The main discussion I see in this thread is those confused between the 32 bit processors and the 32 bit EFI. The chances of Apple dropping all 32 bit EFI only machines in 10.7 is not as likely to happen as them simply dropping 32 bit processors. Does that mean Apple can't do both at the same time in 10.7 should they want to? No, it doesn't.
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.
Will Apple drop 32-bit support with Lion?
- Thread starter pineapple216
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The main discussion I see in this thread is those confused between the 32 bit processors and the 32 bit EFI. The chances of Apple dropping all 32 bit EFI only machines in 10.7 is not as likely to happen as them simply dropping 32 bit processors. Does that mean Apple can't do both at the same time in 10.7 should they want to? No, it doesn't.
http://www.ahatfullofsky.comuv.com/English/Programs/SMS/SMS.html
<<<So what is the commotion about?
Its a bit of a storm in a tea cup. The perceived problem is two-fold.
For one a limitation set by Apple is that Snow Leopards 64-bit kernel works only on Macs with 64-bit EFI. Technically a 64-bit kernel can be launched by a 32-bit EFI just fine.
The other is that Apple also disabled 64-bit kernel support for any Macbook, even those with a 64-bit EFI.
This limitation only affects the kernel!
64-bit applications (like Finder, Mail, Safari, iCal, and iChat) will run just fine (including benefits) on a 32-bit kernel in Mac OS X!
Snow Leopard is 64-bit for all users with a 64-bit CPU. The applications are, the memory space is. The ONLY THING that doesn't load into 64-bit - ON PURPOSE - is the kernel!
Why would Apple do that?
The problem is compatibility with third-party drivers. Some programs are so deeply intertwined with the OS that they reach deeply into its bowels and modify its core, the kernel - these drivers are called kernel extensions (or kext).
Rule
A 32-bit processor can only run 32-bit stuff.
A 64-bit processor can run 32-bit and 64-bit stuff.
(stuff can be system, kernel, applications, drivers, etc)
So you need a 64-bit processor to run 64-bit anything
On a 64-bit processor:
A 32-bit Kernel can run both 32 and 64 bit applications.
A 64-bit Kernel can run both 32 and 64 bit applications.
A 32-bit Kernel can load only 32-bit kexts (kernel extensions).
A 64-bit Kernel can load only 64-bit kexts (kernel extensions).>>>
<<<So what is the commotion about?
Its a bit of a storm in a tea cup. The perceived problem is two-fold.
For one a limitation set by Apple is that Snow Leopards 64-bit kernel works only on Macs with 64-bit EFI. Technically a 64-bit kernel can be launched by a 32-bit EFI just fine.
The other is that Apple also disabled 64-bit kernel support for any Macbook, even those with a 64-bit EFI.
This limitation only affects the kernel!
64-bit applications (like Finder, Mail, Safari, iCal, and iChat) will run just fine (including benefits) on a 32-bit kernel in Mac OS X!
Snow Leopard is 64-bit for all users with a 64-bit CPU. The applications are, the memory space is. The ONLY THING that doesn't load into 64-bit - ON PURPOSE - is the kernel!
Why would Apple do that?
The problem is compatibility with third-party drivers. Some programs are so deeply intertwined with the OS that they reach deeply into its bowels and modify its core, the kernel - these drivers are called kernel extensions (or kext).
Rule
A 32-bit processor can only run 32-bit stuff.
A 64-bit processor can run 32-bit and 64-bit stuff.
(stuff can be system, kernel, applications, drivers, etc)
So you need a 64-bit processor to run 64-bit anything
On a 64-bit processor:
A 32-bit Kernel can run both 32 and 64 bit applications.
A 64-bit Kernel can run both 32 and 64 bit applications.
A 32-bit Kernel can load only 32-bit kexts (kernel extensions).
A 64-bit Kernel can load only 64-bit kexts (kernel extensions).>>>
Macstories reports that the announcement mentions:
As was to be expected, essentially any Mac using a Core2Duo or newer. I assume the late 2006 iMac will be supported in later seeds. Perhaps a driver issue.
