MBP mid 2012 to install Snow Leopard?

[midnik]

Hey guys, first post so please do not hang me ^^
I have a MBP mid 2012 and i want to Dualboot my Catalina with Snow Leopard (for Rosetta programs).
I read that you can Install SL 10.6.7 on Ivy Bridge PCs with iBoot, but this is only for PC not for Mac.
I already partitioned my SSD with 800GB APFS for Catalina and 200GB MacOS Extended where SL should be installed on it, but the SL 10.6.7 image won't boot, it gets stuck in the beginning right after loading the mach kernel. I did not modify anything yet.
Do you know how to get this installed?

 

[theMarble]

If I recall correctly, @Amethyst1 managed to get Snow Leopard somewhat working on a 2012 13" rMBP, however graphics acceleration didn't work, meaning that any graphically-intensive apps will at best perform terribly, and at worst, will refuse to start at all (such as Final Cut Pro and Motion). Given the graphical demands of most websites these days, they could be an issue as well.

Hackintosh's are extremely different from an MBP in the context of what you are looking to do. With a Hackintosh, while you are running an Ivy Bridge CPU, which can be spoofed to run in SL, you are not running off the iGPU (the HD 4000), rather a PCIe-based GPU that has proper working drivers for SL (unless you are running a Kepler card), so graphics accleration will be working properly. You also choose USB cards and such that are supported in SL.

To put it simply, just don't put SL on it. My suggestion would be either to run Lion, which does work on a 2012 MBP, or pick up a 2011 or earlier MBP that can run Snow Leopard without issue.

 

[bobesch]

Hey guys, first post so please do not hang me ^^
I have a MBP mid 2012 and i want to Dualboot my Catalina with Snow Leopard (for Rosetta programs).
I read that you can Install SL 10.6.7 on Ivy Bridge PCs with iBoot, but this is only for PC not for Mac.
I already partitioned my SSD with 800GB APFS for Catalina and 200GB MacOS Extended where SL should be installed on it, but the SL 10.6.7 image won't boot, it gets stuck in the beginning right after loading the mach kernel. I did not modify anything yet.
Do you know how to get this installed?

AFAIK you cannot go below the OSX-version, that came preinstalled with your Mac.
For the mid2012 MBP it's Lion.
I didn't try to boot SL on my very same 2012 MBP but have a SL-Server-VM with Fusion, that runs quite decent - the only drawback is, that it hogs a full 40GB space on the hard drive. Speed is not a problem.
You may find SL-Server at MacintoshGarden. I'm sure VirtualBox will offer the option of a SL-VM too.
Edit: as @theMarble said: better don't hassle with SL-installation on an unsupported device but go for the real thing (which is IMHO a sturdy c2duo Unibody-MBP).

 

[theMarble]

but have a SL-Server-VM with Fusion, that runs quite decent, but hogs a full 40GB space on the hard drive. Speed is not a problem.

That's another good solution, but (correct me if I'm wrong) graphics accleration doesn't work, so depending on what apps OP wants to run, it may not be the best option.

AFAIK you cannot go below the OSX-version, that came preinstalled with your Mac.

There are a small handful of machines that can run OS's released before they came out, such as the Late 2011 MBP, which can run Snow Leopard without issue as the hardware and Model ID is identical to the Early 2011 MBP. This is obviously not the case for the 2012 MBP.

 

[bobesch]

That's another good solution, but (correct me if I'm wrong) graphics accleration doesn't work, so depending on what apps OP wants to run, it may not be the best option.

Oh, I was just in need for a Power-FaxMachine and that Fax.App was limited to Leopard/PPC&intel and SL.
So no experience, how graphics work unter distress ... but guess a quadcore i7 will cope!

There are a small handful of machines that can run OS's released before they came out, such as the Late 2011 MBP, which can run Snow Leopard without issue as the hardware and Model ID is identical to the Early 2011 MBP. This is obviously not the case for the 2012 MBP.

Naah, better stay off the i5/i7 15" MBP from 2010 to 2011. (Well, if it's about a 13" MBPs of that period: they are ok.)
For Leopard/SL a 15" c2duo from 2008 to 2009 might be better suited and longer lasting.
But more stuff ... Better try to get a VM running!

 

[theMarble]

Edit: as @theMarble said: better don't hassle with SL-installation on an unsupported device but go for the real thing (which is IMHO a sturdy c2duo Unibody-MBP).

Or better yet, get a 2011 13" MBP. The Sandy Bridge chips scream in comparison to any Penryn/Nehalem-based MBP, plus you get the added bonus of 1333MHz RAM, which is much easier to find these days than 1066MHz, given that the MCP79/89-based MBP's are extremely picky when it comes to memory speed and type.

