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

macOS 15 Sequoia on Unsupported Macs Thread

Status
The first post of this thread is a WikiPost and can be edited by anyone with the appropiate permissions. Your edits will be public.
timothy24 said:

OCLP 1.6 nightly link please​

Click to expand...
From the developers on Discord - Currently, OCLP does not have any kind of support for Sequoia. Developers are making their best efforts in order to add support, but it may take months or even years for something usable to be produced. Please do not install Sequoia at this time and please do not bother developers with questions or ETAs regarding Sequoia development. 🤫
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: olad, LlamaLarry, OKonnel and 14 others
K two said:
From the developers on Discord - Currently, OCLP does not have any kind of support for Sequoia. Developers are making their best efforts in order to add support, but it may take months or even years for something usable to be produced. Please do not install Sequoia at this time and please do not bother developers with questions or ETAs regarding Sequoia development. 🤫
Click to expand...
I wouldn't imagine it taking years lol. I'm guessing that OCLP will be ready by the public release of Sequoia in October.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OKonnel
K two said:
From the developers on Discord - Currently, OCLP does not have any kind of support for Sequoia. Developers are making their best efforts in order to add support, but it may take months or even years for something usable to be produced. Please do not install Sequoia at this time and please do not bother developers with questions or ETAs regarding Sequoia development. 🤫
Click to expand...
So you think this week? 😀

Thank You for all of the work being put in. For some it is a necessity, for some a novelty to load the latest OS onto older machines, and everything in between. Whatever it may be there are a group of developers who continue to use their own time working to make these things happen and I, along with many, Thank You again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OKonnel, ponta pon pon, Larsvonhier and 3 others
Sequoia beta 1 on a supported Mac. Migation runs exactly like unsupported Sonoma.
supp beta.jpg:apple:😉
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hvds and rehkram
amaze1499 said:
Looks quite like it. In fact, it seems to be so small, I couldn’t even be bothered going through all the hassle of walking the beta road till autumn.

I’m going on a limb here, It could be very likely, OCLP development will remain until Apple officially drops the Intel support in MacOS. Whether it’s worth upgrading is written on a different sheet of paper.
Click to expand...
Sequoia = “High Sonoma” (only an incremental upgrade)…
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: olad, K two, OKonnel and 5 others
Yesterday, BTW, I tried to encrypt my Sequoia drive with FileVault: the encryption went well; but on subsequent reboots, after entering the password, it slowly booted - with double progress bars (one smaller one, too) - to a grey screen, with both username and password fields: and the password was not accepted! So, currently, it’s probably not a good idea to apply FileVault to Sequoia Beta 1. I then erased the external drive: better to wait for initial OCLP support, in order to test Sequoia…
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: OKonnel, macinfo, hvds and 4 others
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Arctic Moose, jgleigh, Marfan-58 and 2 others
I didn't say anything because I couldn't remember if they were one of the devs, the name looked familiar and I know the devs have occasionally posted here.
 
Allow me a little rebuke, kindly, for those users who insist on downloading and installing the macOS Sequoia Beta, without being Developers, and thus have to test their applications for the next Operating System, and without even knowing OCLP and all its functions.

What to do with a Beta that, especially at the beginning, is very rough? Furthermore, from Big Sur onwards, Apple began to randomly add and remove functions and more during the Beta versions... In other words, it is no longer like the old days, when the System became more and more stable as the number of Beta versions progressed. Therefore, there is just a big waste of time associated to many risks.

Moreover, Apple's official system for macOS is still Sonoma, which for many of us, thanks to OCLP, works the same as on supported Macs. So feel actual and don't go looking for trouble, perhaps with the unpredictable risk of losing your most important data while hacking trying to get who knows what...

If, on the other hand, you are curious to see Sequoia at work, there are Apple's videos with the new features which mainly concern the new Silicon Macs and not ours.
For our Macs, in fact, but also for many newer Macs, macOS Sequoia doesn't offer much more than Sonoma, and the friend @Sven G rightly called Sequoia an High Sonoma 🙂
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hvds, olad, K two and 1 other person
Am I the only one who feels more compelled to do something when I'm told "no!"? With so many safe ways to experiment without risk to systems and data, let it be. I'm glad I tried Sequoia before the gods approved it and didn't really become motivated until I was basically told I was an idiot if I wanted to try it.

My advice? Test to your heart's content and to the limits of your own risk tolerance. Keep multiple safety nets if you need to protect anything and if you screw up, own it and don't complain about it.

EDIT: ... and if you care what others think, don't post an announcement that you're testing Sequoia.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: olad, TimmuJapan, macpro_mid2014 and 2 others
Until root patching will become available also for Sequoia, the best way to explore the new macOS is in a virtual machine: it works both in Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion (but probably not in VirtualBox or UTM), albeit without graphics acceleration (paravirtualized graphics probably won’t work, so you’ll be stuck with the classic, non-accelerated Parallels or VMware video driver); installation in Parallels is straightforward (everything works, also the automatic installation media creation from the macOS installer app), while in Fusion you must create the installation media manually (the built-in method is still broken, for the more recent macOSes). So, the result will be a quite usable, albeit a little slow Sequoia VM, which can also be updated internally as new betas are published by Apple.

