PDA

View Full Version : Will OS X 10.8 be x64 only?




marcusj0015
Feb 16, 2012, 11:43 PM
Title says it all.



Virtualball
Feb 17, 2012, 12:23 AM
The efi.boot file in the install disk contains this string; "Unsupported 32-bit-only CPU" ...so probably? haha

AbSoluTc
Feb 17, 2012, 12:50 AM
Yes. Mountain Lion is x64 only.

blahbrah
Feb 17, 2012, 01:08 AM
correct me if I'm wrong, but was the move to only Core 2 duos and up in Lion primarily to migrate to only 64bit?

marcusj0015
Feb 17, 2012, 01:53 AM
correct me if I'm wrong, but was the move to only Core 2 duos and up in Lion primarily to migrate to only 64bit?

Thats what I thought, but as the install disk isn't half of the Lion install disk, I was like... wtf?

maflynn
Feb 17, 2012, 06:14 AM
Apple has been setting the bar, high on this and given the quick progression of CPUs they're fully embracing 64 bit at this time

rossip
Feb 17, 2012, 07:57 AM
Title says it all.

Not only is it x64 only, it requires a 64-bit kernel which excludes some early Core 2 Duo's.

DustinT
Feb 17, 2012, 08:08 AM
Not only is it x64 only, it requires a 64-bit kernel which excludes some early Core 2 Duo's.Yup. It makes sense, there's good reasons to encourage people to upgrade to newer hardware as the underlying OS changes.

Shop
Feb 17, 2012, 08:14 AM
Not only is it x64 only, it requires a 64-bit kernel which excludes some early Core 2 Duo's.

I'm not following this... (?)

buckyballs
Feb 17, 2012, 08:40 AM
I'm not following this... (?)

CPU's aren't just 32-bit or 64-bit. They have lots of technologies that the kernel will take advantage of. I'm guessing there's a technology in the i5/i7 that's required by the kernel, but not available of the C2D.

rossip
Feb 17, 2012, 08:42 AM
I'm not following this... (?)
I found this in another post. Basically, the 64-bit kernel means all your drivers run in 64-bit mode. The firmware on some early macs did not support this unfortunately (or apple just doesn't want to rewrite certain early drivers).

OS X Mountain Lion requires a Mac with a 64-bit kernel. Mountain Lion supports the following Mac models:
• iMac (mid 2007 or later)
• MacBook (13-inch Aluminum, 2008), (13-inch, Early 2009 or later)
• MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid-2009 or later), (15-inch, 2.4/2.2 GHz), (17-inch, Late 2007 or later)
• MacBook Air (Late 2008 or later)
• Mac Mini (Early 2009 or later)
• Mac Pro (Early 2008 or later)
• Xserve (Early 2009)

GermanyChris
Feb 17, 2012, 09:24 AM
CPU's aren't just 32-bit or 64-bit. They have lots of technologies that the kernel will take advantage of. I'm guessing there's a technology in the i5/i7 that's required by the kernel, but not available of the C2D.

Later C2D had both 64bit processor's and could boot a 64bit kernal. The kernal you can boot to is written in the firware of your computer. Apple writes the firmware, so you machine might be more than capble of running 10.8 but Apple say's it's time for a new one.. Thanks Apple!!

Shop
Feb 17, 2012, 09:39 AM
Thanks, guys - I follow now. We were referring to mac models by processor. I was being too literal and focusing on the fact that Core 2 processors are 64 bit.

No problem :)

Liquinn
Feb 17, 2012, 09:39 AM
I found this in another post. Basically, the 64-bit kernel means all your drivers run in 64-bit mode. The firmware on some early macs did not support this unfortunately (or apple just doesn't want to rewrite certain early drivers).

