List of Macs Compatible With macOS Sierra

[MacRumors]

Apple today announced macOS Sierra, the latest version of its Mac software platform and renamed successor to OS X El Capitan. The first beta of the update was seeded to developers earlier today, while a public beta will be released in July.

macOS Sierra will be available as a free software update for compatible MacBook, MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini, and Mac Pro models in the fall. Many 2007 to 2009 Macs that are compatible with OS X El Capitan will not be upgradeable to macOS Sierra, as the cutoff is now at least Late 2009.

The official list of Macs compatible with macOS Sierra:

Late 2009 or Later
MacBook
iMac2010 or Later
MacBook Air
MacBook Pro
Mac mini
Mac ProTo determine your Mac's model year, click on the Apple logo in the top-left menu bar and select About This Mac. The model year is listed in the main Overview tab.

Apple has shared the full video of its WWDC 2016 keynote, where it also introduced iOS 10 alongside new versions of watchOS and tvOS.

Article Link: List of Macs Compatible With macOS Sierra

 

[voyagerd]

The first OS my early 2008 MacBook Pro won't be able to run. Maybe Apple will release a new MacBook Pro with Sierra... maybe...?

 

[garirry]

People keep complaining about this but please realise that it's been four years since there has been any OS drops, and prior to that every two-yearly (and even yearly) OS release dropped some of the old computers. I'm annoyed that the MacBook Early 2009 that I got by changing my 2008's logic board will not natively support it, but that's to be expected so I'm not angry.

 

[man3ster]

bs

 

[SteveJobs2.0]

Still quite a few generations that are supported to sole extent. At some point, progress must overrule legacy support.

 

[estabya]

Interesting that the late 2009 minis are supported but not the early 2009 ones. I can't imagine why considering they are identical except for 2.0/2.26ghz CPUs instead of 2.26/2.53.

 

[Andres Cantu]

At least the list is cleaner than the previous. After several releases with no drops, this was coming.

 

[KALLT]

Macs remain the computers with the shortest OS support. Windows, Linux and *BSD are unmatched. Quite different from what Apple is doing on mobile.

Still quite a few generations that are supported to sole extent. At some point, progress must overrule legacy support.

If progress were the reason, they would have made a consistent cut, based on discernible hardware constraints. Yet the late 2009 MacBook is still supported, while it has the same CPU, GPU and RAM as some older MacBook models or even MacBook Pro models of the same year. This appears to be an arbitrary policy choice, not based on hardware considerations.

People keep complaining about this but please realise that it's been four years since there has been any OS drops, and prior to that every two-yearly (and even yearly) OS release dropped some of the old computers

That is not a reason. Do you think Apple should drop hardware just because it is time again to drop some?

 

[ck2875]

My Mid-2009 MacBook Pro just sent over an overly large emoji...

 

[GFLPraxis]

With previous OS releases, drops usually made sense from an engineering perspective. I've always felt that it's better to drop support from old hardware than bloat the OS to keep it running- a longtime Windows issue.

Apple usually made drops for good reason. Dropping PPC Macs. Dropping 32-bit Macs (2007 MacBook with Core Duo). Dropping Macs without the GPU to run Metal well. And most recently, dropping support for 64-bit Macs that had 32-bit controller chips (2007 Mac Pro),l.

But this time it seems so...arbitrary. A 2008 MacBook isn't supported, but a Mac Mini with the same chipset is?

And to me, the worst is the removal of support for 2008/2009 Mac Pro's. These things were top to bottom 64 bit and outperform Apple's CURRENT Mini and MacBook lines, competing with low end current iMacs in multicore benchmarks. An eight core 3 GHz Xeon Mac Pro with a modern PCIe NVidia graphics card should absolutely be able to run Sierra.

While the answer may be that Apple didn't want to bother testing and supporting, it feels like a way to force users happy with their machines to upgrade. I get pushing a 2008 MacBook owner to modernize, but the Pro?

 

[garirry]

That is not a reason. Do you think Apple should drop hardware just because it is time again to drop some?

You do realise how many features are already unavailable on other Macs? Do you think Apple intentionally prevents that? No, it's just that it would run like ****. Better just drop it entirely at this point. And you better actually check the specs of the OS before judging like that.

 

[KALLT]

You do realise how many features are already unavailable on other Macs? Do you think Apple intentionally prevents that?

Irrelevant, the 2009 MacBook is still supported. Internally the same hardware, so it isn’t feature-based or performance-based.

No, it's just that it would run like ****. Better just drop it entirely at this point. And you better actually check the specs of the OS before judging like that.

Do you believe that Sierra will have such high requirements that a jump between El Capitan and Sierra is that significant? Also, did I mention that they still support the 2009 MacBook?

