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
Interesting. I tried it several years ago but had few crashes with macports when building & running if I remember correctly so kind of gave up.
But now I see it gone to version 47 so worth another look. Thx Chris.
Admitting Snow Leopard is even older, but a while ago I stumbled upon mavericksforever. The guy relies on an old, but still up to date version of Firefox and a proxy server. In addition, he has a collection of tweaks and workarounds which still allow for some productive use of the OS. Might be worth a look.
The only system with version 10.6.8 is very successful and full-fledged, which you can work with very seriously, because the system has a full set of serious libraries that allow you to actively work and create new applications. Libraries have been stripped down in the new systems... The Xcode compiler for the 10.6.8 system is very successful and of high quality. The new compilers are of poor quality, the files are truncated, and a lot of things are missing, and so on...
I have a firewall program and I live in peace.
I don't log into icloud because icloud has vulnerabilities. There may be problems with icloud. Because of this, there are information leaks.
The Python 2.6.1 compiler is very high quality. New python compilers have bugs. We'll have to put up with the new versions. But I'm staying with version 2.6.1.
There are apps and games for 10.6.8. There are many of them and they are much more interesting than modern ones. For example, the game "Angry birds" is a lot of fun. In general, I stayed in the 10.6.8 system. In the new systems, just for testing, nothing else.
ionizeds
macrumors newbie
“The T2 Chip shouldn’t be a problem.”
It controls the SSD and many other core parts of the machine. The machine is designed to run with the T2 in sync. Without the T2, There is no machine.
If you’d like to know more, Research it yourself. The T2 OCLP struggles are public knowledge readily available for anyone to find.
The T2 is not just a security chip. It is an ARM64 coprocessor that includes the SSD controller along with audio and video interfaces. It also runs the boot loader for MacOS.
Is it worth buying a m1 MacBook Air that needs a screen replacement it has a 512 ssd and 8g ram just to be able to have Tahoe, when I have a perfect condition 2018 MacBook Air 512 ssd and 16g ram but stuck on Sonoma with it?
Coselmann
macrumors member
I reckon the M1 will soon be “outdated”, so that could be a problem. If anything, it needs at least 16GB of RAM, because I can see that my girlfriend's is still a bit sluggish.
Sh3ldon
macrumors regular
I think if the M1 is taken out of support, it will only be due to planned obsolescence. Unless macOS 27 requires 24GB of RAM to run, I see no reason to remove support for processors that are still so powerful.
So, I'm gonna take a wag and say that it is the opinion that it is not worth me getting that m1 MacBook Air 8gb and 512ssd with the damaged screen that needs replacing just so I can have Tahoe and not be bothered that my 2018 MacBook Air is stuck with Sonoma since it appears that getting the T2 chip and Tahoe working thru oclp is not a priority. My 2018 MacBook Air is in like new condition, has 16gb ram and the 512 ssd, only 200 cycles on battery which still lasts for a full day of use, with like 30% remaining charge without a scratch anywhere on it, and cost me nothing to get since it belonged to a member of my ham radio club who offered it to anyone who wanted it for free.
Bigwaff
Contributor
Get one with undamaged display. These are very cheap on used market. They are tanks which hold up well. My kids have been beating the hell out of theirs for years.
"since it appears that getting the T2 chip and Tahoe working thru oclp is not a priority" sounds like you are expecting the OCLP team to prioritize like a software vendor. OCLP is a hobby project. If one of the developers is interested in spending time digging into T2 chip support they will do so. That doesn't guarantee success though. The T2 runs its own iOS derived operating system called bridgeOS. The level of difficulty involved in jail breaking it will be greater than solving other legacy Mac support issues.
I am not sure Tahoe would run well on any Intel MacBook Air anyway.
It should have been already patched for at least Sequoia. I’m sure there are millions who do not care about security and want to be on Tahoe and being neglected.
If you think OCLP "should have been already patched for at least Sequoia" why not go ahead and submit a patch to the OCLP team that will make it all magically work? I am sure they would welcome the help.
Clearly you don’t get it. The 2018 MacBook Air would be more than able to run Tahoe if the T2 chip was not there. Basically be forced to be on a supported version, Sonoma when Tahoe is the latest and best os
I think it is you who doesn't get it. The 2018 MacBook Air would be able to run Tahoe but would be unlikely to run it well and while Tahoe is the latest version of MacOS not everyone agrees it is the best. Even if you owned a non T2 Mac, OCLP does not yet officially support Tahoe. It's a moot point though because OLCP doesn't support T2 Macs at all.
I don't know if they will ever support T2 Macs. Clearly its a difficult problem to solve and perhaps not worth the time and effort given that Tahoe is the last version of MacOS that will run on Intel Macs and most T2 Macs officially support Sequoia and four of them officially support Tahoe.
amaze1499
macrumors 68000
Intel Macs that can run Tahoe natively are the Mac Pro (2019), MacBook Pro 16-inch (2019), MacBook Pro 13-inch (2020, four Thunderbolt 3 ports), and iMac (2020).
Macs that have an Intel and T2, can run Sequoia, but cant run Tahoe:
- iMac Pro (2017) — first ever T2 Mac, already dropped
- Mac mini (2018)
- MacBook Air (2018, 2019, 2020 Intel)
- MacBook Pro 13-inch (2018)
- MacBook Pro 15-inch (2018)
- MacBook Pro 13-inch (2019, two Thunderbolt 3 ports — the lower-spec one)
- MacBook Pro 15-inch (2019)
- MacBook Pro 13-inch (2020, two Thunderbolt 3 ports — again the lower-spec one)
OCLP cant get past the T2. And very likely wont, considering the development cost / user base ratio and all alternatives when looking at the after market for M2 M3 machines. The necessity to run Tahoe on those machine is simply not given.
Everyone wants to use OCLP, but hardly anyone is prepared to pay for it. Hoping you can prove me wrong.
Come on. OCLP is dead. Nothing's coming from it anymore. By the time anything's released, macOS 27 will already be out, and nobody will want macOS 26. I mean, we're already on macOS 26.3—soon to be macOS 26.4. If they can't manage it, they should just say so. They're not even releasing anything for non-t2 Macs. There hasn't even been a new OCLP version for macOS 15 in six months...
Since the lead developer left, absolutely nothing's been happening.
Since the lead developer left, absolutely nothing's been happening.
Very detailed and all correct except perhaps for Sequoia support. I think it has about 18 months left at this point but support for the current version of Xcode will end with the Xcode 26.4 released. In practice this means that the Macs you listed will soon no longer be useful for iOS and MacOS development.
It really doesn't matter when macOS 27 is released since it won't run on any Intel Macs anyway. Given the value proposition of Tahoe on old hardware is questionable I am not surprised progress on Tahoe support in OCLP has slowed down so much. I think the OLCP team actually lost two major developers, that can't of helped either.
Tahoe is also the first macOS version not to support any traditional Intel Macs, it only supports T2 Macs.
I agree about the release of 27. But even if OCLP support for Tahoe came only next year, it would mean another year of security updates for e.g. iMacs with Kepler cards.
I could even imagine that, since Tahoe is the last release for any Intel machine (including the expensive MacPro), Apple might even provide security updates for a longer time than usual (at least if a major security leak becomes public). What do you think about that?
Last edited: