How long before Mac OS is Apple Silicon only?

[pastrychef]

Blatant straw man. I never said this. Anyone who thinks I did is delusional.

You charts are showing up to 11 years of "support".

Look at the OP, there's no mention of any Macs. He/she doesn't care how long his/her Mac will get "support". The only concern is how many more versions of macOS for Intel Macs.

How many new versions of Mac OS X did the last Power Mac G5 get? How long were they "supported"?

 

[ian87w]

I'm no PC expert, but that's not what I'm seeing. Consider, for instance, the Dell Inspiron 7000 Series laptops. Since Windows 10 was released in 2015, I would assume all of these came with Windows 10, right?:

View attachment 2033812
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Inspiron_laptop_computers

And yet if you go to Dell's website, and you look at the Inspiron laptops that run the current build of Windows 10 (21H2, released Nov. 2021), you'll see only the 7391 is still supported. Support for the earlier ones has been dropped. That means if you bought, say, a 7386 in 2019, your support would not last 10 years and, additionally, you would have no way of knowing when that support would drop.

In fact, according to Dell, the last Windows build on which it was supported was the May 2021 Update (21H1), which is EOL in Dec 2022. That means it has only 3 or 4 years of support after purchase.

It seems the key here is that, to determine years of support for PC's, you can't just look at MS's policies for Windows—it's about Windows and the PC manufacturers together.

View attachment 2033814

View attachment 2033813

source: https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/...ious-versions-of-windows-10#Inspiron-NB-21H2U

The other point I'll make is this: Given that Apple's years of OS support since 2019 has averaged 9 ± 1 years, I think it's inaccurate to characterize it as "dropping support of things willy nilly."

Weird that you keep going to Dell, not Microsoft

Windows 10 system requirements - Microsoft Support

Windows 10 system requirements

support.microsoft.com

Windows 10 Home and Pro - Microsoft Lifecycle

Windows 10 Home and Pro follows the Modern Lifecycle Policy.

docs.microsoft.com

Even Core 2 Duo machines can run Windows 10. The only limitation is whether the peripherals have updated Windows 10 drivers or not.

 

[theorist9]

Weird that you keep going to Dell, not Microsoft

Windows 10 system requirements - Microsoft Support

Windows 10 system requirements

support.microsoft.com

Windows 10 Home and Pro - Microsoft Lifecycle

Windows 10 Home and Pro follows the Modern Lifecycle Policy.

docs.microsoft.com

Even Core 2 Duo machines can run Windows 10. The only limitation is whether the peripherals have updated Windows 10 drivers or not.

That doesn't address the evidence I provided, it just avoids and ignores it. And there's nothing weird about going to Dell—they're a major PC manufacturer (top 3, along with Lenovo and HP).

Perhaps someone who knows more about PC's than I do can chime in, but it seems the issue is that having full support for Windows on a PC is not just about the generic hardware specs listed in your links—looking at that alone paints an incomplete picture. You need to look at the machine as a complete hardware package. That's why I was going to Dell's site to get the bottom-line support info. for each device.

According to Dell, the last Windows build that can run on the 2018/19 Insprion 7386 is 21H1, which your own link says is EOL in Dec. 2022. So how about addressing that directly?

 

[ian87w]

That doesn't address the evidence I provided, it just avoids and ignores it. There's nothing weird about going to Dell—they're a major PC manufacturer (top 3, along with Lenovo and HP).

Perhaps someone who knows more about PC's than I do can chime in, but it seems the issue is that having full support for Windows on a PC is not just about the generic hardware specs listed in your links—looking at that alone paints an incomplete picture. You need to look at the machine as a complete hardware package. That's why I was going to Dell's site to get the bottom-line support info. for each device.

So how about actually addressing the info. from Dell I provided?

Microsoft makes Windows, not Dell. The minimum requirements of Windows 10 is quite clear. Unlike Apple, OC OEMs only provide support for the hardware and drivers. Software updates for the OS Windows come straight from Microsoft. Why do I even need to explain this in a tech forum bewildered myself.

Nah forget it. You do you. Cheers.

 

[theorist9]

Microsoft makes Windows, not Dell. The minimum requirements of Windows 10 is quite clear. Unlike Apple, OC OEMs only provide support for the hardware and drivers. Software updates for the OS Windows come straight from Microsoft. Why do I even need to explain this in a tech forum bewildered myself.

