Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion) Won't Support Some 64-bit Macs With Older GPUs

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the not-invited-to-the-mountain-lion's-reindeer-games dept.

Desktops (Apple) 417

MojoKid writes "Apple is pitching Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion) as the cat's meow, with over 200 new features 'that add up to an amazing Mac experience' — but that only applies if you're rocking a compatible system. Some older Mac models, including ones that are 64-bit capable, aren't invited to the Mountain Lion party, and it's likely because of the GPU. It's being reported (unofficially) that an updated graphics architecture intended to smooth out performance in OS X's graphics subsystem is the underlying issue. It's no coincidence, then, that the unsupported GPUs happen to be ones that were fairly common back before 64-bit support became mainstream."

cancel ×

417 comments

Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (5, Insightful)

jlv (5619) | about 2 years ago | (#40620329)

10.7 dropped support my 1st gen $2000 MacBook Pro, which otherwise still runs perfectly (but with only 10.6).

Apple's hardware isn't just pricey, but they like you to buy new hardware on a regular basis.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620393)

With a first gen macbook pro I think your due for a new laptop......3-5 years is my max of keeping them around.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

siddesu (698447) | about 2 years ago | (#40620557)

Why is that so? Should I also sell my MGA for scrap because it was made in 1956?

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (-1, Troll)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40620659)

No, but JUST LIKE THE MGA

You are a FOOL if you think EITHER is suitable for everyday professional use

WHAT MACBOOK PRO DO I HAVE? (4, Informative)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#40621547)

If you are uncertain of the date from which your Mac was produced, I suggest the CoconutID freeware. [coconut-flavour.com]

It ID's your MacBook (or other model) and pegs the manufacture date within a few days of precision. Clever - it can also perform a lookup and see if a Mac with your ID has ever been reported as stolen. Interesting, for some eBayer's. ;-)

If you ARE on and Mac portable, look at their Coconut Battery app, at the same location. Great for managing battery age, charge history and cycles. It got me free replacement batteries at the Apple Store, on two different machines/occasions. I haven't ever managed that with Sony or Lenovo...

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1, Troll)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 2 years ago | (#40620641)

With a first gen macbook pro I think your due for a new laptop......3-5 years is my max of keeping them around.

Well, maybe, but Apple fans often triumph how their laptops last for 5+ years, so for Apple to drop support like this is a bit of a smack in the face.

(Yes, I hate Apple, I fully admit it).

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (4, Informative)

bsane (148894) | about 2 years ago | (#40621317)

First gen MBPs are 6+ years old... so fans can still brag about the 5+ year life...

Math is hard.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about 2 years ago | (#40620705)

YOUR max.
3.5 years is not a horrendously long time. Hell, 3.5 years ago (2009), they were using 1.83 - 2.0 ghz processors and 512mb-1gb ram in the macbook pro. That's not slow...

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (3, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#40621465)

Depends on what you use it for. The current generation is more than twice as fast. If you get work done on it and the speed makes you more productive, it's beyond the time when an upgrade will likely pay for itself. If it isn't, then you'd probably be better off with something cheaper in the first place.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (4, Interesting)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40620955)

I've just dropped a 256gb SSD in a thinkpad from 2006. The thing runs better than when it was brand new and it runs considerably cooler and quieter. It's for development and non-gaming entertainment so even if is no doubt lacking in the gaming department that doesn't matter.

I intended to keep my macbook until it falls apart or the battery dies. There's no need to buy new hardware just for the sake of it if you don't need it. Unless you buy rubbish low-end Dells or Acers which then you'll be lucky to get 3 years out of it.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (2)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about 2 years ago | (#40620423)

I've always been baffled at people buying Mac, hardware to me it's a bit like console gaming, which also baffles me these days, as it's got all the hassles PC gaming has these days with none of the flexibility.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (4, Insightful)

blahbooboo (839709) | about 2 years ago | (#40620481)

I've always been baffled at people buying Mac, hardware to me it's a bit like console gaming, which also baffles me these days, as it's got all the hassles PC gaming has these days with none of the flexibility.

Really? Last I heard console gaming had no configuration issues, drivers, etc which a PC does..

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about 2 years ago | (#40620559)

hmm I guess all those reports of certain games not working correctly if you had a different (older) hardware revision of the console were just false then and that no such thing ever happened.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (2)

Literaphile (927079) | about 2 years ago | (#40620667)

My Xbox 360 is 6 years old and I have no problems running 2012 games.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

QuantumLeaper (607189) | about 2 years ago | (#40621463)

6 years old? How often do you use it, once a month? The oldest one that my friends have is 3 years old.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

Literaphile (927079) | about 2 years ago | (#40621503)

3 or 4 nights a week for about 45 minutes each time, after the wife and kids go to sleep. So it still sees pretty regular use.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (2)

blahbooboo (839709) | about 2 years ago | (#40620743)

hmm I guess all those reports of certain games not working correctly if you had a different (older) hardware revision of the console were just false then and that no such thing ever happened.

Would love to see a citation on this claim....

HDMA freeze on early SNES (3, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#40621129)

The DMA channels of the Super NES can run in manual mode or in an automatic mode called "HDMA". Manual mode acts like a hardware accelerated memcpy and is essentially identical to the "Blast Processing" of the Sega Genesis. HDMA restarts at the end of each scanline and is useful for fancy 3D-like scrolling effects. But the first Super NES consoles shipped with a defective CPU that would freeze if a manual DMA finishes right before an HDMA starts. (These older consoles show version 1/1/1 in The Lion King and PowerPak instead of the more common 2/1/3.) I seem to remember one of the three versions of Street Fighter II for Super NES triggering this bug and needing to be recalled.

Re:HDMA freeze on early SNES (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621315)

Defective hardware is a whole other story, if any system ships with defective hardware it's going to cause problems, be it a console or a desktop computer.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (2)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621151)

He is right and there was an offer to replace units so while it sucks you get a new xbox out of it. Between RROD and all the other issues I'm sure MS has given away more hardware than anyone else.

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/18/new-xbox-360-update-incompatible-with-some-models-ms-offering-r/2 [joystiq.com]

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (2)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#40620943)

You might have heard people complaining about long load times. I have an old Xbox from 2006, so old it doesn't even have an HDMI port. It doesn't have internal storage so I can't pre-load a game onto the harddrive, and some games like Skyrim have unbearable load times between zones. Newer revision consoles allow you to load all that data locally, so you're not reading if off disk. But the fact is I can still play the game just fine once it's done loading.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621203)

You are right. http://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/18/new-xbox-360-update-incompatible-with-some-models-ms-offering-r/2 [joystiq.com] and there is this list of problems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_technical_problems [wikipedia.org]

That said it's down more to rushed / cost cutting hardware design for most of their problems so even if the system were more open it wouldn't really have helped.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620927)

When was the last time you played on a PC?

It's been probably a decade since I last time had problems with configuration issues, drivers, etc. on a PC.

It's generally buy > download > install > play nowadays. Sometimes it's download > install > download > play > buy instead.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620987)

I've always been baffled at people buying Mac, hardware to me it's a bit like console gaming, which also baffles me these days, as it's got all the hassles PC gaming has these days with none of the flexibility.

Really? Last I heard console gaming had no configuration issues, drivers, etc which a PC does..

maybe your pc has configuration/driver issues...

google 'skyrim freeze ps3' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621095)

i was surprised to see that console gaming is now a lot like pc gaming.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1, Redundant)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40620619)

I've always been baffled by people who think that spending the lowest amount of money on the initial purchase automatically means a lower overall cost.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about 2 years ago | (#40620763)

If you game on your dad's computer, than you're right.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1, Interesting)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621051)

Not really. They don't do legacy support on the scale Microsoft does and I suspect the benefit outweights the hassle of supporting the older hardware. That sucks but that doesn't instantly make the machine unseble and even if someone doesn't want to use an outdated version of OS X for years then put Linux on it or, if you're not very bright, Windows.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621117)

I think "not very bright" is the reason they're using Apple hardware/software in the first place.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1, Troll)

Bake (2609) | about 2 years ago | (#40620513)

I too own a 1st gen MacBook Pro that doesn't run 10.7 either.

That's perfectly fine because IT'S A 6 YEAR OLD MACHINE.

In computing years, that's an eternity.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (4, Insightful)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#40620663)

Not anymore. A 6 year old machine might not be able to run the latest games, but it can run the latest Windows or Linux OS, the latest work processing and productivity software, and the latest browsers. I have a 2006 Core 2 machine with 4 GB RAM and a nice big harddrive in it. It runs Ubuntu 12.04, Windows 7, and Windows 8, runs Office 2010, runs Google Chrome and Opera 12.... this is a machine that does what most people need it to. This is very different from say 1996, where a computer from 1990 was laughable.

But we're not even talking about 6 year old machines here; where talking about machines you might have bought in 2008/2009. That's 3-4 years old! I have a quad core machine that old that can even run some of the latest games at decent resolution and FPS, and of course runs the latest Windows and Linux OS. It's unacceptable that a 3 year old mac could not run the latest Mac OS.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40620701)

Huh? I have a 2000 laptop with P4, 1 Gig RAM, loads and runs Fedora perfectly

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#40620781)

What do you mean huh? That's exactly my point. Even a 12 year old system can run a modern OS just fine.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620989)

Seconded. I bought a three-year-old MBP on eBay, and flipped my 6+-year-old one on craigslist. Total cost was about $500, and I get a much-needed upgrade and another Apple-branded feline.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621195)

There's a non-trivial amount of hardware that just plain didn't get drivers when the driver model changed between XP and Vista/7. I know I've got an external sound card and a printer that I had to replace.

In this case it was the graphics card. That sucks and all, but what the hell is Apple supposed to do about it?

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (3, Insightful)

Psyborgue (699890) | about 2 years ago | (#40620535)

Maybe you won't be able to run the OS, but it'll still be a long time before apps require 10.8. My 5 year old MBP (late 07) is supported. 5 Years isn't exactly bad. Had the 8600m GPU not burned itself out just after the warranty period, i'd probably still be using the thing.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620575)

Yeah, and how many Wintel machines bought in 2006 (first Gen Macbook Pro guessing the date) can run ANYTHING.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

greg1104 (461138) | about 2 years ago | (#40620843)

I happily work some days on a 2006 ThinkPad T60. The 2GB memory limit is the only part that really limits its ability to function as a basic business laptop. MacBook Pro models from 2006 with 2GB of memory are equally fine for routine work, just can't have too many applications running at once.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (3, Insightful)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#40620687)

Apple's hardware isn't just pricey, but they like you to buy new hardware on a regular basis.

Is there any company that doesn't like you to buy their product as frequently as possible?

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (5, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#40621549)

Oracle likes you to buy their products just once. It's only the paying thing that they want you to do as frequently as possible.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (2)

reybo (2540564) | about 2 years ago | (#40620689)

Every time they update the OS they claim to have added hundreds of new "features." Most are useless crap, and the good ones are quickly orphaned.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40620761)

So in other words you are perfectly happy with the computer you have, and you have nothing to complain about, because the new stuff is all junk

Why do you even bother posting when life is nirvana for you?

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

Relic of the Future (118669) | about 2 years ago | (#40620785)

Since when is seven years later equal to "on a regular basis"?

I just recently replaced mine because the plastic case was decaying beneath where my hands rested; loving the aluminum.

But...but...I upgraded my own GPU! (1)

Mr. Protocol (73424) | about 2 years ago | (#40620787)

I stuck a much more modern GPU into my 2006 Mac Pro 1,1, but I bet the 32-bit firmware won't be supported by Mountain Lion anyway. A pox on them all. For the first time I'm seriously considering gutting a Windoze box I don't use any more and turning it into a Hackintosh. Anything future editions of OS X don't like about THAT box, I can upgrade away from piecemeal. Including the mobo.

Re:But...but...I upgraded my own GPU! (2)

dhickman (958529) | about 2 years ago | (#40621043)

Treat your mac as a hackintosh and boot it in legacy mode. Do it with my 1,1 and have been running lion in full 64bit mode. I have heard the ML DP4 works well also and it can be installed as an upgrade install.

Re:But...but...I upgraded my own GPU! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621517)

I run mine with Snow Leopard in 64bit mode (fantastic for running VMs...) but yeah its a shame apple doesn't just do a WCS like the old amigas or VAXes for new firmware... C'est la vie I guess.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621005)

They are far happier to cut off old things and don't provide the same sort of legacy support that Windows does. In many ways that's a good thing but it's also unforunate because actually the hardware lasts for quite sometime so buying a new machine can feel a bit forced.

Who knows, someone may find a way around that. It could be that your machine will support it but it's not ideal so they refuse to support it properly but it'll work.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621191)

I have one too, the reason is that the CPU is 32bit only. 10.7 needs 64bits. This is also the reason why quite a few new apps that support 10.6 won't run on your machine either.

Apple isn't one to keep both 32 and 64 bit variations of their OS around, like MS with Win7.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (2, Insightful)

beelsebob (529313) | about 2 years ago | (#40621289)

Really? You're complaining that a 6 year old computer isn't up to running modern stuff? Really?

Seriously, if you're that concerned about having to buy new machines, sell it after 3 years. Pour $2000 MacBook Pro would almost certainly have fetched $16-1800, and you'd have got a new one, capable of running more modern OSes for effectively $2-400.

Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621439)

Intel CPU?

Just install any linux flavor or windows on it...

Problem solved!

_PROD_ _VER_ won't support _OLD_HW_ (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620335)

_YAWN_

Fast Retina Display MBP (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620353)

First Post because my graphics card is awesome!

Re:Fast Retina Display MBP (4, Informative)

jo_ham (604554) | about 2 years ago | (#40620599)

First Post because my graphics card is awesome!

Actually, the GPU in the Retina MBP is not all that awesome - the huge pixel density is pushing the Nvidia 650M in the retina Macbook Pro to its limits, causing some performance issues compared to the equivalent desktop on the non-retina version. Examples include rapid scrolling on webpages and so on.

$prod $ver won't support $old_ver (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620367)

$boredom_response

Overhyped? (2)

Dinghy (2233934) | about 2 years ago | (#40620413)

It appears that any Mac purchased within the last 3.5 years is ok, judging by the list on that site. I'd say that it's not too horrifying that a computer 4 years old may not run the latest upcoming system. It's a tough balancing act deciding between supporting older equipment, but nobody should be surprised that Apple only looks forward in that regard. That's how they've always been.

Re:Overhyped? (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#40620457)

It appears that any Mac purchased within the last 3.5 years is ok, judging by the list on that site. I'd say that it's not too horrifying that a computer 4 years old may not run the latest upcoming system. It's a tough balancing act deciding between supporting older equipment, but nobody should be surprised that Apple only looks forward in that regard. That's how they've always been.

And in previous years, Apple had more time between releases. If 10.8 were released one year from now, then it would have been 4.5 year old machines.

Re:Overhyped? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621281)

The issue sounds like a technical one due to a transition period from 32-bit hardware to 64-bit so the timing of releases doesn't really factor into that. I'm not sure it's a great idea to no update the system as much just to cater to older systems especially when they'll run just fine with the latest OS they can run and if security is an issue there is Linux.

New operating system doesn't support old hardware (1)

franciscohs (1003004) | about 2 years ago | (#40620419)

so what's the news?

Re:New operating system doesn't support old hardwa (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621041)

The hardware is still 64bit and idential to current models other than the Intel chipset jumps for smaller ICs. This isn't moving from one arch to a new one, it's still generic Intel with Apple's own proprietary crap thrown on top to ensure you still have to buy your cards (and even harddrives in some cases) from Apple only.

Do you really believe a quad core xeon with standard Nvidia GPU is "old"? Because that's what Apple is doing here.

HA! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620429)

HA HA HA!!
How's that reality distortion field working out for ya?

The upgrade treadmill (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#40620437)

I wonder if anybody dreamed it would be this successful.

More of a reason to laugh (5, Insightful)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 2 years ago | (#40620455)

At watching all those experiencing nerd rage that Microsoft is ending XP support after a mere 14 years, and how they are so angry at Microsoft they are going to buy a Mac next rather than upgrade to Windows 7. Then we read stuff like this.

Only a little nerd rage here on slashdot from XP loyalists, but wired.com and CIO magazine's website was filled with them and they were somewhat serious about using a Mac next to avoid planned obscelence in their minds.

Re:More of a reason to laugh (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about 2 years ago | (#40620845)

Linux works on 4 year old Macs.

Re:More of a reason to laugh (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621305)

And they were wrong. XP should have died a long time ago. Vista should be dead now too.

Looks like my $6000 3 year old Mac Pro barely... (2, Insightful)

Assmasher (456699) | about 2 years ago | (#40620479)

...scrapes by.

That's reedonkulous.

Unmitigated success for Apple has been bad for us.

Re:Looks like my $6000 3 year old Mac Pro barely.. (1)

Sez Zero (586611) | about 2 years ago | (#40620651)

...scrapes by.

My $2200 4.5-year old Mac Pro scrapes by handily. Why did you spend $6000 on a computer again?

Re:Looks like my $6000 3 year old Mac Pro barely.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620853)

A top end video card for rendering (not games), maxed out memory and huge hard drives will eat $6k in a Mac Pro.

Re:Looks like my $6000 3 year old Mac Pro barely.. (1)

Burz (138833) | about 2 years ago | (#40620901)

I agree, though my Macbook C2D will not be supported.

Apple has become hooked on planned obsolescence via the iPod, and more so with the iPhone, to the point where they are now worse than Microsoft and their clonemaker army. At this point I would be open to something laptop-centric based on Android.

Re:Looks like my $6000 3 year old Mac Pro barely.. (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about 2 years ago | (#40621033)

3 years ago was 2009, and that was the second generation Macbook which has 2.66 ghz or a 2.8 ghz processor with 2-4 gb ram.
Judging by your price, you went with the higher of the chip & ram.

I bought mine for $1,100 and have a 2.8 ghz processor and 4 gb ram, this year.

Re:Looks like my $6000 3 year old Mac Pro barely.. (1)

bluec (1427065) | about 2 years ago | (#40621241)

Mac Pro != Macbook

people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620489)

people that complain about this don't realize 10.7 will get security updates for the next 4 years...
get a life, it's not like your computer doesn't function without 10.8...

AGAIN? (2, Informative)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | about 2 years ago | (#40620509)

Holy upgrades Batman!

If they make the next version of X-Code support only Mountain Lion like they made the current version only support Lion - I'm going to scream! Because my clients wanted to support features of the latest iOS, I had to upgrade to a new Mac because my older model couldn't run Lion - which is required for the latest X-Code.

Re:AGAIN? (3, Insightful)

0x000000 (841725) | about 2 years ago | (#40620727)

You have clients ... charge a little more and absorb the cost of new hardware. What's so hard about that?

Gasp! (3, Funny)

JustAnotherIdiot (1980292) | about 2 years ago | (#40620517)

You mean Apple is forcing people to buy their hardware again to update their software?
I, for one, am totally shocked at this completely unexpected turn of events.

Re:Gasp! (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621337)

I know I'd be cheesed too if I had to either continue using the old OS or Linux on my 5 year old laptop. Next time I'll buy an Acer that will only last 2 years and that'll show them!

Still haven't gotten an answer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620569)

What nobody has answered yet is what happens if you have an older Mac with a newer GPU. Mac Pros are upgradeable after all. What graphics cards are supported, and how old of a Mac can you put them in?

Re:Still haven't gotten an answer (4, Informative)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 2 years ago | (#40620755)

It isn't just the graphics card, you need a a Mac with a 64-bit EFI (Ars Technica [arstechnica.com] article has more detail at the bottom).

Use that cash, hire driver writers (4, Insightful)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 2 years ago | (#40620625)

Mountain Lion apparently doesn't play nice with 32-bit GPU drivers, and while Apple could spend time and resources bringing older models up to par, the Cupertino company decided it was better off dropping support altogether.

If this were a true hardware limitation, it would still be bad. But not wanting to update drivers? While you are sitting on $100 billion cash? How many driver writers do you need for the limited selection of tightly controlled hardware?

Ugh.

Re:Use that cash, hire driver writers (-1, Offtopic)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40620817)

Wow you think that $$$ can solve software management issues

go read "The Mythical Man Month" one more time

Re:Use that cash, hire driver writers (3, Insightful)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 2 years ago | (#40621023)

We are talking about individual device drivers, not upgrading IRS computers. The interfaces are already well defined. The hardware is already well understood. There is an existing code base to work from. There might be half a dozen GPUs in question, which could be handled by half a dozen driver writers working alone for a couple of months.

Re:Use that cash, hire driver writers (-1, Troll)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40621123)

If Apple can chop huge blocks of code from their code base because they can assume a minimum level of functionality from the graphics hardware then they can reduce the number of lines of code in the product and increase the reliability of the product.

Apple cares about its customers that use computers for professional reasons. They are the ones who keep coming back to buy new ones. They are the ones who get high performance and reliability for their modern computers.

In case you haven't figured it out, Apple doesn't care about you. You can make a huff about it but really they just don't care about you and your old computer.

also the ati / nvidia cards are not that differnt (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 years ago | (#40621381)

also the ati / nvidia cards are not that differnt from other ati / nvidia and on the windows side they have 64bit drivers for all the video chips found in macs.

Re:Use that cash, hire driver writers (2)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621395)

It's not wise to piss away money, especially for a small subset of your market. I'm sure they have a pretty good idea of how many people this current effects and it's probably not worth it. The move from 32-bit to 64-bit hasn't been great and it's still a bit shit in some cases but you gotta live with it.

Remember Vista? (4, Insightful)

rogueippacket (1977626) | about 2 years ago | (#40620673)

In before the haters, just think back to the release of Vista and signed vs. unsigned drivers. In this case, we're talking about drawing a very clear line between four year old Mac hardware which will not be supported, and everything else, which will be fully supported. There is no gray area.
Now think back to the debut of mandatory driver signing with Windows Vista - where individual components in your computer would cease to function after an upgrade for no reason other than Microsoft wanted your manufacturer to pay extra for the privilege. Even worse, there really was no way to know before the upgrade if your system would function entirely. At least Apple's upgrade paths are clearly defined, and always have been - from Classic to OS X, PowerPC to Intel, and now Lion to Mountain Lion. You knew what you were getting into when you bought the Mac, and that's a very rigid upgrade cycle of roughly three years (right after your warranty expires) if you want to remain on the bleeding edge.

Re:Remember Vista? (1)

Rich0 (548339) | about 2 years ago | (#40621065)

Yeah, but you can STILL get security updates for XP, let alone Vista or Win7.

It sounds like Apple only supports one previous version.

That means that if you run windows you STILL get completely official security updates for a computer 12 years old, though you should be saving up to replace it now as that will end TWO YEARS from now, when your computer is 14 years old.

It sounds like with OSX you're going to be on shaky ground in 5-6 years. I don't think that is terrible for personal use, but for a corporate user having to roll out a new OS version every other Apple release (they release annually it seems) is a huge amount of overhead, and if you do have some kind of oddball hardware setup you will be forced to keep that moving along as well.

Subsidies (4, Interesting)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#40620735)

And this is why Mac OSX doesn't cost just $19.99. If you bought a Mac in 2011, you've already subsidized your purchase of OSX Mountain Lion you'll buy later in the year. Problem is, if you bought a Mac in 2008, you've already used up your copies of OSX, so you don't get to buy Mountain Lion at $19.99. Apple's decided you need to buy a new Mac to subsidize the next 4 versions of OSX, which you'll be free to buy for $19.99 of course. Until 2016 of course when the process starts over again.

Re:Subsidies (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40621451)

Exactly which is why they don't want you to put OS X on other hardware. They are a hardware company more than a software company but obviously a PC needs an OS. So they've developed one which you pay for in the hardware too.

It's still a better deal given the hardware is still usable with it's latest OS or Linux and it beats having an dell that you'd be lucky to see last 4 years.

An interesting dichotomy (3, Insightful)

davidbrit2 (775091) | about 2 years ago | (#40620769)

As a software company, it's in Microsoft's best interest to prevent "new hardware" from being a barrier to entry for buying their software. (Remember the "Vista Capable" mess?)

As a hardware company, Apple mostly uses their software to try to entice you into buying new hardware.

You aren't Microsoft's customer (2)

sjbe (173966) | about 2 years ago | (#40621209)

As a software company, it's in Microsoft's best interest to prevent "new hardware" from being a barrier to entry for buying their software.

That's because you are not really Microsoft's customer. Relatively few of us actually buy any version of Windows directly from Microsoft. Mostly it is purchased through OEMs. You are not Microsoft's customer. HP, Dell, Asus, Acer, etc are Microsoft's customers. They sell a license to them and those companies resell it to you. The result is that Microsoft has a hard time paying attention to their users and it shows in the experience of using their products.

As a hardware company, Apple mostly uses their software to try to entice you into buying new hardware.

Actually Apple is fundamentally a software company. Nobody buys a Macintosh because of the hardware. Load Windows on Mac Hardware and without seeing the Apple badge on it you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between an Apple PC and a Dell PC. Sure the hardware is nice and given the price charged it darn well better be. No, the difference comes in the software. You buy Apple hardware to get Apple software. They make their money by bundling the two. Same with the iPhone, iPod and iPad. You can get similar hardware for similar or lesser prices. People might like the iPad or iPhone but if you loaded Android on them there is nothing to differentiate them. People buy the iPhone and iPad for the software when all is said and done. The design and branding is just extra.

WRONG WRONG WRONG (0)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40621429)

> You buy Apple hardware to get Apple software.

WRONG WRONG WRONG

I bought a MacBook for the HARDWARE

It mostly runs Linux

My GOODNESS have you SHOPPED??? Nobody makes a laptop as sweet as a MacBook. NOBODY.

For Mac Pro 1,1 and 1,2 help may be at hand (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620771)

http://www.jabbawok.net/?p=47

Looks like it is possible but there's some work to be done. I'll be trying this in a few weeks once the dust has settled.

What pisses me off is that, even if I had the cash to update my Mac Pro, firstly I don't want to, it's still a great machine and secondly, there are no new Mac Pros available anyway.

Closed source drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40620775)

So apple can't get companies to write new 64bit drivers for their obsolete GPUs? Shocking!
Really, we should be applauding apple here because they're really cutting to a full 64 bit release for OSX.

Microsoft has done a good job since vista getting support for 64bit windows. (Probably because since then they've had a policy of denying certification unless you wrote both 64 and 32 bit drivers for your products..) I was surprised, however to learn that they're releasing 32bit windows 8. Hell, I was surprised 32 bit windows 7 even existed.

32bit server '08 only technically existed for a short time (You can't buy it) and is really,in practice, an unsupported platform. 32bit was completely dropped for R2.

older Mac Pro with EFI 32 bit likely locked out as (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 years ago | (#40620795)

older Mac Pro with EFI 32 bit likely locked out as well. And the flash is to small to take EFI 64.

