Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Some of the comments on here are funny, what if you brought a new car and it simply 'Stopped' receiving any support after 4 years, a mechanic is not able to fix any problems..

And how much was a top end fully laden Mac Pro in 2008? As much as a BMW?

Just buy a NEW car and stop moaning eh?.... :rolleyes:
 
Some of the comments on here are funny, what if you brought a new car and it simply 'Stopped' receiving any support after 4 years, a mechanic is not able to fix any problems..

And how much was a top end fully laden Mac Pro in 2008? As much as a BMW?

Just buy a NEW car and stop moaning eh?.... :rolleyes:

The support isn't stopped, you just wont be able to run the latest version of OS X. 10.7 should be expected to be supported for another 4 years, by then the computer is 8 years old, and will still run of course but no more updates will be made to the OS. To take your car analogy, if I bought a BMW in 2008 it's not guaranteed that it can use parts or new features for a 2012 year model.
 
I can understand that you may not have access to every new feature on an older machine if the hardware is just too puny.

But dropping support for old multi-core Mac Pros that are still useful, powerful machines and originally cost stupid money? Not good. Even worse if you're hanging on to an old Mac Pro waiting for a proper upgrade to that line.
 
very fair.

this is why im on the verge of jumping ship entirely to apple.

my notebook is a sony vaio and support has been weak.

have they invented two button mouses yet in the apple world? :p

Apple does not need a two button mouse - Actually it has had a two button system for years but today the mouse or the track pad can do way more than any two button mouse can today. Just have to get used to the gestures then you are good. I really hate using the traditional two button mouse on a Win Machine feels to archaic
 
Not surprised by this news. Technically-speaking Apple probably could have made Mountain Lion compatible with older machines, just by watering-down the bits that didn't work correctly. Like how some features in Lion (like Airdrop) only work with Apple hardware purchased in the last 18 months or so.

But it comes down to economics. Apple is not going to be making much money selling copies of Mountain Lion. So an OS update provides an opportunity to cut the stragglers off and make them think about investing in some new hardware instead. That's where the ROI kicks in for Apple.

Bottom line, I don't think there will be anything gained for those unable to update to Mountain Lion. If your Mac has managed to pass it's 5th birthday, then you should think yourself damn lucky. The current hardware on offer by Apple (especially the desktops) is pretty pitiful currently.
 
Yeah I hope those "pro" consumers don't get the new IOS 6 in their new shiny iPhone 4S. I mean it's an iPhone 4 after all you should not expect to get IOS 6 on it.

This would be really fair, at least the iphone is not even a 1000$ piece of hardware. My Mac Pro is 6 times that and it ain't getting ML neither.

Problem here is tha hardware is not going obsolet as it used to be. Right now, 80% of the "pro" consumers wouldn't need much more than C2D and 4GB of RAM so Apple needs to get planned obsolescence in their software feautures.

But you know what Apple, that wont work much longer and much less if you keep this bulshit thing, like my iPhone 4 handles TomTom but cannot handle new IOS6 Turn by turn feature. Right, thank you for thinking for me but I ain't gonna eat your ********.
 
People can't legitimately expect to receive the newest updates on machines that are 3+ years old.

Sounds a lot like an answer someone would give who got an Apple guy through the iOS devices and then stepped into Mac.

I started with a Mac and let me tell you, 3 years "old" machines should not be a problem for an OS to support.

I think some of the models are just too young to be dropped, but if this stays a one-time eff up it'll be okay in my books...

Glassed Silver:mac
 
My email to Tim Cook

Mr Cook,

I am writing to express my dismay at Apple's refusal to support the Mac Pro 1,1 with the upcoming Mountain Lion release.

When I bought this machine, I distinctly remember a flashy badge on your website proclaiming the machine was "64 bit", now I hear the machine can't run ML because it isn't 64 bit. Please tell me which is true? I don't see any way Apple can legally claim a machine is 64 bit and then 5 years later say, "oh, we didn't mean that kind of 64 bit".

