I tried to boot from the EFI on USB installer, It is the same going to black screen.
If WiFi Patching is a concern, wouldn't another reasonable solution be to just buy an external WiFi adapter that might have newer standards than the built in one (depending on the Mac) and also come with drivers?, or at least have the option to download up to date drivers?
Not trying to be a smart@$$, but I really would prefer this to be a lesson. See if you can figure out why that recommendation doesn't work.
And it's not a good idea. Are sure to be the owner of your machine ? Or in name of security, the OS and the vendors will do what they want ? As Apple now without OCLP ? In name of security, we loose some individual liberty space. Take care.
I really can't find a reason in this context. You're the one who was asked to drop this conversation by numerous people because you were concerned about the security risks of the patcher. All I suggested was an alternative was to buy new hardware compatible with macOS that might provide updated drivers that don't require patching.
I have a 2015 11,4 MBP and I updated from 0.6.8 to 1.0.0 then clicked "update software" from the settings screen and installed with no problems. I went from 13.4.1 to 14.0 through OCLP and settings...no USB. Later I updated to 1.0.1
I did my two Macs one of each way. I went from 13.6 on the MBP to 14.0 via the macos installer run directly in Ventura with OCLP already installed. On the iMac, I made the USB installer to see if there was any difference. I really didn't see any difference in the end results between the two methods of upgrade.
I agree with you, I feel as well, that if there were genuine concerns that really put the casual user into risk here, then the developers would have taken different measures in their development. I personally haven't run into anything yet I've seen concerning, especially for a single home user, which the majority of people who do this probably are.
🥳
Thank you for this information. I believe that the requirement to use OCLP-generated USB installer is only for new macOS installations and not upgrades (e.g. OCLP-generated USB installer is required to install a new instance of Sonoma in a new APFS Volume, but not to upgrade Sonoma 14.0 -> 14.1).
Yes, they want you to do that, which I can totally understand. That way the possibility of user errors while creating the installer are reduced, so there are less people reaching out for support and blaming OCLP for their own error. At least that’s what I imagine being the reason.
I think the problem @deeveedee is referring to, is that you will still have to install the WiFi root patch, as you would most likely want you’re graphics drivers to work, and you can’t install them without the WiFi patch. I don’t think it’s a huge deal, I just wanted to explain what deeveedee probably means.
Exactly @PoloHofer! As you say: "In Ventura it (= Continuity Camera) didn't work first and later the developers fixed it."
But I think that the solution also came with an Apple update of Ventura (13.3 or 4), rather than just a new version of OCLP. We'll see if it will be like this this time too. Let's hope so…
Thank you for clarifying! And you are correct about Wi-Fi patching. If I understand OCLP correctly, when OCLP builds a USB installer, it injects the root-patch into the installer (so that root patches may not be required after the installation). Is that correct?
I think if Ventura is running well, go for it. Sonoma really isn’t slower or less stable than Ventura, but if you have the possibility I would recommend that you first try installing it on an external SSD or a separate Volume to see if there are any problems occurring on your system.
I don’t think so, at first the installer is just a generic one after the creation, the magic happens for the first time when building Open Core itself, because that’s also the first time you need to specify your model, if you are creating it on a different Mac. But please don’t take my word for it, as I have always created the installer manually.
And that’s of course true, too: we cannot really trust corporations or states that have too much concentrated power and whose main goal is profit (instead, power should be distributed among the citizens themselves, and money should only be a means and available to all, at least ideally). But anyway, I think that trying to be as secure as possible is a good idea: and there’s probably still some space for improvements for this, in OCLP…
Excellent observation. I have not used the new 1.x installer yet which is why I was asking. OCLP does have auto-detect functionality, such that it can "Build and Install Open Core" without the user needing to specify their model (OCLP detects the model). I was thinking that maybe OCLP would create a USB installer after first detecting the model on which OCLP was running. I think your logic makes more sense. When I use OCLP 1.x, I'll use it to build a new macOS installer and then see if post-install patches are required after the macOS installation. Thank you.
If you really think this extra layer of security is very important for many people, you could fork it and publish your own, modified version on GitHub, just as (I think) Ausdauersportler recommended. That would probably mean a lot for those people. Also then there would be an improved OCLP (for the people who are concerned about that).
unsuccessful sir. sci mode, math equation plus clear isnt working, but thank you, ill just download another calculator.
Sorry to hear. Looks like Calc behavior is different on different models (not surprising). On my MBP6,2 (non-metal Nvidia Tesla), I open Calc, toggle display mode to Sci and back to Bas and then I can calculate without the NaN problem. Sometimes I have had to do a simple multiplication and Clear in Sci mode before switching back to Basic. Sorry that didn't work for you.
I don't want to be in the software maintenance business. Fortunately, the change is simple enough that most can do it.
