macOS Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Discussion

[amaze1499]

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.

For the sake of completeness: Collin, aka Dosdude1, layed the groundwork for the patcher we use today.

 

[olad]

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.

I can't understand you. OCLP development (and use) was voluntary. Nobody was forced to use it. Nobody's arm was twisted to donate; there was no invoice that OCLP development must continue because some folks donated money. If OCLP shuts down, so be it. @dosdude1's fantastic work stopped some time back; the world of Intel Macs didn't end. Now Apple has said it WILL shut down Intel Macs whenever Tahoe comes out; those who own Intel Macs will continue to use them, but that road is a dead end - D-E-A-D. You had a good ride for a few years, something you (probably) wouldn't have had without OCLP. You donated money. So did others. If they feel the same way as you do, the majority certainly aren't showing it on THIS forum, where his work mattered most.

Apple is not the 'devil'; it gave us Macs after all; however, it is Apple that's shutting down Intels, not @khronokernel!

But where is the charity that's supposed to be in us, to be glad for someone else's progress? Man, he don't owe you no nuthin'... (apologies to Black Americans). So, you are not super-grateful; and heaping praise on Mykola is 'almost slimy' and 'real slimy'! SMH.

BTW, I am sure the Hackintosh forums will continue to function even if OCLP dies. As we know, they do good work. You should migrate there - if, that is, you aren't there already. I wish you a great day.

 

[idenis42]

If the new operating system slows down on older computers, then it makes sense to replace the old one with a more powerful one. And if the new system works fine on older computers, I have a question, WHY does Apple limit the new operating system to some obscure T2 chips or blocks (AVX2) or something else??? Is this called security? No. This is a real mockery and violence against the people. OCLP protected us at a time when Apple was limiting us to a chip. We paid them money for OCLP work. And now OCLP has left and gone to Apple. I consider this a real betrayal. Everything is logical.

 

[Oxygen-X1]

indenis42 yes you have full Right !!!!!

 

[TOM1211]

Can we just close this thread now as it has nothing to do with the topic.

 

[Payne Mononymous Bachman]

Like what the actual crud is going on. You are should be fortunate for all of the hard work over the years to keep old unsupported Macs alive. Without OCLP and Dosdude1 you all would have had to invest in new Macs. The fact that one of the main developers got a job with Apple is incredible and they should be rewarded with all of the hard work they have done over the years. Lets end the fighting and negativity. If you can't then get out of this thread please. Also lets not jump to conclusions that OCLP is dead. Just because one of the main developers has left does not mean that others can't continue making the patcher compatible with Tahoe. The real focus should also be trying to reverse engineer Rosetta. If that can be done there might be a possibility to keep old macs alive once Intel is dropped for good that is if you can make a program that can take ARM based code run on a X86 platform. Anyways like I said lets end the fighting and be grateful for all of the hard work from the Devs over the years.

 

[Payne Mononymous Bachman]

Can we just close this thread now as it has nothing to do with the topic.

I would like to keep it open to see the progress of users already running it on unsupported machines. I hate when people are greedy and have to ruin a good thing going like this thread.

 

[dosdude1]

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.

OCLP is not going anywhere anytime soon, regardless of if Mykola is able to work on the project or not. There are many other developers working on the project as well, who will continue development on it throughout the lifecycle of Tahoe. Now, of course next year when Apple completely drops support for Intel, that’s it... No more binaries compiled for Intel, and there’s nothing anybody can do about that. So only at that point is when development and work on OCLP will stop. So, everyone can rest assured that every effort will continue being made to achieve as much legacy system compatibility with Tahoe as possible.

 

[K two]

OCLP is not going anywhere anytime soon, regardless of if Mykola is able to work on the project or not. There are many other developers working on the project as well, who will continue development on it throughout the lifecycle of Tahoe. Now, of course next year when Apple completely drops support for Intel, that’s it... No more binaries compiled for Intel, and there’s nothing anybody can do about that. So only at that point is when development and work on OCLP will stop. So, everyone can rest assured that every effort will continue being made to achieve as much legacy system compatibility with Tahoe as possible.

Thank you Collin for the clarification on the limited future of OCLP development. The departure of Mykola rattled many, perhaps now the dust can settle and we can move on calmly?

 

[ronton3]

OCLP is not going anywhere anytime soon, regardless of if Mykola is able to work on the project or not. There are many other developers working on the project as well, who will continue development on it throughout the lifecycle of Tahoe. Now, of course next year when Apple completely drops support for Intel, that’s it... No more binaries compiled for Intel, and there’s nothing anybody can do about that. So only at that point is when development and work on OCLP will stop. So, everyone can rest assured that every effort will continue being made to achieve as much legacy system compatibility with Tahoe as possible.

