macOS 13 Minimum System Requirements Speculation

[Yebubbleman]

We've got roughly three months (give or take) to go before we're most likely to hear about Monterey's eventual successor version of macOS, namely macOS 13. Given that Monterey took a year and a half's worth of Macs that could run macOS Big Sur out of the supported Macs list, and given that we're nearly done with the two-year transition from Intel Macs to Apple Silicon Macs, it might be interesting to guess what will happen in terms of the supported Macs list this year.

Personally, I'm not of the mind that Apple is going to pick this particular moment in time to cut off support for all Intel Macs, especially since they were still selling the vast majority of the higher end Intel Macs, within the past six months. That eventual dark day when x86-64 is completely nixed from macOS IS coming, but not this soon.

I'd wager that Apple IS going to release a version of macOS that requires at the bare minimum, an Intel Mac with a T2 chip or any Apple Silicon SoC. There are too many features in the operating system (with more and more being added with each release of macOS) that seem to favor the presence of at least a T2 chip that a "T2 or M1 or newer" requirement for macOS probably isn't that far off. Is that this year? I'd wager it's still somewhat soon for that. But that could totally be next year.

As for what's in between a "T2 or M1 or newer" requirement and what's currently supported today? We're talking about the 2015-17 MacBook Airs, 2015-2017 MacBook Pros, the 2015 & 2017 iMacs, the 2014 Mac mini, and the love-it-or-hate-it 2013 Mac Pro.

I think if Apple is to cull Macs from support for macOS 13, the 2014 Mac mini and, at the very least, the 2015 15" MacBook Pro would make the most sense as they are the only Macs with Haswell and Haswell is...well...long in the tooth. Having macOS 13 support Broadwell and up would be a minor bump that's likely not to affect as large of a number of Mac users as Monterey's increase in system requirements seemed to do. Otherwise, Skylake is the last major bump before we get to Macs that have the T2 (as not much really changed between Skylake and 8th Gen). Culling pre-2017 Macs seems unlikely as Kaby Lake wasn't that significant over Skylake; nor does it seem to be that different in terms of performance or features when compared to Skylake. Then again, Apple has drawn the line around non-CPU components and drivers availability therein before.

I'm of the mind that the 2013 Mac Pro, having components that are normally designed to be supported for way longer terms than the consumer components in the other Macs, will probably retain support for macOS 13, regardless of where the line is drawn for the other Macs.

What say you?

 

[yabeweb]

I think it's the end of the line for the 2013 Mac Pro.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I think it's the end of the line for the 2013 Mac Pro.

It's gotta go sometime. Support for Ivy Bridge E won't last forever, and that's ultimately where Apple tends to draw the line if there are no other compelling reasons (to them) to drop it sooner.

 

[yabeweb]

It's gotta go sometime. Support for Ivy Bridge E won't last forever, and that's ultimately where Apple tends to draw the line if there are no other compelling reasons (to them) to drop it sooner.

Not complaining, just figured that’s where it stands.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Not complaining, just figured that’s where it stands.

I didn't think you came across as complaining. It's sensible. The 2010/12 Mac Pros were supported for nine years before being dropped. This fall will be shortly under nine years of support for the 2013 Mac Pro. Plus, it's not like those Fire Pros or Xeons are getting younger.

 

[socialwill]

I believe that Apple will support the Intel line for 7 years, at least. They are still selling Mac Pro’s today even if no one is buying them. I would guess we will see Intel support at least until 2026, maybe longer on the Mac Pro till 2030. However as Apple has done, and should do as needed, there will be features that need newer chips/options for some features.

 

[yabeweb]

I believe that Apple will support the Intel line for 7 years, at least. They are still selling Mac Pro’s today even if no one is buying them. I would guess we will see Intel support at least until 2026, maybe longer on the Mac Pro till 2030. However as Apple has done, and should do as needed, there will be features that need newer chips/options for some features.

I don't recall the timeframe for switching from G5 to Intel, but I don't think they supported the PowerMac G5 that long with the latest OS.

I actually recall a quite fast transition both in Hardware and Software.

EDIT:
2006 First Intel Macs

10.6 2009 Intel Only Release.

