Windows ain't any better... just ask my Microsoft Surface Go, which was released by Microsoft in Aug 2018, and can't run Windows 11.
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 Ventura Drops Support for Older Macs, Works With 2017 and Later Machines
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't get this I have 2015 iMacs and then a 2017 iMacs as far as I can see the guts of these machines are the same yet only the 2017s can be updated. I do not believe that there is any TECHNICAL reason why this OS cannot be installed I think it is just an awful commercial decision. The thing is I would expect all the this cased iMacs to work up to OSX 10.11 and I would expect all thin cased iMacs (Intel) would work up to the same version be it OS13 or OS14 it doesn't mater but this is a mess as far as my office is concerned. half the offrice are now running the latest software and the other half are orphaned.
When Apples releases a new 27" iMac I will buy new machiones for the whole office, else we will stick with what we have got.
I did try MacMini's with Hawawi MateView (Great screen size 4:3 but the same width as the 27" iMac but no camera and rubbish speakers).
When Apples releases a new 27" iMac I will buy new machiones for the whole office, else we will stick with what we have got.
I did try MacMini's with Hawawi MateView (Great screen size 4:3 but the same width as the 27" iMac but no camera and rubbish speakers).
There is one big difference between the 2015 and 2017 models, and that is full hardware 4K 10-bit HDR HEVC decode support.
My fanless 2017 Core m3 MacBook can decode 4K 10-bit HDR HEVC videos with 25% CPU usage that a 2015 Core i7-6700K iMac can't with 100% CPU usage. That same video takes only about 10% CPU usage on my 2017 Core i5-7600 iMac.
I would not call the guts of these machines the same, the 2017 has a later generation of Intel CPU and a much better GPU. Apple has actually removed about 10GB of code from the OS install by deleting code that supported older hardware.
The later versions of what you are calling the "thin cased" iMacs are even more different internally, particularly the 2020 which is a T2 Mac.
It is unclear when Apple will release a new 27" iMac but the 27" Studio display with a Mac mini would give you the same features.
Windows 11 is the exception, not the standard.
You can run Windows 10 on a PC that shipped with Windows 7 in like 2009; 13 years is a long time.
As for W11, you can still install it on unsupported hardware…
MacOS should officially support Apple devices for 6 - 7 years, if not 7 a 8. People buy Mac’s, in part, for the quality of the hardware. That quality is pointless if you get next-to-no software support after a few years.
Is my 2017 rMBP better than my Late 2013 rMBP? In some ways, yes (sure a eff not the keyboard). But my Late 2013 still runs great and I prefer it as my travel laptop (again, keyboard). No reason it cannot run Ventura, other than Apple hates Nvidia and doesn’t want to create Nvidia drivers.
I have gotten wise to how Apple supports its hardware. So now I will only buy the base model. That way I get the best bang for the buck.
People aren't upgrading their MacBooks at the rate Apple wants to. I know people still rocking their 2012 MBP. Apple made their machines so well that people have been able to keep them for years.
This is bad for apple because it means they aren't making as much money they want. it's cooperate greed at the end of the day.
This is bad for apple because it means they aren't making as much money they want. it's cooperate greed at the end of the day.
Sadly this
Would like Apple to actually make true on their environmental friendly ideas and better support Macs for the longer term.Yeah. I have a 2012 unibody 15" MacBook Pro that I was able to install Mac OS 12 Monterey on via OpenCore Legacy Patcher, and it works pretty well. I also use a 2015 Retina 15" MacBook Pro at work and for most of my Intel Mac needs running Monterey and a Boot Camp partition of Windows 11. I did attempt an OCLP install of Ventura on that Pro, but the installation eventually went awry and wouldn't automatically transfer the OCLP EFI stuff to the internal drive (just sticking it on USB), and in an attempt to manually copy the OCLP EFI stuff to the internal drive's hidden EFI partition I accidentally deleted the Windows boot option, and trying to restore that with a Windows installer just wrecked things even more, so I had to do a Time Machine backup restore and then re-install the Windows Boot Camp partition (luckily, I backed all my Windows files up before the installation, but I still had to re-install my applications.) But with Monterey 12.6.1 installed on the Pro, I might hold off on attempting a Ventura upgrade again. (The only new Ventura features I use are Stage Manager when on my M1 Air's built-in display and the "Remove Background" option in Preview.)
