Apple ends support for Tiger systems, no clear PowerPC upgrade path remains
Mac users still on Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger) systems should be aware that there are no further security or system patches planned for these systems.
Apple introduced security and system updates for Mac OS X 10.5 and 10.6 last week, reflecting the company’s historical record of supporting both the current and previous operating system but no previous iterations.
The problem here is that Snow Leopard only operates on Intel-based Macs, PowerPC-based Macs must move to Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5) in order to continue to receive OS support. This effectively leaves Mac users running Tiger on a PowerPC-based Mac with two options: Get a new Mac or upgrade to Leopard.
Unfortunately, Apple no longer sells Leopard installation discs, leaving PowerPC users who perhaps of necessity must try to keep their computers going for a while longer before they are in position to upgrade them again with no upgrade path to a supported Apple OS that functions on their Mac.
The response to this on the second-hand and independent retail markets has been somewhat exploitative: Leopard installation discs are now being sold at up to $284.99 on Amazon, and up to £134 on eBay UK.
It is open to debate how many copies of Leopard have reached market, if you include promotional, professional and consumer sales, but the second-hand market among Mac users currently on Tiger systems is likely to remain strong, as this is the last Apple OS to furnish PowerPC support.
Apple is unlikely to choose to recommence support for Tiger systems, but there could be some argument made suggesting the company should perhaps make stocks of Mac OS X 10.5 available for customers still using PowerPC Macs.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook
Google
YahooLatest Stories on 9 to 5 Mac
- Apple patents the 3D Apple Store - Alice in Avatar-land
- Surprise: Warner admits iTunes sales slow on price hikes
- Apple ships Aperture 3: 64-bit, Snow Leopard/Intel only, 200 features, $199/£169 (demo available)
- What's coming to the Apple Store this morning?
- Apple Store Down. Can we has Core i7 MacBook Pros?
- Apple podcasts Mac advice video clips
- iPhone gains, BlackBerry loses US smartphone marketshare
AAPL Stock Coverage
196.19+2.07
Poll
Recent comments
- Could also mean that Apple
8 min 2 sec ago - Actually the £ makes a lot of
31 min 18 sec ago - You know why Warner didn't
49 min 40 sec ago - Why would Apple do this?
1 hour 25 min ago - Cocoa is 64bit, Carbon (old)
1 hour 30 min ago - I don't believe in
1 hour 34 min ago - Sounds like hell to me. One
1 hour 58 min ago - This is going to hurt:
99¢ is
2 hours 16 min ago - what is source?
2 hours 26 min ago - Bazzinga!
2 hours 31 min ago
Who's online
There are currently 3 users and 1 guest online.
Online users
- Mark Gurman
- MacLenny
- Helvetica
Comments (54)
I'm an Apple reseller and I don't get it why they don't sell Leopard discs anymore. I have so many customers asking to upgrade their G4s & G5s and their is just no path for them... It's a shame!
Of course, there's the option of switching to a vibrant, community supported OS like Ubuntu (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PowerPCDownloads). Of course, many native Mac applications won't be supported, but many open source alternatives do exist.
Um, yeah. That's why they have a Mac. So they can run Ubuntu on it. Get real.
When I worked for Apple (through Arise, a contractor, of which I was a contractor) we could add previous OS X versions to a customer's cart manually. I was laid off almost a year ago, so I don't know if they can still do that. It was a rip off though, the full $129, you'd be better off looking elsewhere.
And there still people out there using Mac OS 9. Get a life and move on.
People still using Tiger probably no clue just how fast, quiet cool (temperature wise) Intel Macs are. My family has a bunch of Intel Macs, including me, but I also have Leopard running on a 12-inch Powerbook with a 1.5ghz PPC processor. My Dell Mini 9 hackintosh with Leopard is as fast as my Powerbook running Leopard (and has more RAM), except the Dell Mini 9 hardly ever get hot, and it doesn't even have an internal fan.
Apple was 100% right to move to Intel processors and people with PPC Macs need to likewise move on.
It appears not to have occurred to you that many people who agree with you about the desireability of moving on from PPC or even OS 9 may not have the money to make the upgrade. There's really no reason to tell someone that they have "no clue", should "get a life" and "move on" when what's stopping them is a lack of money.
I'm glad your family is well off enough to have a "bunch" of Intel Macs, and that you yourself have an Intel Mac, a PowerBook and a Dell hackintosh but Macs are used by all sorts of people in all sorts of places. There may be those who could afford an upgrade and yet just haven't done it, but to the cash-strapped others your comments might sound unfortunately like a sneer.
We still have systems running Mac OS 9 on G4s, because they are used for medical nuclear imaging. The firm producing the machines is, of course, willing to offer an upgrade path to modern intel-based systems (running Windows) - for about $ 40.000. I think we'll be working with the hot-running, rather loud G4s and the non-updated OS for some time to come. Meaning: Until they fall apart.