You are giving up a slight bit of graphics performance with the HD 3000 in comparison to the 320M in the 2010 MBP, but that in my opinion is worth it. Of course, there is always the 2011 15"/17" MBP with the Radeon 6000M chips, but don't get one unless you really want the fastest Snow Leopard MBP and love to waste money on laptops with GPUs that are equivalent to ticking timebombs.

 

[B S Magnet]

If I recall correctly, @Amethyst1 managed to get Snow Leopard somewhat working on a 2012 13" rMBP, however graphics acceleration didn't work, meaning that any graphically-intensive apps will at best perform terribly, and at worst, will refuse to start at all (such as Final Cut Pro and Motion). Given the graphical demands of most websites these days, they could be an issue as well.

Hackintosh's are extremely different from an MBP in the context of what you are looking to do. With a Hackintosh, while you are running an Ivy Bridge CPU, which can be spoofed to run in SL, you are not running off the iGPU (the HD 4000), rather a PCIe-based GPU that has proper working drivers for SL (unless you are running a Kepler card), so graphics accleration will be working properly. You also choose USB cards and such that are supported in SL.

To put it simply, just don't put SL on it. My suggestion would be either to run Lion, which does work on a 2012 MBP, or pick up a 2011 or earlier MBP that can run Snow Leopard without issue.

Both @Amethyst1 and @greystash have reported varying aspects of SL-on-Ivy Bridge success — with the latter running on a patched mach_kernel (although they didn’t specify how their kernel was patched), while @LightBulbFun ’s test of spoofing the HD 4000 GPU to be read by the kernel as an HD 3000, as tested on Ivy Bridge CPUs, could be a key to making this happen.

This recurring discussion of note may also be something worthwhile enough, at some point, to strike a “Snow Leopard on Unsupported Intel Macs” wikipost into existence. The use-case for such a wikipost would focus, for most practical intents, on the 2012 and maybe 2013 Ivy Bridge models (and even the technically unsupported but out-of-box ready-to-run-10.6.8 on 2012 Westmere Xeons), with Intel HD 4000 iGPUs in the chipset. Beyond that would probably involve wizardry far and beyond possibility for nearly everyone.

 

[firelighter487]

I would save yourself the trouble and just go on eBay and buy something like a 2006 white MacBook. those cost next to nothing nowadays and natively boot Snow Leopard. if you want something faster a Mac Pro from 2006-2008 is also an option. I'd guess the 8-core 2008 3,1 is probably pretty close to the fastest Snow Leopard experience you can have.

 

[B S Magnet]

I would save yourself the trouble and just go on eBay and buy something like a 2006 white MacBook. those cost next to nothing nowadays and natively boot Snow Leopard. if you want something faster a Mac Pro from 2006-2008 is also an option. I'd guess the 8-core 2008 3,1 is probably pretty close to the fastest Snow Leopard experience you can have.

This becomes an issue if they ever plan to use 64-bit applications. The 2006 white (or black) Core Duo MacBooks can, indeed, run 10.6.8, but the possibilities end then and there, and they are also confined, strictly, to 32-bit builds of software. That can put a crimp on long term usage, and it‘s one reason I’ve personally only used Snow Leopard in 64-bit settings ever since 2009.

As it is, they already own a 2012 MacBook Pro and want to see whether they can find a way to use it with the venerable, reliable, stable 10.6.8. In their shoes, I’d want exactly the same!

A 2006–08 Mac Pro, for all the horsepower they have, has the additional limitation of being not very portable.

 

[firelighter487]

This becomes an issue if they ever plan to use 64-bit applications. The 2006 white (or black) Core Duo MacBooks can, indeed, run 10.6.8, but the possibilities end then and there, and they are also confined, strictly, to 32-bit builds of software. That can put a crimp on long term usage, and it‘s one reason I’ve personally only used Snow Leopard in 64-bit settings ever since 2009.

what are you talking about? the Late 2006 white MacBook has a Core 2 Duo, the 2006 - 2008 Mac Pro's are also 64-bit

 

[B S Magnet]

what are you talking about? the Late 2006 white MacBook has a Core 2 Duo, the 2006 - 2008 Mac Pro's are also 64-bit

Reading comprehension 201! :annoyed_pony_expression: see #15

I denoted, specifically, the Core Duo MacBook, which constitute most of the 2006-year MacBooks — May through November — which were sold. The Core 2 Duo 2006 models, which went on sale pretty late that year (November), were 64-bit Merom CPUs (but they were also saddled with a 32-bit EFI, limiting them to 10.7.5). Neither had much of a GPU to write home about.

Additionally, I noted the Mac Pro isn’t portable, and the original poster already owns a mid-2012 MacBook Pro on which they want to try experimenting the use of 10.6.8 on it. That was the question they asked — not a question of “I want to run 10.6.8 on any which Mac, what say y’all?”). The Mac Pro is neither something they asked about nor, I would gather, something they happen to have lying about.

