macOS Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Discussion

[houser]

I still cannot work out why Apple will NOT support earlier machines: after all, I, for one, running a 2018 Mac Mini do simply NOT have the money to buy something newer.

Your answer is in your question. Many people with old computers that work ok don't want to be forced to upgrade or can not afford it. It is a combo of the Apple bottom line and their own standards for acceptable snappy performance, the usual US vulture capitalism and market research. The apple silicon Macs are very nice and quiet and do hard processes with passive cooling that are unthinkable on Intel. Ah well. Not hard to figure out their switch from Intel when you have heard the singing of the fans from your old Macs for long enough
Ubuntu works too.

 

[BeatCrazy]

I still cannot work out why Apple will NOT support earlier machines: after all, I, for one, running a 2018 Mac Mini do simply NOT have the money to buy something newer, and unlikely to in the next 2-3 years. By then I might be so effed-off with Apple I'll default to my "second love": Xubuntu, on one of several perfectly capable, far cheaper machines I have lying around the place winking at me. Now, were Apple to let me bung "Tahoe', "Vegas', and "Whatever-that-funny-area-in-America-where-the-aliens-land" I might feel more PRO investing in a newere Mac when I have the money rather than a nice wodd-turning lathes and/or a set of semi-decent golf clubs.

Good news. You don’t have to buy a new computer. Your 2018 mini will work just fine this year. And next year. And the next. In late 2027, you probably won’t get new security updates.

If you can save up $20/month between now and then, you’ll have enough for a great/new computer by late ‘27.

 

[StefanAM]

Thank you, @khronokernel, for this ride, and wish you the best in whatever you decide to do! Respect!

 

[MacinMan]

For me, the financial part exists, but in addition to that, for me it's also the direction Apple has taken as a company which has made me question if I want a new Mac. Let me explain:

As a Child, Apple was recommended to me as I have low vision, and back in the 80's 90's Apple was a very good platform for people with special needs, they were way ahead of the other options back then.

As I learned to use a computer and found more, and more I enjoyed using them for, I stayed with Apple computers.
Fast forward until today. I went through the 68K to PPC transition, and then PPC to Intel. The Intel migration was my favorite because it combined Apple and Intel, meaning owning an Intel Mac typically meant, you only needed one computer that could do, or run anything, unless you wanted to custom build a compute (of course.) Because of this, I've built up quite a few niche things I like to do with my Mac, or at least have the options available to me.

Switching to an Apple Silicon Mac will in fact, keep the Apple specific features, but then I'll lose the Intel related stuff like retro gaming, or legacy software that still works today, but may not translate well, or at all to the new platform, and there may, or may not be a suitable replacement, especially if the software isn't currently actively developed / maintained anymore. The other problem is finding an exact Apple Silicon replacement for this 27" iMac, it's the perfect size and form factor, in terms of physical size / space needed, and comfortable screen size visually, that's not too big, or too small.

So, that's why I used the analogy on the Sequoia thread of wanting a solution that's stable, current, and compatible, but includes Microsoft's ideology of backward compatible, Apple's cutting edge, and the flexibility of Linux.

The other thing is, I've found Linux to work well for running windows based games, where macOS can, but it doesn't work as well for certain titles. Someone mentioned a while back about the Apple Silicon Macs improving on this, but what about all the old 32-bit Intel based titles, that were either DOS, or older Windows games?
The main thing, holding me back from just switching to Linux, and calling it a day is mainly text message forwarding. This is more of an accessibility feature for me, as it's much easier to type on a touch screen, even with voice dictation options.

One thing people need to remember about me is, I prefer retro computing, but also like to be current enough for reasonable security, and compatibility, but I don't requite the latest, usually.

