iM 4,1-14,4 Older Mac Operating System installed on an SSD?

[CLOD-HOPPER]

Hello, experts. I am not well-versed in technical matters, but I do my best and hope for the best. Because of a complex situation, which need not be entered into, I had a need to install High Sierra onto an iMac (mid-2010) that has had an SSD installed where the DCD drive used to be. (The spinning hard drive is still in use.) I installed High Sierra onto a partition on the SSD. Since then, warning notifications keep appearing, telling me that the disc is not suitable for what is installed on it (I suppose it means on the SSD).

As I say, the situation is to complicated to explain why I had a need to what I did. Also, High Sierra seems to be working OK on the SSD. Is there anything that I should be concerned about, really?
With thanks in hopes of at least one informed response,
C.H.

PS: My posting could not be done without it having a prefix. However, iMac could not be selected, so (just to please the system) I chose MacBook — a complete lie, but I had to choose something.

 

[eyoungren]

Hello, experts. I am not well-versed in technical matters, but I do my best and hope for the best. Because of a complex situation, which need not be entered into, I had a need to install High Sierra onto an iMac (mid-2010) that has had an SSD installed where the DCD drive used to be. (The spinning hard drive is still in use.) I installed High Sierra onto a partition on the SSD. Since then, warning notifications keep appearing, telling me that the disc is not suitable for what is installed on it (I suppose it means on the SSD).

As I say, the situation is to complicated to explain why I had a need to what I did. Also, High Sierra seems to be working OK on the SSD. Is there anything that I should be concerned about, really?
With thanks in hopes of at least one informed response,
C.H.

PS: My posting could not be done without it having a prefix. However, iMac could not be selected, so (just to please the system) I chose MacBook — a complete lie, but I had to choose something.

When you formatted the SSD, did you format it as APFS or just HFS+ (Journaled)? I ask, because Apple introduced APFS as a format for SSDs with High Sierra. I speculate that the warnings may be due to the fact that you formatted the SSD as HFS+ when APFS is better suited to it.

If the SSD is formatted APFS, then I'm not sure what the problem is.

 

[Nermal]

PS: My posting could not be done without it having a prefix. However, iMac could not be selected, so (just to please the system) I chose MacBook — a complete lie, but I had to choose something.

I'm not sure why it wouldn't let you choose it, but I've changed it for you.

 

[Minghold]

I installed High Sierra onto a partition on the SSD. Since then, warning notifications keep appearing, telling me that the disc is not suitable for what is installed on it (I suppose it means on the SSD).

Ignore it, and search for the Terminal hack to disable Notifications (because virtually every piece of shrill, hysterical, panic-mongering official announcement from Apple concerning your software is a bald-faced lie). Notifications debuted in El Capitan, and were murdered in cold blood almost immediately.

 

[Minghold]

When you formatted the SSD, did you format it as APFS or just HFS+ (Journaled)? I ask, because Apple introduced APFS as a format for SSDs with High Sierra. I speculate that the warnings may be due to the fact that you formatted the SSD as HFS+ when APFS is better suited to it.

If the SSD is formatted APFS, then I'm not sure what the problem is.

HFS+ is default for High Sierra, and there is nothing wrong with using that partitioning setup on an SSD. In constrast, APFS is not "better suited" for anything on an intel-series Mac, where it running horrendously slow will be your best possible outcome. On a 2010, which is easy to service yourself, there's no reason whatsoever not to use the fastest possible file system (MacOS Extended journaled AKA HFS+), and Terminal hack notifications and other annoyances (MRT, Spotlight-indexing, etc).

 

[CLOD-HOPPER]

I'm not sure why it wouldn't let you choose it, but I've changed it for you.

Thanks, Nermal. F.Y.I., headings in the prefix drop-down menu alternated, every other one being on a white background, while the others (which seemingly were OK for selecting) were against a black background. I have noticed this in the past. Could it be that my very old browser (Safari v 13.1.2) is buggy, I wonder?
C.H.

