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
I personally have never been against OCLP, I have used it, and it works very well for what it is. I know the comment wasn't directed at me, but I was still curious about it. In my case if OCLP has done anything to help me, it's helped me see the direction Apple has taken as a company and with their desktop OS. I'm not sure if I want to continue to support that by purchasing a new Mac. Apple would have to show me something genuinely appealing that I need to help me decide to get a new mac. macOS already does what I need it to, and to add security updates, and new features I probably won't use enough to make the cost worth it, just doesn't seem to make it worth it to me.
BTW, the other reason I would choose a new machine over using a project such as OCP is mainly for support in terms of from Apple, and the developers of the software I use, if I were to ever need it.
Apple does a fairly decent job supporting older Macs. The 2017 iMac Pro will have beed supported for almost a decade when it stops receiving patches.
I am using a five year old Intel iMac but I am not going to argue that it "performs better than apple Silicon computers in all respects". Its better for running Windows apps, but that's about it now.
Exactly as you say, man 😉 And besides, we will probably feel a real difference in 2027 compared to buying a Mac today.
In my case, for example, I'm ultra-satisfied with my late 2013 iMac which with Sonoma and OCLP flies and is ultra-stable (see my Signature at the bottom of the post; but if you use a mobile device put it in landscape or the Signature doesn't appear).
When I use my friends' Silicon Macs, I just notice that they turn on almost immediately but then, in the Finder, the perceived speed and efficiency is identical to my Mac in every situation.
Of course I know I can't expect lightning-fast video processing and compression, but not being a video maker I don't mind.
Finally, thanks to BetterDisplay Pro, I discovered that my iMac's display goes HiDPI and the apparent definition, in common use, is equal to that of Studio Display...
Apple Silicon disappointed me with its tests and speed. For example. The video was processed in 34 minutes on M2. On a 2011 Intel Mac computer with a WX7100 graphics card, the processing took 27 minutes. Apple Silicon turns on quickly. Intel Mac turns on quickly too. Offices start instantly on both computers. One disappointing thing is that Apple Silicon is thinking slower. Intel Mac thinks faster. I'm more comfortable working with an Intel Mac computer. The sound in both computers is good. There is one disappointment, the sound volume level in Apple Silicon is quieter. There is not enough voltage. In the parallels desktop emulator, the Battlefield game slows down. On an intel mac, you can play smoothly in the parallels desktop emulator. It slows down to work in two-dimensional graphics on an Apple Silicon computer, with only 39 FPS. I'm very comfortable working on an Intel Mac 169 FPS computer. The question is, who needs an Apple Silicon computer?If the computer is new, it does not mean that it is better. We need to look at all the characteristics so that we can safely draw conclusions. Only honestly!!! I definitely don't like the Apple Silicon computer. One disappointment! No offense!
Oh, I'm not able to hear the singing of the fans from my 'old' Macs: possibly the only time I have been grateful for tinnitus . . . LOLYour answer is in your question. Many people with old computers that work ok don't want to be forced to upgrade or can not afford it. It is a combo of the Apple bottom line and their own standards for acceptable snappy performance, the usual US vulture capitalism and market research. The apple silicon Macs are very nice and quiet and do hard processes with passive cooling that are unthinkable on Intel. Ah well. Not hard to figure out their switch from Intel when you have heard the singing of the fans from your old Macs for long enough
Ubuntu works too.
The OCLP programmer left us and went to apple. I think he did the wrong thing!An intel computer performs better than apple Silicon computers in all respects.
You are of exactly the same opinion as I am!!
I apologize for my enigmatic message, but there it goes:
In my opinion, this whole discussion is not about OCLP and Mykola going to work for Apple at all...
For those old enough in these unsupported Mac forums will remember facts that corroborate my beliefs.
But sincerely, I want to believe that I am wrong, I really do! And no, I am not going to talk about this subject and explain myself and if you have no clue what I am talking about, try not to be naive and open up your eyes.
Remember, this is not the forum to discuss that!
I am very grateful to Mykola and all the Devs for their commitment and very hard work. Without them, my 3 unsupported Macs would had gone a long time ago.
I wish @khronokernel the best of luck at Apple! They are very fortunate to have him there.
Thank you all and have a great week!
In my opinion, this whole discussion is not about OCLP and Mykola going to work for Apple at all...
For those old enough in these unsupported Mac forums will remember facts that corroborate my beliefs.
But sincerely, I want to believe that I am wrong, I really do! And no, I am not going to talk about this subject and explain myself and if you have no clue what I am talking about, try not to be naive and open up your eyes.
Remember, this is not the forum to discuss that!
I am very grateful to Mykola and all the Devs for their commitment and very hard work. Without them, my 3 unsupported Macs would had gone a long time ago.
I wish @khronokernel the best of luck at Apple! They are very fortunate to have him there.
Thank you all and have a great week!
If the new operating system slows down on older computers, then it makes sense to replace the old one with a more powerful one. And if the new system works fine on older computers, I have a question, WHY does Apple limit the new operating system to some obscure T2 chips or blocks (AVX2) or something else??? Is this called security? No. This is a real mockery and violence against the people. OCLP protected us at a time when Apple was limiting us to a chip. We paid them money for OCLP work. And now OCLP has left and gone to Apple. I consider this a real betrayal. Everything is logical.
Can we just close this thread now as it has nothing to do with the topic.
