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

Anyone else staying on Mojave and on the path to completely skipping Catalina?

zorinlynx said:
My primary iMac is still on Mojave and it's February. I feel no pressing need to upgrade it to Catalina; no apps I want to run require it, my system is fast and stable and I just can't be bothered.

Wondering if anyone else feels this way. This is the first MacOS release I'm feeling like skipping since I started using MacOS X in 2003. That's really saying something.

Luckily Apple is still supporting Mojave with security and Safari updates, but of course that won't be forever. Hopefully whatever comes out this year will feel more solid and refined and I'll be more willing to upgrade!

(Note that my work-issued 2015 Macbook Pro IS on Catalina, but I don't use it that much. So I HAVE used Catalina; I'm not "afraid of the unknown" or similar nonsense.)
Click to expand...

What might your reasons be not to upgrade to Catalina? You did not mention using 32-bit apps as one, so clearly that is not the impediment. Yes, if you are comfortable and happy with 10.14, there is no reason to upgrade to 10.15, but why not?

As you are also using Catalina on a work-issue Mac, you are able to judge better and have concluded you don't see the benefits of upgrading. That says something about Mojave! If you do not need certain features such as SideCar to use iPad alongside the Mac, maybe no real benefit. Having iTunes is a big plus despite people lampooning it in its heyday.

I upgraded to Catalina, and it works just fine as Mojave did. Perhaps just a little bit smoother graphically, but otherwise at this point there is no major reason to upgrade to Catalina if one is happy with Mojave. I miss the iTunes App Store functionality the most. Let's see what 10.16 brings.
 
I upgraded to Catalina on my 2012 MBP Unibody and its fine. No complaints with it here - on the other hand, I'll never be moving away from Mojave on my Mac Pro 3,1 as I use some 32-bit apps that I still need.

Just depends on what you need, I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macintoshmac
I have one 32bit app I can't live without -- pyTivo which lets me stream movies from my Mac to my Roamio in the other room. My only other option is to fire up a VM and keep it running just so I can use the Windows version of the program, which I really don't want to do on principle even with a ton of RAM installed
 
avz said:
I like Mojave. My only complaint with all the modern systems is that all of them are CPU hungry. I mean, why Mavericks can effortlessly breath through the 1080p HD video with only 2GHz Core 2 Duo? Why this ability never made it to Mojave or other modern systems? Planned obsolense?
Running older machine definitly helps to keep things honest, I find it funny that some people with i5 or i7 don't even know if their machine have "acceleration" or not.

But going back to the topic, all things considered, Mojave has a lot going for it and is here to stay.
Click to expand...

Alright, I have to correct myself here. I was running my Mojave system for quite some time and for some reason hardware decoding wasn't properly working resulting in high CPU usage during HD playback. After a simple restart, the problem went away.
 
On a mac Mini 2018 that came with Mojave and will likely stay on Mojave. I have an hdmi 4k monitor attached and it sounds like Catalina breaks hdmi on the mini. I also have tons of cds converted to itunes and don’t want catalina messing with it.
 
I'm going to add my 3¢. I intend to stay on Mojave; I have 32 bit apps that will never be updated that I still use daily (MS Office 2011).
 
  • Like
Reactions: uneeko1ne
My main machines are going to stay on High Sierra until Apple stops discriminating against Nvidia.

i'll still spin up a VM or run a secondary partition with the newer OS to test things if/when needed, but until something game changing happens I see no reason for the downgrade to Mojave or newer
 
Anarchy99 said:
My main machines are going to stay on High Sierra until Apple stops discriminating against Nvidia.

i'll still spin up a VM or run a secondary partition with the newer OS to test things if/when needed, but until something game changing happens I see no reason for the downgrade to Mojave or newer
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought about that, but I just checked and my iMac has Nvidia graphics.
 
... And here I thought I was going to be one of the only guys to "draw a line in the sand" as far as Apple's inexorable "march of progress" went.

From before Catalina was even introduced, I realized I would want a platform on which to keep 32-bit software alive (for as long as I could).

That's why I decided to buy one of the last 32-bit-capable Macs, and set it up to run indefinitely as such.

But it seems like there's a good number of others who feel the same way.
I wonder if this is slowing the number of Catalina upgrades to existing Mac users...?

And I'm also wondering if there is ANY way that might be put together to "revive" certain older 32-bit apps on 64-bit Mac systems in the future...?
 
I've done a decent job of keeping 32 bit apps away from this build of Mojave, so that's not it.

But the trend of making macOS as secure as an iPhone (read-only System partition and the complicated hacks to make it work) and hence slowly limiting what you can do with it (can't remove apple-supplied office apps, for instance, in Catalina) for a much more capable laptop running Mojave is the stop for me. Plus, I will not upgrade QuickBooks 2016 for ~$200 when the only "feature" of the upgrade applicable to me is Catalina compatibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: colourfastt
staying on Mojave here...Minly because i don't need/want the "little-snitch" type blocking users must do in Catalina... If I wanted a per-app access/deny/network, i would get one.

Plus, i do use some 32-bits apps,, WINE is 64-bit, but not on Catalina.. strangely enough.
 