 

[CLOD-HOPPER]

HFS+ is default for High Sierra, and there is nothing wrong with using that partitioning setup on an SSD. In constrast, APFS is not "better suited" for anything on an intel-series Mac, where it running horrendously slow will be your best possible outcome. On a 2010, which is easy to service yourself, there's no reason whatsoever not to use the fastest possible file system (MacOS Extended journaled AKA HFS+), and Terminal hack notifications and other annoyances (MRT, Spotlight-indexing, etc).

What I ought to tell both Minghold and Eyoungren is that I partitioned the SSD, and on one half, I installed (via a hack with Open Core Legacy Patcher) OS Monterey. It could be that this is what the alerts are referring to, as the boundaries have been stretched in so doing. However, on the other half of the SSD, I installed High Sierra. It was installed on a partition formatted as APFS. Minghold, its speed in use does not seem so bad. I for one am satisfied with it. Of course, it is far from being lightning-fast.
C.H.

 

[Minghold]

What I ought to tell both Minghold and Eyoungren is that I partitioned the SSD, and on one half, I installed (via a hack with Open Core Legacy Patcher) OS Monterey. It could be that this is what the alerts are referring to, as the boundaries have been stretched in so doing. However, on the other half of the SSD, I installed High Sierra. It was installed on a partition formatted as APFS. Minghold, its speed in use does not seem so bad. I for one am satisfied with it. Of course, it is far from being lightning-fast.

Well, on the bright side, you can't really tell that hardware-acceleration is being disabled while running Monterey because you can run virtually nothing on that OS that isn't subscription-model from the AppStore. (My first test of OCL is whether or not 32bit games like Peggle or Angry Birds will play. If they won't, then there's no point to installing Da Vinci Resolve, etc. And if you're not running such high-powered apps, then there's no reason to want a silicon OS anyway if all you're doing is running Safari so you can be "safe" with its updates. Or you could throw Safari in the garbage and run Chromium-legacy, which is up-do-date and runs on OSes as old as Lion without Facebook, YouTube, or your bank giving you any crap about obsolete browsers, and it can run modern uBlock Origin, Sponsorblock, and Adblocker Ultimate extensions. It's never been a better time to run old OSes; e.g., an El Capitan install running in 2gb of ram on a 2007 blackback iMac with Chromium-legacy watching 1080p content. Only have to turn off MRT and notifications in Terminal, and it's nearly as fast as Snow Leopard.)

 

[CLOD-HOPPER]

Well, on the bright side, you can't really tell that hardware-acceleration is being disabled while running Monterey because you can run virtually nothing on that OS that isn't subscription-model from the AppStore. (My first test of OCL is whether or not 32bit games like Peggle or Angry Birds will play. If they won't, then there's no point to installing Da Vinci Resolve, etc. And if you're not running such high-powered apps, then there's no reason to want a silicon OS anyway if all you're doing is running Safari so you can be "safe" with its updates. Or you could throw Safari in the garbage and run Chromium-legacy, which is up-do-date and runs on OSes as old as Lion without Facebook, YouTube, or your bank giving you any crap about obsolete browsers, and it can run modern uBlock Origin, Sponsorblock, and Adblocker Ultimate extensions. It's never been a better time to run old OSes; e.g., an El Capitan install running in 2gb of ram on a 2007 blackback iMac with Chromium-legacy watching 1080p content. Only have to turn off MRT and notifications in Terminal, and it's nearly as fast as Snow Leopard.)

Minghold, you are streets ahead of me in your understanding of things Mac. You have given me a lot to consider, which I will in due course. Thank you!
Regards, C.H.

 

[Minghold]

Mojave debuted in late 2018, most users didn't install it until 2019 or 2020, and it had its last update in 2021. --It's hardly "old" by any stretch of the imagination, and the only software that poopoos it are klepto subscription-model suites with their noses up Apple's backside. (It'd be like calling Windows 10 "old", even though it debuted three years earlier, is still actively supported through next year, and is still the dominant PC OS by a wide margin and will probably remain so even when Win12 shows up. People really are sick of the OS planned-obsolescence treadmill.)