Likelihood of Mojave on Unsupported Systems


Riiiiiight, so because you weren’t impressed that means every other statement you’ve made is true? I don’t think so.

And another one. Where’d you get this one from? Did you get an itchy elbow when you logged in?

Windows, MacOS, Linux variants they’re all the same. They’re all building on a decade or more of iteration. Of course Windows 10 built on Windows 7 and 8, and to some extent XP and Vista. Just like MacOS built on OS X 10.1-10.10. Dig far enough into any OS and you’ll find a window or setting screen that hasn’t changed in years.

Windows 10 is an excellent OS - with the right hardware, MacOS High Sierra is an excellent OS - again with the right hardware. Sometimes that means you have to buy contemporary hardware. Just depends on your tolerances.


Did you miss the stories about Microsoft’s service agreement with Windows 10?

“We will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to.”


So is incessant whinging you do in response.

Its also a valid request for Apple to leave Open GL support in on the machine that need it to continue support. We pay through the nose for these machines so it would be nice for support to continue given how much money Apple has (and their supposed focus on the environment).

Again Windows supports machines older than 10 years old, with their most current operating system. And no it isn’t XP with a reskin, yeah there are components in there that would have been in XP, but there would be code in 10.14 that originated in 10.4 (I think??).

I’ve used Windows 10 professionally and supported it in an enterprise environment and it is really very good.

Isn’t this in regards to law enforcement? Apple apparently also does the same thing when legally required to.


It looks promising for the Mac Pro. Patching in emulation for SSE is nothing new, and the community is pretty experienced at it by now, so it should hopefully be an easy fix. With that compatible GPU, you should be off and running.

I’m somewhat pleased that macOS Mojave ended support for some machines. (I know, out of character for me, isn’t it?)

But there are several machines that would have absolutely crumbled under it. Those 2011 iMacs (6970) and 2011 MacBook Pros (15-17) are running on borrowed time, and if the newer operating system is more graphically taxing on the hardware, I have no doubt that it would have accelerated their already higher-than-usual failure rate.

That’s all.

The Mac Pro on the other hand? Go your hardest. Those machines are still a performance powerhouse with relatively cheap upgrades. Nice to see most are still supported or can be supported with some tweaks.


Apple are lawfully required to maximise profits in the interests of shareholders. Those profits stem from them making products people want. It’s real simple, if you don’t like buying Macs every 5 or 6 years, you don’t have to, you just don’t benefit from macOS updates other than security patches (and then those dry up).

Microsoft sells it’s OS, so to increase sales they have to make their OS work with as many machines as possible. Their hardware sales (surface) barely register compared to their OS/Office Apps sales.

Apple on the other hand is a hardware company that makes it’s OS to DRIVE hardware sales. If you don’t like that fact, too bad. Apple offer free upgrades of macOS to ensure as many people as possible have the latest OS, but when old models would be holding them back in advances they make in macOS, those models fall by the wayside.

Expecting Apple to reverse their direction on the use of Metal, for your benefit and for the benefit of people who barely matter in the scheme of Apple’s revenue is unrealistic.

As for WIndows 10, it’s about recording your Cortana search requests and customising advertising, but it could be anything under the sun given the language of the agreement.


THIS is a very valid point. Sticking with Sierra/High Sierra will actually extend the life of the Mac compared with Mojave.


That’s not spying. Spying implies there is no disclosure to the end user.


Yeah, I think my Mac Pro 3,1 will be fine, and even without Mojave, I think we’re getting High Sierra security updates for like another three years anyway, so by that point we ought to have the new modular Mac Pro, and I’ll have to do a cost/benefit analysis of what the next step might be from there, one way or another. But it seems like it will work out.

