Mac OS X Lion *does* run on Core Duos/Core Solos.

[stewacide]

I think this is all about Apple forcing devs to make 64bit apps. With the next iOS release I'd expect to see the whole system - kernel, drivers and everything - 64bit exclusive. Which will leave behind otherwise capable systems with 32bit EFI.

re: hacking Lion onto 32bit intel, while I'm sure third party apps will continue to ship universal for some time, there's no reason for Apple to ship universal apps for Lion, when when all supported systems can run 64bit apps. Anything that's still working in 7.0 will probably be broken a few patches in. In fact I don't understand why Lion ships with universal binaries at all, except that the decision to go 64bit only was made late in the dev process...

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

except that the decision to go 64bit only was made late in the dev process...

???

OS X has been getting progressively closer to 64-bit only for the past several releases, starting with 10.4 at the latest. This decision was most certainly not made late in the dev process...

 

[stewacide]

???

OS X has been getting progressively closer to 64-bit only for the past several releases, starting with 10.4 at the latest. This decision was most certainly not made late in the dev process...

They why are *ANY* Lion apps, save perhaps those needing to accept old plugins (Safari, PrefPane), shipped in 32bit form?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

That's very much a possibility, especially since Apple tends to lock out older systems as an incentive to upgrade to new hardware.

This proves once and for all that Apple is ONLY doing it for that reason. There's no technical reason it won't run on those systems. They are simply being evil and saying frack you to loyal customers. Give us more money!

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

There's no technical reason it won't run on those systems. They are simply being evil and saying frack you to loyal customers.

You conveniently ignored my post on this subject in this thread, replying to the same thing.

Apple has been pushing for a wholly 64-bit OS ever since the G5 was introduced. When the G5 was experiencing severe issues, they switched to Intel (which had been in the plan for a long time) and were forced to accept one generation of 32-bit CPUs. After that generation, EVERY Mac has shipped with a 64-bit architecture.

There is a very technical reason why Lion won't run on 32-bit Intel machines: Lion is a 64-bit OS. You can't run a 64-bit OS on a 32-bit machine. The 1st two DPs did run on them, but the current ones do not.

 

[Intell]

I think this is all about Apple forcing devs to make 64bit apps. With the next iOS release I'd expect to see the whole system - kernel, drivers and everything - 64bit exclusive. Which will leave behind otherwise capable systems with 32bit EFI.

How is iOS going to be 64-bit when ARM doesn't even make 64-bit processors? The 32-bit EFI has nothing to do with Lion's limitations. The first Mac Pro has 32-bit EFI and 64-bit CPUs.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

They why are *ANY* Lion apps, save perhaps those needing to accept old plugins (Safari, PrefPane), shipped in 32bit form?

Apps and OS are two different things. You have to make the OS wholly 64-bit before making the apps 64-bit. Only an Apple software engineer can really answer your question.

For non-Apple apps, you're most likely looking at the amount of time to recode an app from 32-bit to 64-bit form. Many apps won't benefit at all from 64-bit, which means they'll take their sweet time moving to 64-bit. Just because the OS is 64-bit doesn't mean all the apps have to be.

 

[stewacide]

You conveniently ignored my post on this subject in this thread, replying to the same thing.

Apple has been pushing for a wholly 64-bit OS ever since the G5 was introduced. When the G5 was experiencing severe issues, they switched to Intel (which had been in the plan for a long time) and were forced to accept one generation of 32-bit CPUs. After that generation, EVERY Mac has shipped with a 64-bit architecture.

There is a very technical reason why Lion won't run on 32-bit Intel machines: Lion is a 64-bit OS. You can't run a 64-bit OS on a 32-bit machine. The 1st two DPs did run on them, but the current ones do not.

There's no technical reason Lion can't support 32 bit processors: everything in the OS is still compiled for both, and the kernel still defaults to 32bit on all but Xserves.

 

[Intell]

There's no technical reason Lion can't support 32 bit processors: everything in the OS is still compiled for both, and the kernel still defaults to 32bit on all but Xserves.