10.7 2011 Dropped Rosetta.

In August 2006 they unveiled the Mac Pro, hence 3 years after they dropped support for the PowerMac sold before August 2006, and 2 years later the compatibility layer.

So if they Announced a new ARM Mac Pro in 2022 we could expect support till 2025 (if we go by previews transition).

Now of course it's not a rule, so everything can change.

 

[Jordan246]

Hi guys i got a question for you guys i got a 2016 macbook pro 13in non touch bar model and i was wanting your guys thought's if this machine will be compatible with the next version of macos. Please write back i would appreciate it. Thanks.

 

[gilby101]

We've got roughly three months (give or take) to go before we're most likely to hear about Monterey's eventual successor version of macOS, namely macOS 13.

2 months (almost exactly) to WWDC.

 

[CLS7]

What do you think about iMac late 2015, will it support MacOS 13?

 

[Yebubbleman]

I don't recall the timeframe for switching from G5 to Intel, but I don't think they supported the PowerMac G5 that long with the latest OS.

I actually recall a quite fast transition both in Hardware and Software.

EDIT:
2006 First Intel Macs

10.6 2009 Intel Only Release.

10.7 2011 Dropped Rosetta.

In August 2006 they unveiled the Mac Pro, hence 3 years after they dropped support for the PowerMac sold before August 2006, and 2 years later the compatibility layer.

So if they Announced a new ARM Mac Pro in 2022 we could expect support till 2025 (if we go by previews transition).

Now of course it's not a rule, so everything can change.

I think the timeframe of the PowerPC to Intel transition shouldn't be considered since the Intel to Apple Silicon transition is already happening at an entirely different pace with regards to (a) how long it's taking to flip all of the Intel models into Apple Silicon models and (b) how long after the initial announcement of the transition it took for the first Apple Silicon Macs to appear. I have a feeling we'll still see the same milestones of, for example, a release of macOS that is 100% Apple Silicon only as well as Apple eventually deprecating Rosetta 2 (though, I hope that with Rosetta 2, unlike original Rosetta, being 100% in-house, there's no need for Apple to do this). But I do not believe that we'll see those things happen at the same speed as they happened during the previous transition. The M1 versions of the Air, 13" Pro, and Mac mini have been on the market for a year and a half. Apple is also still supporting Mac minis from 2014 and MacBook Pros/Airs from 2015 to run macOS Monterey. It'll be a good while before they drop Intel from new macOS versions. Though, it would not surprise me to see them hasten things to where non-T2 Intel Macs are dropped. Though, that would suck for anyone that bought a 21.5" iMac in the last three years...

Hi guys i got a question for you guys i got a 2016 macbook pro 13in non touch bar model and i was wanting your guys thought's if this machine will be compatible with the next version of macos. Please write back i would appreciate it. Thanks.

I think that might be at the crux of the question here. 2016 MacBook Pros are Skylake. The 2016 and 2017 MacBook Pros without the Touch Bar (as well as the 2019 and 2020 two-port Intel 13" MacBook Pros) basically use ultra-low-voltage versions that were previously in 2011-2017 MacBook Airs. If Apple divides the line in terms of Skylake being the minimum, then you're fine. If they divide the line in terms of Skylake being the newest that isn't supported (and that 2017 and newer or even T2 Macs and newer are the minimum) then you're not. Either way, I'd give thought to trying to sell that Mac in favor of an M1 MacBook Air (which is basically feature-for-feature identical and WAY better in every possible way).

2 months (almost exactly) to WWDC.

I don't know that it was announced when I posted this originally. Though, it's also the case that I've been having a lot of "holy crap, it's April already?!" moments, so I dunno...?

What do you think about iMac late 2015, will it support MacOS 13?

That's a tricky one. Late 2015 iMacs are definitely Skylake. However, there are a lot of things that the 2016 MacBook Pros (also Skylake) have that are not in that iMac (e.g. Thunderbolt 3, just to name one example). Also, with both Big Sur and Monterey, it seems as though Apple is culling support for iMacs a bit sooner than others. The 2013 iMacs were cut from Big Sur due to lack of driver support for their Wi-Fi card. I have no clue why a 2014 iMac - basically a way beefier version of the still-supported 2015 15" MacBook Pro - was dropped from Monterey, when said beefier MacBook Pro was otherwise allowed.

