Re: Apple requires too much money and sacrifice of control

In article <KBxEP.1621523$TBhc.513900@fx16.iad>,
 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

On 2025-03-25 00:00, Johnny LaRue wrote:

In article <uorjtj1svg4iel6a1il22vrqbe394idovc@4ax.com>,
  Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
 

A Mac mini would be $1400.  What I could build for that is
unbelievable.  Getting macOS to me isn't so amazing, Linux does OK.  I
think Apple is like M$ selling products to high-end users first.

 
Yes, Apple costs more than Dell.   And BMWs cost more than Chevys.   And
steak costs more than chicken.
 
What is your point?
 
But what is the alleged "sacrifice of control"?   What does that even
mean?    My Macs are somehow "out of control"?

 
He's suggesting that in addition to Apple devices being more or less a
walled garden (not really since you can install from outside the Apple
Store even though the operating system makes that needlessly annoying
for some applications like Betterbird), you lose control in that your
hardware is abandoned after a number of years. On an x86-64 machine,
this isn't a problem since you can go ahead and install Linux. However,
once Apple decides not to supply you with MacOS anymore, you're stuck.
You /CAN/ continue to use it, but the lack of updates might make its use
a danger if you are connecting to the Internet.

Macs continue to run fine. 

I have an 11 year old Mini that works fine.   I have this ancient Dual
G5 tower (20 years old) that runs fine.   I am using screen sharing (the
equivalent to remote desktop on Windows) from my M2 Macbook Pro to type
this message on the PPC G5 tower because I like MT-NewsWatcher.  

I have an even older Dual G4 tower (23 years old, the wind tunnel box
AKA Mirror Drive Door) that also runs fine. 

No "loss of control" here.   And if installing Linux means you are "in
control" then I would rather be "out of control".