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 Might Support One Fewer Mac Than Previously Rumored
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, the amount my “playable on mac” section in steam dropped still irritates me
As I said in another comment they just introduced a new M3 variant, so it’s gonna be quite a while on that one, probably 2031 or 2032.
That may be a more likely delineator
MacOS as an appropriate alternative to Windows on the desktop (the selling point for all users), and one that is a full unix (the additional selling point for pro users) is the biggest single reason people use Macs, after that is the ecosystem and integrated services. I dont think it would save any money at all, in fact I think it would kill Macs off entirely
Also they have to maintain Darwin and most of the other layers and APIs anyway for iOS etc anyway
Some of the components of Rosetta 2 are integrated into the silicon, support for x86_64 memory ordering and specific x86 flags to use it and other execution optimizations are baked into AS chips. Just opensourcing the software wouldnt be all that useful. That said I doubt Apple will remove any of that any time soon, outside anything else it enables a lot of useful tools in the virtualization/emulation space used by a lot of professionals (me included).
Anyone else concerned about the incredible amount of e-waste they will create if they don't start supporting the M series longer? I guess you could put Linux on it, but that's probably not realistic for the vast majority of people. At least with the Intel based ones you could run Windows on it until it dies.
The Intel-based ones can't run Windows after October; they can't 'officially' run Windows 11...
Microsoft is creating an incredible amount of e-waste this fall, I'm still surprised governments (hello EU?) aren't up in arms about it...
The problem really is, '32-bit Intel apps' is a shortcut/euphemism/etc for Carbon. That's both why they wanted to drop 32-bit Intel apps (it lets them remove a lot of pre-NeXT baggage... especially if they were anticipating the ARM transition) and why people are still bitter about it (a lot of software that had barely made it to Intel OS X obviously never got rewritten away from Carbon).
But out of all the transitions, I suspect that dropping the classic OS and dropping 32-bit Intel are the two that left the most software behind.
Windows 11 will still support that PC with same CPU as the 2020 Intel Mac for another 8 years at least
eta: I’m wrong on this
Last edited:
All the Intel processors starting with the 6xxx or 7xxx, I forget, have on-processor TPM 2.0. It's just that on the Macs, I don't believe there's a way to enable it in the UEFI and use it.
M1 still has many, many years left of macOS updates.
Not if they stick to 6 OS versions for the MBA. This year's will be the 6th for the 2020 M1...
Ice Lake CPUs (which is what's in that 2020 Intel MBP) has TPM 2.0 built in to the CPU.
"Sticking to 6 OS versions" is dogma for Intel architecture for macOS. Ten years for Apple Silicon is a more pragmatic forecast.
And what do you base that on, other than wishful thinking?
The 6-OS-versions-for-the-MBA rule dates back to the 2017. The 2018/2019 models with Intel 8xxx processors got dropped after Sonoma, while 8xxx processors in 2018/2019 MacBook Pros got Sequoia support.
And are you talking about 10 actual versions, or 8 versions + 2 years of security-only patches?
Apple will support M1–M3 Macs for years since it's a custom ARMv8 architecture, a shift from Intel CPUs that Apple couldn’t fully control. macOS will definitely scale across ARM versions, ARMv8, v9, etc, similar to early iPhone transitions.
Also, M1 Mac's user base is huge, still runs Apple Intelligence, and shares the same software ecosystem as M2, M3, and M4. The only way I see Apple dropping M1 would be for systems with less than 12GB RAM, but even that would get an uproar.
Last edited:
Think of Apple Silicon more like iOS Axx chips. Those get 7-8 years of support.
Since computers typically have longer duty cycles than phones, adding an extra year or two (now without Intel limitations) of current OS makes sense.
If it’s 8+2 or 10+2 is anyone’s guess.
I spent around $8K 8 years ago on a fully-maxed out iMac Pro and it is still running incredibly strong. There is no logical reason for Apple to cut this machine off except for a money grab. I've been exclusively using Apple for 20 years now and I'm growing more and more impatient with them. It's sad...
Wish they'd just allow it without official support. Add some warning but still let you do it without needing 3rd party tools.
I just installed 15.5 on my 2016mbp and it works perfectly fine. Sucks I have to use OpenCoreLegacyPatcher to do it though.
I just installed 15.5 on my 2016mbp and it works perfectly fine. Sucks I have to use OpenCoreLegacyPatcher to do it though.
Cut off Intel once for all. Dedicate the free ressources to fix 90% of the most annoying bugs existing in MacOS today and finish the features that were announced ages ago.
Give us SnowTahoe.
The emoji I would use to underline this message doesn’t even exist yet. But the future looks bright.
Give us SnowTahoe.
The emoji I would use to underline this message doesn’t even exist yet. But the future looks bright.
iPad Pro is treated like a computer. It gets 6-7 years.
iPhone gets 6-7 years.
Mac has historically received 6-7 years. No reason to believe M1 is any different.
Intel just last week released microcode updates for 8th gen Core processors from 2017. Let's not pretend Intel is the limitation here.
Opencore runs the latest OS on ancient Macs so well it makes you wonder why Apple doesn’t just support them natively. That would be an amazing feature to announce… “our new OS brings back support for old Macs to cut down on e-waste”. It wouldn’t even need to add any bloat, as the required drives etc could just be installed based on the hardware detected.
Of course there’s a logical reason. You’ve been sneaking by at under $1000/year for professional use and they’re a business not a charity.
They want you in a new Mac Studio pronto. What’s the confusion?
The word support implies they've got those "ancient Macs" in their QA test cycle. A supported Mac and a version of macOS that runs on a Mac are not the same thing.