As I'm sure you're aware, this machine is still perfectly capable and I'm very disappointed that Apple has decided to stop supporting it, especially given it's status as the top of the line Apple workstation, with a premium price tag attached. I had no plans to upgrade any time soon, especially as your current Mac Pro offerings are somewhat long in the tooth. Now my dilemma is whether I should stick with Apple at all. A premium product, with a significant monetary investment, demands premium support from the vendor. Apple abandoning this machine makes me question Apple's values regarding it's professional customers. After all, why pay more for a top of the line product given the knowledge that your company may decide to drop development for it at any time?
 
ke that.

I also said OSX 10.7 is a pile of ****. Because it is. I wish I could downgrade my iMac to 10.6, but as far as I know. You cant.

Umm clone your drive, or use time macheen and then clean install 10.6 then just use 10.6 system mirgration on a weekend where theres no much going on,

You make everyhting harder then it should be, trust me its on hard to downgrade at all,
 
Not a big deal. They are dropping support for computers 4-5 years old.
I would love to see my old single core windows xp computer handle windows 8.

Edit: Guess my old computer could run it afterall. My bad

Microsoft has been shrinking the kernel in order to allow a single Windows OS to run on mobile type hardware, as well as desktops and servers. This is what we will see with Windows 8. Older hardware will become unsupported by means of no device driver support. When the hardware vendors decide to stop supporting their products, the drivers will stop being maintained. Microsoft will then stop including those drivers with the operating system. You will probably be able to get old drivers to work since Windows 8, for example, is still the same major revision as Vista and 7 (ver 6.x). A next major revision of the OS is a different story however. As for CPU, x86/x64 isn't probably going away anytime too soon.

When it comes to operating systems, IMO, Microsoft and Linux are decades ahead of anyone else (excluding advance computing systems from IBM, which are different). Problem with Linux compared to Windows is lack of software development. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
I'm running a 2008 aluminum unibody macbook. 4GB Ram NVIDIA 9400M 256MB. I know it's on the list of supported machines, but only just.

Can I expect ML to run smoothly on this macbook or am I likely to experience problems since I'm near the bottom of supported specs?

You'll be fine. I've heard ML is smoother than Lion. Other Macs aren't left off because they are uncapable of running the OS, but because Apple wants them to buy new Macs. There's a thread in the ML forums dedicated to upgraded unsupported hardware, and it seems they have been able to run fine.
 
Umm clone your drive, or use time macheen and then clean install 10.6 then just use 10.6 system mirgration on a weekend where theres no much going on,

You make everyhting harder then it should be, trust me its on hard to downgrade at all,

Yeah, I never really looked into it that much.

But, support will most likely be dropped for SL, so I'm hoping ML won't be a heap
 
Some of the comments on here are funny, what if you brought a new car and it simply 'Stopped' receiving any support after 4 years, a mechanic is not able to fix any problems..

And how much was a top end fully laden Mac Pro in 2008? As much as a BMW?

Just buy a NEW car and stop moaning eh?.... :rolleyes:


But its not like that. A car has xxxxmiles or 3 year warranty which ever comes first, its always been like that, you know it, I know it, the 70yo couple accross the street know it.
Apple however has changed from providing decent support, to being greedy and telling its customers if you want to upgrade the OS you need a new system. Prior to this we upgraded out PC's when they became slow after many years which is understandable. Now a perfectly solid mac pro cannot get its OS upgraded. Funny that Windows 8 can be loaded on 8 year old computers but Apple decided it wont bother.
Apple is clearly telling its customers your 3yr system is on its last legs even though its running like a dream. SO time to throw some money at us and get a new model because thats what we want.

Apple is clearly controlling the market through updates, and these updates whether ios or osx clearly work on previous generations however Apple can play the cheeky side and add some code so that the device wont accept it or make it run slow to purposely force people to upgrade.

Once again, a computer has always been known to accept an upgrade to a newer OS application, sometimes with a simple RAM upgrade, a car has always been limited to about 3years warranty service. Its Apple thats going backwards especially with the non upgradeable retina macbook.

:mad: x11bty
 
What environmental issues??? AFAIK Apple products are more green then most other computers, aluminium aside.

Well. It's much greener to not buy a computer then to buy one. And with this apple policy they force many users to buy a new computer instead of buying a new OSX version.
 
