The two stories I cited are examples of what I see are fundamental flaws in the Apple Way and I feel should give people a reason to step back and re-think the whole paradigm.
Spend, spend, spend...
As for running Linux on old hardware, it's not just that it runs. It's *USEFUL* too on old hardware.
As for the CLI to manage the Airport Extreme, what makes you think that rev of the CLI would work if the Airport Utility wouldn't? The GUI is just a front-end to the CLI.
The point here is that Apple's gear isn't compatible with itself over time, and it forces people to purchase upgrades unnecessarily. I suppose the best thing you could say for it is that its clearly a successful business model...
Linux runs just fine on an 8 year old laptop with all the newest tools. It comes with a variety of excellent IDEs to choose from as well as any number of different windowing systems you can pick from. The latest software runs just fine on an 8 year old piece of hardware. Apple forces you to spend, spend, spend to keep everything working together and it just age well.
As for ProTools breaking, it certainly is Apple's fault that an older product does not work. I've got shell scripts I wrote 15 years ago which work fine on any Linux system today. I use an 8 year old $100 laptop running Windows 7 to do location recording with a 13 year old version of CoolEdit to record to. Works fine. And that version of CoolEdit would run under Windows 10. Heck, I could probably get it to run under Wine.
I have another 8 year old laptop that runs Ubuntu 1404 LTS which acts as the music server for my hi-end audio system, using the Banshee application.
Can you imagine anyone using a 6 year old Mac and have it work with anything Apple new? Nahhhhh...
One friend had a MacBook which was 4 years old. She purchased a new Airport Extreme, Apple's home router. The only way to manage the Airport Extreme is with Apple's Airport Utility. The version of Mac OS X had an older version of Airport Utility that wasn't compatible with the router. Furthermore she couldn't upgrade the version of Mac OS X on her laptop to the current rev because it was 4 years old. In order to install the Airport Extreme, she had to borrow a new iPad.
Every other home router on the planet is managed through a web browser interface. There's NOTHING about the Airport Utility that you couldn't do with a browser interface, but noooo... It's an Apple product so you HAVE to use their app to manage it, and if you don't have a current Apple platform to do it from, you're screwed.
Another friend purchased a new iPhone 6 and found that iTunes wouldn't work for him with his laptop. Again, he had to upgrade Mac OS X. His laptop was new enough that it could go up to the current rev of OS X, so he got his iTunes working. But then his ProTools wouldn't work with the new OS X. Three years of studio recordings were lost.
Apple stuff is not only not compatible with other platforms, it's not compatible with itself. Anyone who buys into the Apple eco-system is going to run up against this kind of problem.
I also do location recording of chamber music, so I use the laptop to my editing. I typically burn CD copies of the remastered recordings for the musicians and will check them on the CD player just to make sure everything is right.
I run a Linn LP-12 turntable (serial #1956) which is 44 years old. It's in tip-top shape. I have a Rega RB-300 arm and a Denon DL-110 cartridge. I run that into a tube preamp (http://www.tubes4hifi.com) which feeds an active crossover for the Linkwitz Orion loudspeaker system. I use an Ubuntu laptop with the Banshee music player for my digital source into a Peachtree DAC. Decent grade, but nothing special Parts Express interconnects and 14 gauge zip cord speaker wire. Everyone who hears my system leaves with envy.
*All* headphones suck compared to what I listen to at home. I don't care if you're listening to an mp3 player, a iPhone or what headphone amp you're running it through. It all sucks in comparison. If you want something that actually sounds good AND is affordable for the Common Man, point your browser at:
2) If robots do replace all jobs, the "money" comes from sale of goods just the same. Half the workforce are working and doing the work of the other half - the robots produce the goods / services, and the humans lounge at home.
And just who is going to give money to the humans lounging at home with which they will pay for housing, food, clothing, transportation, goods and services? How much money will they be given? Or is this "home" you speak of just going to be a tent in Hooverville?
3) The result of the above is that food and goods become so cheap and plentiful that the concept of "buying" them will seem old hat.
The economic system is one where all goods and services have to be paid for at some level. Even subsidized services like public transportation and health care require some level of payment. Are you suggesting that the long-term unemployed will be government subsidized sufficiently to have an apartment to live in, with Internet, streaming electronic entertainment, beer in the fridge ("free as in beer") and an endless supply of junk food?
5) Who cares? If you have no job and no money but food is so cheap that going an oiling a robot once a month pays for everything - wow... perfect life.
Even if food, goods and housing are amazingly cheap, if you have no money to pay for them, then they are still too expensive for you.
Back in the 1960's, there was a TV show called "The 21st Century", which was narrated by Walter Cronkite. He kept going on about how much more leisure time people would have in the 21st century. What the futurists of the day forgot to consider was that if you put everyone out of a job, nobody is going to have money to spend, and thus there would be no market to sell to.