64-bit "Lion" kernel on 32-bit EFI?
I'm with you on the last statement. I still have an old MacBook Pro 2,1 (2.16 GHz Core2Duo "Merom" pre-"Santa Rosa") that has only 32-bit EFI. I cannot, no matter what hacking I've done, I can't boot it into 64-bit kernel in Snow Leopard! Will Lion somehow be different, and run in 64-bit mode even if the EFI is 32-bit. Or is there a possibility, that the EFI can undergo a radical firmware update to make it 64-bit EFI?
I'd like to know! I really don't know much about the structure of EFI (I pretty much only remember it standing for "Extensible Firmware Interface", or something like that and that it replaced the old '90's BIOS) Ok, well I just saw "Firmware" in there...?
Ok, now I looked, here's an article about it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface
I'm with you on the last statement. I still have an old MacBook Pro 2,1 (2.16 GHz Core2Duo "Merom" pre-"Santa Rosa") that has only 32-bit EFI. I cannot, no matter what hacking I've done, I can't boot it into 64-bit kernel in Snow Leopard! Will Lion somehow be different, and run in 64-bit mode even if the EFI is 32-bit. Or is there a possibility, that the EFI can undergo a radical firmware update to make it 64-bit EFI?
I'd like to know! I really don't know much about the structure of EFI (I pretty much only remember it standing for "Extensible Firmware Interface", or something like that and that it replaced the old '90's BIOS) Ok, well I just saw "Firmware" in there...?
Ok, now I looked, here's an article about it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface
So, the first developer seed of Lion doesn't run under 32-bit EFI! (1/3 of C2D Macs!)
Ok, well, I just did a little research, the late 2006 iMacs, all 17", 20", and the new 24" (incredible at the time) iMac 5.1, iMac 5,1, and iMac 6,1 respectively were all white and had 32-bit EFI. The next revisions, the iMac 7,1 and up were all aluminum and had 64-bit EFI!
So, does this mean that all Core 2 Duo Macs (like an old MacBook Pro 2,1, I still use occasionally) that have 32-bit EFI will not be supported under "Lion"? Or, as I asked in my previous post, can 32-bit EFI "Firmware" be updated to 64-bit, or will "Lion" run in 64-bit mode with a 32-bit EFI?
I'd really like to know!
Thanks in advance!
Ok, well, I just did a little research, the late 2006 iMacs, all 17", 20", and the new 24" (incredible at the time) iMac 5.1, iMac 5,1, and iMac 6,1 respectively were all white and had 32-bit EFI. The next revisions, the iMac 7,1 and up were all aluminum and had 64-bit EFI!
So, does this mean that all Core 2 Duo Macs (like an old MacBook Pro 2,1, I still use occasionally) that have 32-bit EFI will not be supported under "Lion"? Or, as I asked in my previous post, can 32-bit EFI "Firmware" be updated to 64-bit, or will "Lion" run in 64-bit mode with a 32-bit EFI?
I'd really like to know!
Thanks in advance!
Installed Lion on my MacBook 5,2 and its in 64 bit mode default.
I couldn't even get it to install on my girlfriends Black MacBook 1,1 which I believe is core duo 32bit.
I couldn't even get it to install on my girlfriends Black MacBook 1,1 which I believe is core duo 32bit.
What makes you think that? That whole EFI nonsense is a hoax. Have you ever heard Apple say anything about EFI? No, because it is irrelevant. Whether you can run 64bit code or not has absolutely nothing to do with the type of EFI you have, it is about the CPU.
You need a 64bit machine. Every Mac that has a Core2Duo or newer is a 64bit machine, capable of running 64bit code, independent of what type of EFI they have.
Apple states that Lion needs a Core2Duo or newer. If your machine has a Core2Duo or newer it will run Lion, as simple as that.
That's great to know, but why can't I run 64-but SL Kernel on a Mac with 32-bit EFI?
I would have agreed and thought everything you just said, however, the 64-bit Snow Leopard Kernel will not run on Macs with 32-bit EFI, and a developer release of Lion will not run on an iMac with 32-bit EFI but will run on an iMac with 64-bit EFI.