Thanks for the update and thanks for starting the whole thing.

 

[OKonnel]

Like what the actual crud is going on. You are should be fortunate for all of the hard work over the years to keep old unsupported Macs alive. Without OCLP and Dosdude1 you all would have had to invest in new Macs. The fact that one of the main developers got a job with Apple is incredible and they should be rewarded with all of the hard work they have done over the years. Lets end the fighting and negativity. If you can't then get out of this thread please. Also lets not jump to conclusions that OCLP is dead. Just because one of the main developers has left does not mean that others can't continue making the patcher compatible with Tahoe. The real focus should also be trying to reverse engineer Rosetta. If that can be done there might be a possibility to keep old macs alive once Intel is dropped for good that is if you can make a program that can take ARM based code run on a X86 platform. Anyways like I said lets end the fighting and be grateful for all of the hard work from the Devs over the years

Guys, I realise that some have not experienced the birth and history of OCLP.
Although @dosdude1 is credited for helping to create the OCLP application, and his wonderful Dosdude1’s Patch allows many users to use Catalina on very old Macs, in the interest of truth we must remember that the OCLP’ founder and main architect was @khronokernel (aka Mykola Grymalyuk), with the @dhinakg friend.
His great supervision and work we can SEE with our own eyes, and we can understand and appreciate it if we examine the contents of Dortania's site with all the 'Actions', ‘Issues’, news sections, etc.
Then there is a host of khronokernel’s friends and collaborators who have helped overcome great obstacles. I won't mention them here one by one and the 'credits' can be found on Dortania's OCLP page.
So, basically: @khronokernel & @dhinakg corresponds to OCLP as Steve Jobs & Steve Wozniak corresponds to Apple 🤗

 

[ronton3]

Tahoe Dev b2 is out. I am patiently waiting.

 

[5T33Z0]

For me, Audio stopped working on my Coffee Lake system after updating to beta 2. Will try Whiskeylake next – same issue. Could be an AppleALC-related issue.

 

[olad]

Tahoe Dev b2 is out. I am patiently waiting.

OT. I think MacRumors should have a bit more emoticons/emojis - what I would like are both related to laughter; one when I think something is ridiculous (risible), and the other in appreciation of a finer or funny take on any topic. And others like a warm smile, or a violent disagreement (I joke). But you get the idea.

 

[ronton3]

OT. I think MacRumors should have a bit more emoticons/emojis - what I would like are both related to laughter; one when I think something is ridiculous (risible), and the other in appreciation of a finer or funny take on any topic. And others like a warm smile, or a violent disagreement (I joke). But you get the idea.

When I said patiently waiting I meant--waiting for OCLP--. I should have been a bit more specific. During experimenting I did have the background and opening OS page once but it was stuck. I finally said enough is enough. LOL.

 

[RBSX1]

For me, Audio stopped working on my Coffee Lake system after updating to beta 2. Will try Whiskeylake next – same issue . Could be an AppleALC-related issue.

AppleHDA was remove on this beta. The only solution I found, until now, is VoodooHDA

 

[deeveedee]

I got myself into a little mess with FileVault enabled in Tahoe Beta 2 on my HackMini8,1. FileVault would not accept my password. I booted into Tahoe Beta Recovery, but was unable to unlock and decrypt through "normal" mechanisms. I was able unlock and decrypt by booting into Tahoe Recovery as follows:

1. Boot Tahoe Beta 2 Recovery
2. Select Tahoe Beta Volume to recover
3. Open Utilities > Terminal
4. execute 'diskutil apfs listUsers [Tahoe Beta Volume] to view user UUIDs and note the UUID for 'Local Open Directory User' (where Tahoe Beta Volume is /dev/diskXsY)
5. execute 'diskutil apfs decryptVolume [Tahoe Beta Volume] -user [UUID noted in step 4]
6. when prompted for password, enter your user password for your Tahoe Beta Volume

The encrypted volume should start to decrypt. Monitor decryption progress with 'diskutil apfs list'

After decryption is complete ('diskutil apfs list' reports FileVault 'No' for your Tahoe Beta Volume), reboot. You should now be able to boot and login to your Tahoe Beta Volume without FileVault.

EDIT: Credit - ChatGPT

 

[deeveedee]

Polaris appears to be fully supported now in Tahoe Beta 2. As others have noted, I don't have audio after the Tahoe Beta 2 upgrade. Note that my HackMini8,1 has a Radeon RX 560x (like the real iMac19,x). In order to perform the Beta 1 -> Beta 2 upgrade, I needed to complete the upgrade with the dGPU disabled (UHD630 iGPU only). After the upgrade completed, I enabled the dGPU for normal graphics operation.

