OK, since this whole “inbuilt obsolescence” conspiratorial thinking seems to have a rabid fanbase here, here’s an attempt for those who don’t want to bother with long explanations from the NYT or from Danny as to why modern software can’t run on 10 year old devices, but nevertheless think they understand enough about technology to have a strong opinion on the matter.
Since it looks safe to assume you folks don’t bother with “reading”, but that you can afford Roon, I will go out on a limb and presume you understand the difference between a small number and a big number. Yes, performance is more complex than a single number, yes, the matter is more nuanced, and yes, tech companies not only could, but should of course do more to make software longevity match hardware longevity.
Now, what do those numbers say ?
They say that the minimum spec iPad to run Roon has about 3.5x the raw processing power as a 3rd gen iPad (I didn’t even bother with 1st gen iPads). They say that a current-gen iPad has about 10x the raw processing power as a 3rd gen iPad, and 3x that of a minimum-spec iPad (which is from 7 years ago, I’ll add, so an eternity in computer terms. Yes, you can safely disregard the parenthetical, GB5 number, that’s another benchmark).
Extra credit question: There are four tests under GeekBench 3: 32 single core, 32 multi core, 64 single, 64 multi.
Now, turn your attention to the 64 bit result for the 3rd gen iPad.
What does that tell you about the hardware capabilities, and how could that possibly be related to @danny’s explanation as to why Roon doesn’t run on 8 year old hardware ? And how the hell is that related to “planned obsolescence” ? Do you guys also develop conspiracy theories about Linn because your SACD’s won’t play on LP12s ?