 

[idenis42]

This T2 chip is not needed!!! Without the T2 chip, the system can work fine on older computers. What kind of system security are they talking about??? I still don't understand it. I bought a computer and this computer is mine, I can do anything with it, for example, change the graphics card and install a driver. That's my right. And don't let them touch me! Our people are poor. Apple is too rich. There are a lot of us people. Everyone can buy a cheap computer. APPLE has a lot of money. Apple also wants us to buy a new computer every year because of some unnecessary chip or block or something... I consider it violence on his part. People can't afford to buy expensive computers every year. I believe that Apple should stop introducing tricky prohibitions with some unnecessary chips... The OCLP programmer left us and went to apple. I think he did the wrong thing!An intel computer performs better than apple Silicon computers in all respects. That's my word! The graphics card should not be embedded inside the processor. The graphics card must be discrete. That's the only way! My word is that apple did the wrong thing.

 

[F1Mac]

I don't understand this animosity towards the OLCP developer. It's a strange reaction to say the least. These people give a lot of their time and energy to keep our unsupported Macs alive with the latest macOS releases. They don't HAVE to do it. We should all be grateful instead and thank them for their amazing efforts. Meanwhile OCLP isn't going anywhere, and while I'm looking forward to having Tahoe on my 2013 Mac Pro, at the end of the day there is no urgency, Sequoia runs flawlessly thanks to the team's outstanding work.

Heartfelt thank you for his work and I wish him nothing but the best for the future and his new endeavours.

 

[ronton3]

I don't understand this animosity towards the OLCP developer. It's a strange reaction to say the least. These people give a lot of their time and energy to keep our unsupported Macs alive with the latest macOS releases. They don't HAVE to do it. We should all be grateful instead and thank them for their amazing efforts. Meanwhile OCLP isn't going anywhere, and while I'm looking forward to having Tahoe on my 2013 Mac Pro, at the end of the day there is no urgency, Sequoia runs flawlessly thanks to the team's outstanding work.

Heartfelt thank you for his work and I wish him nothing but the best for the future and his new endeavours.

There is also the option to show support by donating, which I will do again when the Tahoe support comes out, probably should do it anyway.

 

[peppolone]

Starting next week, I'll be joining Apple's Bug Bounty team in Seattle.

Yeah, that says it all... with money, Apple can fix anything.
That's why he's letting the OCLP team down.

First, he was a big Apple opponent who, as he himself writes, didn't even work on the OCLP with Apple devices at first, and now he's working at Apple (for his former enemy).

This has absolute parallels to the time when a well-known iOS jailbreaker (I can't remember the name right now) also went to work for Apple.

It's good for Apple to eliminate unwanted competition like OCLP. After all, Apple has zero interest in supporting old Apple devices, even those that are more than 7 years old. Apple wants people to buy new APPLE devices!!!

Hopefully this defector won't hurt the rest of the OCLP team too much.

I don't see how someone who works on a project like OCLP, which extends the life of older Apple systems, can be considered an "opponent" or "enemy" of Apple.

Speaking for myself, I use OCLP because I genuinely appreciate Apple's products and want to continue using them. If anything, it's a testament to how good their hardware is that people want to keep it running for so long. Using OCLP lets me continue to enjoy the Apple experience, and I don't feel like I'm their enemy, nor do I consider them mine. Perhaps this individual joining Apple's Bug Bounty team is simply looking to contribute their skills to improve Apple's overall security, which is a good thing for everyone.

 

[ADGrant]

I think you get it opposite, I think the challenge this year will getting it run on all T2 Macs. The 2018 MacBook Air has T2 and OCLP isn't support this version.

The 2020 iMac with Fusion Drive does not have T2 security chip, so the T2 security chip isn't the hardline system requirement for macOS Tahoe. Therefore, I think all the dropped Mac, which all have T2 chip wouldn't be patched to run macOS 26 anytime soon.

There is no 2020 iMac with Fusion Drive, all 2020 iMacs have a T2 chip.

 

[ADGrant]

According to this guy, the 21,5" fusion variant of 2020 does not have T2.

edit: But I am unsure there even was an 2020 21,5", so maybe he got it wrong.

