(NEWS) Mountain Lion Mac Pro 1,1

[Rog210]

Apple is not interest in you buying a new Mac Pro if they were interested in that they would have updated them and generated excitement they didn't do that. Apple is interested in EOL the Mac Pro as a whole.

Apple has EOL'd everything with your generation of processor's again if speed were paramount which is one of the reasons for a MP you wouldn't be holding on to it.

You knew Apples business model when you bought your computer and you it at the cusp of Apple EOL they're entire line. Then 6ish years later it surprises when they EOL your computer.

No idea what this means.

 

[GermanyChris]

So you don't want me to compare it to it's competitors in terms of OS support. Neither do you want me to compare it to the rest of the Apple product line. I guess it's a special and unique box then.

I'm not even sure what argument you're trying to make here.

BTW, I'm not the one suing Apple. I certainly support legal action and I'd join any class action suit but I don't have the time to spare.

The only thing I can do is to build a Hackintosh or switch to a Windows box when the time comes.

You knew going in Apples legacy support, I'm saying the shocked complaining is a bit much. You can compare but thats comparing a HW company to a SW company (Apple/MS) again you knew that when you bought.

 

[Rog210]

You knew going in Apples legacy support, I'm saying the shocked complaining is a bit much. You can compare but thats comparing a HW company to a SW company (Apple/MS) again you knew that when you bought.

How do you know what I did and didn't know?

I'm not sure what your point is or why you're even bothering to post here.

 

[GermanyChris]

No idea what this means.

Conroe and Merom i.e. Aall first gen C2D are not supported by Apple in any computer anymore..

Apple is a HW distributor MS is a SW company. SW companies offer legacy support HW companies don't

Apple appears to be interested in ending the MP line hence the three years it's gone without a significant update.

Apple culls HW support quickly, you bought a computer at a time when apple EOL'd their entire line.

You knew all of this when you bought, that means you have no legitimate complaint.

----------

How do you know what I did and didn't know?

I'm not sure what your point is or why you're even bothering to post here.

Nor am I sure why you are.

 

[deconstruct60]

So, then, by Apple's own policy, the 1,1 and 2,1, which were discontinued on January 8, 2008, are not "vintage products."

They are approximately 5 months from being vintage products. Which if round to the closest year is pragmatically vintage. "Less than 6 months from vintage" does not make these "Spring chickens" or even "middle aged" machines. They are on the verge of being de-supported. Reasonable expectations for yet another OS release should be quite low. Not this highly unsupported sense of entitlement. There is little in Apple track record that supports that. Major architecture transitions lead to transitional model machines being dropped sooner rather than later.

The context which you deleted was about what sorts of expectations that Steve Jobs would generally have for Mac products. Generally, he would have probably expected them to updated once a year. With that update cycle 6 years is a reasonable "rule of thumb" expectation.

Hem and haw all you want, the introduction date is immaterial. All that matters is the discontinuation date.

If you want to stick strictly to exactly what is in the policy then this is wrong. The discontinuation date only technically matters for the hardware. It says nothing about the software or new features for the firmware. In fact, it promises nothing for new features for the firmware at all.

The introduction dates most certainly impact the software (e.g, OS). Factors such as which level of OpenGL is supported by the hardware most definitely impacts whether hardware will meet the software's minimal standards that are newer than 6 years old. (e.g, OpenGL 2.1 7/2006, is highly suggestive that it will get tossed by the OS. )

There is no requirement that new software versions/products support old hardware standards. Apple's standard policy is not promise anything about upcoming products.

As the for the technicality of the January 2013 date, it really doesn't buy much in the context of the late July introduction for 10.8 (Mountain Lion). There is less than six month left on its "non-vintage" status. The notion that if Apple introduced 10.8 on January 2 , 2013 that the January 8, 2013 discontinue would be a 'get out of jail free card" for the Mac Pro 2,1 is grossly flawed.

There needs to be some substantive overlap in the support windows between 10.8 and these machines. If 10.8's support window goes from July-August 2012 to July-August 2014 then the pragmatically 8/2012-1/2013 window isn't even 25% overlap ( 5/24 ==> ~20% ). That means during 80% of Mountain Lion support window these two components are out of alignment. That is misaligned plain and simple. Apple keeps things simple ( another thing Steve Jobs habitually did).

