macOS High Sierra (10.13) Unsupported Macs Thread

[roziek]

I have just installed HS Beta 9, everything works amazing, iCloud services (iMessage, FaceTime), NightShift, etc. But the only thing is that when I was installing the Post-Install patches, the APFS Patch was grayed out and I was unable to install the APFS file system. Any suggestions?

Thanks.

Post install patch does not install APFS, but rather patches a volume that is already formatted as APFS to be bootable on unsupported Macs.

And how do I do that (without a fresh install)?

Boot into your USB High Sierra installer and try either one:

1) Open Disk Utility, select your volume in the sidebar, choose Edit > Convert to APFS... (you probably have to unmount it first),

2) In Terminal, run "diskutil apfs convert /dev/diskXsY" command (replace X and Y with desired disk and volume identifiers).

 

[EugW]

High Sierra installed on my MacBookPro5,5 but the machine won't boot back to the USB drive for the post install patch. Damn.

I will try again with a different USB drive.

EDIT:

Success! I made a second patcher on a different USB drive and the same machine boots off that just fine. Did the post update patch and now I'm in High Sierra.

And I'm happy to report that the warning message for my old battery has now disappeared. It told me before that I needed to replace the battery. I appreciate the reasoning for the warning, but it's annoying nonetheless to see it displayed all the time.

Interestingly, now System Information says the condition of the battery is "Normal". Hmmm...

Also, I don't recall updating to Developer Beta 9. I had thought the downloaded copy (downloaded by the patcher today) was Beta 8. I guess not, since I have 17A360a installed.

 

[olad]

@dosdude1. Could the Patch Updater get the option 'Restart later...' please? Thank you

 

[roziek]

Also, I don't recall updating to Developer Beta 9. I had thought the downloaded copy (downloaded by the patcher today) was Beta 8. I guess not, since I have 17A360a installed.

Huh. For me it doesn't download the latest beta, have to find it through other means.

 

[EugW]

Huh. For me it doesn't download the latest beta, have to find it through other means.

My install was late last night. Maybe the timing has something to do with it?

The installer had a version number 13.0.55 but my install was 17A360a which is DB9. Dosdude1's patcher has a date of August 21 and a version number of 2.2.1.

Could there have been an automatic update somewhere during the process? I wasn’t watching it the whole time.

BTW, a little while later I got a reminder to do the Night Shift update. I hadn’t realized that was included.

Everything works perfectly, as mentioned. It feels slower than my 2017 Core m3 MacBook though. That one has a 1.2 GHz chip with Turbo up to 3.0 GHz, a much faster PCIe SSD, and 16 GB RAM. My 2009 MBP has a 2.26 Core 2 Duo, 128 GB Samsung 840 EVO (with HFS+ in High Sierra), and 4 GB RAM. Lots of memory compression necessary even just for very basic usage, and in the past when I was doing more with it, it was very easy to get swaps. I'll have to consider upgrading it to 8 GB.

4K 8-bit HEVC playback is a total lost cause on the 2009 MBP of course but now it can at least recognize the files, and it can now display HEIC/HEIF images. (The 2017 MacBook plays even 10-bit 4K HEVC perfectly.)

For me the patcher was not necessary for Sierra since El Capitan was good enough, but it’s a big deal to now have compatibility with High Sierra’s new file formats. Thanks!

---

BTW, there is now a visible vm directory. Is it normal to be visible?

 

[roziek]

BTW, a little while later I got a reminder to do the Night Shift update. I hadn’t realized that was included.

That’s thanks to the Patch Updater app, it’s in your Utilities folder inside the Applications folder. It gets installed with post install patches; handy thing.

It feels slower than my 2017 Core m3 MacBook though. That one has a 1.2 GHz chip with Turbo up to 3.0 GHz, a much faster PCIe SSD, and 16 GB RAM. My 2009 MBP has a 2.26 Core 2 Duo, 128 GB Samsung 840 EVO (with HFS+ in High Sierra), and 4 GB RAM. Lots of memory compression necessary even just for very basic usage, and in the past when I was doing more with it, it was very easy to get swaps. I'll have to consider upgrading it to 8 GB.

4GB is not even near enough. I say even 8GB is not enough these days. Unless maybe for very basic usage, very light work.

I had to upgrade my secondary Mac, a 13” MacBook Pro (officially High Sierra-supported) to 16GB years ago (somewhere around 2013-2014 maybe?) because I was constantly writing to disk (or very close to it). Thankfully an SSD, so the hit was not that big performance-wise, but still noticeable in every day usage.

The last macOS version I thin runs well on 4GB is Snow Leopard. How the memory is managed by the system changed with Lion and it went downhill from there with every next macOS version (the compression introduced later didn’t help much).

I’d say 8GB is bare minimum these days (unless used for light work and if you want to run one of the older macOS versions; like, max up to Mavericks maybe), but 16GB should really be considered standard, to have a well-performing machine, to be able to work comfortably. Especially if we’re talking older Macs, e.g. Core 2 Duo (they’re not up to the task with the newer macOS versions).
[doublepost=1504450104][/doublepost]Day to day, we use two unsupported 2008 Mac Pros (absolute beasts) and two officially High Sierra-supported 2011 13” MacBook Pros with i5 and i7, and 16GB RAM (as secondary machines when out and about). Mac Pros obviously perform very well, and MacBook Pros still perform well.

But there are two older Macs still in use (for various reasons) in our household:

1) an officially High Sierra-supported white plastic (2010 model I think?) MacBook with Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM and an SSD.

2) a 2008 15” MacBook Pro with Core 2 Duo, 8GB RAM and an SSD.

They both struggle with Sierra, though the 15” performs better thanks to more RAM.

While the i5 and i7 in our newer MacBook Pros are still up to the task, Core 2 Duos in the older ones are really not. And they’re constantly suffocating due to low RAM.

It would be hard to use them as day-to-day machines.

 

[EugW]

4GB is not even near enough. I say even 8GB is not enough these days. Unless maybe for very basic usage, very light work.

I had to upgrade my secondary Mac, a 13” MacBook Pro (officially High Sierra-supported) to 16GB years ago (somewhere around 2013-2014 maybe?) because I was constantly writing to disk (or very close to it). Thankfully an SSD, so the hit was not that big performance-wise, but still noticeable in every day usage.

The last macOS version I thin runs well on 4GB is Snow Leopard. How the memory is managed by the system changed with Lion and it went downhill from there with every next macOS version (the compression introduced later didn’t help much).

I disagree. Mavericks 10.9 did a lot to help out with low memory situations, since it introduced memory compression.

I’d say 8GB is bare minimum these days (unless used for light work and if you want to run one of the older macOS versions; like, max up to Mavericks maybe), but 16GB should really be considered standard, to have a well-performing machine, to be able to work comfortably. Especially if we’re talking older Macs, e.g. Core 2 Duo (they’re not up to the task with the newer macOS versions).
[doublepost=1504450104][/doublepost]Day to day, we use two unsupported 2008 Mac Pros (absolute beasts) and two officially High Sierra-supported 2011 13” MacBook Pros with i5 and i7, and 16GB RAM (as secondary machines when out and about). Mac Pros obviously perform very well, and MacBook Pros still perform well.

But there are two older Macs still in use (for various reasons) in our household:

1) an officially High Sierra-supported white plastic (2010 model I think?) MacBook with Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM and an SSD.

2) a 2008 15” MacBook Pro with Core 2 Duo, 8GB RAM and an SSD.

They both struggle with Sierra, though the 15” performs better thanks to more RAM.

While the i5 and i7 in our newer MacBook Pros are still up to the task, Core 2 Duos in the older ones are really not. And they’re constantly suffocating due to low RAM.

It would be hard to use them as day-to-day machines.

I do agree the 4 GB machine struggles with Sierra though, even with relatively light-moderate usage, but for basic light surfing and email, 4 GB is fine IMO. However, it's a lot better with 8 GB, and I could use an 8 GB machine as an everyday laptop in the short term.

As mentioned though, I did get 16 GB for my MacBook 12", and I also got 24 GB for my iMac, for the occasional times I need more memory, and because I keep my machines a long time.

 

[MB75]

Is this possible to download newest beta of HS directly from App Store when I'm running HS (beta 7), installed with Dosdude1 patcher v2.2.1 ?

 

[hvds]

Just to add another data point to the record of success of High Sierra on unsupported macs, great thanks to all contributors and testers! And also to state that here is another case of the mentioned NightShift problem.

View attachment 715449

I have a MacBookPro5.2, 17inches, mid2009, and use an external (USB) Samsung 840Pro SSD, 256GB, for the High Sierra installation. I am using the macOS High Sierra Patcher 2.2.1. The rest of my system I take from the internal SATA (sorry wrote SASE first) disk which is another Samsung SSD, with Sierra. This internal disk has trim enabled under HS without further action.

I worked happily with HS on HFS+ for a few days. Then I installed the NightShift patch using the Patch Updater, still on HFS+. I observe the same crashes in system settings as Funkstar2 did (in display, keyboard, mouse, trackpad - forgot to test accessibility). Doesn't bother me much, I don't really need NightShift, but I wanted to report.

I then converted this HFS+ system to APFS with terminal (diskutil apfs convert diskXsY) and then applied the Post Install patch for APFS. Worked perfectly! and of course inherited the system settings crashes.

Then did a fresh install on APFS right away, and that also works perfectly! So I'm quite sure the final HighSierra will run well on the MacBookPro5.2. Many thanks again!

