Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:50 AM   #126
parapup
macrumors 65816
 
parapup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
Windows 64-bit versions dropped support for 16-bit programs and all 32-bit drivers. Microsoft did the same thing as Apple (which partly led to the Vista debacle), so even they recognized that there is a limit to legacy support.

Arguably OS X's transition to 64-bit was smoother since they allowed 32-bit drivers to run on the first 64-bit versions, while Microsoft just dropped support altogether and forced OEMs to write 64-bit drivers for everything they wanted certified to run on Windows 7.
That's a totally ways off comparison - When 64-bit Windows dropped 16 bit support, Microsoft was still selling 32-bit Windows. Most importantly very few were still running 16-bit code at the time - even when compared to how many people still run 2007 Mac Pros.

Microsoft making vendors write 64-bit drivers was a good thing - didn't hurt me as a consumer. Microsoft's 64-bit transition was arguably the best - people buying Windows 7 machines today don't even notice it for the most part.

But that's completely besides the point - 64bit is behind us. We are talking supporting older 64-bit capable hardware here.
__________________
MBA(2013) ; ThinkPad x220; Galaxy Note II; Note 10.1 2014 Edition
parapup is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:52 AM   #127
G4DP
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
I wonder if some First Gen MacPro users will file a law suit against Apple. They marketed those machines a fully 64Bit. Not once when being advertised did they tell anyone that it was really a 32Bit machine.

Is no-one at Apple capable of writing an EFI update for the first MacPro?

The obsolescence is a joke, my old G4 worked from 9.0.2 through to 10.4.8. So it ran the latest for 8 years. Are Apple really saying they are not capable of doing that anymore? Is 4 years the best this company can now do for computer hardware support?

Apple really know how to p**s off the Mac Pro community at the moment.
__________________
Apple wouldn't know a cartographer if they stabbed them with a pair of compass' in the backside!
G4DP is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:52 AM   #128
benwiggy
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
My Mac IIsi wouldn't run OS 8.5, because it wasn't a PPC.
My PowerMac 7200 wouldn't run OS X, because it wasn't a G3.
My G3 iBook wouldn't run Leopard, because it wasn't a G4 867MHz.
My 2006 iMac won't run Mountain Lion, because it has a 32-bit EFI/kernal, crummy graphics, whatever.

Nothing new here. This is the march of progress.

This isn't Apple "forcing" anyone to buy new (unless you feel compelled by the latest shiney).

All those machines kept on working. They didn't disappear in a puff of smoke when each new OS was released. Many of them did useful valuable work for many years after they stopped being the latest thing.

The move to Intel and the transition to 64-bit has certainly caused some early cut-offs. Hopefully, hardware should have a bit more stability for the next few years. (Till OS X moves to ARM, of course....!)

Last edited by benwiggy; Jul 11, 2012 at 10:58 AM.
benwiggy is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:52 AM   #129
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by jv2 View Post
Well, this is ok by me as I'm lucky enough to have a new rMBP except when it comes to VPN. It's beautiful, but absolutely can't boot (and work) in 32bit mode. Of course I've only got a 32bit Cisco VPN client, so I can't use that. There is a 64bit Cisco VPN client, but Cisco wants people to PAY for that client... ugh
Ask your IT departement to download it using their SMARTnet contract.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:53 AM   #130
Big-TDI-Guy
macrumors 68030
 
Big-TDI-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Brutal, so this is the road ahead for Apple.
From tools to toys,
durable to dispensable,
creation to consumption,
collectible to common,
focused to forgotten
and passioned to greed.
Big-TDI-Guy is offline   21 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:56 AM   #131
milo
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by G4DP View Post
Is no-one at Apple capable of writing an EFI update for the first MacPro?
And along the same lines, when they shipped a machine with 64 bit CPU, why didn't they make the EFI 64 bit in the first place?