OS X Mountain Lion requires a Mac with a 64-bit kernel. Mountain Lion supports the following Mac models:
• iMac (mid 2007 or later)
• MacBook (13-inch Aluminum, 2008), (13-inch, Early 2009 or later)
• MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid-2009 or later), (15-inch, 2.4/2.2 GHz), (17-inch, Late 2007 or later)
• MacBook Air (Late 2008 or later)
• Mac Mini (Early 2009 or later)
• Mac Pro (Early 2008 or later)
• Xserve (Early 2009)

How much ram is needed for it to work?

marcusj0015
Feb 17, 2012, 03:10 PM
CPU's aren't just 32-bit or 64-bit. They have lots of technologies that the kernel will take advantage of. I'm guessing there's a technology in the i5/i7 that's required by the kernel, but not available of the C2D.

He's referring to SSE4 and such ISA extensions. they're basically instructions on the CPU that can make things faster, like how Sandy Bridge has Quick Sync, for transcoding H.264 faster.

Zorn
Feb 17, 2012, 03:41 PM
I wish Microsoft would take after Apple when it comes to their updates. They spend so much time pandering to people with thousand year old machines that the platform stagnates in many regards. It'll be 2020 and Windows whatever will still be coming in a x86 version.

stewacide
Feb 17, 2012, 03:49 PM
I wish Microsoft would take after Apple when it comes to their updates. They spend so much time pandering to people with thousand year old machines that the platform stagnates in many regards. It'll be 2020 and Windows whatever will still be coming in a x86 version.

MS's problem is much moreso an unwillingness to break software compatibility. There's little to no advantage in dropping hardware support except where it compromises newer systems in some way (or, in Apple's case, to drive new sales :rolleyes:)

jsolares
Feb 17, 2012, 04:04 PM
I'm not following this... (?)

It's not only the CPU that decides which kernel it boots, you need EFI32 and EFI64 to boot the 32 and 64 bit kernels respectively, the newer macs have EFI64 and therefore can boot a 64bit kernel and load 64bit drivers, Lion still has a 32bit kernel, it seems Mountain Lion will only have a 64bit kernel.

CPU's aren't just 32-bit or 64-bit. They have lots of technologies that the kernel will take advantage of. I'm guessing there's a technology in the i5/i7 that's required by the kernel, but not available of the C2D.

There are several Core2Duos that will be able to run Mountain Lion from what i understand, so it's probably the EFI64 part.

He's referring to SSE4 and such ISA extensions. they're basically instructions on the CPU that can make things faster, like how Sandy Bridge has Quick Sync, for transcoding H.264 faster.

SSE4 is already required by several task, which is why the hackintosh community made a kernel that bypassed those instructions to be able to boot 10.4.x+ on cpus that weren't core duo or core2duo, i had 10.4 running on an ibm with a p4-m.

marcusj0015
Feb 17, 2012, 10:27 PM
It's not only the CPU that decides which kernel it boots, you need EFI32 and EFI64 to boot the 32 and 64 bit kernels respectively, the newer macs have EFI64 and therefore can boot a 64bit kernel and load 64bit drivers, Lion still has a 32bit kernel, it seems Mountain Lion will only have a 64bit kernel.



There are several Core2Duos that will be able to run Mountain Lion from what i understand, so it's probably the EFI64 part.



SSE4 is already required by several task, which is why the hackintosh community made a kernel that bypassed those instructions to be able to boot 10.4.x+ on cpus that weren't core duo or core2duo, i had 10.4 running on an ibm with a p4-m.

That was an example, I'm well aware that SSE4 is already required.

jsolares
Feb 18, 2012, 11:19 AM
That was an example, I'm well aware that SSE4 is already required.

Well they haven't introduced that many instructions lately, and they will still support core2duos and xeons that don't have the exact same instructions as sandy brigde i5/i7 so i'm guessing that's not it.

With the current DP it seems the issue is an UEFI check since it still has a 32bit kernel, however with Lion the early DPs hadn't migrated to 64bit apps so they could still run in coreduo/solo machines, my guess is by the end of ML development there won't be a 32bit kernel anymore.

And at this point that's all there is, guessing :S

87racer
Feb 18, 2012, 05:31 PM
Yes. Mountain Lion is x64 only.