Nah forget it. You do you. Cheers.

Because, logically, when you're talking about how Apple's support compares to PC's, you need to look at more than just generic Windows specs. Why I have to explain that on a tech site bewilders me.

Basically, you have this narrative you want to push that Apple's years of OS support are worse than what you get with PC's, and you're going to stick to that narrative, facts and logic be damned.

 

[diamond.g]

According to Dell, the last Windows build that can run on the 2018/19 Insprion 7386 is 21H1, which your own link says is EOL in Dec. 2022. So how about addressing that directly?

Dells link says they have only tested up to that version, that doesn't mean 21H2 won't install/run.

To be honest Windows support is a bit more convoluted than Apples, since MS doesn't provide drivers for every piece of hardware in a system. It also requires the support of the vendor which in the case of Dell has admitted they don't want to write drivers for the older hardware anymore.

 

[Wokis]

I love speculating about this. I still have memories and wounds from the PPC to Intel transition, where Apple considered PPC trash that they wanted to cut off the moment they started shipping Intel-machines.

Fair enough, though. Soon after their discontinuation PPC-machines didn't bring enough performance for the evolving web experience and as a result of ever increasing computing needs for the everyday person, more people upgraded machines more often. Not to mention that Macs were starting to sell like never before making the PPC-population look insignificant by comparison. They were easy to abandon and forget, while looking forward to all the amazing things the new computers would be able to do.

Today with the resent ISA change, things are a little different. The benefits are great but skew towards being more valuable for the portable market (granted it IS the biggest demographic), while say 27" iMac owners might wonder what the big fuzz is about. I imagine so many more Intel machines are being experienced as "still good" and not replaced.

This I do think influences Apple's decision-making. Just making a lot of working semi-recently sold machines look "obsolete" in terms of no longer being able to receive feature updates is probably not going to reflect well on them, so in the near-term I don't think they plan to axe them off completely.

Add to that to the Mac Pro tower, the big symbol of their renewed commitment to the Pro segment, they still don't have an Apple Silicon answer, as the demographic couldn't care less about perceived "snappiness" and are more concerned about the looming threat that any Apple Silicon machine even in this segment will have 0 support for traditionally written graphics card drivers.

Into somewhat of a conclusion I think MacOS 15 might be the release that either is the last for Intel or in fact becomes the one where they get rid of support for any Intel machine altogether. Feels wrong when you think about it today but that means either two or three years more and by then it will probably feel way less weird. It is also VASTLY more generous than the last transition, to the point where I can't expect Apple to give any more.

But what I fear the most isn't really if my Intel Mac gets the latest bells and whistles in an OS-release, but rather how third party programs will handle the coming years. Imagine say Adobe or someone saying that nah, this new app in development isn't getting an Intel-build because they can't bother QA'ing such a version that is only running on dinosaur-computers. I can see a future when some company will ask you to bootcamp Windows if you care about continued app-support.

It will also be interesting to see say as suggested a "T2 cut-off" in the future, with certain features of the newer OS perhaps being offloaded to the A10 inside these machines. It would be a "cool solution" but would probably involve a lot of developer time to get working. And why bother with doing that, is my thought.

Sorry I wrote too much

 

[Zest28]

.

Because, logically, when you're talking about how Apple's support compares to PC's, you need to look at more than just generic Windows specs. Why I have to explain that on a tech site bewilders me.

Basically, you have this narrative you want to push that Apple's years of OS support are worse that what you get with PC's, and you're going to stick to that narrative, facts and logic be damned.

Windows offers better support than Apple for sure.

On Windows, my older Intel Mac’s run just as snappy and responsive as my 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro.

But as soon as those Intel Mac’s run Mac OS, the software Apple designed themselves for these Intel Mac’s, it just feel slow and sluggish.

So I’m actually turning these older Intel Mac’s into Windows machines.

Only the 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro I will keep on Mac OS.

 

[Rafterman]

So I’m actually turning these older Intel Mac’s into Windows machines.

Only the 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro I will keep on Mac OS.

That's not a bad idea, repurposing it. I have a 2019 maxed out 16" Macbook Pro, and there will be a time, in about 5 years, when Intel support may be dropped, or MacOS doesn't run well. Even now, it's $5,500 cost has dropped to about $2,500 resale. In five years, it may not even be worth $1,000 - not worth selling. But it may still be a powerful Windows machine.

I'm not sure if my next Mx Mac will be worth maxing out (I do a lot of video stuiff and the 8TB is useful). You are at the mercy of Apple in how well it gets supported after "x" number of years.

 

[theluggage]

I think this one is a big fat "nobody knows". For starters, we don't know when Apple will stop selling Intel Macs - the 2019 Mac Pro, for example, is still reasonably up-to-date by Xeon workstation standards, and might still be around for a while if the promised Apple Silicon Mac Pro is a radical departure.

I don't think Apple has any published policy about length of support and they have zero obligation (beyond how much bad PR they can tolerate) to provide you with any new OS version with features beyond what was advertised when you bought your machine. Even more consumer-friendly jurisdictions like the EU will probably only hold them to fixing serious bugs that were present at purchase, or maybe prematurely blocking old machines from their services.

One thing Apple could do is simply put the last Intel-compatible MacOS version into "extended support" for an extra few years, just patching any serious security issues & keeping it compatible with services and new iDevices.

On the other side of the coin - it might be in Apple's interest to keep basic Intel support alive and maintain MacOS as a multi-platform OS in case they ever want to go back to Intel or AMD for part of their range (M1 has been a great success in laptops and SFF, but I'm still not sure that the Apple Silicon Mac Pro is going to be a surefire winner). When Apple switched from PPC to Intel, PPC for desktops or laptops (maybe not in other fields) was pretty much dead - today, Intel are not done yet. I don't think the Intel or ARM transitions would have happened if Apple didn't already have MacOS partly running on those architectures...

 

[Zest28]

That doesn't address the evidence I provided, it just avoids and ignores it. And there's nothing weird about going to Dell—they're a major PC manufacturer (top 3, along with Lenovo and HP).

Perhaps someone who knows more about PC's than I do can chime in, but it seems the issue is that having full support for Windows on a PC is not just about the generic hardware specs listed in your links—looking at that alone paints an incomplete picture. You need to look at the machine as a complete hardware package. That's why I was going to Dell's site to get the bottom-line support info. for each device.

According to Dell, the last Windows build that can run on the 2018/19 Insprion 7386 is 21H1, which your own link says is EOL in Dec. 2022. So how about addressing that directly?

You can always run Linux. Windows and Mac OS aren’t the only operation system.

If Apple wasn’t so annoying with their T2 chip, I would have converted my Intel Mac’s to Linux too.

 

[Populus]

Apple has been very aggressive in dropping support for previous intel machines.
Let's take a look at the popular Macbook Air.
Catalina: min 2012 Macbook Air
Big Sur: min 2013 Macbook Air
Monterey: min 2015 Macbook Air
Ventura: min 2018 Macbook Air

So Apple has been increasing their discontinuation of support rate, from 1 year, 2, then 3 years worth of models. At this rate, I can see the next macOS after Ventura to completely drop intel altogether.

If they drop Intel support completely by macOS 14, that would mean that only M1 and M2 machines would be supported at the announcement next summer. I don’t think M3 machines will be out before that. So I see it unlikely. Probably for macOS 15 in 2024, we’ll see.

Also: Remember they are still selling machines without an Apple Silicon replacement, such as the upper level Mac mini, and the Mac Pro. It wouldn’t be cool to stop supporting macOS for machines that are still being sold.

 

[theorist9]

Windows offers better support than Apple for sure.

On Windows, my older Intel Mac’s run just as snappy and responsive as my 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro.

But as soon as those Intel Mac’s run Mac OS, the software Apple designed themselves for these Intel Mac’s, it just feel slow and sluggish.

So I’m actually turning these older Intel Mac’s into Windows machines.

Only the 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro I will keep on Mac OS.

That's an interesting point—you're talking not about the years of support, but how well those OS's run on older but supported machines. For years of support, Apple seems to equal or exceed PC's. But when it comes to how well older machines run on a supported OS, Windows might indeed have an advantage. Apple changes its OS's more rapidly than MS does, which means if you're running a Mac on the last supported OS, it will run, but might not run well.

 

[theorist9]

Dells link says they have only tested up to that version, that doesn't mean 21H2 won't install/run.

