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

cubbie5150

macrumors 6502a
Mar 4, 2007
705
216
Ya, but at only 30 bucks a throw, every year-year and a half, to upgrade...

Only if you're machine supports the newest OS. Some of us are still using 32bit C2D machines (which won't work for Mountain Lion). To be clear, I'm NOT crying & saying Apple should support older OS' forever...
 

AidenShaw

macrumors P6
Feb 8, 2003
18,667
4,676
The Peninsula
justification fail

Nope, they dumped support for any machine that had 32 bit EFI, if it can't boot into the 64 bit kernel it can't run 10.8.

You realize that EFI is just software, and Apple could have released an EFI upgrade for the older 32-bit EFIs running on x64 systems.

Remember that the "E" in "EFI" means "Extensible". Think about it for a minute.

(Actually, outside of Apple the world has moved on to the newer version called "UEFI".)
 

milo

macrumors 604
Sep 23, 2003
6,891
522
Aiden fail

You realize that EFI is just software, and Apple could have released an EFI upgrade for the older 32-bit EFIs running on x64 systems.

I'm not providing "justification" for anything, just answering your earlier question if C2D is supported, and giving the criteria that defines which machines are supported or not.

Of course they can and should support 64 bit CPU regardless of EFI version. Your beef is with Apple, not me, don't shoot the messenger.
 

AidenShaw

macrumors P6
Feb 8, 2003
18,667
4,676
The Peninsula
I'm not providing "justification" for anything, just answering your earlier question if C2D is supported, and giving the criteria that defines which machines are supported or not.

Sorry, I took your post as defending the move, my bad.


Of course they can and should support 64 bit CPU regardless of EFI version.

My point was that EFI is software - so they could simply upgrade the EFI to support 64-bit kernels.
 

milo

macrumors 604
Sep 23, 2003
6,891
522
My point was that EFI is software - so they could simply upgrade the EFI to support 64-bit kernels.

I agree, seems like they're just using this as an excuse to dump more hardware. Not sure if they're too lazy to support the old machines or their intent is to push people to spend cash on new macs but neither would surprise me.
 

AidenShaw

macrumors P6
Feb 8, 2003
18,667
4,676
The Peninsula
I agree, seems like they're just using this as an excuse to dump more hardware. Not sure if they're too lazy to support the old machines or their intent is to push people to spend cash on new macs but neither would surprise me.

I've highlighted what should be the obvious conclusion. "Planned obsolescence" is a fundamental part of Apple's strategy.

You wouldn't want to be caught using last year's Iphone, would you?

With OSX, it's a dance eliminating one or two hardware revisions of systems with each OS revision. (Sometimes with merit - killing x86 and only supporting x64 was a necessary move. But not supporting some x64 CPUs because of a refusal to upgrade the EFI - that's abusive.)
 

MrNomNoms

macrumors 65816
Jan 25, 2011
1,156
294
Wellington, New Zealand
My point was that EFI is software - so they could simply upgrade the EFI to support 64-bit kernels.

From what I understand, the EFI version is probably coincidental to the cut off point rather than the cause given that the EFI32 also corresponds (from what I have seen) to 32bit chipsets (you can have a 32bit chipset with a 64bit CPU) and GPU's that aren't OpenGL 3.x and OpenCL compatible. What it appears is Lion will be making greater use of OpenCL and would sooner users have a great experience than a two tiered experience with pre-OpenCL users 'suffering' with bad performance etc.
 

canman4PM

macrumors 6502
Mar 8, 2012
299
30
Kelowna BC
Ya, but at only 30 bucks a throw, every year-year and a half, to upgrade...

Only if you're machine supports the newest OS. Some of us are still using 32bit C2D machines (which won't work for Mountain Lion). To be clear, I'm NOT crying & saying Apple should support older OS' forever...


Fair enough. But for me, it's only been in the last year that the cheapest iMac available was better than my (now) 4 year old machine. She's a 24" with 2.8Ghz Core2 Duo, 4GB ram and a 1TB drive. I'm assuming this machine they sold last year (the last Core2 Duo 21.5" with almost the same specs as mine) will still be OS-upgradable for another couple of years at least and therefore so should mine. After that, the last OS I can upgrade to will still be supported for a couple of years beyond that. I'm thinking that by the time my iMac is no longer supported by any new OS (nevermind the 4 or so years hangtime of the last OS I'll be able to get), i'll be more than ready to upgrade to a new unit and let the kids wreck the old one.
 

iisdan

macrumors 6502
Feb 19, 2010
319
331
Obviously you haven't used Lion. From not freeing up RAM properly to WiFi connectivity issues there are ridiculous bugs galore. Hopefully Apple gets it right this time with Mountain Lion.

I've used lion since dev preview? Yes it was buggy in dev but not now...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.