Apple however has changed from providing decent support, to being greedy and telling its customers if you want to upgrade the OS you need a new system. Prior to this we upgraded out PC's when they became slow after many years which is understandable. Now a perfectly solid mac pro cannot get its OS upgraded. Funny that Windows 8 can be loaded on 8 year old computers but Apple decided it wont bother.
Apple is clearly telling its customers your 3yr system is on its last legs even though its running like a dream. SO time to throw some money at us and get a new model because thats what we want.
You will get OS 10.6 updates. You need to change your comment to "run the latest and greatest operating system."

That's never been guaranteed. You can run 'a' 64 bit OS, just not the most current. Granted, you can't get latest features, but you'll get bug fixes and security patches.

Are you saying that Microsoft's OS is better because it supports all HW/Drivers perfectly? (oh, maybe not perfectly, but they do support it... until it doesn't work, then they'll tell you to 'oh, go buy a new graphics card, or your BIOS isn't right, or, your Disk Drive doesn't work well with our new SATA-1 driver'... Microsoft tells you what you want to hear... until you actually want it supported).

And More importantly, how is that working out for Microsoft?

Apple is clearly controlling the market through updates, and these updates whether ios or osx clearly work on previous generations however Apple can play the cheeky side and add some code so that the device wont accept it or make it run slow to purposely force people to upgrade.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. in iOS, having a 'forked' OS that supports some things in older devices, and different things in newer devices is a bad thing... but with a Mac... it's a requirement.

In Apple it's more of... If we add a new XXX piece of hardware, and fully exploit it, how many can we add before the OS build kit becomes unwieldly in terms of size, complexity, stability, and variances in User Experience. (Oh, this combo of OS and HW, won't support this app, or this function). Better to keep it to 'all' or 'nothing' If you support this OS, all this is available to you (coder).

You've got to limit the comet's tail.

Once again, a computer has always been known to accept an upgrade to a newer OS application, sometimes with a simple RAM upgrade, a car has always been limited to about 3years warranty service. Its Apple thats going backwards especially with the non upgradeable retina macbook.

:mad: x11bty

OS is not 'Application' Kernel mode stuff has never been an 'always' thing. User Mode code, yes. at best binary compatible, maybe a recompile to get new optimizations, but sometimes you have to recode, because a library is deprecated.

There is warranty service, and there is 'unlimited upgrades' Apple still supports the box, gives the box you bought service, and will fix critical bugs through the prior release for 'just off SW upgrade path list' older hardware. I can't get the latest Engine in my 3 year old BMW from the dealer, nor can I get the latest firmware for that engine installed either.

You forget apple makes the HW and the SW 'together.' The failing of Windows was that the SW had to support the largest swath of HW. Apple tunes its SW for the HW on the market. Eventually, to take advantage of 'new stuff' it has to make a decisions to not support 'old stuff' in the HW.

I mean, if 10.7 is supporting 3 generations (old, current, newest) gives me better stability, security, performance effectiveness of those platforms, and I have an OS that gives me the same for the older, really old, and very old (10.6.9), Are you really 'not supported?'

I do think that Apple is 'leaning' its Mac OS for 'missing link' Mac/Pad transition device, and removing all 32bit support (design compromises made in 2007 for 2008/9 shipments), so it can do OTA upgrades (do I want a 130GB download, 90% of which is for platforms I don't run, and 60% of the Mac Community doesn't run), and be supportable for $19.99 for a household license?

Yes, Apple is looking at the bottom line, but they are looking at the 'experience' as well. I want a good experience... at a great price. If you want infinite upgradeability, then well, I guess you should write your own OS. Nothing is stopping you... You own the HW.
 
Last edited:
But its not like that. A car has xxxxmiles or 3 year warranty which ever comes first,

This one part made me laugh hard!! Because it has NOT 'Alway's been like that'!
And if it was, so how come some manufacturers can give their cars 7 year warranty's? Because that's longer then what Apple has given people....

Apple is clearly controlling the market through updates, and these updates whether ios or osx clearly work on previous generations however Apple can play the cheeky side and add some code so that the device wont accept it or make it run slow to purposely force people to upgrade.

I TOTALLY agree with you on this point though, I swear my iPhone 4 has been made deliberately to run slower and slower with every update, it's like it's being stuffed more and more with bloat ware, that's the user experience that I have with it. I am buying the next one but only for a better camera and more storage so long as I can replace the battery, after that I am not going to get another for a very long time.
 
Last edited:
Uh why would they want to do that?