To be honest Windows support is a bit more convoluted than Apples, since MS doesn't provide drivers for every piece of hardware in a system. It also requires the support of the vendor which in the case of Dell has admitted they don't want to write drivers for the older hardware anymore.

Yeah, it is confusing. That's why I was hoping someone who understood this better than me could chime in. It does seem to me that it's just as you say—in order to run a new build on Windows, you need the build to be compatible with the hardware, but you also need the PC maker to provide drivers that allow their device to work with that new build.

In Apple's case, when they ensure a new OS is compatible with a device, they're providing both. But in the PC world, this responsibiilty is split between the OS maker (MS) and the PC manufacturer. [That's why, as I kept saying, it provides an inaccurate picture of support in the PC world if you look at the former only.]

Now back to to the specific question at hand: What Dell said is not just that they haven't tested it, but that they haven't updated the drivers. Doesn't that mean it won't run or, at best, it will run, but only unofficially?

 

[diamond.g]

Yeah, it is confusing. That's why I was hoping someone who understood this better than me could chime in. It does seem to me that it's just as you say—in order to run a new build on Windows, you need the build to be compatible with the hardware, but you also need the PC maker to provide drivers that allow their device to work with that new build.

In Apple's case, when they ensure a new OS is compatible with a device, they're providing both. But in the PC world, this responsibiilty is split between the OS maker (MS) and the PC manufacturer. [That's why, as I kept saying, it provides an inaccurate picture of support in the PC world if you look at the former only.]

Now back to to the specific question at hand: What Dell said is not just that they haven't tested it, but that they haven't updated the drivers. Doesn't that mean it won't run or, at best, it will run, but only unofficially?

Eh it depends. At work we don’t do driver updates, but we do update the OS and so far we haven’t seen any negative impact from doing what we are doing.

I can imagine that there could be some performance gains we are leaving on the table, but for what we do it doesn’t seem to matter.

 

[mi7chy]

If it's up to Apple the sooner the better since x64 Macs/Macbooks can bare metal boot Windows and fully working Linux (unlike Asahi) when Apple drops MacOS support whereas with Apple Silicon you have to buy a new device. Plus, hackintosh have gotten too popular along with CPU, dGPU, etc. price crash.

 

[VivienM]

Yeah, it is confusing. That's why I was hoping someone who understood this better than me could chime in. It does seem to me that it's just as you say—in order to run a new build on Windows, you need the build to be compatible with the hardware, but you also need the PC maker to provide drivers that allow their device to work with that new build.

In Apple's case, when they ensure a new OS is compatible with a device, they're providing both. But in the PC world, this responsibiilty is split between the OS maker (MS) and the PC manufacturer. [That's why, as I kept saying, it provides an inaccurate picture of support in the PC world if you look at the former only.]

Now back to to the specific question at hand: What Dell said is not just that they haven't tested it, but that they haven't updated the drivers. Doesn't that mean it won't run or, at best, it will run, but only unofficially?

In the PC world, basically all hardware that works with NT 6 works with all versions of NT 6, assuming you stick to the same bitness (i.e. things that don't have 64-bit drivers will be a problem for 64-bit NT 6). NT 6 has been sold as "Windows Vista", "Windows 7", "Windows 8", "Windows 8.1", "Windows 10" (of various feature updates), and "Windows 11", along with a bunch of servers versions, but fundamentally it is NT 6. And because the transition between NT 5 (sold as Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003) and NT 6 was so traumatic, Microsoft has not made any kind of comparable architectural/driver/etc changes since that break things in a comparable way. But basically anything introduced after 2007-2008 supports 64-bit NT 6 just fine.

In reality, in PC land, the drivers largely come from component vendors, not OEMs like Dell, i.e. Realtek, Intel, NVIDIA, etc. (In theory, PC OEMs will tell you that their driver packages are customized, etc., blah - that's largely BS). PC OEMs will stop testing/packaging drivers for a new OS first, but by and large, the component vendors will continue to support newer versions for a while longer. And even if they don't - the overwhelming majority of drivers for the NT 6.x family are interchangeable. A driver advertised as being for Vista will run fine on a later feature upgrade of 10. And Windows Update, if it has a "Vista" driver for a given component, will happily install it for you automagically on a Windows 10/11 system.