There wasn't a 2020 21,5", he got it wrong.

 

[MacinMan]

I don't understand this animosity towards the OLCP developer. It's a strange reaction to say the least. These people give a lot of their time and energy to keep our unsupported Macs alive with the latest macOS releases. They don't HAVE to do it. We should all be grateful instead and thank them for their amazing efforts. Meanwhile OCLP isn't going anywhere, and while I'm looking forward to having Tahoe on my 2013 Mac Pro, at the end of the day there is no urgency, Sequoia runs flawlessly thanks to the team's outstanding work.

Heartfelt thank you for his work and I wish him nothing but the best for the future and his new endeavours.

I personally have never been against OCLP, I have used it, and it works very well for what it is. I know the comment wasn't directed at me, but I was still curious about it. In my case if OCLP has done anything to help me, it's helped me see the direction Apple has taken as a company and with their desktop OS. I'm not sure if I want to continue to support that by purchasing a new Mac. Apple would have to show me something genuinely appealing that I need to help me decide to get a new mac. macOS already does what I need it to, and to add security updates, and new features I probably won't use enough to make the cost worth it, just doesn't seem to make it worth it to me.

BTW, the other reason I would choose a new machine over using a project such as OCP is mainly for support in terms of from Apple, and the developers of the software I use, if I were to ever need it.

 

[ADGrant]

This T2 chip is not needed!!! Without the T2 chip, the system can work fine on older computers. What kind of system security are they talking about??? I still don't understand it. I bought a computer and this computer is mine, I can do anything with it, for example, change the graphics card and install a driver. That's my right. And don't let them touch me! Our people are poor. Apple is too rich. There are a lot of us people. Everyone can buy a cheap computer. APPLE has a lot of money. Apple also wants us to buy a new computer every year because of some unnecessary chip or block or something... I consider it violence on his part. People can't afford to buy expensive computers every year. I believe that Apple should stop introducing tricky prohibitions with some unnecessary chips... The OCLP programmer left us and went to apple. I think he did the wrong thing!An intel computer performs better than apple Silicon computers in all respects. That's my word! The graphics card should not be embedded inside the processor. The graphics card must be discrete. That's the only way! My word is that apple did the wrong thing.

Apple does a fairly decent job supporting older Macs. The 2017 iMac Pro will have beed supported for almost a decade when it stops receiving patches.

I am using a five year old Intel iMac but I am not going to argue that it "performs better than apple Silicon computers in all respects". Its better for running Windows apps, but that's about it now.

 

[OKonnel]

Good news. You don’t have to buy a new computer. Your 2018 mini will work just fine this year. And next year. And the next. In late 2027, you probably won’t get new security updates.

If you can save up $20/month between now and then, you’ll have enough for a great/new computer by late ‘27.

Exactly as you say, man 😉 And besides, we will probably feel a real difference in 2027 compared to buying a Mac today.
In my case, for example, I'm ultra-satisfied with my late 2013 iMac which with Sonoma and OCLP flies and is ultra-stable (see my Signature at the bottom of the post; but if you use a mobile device put it in landscape or the Signature doesn't appear).
When I use my friends' Silicon Macs, I just notice that they turn on almost immediately but then, in the Finder, the perceived speed and efficiency is identical to my Mac in every situation.
Of course I know I can't expect lightning-fast video processing and compression, but not being a video maker I don't mind.

Finally, thanks to BetterDisplay Pro, I discovered that my iMac's display goes HiDPI and the apparent definition, in common use, is equal to that of Studio Display...