I'm guessing you've never used a 2010 or newer Mac have you? They default to 64-bit.

 

[stewacide]

Apps and OS are two different things. You have to make the OS wholly 64-bit before making the apps 64-bit. Only an Apple software engineer can really answer your question.

For non-Apple apps, you're most likely looking at the amount of time to recode an app from 32-bit to 64-bit form. Many apps won't benefit at all from 64-bit, which means they'll take their sweet time moving to 64-bit. Just because the OS is 64-bit doesn't mean all the apps have to be.

Since all officially supported Lion systems can run 64bit apps there's no need to ship them as 64bit/32bit universal apps... yet Apple did, likely because they chose to exclude 32bit systems too late in the dev process to strip the 32bit code out.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

If they stripped all the 32 bit code, there would be huge backlash! It would be an absolutely moronic decision, and you and I both know this. I don't know what point you're trying to make.

I'm not a dev, but my understanding is that, when coding for UB, you make a 64-bit app and when you build it, building it as UB automatically makes it 32-bit compatible as well. That's no extra work for the developer.

Besides, being able to run the app in 32-bit mode has significant advantages. For example, a few months ago Safari wouldn't play anything on YouTube in 64-bit mode. Switching to 32-bit mode fixed the problem. Is TextEdit likely to have a problem like this? No. But building all apps as a UB isn't a bad thing.

 

[Intell]

The 32-bit code is left in for legacy plug-ins and the like.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Since all officially supported Lion systems can run 64bit apps there's no need to ship them as 64bit/32bit universal apps... yet Apple did, likely because they chose to exclude 32bit systems too late in the dev process to strip the 32bit code out.

If they're too darn lazy to strip out the 32-bit code then they might as well let Core Solo/Duo owners use Lion. Their removal of those machines is both arbitrary and capricious. I still say they're just sodding greedmongers. Their own code for iTunes isn't even full Cocoa after how many years? They're hypocrites to boot. FCPro wouldn't even use multiple cores for rendering. Apple doesn't even support their own standards half the time. They probably don't have enough developers to do these things since Steve is so flipping paranoid about total control that he won't approve hiring enough programmers.

 

[gvollant]

Getting it to run on a 64 bit Hackintosh or VM is a lot different than finding a way to run 64 bit system apps on a 32 bit Mac.

My goal is running lion on a Mac Mini selled with Core Duo, but upgraded to Core 2 duo, so it is now a 64 bits mac (which run 64 bits apps perfectly under snow leopard)

 

[marsonist]

You conveniently ignored my post on this subject in this thread, replying to the same thing.

Apple has been pushing for a wholly 64-bit OS ever since the G5 was introduced. When the G5 was experiencing severe issues, they switched to Intel (which had been in the plan for a long time) and were forced to accept one generation of 32-bit CPUs. After that generation, EVERY Mac has shipped with a 64-bit architecture.

There is a very technical reason why Lion won't run on 32-bit Intel machines: Lion is a 64-bit OS. You can't run a 64-bit OS on a 32-bit machine. The 1st two DPs did run on them, but the current ones do not.

I have upgraded A 1.66 Ghz Core Duo Mac Mini to a 1.83 Ghz Core 2 Duo. Snow leopard now runs all of the appropriate applications in 64-Bit mode. With the developer previews of Lion it was possible to edit a plist and install Lion. With the release of the GM that is no longer possible. I'm sure apple doesn't want to have to deal with support issues for nonstandard systems, but to say that they did not intentionally block certain (fully capable) Apple hardware from running Lion is indeed false.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

I have upgraded A 1.66 Ghz Core Duo Mac Mini to a 1.83 Ghz Core 2 Duo. [...] but to say that they did not intentionally block certain (fully capable) Apple hardware from running Lion is indeed false.

Ah I see... wait, you're not running "fully capable Apple hardware", you're running fully capable non-Apple hardware. So there's no surprise that when Apple blocks hardware not normally capable of running 64-bit software, and you've upgraded that hardware so it can, you're still locked out. So, my point still stands. Your hardware may be capable, but it was never intended to be so.

