• where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
    28·
    1 year ago

    Time to update the meme.

    1. windows: oh no, I was in a meeting!
    2. mac: oh no, I need a new mac for this to work!
    3. Linux: I'm afraid to install this, my graphics will probably break again!
    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      2·
      1 year ago

      I’ve had some programs break because their dependencies updated before them but never the graphics

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        7·
        1 year ago

        But you can't decline them or postpone indefinitely. It'll eventually force you to restart and update, and that's a problem.

        When updates break a piece of critical software and can't be postponed indefinitely it's a real problem.

        I've also run into instances where my PC was performing a task that required several weeks of processing time and Windows forced a restart because the process time was longer than the postponement window, so a task that's supposed to take 3 weeks suddenly takes 6 weeks.

        Yes, security is important, but sometimes it's secondary to the entire fucking reason a computer has been deployed, and Microsoft shouldn't be dictating my priorities.

      • NightAuthor@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        I forget the specifics, because I've had autoupdates turned off for a while now, but I think it would make you set "active hours" and then would do updates outside of your active hours. Regardless of you actually using your computer at the time. And, back in the day, my sleep schedule was non-existent, so there was no time that was completely safe for doing updates.

        There was a time when you could postpone, but they got rid of that, or limited it… eventually you'd end up with an unstoppable update. It seems microsoft is trying tons of things to get people to stay up to date, but none are satisfying to everyone.

        I prefer my method, which isn't easily accessible to all, manually updating periodically. Sometimes I'm a month or 2 late, but the worst of the worst vulnerabilities ends up news and that'll get me to update sooner.

        • gnygnygny@lemm.ee
          1·
          1 year ago

          I do not think that any solution will satisfy everyone. the limit of 35 days is probably a bit short.

  • Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
    4·
    1 year ago

    I miss when new macOS releases were actually paid and came with actually useful features that worked on pretty much every Macintosh they ran on for the most part.

  • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
    73·
    1 year ago

    So, what? We're just straight up making shit up about Mac now when trashing it on Lemmy?

    Its literally been over a decade since the last time Apple charged for an OS update

      • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
        0·
        1 year ago

        They 100% did

        Don't get me wrong, there's plenty to gripe about with apple, just like every tech company, but I swear half the complaints I hear about Apple products on lemmy are either outdated or just plain wrong

        For some reason the anti-Apple circle jerk is supercharged on Lemmy. I'll never understand why people get themselves so worked up over a brand they never have to do business with

        • Established_Trial@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          I agree. I work in IT and often get asked what the best phone is when someone is looking. I tell them to go to the store and play around with a number of phones for a while. The one they seem to like best or are drawn to more is the one they should get. It makes 0 difference to me what brand of phone/pc/diapers/whatever someone else uses.

  • June@lemm.ee
    31·
    1 year ago

    Mac user: I’ve never once paid for a system update and am wildly confused by this meme.

    And hardware support continues for so long I’ve never had a machine be unable to run a new OS before I already needed a new machine (I used my ‘08 MacBook Pro for a solid 10 years no problem).

    I feel like some of y’all have never used an Apple machine before.

    • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
      3·
      1 year ago

      They used to charge for OS upgrades about 10 years ago, back when it was still called OSX.

    • BearWolf@lemmings.world
      3·
      1 year ago

      You had to pay for OS X updates before, but they changed that around 15 years ago. I remember paying I think $60 to upgrade from Snow Leopard to Mountain Lion.

  • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    Windows: It's stuck again. Will force-reboot corrupt my system?
    Rolling-release distro: Cool! New features. …5 programs just stopped working all together.
    Point-release distro: Let's see… under the hood improvements.
    Gentoo: I don't have time for this.
    LFS: I never planned to try updating it anyway.

  • rikonium@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    Semi-related but I remember the ancient days when the original iPod touch (not iPhone though) initially had paid OS upgrades - not too crazy for back then when the firmware was often done when the device shipped save for maybe a small patch or three. But there were also larger updates too but not too common.

    And then I remember Steve getting up on stage proclaiming that Apple “has found a way!” to make it free.

  • HeavyDogFeet@lemmy.world
    1·
    1 year ago

    There are high-schoolers alive today (maybe even in this thread) who were born after Apple stopped charging for updates. Maybe it’s time to get some new jokes.