Apple Will End Support For Intel Macs Next Year (9to5mac.com) 29
Apple announced that macOS 26 "Tahoe" will be the final version to support Intel-based Macs, with future macOS releases running exclusively on Apple Silicon devices (that is, 2020 M1 models and newer). They will, however, continue to receive security updates for a few more years. 9to5Mac reports: In some ways, Apple has already stopped supporting some non-Apple Silicon models of its lineup. macOS Tahoe does not work with any Intel MacBook Air or Mac mini for instance. But Tahoe does still support some Intel Macs. That includes compatibility with the 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro, the 2020 Intel 13-inch MacBook Pro, 2020 iMac, and the 2019 Mac Pro.
Based on Apple's warning, you can expect that macOS 27 will drop support for all of these legacy machines, and therefore macOS 26 will be the last compatible version. These devices will continue to receive security updates for another three years, however. Going forward, the minimum support hardware generations will be from 2020 onwards, as that is when Apple began the Apple Silicon transition with the M1. M1 Pro and M1 Max MacBook Pros followed in 2021.
Based on Apple's warning, you can expect that macOS 27 will drop support for all of these legacy machines, and therefore macOS 26 will be the last compatible version. These devices will continue to receive security updates for another three years, however. Going forward, the minimum support hardware generations will be from 2020 onwards, as that is when Apple began the Apple Silicon transition with the M1. M1 Pro and M1 Max MacBook Pros followed in 2021.
OpenCore Legacy Patcher (Score:1)
Apple: "macOS Tahoe does not work with any Intel MacBook Air or Mac mini for instance"
OpenCore Legacy Patcher [opencorele...atcher.net]: "Hold my beer."
Sadly, this will probably be the end of the line for OCLP, since it's specifically Intel-only: no PPC (very old) and no "Apple Silicon" (not old).
Tahoe works with some 2019 and 2020 Intel Macs (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What? You think that switching CPUs is somehow a bad thing?
PowerPC to Intel switch was needed (Score:2)
Fortunately the switch to ARM is not a return to the bad old days of terribly slow emulation. X86_64 Mac apps are translated from X86_64 to ARM binaries. It's not as good as recompiling the source but it's pretty damn close.
Re: (Score:3)
The switch to ARM is one of the best things Apple could have done. Apple doesn't need the absolute best performance out there, where wattage is sacrificed. Apple needs best performance per watt, not just for energy use, but for heat dissipation. Even with this in mind, Apple Silicon Macs still run well enough.
Heat and dealing with that was a major issue. The Intel Macbooks I had either had to have fans on all the time, or were crazily throttled like the m3 (not M3... Intel m3) MacBook from the mid 2010s
Re: (Score:2)
It would be nice to get back to the point where a potential buyer did not have to face the PC or Mac question.
Re: (Score:2)
What a shitty take.
Please tell me what other choice Apple had, when IBM was refusing to make a low-wattage G5 suitable for use in mobile computing. Was Apple supposed to just stop making notebook computers because you said so? Or maybe ship a "laptop" that would cause 2nd degree burns if you used it on your lap, while only having a battery life measured in double-digit minutes at most?
Would you similarly have advocated for them to not move to PowerPC in the first place, and instead just demanded that Moto
Re: (Score:2)
The entire point of the AIM alliance was to make sure Apple wasn't dependent upon any one supplier. Yes, things weren't ideal with Motorola at the time either, but it's not clear to me that throwing PowerPC out the window was the only option.
(Also "IBM refused" to make a "low power" design is rather different from what actually happened, IBM had difficultly fulfilling their original promise to make a 3GHz part and Jobs threw a wobbly about it. Nothing about refusal or low power in there. I'm sure it'd have
Actually it'll happen in 2028 (Score:2)
Apple provides security updates for the three most-recent major releases of macOS. So, as long as Tahoe continues to get patches, Intel Macs will continue to be supported.
Mostly 2027 (Score:2)
Apple provides security updates for the three most-recent major releases of macOS. So, as long as Tahoe continues to get patches, Intel Macs will continue to be supported.
Only for a handful of 2019 and 2020 MacBook Pro and Mac Pro.
For most of the currently supported Intel Macs running Sequoia, 2027 would be the last year.
In theory, on very rare occasions, for particularly heinous bugs, patches occur beyond that 3 year window.
Re: (Score:2)
Only for a handful of 2019 and 2020 MacBook Pro and Mac Pro.
This is true. but older Macs falling off the "supported" list is not exactly a new phenomenon - it's always been a somewhat arbitrary distinction (as OLP, and before that dosdude1's patchers, helped people overcome).
But the architecture change obviously raised an insurmountable cliff in this regard. I can't say I'll be throwing out my 2020 Intel MBP because of it, though... at least assuming Firefox continues to support it for a while.
will apple rosetta 2 end at the same time? (Score:3)
will apple rosetta 2 end at the same time?
Re: (Score:3)
Magic 8-Ball seyz: "Signs point to Yes"
Re: (Score:2)
https://arstechnica.com/gadget... [arstechnica.com]
details there.
T2-Mint FTW (Score:4, Interesting)
The T2 chip makes installing a vanilla Linux distribution on Macs somewhat more problematic - but I've found that T2 Mint [github.com] works pretty well out of the box.
The only issue I've had is with waking the machine from sleep at times. I haven't put much work into getting that sorted, yet, but I'm sure it's doable. Regardless, a cold boot is quite zippy.
macOS 26 runs on some Intel Macs (Score:3)
But these are likely rare enough that if I were starting a brand new app today that would require macOS 26 I'd make it Apple Silicon only just to simplify testing and support.
Good (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I can pick up a used Mac for a hundred or two and slap Linux on it
Make sure it's 2018 or older. The 2019 and 2020 Intel models are being picked up by developers for macOS 26 testing.
Re: (Score:2)
I did that several years ago, but it was a Power Mac G5. Getting a GPU that works with Linux and the PPC bootloader is a little tough but worth it if you want to get Wayland or an X11 compositor up.
Re: (Score:2)
Voodoo 5 yay.
Do any current browsers have performant JIT for PPC?
End of the road for Intel OCLP too (Score:2)
OCLP reintroduces past libraries and Kexts (drivers in Windows parlance KLMs in Linux parlance) into new versions of MacOS. Being that Tahoe/MacOS26 will be the last intel mac, it means that OCLP will not be able to put MacOS 27 onto intel Macs.
Well, thanks to OCPL, at least most intel macs will be supported (on MacOS 26) until fall 2028.
I need to plan accordingly for my Mini late 2018 and Air early 2015
I really hope that, when Apple discontinues the M1 architecture, OCPL can pick up where they left off, an
Re: (Score:2)
I'm typing this on my 2012 11" Air, it just won't die and I am holding out for a hopeful 11" size system this fall, but I have no idea if that will come out.
I even run VMware Fusion on it (i7/8g ram) and it's ok for simple work tasks.
I have a few Intel Mini's running Esxi and that is a really impressive platform for a home lab.
Re: (Score:2)
He is talking about "open core legacy patcher". A tool to put 'unsupported' macOS versions on older Mac's.
No idea why people fancy using abbreviations no one can know what they mean and are hard to Google.
If you want to use an abbreviation from a certain point on in a text, it used to be custom to use the full term once, and introduce the abbreviation.
Re: (Score:2)
I need to plan accordingly for my Mini late 2018 and Air early 2015
Just FYI - Linux Mint installed and ran wonderfully on my 2015 MacBook Pro. Anything that predates the T2 chip should be easy to install Linux on (and it's possible for the T2 models as well).