This is not correct for now. Apple states that it will be 64-bit only but for now 32-bit mode is still working. In fact, that is the only way to get Parallels working on it for now. Reboot while holding the 3 & 2 keys.

yeah
Feb 18, 2012, 07:25 PM
OSX 10.8 will be a Hybrid x64-only OS (just like Lion) :)

AbSoluTc
Feb 18, 2012, 10:53 PM
This is not correct for now. Apple states that it will be 64-bit only but for now 32-bit mode is still working. In fact, that is the only way to get Parallels working on it for now. Reboot while holding the 3 & 2 keys.

The question was "Will ML be x64 only?" - the answer is yes. Now is one thing, upon release is another. That's what people are asking about. The release notes specifically state 64bit only.

DeckMan
Feb 19, 2012, 08:21 AM
The question was "Will ML be x64 only?" - the answer is yes. Now is one thing, upon release is another. That's what people are asking about. The release notes specifically state 64bit only.

So the kernel boot mode will be x64 only. It will still run 32 bit applications, right?

Takuro
Feb 19, 2012, 09:30 AM
So the kernel boot mode will be x64 only. It will still run 32 bit applications, right?

Yep. 32-bit processes should technically be able to execute on a 64-bit architecture, at least in theory. If an app has dependencies on kexts and frameworks that are no longer available in 32-bit variants, however, it gets more complicated and an app can crash due to resource dependencies.

87racer
Feb 19, 2012, 02:09 PM
The question was "Will ML be x64 only?" - the answer is yes. Now is one thing, upon release is another. That's what people are asking about. The release notes specifically state 64bit only.

Thanks for being a jerk. I was correcting people saying it IS 64-bit. That is saying it is NOW 64-bit which it IS not. You are correct in saying the question is "will it be?" The correct answer to the question, which I also answered correctly, "Apple states it WILL BE 64-bit." I just added extra information to my response. Have a nice day.

JuicyJones
Feb 20, 2012, 08:20 AM
Apple will have to do some big updates prior to this release. Logic Pro 9 natively runs in 32-bit and 64-bit must be manually enabled. Also iWork is only 32-bit. Will we see updates to these prior to the ML release? I really doubt it.

pdjudd
Feb 20, 2012, 08:34 AM
Will we see updates to these prior to the ML release? I really doubt it.
I don' think you can say that one way or another - anyway, I still think you can launch 32 bit apps in a 64 bit operating system - the biggest limitation you will run into is memory allocation.

They might patch Logic to make it always 64 bit - that's not to tough. iWork is already due for an upgrade anyway so there't that. Still about 6 months.

iHateMacs
Feb 20, 2012, 09:10 AM
OS X Mountain Lion requires a Mac with a 64-bit kernel. Mountain Lion supports the following Mac models:
• MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid-2009 or later), (15-inch, 2.4/2.2 GHz), (17-inch, Late 2007 or later)

So the above means any 2.4Ghz 15" model year then? Mine is an early 2008 2.4Ghz.

DeckMan
Feb 20, 2012, 09:13 AM
So the above means any 2.4Ghz 15" model year then? Mine is an early 2008 2.4Ghz.

Mine (late '08 MacBook Alu with 2.0 GHz) is supported, according to the sites that released ML System Requirements. Apparently it's more about the graphics adapter.

KnightWRX
Feb 20, 2012, 09:20 AM
It's not only the CPU that decides which kernel it boots, you need EFI32 and EFI64 to boot the 32 and 64 bit kernels respectively, the newer macs have EFI64 and therefore can boot a 64bit kernel and load 64bit drivers, Lion still has a 32bit kernel, it seems Mountain Lion will only have a 64bit kernel.

Has nothing to do with EFI. My old UB Macbook from 2008, which can run Mountain Lion, had a 32 bit EFI.

jsolares
Feb 20, 2012, 03:26 PM
Has nothing to do with EFI. My old UB Macbook from 2008, which can run Mountain Lion, had a 32 bit EFI.

Is it in the supported list? i believe some machines which are not in the supported list can still install ML, it could still be like the first DP of Lion which didn't have 64bit binaries so it could run on Core Duo and Solo machines, they could still remove the 32bit kernel on the next DP.

