Yup, I remember that keynote. Which is why I believe that likely Apple will follow that transition's timeline for support for new OS.
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.
Lifespan of 2020 iMac at this point?
- Thread starter hky740
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have a 2019 iMac, but my next Mac is going to be a Mac Mini (hopefully M2 with more than 16 GB memory) plus an external QHD or 4K monitor. Once you get used to a 27" screen you don't want to go back to 24".
My guess is macOS update support for the 2019 model stops in 2024, maybe next year already.
My guess is macOS update support for the 2019 model stops in 2024, maybe next year already.
Oh... and the ultimate irony, in my opinion, is that the reasons Jobs cited during that keynote for transitioning to Intel just happen to be the very same reasons that Apple is now citing to move away from Intel, to Apple Silicon: performance per watt.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
At the time Intel was doing great. Their Core CPUs were doing excellent in terms of reviews, benchmarks and real-world testing at a fraction of the power that Pentium used. PowerPC was doing horribly as the CPU wasn't scaling to Apple's liking. Hence, the transition happened.
Today? Intel became what PowerPC was in 2005.
Keep in mind that Windows 11 runs great on your iMac, if that’s an option you are interested in, so even if Apple drops support you’ll likely be covered for many years should you choose to run Windows on it.
One of the benefits of Intel iMacs.
One of the benefits of Intel iMacs.
Sure... Plenty of life left in it.
I have a 2020 i5 10th gen MBP 13" that still does great (no problem switching between that and my Studio Max base model).
I tend not to run the latest OS on older equipment (just one that is still supported with security updates).
Windows 11 is unsupported on the iMac as the CPU’s TPM functionality has been disabled in firmware by Apple. Windows 10 is currently scheduled for support until 2025 though.
Strictly speaking, this is true -- but if you are even just a little bit technically inclined, you can almost certainly find and implement the workaround which enables you to bypass the TPM mandate. As I briefly noted in my earlier comment, I've been bootcamping Windows 11 since not long after it came out. Aside from the Windows 10 features that they inexplicably removed, using W11 on my iMac is a roughly comparable experience to using W10.
(It's still not macOS, of course... but perhaps that's a different conversation.)
Windows 11 works great on that iMac. Simply burn the ISO using a software program called Rufus and you are good to go. Bypasses all TPM issues.
I'm currently running Windows 11 in bootcamp on a 2019 iMac.
Microsoft may crack down on this bypass one day, but I doubt it. And even if they did, the demand for a bypass is so enormous, there will always be workarounds.
The “MS may keep Windows 11 from updating in the future” angle is why I’m personally staying on windows 10. Win10 completely supported, and AMD even released updated Windows drivers back in March.
My Steam Deck is my current Linux/ tweaking machine. Don’t want to run Linux on my iMac until it’s completely unsupported by everything else.
My Steam Deck is my current Linux/ tweaking machine. Don’t want to run Linux on my iMac until it’s completely unsupported by everything else.
Well... until at least October 14, 2025, according to Microsoft. Mind you, I don't actually think that Microsoft is going to leave their "legacy" customers entirely in the lurch, when that day comes. I've commented at length on this topic elsewhere, but the short version is this: There are just far too many Windows 10 customers who are still being blocked from upgrading to Windows 11, due to the TPM requirement -- and not just Mac users, either. Microsoft has to account for that issue, somehow. Whether it will be by continuing support for W10 beyond 2025 or by relaxing the W11 requirements so that more people can update (or by some combination of both) remains to be seen.
But I'm largely in agreement with the marshmallow; I very much doubt that they're going to take any meaningful action against users who manage to successfully update to W11 on "unsupported" hardware. Can you imagine the aftermath of such a thing? They'd be absolutely skewered by every single tech reporter on the planet, just for starters... and that's to say nothing of the vitriol that we'd likely find in various comment forums.
I think you will be able to run Mac OS on it until at least 2025.
Or if you don't care about Mac OS getting "unsupported", even longer.
Or if you don't care about Mac OS getting "unsupported", even longer.
Yeah I mentioned in some post of mine somewhere the 2025 end date. For what I do, either OS (Max or Win) going out of support isn’t going to change how long I use this iMac or what I do with it. I’ve already had it almost 2 years so I’ll easily get 5 years of OS support.
Yeah I still have functioning 2010 and 2012 MBAs. Not worried about the OS going out of support. Heck, I’m still blown away that computers are usable after 5 years nowadays, period.
Absolutely -- I have several Macs of roughly that vintage as well; I just keep yanking the spinny hard drives and replacing them with mid-range SSDs to give them a new life. After all, if you're using it for casual web browsing and not for either work or financial transactions, the security implications of out-of-support software are greatly reduced.
I think my oldest still-functioning Mac is a
Last edited:
I think there's really something to be said for NOT updating an older Mac to the latest and greatest MacOS. When you think about it, they all start off feeling blazing fast when you first buy them, and then mysteriously "get slower" as time goes on. That's entirely due to increasing demands from software.
Setting security updates aside for a minute, there's no technical reason you can't just "freeze" a system and run it on whatever OS version runs nice and smooth, versus overtaxing it with updates that almost by design slow your Mac down and make you want to buy a new one.
Recognizing that my comments may have in part set the stage for your comment, I'm going to have to walk back some of that sentiment, now: Unfortunately, most people either can't afford to aren't willing to just entirely set security aside -- and for good reason. If you have a ten-plus-year-old Mac sitting in your house, and you never use it to go to your bank's website or a shopping website or to do actual "I'm-being-paid-for-this" work, than sure; use whatever OS you want to on it. But the moment you login to Amazon or Netflix or whatever on a computer with a years-old unpatched operating system, you're potentially putting real money -- and your identity -- at risk. That is absolutely not what I was trying to recommend.
That said... upgrading to the last version supported by any given Mac shouldn't have to be such a huge trade-off as what you're describing. That
* Edit: I double-checked last night while using the MacBook before bedtime... turns out it's a bit newer than I thought. (Still over a decade, though, so I think my original point is still pretty well intact.)
Last edited:
I also have the concern of the OP. I just purchased a Mid 2020 3.6MHX 10-core I9 with 2RB SSB, 5K retina I paid $2600 for it. My last iMac late 2013 iMac I7 that I bought new in 2013 for $3200. It still runs 32-bit apps on Mojave. Figure I got my moneys worth from that so I was hoping this Mid 2020 would run the most current system OS for like 6 years. Many years after that it may still be working well with an antiquated MacOS. Main reason I chose it over a Studio was cost.
M
M