 

[idenis42]

Apple Silicon disappointed me with its tests and speed. For example. The video was processed in 34 minutes on M2. On a 2011 Intel Mac computer with a WX7100 graphics card, the processing took 27 minutes. Apple Silicon turns on quickly. Intel Mac turns on quickly too. Offices start instantly on both computers. One disappointing thing is that Apple Silicon is thinking slower. Intel Mac thinks faster. I'm more comfortable working with an Intel Mac computer. The sound in both computers is good. There is one disappointment, the sound volume level in Apple Silicon is quieter. There is not enough voltage. In the parallels desktop emulator, the Battlefield game slows down. On an intel mac, you can play smoothly in the parallels desktop emulator. It slows down to work in two-dimensional graphics on an Apple Silicon computer, with only 39 FPS. I'm very comfortable working on an Intel Mac 169 FPS computer. The question is, who needs an Apple Silicon computer?If the computer is new, it does not mean that it is better. We need to look at all the characteristics so that we can safely draw conclusions. Only honestly!!! I definitely don't like the Apple Silicon computer. One disappointment! No offense!

 

[richmond62]

Your answer is in your question. Many people with old computers that work ok don't want to be forced to upgrade or can not afford it. It is a combo of the Apple bottom line and their own standards for acceptable snappy performance, the usual US vulture capitalism and market research. The apple silicon Macs are very nice and quiet and do hard processes with passive cooling that are unthinkable on Intel. Ah well. Not hard to figure out their switch from Intel when you have heard the singing of the fans from your old Macs for long enough
Ubuntu works too.

Oh, I'm not able to hear the singing of the fans from my 'old' Macs: possibly the only time I have been grateful for tinnitus . . . LOL

 

[olad]

Starting next week, I'll be joining Apple's Bug Bounty team in Seattle.

Yeah, that says it all... with money, Apple can fix anything.
That's why he's letting the OCLP team down.

First, he was a big Apple opponent who, as he himself writes, didn't even work on the OCLP with Apple devices at first, and now he's working at Apple (for his former enemy).

This has absolute parallels to the time when a well-known iOS jailbreaker (I can't remember the name right now) also went to work for Apple.

It's good for Apple to eliminate unwanted competition like OCLP. After all, Apple has zero interest in supporting old Apple devices, even those that are more than 7 years old. Apple wants people to buy new APPLE devices!!!

Hopefully this defector won't hurt the rest of the OCLP team too much.

@Oxygen-X1. Never have I seen anything more 'entitled' in my time on MacRumors.
A guy gives 5 years of his time (and part of his life) to developing software that enabled old Macs to run modern software. He charged nothing for it. I don't know how many benefited from it, but I would say thousands. At no time did he write that he was an 'enemy' of Apple (I checked) - he wrote that he avoided Apple products. So did I, because I couldn't afford them. Now he moves on and Apple recognised his worth enough to offer him a job, something different from what he was doing, which didn't 'put food on the table'. And you accuse him of 'defecting'! He owed you nothing, nor the rest of us who benefitted from his team's work. Those who joined him to make OCLP knew his worth! I wonder, if you had his skills, what would you have done? Don't answer that.

I join others in saying a huge 'Thanks' to Mykola for the journey, for making me enjoy the early TUI-based OCLP, the sheer excitement of getting MBP4,1, various ancient MBAs and later, an MBP11,4 to work with everything thrown at them. It's been a great pleasure and honour to use OCLP in all its forms, and I wish you - Mykola - the very best at Apple. Truly.

 

[amaze1499]

@Oxygen-X1. Never have I seen anything more 'entitled' in my time on MacRumors.
A guy gives 5 years of his life to developing software that enabled old Macs to run modern software. He charged nothing for it. I don't know how many benefited from it, but I would say thousands. At no time did he write that he was an 'enemy' of Apple (I checked) - he wrote that he avoided Apple products. So did I, because I couldn't afford them. Now he moves on and Apple recognised his worth enough to offer him a job, something different from what he was doing, which didn't 'put food on the table'. And you accuse him of 'defecting'! He owed you nothing, nor the rest of us who benefitted from his team's work. Those who joined him to make OCLP knew his worth! I wonder, if you had his skills, what would you have done? Don't answer that.