Come 2021 or 2022, either I’ll buy a new Mac Pro, buy a decently priced higher specced Trash Can, or gut the 3,1 for the case and go the Hackintosh route. I know Apple is really trying to get to the point where their chips are proprietary (return to the PPC era, kinda!), but despite a lot of complaints in this and other threads, Apple does have decently long support. So I wouldn’t expect an intel based system built in a year or two to not be supported by quite a few subsequent macOS iterations. I mean my main computer is a 10 year old computer and I guess High Sierra has finally settled down on .4 (I still need to install .5, probably do that today, so cross fingers), and I’m experiencing no issues.

Now, when it comes to MacBooks, that’s a whole other issue. I sold my 2012 MBP 13" and I’m on a 2008 MacBook White 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo as my school/work device running Linux Mint. I’m just completely lost as to what MacBook/MacBook Pro device to pick up. Should it be used, should it be new, what kind of upgradeability will it have if any, if it’s older and used, how long before I lose access to something like even Mojave, let alone future OS releases… I just don’t know.


So to correct Apple stuffing up the hardware on these is a good justification of support being cut short? Lol.

Apple aren’t going to loose much profit from doing the environmentally right thing and giving Macs better software support. Apple does other things that don’t maximise profit, should Tim Cook be arrested?

The end point in terms of the end user and the environment is the same though… I’m not really concerned about the reasoning.

I’m not expecting Apple to reverse anything, merely continue support for Open GL based graphics on old machines, and maintain the metal only version for post 2012 machines.

No one has to use Cortana.


Oh boo hoo. Show me a single Mac that doesn’t have some design flaw. Apple have had cooling issues with their thinner Macs forever. In fact, if my 5k Retina iMac’s GPU dies because of Mojave, I’ll keep it around in case of a product repair program, but will still buy a new Mac, and I won’t be whinging and whining like a bitch over it


Certain Macs have been more flawed than others…

So you’ll reserve your whinging and whining to replying to those who you don’t agree with?


Arguing against whinging and whining is not whinging and whining :slight_smile:


Ah yeah it is, especially when you have to resort to the childish inferring of myself (or others) as a “Bitch”.


If the shoe fits…

I’ll keep replying until Benny tells me otherwise :stuck_out_tongue:

One thing that does concern me about Mojave is the prospect that non-MAS apps will have to be vetted by Apple before they can run on Mojave - some security measure called Notary on Mojave was mentioned at WWDC. Still haven’t found online details yet.


How very mature.


Children, children can we remain on topic? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


Noticed you having your little whinge on MacRumors too. Interesting that the majority view there was in line with mine - that the cutoff was reasonable.

Whereas your expectation that Apple release yet another macOS that still supports OpenGL when Apple have been making the move to Metal for several years, is unreasonable.


And? I’m allowed to express my opinion. Plenty of people there share my view, and it doesn’t matter. Macrumours is full of people who would (and do) support blindly Apple no matter what they did.

Perfectly reasonable expectation for Apple to support a limited number of its own systems when they have the resources for it and claim to be an environmentally friendly company.

Now maybe you can move on from your whinging as @kionon has suggested.


Can you imagine how cumbersome macOS Mojave would be if it still tried to do what it does with OpenGL rather than Metal, just to support old Macs? By the time Security updates run out for Sierra in just over a year’s time, users will have had their Macs for over 7 years. That is a reasonable period for support, and those Macs will still run that OS for years to come probably. No-one is forcing you to throw your Macs on the scrapheap just yet.


Just about as cumbersome as High Sierra is? Perfectly doable to have a slightly seperate version for the older Macs and then the non Open GL for 2012 and later Macs. They managed to support PPC and Intel with both later versions of 10.4 and then again with 10.5 which is far more variation, and they had far fewer resources back then.

As I said before, the loss of OS support is not handled well by Apple in a lot of ways. It’ll be sure to cause issues for people who use other Apple devices and sync them as iOS continues to change. iWork is a good example of that. I’d suggest it is highly likely Apple updates iWork with 10.14, which as usual won’t run on 10.13 and there goes people on 10.13’s ability to collaborate with people on 10.14.