 

[firelighter487]

Reading comprehension 201! :annoyed_pony_expression:

I denoted, specifically, the Core Duo MacBook, which constitute most of the 2006 year MacBooks which were sold. The Core 2 Duo 2006 models, which went on sale pretty late that year (November), were 64-bit Merom CPUs (but saddled with a 32-bit EFI, limiting them to 10.7.5). Neither had much of a GPU to write home about.

Additionally, I noted the Mac Pro isn’t portable, and the original poster already owns a mid-2012 MacBook Pro on which they want to try experimenting the use of 10.6.8 on it. That was the question they asked — not a question of “I want to run 10.6.8 on any which Mac). The Mac Pro isn’t something they asked about nor, I would gather, is it something they happen to have lying about.

I said:

READING COMPREHENSION BRUH

 

[B S Magnet]

READING COMPREHENSION BRUH

You didn’t resolve any meaningful part of their question to the community, and your suggestion deviated from the question they were asking. We are here to help with the resources folks have before them right now. If, one day, they find a 2006 MacBook, Yonah or Merom, then swell. Until then, respond to what folks are asking about.

[And next time, don’t “bruh” me.]

 

[firelighter487]

You didn’t resolve any meaningful part of their question to the community, and your suggestion deviated from the question they were asking. We are here to help with the resources folks have before them right now. If, one day, they find a 2006 MacBook, Yonah or Merom, then swell. Until then, respond to what folks are asking about.

I'm trying to save them time. a 2006-2008 Mac is so cheap now that it's worth it over spending 8 hours trying to get the 2012 to run it.

[And next time, don’t “bruh” me.]

don't ReAdInG cOmPrEhEnSiOn me, I know 3 languages how many do you know? I'm allowed to make a mistake, English isn't my first language.

 

[B S Magnet]

I'm trying to save them time. a 2006-2008 Mac is so cheap now that it's worth it over spending 8 hours trying to get the 2012 to run it.

Locally, people are posting to rid themselves of late 2013 iMacs, for free (my late 2013 iMac was free, though from a friend I helped). They’re not slow systems, especially when running on NVMe and/or SSD, and they’re less cumbersome to move about than a Mac Pro.

At this point, the 2006–2008 polycarbonate MacBook models are either ending up as early collectibles (assuming their flaky top case isn’t splintering apart, as so many have), while the 2011–2013 Macs across the board are entering that stage of being the cheapest, used Intel Macs out there (and whose spare parts and modified upgrade parts are still at their most plentiful for the lowest amount of money).

don't ReAdInG cOmPrEhEnSiOn me,

Fair, and I apologize. Nevertheless, they asked question A, and you replied with answers J and, idk, V. It just isn’t very helpful for them!

I know 3 languages how many do you know? I'm allowed to make a mistake, English isn't my first language.

This contest will not be getting underway. That aside, we’re all allowed to make mistakes, and this is why I’m extending an apology to you.

---

@midnik — Welcome to the Early Intel Macs forum! We’ll try to stay focussed on your question.

 

[firelighter487]

At this point, the 2006–2008 polycarbonate MacBook models are either ending up as early collectibles

what? I bought a 2006 15" MBP a while ago for €30. lmfao. 2006 Mac's are worth nothing

 

[theMarble]

I bought a 2006 15" MBP a while ago for €30.

A 2006 15" MBP with the X1600 is a lot more valuable (in my opinion) than the white/black MacBook's that @B S Magnet was talking about.

 

[firelighter487]

A 2006 15" MBP with the X1600 is a lot more valuable (in my opinion) than the white/black MacBook's that @B S Magnet was talking about.

yeah that's the one I have. it has a few dead keys and dents but that's it. still runs very well. just gotta use an external keyboard which is not a big deal.

 

[B S Magnet]

what? I bought a 2006 15" MBP a while ago for €30. lmfao. 2006 Mac's are worth nothing

Two thoughts:

The first is: what turns up cheapest varies on where one is (I was shocked to learn not long ago how cheaply A1117 Power Mac G5s and 2006–2010 Mac Pro go for in the UK local swap market, given how spendy they remain here in Canada). A lot of that has to do with how much less distance there is in places like the UK or where you might be (i.e., Benelux) to cover in finding a used example “nearby” enough to take a train or hire a car for the day; here, our options tend to be limited to a handful of other major cities located several hundred or thousand kilometres away. Importing from the U.S. is, technically, an option (where many more cities and much lower domestic shipping makes those affordable to move about domestically), but shipping and importation costs are typically as pricey as shipping domestically from across Canada. Those examples which are here tend to be used for a very, very long time by their original owners (like inside recording studios). The iMac, the next weight/size down from the Mac Pro, are plentiful here but still expensive to ship domestically, so people locally tend to get rid of even Haswell and Broadwell models (or at this point, any pre-T2-equipped model) for absurdly low prices (or even for free). Mac minis and Penryn-and-later MacBook Pros here tend to go for more, because there are relatively fewer of them and more of them get upgraded by their users (even 2009 17-inch, fully upgraded, high-res, anti-glare C2D MBPs in excellent condition, have turned up here at local shops, as recently as this past February, for an absurdly high CAD$350!).