If you don't believe me, I have a lovely L502x XPS 15 running the latest Windows 10 release and an L702x (comparable machine but a 17") running Windows 11. State of the art Sandy Bridge laptops (upgraded to 16 gigs of RAM, SSDs, etc) from 2011, originally shipped to run Windows 7. Both run fine. The only thing that might not work is the SD card reader, and I haven't done much to try and get it running. I'm not sure if Dell officially supports anything newer than Windows 8 on them, but they work fine in the latest Windows OSes.

You can take basically any ~2006-2007 era Core 2 Duo machine, which were the first machines to have good NT 6 support, and I would bet you that they will run the newest Windows 10 feature update, or, after you disable the hardware checks, Windows 11 perfectly fine. Especially desktops - laptops can be a little more finicky with things like switchable graphics, etc. My last Core 2 machines are in the closet and have been for years, so I haven't had a chance to actually test it, but... Assuming end of security updates in 2025, that's... close to 20 years of support.

This is why people like me are so angry about the arbitrary hardware restrictions on Windows 11. In my experience at least, every machine that runs NT 6 fine will run Windows 11 just as well as the other flavours of NT 6. But Microsoft says no... *cough*

(Honestly, I really regret that Windows went free for upgrades. Before they made more money selling you an upgrade license than selling Dell/Lenovo a new OEM licence. Now the only way they make money is selling you a new system.)

(Oh, and one other point - some PC OEMs are really, really, really bad at support. My mom had an Acer 1830T that I still have today. It had an Intel video driver version that was officially blocked for Windows 7 SP1. I don't think Acer ever published an updated driver, but you could force the generic Intel driver... and that laptop is still around today, running Windows 11. First-gen i3.)

 

[ian87w]

It wouldn’t be cool to stop supporting macOS for machines that are still being sold.

Those are still supported in Ventura. And transition will complete by this year. Higher end Intel max mini can be replaced with M2 Mac mini, and we’ll probably see M2 Max/Ultra Max Pro.

It’s not cool dropping support, but this is Apple. They’re still selling Apple Watch S3, that will no longer receive updates. It doesn’t bother Apple dropping support quickly when they see fit too. Eg. The core duo/core 2 duo MacBooks. Those are huge sellers, and Apple still didn’t mind giving short support.

It’s not cool for consumers, but for Apple, if you still buy Intel macs today, it’s money for them.

 

[ADGrant]

Probably.

Rosetta 1 was licensed, and probably had a three OS agreement (Tiger, Leopard, Snow Leopard). I believe Rosetta 2 was developed internally.

But at the rate that developers are moving apps from Intel to Apple Silicon, we'll probably see Apple drop all Intel support by 2025.

There are still plenty of apps that have not been converted yet including a few important ones I use.

 

[ADGrant]

They will get rid of Rosetta as they got rid of 32-bit with Mojave, I imagine.

The last of the great MacOS releases are upon us, Enjoy them throughly... In my opinion I am not sad about this. Mojave/Catalina are very mature Operating Systems and will last many a years, the newer releases on Intel will also last many years. They have to.

This thread isn't about Rosetta. It's about the continued support time frame for Intel Macs.

 

[ADGrant]

When talking bout how many OS versions older Macs received, remember that up until Lion, OSX was updated every two years.

And was a paid upgrade until Mavericks

 

[theorist9]

In the PC world, basically all hardware that works with NT 6 works with all versions of NT 6, assuming you stick to the same bitness (i.e. things that don't have 64-bit drivers will be a problem for 64-bit NT 6). NT 6 has been sold as "Windows Vista", "Windows 7", "Windows 8", "Windows 8.1", "Windows 10" (of various feature updates), and "Windows 11", along with a bunch of servers versions, but fundamentally it is NT 6. And because the transition between NT 5 (sold as Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003) and NT 6 was so traumatic, Microsoft has not made any kind of comparable architectural/driver/etc changes since that break things in a comparable way. But basically anything introduced after 2007-2008 supports 64-bit NT 6 just fine.

In reality, in PC land, the drivers largely come from component vendors, not OEMs like Dell, i.e. Realtek, Intel, NVIDIA, etc. (In theory, PC OEMs will tell you that their driver packages are customized, etc., blah - that's largely BS). PC OEMs will stop testing/packaging drivers for a new OS first, but by and large, the component vendors will continue to support newer versions for a while longer. And even if they don't - the overwhelming majority of drivers for the NT 6.x family are interchangeable. A driver advertised as being for Vista will run fine on a later feature upgrade of 10. And Windows Update, if it has a "Vista" driver for a given component, will happily install it for you automagically on a Windows 10/11 system.