(For completeness, I applied the NightShift patch again with Patch Updater... and yes, the system settings crash again. This seems to happen only in Funkstar2's and my case as far as I saw in this thread. Not a big deal for me anyway, but wanted to report.)

Just rebooted HS (3 Sept, 7pm in Switzerland), and the Patch Updater offered an new Nightshift patch. Installed it, rebooted - and yes, Nightshift works now for me too!
Not only that, also the other crashes in system settings are all gone.
Many thanks, this is excellent support!

 

[jhowarth]

New 2.2.2 is out. Did I miss the announcement of what changed in that release?

 

[dosdude1]

New 2.2.2 is out. Did I miss the announcement of what changed in that release?

I didn't announce anything, just fixed a minor issue with the "Download macOS" feature.

 

[idevicetubecam]

Post install patch does not install APFS, but rather patches a volume that is already formatted as APFS to be bootable on unsupported Macs.



Boot into your USB High Sierra installer and try either one:

1) Open Disk Utility, select your volume in the sidebar, choose Edit > Convert to APFS... (you probably have to unmount it first),

2) In Terminal, run "diskutil apfs convert /dev/diskXsY" command (replace X and Y with desired disk and volume identifiers).

[doublepost=1504524606][/doublepost]I did it like you described in the 1.Option and the conversion was successfull. But unfortunately my MBP 5,4 is no more able to show the HS-Drive as bootable. But when i boot in the HS-Installer USB i can see my Installation Drive

 

[EugW]

[doublepost=1504524606][/doublepost]I did it like you described in the 1.Option and the conversion was successfull. But unfortunately my MBP 5,4 is no more able to show the HS-Drive as bootable. But when i boot in the HS-Installer USB i can see my Installation Drive

Hmmm. I guess I’ll just stick with HFS+.

However, is it necessary to patch it post conversion?

 

[roziek]

[doublepost=1504524606][/doublepost]I did it like you described in the 1.Option and the conversion was successfull. But unfortunately my MBP 5,4 is no more able to show the HS-Drive as bootable. But when i boot in the HS-Installer USB i can see my Installation Drive

After patching, assuming the patches were correctly applied (you should choose your Mac model at the top and the disk you installed High Sierra on at the bottom; if it's APFS formatted, you'll see the APFS Patch automatically checked), you won't see your High Sierra drive in the boot menu, if that's what you were looking for. You'll see "EFI Boot", and this is what you should choose, it will boot into your High Sierra installation.
[doublepost=1504528037][/doublepost]

Hmmm. I guess I’ll just stick with HFS+.

However, is it necessary to patch it post conversion?

You should not be afraid to use APFS. The problem we're facing on unsupported Macs is that Apple did not provide us with updated firmware that is able to boot into APFS drives - and that's what we've been working on here.

But once you are booted into APFS High Sierra, everything is fine and fully working, because it's the system manages that aspect.

The only thing you can reasonably be afraid of are problems with APFS itself, as it's an entirely new filesystem - not the fact that you're running it on an unsupported Mac.

In short: if there's a problem with APFS on supported Macs, you'll have it too. If there are no problems there - you won't see any either.

Hope that makes sense .

P.S. I would advise against doing the conversion from HFS to APFS, if that's an option for you. Just format your disk/volume as APFS and then do a fresh High Sierra install on it. The more quirks-inducing factors you eliminate, the less problems you'll run into.

 

[idevicetubecam]

After patching, assuming the patches were correctly applied (you should choose your Mac model at the top and the disk you installed High Sierra on at the bottom; if it's APFS formatted, you'll see the APFS Patch automatically checked), you won't see your High Sierra drive in the boot menu, if that's what you were looking for. You'll see "EFI Boot", and this is what you should choose, it will boot into your High Sierra installation.
[doublepost=1504528037][/doublepost]

THERE IS NO "EFI Boot" avalble.
But my HS-Drive is only viewable wenn i boot into my HSIntallerUSB. I rerun the patcher two times on it.
but No chance

 

[roziek]

What's your setup? Mac model, how many disks installed, whether you're installing on an internal or external disk, etc. The more information the better.

Also, please provide a dump from "diskutil list" and "diskutil apfs list" (run them in Terminal).

 

[jhowarth]

After patching, assuming the patches were correctly applied (you should choose your Mac model at the top and the disk you installed High Sierra on at the bottom; if it's APFS formatted, you'll see the APFS Patch automatically checked), you won't see your High Sierra drive in the boot menu, if that's what you were looking for. You'll see "EFI Boot", and this is what you should choose, it will boot into your High Sierra installation.
[doublepost=1504528037][/doublepost]

You should not be afraid to use APFS. The problem we're facing on unsupported Macs is that Apple did not provide us with updated firmware that is able to boot into APFS drives - and that's what we've been working on here.