All this evidence seems to point to the importance of the interface's word length. I understand that any process (32-bit/64-bit) can run on a 64-bit CPU (at least with Darwin on "x86-64 ISA" (x64), and likely most other OSes), and obviously only 32-bit processes run on a 32-bit CPUs–
Though it just does seem odd that any process except the 64-bit Snow Leopard Kernel will run on a x64 CPU with 32-bit EFI. Why is that?
(I'm referring to Darwin version 10.0+ and not the 64-bit kexts without 64-bit kernel (obviously!), although many 64-bit processes will run on Darwin version 8.4 with the 64-bit BSD layer included with Tiger 10.4.4 back in Jan, 2006)
I would have agreed and thought everything you just said, however, the 64-bit Snow Leopard Kernel will not run on Macs with 32-bit EFI, and a developer release of Lion will not run on an iMac with 32-bit EFI but will run on an iMac with 64-bit EFI.
All this evidence seems to point to the importance of the interface's word length. I understand that any process (32-bit/64-bit) can run on a 64-bit CPU (at least with Darwin on "x86-64 ISA" (x64), and likely most other OSes), and obviously only 32-bit processes run on a 32-bit CPUs–
Such as the 68020 (cleaner 32-bit with integrated MMU in the '030),
386 to P6 (Core Duo was one version of P6?) with the x86 ISA Intel CPUs,
and the ARM and PPC (up to G4) RISC CPUs.
(to name some of the more successful 32-bit CPUs)
386 to P6 (Core Duo was one version of P6?) with the x86 ISA Intel CPUs,
and the ARM and PPC (up to G4) RISC CPUs.
(to name some of the more successful 32-bit CPUs)
Though it just does seem odd that any process except the 64-bit Snow Leopard Kernel will run on a x64 CPU with 32-bit EFI. Why is that?
(I'm referring to Darwin version 10.0+ and not the 64-bit kexts without 64-bit kernel (obviously!), although many 64-bit processes will run on Darwin version 8.4 with the 64-bit BSD layer included with Tiger 10.4.4 back in Jan, 2006)
Last edited:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1103213/
Thus, 64 bit only. Snow Leopard runs 32 bit EFI by default. You have too enable it running as 64 bit. If your machine is a core 2 duo, it will run Lion.
This would indicate a move too totally phase 32 bit out completely.
Last edited:
I got 10.7 to boot on my 32bit Core Duo Macbook - I installed it to a USB drive on a C2D Mac Mini and then removed the .plist that checks the Mac against a list of apple motherboards. It worked a charm - sleep doesnt work but that might because I'm on a drive thats in the Optical Disc bay.
Every MacRumors discussion about 64-bit OS X gets terribly confused. The bit-width of the kernel or EFI is irrelevant to whether or not it can run applications in 64-bit mode. Since Leopard, OS X on a 64-bit processor can run 64-bit applications using a 32-bit kernel (and most 64-bit Macs have been running a 32-bit kernel all this time). Leopard did this to retain compatibility with existing 32-bit drivers.
What people are wondering is whether or not 32-bit processors are supported in Lion. That has nothing to do with whether or not a given machine's kernel or EFI are 64-bit. It doesn't matter if they are or not.
What people are wondering is whether or not 32-bit processors are supported in Lion. That has nothing to do with whether or not a given machine's kernel or EFI are 64-bit. It doesn't matter if they are or not.
My experience and 2 cents:
While CoreDuo machines may not be supported, there is currently a bypass, as some of you know, for the developer preview that involves removing the PlatformSupport.plist after you install Lion on a external drive. I am not extremely well versed in the deep workings of Macs but I did try look in the Package Contents of the Lion installation package to see if I could modify something to bypass the board checker but to no avail. You really have to use a core 2 duo or i5 to install mac and remove PlatformSupport.plist so be able to boot up on a Core Duo 86x.
This only works if you have a handy core 2 duo or i5 available to install on. This is what I did personally:
-Installed Snow Leopard onto a external 500GB drive that I formatted to support OS X (Mac OS X Journaled)
-Used my brother-in-law's 2010 MacBook Pro with an i5 chip, even though other core 2 duos will work as I have read, to upgrade to Lion Dev Preview.
