No, it's not. You can make a USB installer, but macOS still needs to "activate" during the installation process. It just needs to check the Apple servers 1 time with WiFi/Ethernet. You can't connect to the internet 1 time to have it activate? You can use your Phone's connection if you don't have WiFi (Who doesn't have WiFi though?).
The issue for some is that the notion of connecting to Apple's servers to confirm permissibility of installation (or running, see below) of the OS represents a new status on the relationship between seller and buyer, owner and service provider — a status that I see benefitting mainly Apple (this promotes obsolescence by adding hurdles to scenarios overlooked by policy, generally increases leverage over important infrastructure, etc.). Of course, it also benefits, secondarily, the small portion of users whose gear or information would be stolen if not for the magic of centralized rule enforcement. The issue is that it does so at the expense of imposing restrictions on the entire bulk of users.
Personally I'm not worried about my gear or my info getting stolen — I lock them both up. Privacy in the sense of autonomy is another matter, but it's not the main goal I'm worried about in this case. I'm more interested in my computing devices being and remaining usable, and I agree with leman that something like "the computer locking itself under obscure conditions" (my phrase, not his) should be optional. I understand making it so it would likely add attack surface and undermine the overall security program, but there is surely a route that could realize the most important sec gains while still preserving the essential aspects of ownership.
Instead, we have a maximalist approach that benefits the world's most valuable corporation (well, not quite anymore) and a small minority of unfortunate/inept (sorry, no judgment) users.
It can of course be argued that Apple sells hardware for which it merely provides software, which may be allowed to run, or may not — "they don't owe us OS's," or some similar take. Ok, but that's not really how these systems work — the hardware and the software are together the product, which you purchase. Without both, neither is a product. And the transition to a scenario where the software requires checks and registration to run (not iCloud, I get it, but certainly a registry tracking specific computers, correlatable with particular purchase transactions, and correlating those not just with systems but system
instances, again see below) means the relationship Apple users have with compute, becomes less like ownership and more like rental — not completely of course, but I hope you see my point.
____
I spent a bit of time this weekend doing more installations. I broke down and connected to the internet during installation because I find it important to come to an understanding of the situation, not to mention my desire to use my hardware. I'm not an inflexible privacy maxi (I am flexible lol), I just want to know what's up with my gear. While I may not prefer to do it this way, I'm unwilling to just let the computer sit, or to start hacking on it. Too expensive and useful to risk messing around.
I learned some things through this process. One is embedded in what I wrote above:
hardware systems are now tightly correlated with specific system instances.
For example, using two separate external TB3 SSD's to install discreet systems in the hope of being able to swap back and forth with ease is now more complicated, and frankly, feels like I'm doing something unsupported. Even if I use the regular networked process to install the systems, merely swapping between these systems also requires internet connectivity when making the swap.
If I start up on system A, then switch to system B, the computer fails to boot unless connected to the web, presenting a message, "internet connection required to verify startup disk." I understand that this doesn't imply that starting the computer every time requires connectivity — but it does imply that every system starting up on a modern mac must be cleared in some manner by the Apple servers, and that this clearing process produces a lock on purchased hardware that limits its ability to run code it could otherwise run.
And the juiciest tidbit, in my view:
downloaded installers are basically useless as a software archiving asset.
One of my tests involved installing the original version OS for this machine, Monterey, to the external SSD. I started with a 12.7.6 installer I downloaded just under a year ago, to create the bootable thumb drive. Early in the install routine, with the internet
ON the whole time, I received a message about the OS being out of date and an invitation to continue in "reduced security" mode. Cool, but after accepting this, it still failed to restart into setup during that part of the install routine — yes, even with the internet
connected the install failed, presenting a new message: "Reduced Security software update failed. Try again or restart to cancel the update." So I downloaded a fresh copy (via mr machintosh's Apple links) of the
same version installer — 12.7.6 — and re-did the exact same thing… Voila, no messages, functional install.
With these two installers being the same OS version, the issue is most likely one of certificate expiry… showing up in
under a year. Are you kidding me 🙃
Classically (as in, on my trashcan MP as well as my even older Macs) the standard workaround is to reset the system date, stay untethered, and retry. Works like a charm there, but not possible here when installation requires connection to Apple's servers. This example speaks clearly to the future of these machines — no way is Apple, one of the money-grubbingest, developer-extorting companies in the history of computing, going to maintain versions of these old OS's with updated security certs ten, fifteen years hence — they're going to let them expire and become useless and hide behind something in the TOS, just like Adobe has done with every version of their design suite from before CS5.5. Software, and especially operating systems (!) with expiration dates mean hardware with the same.
As a result of this new education I've just received, I can assure you that I will now do my best to ensure this studio's status as the last Mac I will ever buy. I've always justified Apple's hardware premium by continuing to run my machines for years into decades. I don't run my old Qaudra 800 (don't have it, sadly) but I bet I could, zip drive and all. Sad it isn't the same company anymore.
Opinions will be mixed of course, but this is not something I appreciate. Sure, for me it's a privacy/autonomy thing to some extent — think what you will about that. But ideology aside, there are practical implications here that
should matter to anyone spending $6k+ on a computer. The future doesn't bode well for Apple hardware longevity, return on investment, environmental impact, or just plain ol' practical flexibility (/creativity!) on the Mac.
RIP.
