Reading mode: Light Dark

2010 iMac i7 27in: Catalina vs LightRoom Classic 9.0

Go to last post
M

Mark B UK

Senior Member
Messages
1,832
Solutions
1
Reaction score
757
Location
Surrey, UK
I have an iMac i7 27in which I bought new in April 2010 which I use mostly for processing RAW images in LightRoom Classic (monthly subscription version). Over the weekend I noticed that LR had released the 9.0 update but that the Mac wouldn't let me install it because I didn't have the new OS (Catalina); meanwhile Apple wouldn't let me install Catalina because it says my Mac is too old.

This would seem to imply that I am now trapped with a legacy version of LR, and with the passing of time I'll get progressively further behind compared with subsequent new releases.

Is there any solution to this or do I have to bite the bullet and buy a new Mac (or switch to a PC)?
 
If your machine can't run the OS then there's nothing you can do.
 
Mark B UK said:
I have an iMac i7 27in which I bought new in April 2010 which I use mostly for processing RAW images in LightRoom Classic (monthly subscription version).
Click to expand...
Mark B UK said:
Over the weekend I noticed that LR had released the 9.0 update but that the Mac wouldn't let me install it because I didn't have the new OS (Catalina)
Click to expand...
Adobe says that the requirements for Lightroom Classic 9.0 are High Sierra, Mojave, or Catalina. If their installer is demanding Catalina (only), you might want to contact them and ask what's up.

https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/system-requirements.html
Mark B UK said:
meanwhile Apple wouldn't let me install Catalina because it says my Mac is too old.
Click to expand...
It is. You need at least a Late 2012 iMac to run Catalina or Mojave. But I'm sure that you could run High Sierra. It's still in the most recent three (which means that it will probably get critical security updates, for now), and still available for download.

To get High Sierra now, you need to go through this support page:

Apple Support – How to upgrade to macOS High Sierra
Mark B UK said:
This would seem to imply that I am now trapped with a legacy version of LR, and with the passing of time I'll get progressively further behind compared with subsequent new releases.
Click to expand...
I'd check to see whether your system is running High Sierra. and whether LR Classic 9.0 is really Catalina-only. If you're not on High Sierra now, that might be the issue.
 
Thanks Tom. I think my Mac is already running High Sierra, but will check. However I note that Adobe says a 64-bit processor is required, and I have a feeling mine may be 32-bit. Maybe that's the problem and Adobe is giving me the wrong reason for not letting me install LR 9.0 (needing Catalina)?
 
Mark B UK said:
Thanks Tom. I think my Mac is already running High Sierra, but will check. However I note that Adobe says a 64-bit processor is required, and I have a feeling mine may be 32-bit. Maybe that's the problem and Adobe is giving me the wrong reason for not letting me install LR 9.0 (needing Catalina)?
Click to expand...
I don't think that's it.

The Intel CPUs that Apple uses in Macs have been capable of running 32- and 64-bit instruction sets for quite some time. Snow Leopard used a 32-bit kernel by default, but almost every application included with Snow Leopard ran as a 64-bit application . That wouldn't have worked out too well if the CPUs in Late 2009 iMacs had been 32-bit-only.
 
Tom_N said:
Mark B UK said:
Thanks Tom. I think my Mac is already running High Sierra, but will check. However I note that Adobe says a 64-bit processor is required, and I have a feeling mine may be 32-bit. Maybe that's the problem and Adobe is giving me the wrong reason for not letting me install LR 9.0 (needing Catalina)?
Click to expand...
I don't think that's it.

The Intel CPUs that Apple uses in Macs have been capable of running 32- and 64-bit instruction sets for quite some time. Snow Leopard used a 32-bit kernel by default, but almost every application included with Snow Leopard ran as a 64-bit application . That wouldn't have worked out too well if the CPUs in Late 2009 iMacs had been 32-bit-only.
Click to expand...
Thanks. In that case I'll contact Adobe as it seems there's no reason LR 9.0 shouldn't run on High Sierra, which I confirm is the OS currently in use on my iMac.
 
I had the same 2010 iMac with the same specs and recently bumped into the same limits you're hitting. My machine also slowed down considerably. Bottom line is that I bought a new 27" iMac last week and couldn't be happier. The speed difference is very impressive and it makes post processing a joy, as lagginess is pretty much gone. Bite the bullet. You'll be very glad you did.
 
bathgate said:
I had the same 2010 iMac with the same specs and recently bumped into the same limits you're hitting. My machine also slowed down considerably. Bottom line is that I bought a new 27" iMac last week and couldn't be happier. The speed difference is very impressive and it makes post processing a joy, as lagginess is pretty much gone. Bite the bullet. You'll be very glad you did.
Click to expand...
Thanks. The fact that you experienced the same problem with the same scenario suggests there may be no easy fix. Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
 
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
I had the same 2010 iMac with the same specs and recently bumped into the same limits you're hitting. My machine also slowed down considerably. Bottom line is that I bought a new 27" iMac last week and couldn't be happier. The speed difference is very impressive and it makes post processing a joy, as lagginess is pretty much gone. Bite the bullet. You'll be very glad you did.
Click to expand...
Thanks. The fact that you experienced the same problem with the same scenario suggests there may be no easy fix. Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
Click to expand...
I stuck with the i7. 40GB of RAM.

