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

List of Macs Compatible With macOS Big Sur

I suspected that my Late 2013 iMac might be left out of the fun.

Oh well. Not like Catalina will suddenly stop working. Holding out for an ARM iMac with iPad Pro-styling at this point.
 
Ah, so anything with 3rd Gen Intel Core processors is out. They had a good run, but the graphics (especially the HD Graphics 4000) is probably the main reason.

EDIT: Just noticed the 2013 iMac does not fall into that category. It’s odd that model isn’t included when everything else with a 4th gen is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nachodorito, rumormiller and MrUNIMOG
I'm kind of miffed that they they are not supporting the 2012 Retina MacBook Pro, but are supporting the 2013 version. They are practically the same machine, save a slightly upgraded CPU (but same generation), 802.11ac and Thunderbolt 2. Otherwise, all the internals are basically the same: GPU, display, RAM, cache, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjp1, nachodorito, Engender and 4 others
tranceking26 said:
I'm still on the fence about this, my 2015 MBP can have Big Sur but I want to see how it goes for others first.
Click to expand...
I have the same MBP (maxed). I‘m going to add a small volume in disk utility so I can check out the beta, and if it’s looking good I’ll do a clean install when the GM is released.
 
Last edited:
now i see it said:
Yeah/ Big Sur will be loads of fun on a base config 2014 MacMini
Click to expand...
Good ol' oversimplification from Apple's side again. A 2012 (quad-core i7) mini upgraded to SSD runs rings around most - if not all - of the 2014 minis, yet isn't allowed to run Big Sur without jumping through some hoops to trick the installer about the underlying hardware.

Why can't Apple simply open a window on those legacy machines during installation, alerting the user about "Legacy Mac detected, user experience may be impaired, unless you have upgraded to SSD and 8-16GB Ram. Continue with installation?" and let the user decide in case (s)he knows what (s)he's doing?

I know, I know - legacy drivers not supported any longer, too many SKU's can't be tested etc. etc. Still - it feels completely arbitrary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSkywalker77, rjp1, nachodorito and 6 others
ipedro said:
The question I’m now coming across is whether to get a new Mac at all. My iPad Pro is my main computer.

Lightroom, Photoshop and most other apps I use are on iPadOS. My only outstanding Mac app, Final Cut Pro, is now running on ARM. It’s just a matter of time before it comes to iPad.

Do I even need a Mac? 🤔
Click to expand...
No, I think you can ride it out with the iMac and the iPad for the next year...if it scrubs out on you, then you can invest in a Mac. I humbly suggest you save your $$$.
 
konqerror said:
I think a big reason is that Intel is no longer supporting pre-Haswell chips with microcode upgrades for side-channel attacks.
Click to expand...
I think the big problem is that Apple does not explain their reasoning on this. Not that they are required to do so, but it would build some trust and confidence in the company.

Is it because the 2012 mini is officially "legacy" now and a decades old company policy states not to support anything older than 7 years (except for California and Turkey, where they have two more years of officially supported hardware)?!

Perhaps your guess also holds some truth. I just would like to understand and hear some official explanation from the horse's mouth!
[automerge]1592869773[/automerge]
dragoon2745 said:
What is it about my 2012 27 inch iMac that makes it incompatible with Big Sur?
Click to expand...
The simple number of the production year, coupled with some antique company policy, built upon some completely arbitrary number.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajfahey, rjp1, bobnugget and 2 others
Most people it is a good idea to get a new MacBook Pro 16 with the high end AMD video processor. It is going to take at least 3 years to bring the Mac to normalize software performance for the ARM based systems. Get AppleCare and then in 3 years you will see a mature hardware and software platform and you can trade it in at the Apple store for credit. The Mac Pro will be running on Intel for many years because it is a server/workstation processor and they have to have a Mac Operating system for it. It is going to come down too, do you care about the IOS apps running on your system or not. And running Windows in virtualization is progressing, look at Nvidia GeForce now, it runs games pretty well. Also with the price and power of the new game systems this fall and how platform gaming is now changing. You are going to see a upgraded gaming xbox and ps5 ever couple of years not like the old model of 7 years. More like how Apple does it hardware. Faster processors, Faster GPU, Faster SSD more Ram and the like.
 
Vado said:
I’m surprised my Late 2013 27” iMac isn’t supported with Big Sur.
Click to expand...
Me too. I guess we wait to see what ARM-powered machines they create that can run Premier Pro + Photoshop that’s not a Pro.
 
Last edited:
Here's hoping Big Sur isn't the trash heap that Catalina is! Presuming they've put a ton of work into this one, since it will be the first OS for the Arm processors. Maybe Catalina is so bad because most of the dev resources have been working on Big Sur. Fingers crossed this is the case.
 
My 2012 MBA :(((( The one I went and bought myself for my own money.. Now on the road to obsolescence.

I mean.. I pretty much expected it since it was the cut-off point last time. But still. The Intel Iris in my 2015 MBP is barely any better performing than HD 4000 and we know Intel hasn't managed to really up CPU per-thread performance in any meaningful way ever since.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nachodorito
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