I guess I just squeaked by with my trusty Late 2008 Aluminum MacBook 13" and, of course, my wife's 2011 MacBook Air 11" should be good for a few more OS upgrades. Ahhh, progress.
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 Officially Drops Support for Some Older 64-Bit Macs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"updated graphics architecture that was designed to improve OS X's graphics subsystem going forward."
Does that mean that this would fix the lag (or at least sub 30fps) mentioned in an earlier report on the retinabooks?
Does that mean that this would fix the lag (or at least sub 30fps) mentioned in an earlier report on the retinabooks?
Woah, that was close.
My wife's iMac is the Mid 2007. I'm really glad I'll be able to take it up to Mountain Lion. I was hoping to hold off buying another iMac until one with a high density screen came out.
Our Mac Mini and Macbook won't make the cut. (The Mac Mini didn't meet the requirements for Lion even.) I've been looking at the Retina pro, but it's a little pricy right now.
My wife's iMac is the Mid 2007. I'm really glad I'll be able to take it up to Mountain Lion. I was hoping to hold off buying another iMac until one with a high density screen came out.
Our Mac Mini and Macbook won't make the cut. (The Mac Mini didn't meet the requirements for Lion even.) I've been looking at the Retina pro, but it's a little pricy right now.
Why not? My late '06 MBP will run Lion, despite the 5-year difference in release dates.
That being said, I understand why my machine won't be supported, as it's 32-bit. But dropping Mac Pro support is just stupid, especially since they lack a product for users of older Mac Pros to upgrade to.
We have a few people like this at work and they annoy the hell out of me and I am not even a Windows user.
These people are not in scientology or living in North Korea or East Germany, they are using Windows, ffs!
There are a lot of other things more important than that in life... Live and let live...
Whoa did I read that correctly? On page 11.
OSX will only have 2 years of support on the oldest release?! I didn't know that was true.
If so then WTF thats a tad freaking short. Steve left his LSD at the office if so.
ADD: One side is MS going WAY too long, 10 year cycles and clogging up their OS, and sir speedy Mac over here, we need an in between.
OSX will only have 2 years of support on the oldest release?! I didn't know that was true.
If so then WTF thats a tad freaking short. Steve left his LSD at the office if so.
ADD: One side is MS going WAY too long, 10 year cycles and clogging up their OS, and sir speedy Mac over here, we need an in between.
Last edited:
I was not aware of Apple giving OSX away for free. Where do I go about getting that? If Apple is not charging enough for their OSX updates that's not anyone's fault but their own.
If your machine runs Lion, it's 64 bit. It probably has 32 bit EFI, which can be hacked around. It also has older video hardware, maybe that will work, maybe not.
There really isn't a good reason to drop support other than hoping people spend money on new macs. The only thing holding your machine back would be lack of 64 bit video drivers, which really should have been created years ago.
I never said Apple wasn't charging enough. The market via sales dictates whether they are or aren't. What we're talking about here is comparable to the auto industry's warranties. I don't know if you remember their ads in the 90s but having a 5, 7 or 10 year auto warranty was a big deal when most were 3 years. Maybe this is a selling point that the PC industry is heading towards. I absolutely have no problem with the fact that my 2007 Macbook Core Duo won't upgrade to Mountain Lion, but apparently people have an entitled view that Apple should support their computers longer than 2 OS revisions. I highly disagree. I want Apple to thrive not just survive.
With all that said, Microsoft should market the heck out of the fact that they are a software company that supports 10 year old PCs. Apparently, there's a market for it, and who knows, Apple may just come out with a new policy stating that they will support Macs for up to 5 years or 3 OS cycles.
Saying Apple is evil because they won't support older machines is just FUD and really shows how some people (a) are disappointed and let their emotions get the best of them and/or (b) have no common business sense.
So are these dates the dates when a particular compatible model was released? Or can it just be assumed that anything bought on or after the listed date will be ok? I mean since apple often keep some things selling a long time like the iphone3gs etc.
I bought a brand new white macbook in 2010 - can I assume it will run mountain lion?
Probably a dumb question just want to check.
I bought a brand new white macbook in 2010 - can I assume it will run mountain lion?
Probably a dumb question just want to check.
That's not "support!" Support is getting all the latest bug fixes, security patches, etc. Just having something continue to work is hardly "support."
This is indeed the case.
