[rmi_]

While Microsoft is ending support for Windows 10 completely, Apple is just stopping feature upgrades. Apple usually supports old OS versions for years to come, especially when it's the only supported version for a lot of devices. So no, Intel Macs don't need to be retired.

[rollcat]

It's surprising enough that you can still get a few things done with a 2002 PowerBook G4: <https://www.rollc.at/posts/2024-07-02-tibook/>

The most painful parts are (1) it's a bit hot and loud under load; (2) you need to patch modern software like git, likely with little hope to upstream; (3) waiting hours for those "simple" things to compile - which, in the end, tells us something important about what we'd consider "simple" nowadays.

For both retro and previous-generation hardware, security is the most important concern. Patches for PowerPC kept coming until 2011 or so (that's almost 10 years after that particular machine was released). I'd expect the Intel Macs to keep getting official patches until 2030, and in the meantime I wouldn't be surprised to find community efforts to extend that. "Sorbet Leopard" was a thing for PPC Macs, the Hackintosh community is much stronger than back then.

[philistine]

> the Hackintosh community is much stronger than back then

Yeah but they'll be stuck on macOS 26. That's effectively the planned end of that community, they're not interested in running old versions of macOS on PCs.

[rickdeckard]

I'm curious how much of the Hackintosh community can even be upgraded to macOS 26.

With Apple reducing the supported models so drastically [0], the OS may also no longer support most of those older hardware-components anymore.

[0] https://www.macrumors.com/2025/06/09/macos-tahoe-compatible-...

[rollcat]

People are patching newer macOS's to run on older HW (like OpenCore), running older OS's on PCs as they see fit, all Macs allow downgrading (and 10.15 runs on the final 2019 models). I speculate that the community will settle around some version that strikes a decent balance between stability, features, and ease of patching.

[philistine]

Sure, but that community is interested in running the latest version of macOS on a PC. When Apple releases macOS 27 next year, they will have to think long and hard about their next move. Do I buy a Mac to keep my ability to run the latest version of macOS? Or do I tolerate that I'm running an old version of macOS, the first one with the new design that wasn't really finished in that version to boot?

I give it ten years until the websites of that community straight up disappear.

[rollcat]

There will be interest in running a stable and sensible version of macOS on Intel Macs as long as there any Intel Macs left around.

People still use PPC Macs to do work: <https://lowendmac.com/2025/skeuomorphic-icons-a-photoshop-pr...>.

People still write new software for System 6: <https://jcs.org/system6c>, <https://amendhub.com/jcs>.

Those are all hobby projects for 20-30yro machines, few of which are left around. There are millions of Intel Macs in excellent shape. Someone will carry the mantle.

[philistine]

We're not talking about Intel Macs. Those are here forever as collectables. I'm talking about the continuing relevance of hackintoshes. Those will soon join the Intel Macs in the annals of history, and disappear as a relevant community.

[concinds]

Only for security vulnerabilities that "Apple is aware may have been actively exploited". And almost never for any bug fixes (and sadly, Apple now tends to push off bug fixes to the next major release/"n+1" rather than fix bugs in the major version in which they were introduced).

[JumpCrisscross]

> Only for security vulnerabilities that "Apple is aware may have been actively exploited"

That still leaves a perfectly adequate machine for most common uses.

[fsflover]

Would you be fine with your family running a vulnerable, insecure machine for everything, including communication with you?

[fsflover]

I don't understand why I'm downvoted. I don't think it's acceptable to keep a machine with known vulnerabilities "not yet actively exploited" for "most common uses". The defense of Apple here goes too far.

[jurmous]

They also support updating Safari for 2 versions back of macOS.