Have you considered another vender? Should you have considered another vender?
Yes I am still running some computers on OS9, mainly old Titanium laptops running Office 2001. I find VBA on the Mac to be buggy and had to write a significant amount of Applescript patches to get 2001 to run correctly. I never took the time to debug 2004, and instead waited for 2008 to find that VBA was dropped. I will likely say goodbye to OS9 completely once VBA returns as i am quite obstinate and will wait for VBA to return and will not give M$ the benefit of buying one old OS copy and one Office copy per computer. I use 2004 on some Intel machines but it always crashes with complex VBA. I have also written numerous programs in Pascal that do not run in OSX and I do not have the time to learn new languages. I also have found some programs that seem to run better on PPC than Intel platforms, at least on rare occasions, such as MacTheRipper.
I am writing this from one of my four Intel Macs in 10.4. I should have bought one of the remaining 10.5 family packs before it went away. I think Apple should sell a combo 10.6/10.5 pack that will update all machines to the newest possible OS.
I disagree. There's no reason to keep old versions of software on the shelf. I might accept that Apple might offer older versions on their web site, but only if it's clearly labeled.
It is confusing to consumers to see several OSs on the shelf at once. Look at all the ridicule Microsoft has received for multiple versions of their OS. Particularly when the names are so similar (Leopard and Snow Leopard), it is likely to lead to confusion. What happens when a customer comes in to buy the latest OS and picks up the Leopard box, thinking that it must be current because it's on the shelf? Are you going to refund their money?
Besides, the majority of people who were going to upgrade to Leopard have already done so. If it took them 18 months to learn that Leopard was out, they can always buy on eBay.
I think we could see a "torrent" of interest in 10.5....
If this was Microsoft, you would all be bitching about Microsoft not providing support.
MS supports its legacy software because the vast majority of PC users have not "upgraded" and will not "upgrade" to either Vista or Windows 7. The vast majority of Mac users use Leopard or Snow Leopard. The trends are obvious.
> no further security or system patches planned
I don't think many folks will lose sleep over the lack of new security patches for their 4-5 year old Macs, considering how rare it is for Macs to be sucessfully attacked.
I think a more common reason to upgrade an old OS is to get some new feature, or because a new application requires it.
Don't get me wrong, this will certainly be inconvenient for a few folks, but most folks still using 4-5 year old Macs are probably starting to think about a newer Mac anyway.
I have a Quick Silver Dual G4 800 and running the latest Tiger release and I really don't gave much reason to update other then to run little utilities that are only Leopard compatible. The bulk if my software is too expensive to upgrade for a newer OS or switching to Intel CPUs.
Until such time—and it's certainly drawing nigh—as the manufacturer(s) of your "too expensive to upgrade" software force you to do so, most likely by a version increase or, since I suspect you'll be of the mind that whatever ancient version of software you're running is all you'll ever need, by dropping support for your version. PPC Macs are dinosaurs. You've gotten your money's worth out of them, it's time to think about moving into the 2000s with your hardware.
As I said in another post, I have have over 10 Macs at present. Half are PPC and the other half Intel. Some old software runs best in OS9, most newer software runs best in OSX on Intel. Occasional issues crop up where software runs best, though not always as fast, on PPC in OSX; e.g. some discs rip with MacThrRipper on PPC but not Intel (? D-R-M). Well-coded Pascal and even better coded older languages are much faster than object-bloated C.
It's really funny how critical some Apple users are of Microsoft, but you know what XP will have support until 2014, thirteen years after introduction? Apple, you suck.
Support for XP has been discontinued, and re-continued so many times, it's hard to even keep track anymore. In fact, they only reason they have continued support at all is that an overwhelming majority of businesses refuse to move forward from XP. Once the business installed client base goes over the 50% threshold, I'm sure Microsoft will abandoned XP like an unwanted child. It's clear, MS doesn't care about XP consumer customers, as they haven't provided them with any upgrade options directly from XP. Ballmer's excuse: it was time to cut the chains and move on from a technological perspective. As if it would be that difficult to adapt the Vista upgrade system from XP to Windows 7. Microsoft totally could have done it, but wanted to make it painful for customers, who, in their opinion, should have adopted Vista. Those looking for an easier upgrade path would need to update to Vista, then 7... a rather messy proposition. For businesses, they could care less since they're more likely to roll out flat images of 7 to workstations using Ghost or some other similar solution. FWIW, Microsoft continues to support XP because: it took them 6 years to build Vista, 2 more to build Windows 7, and will probably take them another 2 more to get businesses to test and deploy Windows 7. I predict by 2012, Windows XP will finally be killed, but only because it took them so long to build a reasonable, worthy replacement OS.
