Vintage and Obsolete Products List

8 posts / 0 new
Last post
davintosh's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
Vintage and Obsolete Products List

Apple just updated its Vintage and Obsolete Product List. I don't know about the rest of you, but I still have several of those machines in service, chugging along happily.

I figure, as long as a computer does what I need it to do it's far from obsolete. I know that as a computer manufacturer, Apple has to have a different definition of "obsolete", but I still hate to see some of those machines referred to in that way. It's just a little... I dunno... demeaning?

Offline
Last seen: 11 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 16 2005 - 12:05
Every computer I own is on on

Every computer I own is on one of those lists! Well, other than the iMac G5 Smile

John

Dr. Webster's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 52 min ago
Joined: Dec 19 2003 - 17:34
Apple considers a PCI G4 towe

Apple considers a PCI G4 tower as "vintage"? This further cements the fact that Apple wants you to throw away your computer every year and buy a new one.

iamdigitalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 7 months ago
Joined: Mar 1 2004 - 22:18
oh dang, my B&W is on that li

oh dang, my B&W is on that list. well, at least Mactracker says it's still supported.

I wonder if that means 10.5 wont run on it. remember, once it is declared vintage, they stop supporting it's OS.

My PB 100, 145, G3 wallstreet, Plus, and LC III are no surprise, but the B&W? heck, it can run 10.4.5, hold a gig of ram, has onboard USb and firewire.

FAR from vintage.

-digital Wink

Jon
Jon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 4 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
The Apple 1 is conspicuously

The Apple 1 is conspicuously absent from the list, as is the Lisa and Mac XL. Wink

moosemanmoo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: Aug 17 2004 - 15:24
The Apple III Plus was also o

The Apple III Plus was also omitted. How lucky for those seventeen people that bought them!

madmax_2069's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 7 months ago
Joined: Sep 24 2005 - 07:28
this has alway's been my grip

this has alway's been my gripe with apple on how they do this stuff to system more than capable of running OS X. i think they lose more money doing this with there OS X sales. if some one wants to run SO X and the system has no problem running it they should support it. just look at the Beige G3 when upgraded it will run OS X 10.4 great heck it will run OS X 10.4 stock of cource max out the ram is a must and the 4mb vram video upgrade should be to. i dont understand apple at all. who cares if the system has USB or firewire or not it can be installed on the systems without them if the system has pci.

if some one wants a new system so they can run things faster then so be it but you dont have to ditch the current systems that are able of running the latest OS X. IMO i think them doing this will hurt system sales more cause people are afraid to buy a Mac cause of this fact

Hawaii Cruiser's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 20 2005 - 16:03
Uh, looks like it's strictly

Uh, looks like it's strictly based on age, not capability, and has something to do with various laws or codes? Anyway, why would anyone want expensive retail parts or service on a B&W when they can buy a whole 'nother one off eBay for $50 these days. There comes a point where service is just ridiculous (you ever have people ask you if they should take their VCR in for repairs?), and how would we have our fun here at AppleFritter if we all weren't trying to figure out how to fix everything ourselves?
As for OS support. Well, someone almost always finds a way around that too. Apple's still here after almost 30 years of often life-threatened existence. Maybe this is one of the main reasons why. Keep the lovers buying.

Log in or register to post comments