Quote:
Originally Posted by benwiggy View Post
My Mac IIsi wouldn't run OS 8.5, because it wasn't a PPC.
My PowerMac 7200 wouldn't run OS X, because it wasn't a G3.
My G3 iBook wouldn't run Leopard, because it wasn't a G4 867MHz.
My 2006 iMac won't run Mountain Lion, because it has a 32-bit EFI/kernal, crummy graphics, whatever.
First, what was the timeline on each of those?

And second, those are all either major shifts in technology, or chips being too slow, neither of which is the case this time around. Nobody expects technology to be supported forever, the issue is it's being dumped too soon and it's forced obsolescence as opposed to the hardware actually being unable to run the OS.
milo is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:56 AM   #132
nelmat
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio View Post
very fair.

this is why im on the verge of jumping ship entirely to apple.

my notebook is a sony vaio and support has been weak.

have they invented two button mouses yet in the apple world?
No, there is no need for a two button mouse, they are the first computer manufacturer to offer a touch sensitive mouse or (even better) a track pad as standard, which is far superior to a mouse restricted to two buttons and bunged up track wheel filling with dirt. :P
nelmat is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:56 AM   #133
Piggie
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Navdakilla View Post
Not a big deal. They are dropping support for computers 4-5 years old.
I would love to see my old single core windows xp computer handle windows 8.
I'd think a top of the line 3 to 4 year old PC/Laptop should be able to handle Windows 8 pretty well thank you.
__________________
Amiga 500, N64, Dreamcast, Gamecube, Xbox360 Slim 250GB, PS3, Nokia 6210, 3 Home Made PC's, Adidas Watch, Nikon + Fuji Cameras, 32GB iPad, Furry Pigs (mainly pink!)
Piggie is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:56 AM   #134
Michaelhuisman
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobo.hopkins View Post
People can't legitimately expect to receive the newest updates on machines that are 3+ years old.
sure you can, the alternative (wintel) usually does this, and... the usual length of depreciating a pc/laptop/workstation/tablet/smartphone is 3 years. Since it's possible to buy one at the end of a product update cycle, it would make sense to support machines for 3 years plus one update cycle loop...

otherwise...

business decision makers will be acutely aware that supplier (Apple) end-of-lifed products that were "still on the books" - which is *deadly* in the corporate world.
Michaelhuisman is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:57 AM   #135
parapup
macrumors 65816
 
parapup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
And your experience with C, type sizes and how it all maps unto hardware registries with fixed size is ... ?

For userspace applications using sanctionned APIs and not doing any voodoo hacks to get some performance increases, definately the effort is mostly choosing "64 bit" as a target and hitting compile. Drivers are very very different beasts.
I gotta wonder about your experience actually. Having done real driver porting for Linux for years I somehow doubt you understand modern OSes and the facilities they provide to make endianness, and 32-bit/64-bit issue mostly a matter of writing good code that is 64-bit clean - take a look at this for example.

As such all well written code should not be a that big of an effort to port to 64-bit. Apple themselves have done it for some time now since the 64-bit kernel was available.
__________________
MBA(2013) ; ThinkPad x220; Galaxy Note II; Note 10.1 2014 Edition
parapup is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:57 AM   #136
bedifferent
macrumors Demi-God
 
bedifferent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
There is no complete rewrite. 10.8 evolved out of the same code base as 10.0, same as 10.6. There are large parts of the system that don't need to be rewritten every iteration.
Ok, I'll give you that, yet with a simple hack M.L. can run on "unsupported systems". Thus, someone who doesn't have to know coding can get 10.8 to run on a system that Apple claims is not supported due to hardware limitations.

As for writing kexts, it doesn't require a complete system rewrite. Also, "Snow Leopard" was indeed rewritten; it was a ground up overhaul of Leopard, and began the drop of PPC systems. Again, it seems engineering was more concerned about iCloud and iOS implementation than making an OS that is solid with reasonable support for 3-5 year old systems in order to push more hardware sales. They sell the hardware with the OS, it's a choice they made, it is not impossible for them to do.
bedifferent is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:58 AM   #137
Michaelhuisman
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by parapup View Post
That's a totally ways off comparison - When 64-bit Windows dropped 16 bit support, Microsoft was still selling 32-bit Windows. Most importantly very few were still running 16-bit code at the time - even when compared to how many people still run 2007 Mac Pros.

