Will 5,1 be on the chopping block for the next macOS?

[deconstruct60]

According to Everymac the 4,1 had 64-bit EFI.

64-bit EFI is not sufficient.

http://www.everymac.com/mac-answers...-bit-macs-64-bit-efi-boot-in-64-bit-mode.html

There were backward ("32 bit") facing updates to the EFI done. That isn't going to get you better forward facing longevity. There were folks who wanted to keep smaller memory footprints to run on smaller RAM (i.e, cheaper) configs. That works as long as trying to stay in the past.
[doublepost=1475091771][/doublepost]

...
It's the year designations that count. Apple won't refer to the "x,y" Model Identifiers for system requirements.

Model identifiers do change when manufacturing stops. There are corner cases but the Mac Pro 2012 is just a speed bump upgrade. Manufacturing stopping is a critical issue if looking at support lifetime. ( I doubt Apple Market gives a crap about clearly talking about support lifetimes.... so they myopic focus on year suffixes to make their job simpler really doesn't mean much). Hardware it is an very open policy that hasn't change in 15+ years. Software wise the hardware end of life puts an upper bound on software support.

When Apple was moving model ids about every year then the year number is correlated. With updates slower paced across the board the year

 

[ITguy2016]

64-bit EFI is not sufficient.

I didn't claim it was. I was merely answering the question you asked. That question was:

"Did the 4,1 have a 64-bit boot EFI ( have doubts because Apple targeted this as the deep discount Mac with "hand me down" design elements. )."

 

[deconstruct60]

I didn't claim it was. I was merely answering the question you asked. That question was:

"Did the 4,1 have a 64-bit boot EFI ( have doubts because Apple targeted this as the deep discount Mac with "hand me down" design elements. )."

see the emphasized word above? No, you did not answer the question. Booting into 64-bit was the issue. Not whether the EFI was 64 bit. Already knew they weren't the same thing... just had not looked it

 

[ITguy2016]

see the emphasized word above? No, you did not answer the question. Booting into 64-bit was the issue. Not whether the EFI was 64 bit. Already knew they weren't the same thing... just had not looked it

There's no such thing as "boot" EFI so your qualifier is irrelevant. Therefore yes, I did answer your question. Likewise the link you provided did absolutely nothing to demonstrate there was anything other than an arbitrary decision by Apple to discontinue support for this model. According to the link you provided:

These models are believed to be hardware capable of booting MacOS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" in 64-bit mode, but it appears that they have been blocked in EFI from doing so. Unauthorized hacks are available.​

There is no technical reason any of us are aware of as to why the 4,1 MacBook could not have been supported. The only reason anyone can infer is that Apple decided not to support it. End of story.

Sheesh...I knew I shouldn't have responded to you.

 

[flowrider]

Yes it will be and then use Windows

And how do you know this?????? Precognition maybe??????

Lou