10.7 Mac Pro 09 and up only

[hugodrax]

I have been hearing that 10.7 will only be supported on Mac Pro 2009 models and up.

Would be interesting if that is the case, probably has to do with the 64bit EFI

[Sun Baked]

I'd expect at least a Core2Duo and up support, 2GB Memory ...

For some of the newest features, we may see some CPU and/or GPU limits.

Typically this has been filters and such, but we may seem them push a bit outside that box.

Basically the 64-bits will be 64-bit capable CPUs, likely not EFI, like it is now. We will just see them ejecting some Intel CPUs with this next batch and limiting the GPUs.

[Hellhammer]

And your source is? Only 2006-2007 Mac Pro has 32-bit EFI so IF 10.7 has only 64-bit kernel, then it should work on 2008 Mac Pro as well.

Mac Pro 2009 and up would mean that pretty much all non iX Macs wouldn't support it and that sounds ridiculous because Apple still sells computers with C2Ds.

[Transporteur]

Mac Pro 2009 and up would mean that pretty much all non iX Macs wouldn't support it and that sounds ridiculous because Apple still sells computers with C2Ds.

Probably not any more when 10.7 will be finally available (certainly not before the end of 2011).

[Hellhammer]

Probably not any more when 10.7 will be finally available (certainly not before the end of 2011).

True but it would still be ridiculous. Less than a year-old computer that cost over 1000$ but it does not support the latest OS :rolleyes:

Can't see it happening

[Transporteur]

True, which is why I don't believe in such rumours.

[C. Alan]

I don't think they would leave the C2D owners out of the upgrade. Now, I can see certain features not being enabled for performance reasons.

[Concorde Rules]

Not a chance.

10.7 will support everything C2D and up, I put money on it.

Lets not forget the current MBA and 13" MBP and MB are all C2D.

Simples.

PS: It doesn't matter the EFI is 32-bit, Apple can change that if required...

[Wild-Bill]

If it does turn out to be true, then Mr. Jobs will leave work one day only to find my 2008 Mac Pro penetrating the windshield of his car.......

[7thMac]

Please cite your sources.

[roadbloc]

If it does turn out to be true, then Mr. Jobs will leave work one day only to find my 2008 Mac Pro penetrating the windshield of his car.......
And I'll be throwing my 2008 Macbook through the driver side window.

[G4DP]

I have been hearing that 10.7 will only be supported on Mac Pro 2009 models and up.

Would be interesting if that is the case, probably has to do with the 64bit EFI

You've got to love at the amount of bollox already being posted about an OS, we don't even know the name of, let alone any specific features.

[Littleodie914]

Has Apple ever actually placed processor speed restrictions in the system requirements? I know they put requirements on RAM and processor architecture, but I've never heard of them saying "that processor won't cut it."

[Hellhammer]

PS: It doesn't matter the EFI is 32-bit, Apple can change that if required...

Apple wouldn't do that because they want people to buy new Macs.


Has Apple ever actually placed processor speed restrictions in the system requirements? I know they put requirements on RAM and processor architecture, but I've never heard of them saying "that processor won't cut it."

Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard requires:

A Mac computer with an Intel, PowerPC G5, or Power PC G4 (867 MHz or faster) processor

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3759

[Concorde Rules]

Apple wouldn't do that because they want people to buy new Macs.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3759

Whatever.

I guarantee you 10.7 will *not* require 64-bit EFI.

The general public would not understand why W7 x64 could run but 10.7 can't.

[Hellhammer]

Whatever.

I guarantee you 10.7 will *not* require 64-bit EFI.

The general public would not understand why W7 x64 could run but 10.7 can't.

I agree with that. Just noted that I doubt that Apple would update the EFI to 64-bit on four-year-old machine.

Besides, 64-bit kernel is quite useless for most people but it would require some drivers to be rewritten (I think) so I can't see Apple doing that. Also, it would sound stupid if Apple again advertised their new OS as 64-bit... I guess we'll know in few hours :p

[maflynn]

I have been hearing that 10.7 will only be supported on Mac Pro 2009 models and up.

