4K video editing was not really a popular thing back then, but it was HD at the time.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Macs Won't Get Updates After macOS Tahoe
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That seems quite aggressive to me. If a Mac can still officially run a version of MacOS that is still receiving security updates, I see no reason to replace it. However, I might not bother to repair a Mac that was no longer supported by the current version of MacOS unless the repair was low cost.
Some people do the dance to figure out the best return on their hardware and don't wait until it's just about to lose security updates.
Most Macs losing security updates are around 8 or 9 years old. If I get 8 or 9 years use out of a computer I consider it a satisfactory return on investment.
I don't worry about cost as they usually pay for themselves in a month or two for me.
But other people take a different approach and it keeps them in newer hardware moreso than holding them until end-of-support.
With my current Macintosh, I opted for the yearly AppleCare warranty. It may very well be the last Macintosh that I own.
I have that too, but I am discontinuing now the end date for support is determined. I will keep this Mac until it breaks or software support ends, whichever comes first.
I really hate MS Windows and I am not going to commit to full time Linux so my next Mac will probably be a Mac Studio.
Some people either want or need the latest hardware. They take a similar approach to those who acquire their iPhones on a payment plan or lease a car. The alternative is to buy and hold a higher end version of a product. In the case of the 2020 Intel iMac, for me that meant an i9 with 5700XT and a 2TB SSD. For the RAM, I upgraded that myself to 64gb.
That is a good choice. That is my current Macintosh and I have noticed that mostly I create documents, a little programming, presentations, and work on some spreadsheets. This has gotten me to thinking that I can replace the Mac Studio with the iPad Pro for what I am now doing. I would never go to Linux full time as I value my time too much.
As a guy who bought a PPC MacBook 2 months before Intel Macs were released.
Had about 2 years of major OS upgrades maybe it was three but that was it. All the software went x86 and resale value for PPC sucked. This was a terrible experience for me and I realized I had made a big mistake.
So when Apple switched to m series I jumped right on board expecting history to repeat itself. I was actually surprised how long Apple supported Intel Macs after m series transition was complete. I think this was a much better transition than in the past.
We could all argue that all companies don't offer long enough softwares support and all use cutoffs to promote new hardware.
Personally I feel like 10 years is a better timeline for proprietary software and hardware support for Macs and MacBooks and doesn't apply to phones.
For example, 7 years major and minor updates. After 7 years you get 3 years of security updates and bug fixes. Hardware these days lasts longer and costs more so it should be supported longer but since this software is not free it has to have a reasonable cut off.
This would give users a longer useful life, better for environment since Apple "cares", and makes users feel more value from their hardware.
Companies are there to make money and deliver products and services but anything with regularly updated software is different from something without. A pocket knife is a one time transaction excepting warranty claims while an iPhone costs Apple money after sale excepting warranty claims. We can't expect unlimited software support but can expect longer reasonable time lines as the hardware improves and evolves.
I completely disagree with forced obsolescence and would argue thr longer a company supports their products is the best press you can buy. It is a disincentive to buy new which is why a lot of companies would rather have short update cycles. It is up to the consumer to push back and offer realistic compromise.
Had about 2 years of major OS upgrades maybe it was three but that was it. All the software went x86 and resale value for PPC sucked. This was a terrible experience for me and I realized I had made a big mistake.
So when Apple switched to m series I jumped right on board expecting history to repeat itself. I was actually surprised how long Apple supported Intel Macs after m series transition was complete. I think this was a much better transition than in the past.
We could all argue that all companies don't offer long enough softwares support and all use cutoffs to promote new hardware.
Personally I feel like 10 years is a better timeline for proprietary software and hardware support for Macs and MacBooks and doesn't apply to phones.
For example, 7 years major and minor updates. After 7 years you get 3 years of security updates and bug fixes. Hardware these days lasts longer and costs more so it should be supported longer but since this software is not free it has to have a reasonable cut off.
This would give users a longer useful life, better for environment since Apple "cares", and makes users feel more value from their hardware.
Companies are there to make money and deliver products and services but anything with regularly updated software is different from something without. A pocket knife is a one time transaction excepting warranty claims while an iPhone costs Apple money after sale excepting warranty claims. We can't expect unlimited software support but can expect longer reasonable time lines as the hardware improves and evolves.
I completely disagree with forced obsolescence and would argue thr longer a company supports their products is the best press you can buy. It is a disincentive to buy new which is why a lot of companies would rather have short update cycles. It is up to the consumer to push back and offer realistic compromise.
Last edited:
There is another trick as well, making things like storage - ie, the "SSD" kits very hard to find. And then you look at the current SSD kits, they are not compatible with the 2019 Mac Pro.
If you do find a SSD kit for sale new then they are hugely expensive. Aside from that, they were ridiculously expensive when new anyway - plenty justified to make Apple lots of $$$ but no technical reason for the rip-off pricing.
My 2019 MBP is also stopping with Sequoia. Even if OCLP gets Tahoe working, I’m just going to ride out two more years of OS support which brings me to Sept 2027. Eight years ain’t the worst that could have happened. Lucky not to get the PPC->Intel treatment. Once I move to M6/M7(?) in late 2027, going back to Mojave on the 2019 and reinstall some 32-but games and apps, and Parallels 18 for all my legacy Windows XP and Windows 7 games. Might even install Win10 in a Boot Camp partition as well. The 2019 will make a nice legacy device.
I remember, my first Mac I bought in late 2009, a 1.42 GHz eMac G4, to save money and use as a placeholder until I saved up enough to get a used Intel Mac of some kind (sure enough two years later I bought a 2009 white polycarbonate MacBook with 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo processor).
I'm also reminded of initially when the Apple Silicon transition began, I planned to still get an Intel 13" MacBook Pro so I could get a new Mac that could at least run MacOS 11 Big Sur, then wait a bit and get an Apple Silicon-equipped Mac Mini desktop to replace my 2012 quad-core i7 Mini. Instead in early 2021 I had a change of plans and decided to take the plunge and get an M1-equipped MacBook Air, and I was glad I did, upon learning Intel Mac support would gradually dwindle while third-party software support for Apple Silicon Macs would quickly increase.
Well Apple is a much different company than it was during the PPC to Intel transition. They could have (probably should have tbh) dropped Intel support sooner, but would have faced much more severe backlash especially considering how prevalent social media is today.
Considering Tahoe was just released it means security updates till 2028 means you should still have plenty of options to use software on your machine till ~2030 hopefully without major security concerns. By that time the last Intel Macs would be anywhere between 7-10 years old.
Considering Tahoe was just released it means security updates till 2028 means you should still have plenty of options to use software on your machine till ~2030 hopefully without major security concerns. By that time the last Intel Macs would be anywhere between 7-10 years old.