trickle and then to even less than that. As PPC support evaporated, support for the Intel iMacs surged! I understood the situation and I was fully aware of the "consequences" of not upgrading. As software publishers closed the water spout of support I never grumbled or complained. Sometimes I would humbly beg for support but results were mixed. At some point, I had a machine frozen in time. My programs were old and outdated but functional. The programs ran but they ran slowly. Also, I was locked out of new applications because they weren't designed for the PPC architecture. I accepted this situation without any hesitation.
Keeping a consumer computer for seven years is plenty long. I recently upgraded to a current model 2011 iMac. For as much as I would like to keep this computer for seven years as well, I think I will shorten my planned keeping of it to around five. By then I figure there will be newer and greater designs with more power, more support, and more features. But, if Apple and other developers graciously continue supporting my machine then I will continue using it.
The Core Solo and Core Duo Mac's are from around 2006. That's nearly 6 years ago depending on which month you bought that generation of machine. If Apple is still officially supporting these machines with updates then I feel software developers should support them as well. I say "should" and not "must". It's a free market and developers choose the platforms that they feel would offer the greatest payback. Otherwise, it may be time to either lay them down, pass them onto kids, or consider them as locked in time machines.
Think extreme case: would you expect software developers to continue making programs for an Apple II or Amiga 500? No, they are "dead" machines. Eventually, all of today's computers will get there. PPC iMacs are no exception. It's just a matter of time.
Check out a blog called "Low End Mac". It focuses on how to keep older Macs up and running despite the dwindling support. I found the articles well written and they offer a good counter balance to the majority of computer users who are always chasing after the latest and greatest technology.
-=- Boris
John closed this discussion on 26 Jul, 2012 04:00 PM.