Signed versions of OS X?

[RedCroissant]

This might not be the right forum for this, but I like this forum so we'll see how it goes.

The same way that Apple signs versions of iOS that later prevents downgrading devices unless the version is still being signed seems to be where they're going with OS X now. I might be wrong, but at least with the new macbook (and where they seem to be going with iOS devices), that target disk mode might soon become a thing of the past.

I know some Macbooks can't do it due to lack of firewire/thunderbolt ports and as long as they're making MacBook Pros with TB ports then it might hold on. However, if they go to USB-C as a standard (which is a reasonable assumption) then we might get to the point where once you've upgraded to a newer version of OS X that you might not be able to downgrade.

What do you think?

 

[DeltaMac]

I think you might be wrong
Apple provides the last 5 versions of OS X that you can still download.
Plus, the next older, Snow Leopard, is still for sale at the online Apple Store, even though no new Mac has been able to boot into Snow Leopard for more than 4 years.

OS X is a completely different product, and there's no indication at all that Apple would ever do with OS X anything similar to iOS distribution.

Your thoughts about USB-C doesn't do much to help your argument. USB-C is still a bootable protocol, assuming you have an external storage device that can boot a Mac while connected to the USB-C port.

 

[weckart]

Apple would need to find a way to lock the bootloader first. It might spell the end of Windows on Apple hardware. On the other hand it would give more impetus for hackintoshes, assuming UEFI does not already lock out Linux as has been mooted in recent years.

 

[MagicBoy]

I think it's not an issue. Internet Recovery restores the original shipping version of OS X based on the serial number.

Apple are not forcing the latest version of OS X onto Macs as they do with iOS devices.

 

[weckart]

I think it's not an issue. Internet Recovery restores the original shipping version of OS X based on the serial number.

Apple are not forcing the latest version of OS X onto Macs as they do with iOS devices.

It restores the latest version that matches your signed account IIRR.

 

[MagicBoy]

When I ran internet recovery on the 2011 having installed an SSD it put the latest version of Lion back on it, not the then current Mountain Lion.

Maybe it's changed.

(I'm not about to nuke the rMBP to find out mind!)

EDIT :
The gospel according to Apple ... (https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT201314)

Which version of OS X is installed by OS X Recovery?

• If you use the Recovery System stored on your startup drive to reinstall OS X, it installs the most recent version of OS X previously installed on this computer.
• If you use Internet Recovery to reinstall OS X, it installs the version of OS X that originally came with your computer. After installation is finished, use the Mac App Store to install related updates or later versions of OS X that you have previously purchased.

 

[chrfr]

This might not be the right forum for this, but I like this forum so we'll see how it goes.

The same way that Apple signs versions of iOS that later prevents downgrading devices unless the version is still being signed seems to be where they're going with OS X now. I might be wrong, but at least with the new macbook (and where they seem to be going with iOS devices), that target disk mode might soon become a thing of the past.

I know some Macbooks can't do it due to lack of firewire/thunderbolt ports and as long as they're making MacBook Pros with TB ports then it might hold on. However, if they go to USB-C as a standard (which is a reasonable assumption) then we might get to the point where once you've upgraded to a newer version of OS X that you might not be able to downgrade.

The absence or presence of Target Disk Mode has no bearing on whether or not you can downgrade the OS on a Mac. The current MacBook isn't even the first Mac that can't do it. The late 2008 aluminum MacBook also had only USB ports and can run anything between 10.5.5 and current versions of OS X. Both computers boot perfectly well from USB devices.
(and yes, this is not the proper forum for this topic.)

 

[eyoungren]

I think you might be wrong
Apple provides the last 5 versions of OS X that you can still download.
Plus, the next older, Snow Leopard, is still for sale at the online Apple Store, even though no new Mac has been able to boot into Snow Leopard for more than 4 years.

OS X is a completely different product, and there's no indication at all that Apple would ever do with OS X anything similar to iOS distribution.

Your thoughts about USB-C doesn't do much to help your argument. USB-C is still a bootable protocol, assuming you have an external storage device that can boot a Mac while connected to the USB-C port.

I would have to lean towards Red's thought on this.

El Capitan contains System Integrity Protection. Essentially, it locks certain invisible UNIX folders from modification. Not even the root user can modify those folders.

Lots of people are seeing that as Apple pushing devs to clean up their coding act and write their code properly, but I'm not so sure.

One of the benefits we older PowerPC/OS X users have is the fact that we can modify those folders to tweak things the way we like. In El Capitan, Apple is using SIP to prevent any modification to OS X system files. Doing that guarantees a pristine install of OS X that cannot be modified or altered. Say goodby to any kind of thing reminescent of Shapshifter or Magnifique. You get what Apple decides to give you for the GUI and that's it.

Of course, right now SIP can be turned off, but it's now more involved than simply turning off Gatekeeper. I don't believe it's far-fetched that one day we'll find Apple won't let us turn things like this off anymore. When that happens, it's a small step before Apple decides that wallpaper and placement of icons is all we should be allowed for customization of the system.

Locking the system down entirely is not a stretch by any means I think.

Just my opinion.

 

[lowendlinux]

Apple would need to find a way to lock the bootloader first. It might spell the end of Windows on Apple hardware. On the other hand it would give more impetus for hackintoshes, assuming UEFI does not already lock out Linux as has been mooted in recent years.

Thats not UEFI that's secure boot. All my boxes UEFI boot to include my latest z97 desktop.

 

[weckart]

Thats not UEFI that's secure boot. All my boxes UEFI boot to include my latest z97 desktop.

Secure Boot is a part of UEFI, so yeah it is UEFI. So far WinBoxes have not enabled this as a default otherwise you would have to look at OS-free computers or build your own in order to install Linux or other non-trusted OSes.

 

[lowendlinux]

Secure Boot is a part of UEFI, so yeah it is UEFI. So far WinBoxes have not enabled this as a default otherwise you would have to look at OS-free computers or build your own in order to install Linux or other non-trusted OSes.

But it's not correct to say because of UEFI the correct thing to say is because of secure like I said.