Where because apple isn't talking, in fact very little information has been leaked, including the name of 10.7. People have "Assumed" the name is lion but its just that an assumption. Likewise the requirements for 10.7 is just pure speculation.

Apple has generally done a great job at supporting legacy hardware, look at how long it took them to drop PPC frameworks and go straight to intel.

I don't what the minimum requirements for 10.7 will be, but apple knows and that means we may hear (and we may not) it later today.

[deconstruct60]

And your source is? Only 2006-2007 Mac Pro has 32-bit EFI so IF 10.7 has only 64-bit kernel, then it should work on 2008 Mac Pro as well.


It is not about "it should work" on the hardware. 10.6 could have worked on the about 3 year old (when 10.6 went into developer release) G5's too. It is about whether Apple puts the machine into the QA regression test set for the release and subsequent updates. If 10.7 "betas" are not tested on 2008 models then it will not be released for it. ( it might work with some hacking, but it won't be supported).

It may boil down to numbers. There may be not enough 2008 models to make it worth the extra expense. Additionally, the release date for 10.7 may move the 2008 models on to the "too old" pile.

Apple kills off support for older machines. 10.7 will probably release around Q4 2011 or Q1 2012. At the latter point, a 2008 machine is minimally 4 years old. Is that machine even being supported by Apple anymore? Even with Applecare you are out of the window. If on a 3 year depreciation schedule, then at 4 years you are past zero. On a 5 year schedule, you only have a year left.. ( should be far more worried about migrating to new box than installing a brand-spanking-new OS. Need a stable current system more than a new one. ). 2007 is definitely out of the range Apple will support just on age not hardware capabilities. The more the 10.7 release slides into 2012, the 2008 machines will be just as "too old". (the MP release date in 2008 was Jan 2008. That means 10.7 need only slide one month into 2008 before all the 2008 models are "too old". Somewhat likely the "stable enough for production" version 10.7.2 won't even be out by then even if did release in then. Definitely would be "too old" for all the subsequent dot releases. You can't just look at the release date. Apple isn't going to stop supporting a model with the 'dot' updates. Once on board at the beginning supported till releases 10.8. that is another two years. ).

You can see where Apple is moving to a model where users get one, maybe two Mac OS X upgrades before they drop support. That's because Mac OS X is on a 4-5 cycle for those two updates if measure "first release" (on first) to "stable release update" (on second). Apple openly said a couple years ago they were going to slow down the pace of Mac OS X updates to a somewhat slower pace. 2+ years is likely what they are going to settle into.



Mac Pro 2009 and up would mean that pretty much all non iX Macs wouldn't support it and that sounds ridiculous because Apple still sells computers with C2Ds.

No, they could just cut Mac Pro 2008s and leave the a large body of C2D in. All they have to do is cut the opaque misdirection pointing at CPUs when this is really about cutting off old hardware system platforms. Apple is trying to use CPUs to date the platform (hence the xxxMHz sometimes. ) which is imprecise.


The 2008's would get security updates via 10.6. They will be in "extended life support". However, at end of 10.7's period as lead release, it would be around 2013-14 and the machines are 5-6 years old. That's a long time in "computer years". Users are free to keep using machines that old, but the primary purpose should be to look in the rear-view mirror running "2011 and previous" era software. 10.6 will run the vast majority of those just fine.

[Hellhammer]

No, they could just cut Mac Pro 2008s and leave the a large body of C2D in. All they have to do is cut the opaque misdirection pointing at CPUs when this is really about cutting off old hardware system platforms. Apple is trying to use CPUs to date the platform (hence the xxxMHz sometimes. ) which is imprecise.

And what would be the point to do that since 2008 Mac Pro is faster than any Core 2 Duo that Apple has used? Yes, Apple could drop support if they wanted but I can't see why would they do that for 2008 Mac Pros.

Maybe you should try to summarize your point a little. You wrote a wall of text but at least I don't understand its meaning.

[pastrychef]

Historically, the OSes continue to support machines up to 5 years old. I call BS on this rumor.

[ActionableMango]

The 2008 is too new. Makes no sense. But I guess we'll find out in an hour or so. :)

[Cindori]

Apple did not update Mac Pro EFI to support new GPU's.

They will not update EFI to support new OS either.