 

[gilby101]

If they divide the line in terms of Skylake being the newest that isn't supported

Not saying it is not important, but I don't think that Intel CPU generation has been the key criterion for dropping support. Graphics, particularly lack of support for Metal, has been more important. And you have already mentioned Wifi drivers.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Not saying it is not important, but I don't think that Intel CPU generation has been the key criterion for dropping support. Graphics, particularly lack of support for Metal, has been more important. And you have already mentioned Wifi drivers.

I don't disagree with you, but it has sometimes coincided with other such changes. Like with Mojave, it was pretty much a perfect Ivy Bridge and newer (with the exception of 2010/2012 Mac Pro support with an upgraded video card) split. Given that, I could totally see something where 2016 MacBook Pros are allowed, but 2015 iMacs (which are also Skylake) aren't. Then again, I get the feeling (and, at this point, it's only a feeling) that Apple really wants to get to a place where it's T2 or Apple Silicon only and sooner rather than later.

 

[EugW]

I think if Apple is to cull Macs from support for macOS 13, the 2014 Mac mini and, at the very least, the 2015 15" MacBook Pro would make the most sense as they are the only Macs with Haswell and Haswell is...well...long in the tooth. Having macOS 13 support Broadwell and up would be a minor bump that's likely not to affect as large of a number of Mac users as Monterey's increase in system requirements seemed to do. Otherwise, Skylake is the last major bump before we get to Macs that have the T2 (as not much really changed between Skylake and 8th Gen). Culling pre-2017 Macs seems unlikely as Kaby Lake wasn't that significant over Skylake; nor does it seem to be that different in terms of performance or features when compared to Skylake. Then again, Apple has drawn the line around non-CPU components and drivers availability therein before.

I'm of the mind that the 2013 Mac Pro, having components that are normally designed to be supported for way longer terms than the consumer components in the other Macs, will probably retain support for macOS 13, regardless of where the line is drawn for the other Macs.

What say you?

Apple usually supports macOS on machines for at least 5 years after the date the machine is discontinued (and then they get some security updates after that). As someone has already mentioned, CPU generation is of secondary importance.

Other machines you didn't mention are the 2015 iMacs, 2016 MacBook Pros, 2015 MacBook Airs and 2016 MacBooks, which were all discontinued in 2017. The main caveat here for the 2015 MacBook Airs though is that they were refreshed in 2017 with new models... with the exact same model number - MacBookAir7,2. Here are the discontinuation dates of the machines you mentioned, plus the others not mentioned:

2016: 15" MacBook Pro 2015
2017: MacBook 2016
2017: MacBook Air 2015 <-- The caveat is that they were updated in 2017 with the same model number.
2017: 13" MacBook Pro 2015
2017: MacBook Pro 2016
2017: iMac 2015
2018: Mac mini 2014
2019: Mac Pro 2013

The most at risk is that 15" MacBook Pro 2015 as you say, but IMO also the ones discontinued in 2017. OTOH, they would probably actually still continue to support the Mac Pro 2013 and the Mac mini 2014 in macOS 13, unless Apple changes its support pattern. That said, considering the Mac mini 2014 and Mac Pro 2013 are big anomalies, this would be a situation where changing the support pattern might make sense.

It should also be noted that the 15" MacBook Pro 2015 was discontinued after 10.12 Sierra already came out in 2016. The machines discontinued in 2017 were still on 10.12 Sierra as well, since they were discontinued at WWDC 2017. 10.13 High Sierra didn't come out until fall 2017. So, from that perspective, the 15" MacBook Pro 2015 discontinued in 2016 might be treated similarly to the other machines discontinued in 2017. Here is the list of OSes:

10.12 Sierra <-- This is the OS that was available when those machines were discontinued in 2016 and 2017.
10.13 High Sierra
10.14 Mojave
10.15 Catalina
11 Big Sur
12 Monterey
13 ??? <--- This OS is 6 generations after 10.12 Sierra.

