Looks like Apple may be sheading another generation of Mac machines. Lion eliminated folks who use Rosetta, now indications are that Mountain Lion will eliminate all the 2007 Mac's using 32 bit EFI firmware--and that includes me. Not gonna buy another Mac (have 4 now) just to run Mountain Lion.
Maybe Apple will issue a firmware upgrade just for us old fogeys...
Why do you think that? 2007 machines are listed as working with ML. I am counting on it working with my late 2006 machine with Core2Duo.
try booting in 64 bit mode by pressing 6 and 4 simultaneously on boot up.
Then check system to see if it booted as 64 bit.
also check the display chip - Intel display not supported either.
Apple is not supplying 32 bit efi updates with mountain lion. Only 64 bit mode supported.
I replaced my 7yr old Dell 9130 laptop (XP sp3) after a harddrive malfunction (lost everything!) and replaced it with an Asus, Windows7 64bit. May not be a great idea if you are using legacy programs.
My old Foxpro 2.0 programs no longer run (vaguely possible with DOSBox).
MS Access will read the .dbf files and output .csv so MS Excel can read the data. I prefer a database program over a spreadsheet and Access (for exmample) is quite different than Foxpro. Buyer beware.
As a recent Windows 7 user, I too recently made the big jump from 32-bit XP to 64-bit Windows 7.
For a couple of legacy products I found VirtualBox to be a great asset. It is a free program and allows you to run virtual computers within your current OS. It supports Windows, OS X, linux, and Solaris hosts. This weekend I'm going to be playing with the consumer release of Windows 8 all with Virtualbox.
I have an older dual boot system that runs both Windows XP 32-bit and Windows XP 64-bit. While the lack of 16-bit support can be annoying, my biggest gripe about 64-bits is the lack of drivers for many older devices. USB devices more than five years old may not and may never have 64-bit drivers available. I have some older USB to serial port devices and only one of them has 64-bit drivers.
Overall, I do prefer the 64-bit environment as it provides more memory space and better process isolation than the 32-bit environment.
Apple is famous for leaving operating systems behind look at Apple 2 which I started with then because they left in the dust I went to Windows.
While I sympathize with your inconvenience, I don't think that's it's unreasonable for a company to stop supporting old products after a reasonalbe numbers of years.
I'm retired from IBM where I worked on mid-range mainframe computers, and they did it all the time. They typically give at least a year or two notice to their customers to give them plenty of time to upgrade to newer hardware and/or current versions of software.
BTW, remember Y2K? That forced a lot of our customers to get current.
I have often run an operating system long after it was "obsolete". Unless you have software that needs to be on the bleeding edge of technology, I say run it until it becomes a pain in the a**, then jump forward a couple generations!
Sony- Can't play PS2 or PS1 games on a PS3.
Microsoft- Most X-Box games do not play on the 360. Alot of software for Win98 worked on XP but then came Vista and it no longer worked.
Apple- Not overly familiar but as mentioned above and Siri I do not believe works on older I-Phones.
Auto Industry- Where did our leaded gas go, granted different story but had throw it in.
In my line of work I see this a lot also. Printer/Copier industry print drivers become unsupported as newer machines are introduced. As new equipment is introduced it just becomes to expensive to support older technology whether it be software or hardware. Granted some software does not seem that old but if you trace the source code it may be a very old software that either just will not work with new hardware or again is deemed just too expensive.
If I remember correctly the late 06 and 07 iMac ( at least the 24 inch)
will run 64 bit.
terms | privacy | contactCopyright © 2006-2020