Microsoft making vendors write 64-bit drivers was a good thing - didn't hurt me as a consumer. Microsoft's 64-bit transition was arguably the best - people buying Windows 7 machines today don't even notice it for the most part.

But that's completely besides the point - 64bit is behind us. We are talking supporting older 64-bit capable hardware here.
exactly.
Michaelhuisman is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 10:59 AM   #138
steveOooo
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: (UK) Hampshire / London
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleMoose View Post
Planned obsolescence drives HW sales. And if you just state the truth there will be @#$% to pay. When I invest in a computing device I want it to be able to stay current for a MINIMUM of 5 years.

Clearly Apple has a different "minimum" in mind for most of its computing devices.

And since the trend is away from DIY upgrades/part replacements...we are even more at the mercy of the computer industry. If they ever get to one year disposable devices, hopefully we will be able to trade them in for a sizable down payment to get the latest and greatest.
Reminds me a little of football / soccer replica shirts in the uk - they change every 2 years, they would like it every year but the fa ruled against it.

Maybe they'll drop AppleCare down to 2 years.
steveOooo is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:00 AM   #139
WordMasterRice
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Upstate NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdelvecchio View Post
and your argument continues to stand -- not being able to run the latest & greatest OS X doesnt in anyway de-value the usefulness of your version. it's every bit as functional as the day you bought it, probably more.

just stop comparing it to whats new *today*.
Do you develop anything? Only about 2 months after Lion was released it was required to even run Xcode.
WordMasterRice is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:02 AM   #140
star-affinity
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itpirate View Post
That stinks! I can upgrade my 08 iMac, but not my 2007 Mac Pro? My Mac Pro can run circles around my iMac.
The processors are 64 bit on the Mac Pro, so I guess the problem is about the graphics card drivers. If you get a newer graphics card it might work (if I understand correctly). Time will tell I guess.
star-affinity is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:03 AM   #141
LordVic
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by Navdakilla View Post
Not a big deal. They are dropping support for computers 4-5 years old.
I would love to see my old single core windows xp computer handle windows 8.
Windows 8, and even 7 run pretty darn well on older hardware.

I have ran Win7 on hardware as old as Northwood Pentium 4's. My brother still runs a Pentium 4 based dual core system. With enough RAM, CPU and GPU, it actually is a pretty reliable machine and suprisingly quick.

I've been testing Win8 on a very early single core Atom CPU (1.66ghz N455). its not super fast, but runs.

I Understand OSx migrating away from the older hardware platforms. But the complete cut off that they do on occasion sometimes seems heavy handed instead of just including legacy support.
LordVic is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:03 AM   #142
CodeBreaker
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sea of Tranquility
While my computer is in the supported models list, this puts me back from buying another Mac. And I totally feel that Mac OS X these days is just gloss and drop shadows.

I have a Hackintosh on 10.6 and I just realised that it is what does the real work for me. My MacBook just sits on my lap. My next computer will be a Hackintosh with SL.
__________________
.
CodeBreaker is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:04 AM   #143
surma884
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Not sure why people are pissed. It's not like your Mac will stop working when ML is released. Apple isn't forcing you to upgrade. You can keep running SL or Lion as long as you want.

