Support Staff2 Posted by John on 11 Apr, 2012 05:34 AM
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.
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 Staff4 Posted by John on 12 Apr, 2012 12:26 AM
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.
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
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! :-)
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
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
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
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
13 Posted by Boris Sheikman on 18 Apr, 2012 08:43 PM
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
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
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.