Because dumping support pisses off users. Some will upgrade to new macs, some will be savvy enough to run 10.8 via the hack or get a hackintosh, and some will be fed up enough to jump ship for windows.

They need to find a balance between nudging people to shell out for upgrades but not making it feel like a constant money grab. This time around the forced obsolescence is too obvious.


You really should be replacing your Mac every couple of years to benefit from all the advancements and latest technologies anyway.

Thanks for giving all the Mac Pro users their biggest laugh of the day. The "new" MP that apple just released is the same machine as the one they released in 2009, only difference is a CPU swap (which people can do themselves if they have the older models).

Even the earliest mac pros are plenty powerful to run 10.8, the limitation is completely artificial.


I don't know why people keep clinging to the GPU having anything to do with this. It's strictly the fact that Mountain Lion has a 64-bit kernel only. This requires 64-bit EFI. The architecture of the machines which have 64-bit processor, but only 32-bit EFI, cannot support 64-bit EFI. This is a physical design drawback of the firmware chip used by Apple.

Sorry, but you're dead wrong.

The hackintosh crowd has 10.8 running on macs with 32 bit EFI. It's not really required to run the OS, just something Apple has set up as an arbitrary limitation. If the hackers can work around it, of course Apple could if they wanted.

And the GPU is an issue, for 10.8 to work the machine needs 64 bit video drivers. In some cases people swapped to a newer video card, in others it may be possible to hack 64 bit support.
 
Last edited:
People can't legitimately expect to receive the newest updates on machines that are 3+ years old.

It depends. I have a late 2006 MacBook, and it still feels like a fast new machine to me. No performance issues at all, even running Xcode with "only" 2MB of RAM.

I fully understand why compatibility is difficult, and I'm not going to complain. But I can also understand why some people would complain. It's not like a 2012 non-retina Pro contains amazing tech unheard of in 2006. It's brighter and faster and has some cosmetic differences, but it's fundamentally the same.
 
Apple is sticking it to all the users that bought their devices back when they were still advertising macs as "from the makers of ipod" and sticking an ipod next to the mac in the ad to ship a few computers.

Greed, obscene wealth and success has got to their heads. They got to remember though they got here because some people paid with their hard earned cash, the very same people to which they are now sticking their finger up their rectum and pretty much commanding them to buy new macs.

I've been reading some of the most ludicrous posting from the apologists, both the informed ones and the run off the mill apple web minions.

What's really pissing me off is that lion wasn't a good os to begin with. If they wanted to drop compatibility they should have done it leaving the computers with a half decent os not one step behind the service pack that is mountain lion. They made said macs have a slow, bloated os, and now a year after that they won't even allow them to upgrade.

What about then offering an option for a hassle free downgrade to snow leopard instead of the worst os in os x's history which arguably is what lion is?

Windows 8 can run perfectly well and make these core2duo macs apple obsoletes fly, let alone the mac pros. So can windows 7 and xp.
 
Actually...

Most of this "dropped support" is for Macs from 2008 and newer...machines barely 4 years old...and machines that could have been purchased late in their release (for example a "late 2008" model that was purchased in mid or late 2009...and yes, for the exact same price as when it was released in late 2008).

For a company who builds the OS and the hardware, this is unacceptable...and a major reason why Apple just doesn't live in the business space.

Actually, speaking as someone who deals with this in the corporate space you are wrong. Fortune 100 businesses are on a three year buy, use, replace cycle. The three year extended warranties are pretty much standard so by the time the machine goes out of warranty they replace since no company wants to be stuck with a repair bill for a 3-4 year old computer not worth repairing. Time is money.

Penny pinching companies are the ones that try to keep things going as long as possible (I recently saw one that was 7 years before things started distintegrating and they were forced to buy).
 
And More importantly, how is that working out for Microsoft?

Excuse me, but that is the probably the most bs argument/question I 've read all day. By the same token when apple was selling better computers than microsoft, with an arguably better os but wasn't doing well at all, one could have asked, how's that working out for apple?

You know, the question is, how's that working out for the user? I don't care how it's working out for apple, frankly, is apple are crapping up their macs, force obsoleting them and are still the world's largest tech company, why should the user care?