-When I was in Lion using the 2010 MacBook Pro, I booted from my external 500GB drive, I removed PlatformSupport.plist, AND changed the trackpad to not be inverted.
-I then plugged the drive into my MacBook Pro Core Duo and it booted up and worked fine for the most part. (I say most part because some apps crashed and it was a little slow, but I dont want to blame Lion seeing as I was in need of a fresh reformat, which I did and my machine has been running much better with no issues using Snow Leopard)
Now, as a 86x core duo owner with one of the first intel MBPs I do hope Lion will support 86x and I can still use this trick to get Lion running on my MBP. I do understand how the people with Core 2 Duos or better would want to lose the extra fat by removing 86x support, as I would want the same if i had a 64x machine.
Even though iLife '11 is 86x, 64x will still support it because most 64x machines can support 86x software. From what i read in this post and other places, it does seem as Apple will drop 86x support from the official GM release, but if it does, then my question is why did it support 86x in the developer preview?
While CoreDuo machines may not be supported, there is currently a bypass, as some of you know, for the developer preview that involves removing the PlatformSupport.plist after you install Lion on a external drive. I am not extremely well versed in the deep workings of Macs but I did try look in the Package Contents of the Lion installation package to see if I could modify something to bypass the board checker but to no avail. You really have to use a core 2 duo or i5 to install mac and remove PlatformSupport.plist so be able to boot up on a Core Duo 86x.
This only works if you have a handy core 2 duo or i5 available to install on. This is what I did personally:
-Installed Snow Leopard onto a external 500GB drive that I formatted to support OS X (Mac OS X Journaled)
-Used my brother-in-law's 2010 MacBook Pro with an i5 chip, even though other core 2 duos will work as I have read, to upgrade to Lion Dev Preview.
-When I was in Lion using the 2010 MacBook Pro, I booted from my external 500GB drive, I removed PlatformSupport.plist, AND changed the trackpad to not be inverted.
-I then plugged the drive into my MacBook Pro Core Duo and it booted up and worked fine for the most part. (I say most part because some apps crashed and it was a little slow, but I dont want to blame Lion seeing as I was in need of a fresh reformat, which I did and my machine has been running much better with no issues using Snow Leopard)
Now, as a 86x core duo owner with one of the first intel MBPs I do hope Lion will support 86x and I can still use this trick to get Lion running on my MBP. I do understand how the people with Core 2 Duos or better would want to lose the extra fat by removing 86x support, as I would want the same if i had a 64x machine.
Even though iLife '11 is 86x, 64x will still support it because most 64x machines can support 86x software. From what i read in this post and other places, it does seem as Apple will drop 86x support from the official GM release, but if it does, then my question is why did it support 86x in the developer preview?
Chances are that those apps crashed because they were compiled for 64bit CPUs only. No wonder a Core Duo would have no clue what to do with it and the app crashes.
If I were you I wouldn't expect to be able to run Lion on a Core Duo just by removing a simple CPU check. The closer to the release of the Gold Master the more apps and parts of the OS will be compiled for Core 2 Duo or newer...
Chances are that those apps crashed because they were compiled for 64bit CPUs only. No wonder a Core Duo would have no clue what to do with it and the app crashes.
If I were you I wouldn't expect to be able to run Lion on a Core Duo just by removing a simple CPU check. The closer to the release of the Gold Master the more apps and parts of the OS will be compiled for Core 2 Duo or newer...
That's a solid point, although since I did fresh install of snow leopard, my machine has been flawless where it was shotty before. I do want to re-upgrade to Lion again and see how much the performance improves and if there are still issues.
Some people who have tested Lion on Core Duos said performance was better than SL, even in the Dev Preview.
Also the apps that crashed didn't crash right away but worked for a little while before I got the crash. You still may be right, I just wanted to clarify my machine wasn't even close to tip-top shape when I tested it.
If people are still interested, I'll post a response after I get a chance to re-upgrade to Lion and give it a whirl.