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
jgleigh
macrumors regular
olad
macrumors 6502
Yes, because we are curious; I think most would rather be curious than merely accept it can't be done. The developers at OCLP haven't given up. Why should we?
tsialex
Contributor
Unfortunately, all T2 Macs need a lot of patches, main issue is the T2 controlled storage.
Why won't they release OCLP 3.0 without support for T2 Macs (at first) and get the rest of us up to speed while new releases are prepared?
They are doing the only smart thing they can do. Make no promises as to timeline or results. Until the problem is solved it's unsolved. How can they give an answer to an unsolved problem? Once it is solved it's just a matter of time to get releases ready. Maybe we will hear something then. However, sometimes problems happen late in development so it would probably be wise to just release when ready and not say anything until then.
Upgrading very old Apple computers to macOS Tahoe no longer makes sense. They should remain on macOS Sequoia.
However, we have the latest hackintoshes with 14th or 15th generation processors that are more powerful than MacPro. OCLP developers should focus on such computers. Why resuscitate something that is worth $100? Such computers will never work efficiently on macOS Tahoe.
However, we have the latest hackintoshes with 14th or 15th generation processors that are more powerful than MacPro. OCLP developers should focus on such computers. Why resuscitate something that is worth $100? Such computers will never work efficiently on macOS Tahoe.
Neon Ball
macrumors regular
There is nothing to focus on with those CPUs. They've never ran macOS, so for example iGPU drivers for them don't exist at all because Apple never developed them. There is also no support for Intel E-core/P-core scheduling for the same reason, macOS kernel does not support it on Intel. Hackintoshing will also be dead with macOS 27 going full ARM.
OCLP devs don't do any work for Hackintoshes, only real Macs.
Last edited:
Here You can see how newest 15th Gen Hackintosh outperform any Silicon Macs 😃
I use OCLP succesful na Sequoia or on Tahoe too . On Radeon GPU You dont need iGPU.
Neon Ball
macrumors regular
Yeah but it doesn't work properly the way the CPU is designed. As I already said there is no support for E-core/P-core scheduling, so you kinda want to disable the E-cores because otherwise your high performance apps may be running on the E-cores and you lose performance because macOS has no idea what is a P-core and what is an E-core on Intel. It already works as good as it ever will, so there's no need for OCLP, OpenCore or any other devs to do anything for it.
Regardless, hackintoshing will be dead with macOS 27 anyway and apps are already starting to slowly drop Intel based Macs/Hacks. New games are targeting Apple Silicon and a lot of graphics productivity apps will probably soon start targeting Metal 4 which is Apple Silicon only. Blender for example has already dropped GPU acceleration support for Intel/AMD GPUs in v4.3 turning them software only, GPU acceleration is now targeted only for Apple Silicon.
Last edited:
It actually does, but I understand if it isn't the type of response you were looking for.
I asked why not release it for those where they have it working already. Not addressed in your reply.
But why should I care how the processor uses cores on macOS if it's faster than the top-of-the-line Mac?
For the same price, I can have four computers with the power of a MacPro instead of one original MacPro. Plus, I'm not dependent on Apple's expensive service because I can replace everything myself
tsialex
Contributor
Neon Ball
macrumors regular
It can be faster but also consumes way more power especially when it can't properly schedule tasks. I also don't get why you were asking for devs focus on it when it already works? There is nothing to focus on, Tahoe already works on Hacks.
Anyway for the 3rd time, hackintoshing will be dead soon like in the example of Blender dropping hardware acceleration support for non-Apple Silicon GPUs and macOS 27 dropping Intel. There is no path forward here except with Apple Silicon.
Last edited:
Developers could release an official version of OCLP – something that works. If they have something that definitely works, they should do it. That's my opinion.
You can still use Hackintosh for a long time. Not everyone wants to have the latest system or software. I'll say more, there is an overproduction of software. Programs expanded to the point of absurdity become inconvenient for the user. And today, companies are telling people that they have to change everything every year for no apparent reason.
You can still use Hackintosh for a long time. Not everyone wants to have the latest system or software. I'll say more, there is an overproduction of software. Programs expanded to the point of absurdity become inconvenient for the user. And today, companies are telling people that they have to change everything every year for no apparent reason.
Neon Ball
macrumors regular
All releases of OCLP by Dortania are official, I don't know what you mean by that statement. Tahoe patches are not in a state where they can be released, so they won't be. There is no "definitely works" in patched operating systems in general, some quirks will always be around and it's up to the user to determine whether those quirks impact their usecases.
OCLP also doesn't officially support Hackintoshes and never has, that will not change since the devs simply don't want to work with Hacks due to the overwhelming amount of hardware. It has always targeted real Macs and will continue to do so, Hackintosh users using OCLP are on their own.
Last edited:
amaze1499
macrumors 68000
I think that statement goes in the right direction. Tahoe is no fun yet on supported machines and wont be any fun on oclp macs in terms of using them as a daily driver. Way too demanding. This MacOS is build for a different kind of hardware whatsoever.
My MBP 2012 is a very flexible and brilliant machine, a good USB A/Thunderbolt1 dock connected through 1Gbit Ethernet. It also serves as a terminal from anywhere else into my M4 Mac. Catalina is very much alive. Tahoe is nice, but still quite buggy even in 26.3. Error -8058 anyone? And that glas design... definitely a lovehate thing.
hvds
macrumors 6502a
MBP11,1: updated to 26.4b2 from b1 on external SSD, from USB installer, EFI is from OCLP 3.0.0n (Dec 4th, 25).
Indeed no HFS+ issues.
Occasional WS crashes, and machine KPs when shutting down, as earlier with Tahoe. Good enough to write this post.
Looking forward to Tahoe patches. Sequoia running happily on internal SSD. Thanks and all the best to developers!
Attachments
Last edited: