Liquid Glass seems to be a source of complication for a not such important thing. I could see a lightweight version of Tahoe / OCLP, without Liquid Glass but allowing people to enjoy the rest of the new features.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
macOS Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Discussion
- Thread starter jshayya0184
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Liquid Glass itself isn't a problem, old drivers are. Most problems we're currently trying to solve already existed on Sequoia and older but they caused more problems on Tahoe so some patches we're working for Tahoe should also benefit Sequoia and older.
My experience with 10+ unsupported Macs on Tahoe is that Liquid Glass and animations are surprisingly smooth on Macs from 2012+ but the OS is considerably slower compared to Sequoia because Apple keeps increasing the CPU usage with more and more processes.
Liquid Glass is only a problem for non-Metal GPUs since we have to replace it with the blur available on the old frameworks we have to use but that mostly causes more graphical glitches and will need a lot of work to make it usable.
I have a late 2013 iMac and a mid 2013 MacBook Air. Wondering if I should attempt Tahoe yet?
Only on a test volume that can be deleted, and give a lot of time for things to coalesce.
I don't see much reason to upgrade to Tahoe. All the changes seem to be superficial.
Few changes in iOS 26.2 beta, no news of Tahoe 26.2 yet: https://www.macworld.com/article/29...anges-to-sleep-score-apple-news-and-more.html
Few changes in iOS 26.2 beta, no news of Tahoe 26.2 yet: https://www.macworld.com/article/29...anges-to-sleep-score-apple-news-and-more.html
Last edited:
Depends on your reason. If you want to experiment and you know how to mitigate risks, why not?
If you're considering a Tahoe attempt with a Mac / Volume on which you depend for any real work (or anything for that matter) ... No.
Liquid Glass?… It's Apple's answer to a non-existent problem with macOS and a response to needs that no one has ever proposed or requested...
In any case, the work of @educovas and other OCLP developers is very important because, as Educovas himself points out, continuing to develop OCLP for Tahoe will also help improve other macOS versions such as Ventura, Sonoma and Sequoia on unsupported Macs.
Personally, I hope that Educovas (who seems to be the only remaining developer who knows Kepler graphics well) will fix the very serious issues plaguing the Sequoia’s “Preview” app (hystogram, Auto Level, etc.) with iMac 14,2, as well as other malfunctions that forced me to switch back to Sonoma, in March, after six months with Sequoia. Some annoying bugs include the inability to stream video from the iPhone YouTube app to the Mac, random crashes when creating custom icons for files and folders, and so on.
With Sonoma, on the other hand, my iMac is comparable to a new Mac without Tahoe. The hardware differences during video encoding, etc., in fact, not very important to me.
In the end, serious users like us only care that the operating system are very stable and works well with productivity apps; and we don't care about liquid or opaque buttons, transparencies, rounded windows, etc.
Last edited:
Personally if I thought I could run either "Lion" or "Snow Leopard" on my more 'modern' Macs, with an up-to-date web-browser I would.
Well definitely no reasons to upgrade since there wont be a huge performance increase on such a system with elderly hardware. 15.7.2 can handle all daily tasks well, although I see performance decrease across the board and especially when using browser related tasks. That goes for Safari, STechnology and Firefox. However, thats only my experience on this 9,2.
The reason for your Preview problems is the downgraded CoreImage, that was necessary until recently. We (me and ASentientBot) were able to use the stock CoreImage on Tahoe and Sequoia and that should be fixed when OCLP 3.0.0 is out ( i hope it won't create new problems). Those custom icons crashes could also be related but it's untested.Liquid Glass?… It's Apple's answer to a non-existent problem with macOS and a response to needs that no one has ever proposed or requested...
In any case, the work of @educovas and other OCLP developers is very important because, as Educovas himself points out, continuing to develop OCLP for Tahoe will also help improve other macOS versions such as Ventura, Sonoma and Sequoia on unsupported Macs.