2010 Mac Pro already started booting default to 64bit.


My bet is that 10.7 will req 64bit EFI and that will not let you install it on a 2006, 2007 Mac Pro.

You can shout "that will never happen!!! apple is teh good guys!!!" all you want, Apple doesnt give a **** about stuff they are no longer selling and this has proven in the past.


I doubt we will know any more after this Keynote, it's unlikely Steve would say "Oh and hey! We are dropping support for old machines!". This keynote is about showing of features, not issues.

[G4DP]

It is not about "it should work" on the hardware. 10.6 could have worked on the about 3 year old (when 10.6 went into developer release) G5's too.

Well that's a load of BS. The whole point of 10.6 was to remove PPC binary and make the OS more efficient for the future on Intel machines.

Apple kills off support for older machines. 10.7 will probably release around Q4 2011 or Q1 2012. At the latter point, a 2008 machine is minimally 4 years old. Is that machine even being supported by Apple anymore? Even with Applecare you are out of the window. If on a 3 year depreciation schedule, then at 4 years you are past zero. On a 5 year schedule, you only have a year left.. ( should be far more worried about migrating to new box than installing a brand-spanking-new OS. Need a stable current system more than a new one. ). 2007 is definitely out of the range Apple will support just on age not hardware capabilities. The more the 10.7 release slides into 2012, the 2008 machines will be just as "too old". (the MP release date in 2008 was Jan 2008. That means 10.7 need only slide one month into 2008 before all the 2008 models are "too old". Somewhat likely the "stable enough for production" version 10.7.2 won't even be out by then even if did release in then. Definitely would be "too old" for all the subsequent dot releases. You can't just look at the release date. Apple isn't going to stop supporting a model with the 'dot' updates. Once on board at the beginning supported till releases 10.8. that is another two years. ).

Apples support for older machines has generally lasted 5 or 7 years. A G4 that originally came with 9.0.1 was supported all the way through until 10.4. That was a lifespan of 7 years.

Your 'magical' theory makes no sense on any level. Hellhammer is spot on. What is the point of your long post.

You think Apple will drop support for machines because of it's age, regardless of the fact it is faster and more powerful then 95% of Macs sold?

[G4DP]

Apple did not update Mac Pro EFI to support new GPU's.

They will not update EFI to support new OS either.

2010 Mac Pro already started booting default to 64bit.


My bet is that 10.7 will req 64bit EFI and that will not let you install it on a 2006, 2007 or 2008 Mac Pro.

You can shout "that will never happen!!! apple is teh good guys!!!" all you want, Apple doesnt give a **** about stuff they are no longer selling and this has proven in the past.

I doubt we will know any more after this Keynote, it's unlikely Steve would say "Oh and hey! We are dropping support for old machines!". This keynote is about showing of features, not issues.

Well you don't know anything. 2008 Mac Pro comes with 64bit EFI. Do your research first.

[Cindori]

Well you don't know anything. 2008 Mac Pro comes with 64bit EFI. Do your research first.

A simple typo. With 2200 posts in this forum category alone I think it's safe to say I know my shiet ;)

[nanofrog]

Historically, the OSes continue to support machines up to 5 years old. I call BS on this rumor.
Sadly, Apple seems to be reducing this to ~ 3 years (standard for consumer systems, though Microsoft goes past this for OS support, as without that, they'd loose money).

On the MP's for example, the '06 - '07 systems are EFI32. They lost support for some of the more recent graphics cards in 2009 (nVidia cards are EFI64 based, and will not work). ATI's products use EBC, which is why they've continued to be usable.

10.6 is an interim product, as it contains support for both K32 and K64, and Apple has stated they're not going to do this for long (they need to get the libraries converted to 64 bit). Once done, K32 will vanish.

What you have to remember, is Support = money, and Apple is cheap. Nor do they make anything on supporting old hardware, so it's in their best interest to reduce the support period in order to "encourage" Mac users to upgrade their machines more often (where they do make money). ;)

Apple did not update Mac Pro EFI to support new GPU's.

They will not update EFI to support new OS either.