What kind of twisted logic is this? People are having their very expensive computers and stuck to lion for no reason other than apple wanting to shamelessly obsolete more macs and force them to get their wallet out, and they are supposed to say, sure that's a bummer, but look how great it's working out for apple...:rolleyes:

----------

Actually, speaking as someone who deals with this in the corporate space you are wrong. Fortune 100 businesses are on a three year buy, use, replace cycle. The three year extended warranties are pretty much standard so by the time the machine goes out of warranty they replace since no company wants to be stuck with a repair bill for a 3-4 year old computer not worth repairing. Time is money.

Yeah...good luck to any company aiming to be in the fortune 100 if they keep upgrading their computers every 3 years... Maybe people should feel ashamed for being penny pinchers as well and not in the fortune 100 or 500 and expect their computers to last them for more than 5 years. In any case apple is a joke in the business sector and for a good reason.
 
This has nothing to do with 5, 3 or 2 years.

First was the "new" Mac Pro update that it is a shame that a company that has made tons of money lately hasn't work NOTHING in the most expensive product they own. So I wont buy this "new" mac shame machine.
...

BI-waitforit-NGO!

it's not about a timeline here. It's about hardware performance.

Virtually every x86 piece of apple hardware is technically powerful enough to run the OSx revisions.

There are tiems when I understand the need to replace hardware. Sometimes the hardware itself just isn't fast enough or beefy enough, that it's damn near impossible to run the latest software or OS. This is no artificial barrier. This is a legitimate reason for the need to upgrade hardware.

This is not what's happening in this case.

Apple has created an artificial system requirement. The hardware in virtually every x86 based mac computer is more than adequate to run OSx 10.7 or 10.8, Regardless of bit of the firmware. There is no physical barrier to preventing you from using it. There's no shortage of ram, shortage of clock cycles, ro buss speeds or ports or .... anything hardware related.

It was apple deciding that they didn't want to rewrite a stack of drivers in 10.8. So instead fo them writing the drivers to support all their own hardware, they've just said "nope, you're cut off, buy new computer".

as consumers, that should be a big red flag.
 
Yes, but we are not talking about some 5 year old cheap MacBook, we are talking about 10,000$ Mac Pro systems marketed as "true 64-bit workstation" that are still faster than any consumer Mac even today!

I agree with your point but that's not entirely true - many of the iMacs and laptops are faster than the original quad mac pro (with benchmarks to bear that out). It only makes sense, those were quad machines and now there are plenty of quad core machines with hyperthreading. But the original mac pros are still faster than many of the machines that are supported by 10.8, as well as the advantages with ram and hard drive capacity you mentioned.

No excuse not to support these earlier machines, particularly the MP.


It's stupidly expensive to support and test software for old systems

But not nearly as much for the machines that are getting dropped in this particular update. It's not that many models, and the hardware isn't all that different than the machines that are supported.
 
Microsoft has been shrinking the kernel in order to allow a single Windows OS to run on mobile type hardware, as well as desktops and servers. This is what we will see with Windows 8.

Windows is quite modular (see "server roles") so "shrinking" doesn't imply removing anything from desktop/server systems, it means not including unnecessary subsystems on the mobiles.


Older hardware will become unsupported by means of no device driver support. When the hardware vendors decide to stop supporting their products, the drivers will stop being maintained. Microsoft will then stop including those drivers with the operating system.

This has always been the case. Manufacturers of cheap consumer devices are usually the problem, when you buy a RAID card which costs more than a Mac Pro for a server, you can be pretty confident that you'll get drivers for a long time.


You will probably be able to get old drivers to work since Windows 8, for example, is still the same major revision as Vista and 7 (ver 6.x). A next major revision of the OS is a different story however. As for CPU, x86/x64 isn't probably going away anytime too soon.

In other words, devices will continue to work with Win8, and no driver changes are needed for the most part. (And it's not strictly the overall major revision - some XP drivers work in Win7, but the graphics driver API model changed with Vista so no graphics drivers from XP will work.)


When it comes to operating systems, IMO, Microsoft and Linux are decades ahead of anyone else (excluding advance computing systems from IBM, which are different). Problem with Linux compared to Windows is lack of software development. Just my opinion.

Linux folks have to work harder than Microsoft, though, since kernel code in Linux builds against the kernel source files. Microsoft has opaque APIs, so an API version check is enough to decide whether to load a driver.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.