As for Apple not re-writing the drivers to support the older Macs, I'm all for them. I'm a developer myself and it requires a lot of time to maintain 32bit and 64bit builds. I'm surprised Windows still supports 32bit. Hopefully with Windows 9 they drop it. Supporting multiple platforms and old hardware makes the OS bloated and more prone to bugs.
surma884 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:05 AM   #144
milo
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by star-affinity View Post
The processors are 64 bit on the Mac Pro, so I guess the problem is about the graphics card drivers. If you get a newer graphics card it might work (if I understand correctly). Time will tell I guess.
It's both. The video card can be replaced, and the EFI won't let it run but that can be worked around hackintosh style. Since people have it working, it's just flat out stupid that Apple won't support it directly with the right video card.
milo is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:05 AM   #145
jlnr
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwiggy View Post
Nothing new here. This is the march of progress.
[]
All those machines kept on working. They didn't disappear in a puff of smoke when each new OS was released.
This is a terrible comparison. Hardware has reached a plateau, this is not comparable at all to the Intel transition. Add RAM and an SSD to these obsolete computers and they may outperform others which made the cut.

Computers don't disappear in a puff of smoke once security updates stop, but from a professional POV they're dead.
jlnr is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:08 AM   #146
lilo777
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Apple next move...

disposable Mac Pros: glued hard drives/SSDs, motherboard fused with the case. Computers are not supposed to be used for more than 3 years anyways.
lilo777 is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:08 AM   #147
Uabcar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Late 2009 mini here -@2.26 C2D. This will likely be the last OSX upgrade for me. Prob. about right though - as I was just thinking that I need to begin planning for my next upgrade.

I really want to hold off until the Retina display capable machines become available via the std vs the premium models. Hoping this in within the next 12 mths.
Uabcar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:08 AM   #148
roadbloc
macrumors 604
 
roadbloc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: UK
Send a message via Skype™ to roadbloc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Navdakilla View Post
Not a big deal. They are dropping support for computers 4-5 years old.
I would love to see my old single core windows xp computer handle windows 8.
Windows is supported for much longer than OS X is. Unless you buy a new Mac, you can find yourself without support and being unable to run newer applications very fast. With Windows, even if the newest OS doesn't support your hardware, your current version of Windows will probably be supported for years to come.

XP is still just about in support (but not for much longer). Your old single core computer will be in support longer than any Mac will be. And I think it is a massive shame. I wish Apple supported their OSs like Microsoft does.
__________________
roadbloc is offline   11 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:09 AM   #149
nilk
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Florida, U.S.
As a 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 owner (that I bought in 2007) I am disappointed, but not surprised as I saw it coming. This machine is completely capable of running Mountain Lion, way more capable than my early 2008 MBP that is supported in ML. They could have updated the EFI32 firmware to EFI64 if they wanted to, but it's typical of Apple to not do that sort of thing. It's theoretically possible for someone to hack the Mac Pro 1,1 to use EFI64 firmware, but apparently it's too difficult (failed attempts may mean a bricked machine)...

I'll probably be using the software hack that is available to get ML to run if it works well enough. My Mac Pro will basically be a hackintosh. I'm holding out until there is a major Mac Pro update to replace it, or maybe wait for a Haswell rMBP and go the laptop-only route.
__________________
Mac Pro 2,1 w/ Xeon E5345's & ATI 5770 / Early '09 17" MBP / Early '08 15" MBP / 2012 15" rMBP / iPhone 4S 64GB
nilk is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2012, 11:10 AM   #150
faroZ06
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by bedifferent View Post
How much effort does it take to upgrade a kext/driver? I would guess less effort than working on "Game Center".
They could probably add support for older Macs if they tried, but they don't want to try. 5 years IS pretty old though, and the OS is only $30.
faroZ06 is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mountain Lion on Older Macbook DockMac OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion 2 Nov 30, 2012 05:37 PM
Using older OSX version Time Machine Server to backup Mountain Lion macs. A bad idea? ooans Mac OS X Server, Xserve, and Networking 1 Nov 30, 2012 12:10 AM
mid '10 MBP on Lion, does new Mountain Lion 10.8.2 fixes issues found on older models amyangel OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion 5 Sep 19, 2012 10:00 PM
Mountain Lion for older Mac petition Chocomonsters Mac Pro 3 Aug 21, 2012 11:14 PM
Mountain Lion on Older Macs Sambo110 OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion 8 Jul 4, 2012 01:41 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps