Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
macOS 10.13 and iOS 11 System requirement predictions
- Thread starter Lounge vibes 05
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They shouldn't drop any Macs, they already dropped too many for sierra even though there was no reason to justify it for the most part.
Whenever Metal is considered as "ready", Apple will drop Macs that don't support it. It's too expensive to maintain compatibility and write drivers for openGL, CL and Metal for every GPU there is and will be. Metal will make things simpler. One driver is enough per GPU.
To keep compatibility with older apps Apple could write a layer on top of Metal to emulate openGL and CL. But still it would work only with hardware compatible with Metal.
When Metal is ready is unknown... 10.13 or 10.14? We'll know pretty soon, if it is 10.13.
I suppose this could be one of the reasons why Apple dropped Nvidia and why we haven't seen many updated Mac's recently. Less work and money for the drivers. They're waiting for Metal to be completed.
Last edited:
I don't know. A part of me thinks that no Macs will be dropped this time, but the other part says my MacBook Pro mid 2010 will be unsupported, because iPhone 5 will be unsupported.
We'll wait and see. Actually, I think the Macs that don't support NightShift will be unsupported.
Last edited:
I don't buy into the top expensive excuse. Microsoft supports far more computers than Apple does, which is laughable given he cost of Macs.
Apple is lead by a beancounter. And Apple sold 18.4 million Macs last year while Windows sold over 220 million copies... so, Apple should put 1/10th of Microsofts OS R&D to be competitive... developing an OS is expensive. Where to find savings?
Well, Apple still makes money from the iOS devices.
That Apple has sold only 18.4 million Macs is clearly Apple's fault. I've told awhile ago, stop releasing every new OS every other year.
Remember Leopard compared to Tiger? It was clearly revolutionary. Now they release the same operating systems over and over again.
macOS Sierra only had pretty much Siri as a new feature. My desktop PC from 2004 can run Windows 10 (not very smoothly, but you still get the point)
OS X has the same operating systems over and over again. I'd understand dropping support for PowerPCs as it required a lot of extra money, but still…I see no reason to protect Apple on this one.
That Apple has sold only 18.4 million Macs is clearly Apple's fault. I've told awhile ago, stop releasing every new OS every other year.
Remember Leopard compared to Tiger? It was clearly revolutionary. Now they release the same operating systems over and over again.
macOS Sierra only had pretty much Siri as a new feature. My desktop PC from 2004 can run Windows 10 (not very smoothly, but you still get the point)
OS X has the same operating systems over and over again. I'd understand dropping support for PowerPCs as it required a lot of extra money, but still…I see no reason to protect Apple on this one.
Which sucks. The insane markup on Macs should go into long software support, not frwaking tv shows.
I'm with you. Sierra at most should have only dropped the 2007 Macs, and maybe the white 2008 MacBooks, but everything else can run it well (As shown by those who have got it running on unsupported Macs. Sierra literally had nothing in it. I highly doubt 10.13 will either. I also would love a two year cycle again. Apple barely gets one version stable and suddenly we're back to square one and they update iWork to only run on the new one and if you want to use the new iWork file format that they always seem to introduce, you're forced to upgrade.
I hope, that - if there's coming the macOS 10.xx "The Messiah" with Metal only, which excludes all other Macs - that the previous version will be LTS, Long Term Support that receives regular updates for an extra year or two.
For instance, if 10.13 is "The Messiah", then 10.12 should receive updates at least up to 10.12.12. Then Sierra would be rock stable and would earn the mountain name.
For instance, if 10.13 is "The Messiah", then 10.12 should receive updates at least up to 10.12.12. Then Sierra would be rock stable and would earn the mountain name.
Last edited:
I'm also curious if they would drop the Mac Pro 5,1.
Remember that metal is a GPU thing, not a "Mac" thing. A Mac Pro could easily support metal.
Also remember that Apple admitted to their Mac Pro 6,1 gaff and promised a modular Mac Pro int he future. Me thinks a way to honor their bargain is to keep the 5,1 line supported through OS 10.13.
If 2012 Mac Pros and above are only supported, then it should be easy for this community to patch the installer to treat a 2010 Mac Pro as a 2012 Mac Pro. They're the same damn thing.
Remember that metal is a GPU thing, not a "Mac" thing. A Mac Pro could easily support metal.
Also remember that Apple admitted to their Mac Pro 6,1 gaff and promised a modular Mac Pro int he future. Me thinks a way to honor their bargain is to keep the 5,1 line supported through OS 10.13.
If 2012 Mac Pros and above are only supported, then it should be easy for this community to patch the installer to treat a 2010 Mac Pro as a 2012 Mac Pro. They're the same damn thing.
I don't think they'll change retirement at all for a couple years. Last year was an adjustment for a bit.
Apple have just released advice on preparing for 10.13 [https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208018]. It says in part:
How long will Apple be selling Fusion drive Macs formatted with HFS+ ?
Doesn't make sense to me at present.
"When you upgrade to macOS High Sierra, systems with all flash storage configurations are converted automatically. Systems with hard disk drives (HDD) and Fusion drives won't be converted to APFS."
Does this mean HDD-only and Fusion drive Macs will not be able to boot APFS ? If so, what are they thinking ? Currently the only SSD-only desktop Macs are iMacs Pros.
How long will Apple be selling Fusion drive Macs formatted with HFS+ ?
Doesn't make sense to me at present.
APFS is compatible with hard disks and Fusion drives. Sounds like it's not automatically converting them, probably due to the time it would take.
Yes, the advice is that APFS is compatible with HDDs but the advice remains ambiguous. There is no advice on whether a startup HDD can be converted to APFS, whether or not there is a connected SSD. Reports are surfacing on Apple Discussions suggesting that many are unable to successfully convert an HDD-only startup drive.
I just wish there was clear, unambiguous advice from Apple on what will and will not work. Especially it would be great if Apple had issued release notes on the public beta releases. I wouldn't have wasted so much time trying to convert to APFS with each release.
I just wish there was clear, unambiguous advice from Apple on what will and will not work. Especially it would be great if Apple had issued release notes on the public beta releases. I wouldn't have wasted so much time trying to convert to APFS with each release.
Why should Apple waste time maintaining compatibility with really old hardware? I want Apple to be laser focused at innovating, not just keeping old crappy tech working.
Maybe Apple uses statistical data to decide where the cut off point should be? For example, when machines go to update the OS then they probably surrender some config stats which Apple go over to decide where the cut off point should be. If there are too little uptake for a certain model then maybe it's past its peak of usage and doesn't make sense to support? I'm figuring they use empirical data to drive these decisions.
[doublepost=1503846097][/doublepost]
The key verb in the support sentence is "upgrade". If you are not upgrading from a prior OS then your spinner should get APFS by default.
[doublepost=1503846169][/doublepost]
Apple sells a lot of base configurations which contain spinners. That "old crappy tech" is cutting edge for Apple still.
Ubuntu shows that is possible to make a pretty full of resources OS and keep the compatibility with old hardware with flavours. Will be easy for Apple, but MacOS is "free", so they won't keep a team making light versions of a system they won't sell. In my opinion, Apple is creating a bizarre situation where good hardware needs now Windows and Ubuntu to keep working, including my old Mac Mini.
Back to the subject, Sierra is better than a lot of previous versions, it's lighter and faster than El Capitan. But none of those systems will appropriately run in a HDD without a basic custom job. So basically will be possible to upgrade some Macs with HDD to High Sierra, but not advisable.
As for iOS, even more bizarre situation. iOS is better than Android, but both are problematic! (we are better than... what?) I have seen many people giving up of smartphone and buying a simple old fashioned cellphone - at list they can make calls! If nothing is done, Google and Apple only making newer versions for newer complex and expansive devices, smartphone will be a gadget only for enthusiasts and people that don't mind buying a partial useless product.
To be honest I have no clue what you're talking about. Computers at home will soon only be for enthusiasts. But everyone on earth will have a smartphone.
iOS is better than ever. Why would anyone buy a dumbphone to make a call? Who even makes calls nowadays?
Apple has officially advised that APFS will not be available for fusion drives in the first release of 10.13:
So, that answers the question for fusion drives. Can we expect APFS on hard drives in 10.14 ? Or never ?
So, that answers the question for fusion drives. Can we expect APFS on hard drives in 10.14 ? Or never ?
Everyone ON EARTH??? What earth are we talking about? Most of the world don't have 3G coverage nor WiFi near, sometimes not even signal. Besides, an iPhone 6s here is about US$ 700 (basic in iPlace) for people that earn US$ 2,7 per hour average (basically in Brazil, Mexico, China, etc.), and you know will not last even if you don't lost or be stolen - it's perishable. Everyone on earth with a smartphone in hands is still sci-fi.
• You know people don’t mean it literally when they say “everyone on earth”?
• The poorest people don’t afford a computer either, so why discuss them? We were talking about computers vs smartphones.
• If you go to Brazil, China etc you will se smartphones Everywhere. Computers, not so much. (Samsung is killing it in Brazil)