However, I'm hopeful they'll just keep supporting all the machines in macOS 13 as they did in Monterey. It may be wishful thinking though, since we bought a 2015 MacBook Pro last year. It's absolutely mint with a brand new battery, so it would be a shame if it didn't get macOS 13. Last year we also bought a 2017 MacBook Air which is clearly inferior to the 2015 MacBook Pro, but going by its discontinuation date, the 2017 MacBook Air will get macOS 13.

BTW, in terms of CPU generations, Kaby Lake was arguably a big upgrade over Skylake. Kaby Lake has full 10-bit HEVC decode acceleration. Skylake does not. HEVC h.265 10-bit videos will play on a Kaby Lake i5 iMac cleanly at just 10% CPU usage with silent fans. Those same videos will not play on a Skylake i7 iMac cleanly at 100% CPU usage with the fans at maximum.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Apple usually supports macOS on machines for at least 5 years after the date the machine is discontinued (and then they get some security updates after that). As someone has already mentioned, CPU generation is of secondary importance.

Other machines you didn't mention are the 2015 iMacs, 2016 MacBook Pros, 2015 MacBook Airs and 2016 MacBooks, which were all discontinued in 2017. The main caveat here for the 2015 MacBook Airs though is that they were refreshed in 2017 with new models... with the exact same model number - MacBookAir7,2. Here are the discontinuation dates of the machines you mentioned, plus the others not mentioned:

2016: 15" MacBook Pro 2015
2017: MacBook 2016
2017: MacBook Air 2015 <-- The caveat is that they were updated in 2017 with the same model number.
2017: 13" MacBook Pro 2015
2017: MacBook Pro 2016
2017: iMac 2015
2018: Mac mini 2014
2019: Mac Pro 2013

The most at risk is that 15" MacBook Pro 2015 as you say, but IMO also the ones discontinued in 2017. OTOH, they would probably actually still continue to support the Mac Pro 2013 and the Mac mini 2014 in macOS 13, unless Apple changes its support pattern. That said, considering the Mac mini 2014 and Mac Pro 2013 are big anomalies, this would be a situation where changing the support pattern might make sense.

It should also be noted that the 15" MacBook Pro 2015 was discontinued after 10.12 Sierra already came out in 2016. The machines discontinued in 2017 were still on 10.12 Sierra as well, since they were discontinued at WWDC 2017. 10.13 High Sierra didn't come out until fall 2017. So, from that perspective, the 15" MacBook Pro 2015 discontinued in 2016 might be treated similarly to the other machines discontinued in 2017. Here is the list of OSes:

10.12 Sierra <-- This is the OS that was available when those machines were discontinued in 2016 and 2017.
10.13 High Sierra
10.14 Mojave
10.15 Catalina
11 Big Sur
12 Monterey
13 ??? <--- This OS is 6 generations after 10.12 Sierra.

However, I'm hopeful they'll just keep supporting all the machines in macOS 13 as they did in Monterey. It may be wishful thinking though, since we bought a 2015 MacBook Pro last year. It's absolutely mint with a brand new battery, so it would be a shame if it didn't get macOS 13. Last year we also bought a 2017 MacBook Air which is clearly inferior to the 2015 MacBook Pro, but going by its discontinuation date, the 2017 MacBook Air will get macOS 13.

BTW, in terms of CPU generations, Kaby Lake was arguably a big upgrade over Skylake. Kaby Lake has full 10-bit HEVC decode acceleration. Skylake does not. HEVC h.265 10-bit videos will play on a Kaby Lake i5 iMac cleanly at just 10% CPU usage with silent fans. Those same videos will not play on a Skylake i7 iMac cleanly at 100% CPU usage with the fans at maximum.

The only reason I can see for them to keep the 2015 15" around is because they took until 2018 to discontinue it. Same goes for the 2014 Mac mini. Monterey isn't the best experience on Haswell, let alone Broadwell. It's OKAY on Skylake and Kaby Lake. Though it feels like it's been forever since Apple dropped support for Mac models based on performance rather than due to support for an individual component.