Since I'm using WhateverGreen.kext, I disabled dGPU for the Beta 1 -> Beta 2 upgrade by specifying boot-arg -wegnoegpu. After the upgrade completed, I removed the boot-arg.

EDIT: Easy upgrade from Tahoe Beta 1 -> Beta 2 on my HackBookPro6,2 (SMBIOS MBP6,2 / non-metal Nvidia Tesla Graphics). No graphics acceleration and no Wi-Fi (since there are no OCLP post-install patches), but still amazed that the Tahoe installation was so smooth.

Spoiler

 

[idenis42]

Polaris appears to be fully supported now in Tahoe Beta 2. As others have noted, I don't have audio after the Tahoe Beta 2 upgrade. Note that my HackMini8,1 has a Radeon RX 560x (like the real iMac19,x). In order to perform the Beta 1 -> Beta 2 upgrade, I needed to complete the upgrade with the dGPU disabled (UHD630 iGPU only). After the upgrade completed, I enabled the dGPU for normal graphics operation.

View attachment 2522674

Since I'm using WhateverGreen.kext, I disabled dGPU for the Beta 1 -> Beta 2 upgrade by specifying boot-arg -wegnoegpu. After the upgrade completed, I removed the boot-arg.

Does your processor support AVX2?

 

[idenis42]

On my iMac 27, 2011, the Tahoe beta 2 system only works if installed on top of the sequoia system. Everything goes well from a clean install to a clean disk. But when registering at the privacy stage, it restarts. The sound is there, the keyboard and mouse are working. A video card without an accelerator, although it knows the WX7100 video card. It loads faster than the Sequoia system by 7 seconds. For example, sequoia loads 17 seconds before the end. The Tahoe loads in 10 seconds. So the system is lighter? Applications open faster than in the Sequoia system. That's all for now.

 

[deeveedee]

Does your processor support AVX2?

Yes - CoffeeLake.

Based on my own experience, I don't see any technical reason why macOS Tahoe dropped support for macMini8,1 and iMac19,x. Of course, Apple could continue to remove components with subsequent Tahoe Beta versions (like they did with AppleHDA).

 

[5T33Z0]

Because the decision was not based on technical considerations but on commercial ones… it's Apple after all

AppleHDA could make a return – just like the compatible for Polaris cards which have been reported working again in beta2

 

[5T33Z0]

I managed to get my Radeon RX580 back to work in beta 2. I had to disable Whatevergreen during Install. Otherwise the progress bar would get stuck early. Once the install was completed, I enabled it again and rebooted. GPU is working fine now.

 

[hvds]

MBP11,1 and MBP5,2: success with installing, booting and logging into Tahoe 26b1.
In both cases, using external SSD connected to onboard USB and made clean install. EFIs generated with OCLP 2.4.0 and modified in-place (on target SSD) to use OC 1.0.5 and the respective Info.plist in USB-Map.kext. Thanks again deveedee and others! See post #67.

Also in both cases, needed to first install Sequoia 15.5 from USB installer, and do all the fresh setup (no data migration), and then install 26b1 over it from USB installer. Without first having Sequoia, after clean install of 26b1 I was unable to proceed beyond login as it seemed that system assistant got stuck (3rd picture, from MBP5,2) - maybe it would just have taken longer than the 1hr I waited. Thanks to Larsvonhier for his remark earlier in the Tahoe posts.

So far so good or even excellent for this 1st beta - didn't expect more at this point.

MBP11,1: updated to 26.0b2 from b1.
On external SSD, using USB installer made from InstallAssistant.pkg downloaded via Mr.Macintosh. Installed over b1 which was installed over clean installation of 15.5 (direct clean Tahoe did not get beyond login/password entry).
Using same OCLP EFI as before, i.e. a modified 2.4.0.
Running at usable speed after letting it calm down for >1hr, until the Dock appeared at all. No patches applied. Writing this post from Safari on this Tahoe system.
Thunderbolt Ethernet working.
Sound not working.
At this early state of Tahoe, that means happiness...

Edit:
similarly, MBP5,2 updated to 26.0b2.
The dual-USB3 expresscard (nanotech) that I use to connect external keyboard and mouse still works in Tahoe.
Didn't get Safari to work yet.

 

[Oxygen-X1]

OCLP is not going anywhere anytime soon, regardless of if Mykola is able to work on the project or not. There are many other developers working on the project as well, who will continue development on it throughout the lifecycle of Tahoe. Now, of course next year when Apple completely drops support for Intel, that’s it... No more binaries compiled for Intel, and there’s nothing anybody can do about that. So only at that point is when development and work on OCLP will stop. So, everyone can rest assured that every effort will continue being made to achieve as much legacy system compatibility with Tahoe as possible.

Thanks @dosdude1 for the hopeful message.