(In Parallels, after installing the Tools in the VM, the paravirtualized, accelerated driver will be used: if it doesn't work, the VM will boot to a black screen or halt during boot; if so, just shut it down (even forcedly, if it’s stuck), and then issue this command in the host Mac’s Terminal: prlctl set <VM_NAME> --video-adapter-type parallels; and then it should boot and run correctly: but of course with non-accelerated graphics.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: macinfo and macpro_mid2014
… Two recent links:

www.parallels.com

Parallels macOS: Test Catalina–Tahoe Versions | Parallels

Learn how to use Parallels macOS virtual machines to test apps across Catalina through Tahoe, streamline QA workflows, and ship releases with confidence.
www.parallels.com

Sequoia as VM on an Intel Mac | Fusion

Host: 2019 iMac with macOS 14.5 and Fusion 13.5.2.Attempting to install macOS 15 Sequoia as a virtual machine.Progress:Create Sequoia ISO, boot it as a CD and i
community.broadcom.com

… the first one for Apple silicon Macs, but as said before it works also for our old Intel ones (for which it isn’t necessary to install the beta Xcode, and of course you must download the traditional macOS installer package, not the IPSW file; for example, from Mr Macintosh: https://mrmacintosh.com/macos-sequoia-full-installer-database-download-directly-from-apple); and the second one illustrating some of the graphical problems with Fusion (which, as also said below, supports macOS VMs only on Intel).

So, currently, it is much easier to virtualize Sequoia (which, even if installed natively and booted through OCLP, would anyway be without root patches: rather useless)…
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: olad, macinfo and K two
Sven G said:
… Two recent links:

www.parallels.com

Parallels macOS: Test Catalina–Tahoe Versions | Parallels

Learn how to use Parallels macOS virtual machines to test apps across Catalina through Tahoe, streamline QA workflows, and ship releases with confidence.
www.parallels.com

Sequoia as VM on an Intel Mac | Fusion

Host: 2019 iMac with macOS 14.5 and Fusion 13.5.2.Attempting to install macOS 15 Sequoia as a virtual machine.Progress:Create Sequoia ISO, boot it as a CD and i
community.broadcom.com

… the first one for Apple silicon Macs, but as said before it works also for our old Intel ones (for which you must download the traditional macOS installer package, not the IPSW file; for example, from Mr Macintosh: https://mrmacintosh.com/macos-sequoia-full-installer-database-download-directly-from-apple); and the second one illustrating some of the graphical problems with Fusion.
Click to expand...
Reading through that post. suggests that for Mac users, it's better to switch to Parallels desktop for macOS VMs, as VMware isn't a guarantee reliable supported platform going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macpro_mid2014 and Sven G
@Sven G It's a bit ironic we're talking about VMware, macOS, and open core and the graphics issues that come with it. I found out when I initially installed VMware Workstation on my Linux dual boot they don't support AMD GPUs under Linux for graphics acceleration. Just though I'd throw that out there because I was hoping switching to a different platform would solve the issues with Open core, and VMs. The issue it did solve is, the OS i wanted as a guest works great as the host, but VMWare on that platform doesn't have great support either. I found the Heroic game launcher for macOS and it will install the windows versions of the games in wine-crossover, but I had asked if anyone had any experience with wine on a patched mac a while back regarding graphics issues. I have a Sonoma installer made with open core 1.5, but I was waiting to see if anyone could tell me my alternative to a VM would work under open core, so I don't break my stable system and waste time having to fix it.
 
deeveedee said:
Am I the only one who feels more compelled to do something when I'm told "no!"? With so many safe ways to experiment without risk to systems and data, let it be. I'm glad I tried Sequoia before the gods approved it and didn't really become motivated until I was basically told I was an idiot if I wanted to try it.
My advice? Test to your heart's content and to the limits of your own risk tolerance. Keep multiple safety nets if you need to protect anything and if you screw up, own it and don't complain about it.
EDIT: ... and if you care what others think, don't post an announcement that you're testing Sequoia.
Click to expand...
Hi @deeveedee . 🙂 I fully agree with your idea of freedom... 😀 and my warning is not intended to discourage or limit at people who, like you, know what they are doing and are perfectly aware...
But for years, with Big Sur and then the other Systems to follow, we have always found ourselves faced with friends who act on the wave of enthusiasm and without a vague idea; so, many times, the Forum ends up getting clogged up to help people that has caused problems with their Mac and even if they get help they understand with great difficulty or not at all.
In any case I didn't want to humiliate or offend anyone! I only communicated my perception of the uselessness of pre-installing Systems still in the initial Beta stages. But, I repeat, without claiming to impose anything and hoping to be taken seriously only by those who do not act with a minimum of awareness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: olad, ronton3 and deeveedee
OKonnel said:
Hi @deeveedee . 🙂 I fully agree with your idea of freedom... 😀 and my warning is not intended to discourage or limit at people who, like you, know what they are doing and are perfectly aware...
But for years, with Big Sur and then the other Systems to follow, we have always found ourselves faced with friends who act on the wave of enthusiasm and without a vague idea; so, many times, the Forum ends up getting clogged up to help people that has caused problems with their Mac and even if they get help they understand with great difficulty or not at all.
In any case I didn't want to humiliate or offend anyone! I only communicated my perception of the uselessness of pre-installing Systems still in the initial Beta stages. But, I repeat, without claiming to impose anything and hoping to be taken seriously only by those who do not act with a minimum of awareness.
Click to expand...
That's why I usually ask questions about something I'm considering doing, especially in a situation like this where it's not officially supported to see if someone else has already tried it, and if it doesn't work, save myself unnecessary time recovering from it. I just realized i'm talking on the macos 15 thread too and asking about macos 14. Either way,it probably doesn't matter since what i'm asking about involves an unsupported version of macos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OKonnel and deeveedee
OKonnel said:
But, I repeat, without claiming to impose anything and hoping to be taken seriously only by those who do not act with a minimum of awareness.
Click to expand...
Wholeheartedly agree. It's ok to generate awareness and then allow people to make their own decisions. On that note, someone should think about creating a thread with the potential consequences of running unsupported versions of macOS after disabling SIP, disabling Secure Boot, breaking the APFS seal and injecting an old version of the Wi-Fi framework.
 
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: OKonnel and olad
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