Last edited:
ssls6 said:
leopard - snow leopard
lion - mountain lion
sierra - high sierra

some releases are focused on stability, I keep those on macs where stability is key

my 2014 mac mini media server is on high sierra
my 2012 mac pro is on high sierra
my 2014 MBP is on catalina
my 2017 iMac pro is on catalina
my 2019 work MBA is on mojave

I like mojave but the benefits/downsides aren't really worth it on my MP 5,1 or Mac Mini. The Mini can have an uptime that stretches into 90+ days. The Mac Pro would likely see a GPU hit moving to Metal with the GTX680 that's in it. I don't feel like spending more money on the machine. I restart the MBP and iMac Pro enough that it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
I have used all the OSs up to Mojave with a 4-core and a 12-core, both with NVMe boot drives. I think High Sierra works fine, but I think Mojave is smoother and more secure. Admittedly, getting through the point upgrades was difficult, but 14.5 was smooth and 14.6, smoother. Once I knew it was the last OS, I did a clean install and was able to cut my boot disk in half, and I think that may have helped as well. Also, an excellent replacement for your GTX680 can be had for $180, the RX 580. Believe it or don't, it's about twice the OpenCL performance (GB5/openCL). A friend who used to use a 680, now has the 580 and has time trials with both cards from his PT-GUI ripping software. About a third of his tests showed only moderate speed increases. Another third were 2X and the rest were 3-4X faster with the 580. He thinks it is primarily the extra VRAM (8GB vs 2GB) that speeds things up. He is using a Phase1 Medium Format 50MB CMOS back and compositing 3 to 6 images into one. The IQ is breathtaking, unless you have the newest 150MB sensor version, with a small lean on your domicile... Then your MP 5,1 could be an emergency backup to your iMac Pro...
 
  • Like
Reactions: bearflag7
Problems with SMB are holding me off to upgrade to Catalina. As far as I know, the situation is a bit better but there are still users reporting problems.

And how is the situation with Mail nowadays?
 
I am using Mojave which came with this 2018 (December) MacBook Pro and have no intention of upgrading as I fear I'll have to reconfigure all my apps for web and mobile development - and also brew. I spent a lot of time configuring my system to make my development environment work properly. I fear it'll break if I upgrade to the next version of macOS. I intend to keep it this way for another 3-4 years, after which I'll buy the next MacBook Pro with the latest macOS and start porting / migrating from my current MBP to the future one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mariogt and madrich
has anyone tried using Parallels to run old 32 bit apps on Catalina? I am still on Mojave so I have no idea if that would work...even if that miraculously does work, I doubt it would work with my favorite 32 bit app, Picasa...
 
It works, with all of the caveats that come with running a VM. But, Windows guests work much better than Mac guests, simply because of the amount of optimization VM vendors put into making sure Windows guests run well. So if you want to run Picasa in a VM, I'd go with the Windows version of Picasa.

If you really want to run the mac version, I've found that VMWare Fusion runs Mac guests better than Parallels. (With Windows guests, they both perform more-or-less the same.)
 
I am also sticking with Mojave on all my Mac.
I still have to use 32 bit app.
and I don't like the way apple doing now that is newer OS unneccessary requires more CPU power while little functionality are added.
 
I'll skip Catalina too. Had upgraded two times (first time when it was released and second time after 10.15.2 was issued) and experienced major issues like broken font rendering in several applications (10.15) and sudden crashes of development tools I use. It also corrupted my Photo Library which I wasn't able to recover (the only way for me was to extract the "masters" out of the library folder) and made weird changes to my Time Machine backups.

Been quite happy with Mojave as it's super stable for me. Hopefully Apple invests more time into getting things stable for the next macOS release instead of adding tons of questionable features.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikiotty and madrich
Still staying on Mojave for now.

Mojave is one of those decent 'keeper' versions of macOS that I will probably keep around for many years on an external boot drive (especially since it can still run some older 32bit software) even after I upgrade to a newer version of macOS down the track.

Waiting until they finally come out with another decent version of macOS before I replace Mojave on the primary internal drive (skipping that garbage Catalina).
 
I'm stuck due to 32-bit apps. I'd be happy to upgrade once something better than Mojave appears (clearly that hasn't happened yet), but I am not going to rent software, so I need decent alternatives to Adobe Lightroom 6 and Photoshop CS6 to appear first.

I really don't understand why Apple believes so strongly in breaking older software every 4-5 years.
 
Still on Mojave here, and always will be.... There are small bugs i just hate when i tried Catalina in VM... Although you can add apps to "Full disk access"so it doesn't ask you constantly when you change folders for "security access", it drives me nuts that this is the only way to do it, but i guess the biggest thing is Apple mail..

I like my columns how they are... If some are taken away, i loose it. loosing 64 app i dunno is should be an issue, as although i have 32-bit only apps WINE (since it doesn't work on Catalina), i don't really use them much anyway.

Overall, i feel ok where i am
 
madrich said:
Staying with Mojave for my MBA. I am afrai, very afraid of Catalina.

As Fishrrman above says “With all the problems of Catalina, I regard it as a successor to Mavericks -- the only version of the OS that I thought was so bad that I don't even keep a copy of it in my software archives.”
Click to expand...

Catalina is a major step - removing 32 bit support. There is blood. Give it time and apps/drivers will catch up.

If you run 32 bit software the time is here to spin it up in a 32 bit compatible virtual machine of an older OS.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
It works, with all of the caveats that come with running a VM. But, Windows guests work much better than Mac guests, simply because of the amount of optimization VM vendors put into making sure Windows guests run well. So if you want to run Picasa in a VM, I'd go with the Windows version of Picasa.

If you really want to run the mac version, I've found that VMWare Fusion runs Mac guests better than Parallels. (With Windows guests, they both perform more-or-less the same.)
Click to expand...

That's always been the case though... These virtualization companies products perform better with Windows because most users wanna run Windows with a VM..

How many Mac....? Even Linux/Ubuntu would probably go well. while Mac performance has always been a major problem, and i won't ever see it get better.. as there is little headwind there. Luckily, there have ben "fixes" from GitHub (beamoff for instance) to fix that performance with older OS's
 
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
Back