Don't forget to mention that the current permutation of the APFS patch doesn't support encrypting the APFS volume so steer clear of doing that for now.

 

[EugW]

Thanks for all the info. It seems APFS adds an extra layer of complexity on these unsupported machines. While I appreciate the effort in getting APFS working for those who need it, I'm personally going to just avoid dealing with the extra complexity, esp. since for me, my MacBookPro5,5 is just a secondary machine. I'm just happy to get High Sierra working, so that I have full image format support. This is important, since going forward, all images from my wife's iPhone 6s and my iPhone 7 Plus will be HEIF/HEIC.

 

[roziek]

Don't forget to mention that the current permutation of the APFS patch doesn't support encrypting the APFS volume so steer clear of doing that for now.

Yeah, that too . Hope we'll get that working too at some point.

Thanks for all the info. It seems APFS adds an extra layer of complexity on these unsupported machines. While I appreciate the effort in getting APFS working for those who need it, I'm personally going to just avoid dealing with the extra complexity, esp. since for me, my MacBookPro5,5 is just a secondary machine. I'm just happy to get High Sierra working, so that I have full image format support. This is important, since going forward, all images from my wife's iPhone 6s and my iPhone 7 Plus will be HEIF/HEIC.

Sure, to each his own . I've been waiting for HFS+'s replacement for a long time, hece I myself am very excited for APFS and the perks it has.

P.S. I would argue that getting High Sierra working on APFS is no more complexity than getting High Sierra working on HFS. In both cases you need to prepare a patched USB installer and in both cases you need to apply post install patches. The only difference is that you have to format the disk as APFS instead of HFS+.

 

[EugW]

Sure, to each his own . I've been waiting for HFS+'s replacement for a long time, hece I myself am very excited for APFS and the perks it has.

P.S. I would argue that getting High Sierra working on APFS is no more complexity than getting High Sierra working on HFS. In both cases you need to prepare a patched USB installer and in both cases you need to apply post install patches. The only difference is that you have to format the disk as APFS instead of HFS+.

Well, in my case doing a fresh install would also be another extra step, or in fact, several extra steps. My High Sierra install on my 2009 MacBookPro5,5 is an upgrade. You recommended not doing an HFS+ to APFS conversion on these patched HFS+ Macs.

I will likely be using APFS on my 2017 MacBook and my 2017 iMac though, at least if it's reasonable to do conversions, esp. on the iMac. It would be irritating to have to do a fresh install on the iMac, as it would take hours to get everything reinstalled and configured to how I need to them to be configured.

 

[roziek]

True, I do not recommend it, because it has been a hit or miss for people. But if you can do a test run, on perhaps a second disk (clone your current system to it first) , then I would try that. It can work just fine for you and you wouldn't have to set everything up from scratch, you'll be working from an exact clone (I recommend either SuperDuper! or Carbon Copy Cloner).

I have still not yet decided whether I'll be using APFS on my day-to-day machine when High Sierra comes out (I really want to, though), but my concerns are purely related to APFS being just an infant of a filesystem. I just don't know how comfortable I am diving head first with all my important data to a filesystem so young. I'll try to hold out a bit and let the world test it first and Apple work out the kinks.

 

[idevicetubecam]

What's your setup? Mac model, how many disks installed, whether you're installing on an internal or external disk, etc. The more information the better.

Also, please provide a dump from "diskutil list" and "diskutil apfs list" (run them in Terminal).

OK Bro, the problem was that I didn't use the latest Sierra patcher ..
Now HS is working on APFS on my MBP 5,4 2009...
Thx for the great Job to all Devs

 

[roziek]

OK Bro, the problem was that I didn't use the latest Sierra patcher ..
Now HS is working on APFS on my MBP 5,4 2009...
Thx for the great Job to all Devs

I see . Great to hear that.

 

[jbarley]

I'm running High Sierra beta 17A330h, no known problems.
My concern is I'm pretty sure there have been more recent beta releases none of which I can seem to locate.
I do have the software update patch installed but so far I've yet to see an update show up in the Appstore.
Just maybe I'm miss-understanding how this should work?

Edit: Finally managed to update.
Re-registered in the beta program,
re-enrolled my MacPro,
re-applied the software update patch, and wella!
the Sierra public Beta 8 showed up and installed OK.

 

[tarasis]

Well, in my case doing a fresh install would also be another extra step, or in fact, several extra steps. My High Sierra install on my 2009 MacBookPro5,5 is an upgrade. You recommended not doing an HFS+ to APFS conversion on these patched HFS+ Macs.

If it helps I can report the conversion of an Samsung 830 SSD formatted with HFS+ converted to APFS without issue on my MacBook Pro 5,5

(Did it via command line. Lucky it did as I had already accidentally killed my time Machine backup copy)