Kaby Lake wasn't a huge speed performance bump; though the HEVC decode acceleration is substantial, especially as far as Apple and macOS are concerned. If Apple prioritizes that, I could see a 2017 Macs or newer (give or take continued support for the 2013 Mac Pro).

I don't think the oldest OS for the Macs that got discontinued in 2016 and 17 makes too huge of a difference. The oldest Mac supported by Monterey came with OS X Mavericks initially.

Certainly continued support of the same machines would be nice; though, given how Monterey runs on Haswell and Broadwell Macs, I'm not the most optimistic that those will remain supported.

 

[EugW]

IMO Monterey runs well on the 2014 Mac mini as long as there is 8 GB or more memory and SSD. I run that combo every day.

 

[padams35]

The same Macs that were supported for macOS Monterey (12.x)*​

*Except for the 2014 Mac Mini. I'm predicting the 2014 mini gets dropped and/or 8GB RAM becomes a new minimum requirement.

I would be shocked if:
> The 2013 Mac Pro is dropped (Last sold 2019)
> The 2015 Macbook Air is dropped (same model id as 2017 Macbook Air)
> The 13" 2015 Macbook Pro is dropped (there is no way Apple still supports the 2015 Air but drops the Pro, right?)

With the above most likely supported I'm willing to predict the Late 2015 iMac is also supported.

The 2015 15" MBP is borderline with the 4th-gen CPUs, but since I'm predicting the 2013 Mac Pro will be supported that probably isn't a deal breaker.

The 2014 Mini however is an obvious target for a cut, especially the underpowered baseline config.

PS: Two weeks until WWDC. Get your predictions in!

 

[EugW]

The same Macs that were supported for macOS Monterey (12.x)*​

*Except for the 2014 Mac Mini. I'm predicting the 2014 mini gets dropped and/or 8GB RAM becomes a new minimum requirement.

I would be shocked if:
> The 2013 Mac Pro is dropped (Last sold 2019)
> The 2015 Macbook Air is dropped (same model id as 2017 Macbook Air)
> The 13" 2015 Macbook Pro is dropped (there is no way Apple still supports the 2015 Air but drops the Pro, right?)

With the above most likely supported I'm willing to predict the Late 2015 iMac is also supported.

The 2015 15" MBP is borderline with the 4th-gen CPUs, but since I'm predicting the 2013 Mac Pro will be supported that probably isn't a deal breaker.

The 2014 Mini however is an obvious target for a cut, especially the underpowered baseline config.

PS: Two weeks until WWDC. Get your predictions in!

My predictions:

macOS 13 will support
2013 Mac Pro
2014 Mac mini
2015 MacBook Pro 15"
2017 MacBook Air

macOS may or may not support
2015 MacBook Air 11"
2015 MacBook Air 13"
2015 MacBook Pro 13"

Although the 2015 MacBook Air 13" and the 2017 MacBook Air 13" both share the MacBookAir7,2 A1466 name, they have different EMC designations. The 2015 is EMC 2925 but the 2017 is EMC 3178. They would be recognized as different models, at least by some software.

I hope the 2015 MacBook Pro is supported though, since I bought one last year for my kid. It runs very well with Monterey, so from a performance perspective it is more than capable of running macOS 13. Also, Apple supporting the 2015 15" MacBook Pro could mean they might be inclined support the 2015 13" MacBook Pro too. They weren't released at the same time though so perhaps that's just wishful thinking.

Also, if they did choose the route of going for all the same Macs as Monterey, they would just leave the 2014 Mac mini there too. There is no point of singling that one out. Remember, the 2015 MacBook Airs also shipped with 4 GB RAM, and it’s non-upgradable. It’s unlikely Apple would impose an 8 GB minimum IMO unless all models from that line supported 8 GB minimum.

BTW, it should be noted that support in beta OS versions released at WWDC does not guarantee support in the final version in the fall.

 

[MajorFubar]

As a guy who owned a 2011 iMac for way longer that Apple wanted me to (11 years), IMO it's less of a case of which computers will they forcibly ostracise, and more of a case of which computers will continue to work well with the new OS's. From my experience, about 6-7 years after the launch of a Mac's native OS the experience of using it on the latest and greatest is probably going to significantly suffer compared to the experience of using the same OS on newer models, even if the hardware officially supports it.