Yep, I got Mac OS 13 Ventura running on my 2015 Retina 15" MacBook Pro with virtually no hassle now thanks to OCLP 0.5.1!
Well...
Apple's Poor Patching Policies Potentially Make Users' Security and Privacy Precarious - The Mac Security Blog
Apple's practices regarding security updates are frustrating and perplexing, and may endanger users.www.intego.com
Apple clarifies security update policy: Only the latest OSes are fully patched
Apple clarifies security update policy: Only the latest OSes are fully patched
New document confirms what security researchers have observed for a few years.
arstechnica.com
Mentioned in @eryeh ’s writeup (https://blog.google/threat-analysis-group/analyzing-watering-hole-campaign-using-macos-exploits/…), this wasn’t patched for Catalina until Sept 23. NOT mentioned: This was
234 days
after #Apple patched the same vuln for Big Sur.
@Apple , randomly choosing which vulns you patch for 2 prior #macOS endangers customers.
This is utterly shameful.Apple clarifies security update policy: Only the latest OSes are fully patched
Apple clarifies security update policy: Only the latest OSes are fully patched
New document confirms what security researchers have observed for a few years.
A Mac is good for 5-6 years. This has been true since at least the original Intel transition in 2006, possibly before.
I've always thought of the cost of premium Mac ownership as being $1,000 a year, as a top-spec MacBook Pro is about $5,000-$6,000.
I think it's odd though that AppleCare is now perpetual. Hardware support for ten years, but software support that ends in year six.
I've always thought of the cost of premium Mac ownership as being $1,000 a year, as a top-spec MacBook Pro is about $5,000-$6,000.
I think it's odd though that AppleCare is now perpetual. Hardware support for ten years, but software support that ends in year six.
Nice. Any bugs that bother you?
My daughter's 2015 Retina 13" MBP is on Monterey, and I think I'm gonna keep it there for a while, but perhaps in the future I'll put macOS 13 or macOS 14 on it.
I presume some of this has to do with Intel (i.e., spectre & meltdown) vulnerabilities hitting the R&D bottom-line and potential litigation.
Mitigations for meltdown and spectre came at the cost (some substantial) of CPU performance so it's quite reasonable to assume is taking extra time to approach potential fixes (if any) while prioritizing other projects so they don't trigger potential litigation for further crippling the performance of people's machines in the name of safety yet the cost of previously advertised performance.
I think that's bad, too.
But I also never believed that Apple would fix all security vulnerabilities in old versions. There were occasional signs of that. Since my Macs were always up-to-date enough, I wasn't affected.
Since Apple mostly patches old versions but is quite intransparent about what has really been patched, users are kept in a false sense of security. Apple never claimed that old macOS versions would be patched.
Now Apple has at least given a hint about what is going on.
Apple wants to invest as little as possible in old macOS versions. That has probably always been the case, even if there was no CPU architecture switch at all. A CPU architecture switch reinforces this, of course.
Bad for Mac users. Especially bad in the future when you can't install alternative operating systems on AppleSilicon as easily as on Intel Macs.
As far as I know, it doesn't matter that much for macOS. The macOS kernel (XNU) has always worked differently (4/4 split) and has therefore always been slower. Because of the way macOS works, the mitigations did not make it slower resp. some of the mitigations were not necessary.
I can be wrong.
Does Apple maintain APFS in older macOS?
Using version numbers, it’s possible to track changes in critical sub-systems like APFS within macOS. According to those, APFS was updated twice while Catalina was in security-only maintenanc…
eclecticlight.co
Last Week on My Mac: Home truths about macOS
True or false? Apple supports macOS for three years. Apple’s security updates are sufficient. New versions of macOS are full of bugs. It’s safer to delay upgrading.
eclecticlight.co
Only one I've noticed is that sometimes Ventura won't boot; among selecting the OCLP Ventura partition during startup the loading bar will only fill a bit before freezing, so I have to restart the computer, but usually it'll boot on the second attempt. Maybe that'll be addressed in a future OCLP update.
OK thx, good to know. All the more reason to hold off for now, considering it's her primary computer.
Sounds like a user problem. Windows 11 running here on an even older 2012 laptop.
Obviously. What business doesn't. But of course no one's forced to use Ventura or--if they want to use Ventura--they're not being forced to buy new (used and refurbished are also options).