The joke is that the majority of PC users are not convinced of the need to purchase Vista or Windows 7, whereas a growing number of Mac users are adopting Leopard and Snow Leopard. MS supports XP because XP is the default OS for PCs. Likewise, Leopard and Snow Leopard are the default OSs for Macs.
As an owner of a G5 iMac, which runs perfectly, I don't like being told that there is NO upgrade path for me. What of the millions of users who use older machines than that? Is Apple just going to junk the "Old machines"? There is a whole group of users of "Old Macs", problem being that they run perfectly - what is to happen to them? I think that this is a big mistake, especially when there is some actual competition from Windows, finally.
Well, as an owner of a perfectly functioning G4 flat panel iMac running the latest version of Tiger, I agree too. I may be getting close to getting a new Intel iMac but it is kind of a shame that we are not getting support out here for lots of this perfectly capable older hardware that is still being used daily by lots of users.
Perhaps this means the underlying Tiger code that powers the Apple TV will be updated to Snow Leopard?
Just a thought....
If someone needs to upgrade to Leopard, it seems easy enough to buy it from one of several on-line vendors.
While I agree that Apple should still offer Leopard for PPC Macs, at least through their website if not at retail, the idea that they should still be supporting Tiger doesn't hold up. There are no serious security threats that I'm aware of for 10.4 that haven't been addressed, and the number of active machines running it is too low to be a much of a target for any new attacks. As for the argument that XP will be supported until 2014, that's only because Vista was such a disaster. Microsoft didn't want their customers, the overwhelming number of which still run XP, to get angry and switch. If the majority of Apple's customers were still running Tiger, you can bet they'd still support it for the same reason.
People need to accept that Apple is in the business of making money...lots of it, just like Microsoft or Exxon or any other successful company. Just take a look at their profit margins. Why wouldn't they take steps like this that encourage sales of new machines while also lowering support costs? If you don't like their capitalist outlook, stick with your old machines or switch to Linux. Otherwise, get used to the fact that like most things in life, you've got to pay to play.
It's true that Apple is in the business of making money. And it also gets clear to me, that Apple isn't different as MS or Exxon. :-(
But when I bought my ppc mac / osx 10.4 Tiger I've paid to get service. And yes, it's a lot of work to work out the security updates also for Tiger. But that's part of the job.
Apple, do you remember the time (end of 90's) you were almost bankrupt? You was begging your customers 'Please people, keep buying macs'.
But that's a long time ago. At this time Apple has $34 billion on the bank (*).
I guess it's better if Apple gets again through a financial depression time. Maby they realize they have to offer some customer-service.
(*) CHART OF THE DAY: Apple's Soaring Pile Of Cash (AAPL)
I retied my cube due to lack of 10.5 support - it works just fine and UNLIKE XP does not need to be patched due to constant attacks from the web. I retired the Cube mostly because it was too slow (old) and but in a pinch I can bring up and it is still serviceable.
Having had Mac servers on the internet for years (make that a decade and a half) open no firewall, with and without being NATed and never had a problem. I have not been able to keep a XP machine online for a year with it being hacked with NAT and a firewall.
I have a ppc iBook running 10.3 and a Mini on 10.4. I DO resent that Apple broke syncing on my Mac.com account for 10.3. I think they should have given a free (or minimal cost) upgrade to 10.4 available to maintain this syncing. (10.5 was already out.) However, if not for the broken syncing I do not expect Apple to maintain some endless "upgrade path" for old equipment. Both computers continue to function in their assigned tasks as well as they ever did. As many have noted, they are "perfectly capable older Macs." When I feel they no longer are, (Real soon, now!) I will joyously join the ranks of Intel Mac 10.6 owners. I will then use that/those until some fun feature compels me to upgrade to 10.7 or 10.8 or - not.
I also don't expect Honda to make an engine swap available because a new one might get slightly better mileage or slipping a V6 in place of my 4 cylinder will allow me to pull a trailer that just caught my eye. Or upgrade the interior because I've just decided I'd like built in GPS and iPod support!
And I've owned Macs since my 7200 w/ OS 7 and a IIGS before that. My 7200 won't run 10.5, Waaah!
For the computers that Apple still officially supports (which is now only iMac G5 and PowerMac G5's) there should be an option to upgrade to the latest OS version available for that particular hardware, which is Leopard.
But really people should have seen this coming when Snow Leopard was announced as Intel only, Apple only ever sells the latest version, so they should have brought leopard while it was still be sold. I'm not defending Apple, but we all know how they work!
If Apple were still selling Leopard (even if just for PPC owners), it would slow adoption of Snow Leopard and that's something they clearly want to avoid at all costs. I don't really know why they're making such a big effort this time around, but the push to get all Mac users onto Intel/Snow Leopard is unprecedented. They didn't even make this much effort to get people off OS 9.