 

[EugW]

As a guy who owned a 2011 iMac for way longer that Apple wanted me to (11 years), IMO it's less of a case of which computers will they forcibly ostracise, and more of a case of which computers will continue to work well with the new OS's. From my experience, about 6-7 years after the launch of a Mac's native OS the experience of using it on the latest and greatest is probably going to significantly suffer compared to the experience of using the same OS on newer models, even if the hardware officially supports it.

The 2014 Mac mini with hard drive is basically unusable even back in Big Sur and earlier. It runs Monterey well (and officially) with 8 GB RAM and SSD though.

 

[padams35]

BTW, it should be noted that support in beta OS versions released at WWDC does not guarantee support in the final version in the fall. Also, if they did choose the route of going for all the same Macs as Monterey, they would just leave the 2014 Mac mini there. No real point of singling that one out. Remember, the 2015 MacBook Airs also shipped with 4 GB RAM, and it’s non-upgradable. It’s unlikely Apple would impose an 8 GB minimum IMO.

That's probably true, but the 2017 MBA did ship with 8GB RAM standard, 8GB was an optional upgrade for 2015 MBAs, and by all indications Monterey doesn't really work that will with just 4GB RAM even with an SSD. So unlikely but plausible. However as the only guy even considering the possibility of a RAM increase I want the precognitive credit if it does happen happen.

My predictions:

macOS 13 will support
2013 Mac Pro
2014 Mac mini
2015 MacBook Pro 15"
2017 MacBook Air

macOS may or may not support
2015 MacBook Air 11"
2015 MacBook Air 13"
2015 MacBook Pro 13"

There is precedent (Mid 2012 Macbook Pro not making the cut for Big Sur) of Macs getting cut less than 4 years after discontinuation. I wouldn't put too much certainty in the 2014 Mini being supported.

Maybe this will be another High Sierra where nothing gets cut. Maybe this will be another Monterey where Apple aggressively limits support. More likely my gut feeling is MacOS 13 will be another Catalina where just one or two inconvenient outliers, then the 2010/2012 Mac Pro and here the 2014 mini, get dropped.

 

[EugW]

There is precedent (Mid 2012 Macbook Pro not making the cut for Big Sur) of Macs getting cut less than 4 years after discontinuation. I wouldn't put too much certainty in the 2014 Mini being supported.

Maybe this will be another High Sierra where nothing gets cut. Maybe this will be another Monterey where Apple aggressively limits support. More likely my gut feeling is MacOS 13 will be another Catalina where just one or two inconvenient outliers, then the 2010/2012 Mac Pro and here the 2014 mini, get dropped.

The 2012 MacBook Pro is a weird one. It was essentially replaced in 2013 and most of the SKUs were discontinued as standard configurations in 2013. However, they kept it around as the low cost version for 4 years.

I agree the 2014 Mac mini was an anomaly too, but it's a different kind of anomaly, as it wasn't replaced until 2018.

 

[Falhófnir]

I've got a feeling it's going to be the end of the line for the 2015 MBPs and probably all other remaining 2015 or earlier machines. Apple don't seem to be hanging around with clearing out older Intel machines since the AS transition kicked off. They dropped both the late 2013 and 2014 MBP with Monterey, and the 2012 and early 2013 MBP with Big Sur immediately prior.

 

[EugW]

I've got a feeling it's going to be the end of the line for the 2015 MBPs and probably all other remaining 2015 or earlier machines. Apple don't seem to be hanging around with clearing out older Intel machines since the AS transition kicked off. They dropped both the late 2013 and 2014 MBP with Monterey, and the 2012 and early 2013 MBP with Big Sur immediately prior.

While you could be right, the termination of the support for the 2014 MBP was right on schedule as expected for age. It was discontinued in 2015, so it's no surprise it didn't get Monterey in 2021.

If anything, the late 2013 MBP got support for longer than expected.

 

[frou]

It's funny that people often try and come up with logical explanations for dropped support based on hardware capabilities, when Apple has the luxury of not needing to give ANY explanations, nevermind logical ones!

The situation could be dubbed "Responsibility Laundering" or something like that!