If you don't believe me, I have a lovely L502x XPS 15 running the latest Windows 10 release and an L702x (comparable machine but a 17") running Windows 11. State of the art Sandy Bridge laptops (upgraded to 16 gigs of RAM, SSDs, etc) from 2011, originally shipped to run Windows 7. Both run fine. The only thing that might not work is the SD card reader, and I haven't done much to try and get it running. I'm not sure if Dell officially supports anything newer than Windows 8 on them, but they work fine in the latest Windows OSes.

You can take basically any ~2006-2007 era Core 2 Duo machine, which were the first machines to have good NT 6 support, and I would bet you that they will run the newest Windows 10 feature update, or, after you disable the hardware checks, Windows 11 perfectly fine. Especially desktops - laptops can be a little more finicky with things like switchable graphics, etc. My last Core 2 machines are in the closet and have been for years, so I haven't had a chance to actually test it, but... Assuming end of security updates in 2025, that's... close to 20 years of support.

This is why people like me are so angry about the arbitrary hardware restrictions on Windows 11. In my experience at least, every machine that runs NT 6 fine will run Windows 11 just as well as the other flavours of NT 6. But Microsoft says no... *cough*

(Honestly, I really regret that Windows went free for upgrades. Before they made more money selling you an upgrade license than selling Dell/Lenovo a new OEM licence. Now the only way they make money is selling you a new system.)

(Oh, and one other point - some PC OEMs are really, really, really bad at support. My mom had an Acer 1830T that I still have today. It had an Intel video driver version that was officially blocked for Windows 7 SP1. I don't think Acer ever published an updated driver, but you could force the generic Intel driver... and that laptop is still around today, running Windows 11. First-gen i3.)

Thanks—I really appreciate the informative response!

Are the years of support significantly longer for higher-end devices than lower-end ones? E.g., you wrote: "You can take basically any ~2006-2007 era Core 2 Duo machine, which were the first machines to have good NT 6 support, and I would bet you that they will run the newest Windows 10 feature update.... Assuming end of security updates in 2025, that's... close to 20 years of support." But if you look at, say, a 2008 Dell Inspiron Mini, which uses an Intel Atom N270, would that still be supported? And if not, how many years of support did that get?

 

[VivienM]

Thanks—I really appreciate the informative response!

Are the years of support significantly longer for higher-end devices than lower-end ones? E.g., you wrote: "You can take basically any ~2006-2007 era Core 2 Duo machine, which were the first machines to have good NT 6 support, and I would bet you that they will run the newest Windows 10 feature update.... Assuming end of security updates in 2025, that's... close to 20 years of support." But if you look at, say, a 2008 Dell Inspiron Mini, which uses an Intel Atom N270, would that still be supported? And if not, how many years of support did that get?

I don't think it has to do with how high-end anything is, particularly, but rather the components inside and who makes them. Generally, if anything, too high-end exotic components are problematic, even more problematic than low end.

Fundamentally, what you have to realize is that PC land gets its components from very specific suppliers:
- video - Intel, ATI/AMD, NVIDIA
- chipsets/storage controllers/etc - Intel, AMD, some others in NVMe land, others in the past
- audio - Realtek is now the dominant player, you used to have a lot more Creative Labs than today, there used to be Conexant and one or two more
- wired networking - Intel, Broadcom, Marvell, Killer, Aquantia (now Marvell but I think they're a separate driver)
- wifi - Intel, Atheros, Broadcom
- trackpads - Synaptics and another outfit whose name escapes me right now

Most PCs, whether they are pre-built OEM systems or systems you build yourself, use a combination of components, some more or less low or high end, from the same players. (Go and check out some motherboards from Asus/Gigabyte/MSI/etc and look at the spec sheets - you will see slightly different combinations of the same parts) Look in Device Manager for many Windows systems and you will find NOTHING with the OEM's name.

Some high-end machines will have weird things from weird suppliers. That's dangerous and likely to have more compatibility issues sooner than something more generic.

