Intel Macs Won't Get Updates After macOS Tahoe

[VivienM]

But the MS installer is really easy to bypass because of the way MS created the installation software.

Yes, I know that. I have an Ivy Bridge system next to my retro Macs that dual boots XP with 11 in BIOS/MBR mode (so wildly further away from the supported list). Have had lots of other unsupported 11 systems of various vintages.

But at the end of the day, I'm happy enough to take the risk of running 11 unsupported on my home systems, but I would never suggest that for a family member, work, or anybody else. It's like OCLP. Would you give your mother-in-law or your boss a Mac running OCLP?

 

[VivienM]

After all, I would conclude that it is not a big deal if this is the last macOS for Intel, because it means at least three more years of full official support for the latest Intel Macs, BUT the point where Apple should make a positive move and clearly announce it is that it will provide security support for Intel Macs for longer than that, but also updates for key Apple applications so that these computers are not excluded from the entire Apple ecosystem. That's 50 million users on Intel Macs. This cannot and should not be ignored, both from an environmental and business perspective, as well as user trust in Apple.

Sorry to play devil's advocate a bit, but how is this any different than what Apple does every year?

e.g. I have sitting on my desk my mom's old late-2013 MacBook Pro 15.4" that landed here after its SSD died. She got it in late 2013, the last OS it got was Big Sur (2020). Two years of security updates until fall 2023. By 2024 or so, it's excluded from 'the entire Apple ecosystem'. Also can't run, say, newest version of MS Office. By this summer, it's going to be dropped from Chrome. Once OCLPed, machine still runs great, it's a little low on RAM for my liking, but meh. Unless the battery starts swelling again, I suspect that with a supported OS and supported software, this machine would remain functional for many people/uses for another 4-5 years.

How is what they're doing with, say, the 2019 MacBook Pro any different? Okay, it gets one less year of OS support (seven total versions vs eight), but that's about it.

It's not like they've abruptly cut off 'all Intel Macs', either. They've been cutting them off as each approach roughly the 'normal' timeline or maybe one less year than before.

 

[opeter]

Even, if Apple won't support Intel Macs anymore, you can still install Windows, or any of the Linux, BSD, Unix etc. based x86/x86-64 compatible other Operating Systems on them.

You cannot do the same on the Silicon Apple Macs.
It will we interesting to see, how long the lifespan of the Macs with Apple Silicon will be, compared to Intel Macs, when there wont be any OS updates in the future.

Last month I installed Linux Mint XFCE on and Intel Mac mini from 2007. Of course the RAM was upgraded to the max (2 + 1 GB, in any case it only recognize 3 GB) and I replaced the internal defective HDD with an cheap SATA SSD (the Mac mini has slow SATA port, maybe 1st gen?). The biggest bottleneck is the Intel integrated graphics chip GMA950.

Let's say it is "usable" for light work.

 

[Alwis]

Im am still using a MacBook Pro from 2008 with Linux for testing. Not suitable as daily runner anymore, but more than enough for this task.

 

[0423MAC]

The thing that chaps my ass about Apple is that their public environmental stances don’t exactly align with their planned obsolescence strategy. They can post as many fancy PDF files in that portal they have online, but this has been an ongoing gripe with them for well over a decade now.

While they are clearly not as fast as the new AS macs there are a ton of Intel MacBooks that are perfectly useable for specific tasks.

It’s still too early to tell, but the openness of the Intel era will be sorely missed by someone like me and apparently a few others in here as well. MacBooks as old as 2008 can still perform light tasks well and there is no reason why current macs with AS can’t do the same thing with Linux or another OS in the future. If Apple locks things down like the iPhone and iPad I might very well move to another solution for my computing needs.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Even, if Apple won't support Intel Macs anymore, you can still install Windows, or any of the Linux, BSD, Unix etc. based x86/x86-64 compatible other Operating Systems on them.

You cannot do the same on the Silicon Apple Macs.
It will we interesting to see, how long the lifespan of the Macs with Apple Silicon will be, compared to Intel Macs, when there wont be any OS updates in the future.

Last month I installed Linux Mint XFCE on and Intel Mac mini from 2007. Of course the RAM was upgraded to the max (2 + 1 GB, in any case it only recognize 3 GB) and I replaced the internal defective HDD with an cheap SATA SSD (the Mac mini has slow SATA port, maybe 1st gen?). The biggest bottleneck is the Intel integrated graphics chip GMA950.

Let's say it is "usable" for light work.

I'm currently shopping 2019 iMac 27's on "fire sale" locally, specifically to put Windows on one for my 87 year old uncle.

The big turnoff is how many have those fusion drives, which I want no part of for him.

 

[Lioness~]

Miss the smaller Intel MacBooks 😢
But the MBA M3 is both lighter and faster, so I’m not complaining too much, just a bit for the sake of it.
I wouldn’t say no to newer Ive designed Mac’s though - we all know it won’t happen though.

 

[opeter]

Miss the smaller Intel MacBooks 😢
But the MBA M3 is both lighter and faster, so I’m not complaining too much, just a bit for the sake of it.
I wouldn’t say no to newer Ive designed Mac’s though - we all know it won’t happen though.

I don't miss Ive's design(s), to be honest.