Considering that it's basic x86 Linux+Chrome it could be supported indefinitely without any issues. Especially just chrome, once unsupported it won't even receive updates to the browser and that's unacceptable
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
83 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37691 readers
328 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Ars mentions that Apple (on average) now supports new Mac’s for 7 years, but even though Apple stops delivering updates at least the (non-Safari) browsers and other software may continue to receive updates for quite a bit longer.
In this day and age browser security is the first and most important line of defense, and as long as your browser is updated and your firewall is up you can have some sense of security.
I personally never touched a Chromebook, and have no idea how hard it is to get Linux onto them, but it sure proves Stallmans old argument about freedom.
I personally never touched a Chromebook, and have no idea how hard it is to get Linux onto them, but it sure proves Stallmans old argument about freedom.
In some cases you have to physically modify hardware to get a different OS onto a chrome device. It could be anything from removing a write-protect screw from the motherboard, all the way up to flashing an EPROM.
See here: https://mrchromebox.tech/
Sounds perfect! /s
it's quite the opposite, updates for safari are generally tied to the operating system so after 7 years (but it could be 4 years in edge cases) safari will stop receiving updates. While third party browsers instead are more gentle, will continue to get updates as long as possible (but it's still not calculated in "decades" as for windows or linux)
regarding updates, i think linux can be installed on them (never touched one nor plan to do so in the next decade) but the combo shitty cpu+extremely small and slow emmc storage+the bare minimum RAM is a killer. Maybe just for a fun experiment
That’s what I wrote. :)
And as for Windows updates we don’t know what the future holds. Windows Vista and 8 certainly wasn’t supported for decades.
Linux distros are fine as long as you do dist-upgrades, but that’s not something most people’s grandparents, heck, even most people, are going to do even if they were able to walk into a store and actually buy a computer with Linux on it.
And as for the edge case Macs which only received four years of software updates - I’d be pissed if I was the owner of one.
Ah i translate wrong in my head, re reading now it's exactly what you said
updates for safari are generally tied to the operating system
Sure - but Apple also ships bugfix and web standards compatibility updates for old versions of Safari. You don't have to be running the latest version to be fully supported. You only need the latest version for user interface features (tab grouping, etc).
It's generally only a problem with really old hardware.
I recently got a Chromebook from work (it's no longer supported by manufacturer, so it was bound for ewaste). A Toshiba Chromebook 2 (model CB35-B3440).
Installing Linux was pretty uneventful after struggling a bit to get ChromeOS re-installed, which I had to do as the original image was 'enterprise managed' and thus had developer mode disabled. After reinstalling ChtomeOS and removing the hardware write lock (a foil sticker on the MoBo), I ran the install script from https://mrchromebox.tech/ which reflashed the firmware to Coreboot. Its pretty much a standard EFI laptop at that point.
It has 4GB memory, an Intel Celeron N2840 CPU and 16GB eMMC. I put Fedora LXQT on it. Overall, it is very underpowered in the CPU department, noticeably more so even compared to other low end laptops of similar vintage I have. But, its good enough for web browsing and e-book reading. The HD screen looks pretty good and the best part is the batterey life is way better than any other laptop I've had. You can actually use it for a full day on a single charge. If you understand the limitations, its a worthwhile device considering the cost of these ranges from free in m case to about $40 used on Ebay
Apple's current 7 year cutoff includes radical evolutions of hardware over recent years.
The latest cutoff, as far as I know, is Macs that typically were sold with a spinning rust HDD - which are honestly useable anyway on the new filesystem which has been designed from the ground up for SSDs. Modern MacOS just can't cope with seek time lag to access the disk.
The big cutoff before that was transitioning from 32 bit to 64 bit CPUs. And the next cutoff will be from x86 to ARM.
Apple doesn't have a hard cutoff - they have a "we will support as far back as we can" cutoff, which is a combination of the cost required to keep it compatible and the number of actual users on old hardware.
Also - even after things are no-longer "supported" they often still get security patches from Apple. Especially if something is actually being exploited.
I’m well aware of the developments, but fact is that it would be trivial to support these devices, they just choose not to.
Assuming that Apple makes “informed” decisions based on the number of active devices is just ridiculous. Apart from the abysmal 2016 and up Intel-based MBP machines there is plenty of great and capable hardware out there.
Both my 2011 MBA and 2014 MBP (late 2013 model which honestly holds up way better than my 2018 MBP) have both gone out of favor [1], but they both have SSD’s and are fully capable of running 64-bit software.
Apart from the security coprocessor for touchID there’s very little difference between these and the machines that are currently supported.
As for Apples willingness and ability to deliver software updates to earlier, but still officially supported versions of MacOS - there are considerable issues and concerns [2].
1: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213264 2: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/11/psa-apple-isnt-actually-patching-all-the-security-holes-in-older-versions-of-macos/
Firmware updates though.
How often do you see a worthwhile firmware update to something older than two years?
Besides, running Linux isn’t a blocker for firmware updates if the vendor supports it.
I run a Chromebook from HP that no longer has support from Google. I had to pull the back off and remove a physical screw to reinstall the OS but am happily running Pop_OS 22,04 on it which gets linux-firmware updates. Unfortunately I have not seen a bios update in quite some time, but the firmware still gets support from the kernel and distro. I did need the juevos to actually open my computer up after researching what to do and the knowledge to futz with all the keyboard oddities to get the keyboard fully functional that most people just don't have the knowledge to easily do nor the patience to fight with Google searches and Gallium tools/documentation to make these things work.
Chromebooks are not a walled garden, they don't need "support" themselves, you can even install Windows 10 on one!
The problem comes from "school test administering companies" requiring a "bootlocked hardware with closed support" for the laptop to work for school.
That other thing about hardware attestation from the browser, that has so many up in arms, is actually a possible solution for this particular problem.
No, it's not.
Use your "you don't get funding unless..." lever to ban schools from doing business with shitbag companies with invasive requirements and your problem is solved.
Allowing Google to abuse their market position to destroy the internet is not a valid answer.
The current lever is "you get closed unless... you follow these invasive rules we've come up with, which we're forcing testing organizations to follow, and you're free to do business with whatever company you want... oh, Google turns out to be the cheapest one following those rules? Whatever."
The browser attestation is a way for Google to keep offering an even cheaper way to comply with those invasive rules.
Browser attestation is a massive, unconditionally unforgivable invasion of privacy, for the exclusive purpose of strengthening Google's monopoly on the internet.
There's no possible scenario you could contrive where there's even .00000001% good faith mixed in with the bad, because if even that little was there, you would never consider implementing it.
massive, unconditionally unforgivable invasion of privacy
Have you tried taking a proctored test? The kind where you have to install proctoring software which takes 100% control of your PC, requires you keeping your webcam and mic open, show it around your room, stay in frame all the time, and not look away too many times in case the proctor fails you for potentially cheating from off-screen materials?
The unforgivable invasion of privacy is already here, has been for a long time, and it didn't come from Google.