I join others in saying a huge 'Thanks' to Mykola for the journey, for making me enjoy the early TUI-based OCLP, the sheer excitement of getting MBP4,1, various ancient MBAs and later, an MBP11,4 to work with everything thrown at them. It's been a great pleasure and honour to use OCLP in all its forms, and I wish you - Mykola - the very best at Apple. Truly.

Yes! Thank you!

 

[Oxygen-X1]

@Oxygen-X1. Never have I seen anything more 'entitled' in my time on MacRumors.
A guy gives 5 years of his time (and part of his life) to developing software that enabled old Macs to run modern software. He charged nothing for it. I don't know how many benefited from it, but I would say thousands. At no time did he write that he was an 'enemy' of Apple (I checked) - he wrote that he avoided Apple products. So did I, because I couldn't afford them. Now he moves on and Apple recognised his worth enough to offer him a job, something different from what he was doing, which didn't 'put food on the table'. And you accuse him of 'defecting'! He owed you nothing, nor the rest of us who benefitted from his team's work. Those who joined him to make OCLP knew his worth! I wonder, if you had his skills, what would you have done? Don't answer that.

I join others in saying a huge 'Thanks' to Mykola for the journey, for making me enjoy the early TUI-based OCLP, the sheer excitement of getting MBP4,1, various ancient MBAs and later, an MBP11,4 to work with everything thrown at them. It's been a great pleasure and honour to use OCLP in all its forms, and I wish you - Mykola - the very best at Apple. Truly.

@olad. gets a "like" from me too.

Everything you wrote is correct.
Then you'll probably be happy if a working OCLP for Tahoe never appears
again if the lead developer doesn't continue.

The whole world was hoping for this, because it's the last Intel-supporting macOS,
that it will continue to run on older Intel Macs.

But now that the lead man at OCLP is switching to Apple for money, Sequoia 15.6.x will
mean the end of macOS on older Intel Macs.

And that's nice? Or is it?
Why don't you respond to this and don't just repeat everything else that others write!!!

I have also donated several hundred dollars to the OCLP Team and that is why I
am even more annoyed that it is all probably over now.
By the way, in other forums many people share my, albeit critical, opinion about the head of OCLP.

 

[StefanAM]

@olad. gets a "like" from me too.

Everything you wrote is correct.
Then you'll probably be happy if a working OCLP for Tahoe never appears
again if the lead developer doesn't continue.

The whole world was hoping for this, because it's the last Intel-supporting macOS,
that it will continue to run on older Intel Macs.

But now that the lead man at OCLP is switching to Apple for money, Sequoia 15.6.x will
mean the end of macOS on older Intel Macs.

And that's nice? Or is it?
Why don't you respond to this and don't just repeat everything else that others write!!!

I have also donated several hundred dollars to the OCLP Team and that is why I
am even more annoyed that it is all probably over now.
By the way, in other forums many people share my, albeit critical, opinion about the head of OCLP.

I totally disagree with you. Thinking like that is selfish. But this is me.....

 

[olad]

@olad. gets a "like" from me too.

Everything you wrote is correct.
Then you'll probably be happy if a working OCLP for Tahoe never appears
again if the lead developer doesn't continue.

The whole world was hoping for this, because it's the last Intel-supporting macOS,
that it will continue to run on older Intel Macs.

But now that the lead man at OCLP is switching to Apple for money, Sequoia 15.6.x will
mean the end of macOS on older Intel Macs.

And that's nice? Or is it?
Why don't you respond to this and don't just repeat everything else that others write!!!

I have also donated several hundred dollars to the OCLP Team and that is why I
am even more annoyed that it is all probably over now.
By the way, in other forums many people share my, albeit critical, opinion about the head of OCLP.

This is what the 'lead man' wrote:

What does this mean for OpenCore Legacy Patcher?

"Hopefully very little, as there are still going to be a ton of brilliant members working on the patcher. The project will be in good hands."

