your computer was made early/mid 2007. it is not compatible with OSX ML.
Your Mac must be one of the following models:
-iMac (Mid 2007 or newer)
-MacBook (Late 2008 Aluminum, or Early 2009 or newer)
-MacBook Pro (Mid/Late 2007 or newer)
-MacBook Air (Late 2008 or newer)
-Mac mini (Early 2009 or newer)
-Mac Pro (Early 2008 or newer)
-Xserve (Early 2009)
Not sure if it makes any difference …
I bought my MacPro, as a BTO version … and not the stock standard version.
Quad-Core Intel Xeon, 3 GHz
Surely this has the capability to run the new operating system?
It was bought, late 2007.
But surely, as I did the BTO, with the highest spec available @ that time, that should be the same / better / than the spec released early 2008?
Features like what?
As I say, I have a MacBook Pro, which I did the update to OSX 10.2.8 first.
MacBook Pro, bought Feb 2008 model [3.1], vs the MacPro model [2.1] bought September 2007.
There is nothing that the MacBook Pro has that the MacPro … well not immediately evident anyway.
Aside from the built in iSight camera, naturally. But I do have an external logitech camera attached to my MacPro.
So what exactly is the root cause for the "cut off' ?
If I am to do a capability comparison of the MabBook Pro vs the MacPro, it is very well clear that MacBook Pro is far under that of the MacPro. I mean just comparing the ram/processor/storage/connectivety etc etc, the MacPro trounces the MacBook, any day … ??
So, what is this elusive "feature" that the meaker MacBook Pro has that my beastly MacPro is lacking?
Surely it can't just be as simple as a model number identification?
[see my previus message to markwmsn regarding hardware/physical attributes].
I get it that there needs to be a "cut off / realistic end of life" applicable to any machine, but how can the MacPro be "outperformed" by the a MacBook Pro, that is in my opinion, nowhere nearly in the same league? And that only because it's "model number" is the only overwhelming feature between the two Macs?
Not 100% sure about this but a lot of macs were dropped for their lack of 64bit support which ML only uses.
Not being fresh here, just trying to help, but you could try googling you model number and OSX to see if other people, who have your issue, state what is blocking them from installing ML.
This would give you a better understanding of the possible reason it's not supported...
Can't be that, [64bit] as this MacPro I have is fully capable, and is running 64bit.
In fact, as far as memory serves, this one I bought [B.T.O. option] was one of the 1st 64bit offerings made available.
But thanks for weighing in …
Anyone else have a suggestion?
Mac Pro MacBook Pro
Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro2,1
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Processor Speed: 3 GHz
Number Of Processors: 2
Total Number Of Cores: 8
L2 Cache (per processor): 8 MB
Memory: 24 GB
Bus Speed: 1,33 GHz
Boot ROM Version: MP21.007F.B06
SMC Version (system): 1.15f3
Model Name: MacBook Pro
Model Identifier: MacBookPro3,1
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 2,4 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 2
L2 Cache: 4 MB
Memory: 4 GB
Bus Speed: 800 MHz
Boot ROM Version: MBP31.0070.B07
SMC Version (system): 1.18f5
Even the graphics capabilities, are in the favor of the MacPro, which I opted for:
ATI Radeon X1900 XT, rather than the default option at the time.
This graphics card is due to be replaced with the newer 5870 upgraded card.
Just have not slipped it in the case, as yet.
But even without the graphics card update, it is still better than the MacBook's graphics capabilities, surely?
Do you know what the "feature" is?
I mean, I even made sure that my MacPro had the bluetooth module fitted. Which here in South Africa, was not fitted standard to the MacPro models, and needed to be "added at extra cost", even though most other countries were supplying the unit already fitted, as standard.
It is not like the one Mac has thunderbolt, and the other not … etc.
It is seemingly not a "harware" problem, so if it is a "software" thing … surely a piece of code can be written, to accommodate people like myself, who were willing to venture into the B.T.O. market, so as to make sure that we were "getting ll that we could get, and more".
Thought that it was best to be discussing this via the offcial channel?
Thought that perhaps if Apple were intereseted in retaining me as a "long standing" customer, that perhaps they could pick up and respond … ?
Does anyone know what the "feature" could be?
As I say, I could understand it, if the MacBook Pro [3.1] and my MacPro [2.1] - B.T.O. - were indeed both not capable of running OSX ML - for whatever "hardware shortage" they suffer. But it appears that it is not a "hardware" incapability at play here, and more of a matter of an "unfair business practice" ?
Why should I now have to drop huge dough again, to ensure that my "active" MacPro can continue to deliver, while my current MacBook Pro, which is nowhere in the same league, can continue to deliver going forward, limping along if compared to the current MacPro, without needing to be replaced?
That is just obscene.
And yes, I have "googled it" and can't find a resolve … that is the reason for my posting comments here, so that hopefully someone/anyone can help …
Sorry about being vague. I knew at one time. I think at least one requirement for ML was 64-bit EFI (boot code),
My "Early 2008" Mac Pro, the earliest Mac Pro officially eligible for Mountain Lion, shows as follows:
Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro3,1
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Processor Speed: 2.8 GHz
Number of Processors: 2
Total Number of Cores: 8
L2 Cache (per Processor): 12 MB
Memory: 10 GB
Bus Speed: 1.6 GHz
Boot ROM Version: MP31.006C.B05
SMC Version (system): 1.25f4
Note the higher Model ID, Boot ROM, and SMC Version.
As I say … it appears it is not "a hardware related matter" … and more a matter of a few pieces of "code" needing to be added to the current OSX ML installer?
Anyone willing to help, I am keen to hear your input. I understand that "apple" are not "officially" here … but let's face it, where do they "really" get information relating to "user experiences" if they are not "monitoring" locations like this?