Mini3,1 El Cap... upgrade to Catalina or wait for Big Sur?

[flopticalcube]

My Mini3,1 2.53/8GB/128GB+500GB currently has El Cap running on it. Is it worth doing the unsupported upgrade to Catalina? Is it noticeably slower than El Cap? Has anyone successfully done the upgrade to Big Sur and if so was it worth it? Mac does very little work these days so this will be mostly for kicks.

 

[Fishrrman]

I'd "stay put" right where you are.
Or "move up one notch" to 10.12 "Low" Sierra...

 

[flopticalcube]

Its that bad is it? Are we talking Lion slow?

 

[Wowfunhappy]

IMO, your three logical options are to:

• Stay Put
• Upgrade to High Sierra
• Upgrade to Mojave

I disagree with Fishrrman—using Sierra over High Sierra is like using Leopard over Snow Leopard (on Intel hardware ofc). Standard Sierra is fine, but there's no reason not to use High Sierra.

Mojave is a tad slower than High Sierra on older hardware, in my experience. My theory is it's because they made the whole UI use metal, which they didn't optimize as well for older GPUs. But if you want to run software that requires Mojave, or if you want dark mode, it's not such a huge difference.

Catalina is just a buggy mess that should be avoided at all costs. Worst release since Yosemite for sure, and possibly since Lion.

 

[flopticalcube]

Thanks, I gather APFS is fine with these older machines. I might start with High Sierra and then see if I want to move to Mojave.

 

[eyoungren]

Thanks, I gather APFS is fine with these older machines. I might start with High Sierra and then see if I want to move to Mojave.

If you convert to APFS when on one of these patched installs be aware that there's a special loader that has to be installed (if you have a machine that did NOT natively support High Sierra (and therefore cannot boot APFS volumes natively)). You can see more here: http://dosdude1.com/mojave/#known_issues See #6.

 

[AL1630]

What are the advantages of High Sierra over Sierra? I'm still leery of running it after reading about how it was kind of a mess on release.

I used to run Mojave on my older Macs but I've switched to Sierra since it seems to run much better. I agree that Catalina is a mess, a relative has a 2017 iMac with it and it's nothing but problems. They asked me to roll it back to Mojave which I'm sure will be fun.

 

[MultiFinder17]

I’ve tried several patched OS’s on my C2D/9400M based Macs, and I always come back to High Sierra. Mojave runs well in certain circumstances (I run it quite well on my 2008 iMacs), but I’ve never gotten it to be completely happy and stable on the 9400M-based machines. High Sierra, on the other hand, runs as if it were native in my experience.

I have High Sierra on my 2008 15” MBP and my 2009 mini, and it runs beautifully. I was never happy with the performance on Mojave, nor the stability of some of the patches, namely the graphics patches. HS, however, natively supports some 9400M machines, so it works beautifully with it.

As to the advantages of High Sierra vs Sierra, software support is becoming a bigger one. Several apps that I use regularly on my production machines (namely OneDrive) now require HS or later. I’ve never noticed that it is appreciably or noticeably slower than Sierra on the same hardware, and it’s my go-to OS when I can.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Several apps that I use regularly on my production machines (namely OneDrive) now require HS or later.

For what it's worth, I'm using OneDrive all the way back here on Mavericks without issue. I used the App Store trick to download the last compatible version, it still syncs and everything.

 

[AL1630]

I’ve tried several patched OS’s on my C2D/9400M based Macs, and I always come back to High Sierra. Mojave runs well in certain circumstances (I run it quite well on my 2008 iMacs), but I’ve never gotten it to be completely happy and stable on the 9400M-based machines. High Sierra, on the other hand, runs as if it were native in my experience.

I have High Sierra on my 2008 15” MBP and my 2009 mini, and it runs beautifully. I was never happy with the performance on Mojave, nor the stability of some of the patches, namely the graphics patches. HS, however, natively supports some 9400M machines, so it works beautifully with it.

As to the advantages of High Sierra vs Sierra, software support is becoming a bigger one. Several apps that I use regularly on my production machines (namely OneDrive) now require HS or later. I’ve never noticed that it is appreciably or noticeably slower than Sierra on the same hardware, and it’s my go-to OS when I can.

Mojave has never run totally right on my 9400M MacBook either, the patches were pretty stable for me but there were still plenty of strange graphics and bad performance going on. I'll have to try HS on it, maybe I'll just do a partition for now.

Also @Wowfunhappy, what's the App store trick? I looked around in the OS and wiki threads but didn't see anything.

 

[MultiFinder17]

For what it's worth, I'm using OneDrive all the way back here on Mavericks without issue. I used the App Store trick to download the last compatible version, it still syncs and everything.

