..is that supposed to be make it any better? An OS update shouldn't kill my laptop, regardless of how old my laptop is. At most just don't let the update roll to laptops that are too old.
Nah, dude, they are in there saying "let's make more bags of money", which is exactly why software continues to suck at an accelerated rate. None of it is reliable long term and it changes so fast users can't keep up, other than having to shell out more and more money to stay in the game of usable software.
A few days ago I woke up and my Sonos won't respond with Alexa. The software got updated and now they expect me to jump through a bunch of hoops (including logging out of Amazon on my devices) to get it back, but I'm not.
It doesn't make any better but, there's nothing sinister about it.
I don't like using Windows but I admire MS's commitment to back compatibility. I know it adds a tremendous amount of work and makes some vulnerabilities very difficult or impossible to address.
TBF I don't believe MS can or does ship firmware updates for any hardware other than their own. So they are less likely to suffer this particular failure.
Ah, that's why they changed it from 5
> They have also occasionally shipped security updates for even older hardware.
Yes, only security updates
> I don't like using Windows but I admire MS's commitment to back compatibility. I know it adds a tremendous amount of work and makes some vulnerabilities very difficult or impossible to address.
Yes, but there's a price for backwards compatibility. It makes the goal of "it just works" near insurmountable.
I'm not saying what MS or Apple is doing either is good or bad. I'm just explaining the pros and cons of both approaches. There's no wrong choice. You just need to be aware of the pros and cons before making a commitment on your choice. Dropping support for old stuff has been Apple's MO for decades now, while it feels to be the opposite for Microsoft