The OS version whose desupport window most closely matches the early Mac Pro's desupport date is Lion. Lion does run on these machines, so there is no mismatch. If the objective is to be in alignment with Apple support policies the primary migration activity for this Fall would be to transition off the Mac Pro 1,1 and 2,1 machines. Not grandstanding for a temporary hack to cover some nonsignificant span of those machines support windows.

 

[deconstruct60]

The problem is going to come down to how Apple decided to market the platform. It is not the customers responsibility to have to open a machine and examine it down to a board level. If Apple says it is a "64-Bit Workstation" then any "reasonable" consumer should be able to take what they say at face value.

There was no need to go down the board level. Mac OS x 10.4 did not support GUI 64 bit apps. As marketed these 1,1 and 2,1 machines could only do command line 64 bit apps. A reasonable consumer would presume that the hardware + software combination was what the 64 classification was. A reasonable consumer would also not that Apple doesn't promise or promote future products. So if there is some ellusive future software component is necessary, it isn't being marketed. Kind of hard to claim it is marketed if they don't talk about it.

This article appears 6 months before the Mac Pro 1,1 (8/2006) model.

http://www.drdobbs.com/parallel/mac-os-x-tiger-64-bits/184406429

which clearly outlines the limitations. Mac OS X 10.5 didn't show up until after the 2,1 was released.

So the notion that naive users were confused that these systems were 65-bit from top to bottom and all the way down is comical. It was obvious they were not from day one.


This is mostly all revisionist history. At the time there were far more folks all bent out of shape about needing 32-bit device drivers to that their workload largely depended upon. So the 32-bit kernel was a feature that was "better than" the Windows alternative that made you toss 32-bit drivers for 64-bit apps. Largely want people were looking for in 64-bit workstations were 64-bit apps. Not OS.

 

[macpro2000]

I called Apple support today just to hear from them their take on the 1,1 with ML...came down to he said he could see how their was frustration as the DP of ML had support so you know it could work if they wanted it to. Other than that, pretty much said I was SOL.

 

[PowerPCMacMan]

If you want to install Mountain Lion on your 1,1 Mac Pro, there is a guide out there which shows exactly how to do it.

I called Apple support today just to hear from them their take on the 1,1 with ML...came down to he said he could see how their was frustration as the DP of ML had support so you know it could work if they wanted it to. Other than that, pretty much said I was SOL.

 

[TacticalDesire]

If you guys really want ML so bad, start saving up for a newer MP. By the time 2013 rolls around you should have enough. But really, ML isn't really anything to right home about. Continue enjoying your 1,1's until you can't use them anymore. You've still got a number of years before support for Lion completely drops. If you want software and OS support that will outlive you, then get a Windows 7 workstation.

 

[PowerPCMacMan]

You have a valid point there.

If you guys really want ML so bad, start saving up for a newer MP. By the time 2013 rolls around you should have enough. But really, ML isn't really anything to right home about. Continue enjoying your 1,1's until you can't use them anymore. You've still got a number of years before support for Lion completely drops. If you want software and OS support that will outlive you, then get a Windows 7 workstation.

 

[Mr.damien]

You've still got a number of years before support for Lion completely drops.

With the new Apple policy of OS release each year, it's not a "number of years before support for Lion is dropped", it's only one year ...

 

[TacticalDesire]

With the new Apple policy of OS release each year, it's not a "number of years before support for Lion is dropped", it's only one year ...

I'm sure everyone still got the point. Way to be nitpicky

 

[paulrbeers]

With the new Apple policy of OS release each year, it's not a "number of years before support for Lion is dropped", it's only one year ...

I still see security updates for Leopard and it came out in what 2007? 2008?

http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1533

So yes, Apple still supports software for years to come. Sure maybe you won't get all the new features of new OS's, but security patches/updates that are vital are still done.

 

[paulrbeers]

Sorry to get off topic, but what happened with SilverTard? He posted a ton for about 3-4 days and has been gone ever since. I was actually curious to know what (if any) has happened with the lawsuit. I find it frivolous and unfounded, but I'm always curious in these matters! I know it would/could be years before the lawsuit would be finalized/settled, but he was just so darn sure he would win.....

 

[SpyderBite]

With the new Apple policy of OS release each year, it's not a "number of years before support for Lion is dropped", it's only one year ...