He couldn't do better than that. In any case, Tahoe (MacOS 26) is the last Intel-supported macOS. So 15.6 - which works pretty well as it is, should be a no-brainer to develop; you may have noticed that there are more than 25 active AND mentioned contributors (Jazzzny (what a handle!), ASentientBot, and all the others, each with their contributions that gave us OCLP). I have contributed no money; but if I had, I don't think I would be asking how the money is spent, especially since contribution was voluntary.

If others in other forums share your opinion of Mykola, that's their privilege. Some share your opinion on this thread too. But most of us here - well I think I can say that most of us who have been here since OCLP started - do not share your opinion.
Have a great day.

 

[ronton3]

@olad. gets a "like" from me too.

Everything you wrote is correct.
Then you'll probably be happy if a working OCLP for Tahoe never appears
again if the lead developer doesn't continue.

The whole world was hoping for this, because it's the last Intel-supporting macOS,
that it will continue to run on older Intel Macs.

But now that the lead man at OCLP is switching to Apple for money, Sequoia 15.6.x will
mean the end of macOS on older Intel Macs.

And that's nice? Or is it?
Why don't you respond to this and don't just repeat everything else that others write!!!

I have also donated several hundred dollars to the OCLP Team and that is why I
am even more annoyed that it is all probably over now.
By the way, in other forums many people share my, albeit critical, opinion about the head of OCLP.

I like that you have donated. Now would be a good time to put this to rest.

 

[Oxygen-X1]

This T2 chip is not needed!!! Without the T2 chip, the system can work fine on older computers. What kind of system security are they talking about??? I still don't understand it. I bought a computer and this computer is mine, I can do anything with it, for example, change the graphics card and install a driver. That's my right. And don't let them touch me! Our people are poor. Apple is too rich. There are a lot of us people. Everyone can buy a cheap computer. APPLE has a lot of money. Apple also wants us to buy a new computer every year because of some unnecessary chip or block or something... I consider it violence on his part. People can't afford to buy expensive computers every year. I believe that Apple should stop introducing tricky prohibitions with some unnecessary chips... The OCLP programmer left us and went to apple. I think he did the wrong thing!An intel computer performs better than apple Silicon computers in all respects. That's my word! The graphics card should not be embedded inside the processor. The graphics card must be discrete. That's the only way! My word is that apple did the wrong thing.

The OCLP programmer left us and went to apple. I think he did the wrong thing!An intel computer performs better than apple Silicon computers in all respects.
You are of exactly the same opinion as I am!!

 

[macpro_mid2014]

I apologize for my enigmatic message, but there it goes:

In my opinion, this whole discussion is not about OCLP and Mykola going to work for Apple at all...

For those old enough in these unsupported Mac forums will remember facts that corroborate my beliefs.
But sincerely, I want to believe that I am wrong, I really do! And no, I am not going to talk about this subject and explain myself and if you have no clue what I am talking about, try not to be naive and open up your eyes.

Remember, this is not the forum to discuss that!

I am very grateful to Mykola and all the Devs for their commitment and very hard work. Without them, my 3 unsupported Macs would had gone a long time ago.

I wish @khronokernel the best of luck at Apple! They are very fortunate to have him there.

Thank you all and have a great week!

 

[Oxygen-X1]

I apologize for my enigmatic message, but there it goes:

In my opinion, this whole discussion is not about OCLP and Mykola going to work for Apple at all...

For those old enough in these unsupported Mac forums will remember facts that corroborate my beliefs.
But sincerely, I want to believe that I am wrong, I really do! And no, I am not going to talk about this subject and explain myself and if you have no clue what I am talking about, try not to be naive and open up your eyes.

Remember, this is not the forum to discuss that!

I am very grateful to Mykola and all the Devs for their commitment and very hard work. Without them, my 3 unsupported Macs would had gone a long time ago.