2010 Mac Pro already started booting default to 64bit.


My bet is that 10.7 will req 64bit EFI and that will not let you install it on a 2006, 2007 or 2008 Mac Pro.
If they've finished the libraries, then K32 support will be gone (ridding OS X of it, will be cheaper and easier for Apple). If not 10.7, 10.8 for sure. As it's already mentioned, the 2010 systems default to K64, which is a significant indicator as to the direction they're going IMO (and have stated they're going this route - it was on the front page of MR at the time - , which seems to have been forgotten).

[pastrychef]

Sadly, Apple seems to be reducing this to ~ 3 years (standard for consumer systems, though Microsoft goes past this for OS support, as without that, they'd loose money).

On the MP's for example, the '06 - '07 systems are EFI32. They lost support for some of the more recent graphics cards in 2009 (nVidia cards are EFI64 based, and will not work). ATI's products use EBC, which is why they've continued to be usable.

10.6 is an interim product, as it contains support for both K32 and K64, and Apple has stated they're not going to do this for long (they need to get the libraries converted to 64 bit). Once done, K32 will vanish.

What you have to remember, is Support = money, and Apple is cheap. Nor do they make anything on supporting old hardware, so it's in their best interest to reduce the support period in order to "encourage" Mac users to upgrade their machines more often (where they do make money). ;)


If they've finished the libraries, then K32 support will be gone (ridding OS X of it, will be cheaper and easier for Apple). If not 10.7, 10.8 for sure. As it's already mentioned, the 2010 systems default to K64, which is a significant indicator as to the direction they're going IMO (and have stated they're going this route - it was on the front page of MR at the time - , which seems to have been forgotten).

The video card support issue is entirely different. It has nothing to do with whether the OS supports systems that are 5 years old or not. I haven't seen anything to suggest that Apple only supports computers ~3 years old for OS upgrades.

As for the K32 vs K64, I suspect you may be correct. But, by the time, Apple drops K32, the Mac Pro 1,1 and 2,1s will probably be over 5 years old.

[nanofrog]

The video card support issue is entirely different. It has nothing to do with whether the OS supports systems that are 5 years old or not. I haven't seen anything to suggest that Apple only supports computers ~3 years old for OS upgrades.

As for the K32 vs K64, I suspect you may be correct. But, by the time, Apple drops K32, the Mac Pro 1,1 and 2,1s will probably be over 5 years old.
Support is all of it though, not just one part (OS or hardware). If enterprise purchasers saw a vendor that said "We'll offer OS support for 5 years, but hardware for 3 years", the response would be "Thanks, but go fly a kite...". They'd buy elsewhere if something like that were to actually happen.

They tend not to be able to buy every single system needed at once, so span the purchases over time. For integration, they need access to the same exact hardware during all the purchases. This also means that hardware upgrades need to be possible for the full MTBR planned for the system to keep the cost/year for the intended performance level (can't afford to replace workstations as rapidly as business machines used for say Office type applications like word processing and whatnot, so the MTBR is longer than a consumer system).

Yet Apple tends to treat thier workstation and server system hardware like consumer machines, and keep it to 3. Not good, but since it's looked at as a closed system, they figure they've users "over a barrel" as it were, and feel they can get away with it.

Perhaps a minor technicality to some, but as budgets are being tightened and system costs increasing, I expect it to become more prominent for Apple's Enterprise/Professional customers as well.

[Graeme43]

It better run on my Mac Pro as it has the power and a stupid block by Apple to make it not work would piss me off lol :D I can't afford £2000 for new one just because they want me to buy another one

[Transporteur]

It better run on my Mac Pro as it has the power and a stupid block by Apple to make it not work would piss me off lol :D I can't afford £2000 for new one just because they want me to buy another one

Do you really NEED the upgrade?

Personally, I don't see the point of upgrading the OS almost every year anyway.
If the new OS'es wouldn't ship with a new computer, I'd probably still be on Tiger.