 

[shaivure]

My goal is running lion on a Mac Mini selled with Core Duo, but upgraded to Core 2 duo, so it is now a 64 bits mac (which run 64 bits apps perfectly under snow leopard)

Hey, I've just managed to install the Lion GM on my Mac Mini 1,1 which I upgraded with a Core 2 Duo.

Details in my blog link in my signature

 

[weckart]

Hey, I've just managed to install the Lion GM on my Mac Mini 1,1 which I upgraded with a Core 2 Duo.

Details in my blog link in my signature

Hmm. Checking the sources in your blog reveals that the torrent is only hosted on a couple of sites and has disappeared (if it ever existed) from the rest that were brought up in the linked search.

That usually is a red flag that there is more than you bargained for in that doctored GM. I do hope you have Little Snitch installed for your own safety.

 

[andreas.b]

I'm downloading it now to check out the contents. Annoyingly it's zipped up, so you can't select to only download the hack.

You have a good point about it being removed from bigger sites. I hope I can get something legit out of it, as I do want to run this on my 64-bit CPU Mac Mini (why not?).

Hopefully there's some good documentation included if it is legit, so that the hack would be possible to reproduce. I'm not sure I'm able enough to be 100% sure if something malicious is included or not.

I find it a bit weird that the hack is ONLY distributed in this way, you would think that it should originate as a standalone hack from some of the forums regarding MacOS, but nothing turns up on google.

 

[shaivure]

Hmm. Checking the sources in your blog reveals that the torrent is only hosted on a couple of sites and has disappeared (if it ever existed) from the rest that were brought up in the linked search.

That usually is a red flag that there is more than you bargained for in that doctored GM. I do hope you have Little Snitch installed for your own safety.

Hmm, admittedly I may have been a little too trusting, however I don't use this as my main machine. Thanks for the tip and I'll try and monitor for any suspicious behaviour.

If anyone can detail how to reproduce the hack on the retail version when it is is shipped then I'd be interested in finding out how. I might take a look at the files in the package tonight and see what I can work out.

Cheers

 

[andreas.b]

Okay, in my eyes it seems to be legit, more specifically the packages included in "Educational Materials" seems to be fine, if you were to create your own image from your own Lion ESD image, using the following method, you would likely be safe.

In all likelyhood the included installer image haven't been tampered with either, so it could be safe too. On your own risk tho, no guarantees

For people interested they could likely make it work themselves using the guide found here:

http://www.obviouslogic.com:8080/solutions/lion-vmware/ and the OSInstall.mpkg and PlatformSupport.pkg from the "Educational Materials" from the torrent.

 

[optimistique1]

Core Duo Processor

Hmm, admittedly I may have been a little too trusting, however I don't use this as my main machine. Thanks for the tip and I'll try and monitor for any suspicious behaviour.

If anyone can detail how to reproduce the hack on the retail version when it is is shipped then I'd be interested in finding out how. I might take a look at the files in the package tonight and see what I can work out.

Cheers

Hi Buddy your guide looks great, do you know if there is anyway to run 10.7 GM on a machine that only has a Core Duo Processor and not the upgraded Core 2 Duo?

 

[Intell]

Hi Buddy your guide looks great, do you know if there is anyway to run 10.7 GM on a machine that only has a Core Duo Processor and not the upgraded Core 2 Duo?

A 64-bit CPU is required. The Core Duo is not 64-bit.

 

[roobarb!]

A 64-bit CPU is required. The Core Duo is not 64-bit.

True. To clarify, the Finder is now compiled with only 64-bit binaries, so there's no way it'll run on a Core Duo (which is 32-bit only). The Finder is pretty fundamental, so while you might get to the desktop, you'll bump into so many issues as to make it useless.

Just to rub a little salt in, Lion's new Finder was 32 and 64-bit in DP1, so again, it's an arbitrary decision by Apple to ensure there's no support for 32-bit CPUs.

 

[andreas.b]

But all 32-bit macs are socketed as far as I know, so what's stopping you from putting a 64-bit CPU in it?