Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac OS X Lion *does* run on Core Duos/Core Solos.

Steve Ballmer

Steve Ballmer

macrumors 6502
Oct 2, 2009
405
133
Redmond, WA
But the average Mac user will never know about this because they will never edit/alter/remove such .plist files. Interesting to know it is possible, though.
 
AndyK

AndyK

macrumors 65816
Jan 10, 2008
1,025
377
Terra
It's cool it's been hacked too show it "can" be done, but it "wont" simply because of what's posted above me, in that the average user that is bummed their machine is becoming unsupported will either upgrade too a new one or stay on Snow Leopard.

For advanced users it's great though, although I'm not sure why :p
 
Steve Ballmer

Steve Ballmer

macrumors 6502
Oct 2, 2009
405
133
Redmond, WA
iMacC2D said:
For sure. It'll be for the tweakers more than anything, but some minor modification can get you a long way with an unsupported machine and the fact it's possible at all is great, imho.

Unless Apple goes ahead and changes it by the time the gold master comes around. That would be a problem.
Click to expand...
That's very much a possibility, especially since Apple tends to lock out older systems as an incentive to upgrade to new hardware.
 
Mr. Retrofire

Mr. Retrofire

macrumors 603
Mar 2, 2010
5,064
518
www.emiliana.cl/en
iMacC2D said:
For sure. It'll be for the tweakers more than anything, but some minor modification can get you a long way with an unsupported machine and the fact it's possible at all is great, imho.

Unless Apple goes ahead and changes it by the time the gold master comes around. That would be a problem.
Click to expand...

I'm also not sure, that Rosetta will be disabled forever in Lion. I think Apple disabled it in the Lion DP, because they need to port it to 64-Bit Intel x86_64 instructions.
 
E

Embio

macrumors member
Mar 1, 2010
82
0
iMacC2D - is your machine having issues with sleep? My Macbook seemed to be having a couple but I am suspecting that this was due to being booted off USB/ODD ATA connections. Not quite ready to install on the SSD just yet, but a pleasant surprise that my Macbook from 2006 is still running the latest OS in 2011
 
E

Embio

macrumors member
Mar 1, 2010
82
0
aye don't suppose it'd be as big a problem on an iMac! I wonder if it will be killed in the next build... certainly hope not. If the Kernel is 32bit and the applications are still being compiled for 32bit, what else is there?
 
S

scenemissing

macrumors member
Jun 18, 2010
83
0
I remember the same thing went on with the 10.5 update. It would check for a given processor speed. The easy way around was to put the drive in something else, upgrade, and put it back...
 
S

Stevelane

macrumors newbie
Mar 3, 2011
1
0
Yes it does boot!

Thanks for the tip iMacC2D I would never have got it going without!
I am running an ancient core 2 Duo 2.16 iMac and so far Lion works fine for me. Of course it's early days yet.



Steve
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

axu539

macrumors 6502a
Dec 31, 2010
929
0
This is great for tweakers, but I'd expect the Lion experience to not be optimal on those machines. How does it feel on the Core Duo iMac?
 
Mr. Retrofire

Mr. Retrofire

macrumors 603
Mar 2, 2010
5,064
518
www.emiliana.cl/en
axu539 said:
This is great for tweakers, but I'd expect the Lion experience to not be optimal on those machines. How does it feel on the Core Duo iMac?
Click to expand...

Please read the thread!

iMacC2D said:
It has no issues running any of the applications (Safari works, for example) and the overall speed of the system is on par and faster depending on spec than its Core 2 Duo based counterpart. (Compared with my Late 2006 CD iMac Core 2 Duo)
Click to expand...
 
N

newfoundglory

macrumors 6502
Nov 5, 2007
281
8
Mr. Retrofire said:
Btw, as long as

Code: 
lipo -info /mach_kernel

returns "i386", you should be able to use Lion on 32-Bit Intel machines.
Click to expand...
Rather odd that Apple have (currently) chosen not to 'support' 32-bit processors, but that the kernel is still a fat binary..... does this mean they are currently undecided... or are they doing a 2006 "just in case" scenario?

Most of us with 64 bit machines could do without the extra fat!
 
richard.mac

richard.mac

macrumors 603
Feb 2, 2007
6,292
4
51.50024, -0.12662
oh wow! thanks iMacC2D! (such a contradicting username :D) i havent installed Lion on my Core Duo MBP yet as it was not supported. i knew it would be as simple as deleting/altering a file! as i saw the kernel was indeed i386… damn you Apple! :mad:
 
Last edited:
E

Embio

macrumors member
Mar 1, 2010
82
0
The kernel I can understand, but why is everything else still being compiled in 32bit as well as 64bit? Lion 11a390 may be the last hurrah for Core Duos, I bet retail definitely wont run :-(
 
0007776

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,473
8,170
Somewhere
Steve Ballmer said:
But the average Mac user will never know about this because they will never edit/alter/remove such .plist files. Interesting to know it is possible, though.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that almost everyone who cares about having lion on their computer has upgraded their old intel machines, and the ones who haven't upgraded come here to complain and find out about these solutions.
But I wouldn't be surprised if this support was gone in the final release, didn't Leopard support G3s in the betas and then drop that support for the final release?
 
A

AtariKee

macrumors member
Apr 2, 2008
68
0
iMacC2D said:
Difference with 10.5 is that the checks were at the installer level. If you could get the OS installed on another machine or skip the checks in the installer via other methods, you didn't need to do anything else afterward.

It's very similar in this case, you can install from a newer machine or even Target Disk Mode the older Mac to a newer Mac and run the installer on the newer Mac to the older Macs drive. The difference is because the check is actually built in to the operating system, you have to remember to trash that plist file after the installer is done.

As far as the scenario goes though, it's pretty much the same. Leopard ran well on quite a few G4s, especially the 800MHz Dual Processor models that were also excluded from support. Leopard upgrades on older machines, although it never became a mainstream occurrence, did become popular with the technically inclined and hobbyist groups.
Click to expand...

Leopard is running on my 550 Mhz TiBook; quite well, in fact. I still have to download the Lion preview when I get time (I see it on the App Store but just haven't gotten around to it) and give this a try.
 
mabaker

mabaker

macrumors 65816
Jan 19, 2008
1,209
566
That is indeed encouraging and all the more egregious from Apple’s side. No excuses accepted from the fanboys.
 
richard.mac

richard.mac

macrumors 603
Feb 2, 2007
6,292
4
51.50024, -0.12662
so i cant get it to install. i restored the installer to a flash drive and removed the plist and tried to install while booted into SL, but it says it cannot be installed on this Mac.

i then i tried to boot into the installer and install, but it still says the same. tried adding my Mac's mobo id, but didnt work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom