4 ms·

New macOS historically runs on devices between 5 and 10 years old. Longest in recent memory was El Cap which supported 8-10 year old devices. Shortest was Snow

New macOS historically runs on devices between 5 and 10 years old. Longest in recent memory was El Cap which supported 8-10 year old devices. Shortest was Snow Leopard, which supported 3 year old devices. Ventura is lower, 4-5 years, but that happens periodically when aligned with major architectural changes. [edit] Honestly, their support cycle is pretty impressive. And just because they don't release a newer version of macOS doesn't mean software stops working.

myself248 4y ago
Why should 4-5 years be lauded? I daily-drive an AthlonXP machine from 2008. Nothing about the hardware requires dropping support. (Linux has, sadly but understandably, dropped support for the older 386/486/ppro architectures in the name of kernel sanity, but I wouldn't run a desktop with any of those anyway.) Dropping support for hardware that still runs perfectly fine, and isn't a heinous mess of architectural workarounds, is nothing more than a crass money-grab. Which is completely understandable for a company whose job is to make money, but I still don't see why that's praiseworthy.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- wtallis 4y ago
  It's one thing for the Linux kernel to still support 15+ year-old hardware (the Athlon XP was already pretty old by 2008). It's a very different thing for a full desktop OS to still support it in a feature-complete way. Historically, Apple seems to prefer to drop support for old hardware rather than maintain a long list of caveats about which features cannot run on older machines. Throughout the Intel Mac era, Apple was clearly trying to raise the bar for baseline GPU performance to ensure the graphical effects really would run "perfectly fine" as you put it, though they were stymied by some of Intel's anti-competitive behavior. Their decision to drop support for the 32-bit kernel and firmware was quite reasonable, though the later decision to drop support for 32-bit applications was more of a problem for users.
- nomel 4y ago
  > I daily-drive an AthlonXP machine from 2008. Nothing about the hardware requires dropping support. Does Windows 11 work on that machine? Does Windows 10?
TrevorJ 4y ago
I've run into this a few times with Apple. It's not that the upgrade is explicitly not allowed by policy. It's just that things are broken in ways which prevent you upgrading/using the device properly. I don't know if it's just lack of care on Apple's part, incompetence, honest mistakes or a stealth method of forcing an upgrade. In any case, hardware that seemed slow and outdated with Apple's software ecosystem now runs perfectly with Ubuntu. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- arcticbull 4y ago
  I suspect it's more that maintaining a 10+ year testing matrix across three architectures and like 15 product families is pretty un-manageable. The cross product matrix is already staggering, but imagine testing 10 years of iPhones, 10 years of iPods, however many years of Watch, AirPods, chargers, etc against every Mac released for 10 years - in every configuration? Every time you ship an OS update? Wild.
- rurp 4y ago
  I've had a similar experience, where supported OS updates rendered a macbook effectively unusable due to performance hits and bugs. It's one of several reasons that I stopped buying macs for my personal dev machine and switched to ubuntu. Linux certainly isn't perfect but updates have been more pleasant than on mac or windows.

myself248 4y ago

Why should 4-5 years be lauded? I daily-drive an AthlonXP machine from 2008. Nothing about the hardware requires dropping support. (Linux has, sadly but understandably, dropped support for the older 386/486/ppro architectures in the name of kernel sanity, but I wouldn't run a desktop with any of those anyway.) Dropping support for hardware that still runs perfectly fine, and isn't a heinous mess of architectural workarounds, is nothing more than a crass money-grab. Which is completely understandable for a company whose job is to make money, but I still don't see why that's praiseworthy.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
wtallis 4y ago
It's one thing for the Linux kernel to still support 15+ year-old hardware (the Athlon XP was already pretty old by 2008). It's a very different thing for a full desktop OS to still support it in a feature-complete way. Historically, Apple seems to prefer to drop support for old hardware rather than maintain a long list of caveats about which features cannot run on older machines. Throughout the Intel Mac era, Apple was clearly trying to raise the bar for baseline GPU performance to ensure the graphical effects really would run "perfectly fine" as you put it, though they were stymied by some of Intel's anti-competitive behavior. Their decision to drop support for the 32-bit kernel and firmware was quite reasonable, though the later decision to drop support for 32-bit applications was more of a problem for users.
nomel 4y ago
> I daily-drive an AthlonXP machine from 2008. Nothing about the hardware requires dropping support. Does Windows 11 work on that machine? Does Windows 10?

TrevorJ 4y ago

I've run into this a few times with Apple. It's not that the upgrade is explicitly not allowed by policy. It's just that things are broken in ways which prevent you upgrading/using the device properly. I don't know if it's just lack of care on Apple's part, incompetence, honest mistakes or a stealth method of forcing an upgrade. In any case, hardware that seemed slow and outdated with Apple's software ecosystem now runs perfectly with Ubuntu. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

arcticbull 4y ago
I suspect it's more that maintaining a 10+ year testing matrix across three architectures and like 15 product families is pretty un-manageable. The cross product matrix is already staggering, but imagine testing 10 years of iPhones, 10 years of iPods, however many years of Watch, AirPods, chargers, etc against every Mac released for 10 years - in every configuration? Every time you ship an OS update? Wild.
rurp 4y ago
I've had a similar experience, where supported OS updates rendered a macbook effectively unusable due to performance hits and bugs. It's one of several reasons that I stopped buying macs for my personal dev machine and switched to ubuntu. Linux certainly isn't perfect but updates have been more pleasant than on mac or windows.