Now they have 64 bit cpus and can run 64bit code as well windows 64 so why can't apple work around that?

Re:older Mac Pro with EFI 32 bit likely locked out (1)

Sez Zero (586611) | about 2 years ago | (#40621165)

Now they have 64 bit cpus and can run 64bit code as well windows 64 so why can't apple work around that?

Because they want you to buy new hardware.

Hackintosh your Macintosh. (5, Interesting)

dhickman (958529) | about 2 years ago | (#40620869)

I have a macpro1,1 with 8 cores(clovertown), 16 gigs ram, and the current 2011 ATI video card.

Yes I have had the machine for 6 years and I could upgrade. But the current hardware is not that much of a performance upgrade for the cost.

Xeon based systems of this generation like the Dell 2900, 1950, are still a viable system and still well supported and will be for years into the future.

Apple decided to stop supporting this machine a few years back by not allowing it to run a 64 bit kernel with the lame excuse that a 32bit boot loader can not boot a 64 bit os.

Solution that works great.

Hackintosh your machintosh.

Install cameleon and boot the mac in legacy mode as a hackintosh. With Snow Leopard, the machine runs the 64 bit kernel and is noticeably faster. There is no reason that Mountain Lion will not work well also since the macpro1,1 is the same hardware as the 2,1 and most of the 3,1.

By doing this you can now run any video card that you want and still maintain a legal right to use the software.

I was starting to decide on upgrading to a current mac pro, but to be honest, there is no reason to drop that kind of change on a machine that Apple will drop within a 5 year period.

Re:Hackintosh your Macintosh. (1)

dhickman (958529) | about 2 years ago | (#40620933)

Oops. Lion also works well this way, and I have seen that people have been running Mountain Lion DP4 this way with no issues. From what I understand upgrade install works fine.

EFI32 (3, Informative)

dmitriy (40004) | about 2 years ago | (#40621109)

Mountain Lion kernel is 64-bit only, and requires 64-bit EFI firmware. Older systems have 32-bit EFI. Unofficial Chameleon EFI emulator can run 64-bit EFI on some older systems.

Exactly why I buy a Late model Macs. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621229)

I got burned back in 1999 with a poorly timed mac desktop purchase. Now before buying a Mac I look for rumors about upcoming releases. Two replaced macs (the old macs are still used daily) later and I have found the sweet spot to be the latest model of the last version. I'm already regretting not buying a second 17" MacBook Pro after the retina "upgrades".

It is a bit of a hassle and given the direction Apple is going I suspect they will be too consumer market to meet my requirements soon.

Compare to cars (0)

FranTaylor (164577) | about 2 years ago | (#40621249)

People lease cars for 3 years and move on to a new one, it's commonly accepted practice.

Even though cars have been around for 100 years and the new ones are really only marginally better than the older ones.

Modern cars last 10 years no problem even in the salt and snow of new england.

So WHY do people FREAK out when they roll over computer purchases in the same 3 year period? The progress rate is very high so the modern system makes the 3 year old one look like junk and STILL people moan and complain!

I just don't get it.

Mountain Lion who? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40621301)

Twenty years ago I was the greatest Mac bigot of them all.

Now, why buy Mountain Lion anyway? Lion had exactly one feature (resize windows from any edge) I wanted; the rest I've either turned off (Retard-a-scroll) or ignored (iCloud, software store, social media junk.) Mountain Lion looks like the lobotomized twin of Windows 8.

(I call it retard-a-scroll, but it's actually a good idea, if I hadn't spent all those years getting used to the opposite. What could they have been thinking?)

I never enjoyed programming OS X as much as I did Classic, and now I think that last contract really will be the last. I looked at the new Retina MBP at the Apple store the other day and it didn't impress me much more than a similar Samsung at the MS store (for a third less $) Big selling point: both run the current OS, no being limited by the next.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...