[Graeme43]

I love new OS I always like to run the latest :cool: im not from the xp 2001 crowd u know

[cutterman]

I love new OS I always like to run the latest :cool: im not from the xp 2001 crowd u know

Dont knock XP. It is a very solid OS that will still install on the vast majority of PC hardware;)

[Graeme43]

Dont knock XP. It is a very solid OS that will still install on the vast majority of PC hardware;)

I love XP, it made me buy a Mac and I could have never been happier :D

[scottsjack]

Speaking of XP I turned my late 2009 mini 2.66 into an XP Pro only machine. It's the nicest XP machine I've ever had. 4GB RAM is perfect for XP, and XP reports that the 9300M graphics card is using 512MB of shared RAM instead of the 256MB that OS X allows it. The remaining 3.5GB is more than XP 32-bit can use.

After loading the Bootcamp drivers from one of the mini's CDs all functions work perfectly on my XP only mini.

Speaking of new Mac OSs I too am looking forward to 10.7. I don't really want all that social networking/app store crap but if it offers actual improved performance and (God forbid) windows that can be resized from any corner (like Windows) I'll be glad to buy and install it.

[siorai]

Looks like it will be time to put together another Windows box after all. If 10.7 won't install on my early 08 Mac Pro I'm done with Apple. I love the OS, but I'm getting really, really tired of their blatant money grabbing, forced obsolescence. What's that Steveo? I can't even have a wallpaper on my 3G with iOS4? Interesting. It works perfectly fine when my 3G is jailbroken, but miraculously it causes a stock 3G to explode? Oh... I see. I'm supposed to buy an iPhone 4. Gotcha. Go piss up a rope Steveo.

[netdog]

Oh yes. You all had better replace your pre-2009 Mac Pros. LOL

I hope they're reading this thread in Cupertino. It will give them something to laugh about.

This thread is absolute idiocy.

[mjsmke]

When 10.7 comes out, we don't HAVE to upgrade to it. Our computers wont implode if we keep using Snow Leopard. if this rumour is true and pre 2009 Mac Pros wont work with it then don't upgrade to it. Theres nothing wrong with not having the latest OS. I still have 10.3.9 in my old iMac because i have no reason to upgrade it.

I probably wont buy 10.7 because i simply don't need it. Plus i don't want to have to change any software that wont run on it. I'll wait till 10.8, and if that wont work on my 2009 Mac Pro i'll wait until i need to upgrade the computer. By then OS11 will probably be out (and i cant think of anymore appropriate animals to call it, maybe it'l be called... ermm....hamster).

[Transporteur]

This thread is absolute idiocy.

Absolutely. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever to make any hasty conclusions at this stage. There is no evidence for this at all, so don't jump the gun and just keep working with your current systems.

[siorai]

Oh yes. You all had better replace your pre-2009 Mac Pros. LOL

I hope they're reading this thread in Cupertino. It will give them something to laugh about.

This thread is absolute idiocy.

I'm not saying that when 10.7 hits I'm rushing out to turn my early 08 into a boat anchor and replace it with a new comp. I'm just saying that if Apple wants to effectively kill off three year-old hardware, I'm done with them and when I do need to upgrade, it sure as hell will not be a new Apple.

[pastrychef]

This thread is absolute idiocy.

+1

[jrlcopy]

My friend bob down the street, he likes to mow our grass on the weekends, told me today that there will be some fancy new wireless usb with 10.7, I can't believe they'd so such a thing *throws hands up in the air*.



:D haha

[hugodrax]

Lion for 64bit computers only. Since anything with EFI32 will not boot a 64bit kernel. That means 09 and up only.

from what I hear recently.

[Graeme43]

The preview works on 2006 Mac Pros sooo they might be able to hold on until 10.8

[toxic]

Lion for 64bit computers only. Since anything with EFI32 will not boot a 64bit kernel. That means 09 and up only.

from what I hear recently.

the front page reports it requires a 64-bit processor (Core 2) and says nothing about the EFI. every Mac Pro has a 64-bit processor. even if it does require EFI64, that only obsoletes the 2006/2007 model.

[Graeme43]

I don't really like how the Mac Pro 1,1 which says 64-bit on the box is going to be obsoleted probably through its EFI eventually I guess with 10.8 :( I still have a 500MHz TiBook that runs 10.4 but I'd like to be able to run the latest OS as well :D without buying £2k machines all the time lol

[chrismacguy]

the front page reports it requires a 64-bit processor (Core 2) and says nothing about the EFI. every Mac Pro has a 64-bit processor. even if it does require EFI64, that only obsoletes the 2006/2007 model.