The other is: by “collectible”, I was referring specifically to well cared for examples in, optimally, their OEM, serial-matched boxes. Model-specific parts for maintaining these (logic boards, PRAM batteries, cables, etc.) are no longer as commonly available as they once were even three years ago. Well-worn examples may be worth next to nothing (or nothing) in many places, but well-cared-for examples (arguably harder to maintain because of the polished polycarbonate shells and brittle top cases, at least for MacBooks and earlier Mac minis) — and especially any BTO/CTO examples (namely, if ordered with more RAM) — are ones entering that early collectible stage. [Consider the black MacBook with a fresh, black-shelled battery, in outstanding shape and original, matched box!]

Given these factors, I am liable these days to direct people, if asked by them to do so, toward the general current “sweet spot”, where most affordable + most featured + broad parts availability intersect. At this moment, that’s generally the 2010–2013 range of models.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Hey guys, first post so please do not hang me ^^
I have a MBP mid 2012 and i want to Dualboot my Catalina with Snow Leopard (for Rosetta programs).
I read that you can Install SL 10.6.7 on Ivy Bridge PCs with iBoot, but this is only for PC not for Mac.
I already partitioned my SSD with 800GB APFS for Catalina and 200GB MacOS Extended where SL should be installed on it, but the SL 10.6.7 image won't boot, it gets stuck in the beginning right after loading the mach kernel. I did not modify anything yet.
Do you know how to get this installed?

A Mid 2012 will only be able to run really late versions of Lion as the absolute earliest supported OS. You could try using modded kexts and drivers and such to get it going, but even then you're probably going to have issues with driver stability given that Apple never made drivers for those Macs for Snow Leopard. You could try running Snow Leopard in a VM. That might get you further along.

I'd say that if what you want is Snow Leopard, you're probably best off with a Mid 2010 or Early/Late 2011 13-inch MacBook Pro or a Mid 2009 15-inch/17-inch MacBook Pro. Those were the most stable and recent MacBook Pros that could run Snow Leopard. Incidentally, the 2010 MacBook Airs also offer a pretty decent ride on the Snow Leopard express.

 

[midnik]

i know that an older Macbook would be better, i have a MB Unibody from 2008 or 2009, but i don't want to use a 2nd or 3rd MB just for 1 or 2 reasons. Also i don't have the rMBP just the normale MBP 13" from mid 2012.
But i also have a 2011 MBP, but i thought that comes with Tiger preinstalled also. Can i just install SL 10.6.7 easy from DL-DVD or how can i achieve this?

 

[B S Magnet]

i know that an older Macbook would be better, i have a MB Unibody from 2008 or 2009, but i don't want to use a 2nd or 3rd MB just for 1 or 2 reasons. Also i don't have the rMBP just the normale MBP 13" from mid 2012.

But i also have a 2011 MBP, but i thought that comes with Tiger preinstalled also. Can i just install SL 10.6.7 easy from DL-DVD or how can i achieve this?

On the 2011 MBP, you should be able to install 10.6.7, though having bought an early 2011 MBP in August 2011, mine shipped with OS X Lion 10.7.0 and was one of the first to lack the then-usual installer DVD.

To work around this, I migrated the physical HDD from a 2009 MBP I had, which had run 10.6.8, using Carbon Copy Cloner to migrate it over to the 2011 MBP. Having a 10.6.8 already in place (security updates and all) and cloning it is probably the easiest way to get things set up (that is, if you have a build for that from another Mac).

The next-easiest way is to find the 10.6.7 grey install DVD which shipped with the early 2011 MBPs, prior to July 2011 (when all subsequent units came pre-installed with Lion). On archive-dot-org, there’s a DVD install image for the 15-inch early 2011 MBP with 10.6.7 and the 13-inch early 2011 MBP, also with 10.6.7.

The 17-inch installer DVD variant is not archived, but to my knowledge, the early 2011 13, 15, and 17-inch install DVDs all came shipped with the same special build of 10.6.7 designed, specifically, for those three Sandy Bridge MBPs (the MacBookPro8,x): Build 10J3250. (This build should also work on the late 2011s, as well.)

Let us know how it goes!

 

[f54da]

If you just need a single app (Fax) it's probably easier to get that app to run on Lion. As mentioned gpu acceleration is the main blocker to running older os on a new macbook.