JohnDoe98
Feb 20, 2012, 03:30 PM
Is it in the supported list? i believe some machines which are not in the supported list can still install ML, it could still be like the first DP of Lion which didn't have 64bit binaries so it could run on Core Duo and Solo machines, they could still remove the 32bit kernel on the next DP.

Are you saying a 32bit EFI cannot load a 64bit Kernel? Why not?

jsolares
Feb 20, 2012, 04:50 PM
Are you saying a 32bit EFI cannot load a 64bit Kernel? Why not?

It's what i understood from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface)
UEFI requires the firmware and operating system to be size-matched; i.e. a 64-bit UEFI implementation can only boot a 64-bit UEFI operating system.

The fact that my iMac can also boot 32bit if available i would guess it's because it has both extensions to UEFI and not just the 64bit one.

JohnDoe98
Feb 20, 2012, 05:08 PM
It's what i understood from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface)


The fact that my iMac can also boot 32bit if available i would guess it's because it has both extensions to UEFI and not just the 64bit one.

Can't always trust wikipedia:

See this (http://netkas.org/?p=830)

jsolares
Feb 20, 2012, 05:15 PM
Can't always trust wikipedia:

See this (http://netkas.org/?p=830)

Doesn't that say that apple 64bit kernel is part 32bit? it says it starts in 32bit mode and then moves itself to 64bit mode, so what wiki says may still be true.

But in the end the issue still remains, unless apple does something those machines with 32bit UEFI will not boot a 64bit kernel without using chameleon and with no drivers, which is seemingly where ML is headed with no 32bit fallback at all.

JohnDoe98
Feb 20, 2012, 05:30 PM
Doesn't that say that apple 64bit kernel is part 32bit? it says it starts in 32bit mode and then moves itself to 64bit mode, so what wiki says may still be true.

But in the end the issue still remains, unless apple does something those machines with 32bit UEFI will not boot a 64bit kernel without using chameleon and with no drivers, which is seemingly where ML is headed with no 32bit fallback at all.

Well, Apple has listed the computers that will work in ML, if any of those has 32bit EFI's, if you take Apple's word for it, they will find a way to make them work.

KnightWRX
Feb 20, 2012, 06:09 PM
Is it in the supported list?

I said it was. It is. The late-2008 Unibody MacBook 13", with the nVidia 9400 chipset. It's in the supported list. It has 32 bit EFI.

The problem is a lack of 64 bit kext's for Intel graphics and ATI's X1600. It's not EFI.

jabbawok
Feb 20, 2012, 06:17 PM
ML will not boot on a mac with EFI32 unless you hack it.
All core2 CPUs are EMT64, what you would call 64bit.

DeckMan
Feb 20, 2012, 06:17 PM
The problem is a lack of 64 bit kext's for Intel graphics and ATI's X1600. It's not EFI.

Ohh, that's why the old Intel graphics aren't supported anymore. I knew there was a good reason.

jsolares
Feb 20, 2012, 07:10 PM
I said it was. It is. The late-2008 Unibody MacBook 13", with the nVidia 9400 chipset. It's in the supported list. It has 32 bit EFI.

The problem is a lack of 64 bit kext's for Intel graphics and ATI's X1600. It's not EFI.

You said it can run ML not that it was on the supported list, i was just making sure you didn't hack ML to be able to run it.

And besides that one has a 64bit EFI, it is (was perhaps) restricted to 32bit kernel by other means, not the EFI, i had one, i know i made it boot into 64bit kernel as well without using another boot loader.

With Lion or ML does it say if it's in 64bit kernel?

JuicyJones
Feb 20, 2012, 07:38 PM
I don' think you can say that one way or another - anyway, I still think you can launch 32 bit apps in a 64 bit operating system - the biggest limitation you will run into is memory allocation.

They might patch Logic to make it always 64 bit - that's not to tough. iWork is already due for an upgrade anyway so there't that. Still about 6 months.

But a lot of the Logic plugins are still running 32 bit. Both iWork and Logic are both due for an update. It seem Apple has almost given up on iWork. It should have been updated before iCloud came out.