Like what the actual crud is going on. You are should be fortunate for all of the hard work over the years to keep old unsupported Macs alive. Without OCLP and Dosdude1 you all would have had to invest in new Macs. The fact that one of the main developers got a job with Apple is incredible and they should be rewarded with all of the hard work they have done over the years. Lets end the fighting and negativity. If you can't then get out of this thread please. Also lets not jump to conclusions that OCLP is dead. Just because one of the main developers has left does not mean that others can't continue making the patcher compatible with Tahoe. The real focus should also be trying to reverse engineer Rosetta. If that can be done there might be a possibility to keep old macs alive once Intel is dropped for good that is if you can make a program that can take ARM based code run on a X86 platform. Anyways like I said lets end the fighting and be grateful for all of the hard work from the Devs over the years.
I would like to keep it open to see the progress of users already running it on unsupported machines. I hate when people are greedy and have to ruin a good thing going like this thread.
OCLP is not going anywhere anytime soon, regardless of if Mykola is able to work on the project or not. There are many other developers working on the project as well, who will continue development on it throughout the lifecycle of Tahoe. Now, of course next year when Apple completely drops support for Intel, that’s it... No more binaries compiled for Intel, and there’s nothing anybody can do about that. So only at that point is when development and work on OCLP will stop. So, everyone can rest assured that every effort will continue being made to achieve as much legacy system compatibility with Tahoe as possible.
Thank you Collin for the clarification on the limited future of OCLP development. The departure of Mykola rattled many, perhaps now the dust can settle and we can move on calmly?
Guys, I realise that some have not experienced the birth and history of OCLP.
Although @dosdude1 is credited for helping to create the OCLP application, and his wonderful Dosdude1’s Patch allows many users to use Catalina on very old Macs, in the interest of truth we must remember that the OCLP’ founder and main architect was @khronokernel (aka Mykola Grymalyuk), with the @dhinakg friend.
His great supervision and work we can SEE with our own eyes, and we can understand and appreciate it if we examine the contents of Dortania's site with all the 'Actions', ‘Issues’, news sections, etc.
Then there is a host of khronokernel’s friends and collaborators who have helped overcome great obstacles. I won't mention them here one by one and the 'credits' can be found on Dortania's OCLP page.
So, basically: @khronokernel & @dhinakg corresponds to OCLP as Steve Jobs & Steve Wozniak corresponds to Apple 🤗
Tahoe Dev b2 is out. I am patiently waiting.
AppleHDA was remove on this beta. The only solution I found, until now, is VoodooHDA
I got myself into a little mess with FileVault enabled in Tahoe Beta 2 on my HackMini8,1. FileVault would not accept my password. I booted into Tahoe Beta Recovery, but was unable to unlock and decrypt through "normal" mechanisms. I was able unlock and decrypt by booting into Tahoe Recovery as follows:
After decryption is complete ('diskutil apfs list' reports FileVault 'No' for your Tahoe Beta Volume), reboot. You should now be able to boot and login to your Tahoe Beta Volume without FileVault.
EDIT: Credit - ChatGPT
- Boot Tahoe Beta 2 Recovery
- Select Tahoe Beta Volume to recover
- Open Utilities > Terminal
- execute 'diskutil apfs listUsers [Tahoe Beta Volume] to view user UUIDs and note the UUID for 'Local Open Directory User' (where Tahoe Beta Volume is /dev/diskXsY)
- execute 'diskutil apfs decryptVolume [Tahoe Beta Volume] -user [UUID noted in step 4]
- when prompted for password, enter your user password for your Tahoe Beta Volume
After decryption is complete ('diskutil apfs list' reports FileVault 'No' for your Tahoe Beta Volume), reboot. You should now be able to boot and login to your Tahoe Beta Volume without FileVault.
EDIT: Credit - ChatGPT
Last edited:
Polaris appears to be fully supported now in Tahoe Beta 2. As others have noted, I don't have audio after the Tahoe Beta 2 upgrade. Note that my HackMini8,1 has a Radeon RX 560x (like the real iMac19,x). In order to perform the Beta 1 -> Beta 2 upgrade, I needed to complete the upgrade with the dGPU disabled (UHD630 iGPU only). After the upgrade completed, I enabled the dGPU for normal graphics operation.
Since I'm using WhateverGreen.kext, I disabled dGPU for the Beta 1 -> Beta 2 upgrade by specifying boot-arg -wegnoegpu. After the upgrade completed, I removed the boot-arg.
EDIT: Easy upgrade from Tahoe Beta 1 -> Beta 2 on my HackBookPro6,2 (SMBIOS MBP6,2 / non-metal Nvidia Tesla Graphics). No graphics acceleration and no Wi-Fi (since there are no OCLP post-install patches), but still amazed that the Tahoe installation was so smooth.
Since I'm using WhateverGreen.kext, I disabled dGPU for the Beta 1 -> Beta 2 upgrade by specifying boot-arg -wegnoegpu. After the upgrade completed, I removed the boot-arg.
EDIT: Easy upgrade from Tahoe Beta 1 -> Beta 2 on my HackBookPro6,2 (SMBIOS MBP6,2 / non-metal Nvidia Tesla Graphics). No graphics acceleration and no Wi-Fi (since there are no OCLP post-install patches), but still amazed that the Tahoe installation was so smooth.
Last edited:
On my iMac 27, 2011, the Tahoe beta 2 system only works if installed on top of the sequoia system. Everything goes well from a clean install to a clean disk. But when registering at the privacy stage, it restarts. The sound is there, the keyboard and mouse are working. A video card without an accelerator, although it knows the WX7100 video card. It loads faster than the Sequoia system by 7 seconds. For example, sequoia loads 17 seconds before the end. The Tahoe loads in 10 seconds. So the system is lighter? Applications open faster than in the Sequoia system. That's all for now.
Yes - CoffeeLake.
Based on my own experience, I don't see any technical reason why macOS Tahoe dropped support for macMini8,1 and iMac19,x. Of course, Apple could continue to remove components with subsequent Tahoe Beta versions (like they did with AppleHDA).