Oh? I can't say I'm familiar with such a trick; I'd be extremely interested to know

 

[MultiFinder17]

Mojave has never run totally right on my 9400M MacBook either, the patches were pretty stable for me but there were still plenty of strange graphics and bad performance going on. I'll have to try HS on it, maybe I'll just do a partition for now.

I always had two recurring issues that I could never get to the bottom of - the GPU patch would occasionally bork itself, slowing the machine to an unusable crawl until I booted off the flash drive and reinstalled it. In addition, it would occasionally fail to wake from sleep in a usable state, something which I cannot bring myself to deal with. I've always used Macs because they're such reliable sleepers

Ever since I switched it to High Sierra, it's as though it runs it natively. Well, except for the APFS booter at the beginning, but that's been a super-reliable patch.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Oh? I can't say I'm familiar with such a trick; I'd be extremely interested to know

Also @Wowfunhappy, what's the App store trick? I looked around in the OS and wiki threads but didn't see anything.

Huh, we need to document this somewhere!

1. "Buy" the app from the App Store on a newer OS, so it gets added to your Apple ID account. (I do this in a VM so I don't even have to switch computers.)
2. On the older OS, open the App Store, go to the "Purchased" tab, and try to install the app. You must press the button that's in the purchased tab, and not the seemingly-identical button in any other location of the App Store.
3. If an older, compatible version of the app exists, the App Store will ask if you would like to install that one. Say yes.

And the result:

Works on iOS too btw.

 

[AL1630]

Nice, thanks! It is similar to the method of getting apps on ancient versions of iOS. I wonder what the best wiki thread for that info is. The pinned Startup Thread maybe?

 

[flopticalcube]

Well, except for the APFS booter at the beginning, but that's been a super-reliable patch.

What is your thoughts about APFS on an older Mac? I have no real need to hold on the HFS+ for the SSD so thought I would try APFS. The spinner needs to remain HFS+ though as I don't want to mess with it.

 

[MultiFinder17]

What is your thoughts about APFS on an older Mac? I have no real need to hold on the HFS+ for the SSD so thought I would try APFS. The spinner needs to remain HFS+ though as I don't want to mess with it.

From my experience, I could take it or leave it. I know that it’s a bit kinder to SSDs, which I have in all of my aging Macs. It also makes software updates less of a pain to install, as Mojave expects APFS and refuses to install security patches on an HFS+ drive without some tweaking. Those two things aside, I don’t notice any performance difference.

I have my 2008 24” iMac still on HFS+, but all of my other machines are running APFS. I plan on wiping the 24” at some point and redoing it with APFS at some point.

The APFS booter ‘patch’ is solid. It’s a small preboot EFI shell thing that boots, recognizes APFS, then hands things over to OS X. It’s been a seamless experience for me.

 

[MultiFinder17]

Huh, we need to document this somewhere!

1. "Buy" the app from the App Store on a newer OS, so it gets added to your Apple ID account. (I do this in a VM so I don't even have to switch computers.)
2. On the older OS, open the App Store, go to the "Purchased" tab, and try to install the app. You must press the button that's in the purchased tab, and not the seemingly-identical button in any other location of the App Store.
3. If an older, compatible version of the app exists, the App Store will ask if you would like to install that one. Say yes.

And the result:

View attachment 1728288

Works on iOS too btw.

Hmmmm, I just tried this on my end and got this

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Hmmmm, I just tried this on my end and got this

View attachment 1728490

🧐

Super weird! A couple others in the past have told me this trick doesn't work for them, but I've always thought it had to be user error. It's just never failed me. For OneDrive for instance, I'd never downloaded it from the App Store prior to September 2020, well after Mavericks support was dropped. But I can see from the screenshot you're definitely in that purchased tab... so what could possibly be different?

Edit: You're definitely in 10.9 and not an earlier OS, right? I don't know what the earliest OS is that OneDrive ever supported.

 

[MultiFinder17]

🧐

Super weird! A couple others in the past have told me this trick doesn't work for them, but I've always thought it had to be user error. It's just never failed me. For OneDrive for instance, I'd never downloaded it from the App Store prior to September 2020, well after Mavericks support was dropped. But I can see from the screenshot you're definitely in that purchased tab... so what could possibly be different?

Edit: You're definitely in 10.9 and not an earlier OS, right? I don't know what the earliest OS is that OneDrive ever supported.

This is in Lion, but there was a OneDrive client for Lion in the long ago.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

This is in Lion, but there was a OneDrive client for Lion in the long ago.

Ah, I bet that's it!