I wish @khronokernel the best of luck at Apple! They are very fortunate to have him there.

Thank you all and have a great week!

Also beautifully written, super grateful (almost slimy), like others here. And above all, really slimy,
but not having donated a single penny, yes, those are the right people here.

The fact that your Mac devices from your signature will probably never see macOS 26 Tahoe
doesn't bother you at all, of course? Or does it?

I suspect that without this person Mykola, OCLP will shut down.

That's done for good: macOS 26 on Intel Macs, and of course you think that's absolutely great, right?
That sounds something like "well, it's good that he switched to Apple," we don't need him anymore.

Man oh man oh man, if only you would think more carefully about the disadvantages these are
for all those who were hoping for a functioning OCLP for what is now the last macOS for Intel PCs.

 

[OKonnel]

@olad. gets a "like" from me too.

Everything you wrote is correct.
Then you'll probably be happy if a working OCLP for Tahoe never appears
again if the lead developer doesn't continue.

The whole world was hoping for this, because it's the last Intel-supporting macOS,
that it will continue to run on older Intel Macs.

But now that the lead man at OCLP is switching to Apple for money, Sequoia 15.6.x will
mean the end of macOS on older Intel Macs.

And that's nice? Or is it?
Why don't you respond to this and don't just repeat everything else that others write!!!

I have also donated several hundred dollars to the OCLP Team and that is why I
am even more annoyed that it is all probably over now.
By the way, in other forums many people share my, albeit critical, opinion about the head of OCLP.

Two days ago I read that the good Mykola Grymalyuk (aka @khronokernel) has been hired by Apple and has become a full-time 'Apple Product Security Engineer'. (Source: LinkedIn and Mykola's blog)

Mykola's story, even as a child, is touching and he himself talks about it in his blog.
The good and kind @khronokernel created OCLP for fun and Apple, instead of persecuting and/or punishing him, now welcomes him among its Engineers. We should rejoice for him, but also for us, because thanks to him Apple could reduce some greedy attitudes. Hurray!

In the early days of OCLP, on a few occasions, I had the good fortune and privilege to speak directly with Mykola (exchanging a few e-mails with which he helped me personally) and I was surprised by his great simplicity and disinterest in money. Mykola, in fact, refused any financial help from me (which he could have used for development) and asked me, instead, to help some Institute for scientific research on the Crohn's disease from which he suffers (note: he publicly declares this himself and therefore I am not revealing any secrets...).

Subsequently OCLP set up a way to receive aid to buy old Macs and the donations are transparent. Nobody got rich, but if anything the other way around.... And the money was also used to enable trips to Cupertino and support Mykola's stay at some WWDCs
So let's give credit and thank rather than criticise.

For my part, I believe that our unsupported Intel Macs have reached the top with macOS Sonoma and some, more recent ones, with Sequoia.
There isn't much difference between Sonoma and Sequoia, but Sonoma is more stable, perhaps because Sequoia is subject to new restrictions on extended attributes and security controls that (in some cases) cause strange behaviour, and because Sequoia is used (and burdened) by Apple to research how to integrate AI features that don't affect Intel Macs. Spotlight also suffers and often slows down the Mac... Why use Sequoia, then, if not only for the some Macs where Sonoma proves more unstable?

As far as macOS Tahoe is concerned, the cosmetic leap (irrelevant for those who want to use their unsupported Intel Macs for work and are doing well) is very reminiscent of the transition from Catalina to Big Sur. Stability, in fact, began to reappear with macOS 12.4 Monterey, and up to Sonoma our old Macs, thanks to OCLP, have become increasingly stable and fast.
Tahoe, moreover, will not change the practical use of old Macs at all, and one must also consider that all the engineers' concentration is now totally absorbed in optimising the Code for silicon Macs. Consequently, there is a risk that there will be many bugs or conflicts, visible or hidden, when using Tahoe on Intel machines….
This is inevitable and rightly part of progress.