Personally, I hope that Educovas (who seems to be the only remaining developer who knows Kepler graphics well) will fix the very serious issues plaguing the Sequoia’s “Preview” app (hystogram, Auto Level, etc.) with iMac 14,2, as well as other malfunctions that forced me to switch back to Sonoma, in March, after six months with Sequoia. Some annoying bugs include the inability to stream video from the iPhone YouTube app to the Mac, random crashes when creating custom icons for files and folders, and so on.
With Sonoma, on the other hand, my iMac is comparable to a new Mac without Tahoe. The hardware differences during video encoding, etc., in fact, not very important to me.
In the end, serious users like us only care that the operating system are very stable and works well with productivity apps; and we don't care about liquid or opaque buttons, transparencies, rounded windows, etc.
I feel like your problem with AirPlay to Mac (I assume) is probably due to FeatureUnlock and that's something I can't help with.
First of all, thank you, dear @educovas and I am glad to hear that perhaps, in Sequoia, with OCLP 3.0, the problem with the Preview app could be solved. For me, in fact, the Preview app is as useful as air, water and food.
As for AirPlay on Mac in Sequoia, STRANGELY, the problem only affects videos from the YouTube app from iPhone to Mac and ONLY videos with protected content and/or advertisements. Some videos, instead, work very well and it’s strange; which makes me think that it is definitely not due to the Kepler video card. And about Feature Unlock, I enable it always completely. Mah 🤷♂️ It’s a mystery…
With Sonoma, instead, everything works perfectly perfectly perfectly 🤗
Thanks again
I have Big Sur on the MacBook Air and it seems to work just fine on it. I have sequoia on my iMac which works great, just have to figure out its issue with mail, getting new messages. Maybe I should leave both alone for a while longer.
T26B.2. OTW/OTA. On a deletable Exp/Test Volume that is not appropriate for daily use.
EDIT: Had to restart, other than that no problems, seems like the mouse is working better, could just be wishful thinking. Now back to Seq volume.
EDIT: Had to restart, other than that no problems, seems like the mouse is working better, could just be wishful thinking. Now back to Seq volume.
Attachments
Last edited:
The new versions are using a lot of CPU due to background processes, as mentioned. I continue to use Sonoma via OCLP on my 2017 Macbook Pro with a dedicated graphics card because I find it the best version available after Ventura. I'm not in a hurry to use macOS 26; I used Sequoia for a while and didn't like the experience.
Thanks, mate! In a nutshell, you've expressed what I struggle to say in many sentences...
Apple has made Sequoia much more complicated, both in terms of security and in terms of adding AI features that are not even complete in Tahoe...
Tahoe, therefore, in my opinion, is still a very immature system, and I compare it to Big Sur, which, becoming macOS 11, represented a novelty compared to the previous macOS 10.X, but was then improved and stabilised with Monterey.
The work of the OCLP team is still very important, however, as it is likely that thanks to the commitment, intelligence and kindness of its developers, an unexpected solution will suddenly be found.
This has already happened in the past when OCLP seemed to have reached its limit and suddenly, instead, they found a way to solve problems related to AMFI, dyldcache, etc.
They are good geniuses 🙏😇
Each new major release of macOS will certainly place more demands on hardware. Same is true for MS Windows. I'm running macOS Tahoe 26.2 Beta on an i7-10610u mobile CPU with only UHD630 iGPU (no dGPU). Performance is fine.
I have enabled the following System Settings:
Activity Monitor for Tahoe 26.2 Beta (Sorted Highest to Lowest %CPU)
Each of us will need to evaluate Tahoe performance for ourselves on our own hardware. For some, we'll be thrilled by the fact that our hardware has a new lease on life and we'll be less concerned about a minor degradation in performance.
Also, the upgrade of my old legacy rig from Tahoe 26.1 to 26.2 Beta was easy. Still patiently waiting for OCLP post-install patches.
EDIT: @OKonnel I haven't observed any increase in Security/AI complexity (especially since AI is not present in macOS for Intel). I think many will be quite pleased with Tahoe.