I couldn't find any reference to said Policy. Could you please cite the source for the new Apple policy which involves a yearly OS release? Kthx

 

[paulrbeers]

I couldn't find any reference to said Policy. Could you please cite the source for the new Apple policy which involves a yearly OS release? Kthx

I am sure by Policy, he didn't mean support policy but rather their new goal of releasing a new OSX every year like they do for iOS updates. Sort of poorly worded when discussing support policies and software release policy at the same time.

 

[yellowbunny]

I've jut set up Chameleon today, it's pretty east to do and it runs 100% perfect. Recommend it, its especially easy if you have bootcamp set up (I've left comments that explain why on http://www.jabbawok.net).

 

[mustang_dvs]

Anyone have any snags in updating a 1,1 to 10.8.1?

 

[yellowbunny]

updated through the app store fine for me.

 

[PurpleLogix]

updated through the app store fine for me.

Your running it with chameleon?

 

[derbothaus]

With the new Apple policy of OS release each year, it's not a "number of years before support for Lion is dropped", it's only one year ...

Well. We do only pay 19.99-29.99 for these things nowadays. 129.00 a pop gave you longer support, I guess.

 

[yellowbunny]

Yes, running Chameleon here.

Your running it with chameleon?

 

[Wind06]

Hi,

I'm running ML 10.8.2 without any problem until now on a MacPro 1,1 early 2006. But now I want to launch BootCamp utility. but it does not work I got an error message telling " I need to update the internal Rom blabla..."

Is there a way to have the Boot Camp utility to work on MacPro 1,1 under ML ?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Tat64]

Bootcamp + chameleon co-share?

Hello, I have a different but Bootcamp related question on this type of set up (ML on Mac pro 1,1): since I need a separate SATA HDD for chameleon, I was wondering whether I could co-share this HDD with my Win 7 x64 Bootcamp installation. If I manually partitioned this HDD into 2 partitions using MBR scheme, then left the BOOT partition still empty, installed Win 7 on the other partition manually (following the procedure of holding down Alt and choosing Win 7 DVD from boot menu, then installing to the 2nd partition), and after Win 7 was working, went back and installed chameleon on the BOOT partition on this HDD (followed by terminal command ‘bless’ etc), would this work? I just want to make sure I’m not missing something obvious…thanks in advance

 

[Colpeas]

I Hope this happens.

In my lab I have a 1,1 and a 5,1.

The 1,1 runs Dual 3.0 and the 5,1 has Dual Quad 2.26. The 1,1 is frequently "snappier" feeling and yet I look at it as neutered, or less potent.

I have spent some very long hours working out those nifty Fermi EFIs, but they fall on deaf ears in the 1,1. I just imagined how incredibly awesome it would be to run an update on it and have it suddenly be back on same playing field as the 5,1.

And I am 95% certain that the EFI64 for a 1,1 already exists. Look at the 3,1 and note how similar it is. My guess is that it was developed with 1,1 as starting point. SO sitting in the Apple labs somewhere in Cupertino, in the back of a testing lab, or in a storeroom, is a 1,1 running an EFI64. It is likely that it isn't perfect, but could be finished.

But do consider what would happen if such a thing got out in public. Anything that did NOT have an EFI64 would STOP working. SPecifically, Nvidia 7300 and 8800GT cards would not show boot screens on next boot and would need to be replaced. All ATI/AMD cards would be fine as they use a universal EBC style EFI. (exception being X1300 and non-updated X1900XT cards) I asked an Nvidia engineer that I converse with why they went with EFI32/64 instead of EBC as AMD did and got a silent response. I imagine there is a reason.

So any other peripherals that have an EFI32 on them would also quit working.

In other words, APple would open a potential FLOOD of support questions. Most people REFUSE to read much and just expect a custom-tailored support answer for their own personal consumption. No matter how many checkboxes they had "agreed" to or warnings posted, there would be literally thousands of "dead" computers. And instead of helping people post insanely cute puppy photos from their iPhone, the genius bars would be overwhelmed with people bringing dusty, long forgotten 1,1s in and demanding satisfaction.

They would literally have to train every genius at every service location all about this long forgotten machine. So add that cost to the equation. Waking that sleeping dog would be rather pricey.

Could be solved easily by not letting the EFI to update unless you have a supported GPU installed in you Mac Pro. That wouldn't be that hard...