I'm waiting for Apple to embrace the inevitable and release 10.9 - Zombie Cat.
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.
OS X Mountain Lion Drops Support for Many 2006-2008 Macs with Integrated Graphics
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm waiting for Apple to embrace the inevitable and release 10.9 - Zombie Cat.
Ah well, I knew the day would come.
I bought a second-gen white MacBook in November 2006, and it's the best computer purchase I've ever made. It still looks and feels brand new. No discoloring, no dead pixels, no damage, the screen is still beautifully bright. And most importantly it's still snappy. It boots faster than my Windows 7 desktop. I run Xcode 4 on it, no problem. I mix music with Garage Band. I do web development. Yet, even with what now looks like an underwhelming 2GB RAM, I have no performance issues.
It shipped with Tiger, I skipped Leopard, but I bought both Snow Leopard and Lion. Now that the writing is on the wall with Mountain Lion, I expect I'll get one of the upcoming revisions to the MacBook Air. But were it not for Mountain Lion and the inevitable version of Xcode that requires it, I could go on using the same MacBook for years. I hope the next Mac I buy serves me as well.
I bought a second-gen white MacBook in November 2006, and it's the best computer purchase I've ever made. It still looks and feels brand new. No discoloring, no dead pixels, no damage, the screen is still beautifully bright. And most importantly it's still snappy. It boots faster than my Windows 7 desktop. I run Xcode 4 on it, no problem. I mix music with Garage Band. I do web development. Yet, even with what now looks like an underwhelming 2GB RAM, I have no performance issues.
It shipped with Tiger, I skipped Leopard, but I bought both Snow Leopard and Lion. Now that the writing is on the wall with Mountain Lion, I expect I'll get one of the upcoming revisions to the MacBook Air. But were it not for Mountain Lion and the inevitable version of Xcode that requires it, I could go on using the same MacBook for years. I hope the next Mac I buy serves me as well.
Thankfully I upgraded all my Macs this year and late last year. However I can see how the lack of support is frustrating for people. I have a few friends that use the affected MacBook and they are none too thrilled to be forced in to the obsolete bin. I can see their anger that they spend $1000+ on a machine only to have Apple force faze it out in a few years. Even more glad that I updated recently!
Apple wants to sell you a mac every 2.5 years and an iphone every 18 months. It's a corporate strategy that will lead them to the much desired 1.000.000.000.000 us $ market evaluation. 
Strange how Microsoft seem like the good guys these days... Then again we all knew this was going to happen sooner or later!
I used to own a BlackBook but got rid of it when they were still selling like hotcakes!!
Looking forward to getting a late 2012 MacBook Pro with ML sometime before Christmas though! Nobody designs laptops better than J. Ive!
Strange how Microsoft seem like the good guys these days... Then again we all knew this was going to happen sooner or later!
I used to own a BlackBook but got rid of it when they were still selling like hotcakes!!
Looking forward to getting a late 2012 MacBook Pro with ML sometime before Christmas though! Nobody designs laptops better than J. Ive!
I'm afraid that's not true. If the EFI isn't 64-bit then the kernel can't address the 64-bit memory space. The kernel isn't a boot loader.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4287
Nice - the machine is solid - I didn't see any reason why they would drop support.
Lion is a bloated piece of crap. It uses 2 GB of RAM just to boot up.. that's absolutely ridiculous.
....The last "Snow" OS dropped support for an entire processor architecture Apple had been touting and using for 12 years >_>
By the way, there's still a way to assign a keyboard shortcut to show all windows of the current application, Exposé style. Just look for "Application windows" under "Mission Control" in System Preferences. Or you can use MagicPrefs or BetterTouchTool to use a gesture on your Magic Mouse or trackpad to activate it. Not as good as the old, but still a good workaround.
I wonder how many people who are distressed over this are the same ones that a few years back were telling ticked off G5 owners to "move on" and "get a modern system."
Yes, but that was because Apple basically acknowledged that 10.0 was beta-level software.
Exactly. And at the time many pointed out that they'd be whining when their systems were dumped.
G5 dumped, intel users: "suck it up".
Core duo dumped, 64 bit chip users:"suck it up".
Now the low end of those users are dumped, and as expected, the hypocritical whining.
I saw this day coming for my Early '08 BlackBook... I just did not thing they would announce a new OS so soon.
A good way to decide to get a new computer is when you max out your software upgrade availability. I've run my computer for four years (archaic for technology), and it runs like a charm- a bit slow in some areas. But it's time for an upgrade... a 13' MacBook would do nicely.