EDIT2: To be clear, I have very low expectations for Tahoe performance on my 2010 laptop. In fact, I expect performance to be pathetic, so anything better than that will be a pleasant surprise.
I have enabled the following System Settings:
- Accessibility > Display > Reduce Transparency
- Accessibility > Motion > Reduce Motion
Activity Monitor for Tahoe 26.2 Beta (Sorted Highest to Lowest %CPU)
Each of us will need to evaluate Tahoe performance for ourselves on our own hardware. For some, we'll be thrilled by the fact that our hardware has a new lease on life and we'll be less concerned about a minor degradation in performance.
Also, the upgrade of my old legacy rig from Tahoe 26.1 to 26.2 Beta was easy. Still patiently waiting for OCLP post-install patches.
EDIT: @OKonnel I haven't observed any increase in Security/AI complexity (especially since AI is not present in macOS for Intel). I think many will be quite pleased with Tahoe.
EDIT2: To be clear, I have very low expectations for Tahoe performance on my 2010 laptop. In fact, I expect performance to be pathetic, so anything better than that will be a pleasant surprise.
Last edited:
It's going to be crazy if OCLP has to backport Intel support in macOS 27.
Extremely unlikely, so that's the end of the road for Intel Mac and most hackintosh users.
Perhaps OCLP will still be useful for updating old Apple Silicon Macs that are unsupported, like M1 in the future.
Extremely unlikely, so that's the end of the road for Intel Mac and most hackintosh users.
Perhaps OCLP will still be useful for updating old Apple Silicon Macs that are unsupported, like M1 in the future.
There's no path for this, or rather the effort required would be leaps and bounds more than what OCLP is doing right now, trying to disassemble ARM64 binaries and produce Intel versions? For *everything*?
macOS 26 will be the end of the line for Intel Mac users, whether they are using "supported" systems or otherwise.
Does anyone have the link to olcp 3.0.0 as I cant find it
OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/CHANGELOG.md at macos-next · dortania/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher
Experience macOS just like before. Contribute to dortania/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com
This may help, it is several months old and I use it for testing on a deletable volume. Use with caution and patience.
Click on "source.md"
Edit: If this is not the latest please let us know.
I think I am wrong about this I just tried source and it says 2.4.1. Maybe someone else can help.
Last edited:
There isn't a "link to OCLP 3.0.0." It is not yet available. This thread has several posts about building OCLP 3.0.0 from source.
@noor8706 Given that you are asking the question, I'm guessing that you are looking for a link to the pre-built binary to OCLP 3.0.0 that you can download. OCLP 3.0.0 is not yet released and macOS Tahoe is not supported by OCLP at this time. We're all waiting patiently for the Devs to tackle numerous challenges introduced by Tahoe. If I'm wrong about your question and you are wanting to build OCLP from source code, you'll find the answer in this thread. Even after building from source, OCLP 3.0.0 is at a stage where it may allow you to install and upgrade macOS Tahoe, but it will NOT apply post-install patches for audio, Wi-Fi and graphics (if necessary).
EDIT: If you're determined to try Tahoe on your unsupported Mac and you know how to mitigate the risks so that you're not jeopardizing your data and your Mac, you can start with OCLP 2.4.1 as noted here. Again, if you want to build OCLP 3.0.0 from source, you'll find multiple posts in this thread about how to do that.
Last edited:
Now things are getting really crazy. Apps like Terminal, TextEdit, Activity Monitor, iMessage,
System Settings, FaceTime, etc., aren't working anymore (see image).
The error message says I haven't installed macOS Tahoe 26.2, even though
I just did a clean install with beta 1 of 26.2 Build 25C5031i.
What's causing this? Does anyone know anything about it?
System Settings, FaceTime, etc., aren't working anymore (see image).
The error message says I haven't installed macOS Tahoe 26.2, even though
I just did a clean install with beta 1 of 26.2 Build 25C5031i.
What's causing this? Does anyone know anything about it?
Attachments