It wont require EFI64, since so many other, non-Pro Macs have EFI32, AFAIK as late as early 2009 (Possibly Late 08, Im not too sure about this one). Id say 10.8 will be EFI64(Because by 2012/13 Apple can "justify" killing off Machines that were last sold in January '08) and then 10.9 will require a 2009/2010 (ie Nehalem) Mac Pro.

[Graeme43]

Maybe the group of guys that get Mac OS X running on PCs will be able to work around the EFI 32 limit when 10.8 comes around? It will suck when people who haven't bought Macs will be running it and I won't lol :rolleyes:

[peskaa]

Lion for 64bit computers only. Since anything with EFI32 will not boot a 64bit kernel. That means 09 and up only.

from what I hear recently.

Yet the 2008 Mac Pro is EFI 64.


Stop talking rubbish.

[jeanlain]

I'm pretty sure that older Mac Pros can run 64-bit windows (including the kernel). If a certain version of OS X cannot run on these machines because it requires a 64-bit kernel, if would be a shame.

Anyway, Lion requires a 64-bit processor, not a 64-bit firmware. Note that all first-gen core 2 Macs shipped with a 32-bit EFI, and that's a lot of machines.

[Hellhammer]

I'm pretty sure that older Mac Pros can run 64-bit windows (including the kernel). If a certain version of OS X cannot run on these machines because it requires a 64-bit kernel, if would be a shame.

Anyway, Lion require a 64-bit processor, not a 64-bit firmware. Note that all first-gen core 2 Macs shipped with a 32-bit EFI.

Frankly, 64-bit Windows and Ubuntu run fine on 2006 Mac Pros but for some reason, they cannot boot into 64-bit kernel in Snow Leopard.

[gullySn0wCat]

Has anyone tested the developer preview on a Mac Pro 1,1?

I would like to think (but doubt) that Apple would be nice enough to release a firmware update to allow the machine to boot into 64bit mode.

Arbitrary restrictions:rolleyes::apple:

[Cindori]

people have already the beta Lion 10.7 running on Mac Pro's 2006, dont worry.


the support fore Core duo intel cpu (32 bit cpu) is dropped though, so first Intel Macbook Pro and some other Macs will not run it. Mac Pro 2006 and up will though, cause it has 64-bit cpu.

it shows though that Apple were willing to drop support for first gen Intel machines and it wouldnt have been a impossible thing to drop 32bit efi and 2nd generation also... we will 95% see it happen in 10.8

[gullySn0wCat]

people have already the beta Lion 10.7 running on Mac Pro's 2006, dont worry.


Yay!! LOL:D

[kellen]

Lion for 64bit computers only. Since anything with EFI32 will not boot a 64bit kernel. That means 09 and up only.

from what I hear recently.

You bumped your thread with bad info to spout more bad info. Your sentence makes no sense either, as others have pointed out.

[elvisizer]

this takes the cake as the most insane rumor i've come across on the internet in some time, probably years (though i don't make it out to 4chan often, so that may not be saying much). You're talking about cutting support for systems that may still be under applecare warranties, for god's sake.
ludicrous! :)
Like Cindori said, it'll happen at some point, but 10.7 is far too soon.

[goMac]

Apple has no reason to drop K32.

I had, however, been hearing that they had been looking at dropping 32 bit ever since the times of the 2006 Mac Pros. Decreases binary sizes, allows them to push the new 64 bit ABI with some nice developer features.

Have never heard anything about dropping K32 though. No engineering reason why they'd need to. I'd say we're likely to see an entirely new kernel before they'd drop K32.

[jeanlain]

Any thoughts about the reasons preventing the 64-bit kernel from running on EFI32 Macs, while these Macs run Windows and Linux 64-bits without issue?

[goMac]

Any thoughts about the reasons preventing the 64-bit kernel from running on EFI32 Macs, while these Macs run Windows and Linux 64-bits without issue?

My guess is it's because Mac OS X is more closely tied to the EFI pre-boot environment, whereas BIOS is a bit "dumber" than EFI.