KnightWRX
Feb 20, 2012, 07:45 PM
You said it can run ML not that it was on the supported list, i was just making sure you didn't hack ML to be able to run it.

Sorry, I thought that someone in this thread discussing EFI related topics would have actually looked at the supported list before commenting and so I didn't spell it out specifically. Noticed I never claimed to have "hacked" it either.

iThinkergoiMac
Feb 20, 2012, 08:06 PM
Man... this is going to break the ability to use a Logitech Harmony remote with OS X. The drivers are STILL 32-bit only... as it is now, I have to force 32-bit kernel in Lion just to change my remote settings. Blah!

jsolares
Feb 20, 2012, 11:03 PM
Sorry, I thought that someone in this thread discussing EFI related topics would have actually looked at the supported list before commenting and so I didn't spell it out specifically. Noticed I never claimed to have "hacked" it either.

I gave it a look and found all those left out had 32 bit efis, didn't memorize the list. and i wanted to make sure we were talking about the same thing.

Your machine has a 64bit EFI, when SL came out it wasn't allowed to boot the 64bit kernel which is entirely different than being able to.

Can you look and see if it's running a 64bit kernel in Lion or Mountain Lion?

----------

Man... this is going to break the ability to use a Logitech Harmony remote with OS X. The drivers are STILL 32-bit only... as it is now, I have to force 32-bit kernel in Lion just to change my remote settings. Blah!

I have to keep an XP VirtualMachine around to be able to connect to a clients VPN, it's an old cisco pix, the Lion setup doesn't work with it, it never authenticates or something, the latest client i've found doesn't work in 64bit kernel :(

JohnDoe98
Feb 20, 2012, 11:16 PM
I gave it a look and found all those left out had 32 bit efis, didn't memorize the list. and i wanted to make sure we were talking about the same thing.


What's the oldest system that will be supported on ML? My late 2007 MBP 3,1 initially came with a 32bit EFI, but in light of this discussion I checked in Terminal and it now runs 64bit EFI, so it wouldn't surprise me if with Lion, or earlier, Apple updated the EFIs for all machines capable. Are there any models/machines older than mine that will support ML? Perhaps the iMac 7,1? Maybe someone can check what EFI that runs since likely anything newer is already on 64bit EFI, so the discussion could be useless.

pdjudd
Feb 20, 2012, 11:21 PM
What's the oldest system that will be supported on ML?

What size is the pro? If it is the 13” sorry only 2009 and beyond. 15 and 17” is good though. 2007 is the oldest.

JohnDoe98
Feb 20, 2012, 11:24 PM
What size is the pro? If it is the 13” sorry only 2009 and beyond. 15 and 17” is good though. 2007 is the oldest.

15! Looks like I'll get one more update and then have to ask myself if I'm happy with where the upgrade path ends or if it is time to get a new MB (hopefully a Retina one by then).

jsolares
Feb 20, 2012, 11:25 PM
What's the oldest system that will be supported on ML? My late 2007 MBP 3,1 initially came with a 32bit EFI, but in light of this discussion I checked in Terminal and it now runs 64bit EFI, so it wouldn't surprise me if with Lion, or earlier, Apple updated the EFIs for all machines capable. Are there any models/machines older than mine that will support ML? Perhaps the iMac 7,1? Maybe someone can check what EFI that runs since likely anything newer is already on 64bit EFI, so the discussion could be useless.

Only Apple knows for sure, with the current list its seems to be efi based, in the end... who knows :)

pdjudd
Feb 20, 2012, 11:36 PM
15! Looks like I'll get one more update and then have to ask myself if I'm happy with where the upgrade path ends or if it is time to get a new MB (hopefully a Retina one by then).

remember, we cannot extrapolate anything. The only info we have is based on the DP which isn’t set in stone, Even if that is set in stone we have no idea what Apple’s future hardware and software developments are at all. We have no way to know at all.

JohnDoe98
Feb 21, 2012, 12:12 AM
remember, we cannot extrapolate anything. The only info we have is based on the DP which isn’t set in stone, Even if that is set in stone we have no idea what Apple’s future hardware and software developments are at all. We have no way to know at all.

We have induction don't we?