There may have been a OneDrive for Lion, but it may have not been on the App Store, or it may have been de-listed and re-listed as a new product at some point. The latter is what prevents you from using the trick on Twitter, for instance.

 

[K two]

My Mini3,1 2.53/8GB/128GB+500GB currently has El Cap running on it. Is it worth doing the unsupported upgrade to Catalina? Is it noticeably slower than El Cap? Has anyone successfully done the upgrade to Big Sur and if so was it worth it? Mac does very little work these days so this will be mostly for kicks.

Your Mini3,1 as configured will run the latest Catalina just fine.

 

[Project Alice]

Your mini will run Catalina just fine. Contrary to popular belief 10.11-10.15 really don’t run that differently. I’ve noticed that 10.13 and above tend to be slower on regular HDDs, even if installed using HFS. But with an SSD it’s fine.
For the people that have had issues with the 9400m, I have 3 macs with that GPU and have had no problems so, I’d say it’s probably user error with the patch. Mojave usually needs patched twice, once in the installer and then again with patch updater always fixes any graphic problems.

Catalina/Mojave can be installed with the patch, or it can also be done using OpenCore. I put catalina on my MacBook5,2 using opencore. It boots a lot faster because it doesn’t need the EFI script for APFS support.

You can’t run Big Sur on it unless I’ve been out of the loop and someone made a patch that adds graphics support; last time I checked there wasn’t.

 

[bobesch]

What is your thoughts about APFS on an older Mac? I have no real need to hold on the HFS+ for the SSD so thought I would try APFS. The spinner needs to remain HFS+ though as I don't want to mess with it.

My main reason to go for Mojave is the dark mode. It's so convenient to the eyes - especially in the evening (and with "Grey" you may switch between dark and light mode for each App individually)

The reason to stay with Mojave or lower is, that I want to keep 32-bit Apps working and because of MojavePatcher fortunately did let me stay with HFS+ on my early-2008 15/17"MBP (once the drive is pre-formatted in HFS+ the MojavePatcher didn't migrate file system to APFS automatically but stays with HFS+).

The reason to stay with HFS+ is, that I'd like to keep access to drives and drive-clones or Macs in TDM even through older and PPC Macs.

(And to be honest: so far I'm feel not clever enough to understand the knack about how to deal with APFS properly ...)
To avoid any hassle with patched Mojave not working after any update, I've spent MojavePatcher an extra tiny 12GB partition at the very end of my hard drive - just in case - and I might boot from that MojavePatch-partition to fix any problems with patched Mojave (the the same would also apply to the other patches of Sierra, HighSierra and Catalina).

To fix glitches with a dark-grey sidebar and menubar on Mojave ( #125 ) you have disable the transparency/translucency effects through the Accessibility preference pane.

 

[flopticalcube]

Thanks. Not sure if 32 bit support would be relevant for me but its good to know. I will be using two VirtualBox sessions with Windows 7 as well as Linux running probably 24/7 so that is something I would need to make sure works flawlessly. I know VB needs at least Sierra in its current configuration. I love dark mode on my Windows 10 box and that would definitely be a draw for Mojave.

 

[bobesch]

Thanks. Not sure if 32 bit support would be relevant for me but its good to know. I will be using two VirtualBox sessions with Windows 7 as well as Linux running probably 24/7 so that is something I would need to make sure works flawlessly. I know VB needs at least Sierra in its current configuration. I love dark mode on my Windows 10 box and that would definitely be a draw for Mojave.

Ha, can't tell about VirtualBox on Mojave, but I have no complaints with VMware Fusion8 and Windows 98 to 10 VMs.
(Win2k is the burner and keeps my ScanSnap1500 running; WinXP has a decent performance, so does Win7. Win8 and Win10 do work on my early-2008 2,5 GHz MBP/6GB RAM/Mojave but are too slow to keep coronaries healthy)
I guess VirtualBox can cope as well.
You might partition your harddrive and run different versions of macOS side-by-side to find out, which one fits you the best. One or more USB-drives and CarbonCopyCloner (CCC) for clone-backups come are basic for security during testdrives and for later use as backup-tool anyway.
With CCC you can move/backup stuff onto/off your internal drive to free space for alternative installations. So you won't lose a full installation while trying out something completely new. And CCC can even copy the Recovery-Partition.
And better to keep the virtual machines and date on a separate partition, so all different partitions/versions of macOS are able to access the VMs in one place (and take care to make a clone-copy of that data-partition too before starting to partition the harddrive).

(@flopticalcube Sorry, I 've just noticed that you're a Mac veteran since 2006, so mentioning the CCC-stuff is rather for the mere mortals ... )