
Apple retires Snow Leopard from support, leaves 20% Macs vulnerable to attacks - adventured
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9246609/Apple_retires_Snow_Leopard_from_support_leaves_1_in_5_Macs_vulnerable_to_attacks
======
gum_ina_package
Can you imagine if Microsoft did something like this? Leaving 20% of all
Windows users unsupported!

For me, it's just another example of the kinds of things Apple can get away
with and no one bats an eye. 20% of all Mac users must upgrade or risk being
unsecure. So what the upgrades are free? What if you have a critical piece of
software that isn't compatible with the latest OS X? Or what if your hardware
can't support an upgrade?

EDIT: Some people are making comparisons to MS dropping XP support, but I
don't think that's a fair comparison since XP was released in 2001 and Snow
Leopard in 2009.

~~~
ChrisClark
I assume you're referring to the 30% of Windows users (XP) that will be left
unsupported and unprotected in April of this year?

~~~
louthy
Snow Leopard release date: August 28, 2009

Windows XP release date: October 25, 2001

~~~
_zen
Also, hardware bought that had Windows XP on it would be ancient today. We're
talking Pentium 4s here.

Mac hardware from 2009 is still very capable for what most people use it for:
office suite, email and web browser.

(I could argue a optimized Windows XP computer from that era could still do
well with today's software, but if someone is still using Windows XP on 10
year old hardware, it's probably running subpar)

~~~
jonah
Mac hardware from 2009? My early 2011 MacBook Pro came with Snow Leopard and
it has an i7. It's still plenty fast enough to run several VMs, an IDE and do
real(TM) work on it.

------
_zen
What legitimate reason does Apple have for not updating Snow Leopard? All I
see is a company trying to force unnecessary hardware or software purchases on
people. Most people just need a web browser and an Office suite, they don't
need the new features of Mavericks or the latest hardware.

It's only 4 years old. Microsoft's Windows XP is still supported until April
8th, after 12 long years. Disappointing for Apple.

------
RexRollman
That titles seems alarmist. It could also be stated that the users who aren't
upgrading are leaving 20% of Macs vulnerable.

~~~
cjensen
Lion requires a 64-bit Intel CPU. All of the initial Intel Macs cannot be
upgraded past Snow Leopard. All PowerPC Macs cannot be upgraded past Leopard.

~~~
protomyth
Even the 64-bit CPU won't run Lion if the EFI is 32-bit.

------
vivab0rg
It was already high-time for upgrading my second-hand Core 2 Duo 1.8 GHz Mac
mini from Snow Leopard to Linux. The hardware is still running strong, so
there's no reason to hold it back in OSX-land...

~~~
cake
Snow Leopard is still the best OS X I know (now being on Mountain Lion), it
was fast and efficient.

It still works wonders on the old Core 2 Duo and I wouldn't upgrade any of the
older machines I have.

------
interstitial
So now we have afternoon and morning versions of HN?
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7310404](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7310404)

------
jarcoal
To me the bigger news here is that this bug has been in the wild for at least
5 years.

~~~
soneil
It hasn't. The 'gotofail' bug doesn't exist in 10.8.5 or earlier.

The 'news' here is that Safari6 & 7 received updates but Safari5 didn't.
Piggy-backing 'gotofail' is just alarmism.

------
outside1234
Apple is a hardware business. It pays to make their hardware obsolete.

------
qwerta
Great, so now there will be another army of zombie computers. Thansk very much
Apple. Perhaps I should start forwarding spam I get.

~~~
danielweber
Wait, was this an arbitrary code execution bug?

~~~
qwerta
Encryption bug could be used by malware, but there were also several others
bugfixes in that patch:

> The update, the first since mid-December, patched 32 other vulnerabilities
> in various versions of OS X, including six in QuickTime, Apple's media
> player, and more disturbing, four bugs that could be used by attackers to
> bypass the application "sandbox," an isolation technology designed to
> minimize damage when malware does make it onto a Mac.

------
iratedev
No, customers leave themselves vulnerable.

~~~
Schlaefer
No, they bought a device that was secure, or least supposed to be. They didn't
do anything to change that. If a flaw is discovered now that existed back then
it should be addressed to recover to that state again.

Let's be honest: Apple is making money selling new hardware, so they have no
incentive to provide support over a long period of time that does not generate
new revenue. Nothing more, nothing less.

~~~
iratedev
Exactly. I stated above that it is a user's fault for not keeping up to date
and making poor technology choices.