It's an X1600. It'll display video... and that's about it.
But honestly, I don't need much else from a video card
Completely agree. And I would consider switching back to Window$ if I hadn't paid for a new rMBP last year (long story). I just don't like the idea of rewarding them for shorting my purchases' usable lifespan.
Those touting how great windows 7 or 8 works on old pc hardware, they can install it on their intel macs that are not supported by ML.
Using 4+ year-old HW is fine, but I prefer to sell at the 3-4 year mark (or sooner) and upgrade to new hardware. The cost differential compared to buyong new and NOT selling is significant. The nice part about Macs is that they have far more resale value than PC hardware at any age.
I would greatly prefer that security OS updates be supported for a minimum of 5 years if not more. I wonder if running certain anti-malware programs (assuming they are updated to run on old OSes) will protect the older machines still using the internet? My dad is still running Tiger on a G4 iMac (sure, I can upgrade him to leopard, but... meh!).
Using 4+ year-old HW is fine, but I prefer to sell at the 3-4 year mark (or sooner) and upgrade to new hardware. The cost differential compared to buyong new and NOT selling is significant. The nice part about Macs is that they have far more resale value than PC hardware at any age.
I would greatly prefer that security OS updates be supported for a minimum of 5 years if not more. I wonder if running certain anti-malware programs (assuming they are updated to run on old OSes) will protect the older machines still using the internet? My dad is still running Tiger on a G4 iMac (sure, I can upgrade him to leopard, but... meh!).
I'm not tremendously upset that my 2007 MacBook doesn't support ML, I don't use it any more. The keyboard died, along with the battery and it's not worth replacing. But I do find it quite entertaining that my 2007 Dell D830 (on which I have replaced both of the above for 1/4 the cost) runs ML just fine
That, and the patent trolling are good reasons that Apple won't be receiving another penny from me despite being a hardcore Mac-ite since I departed the Amiga in 1996 with my Peforma 630
That, and the patent trolling are good reasons that Apple won't be receiving another penny from me despite being a hardcore Mac-ite since I departed the Amiga in 1996 with my Peforma 630
That's a pity for those who own 64 bit Macs with 32 bit EFI. I tried Mountain Lion on a 2007 iMac upgraded from Lion and it was running great, faster than Lion. Something like 2006 Mac with enough RAM should handle Mountain Lion just fine. That should be hackable right?
Well, I really don't mind keeping Lion on my Macbook. I don't care about the latest graphics wizardry on my 4 year old machine or a 64 bit kernel or Notification Center or whatever latest. What is irritating though is those apps (like Reminders, Notes) that Apple wants to sell as "operating system features" like they are the peak of current technology or so graphics intensive or I don't know what. I've been waiting for a decent solution since iCloud was introduced, for syncing notes/reminders (don't tell me about Mail/iCal, ugh!) and usually end up using third party tools. Apple has been totally incompetent on this. I wouldn't mind buying them on the Mac App Store like I did with Facetime on Snow Leopard. But I don't see that happening. And there is no good reason for that. They just don't want to.
What's gonna add insult to injury is removing Messages.app from my Lion machine, should that finally happen. I've been using it a lot (better than typing on an iPad/iPhone when I'm home). This whole artificial limiting of minor but user satisfying features sometimes drives me nuts!!
Has anyone got a link to where it states that Apple will drop support for my OSX 10.7 when they launch 10.8? I want to read what it says.
Because that's not an artificial limitation, at all...
...It's not like run of the mill PC hardware running a 32-bit BIOS can boot a 64-bit Mac OS kernel.
I see your point but I feel like I should say that I'm running an '07 Core 2 Duo Windows PC with an upgraded graphics card that runs everything I throw at it. Granted I'm not running servers or compiling, but it run's recent AAA game titles just fine @ 1680x1050. It could certainly run any available OS if the developer cared.
Seems a tad "perkier" on mine. It may just be a placebo effect, but either way I am happy with ML so far.
I was actually kind of surprised to learn that my partner's 2006-era 17" C2D iMac actually supported Lion, so that it isn't supported by Mountain Lion doesn't really take me by surprise at all. The day had to come that the older Intel machines were finally outstripped by OS X.
phew my Mid/late 2007 MBP lives another day, having replaced the DVD with a second HDD (1TB in each bay) it'd be hard to "downgrade" to a new machine with less space