 

[maclaw21]

So as someone who won't be able to upgrade, APPLE BETTER ****ING RELEASE A NEW MBP! WHAT THE HELL.

 

[Corrode]

What does a 2009 MacBook have that my 2009 MacBook Pro doesn't? Confused.

 

[KALLT]

And to me, the worst is the removal of support for 2008/2009 Mac Pro's. These things were top to bottom 64 bit and outperform Apple's CURRENT Mini and MacBook lines, competing with low end current iMacs in multicore benchmarks. An eight core 3 GHz Xeon Mac Pro with a modern PCIe NVidia graphics card should absolutely be able to run Sierra.

Generally, it is not always about raw CPU performance. Technology can perform exceptionally well, but still be considered old. The latest GPUs have tons of features that older ones don’t have. It is reasonable to drop support in order to use these while cutting out technically obsolete code. The problem I have here is that Apple seems to be making an arbitrary choice, given that they do support old technology.

 

[MacSince1985]

The first OS my early 2008 MacBook Pro won't be able to run. Maybe Apple will release a new MacBook Pro with Sierra... maybe...?

Historically, there has been many "unsupported" models able to run that OS, sometimes with a little hack to fool the installer. "Unsupported" often means that Apple stops testing on that machine. Unless there are technical specifications (like when 32-bit was dropped), you most likely will be able to run Sierra.

 

[JosephAW]

What? No my Mac Pro 1,1. Well at least I can run windows x

 

[Glassed Silver]

You do realise how many features are already unavailable on other Macs? Do you think Apple intentionally prevents that? No, it's just that it would run like ****. Better just drop it entirely at this point. And you better actually check the specs of the OS before judging like that.

If a fully maxxed out Mac Pro from the 2009 can't run Sierra that says more about the "worlds most advanced desktop operating system" than anything else, don't you think?

Unless of course it's sales politics...

At this point, I'm not buying it anymore.
The OS is free, that's quite the change. (or "free" as I should put it)
Windows isn't nearly as much of a slouch anymore, sure it has its problems in many other areas, but OS X isn't exactly perfect either.
Yet Windows manages to stay compatible with a wide range of computers and OS X is sitting here getting dropped from still perfectly viable computers.

Historically, there has been many "unsupported" models able to run that OS, sometimes with a little hack to fool the installer. "Unsupported" often means that Apple stops testing on that machine. Unless there are technical specifications (like when 32-bit was dropped), you most likely will be able to run Sierra.

I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't even allow any tricks like that anymore.
Then again maybe you're right.
Guess we'll have to wait and see, but it's hard to be optimistic these days.

Glassed Silver:mac

 

[Shanghaichica]

Do all macs get the Siri feature?

I have a 2014 MBA and I'm hoping to get the Siri feature.

 

[Ryantjan]

Why macbook pro mid-2009 don't get update?

The lowest spec mbp mid-2009 have same hardware with late-2009 macbook white unibody, wtf apple?

Just different storage, i have mbp mid-2009 with higher spec than late-2009 macbook

 

[KALLT]

Do all macs get the Siri feature?

I have a 2014 MBA and I'm hoping to get the Siri feature.

I don’t see why not. It seems to be replacing/supplementing dictation and voice control.

 

[fredfnord]

What does a 2009 MacBook have that my 2009 MacBook Pro doesn't? Confused.

The 2009 MBP had dual GPUs in many configurations, which were not auto-switchable. (You had to log out to switch.) If I had to guess, I'd say that was a good candidate. There are many other possible ones too though.

 

[karsten]

what's wrong with a 2009 mac pro?

 

[Ryantjan]

The 2009 MBP had dual GPUs in many configurations, which were not auto-switchable. (You had to log out to switch.) If I had to guess, I'd say that was a good candidate. There are many other possible ones too though.

But 13" MBP mid-2009 have same spec with 13" MBWU late-2009, and higher end model have better cpu with higher clock rate

Why apple drop support on 13" mbp mid-2009? Its more expensive than late-2009 mb

 

[GFLPraxis]

Generally, it is not always about raw CPU performance. Technology can perform exceptionally well, but still be considered old. The latest GPUs have tons of features that older ones don’t have. It is reasonable to drop support in order to use these while cutting out technically obsolete code. The problem I have here is that Apple seems to be making an arbitrary choice, given that they do support old technology.

Agreed that it's not always about raw performance. But there's absolutely nothing about a 2008 Mac Pro that doesn't exceed a 2009 MacBook. There's no logic here from a tech standpoint.

My 2008 Mac Pro is eight core 2.8 GHz Xeon, 32 GB RAM, with a SSD and a GeForce 760 GTX. There's absolutely zero reason it couldn't run the latest OS.