Some of these components also have longer lifecycles than others, e.g. if you look at wired networking, non-servers/workstations have basically been stuck at gigabit Ethernet since 2006 or so. I would guess that the PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet controllers sold today are very, very similar to the ones sold by the same manufacturers in 2006. My early-2017 Gigabyte enthusiast board and my Lenovo T590 work laptop from late 2019, for example, both have Intel i219-Vs. Intel launched the i219-V in Q2 2015 and their web site says "expected discontinuance" in 2030, so I think you should expect Intel to release a driver for Windows 13 or 14 for the i219-v (and realistically, the Windows 7/10 driver would probably work fine on Win13). And the i219-v's driver is packaged with the drivers for a whole family of Intel GbE controllers.

The most important thing, in my mind, is how easy a component vendor makes it to get generic drivers. Generally speaking generic drivers will be updated long after Lenovo/Dell/etc give up on packaging a driver for a particular component for a given model. NVIDIA is probably the best at this - you can get drivers for everything from their site, they release new drivers every month or so for the last X years' worth of GPUs, and then older GPUs basically end up with legacy drivers that are no longer seriously maintained. (So, for example, for a ~2007-era 8800GT, the latest driver is for Windows 10 64-bit and dated late December 2016. The oldest GPUs in 'mainstream' support from NVIDIA are the GTX 750 from 2014, which has a current driver for Win10/11)

The biggest troubles I have had with older PC systems have been with ATI switchable graphics which were actually offered on fairly high end systems. Or really, ATI anything - not to knock on ATI, but Intel or NVIDIA is generally less troublesome for drivers and long-term support.

As for the 2008 Inspiron Mini, I had one of those - the second gen model that shipped with Win7 starter, I think it was an N450 Atom. Those machines were so bad I'm sure they all landed in the e-waste pile long before anybody started caring about whether they support newer OSes. Can't even remember if they support x64...

 

[ADGrant]

Those are still supported in Ventura. And transition will complete by this year. Higher end Intel max mini can be replaced with M2 Mac mini, and we’ll probably see M2 Max/Ultra Max Pro.

It’s not cool dropping support, but this is Apple. They’re still selling Apple Watch S3, that will no longer receive updates. It doesn’t bother Apple dropping support quickly when they see fit too. Eg. The core duo/core 2 duo MacBooks. Those are huge sellers, and Apple still didn’t mind giving short support.

It’s not cool for consumers, but for Apple, if you still buy Intel macs today, it’s money for them.

You do not know that the transition will be complete this year or that there will be a new M2 Mini this year.

During the last transition, Apple was not only transitioning from Power PC but also from 32bit to 64bit. The installed base of 32bit Intel Macs was probably never that large, certainly not compared to the current installed base of Intel Macs.

I think it is unfortunate that they are still selling the S3 Apple Watch though since I still have an S3 watch I have benefited from the continued support. However, the S3 is the last 32bit Apple Watch and I think the last 32bit consumer device Apple sells.

 

[Kcetech1]

Now back to to the specific question at hand: What Dell said is not just that they haven't tested it, but that they haven't updated the drivers. Doesn't that mean it won't run or, at best, it will run, but only unofficially?

Will run beautifully on component level or even Microsoft " basic " drivers. I even have some old 2006 C2D computers with 8GB and SATA SSD's that are running the current windows 10 release and even those dinosaurs run circles around my iMac with the bloody hybrid drive

Are the years of support significantly longer for higher-end devices than lower-end ones? E.g., you wrote: "You can take basically any ~2006-2007 era Core 2 Duo machine, which were the first machines to have good NT 6 support, and I would bet you that they will run the newest Windows 10 feature update.... Assuming end of security updates in 2025, that's... close to 20 years of support." But if you look at, say, a 2008 Dell Inspiron Mini, which uses an Intel Atom N270, would that still be supported? And if not, how many years of support did that get?

In some cases yes especially business/enterprise class units. my antique HP 8740W/Dreamcolor from 2010 with a bloody 10 bit color accurate screen still gets official updates and is running current windows 10 and can even run windows 11 since it can have the TPM2.0 system added to it. ( and MS will officially let unsupported CPU's run with an installer they provide ) I just found this out recently. I estimate it can still work as one of my color accurate workstations for another 5 years or so, it tops out at 32GB so its bigger brothers will take over soon but 15+ years isnt a bad run. I know of even older Core Duo's running in automation and lighter work with no issues.