Aside from worrying about OS updates, there isn't much advantage to K64 on a 06 Mac Pro anyway, which is why it's not a priority for Apple to update the firmware.

Edit: K32 actually runs in 36 bit mode, which pretty much gets rid of any issues that would have come with a real 32 bit kernel. And the userland runs in pure 64 bit on an 06 Mac Pro, which is really where it matters.

[DeeEss]

I don't see this happening at all.

[goMac]

Another thing to remember is that K32/K64 are not really Apple controlled projects. The lead developer actually works at Microsoft. Yes, Apple could just stop including K32, but it would take a broader decision than that actually stop K32 development.

It's not like Steve is just going to one day say "Stop K32 development!" Apple doesn't even have that power, although they could take their engineers away from the project.

A more likely situation for Apple dropping K32 is if they wrote their own kernel.

[Wild-Bill]

Aside from what cindori has already posted, rest assured that if my 2008 Mac Pro is prevented somehow from running 10.7, Mr. Jobs will find my Mac Pro tower lodged in the windshield of his car. :D

[hyram]

Another thing to remember is that K32/K64 are not really Apple controlled projects. The lead developer actually works at Microsoft. Yes, Apple could just stop including K32, but it would take a broader decision than that actually stop K32 development.

It's not like Steve is just going to one day say "Stop K32 development!" Apple doesn't even have that power, although they could take their engineers away from the project.

A more likely situation for Apple dropping K32 is if they wrote their own kernel.

Since you seem to know... tell us a little more about who actually does control the OS X kernal. Inquiring minds want to know!

[goMac]

Since you seem to know... tell us a little more about who actually does control the OS X kernal. Inquiring minds want to know!

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/mach/public/www/mach.html

There's the homepage.

Keep in mind Apple's version is modified, but Mac OS X is based on an open source kernel.

I believe Apple's modifications are also open source.

[peterb81]

Lion works fine on Mac Pro 1.1 (32bit Kernel though)

http://users.tpg.com.au/peterb81/macpro.png

Has anyone tested the developer preview on a Mac Pro 1,1?

I would like to think (but doubt) that Apple would be nice enough to release a firmware update to allow the machine to boot into 64bit mode.

Arbitrary restrictions:rolleyes::apple:

[hyram]

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/mach/public/www/mach.html

There's the homepage.

Keep in mind Apple's version is modified, but Mac OS X is based on an open source kernel.

I believe Apple's modifications are also open source.

Web page last update in 1997???... I wouldn't exatly say they are actively developing. Leads me to believe that apple has to have their own kernel development team somewhwere. I believe you're right that the mods should be open source.

[goMac]

Web page last update in 1997???... I wouldn't exatly say they are actively developing. Leads me to believe that apple has to have their own kernel development team somewhwere. I believe you're right that the mods should be open source.

Mach is still under development, several other OS's use it...

But the feeling I have is that there hasn't been very much active development at Apple either on Mach. One of the lead developers on Mach was actually employed by Apple for a long time, and he left Apple several years ago.

[lewdvig]

people have already the beta Lion 10.7 running on Mac Pro's 2006, dont worry.


the support fore Core duo intel cpu (32 bit cpu) is dropped though, so first Intel Macbook Pro and some other Macs will not run it. Mac Pro 2006 and up will though, cause it has 64-bit cpu.

it shows though that Apple were willing to drop support for first gen Intel machines and it wouldnt have been a impossible thing to drop 32bit efi and 2nd generation also... we will 95% see it happen in 10.8

I'll replace my 1,1 for 10.8. :)

Maybe. I am very pleased with my 1,1 and can't see myself wanting a new one.

Shame about the EFI issue. I would love to get a new nvidia video card.

[gullySn0wCat]

Unless you have more than either 32 or 64gb of RAM (can't remember which) the 32 bit kernel doesn't make a difference:D

[Cindori]

Just heard on insanelymac that you can install Lion on unsupported (Macbook first gen) computers if you simply remove a Plist called PlatformSupport.



This basically means:
Apple made a Plist to block out old devices on purpose.
:(

[Pressure]

You can install the current developer version of Lion on any Intel Mac just by removing the PlatformSupport.plist ;)

Even Core Duo is supported that way.