A good way to decide to get a new computer is when you max out your software upgrade availability. I've run my computer for four years (archaic for technology), and it runs like a charm- a bit slow in some areas. But it's time for an upgrade... a 13' MacBook would do nicely.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
I prefer the text, it's quicker. But now I understand, thank you.
jll62 said:
I prefer the text, it's quicker. But now I understand, thank you.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
--duplicate---
--duplicate---
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
I prefer the text, but is there a way to do this without a trackpad, say for those of us who think trackpads suck, one reason I don't have a laptop. Plan to get an iPad, but then your actually touching what your working with.
ArtOfWarfare said:
I prefer the text, but is there a way to do this without a trackpad, say for those of us who think trackpads suck, one reason I don't have a laptop. Plan to get an iPad, but then your actually touching what your working with.
I can't say that I'm surprised by this. It's very clear to me that Apple has had zero interest in supporting these graphics cards for several years now. Many longstanding bugs remain unfixed (editing in iPhoto and Aperture means extreme frustration as the screen gets corrupted constantly, having to get out and back in), and it feels like Apple saying "Screw you for not giving us more money and buying a newer machine."
More generally, I wonder if this means Apple is moving to drop support for Macs more quickly, as with iOS devices. Will new Macs only get OS updates for 3 years as with iOS? Hopefully not that soon, but it will be interesting to see.
Mountain Lion will be the first version for which I won't own a supported machine at the time of release. I don't buy new Macs very often (Apple must hate me), but it's never been a problem staying current until now. My 2002 Power Mac, the lowest end model at the time, stayed current for 7.5 years, through 5 major OS revisions (10.1.2 - 10.5.8). My 2008 Mac mini will apparently only stay current for 4 years and through 3 major revisions (10.5.x - 10.7.x).
I've been wanting a new iMac for quite some time, due in large part to the above GMA 950 issues (but I hate to reward the company for refusing to fix their shoddy lower end stuff). Been very close to pulling the trigger on a refurb 2011 i7 iMac. But now that the OS release schedule is officially being accelerated, and there's a possibility that hardware end-of-life will also be accelerated, I'm not buying until at least the next hardware revision.
And even then, how long will it be supported? Through 10.10.x, EOL in 2015 when 10.11 "Look at that bitch Chantelle with her new shoes, she think she cute" comes out? (Apple officially runs out of good catty names, stolen from slashdot)
More generally, I wonder if this means Apple is moving to drop support for Macs more quickly, as with iOS devices. Will new Macs only get OS updates for 3 years as with iOS? Hopefully not that soon, but it will be interesting to see.
Mountain Lion will be the first version for which I won't own a supported machine at the time of release. I don't buy new Macs very often (Apple must hate me), but it's never been a problem staying current until now. My 2002 Power Mac, the lowest end model at the time, stayed current for 7.5 years, through 5 major OS revisions (10.1.2 - 10.5.8). My 2008 Mac mini will apparently only stay current for 4 years and through 3 major revisions (10.5.x - 10.7.x).
I've been wanting a new iMac for quite some time, due in large part to the above GMA 950 issues (but I hate to reward the company for refusing to fix their shoddy lower end stuff). Been very close to pulling the trigger on a refurb 2011 i7 iMac. But now that the OS release schedule is officially being accelerated, and there's a possibility that hardware end-of-life will also be accelerated, I'm not buying until at least the next hardware revision.
And even then, how long will it be supported? Through 10.10.x, EOL in 2015 when 10.11 "Look at that bitch Chantelle with her new shoes, she think she cute" comes out? (Apple officially runs out of good catty names, stolen from slashdot
)
Another good reason to buy the discrete graphics mini; Intel graphics have long been the archilles heel in Macs. Don't be surprised to see history to repeat further down the line.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
I refused to buy any Mac with integrated graphics. The first one I have even been considering is the current 11" air, and only under 2 conditions, 1) if it was my second Mac, or 2) there was a way to add a graphics card, thunderbolt breakout box or integrated directly into the thunderbolt display.
I refused to buy any Mac with integrated graphics. The first one I have even been considering is the current 11" air, and only under 2 conditions, 1) if it was my second Mac, or 2) there was a way to add a graphics card, thunderbolt breakout box or integrated directly into the thunderbolt display.
I agree. Lion is faster on the three Macs here (iMac, MacBookPro, MacMini) than Snow Leopard was, and works flawlessly. Many of the features in Lion I use constantly and would not want to give up.
As the guys over on The Verge put it, integrated graphics aren't to blame for the drop of support. It's about having a 64-bit EFI and 64-bit kexts for the GPUs.
Commenter "frumpsnake" mentioned this on The Verge:
"The release notes for Mountain Lion clearly say that Mountain Lion is 64-bit only and does not support 32-bit Kernel Extensions, unlike Lion which is a hybrid 32/64-bit system that can run 64-bit apps on a 32-bit kernel.
That means it requires
a) A 64-bit processor
b) A 64-bit EFI
c) 64-bit Kernel Extensions for all devices
The first one isnt a problem, since Lion dropped support for all pre-Core 2 CPUs, but b and c will be.
TUAW are 100% correct in blaming the Intel graphics processors. AppleIntelGMAX3100.kext and AppleIntelGMA950.kext are indeed 32-bit only Kernel Extensions, at least as far as Lion goes, whereas most other graphics drivers (including the X1600 and 7300 kexts) are both x86 and x64.
The other products The Verge list like the late 2006 iMacs/Macbook Pros and original Mac Pros arent excluded because of their GPUS, but because they dont have 64-bit EFIs.
Here is every supported product along with its predecessor:
iMac (Late 2006): 32-bit EFI
iMac (Mid 2007): 64-bit EFI
MacBook (Mid 2007): 32-bit kext (GMA950)
Macbook (Aluminum 2008, Plastic 2009): 64-bit kext (GF9400)
Macbook Air (original): 32-bit EFI
Macbook Air (late 2008): 64-bit EFI
Macbook Pro 13" (Original, aka Mid 2009): 64-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (15", 2.16/2.33GHz): 32-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (15", 2.2/2.4GHz): 64-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (17", Late 2006): 32-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (17", Late 2007): 64-bit EFI
Mac Mini (Mid 2007): 32-bit kext (GMA950)
Mac Mini (Early 2009): 64-bit kext (GF9400M)
Mac Pro (Original): 32-bit EFI
Mac Pro (Early 2008): 64-bit EFI
The list of supported Macs sure looks like the list of fully 64-bit machines now doesnt it?"
Take a look at the full article: http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/16/2803414/os-x-10-8-compatible-macs-developer-build
Commenter "frumpsnake" mentioned this on The Verge:
"The release notes for Mountain Lion clearly say that Mountain Lion is 64-bit only and does not support 32-bit Kernel Extensions, unlike Lion which is a hybrid 32/64-bit system that can run 64-bit apps on a 32-bit kernel.
That means it requires
a) A 64-bit processor
b) A 64-bit EFI
c) 64-bit Kernel Extensions for all devices
The first one isnt a problem, since Lion dropped support for all pre-Core 2 CPUs, but b and c will be.
TUAW are 100% correct in blaming the Intel graphics processors. AppleIntelGMAX3100.kext and AppleIntelGMA950.kext are indeed 32-bit only Kernel Extensions, at least as far as Lion goes, whereas most other graphics drivers (including the X1600 and 7300 kexts) are both x86 and x64.
The other products The Verge list like the late 2006 iMacs/Macbook Pros and original Mac Pros arent excluded because of their GPUS, but because they dont have 64-bit EFIs.
Here is every supported product along with its predecessor:
iMac (Late 2006): 32-bit EFI
iMac (Mid 2007): 64-bit EFI
MacBook (Mid 2007): 32-bit kext (GMA950)
Macbook (Aluminum 2008, Plastic 2009): 64-bit kext (GF9400)
Macbook Air (original): 32-bit EFI
Macbook Air (late 2008): 64-bit EFI
Macbook Pro 13" (Original, aka Mid 2009): 64-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (15", 2.16/2.33GHz): 32-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (15", 2.2/2.4GHz): 64-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (17", Late 2006): 32-bit EFI
Macbook Pro (17", Late 2007): 64-bit EFI
Mac Mini (Mid 2007): 32-bit kext (GMA950)
Mac Mini (Early 2009): 64-bit kext (GF9400M)
Mac Pro (Original): 32-bit EFI
Mac Pro (Early 2008): 64-bit EFI
The list of supported Macs sure looks like the list of fully 64-bit machines now doesnt it?"
Take a look at the full article: http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/16/2803414/os-x-10-8-compatible-macs-developer-build
How long have you been using Macs? They USED to release a new OS every year, and at $129. Then they slowed that down, to every other year or so in 2006.
Just looking at OS X:
Public Beta Kodiak, September 13, 2000
10.0 Cheetah, March 24, 2001
10.1 Puma, July 18, 2001
10.2 Jaguar, May 6, 2002
10.3 Panther, June 23, 2003
10.4 Tiger, May 4, 2004
10.5 Leopard, June 26, 2006
10.6 Snow Leopard, June 9, 2008
10.7 Lion, October 20, 2010
10.8 Mountain Lion, February 16, 2012
So you can see they had a major revision every year (two in 2001) since the release of OS X, until they got to Leopard. Then it was every two years. Now it's going back to every year. And at $29, I don't see a problem!
I've used every version of Mac OS starting with 7.1.2. I skipped the public beta of OS X, but installed Cheetah the day is was released. Had to do a lot of dual booting back then.
In the time between 7.1.2 and OS X 10.0, I've used 23 different versions of Mac OS, ending with Mac OS 9.2.2.
I bought a PowerMac 6100 in 1994. So in the seven years from that machine running 7.5 to Mac OS X 10.0 in 2001, Apple released 21 OS updates. That's three updates a year!
I didn't think I like them either. Then I saw the demos for Lion and wanted to try one. Then my son got a 15" MacBook Pro, and showed me what the track pad did. I just got a Magic Trackpad this week, and I love it. I don't miss the mouse at all.
QUITE SO!
Why would this be voted down? when i had my Mac Pro refurb with lion on it (which the apple staff said had Snow Leopard installed on it and i should not install SL on it) i ended up with apps that would not work including my Epson scanner 2480 which works perfectly well.
I cloned my macbook pro hard drive with snow leopard on it ran the mac pro fro a while with the Lion disk still in it ,all worked well then took Lion disk out.
The main reason for running SL for me is so i have no printer dialog issues for my Epson R2400
Last edited:
Who notices a major inconsistency?
Machines with "32-bit EFI" include many 2007 models, and all MacBooks, at least, that was what they made it seem with Snow Leopard.
I've come across this, though, might help...
Mac OS X Internals » Blog Archive » Is Your Machine Good Enough for Snow Leopard K64?
AnonMac50
----------
How many computers were actually dropped from support? 10.0-10.2 supported the same thing. You could put System 7.5.5 (released in 1996) on a 1986 Mac Plus. Isn't that 10 years of support? Then you've got several more years just support. 10.3 ran on most of the 10.2 supported computers. 10.4 came almost 2 years later and dropped computers without firewire (even though they could run it perfectly). 10.3 was supported for several years after. How many of those 23 upgrades were paid?
Machines with "32-bit EFI" include many 2007 models, and all MacBooks, at least, that was what they made it seem with Snow Leopard.
I've come across this, though, might help...
Mac OS X Internals » Blog Archive » Is Your Machine Good Enough for Snow Leopard K64?
AnonMac50
----------
How long have you been using Macs? They USED to release a new OS every year, and at $129. Then they slowed that down, to every other year or so in 2006.
Just looking at OS X:
Public Beta Kodiak, September 13, 2000
10.0 Cheetah, March 24, 2001
10.1 Puma, July 18, 2001
10.2 Jaguar, May 6, 2002
10.3 Panther, June 23, 2003
10.4 Tiger, May 4, 2004
10.5 Leopard, June 26, 2006
10.6 Snow Leopard, June 9, 2008
10.7 Lion, October 20, 2010
10.8 Mountain Lion, February 16, 2012
So you can see they had a major revision every year (two in 2001) since the release of OS X, until they got to Leopard. Then it was every two years. Now it's going back to every year. And at $29, I don't see a problem!
I've used every version of Mac OS starting with 7.1.2. I skipped the public beta of OS X, but installed Cheetah the day is was released. Had to do a lot of dual booting back then.
In the time between 7.1.2 and OS X 10.0, I've used 23 different versions of Mac OS, ending with Mac OS 9.2.2.
I bought a PowerMac 6100 in 1994. So in the seven years from that machine running 7.5 to Mac OS X 10.0 in 2001, Apple released 21 OS updates. That's three updates a year!
How many computers were actually dropped from support? 10.0-10.2 supported the same thing. You could put System 7.5.5 (released in 1996) on a 1986 Mac Plus. Isn't that 10 years of support? Then you've got several more years just support. 10.3 ran on most of the 10.2 supported computers. 10.4 came almost 2 years later and dropped computers without firewire (even though they could run it perfectly). 10.3 was supported for several years after. How many of those 23 upgrades were paid?