After I got the new machine set up the way I wanted it, I cloned the hard drive to a 2TB external SSD and made that bootable. I now boot from and use the external SSD as my primary drive and backup to my internal HDD, using SuperDuper.
 
bathgate said:
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
I had the same 2010 iMac with the same specs and recently bumped into the same limits you're hitting. My machine also slowed down considerably. Bottom line is that I bought a new 27" iMac last week and couldn't be happier. The speed difference is very impressive and it makes post processing a joy, as lagginess is pretty much gone. Bite the bullet. You'll be very glad you did.
Click to expand...
Thanks. The fact that you experienced the same problem with the same scenario suggests there may be no easy fix. Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
Click to expand...
I stuck with the i7. 40GB of RAM.

After I got the new machine set up the way I wanted it, I cloned the hard drive to a 2TB external SSD and made that bootable. I now boot from and use the external SSD as my primary drive and backup to my internal HDD, using SuperDuper.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's quite a lot of memory, but I guess needed given how much bigger RAW files have become in recent years and will probably keep doing so. Was going to specify 32GB; now wondering if that's enough given that I hope a new Mac will last 9-10 years as the current one has.
 
My iMac was from 2011 and I also missed Mojave and the Catalina updates by a year. I new the day was coming so I just got a new iMac. Apple will provide security updates to High Sierra until fall of 2020 when the next version of OS comes out. I'm gonna call it Cactus lol.
 
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
I had the same 2010 iMac with the same specs and recently bumped into the same limits you're hitting. My machine also slowed down considerably. Bottom line is that I bought a new 27" iMac last week and couldn't be happier. The speed difference is very impressive and it makes post processing a joy, as lagginess is pretty much gone. Bite the bullet. You'll be very glad you did.
Click to expand...
Thanks. The fact that you experienced the same problem with the same scenario suggests there may be no easy fix. Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
Click to expand...
I stuck with the i7. 40GB of RAM.

After I got the new machine set up the way I wanted it, I cloned the hard drive to a 2TB external SSD and made that bootable. I now boot from and use the external SSD as my primary drive and backup to my internal HDD, using SuperDuper.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's quite a lot of memory, but I guess needed given how much bigger RAW files have become in recent years and will probably keep doing so. Was going to specify 32GB; now wondering if that's enough given that I hope a new Mac will last 9-10 years as the current one has.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've always been of the notion that you can never have too much RAM. My primary camera is a D800, so each RAW file starts out at 36MB before any processing. I need all the help I can get!
 
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
Mark B UK said:
Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
Click to expand...
I stuck with the i7. 40GB of RAM.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's quite a lot of memory, but I guess needed given how much bigger RAW files have become in recent years and will probably keep doing so.
Click to expand...
He probably didn't need that much RAM. 32 GB of third-party RAM costs less than $200 these days, making it a temptation to err a bit on the "too much RAM" side.
Mark B UK said:
Was going to specify 32GB; now wondering if that's enough given that I hope a new Mac will last 9-10 years as the current one has.
Click to expand...
If you get a 27" iMac, you're not locked into the initial amount of RAM. You don't need to buy it all from the factory (at prices that are about 4x those of third-party RAM), and you don't need to start off with the amount that you might be using 10 years from now.

According to Apple, a 2019 27" iMac can take up to 64 GB (4 x 16 GB) of RAM. According to OWC, it can take up to 128 GB (4 x 32 GB). EIther way, it's very unlikely that you need to start with that much now.
 
Zeee said:
My iMac was from 2011 and I also missed Mojave and the Catalina updates by a year. I new the day was coming so I just got a new iMac. Apple will provide security updates to High Sierra until fall of 2020 when the next version of OS comes out. I'm gonna call it Cactus lol.
Click to expand...
Maybe Apple should have reversed the naming of 10.14 and 10.15. Then:

[Santa] Catalina [Island] ("10.14") – The final vacation stop for 32-bit applications.

Mojave [Desert] ("10.15") – Where 32-bit applications go to die.

:-)
 
Last edited:
Tom_N said:
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
Mark B UK said:
Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
Click to expand...
I stuck with the i7. 40GB of RAM.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's quite a lot of memory, but I guess needed given how much bigger RAW files have become in recent years and will probably keep doing so.
Click to expand...
He probably didn't need that much RAM. 32 GB of third-party RAM costs less than $200 these days, making it a temptation to err a bit on the "too much RAM" side.
Tom_N said:
Was going to specify 32GB; now wondering if that's enough given that I hope a new Mac will last 9-10 years as the current one has.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I ordered 8 for my iMac. iMac Ram pricing is ridiculous.
Tom_N said:
If you get a 27" iMac, you're not locked into the initial amount of RAM. You don't need to buy it all from the factory (at prices that are about 4x those of third-party RAM), and you don't need to start off with the amount that you might be using 10 years from now.

According to Apple, a 2019 27" iMac can take up to 64 GB (4 x 16 GB) of RAM. According to OWC, it can take up to 128 GB (4 x 32 GB). EIther way, it's very unlikely that you need to start with that much now.
Click to expand...
I put in 32 of OWC. I'll through another 32 next month.
 
Tom_N said:
Zeee said:
My iMac was from 2011 and I also missed Mojave and the Catalina updates by a year. I new the day was coming so I just got a new iMac. Apple will provide security updates to High Sierra until fall of 2020 when the next version of OS comes out. I'm gonna call it Cactus lol.
Click to expand...
Maybe Apple should have reversed the naming of 10.14 and 10.15. Then:

[Santa] Catalina [Island] ("10.14") – The final vacation stop for 32-bit applications.

Mojave [Desert] ("10.15") – Where 32-bit applications go to die.

:-)
Click to expand...
LOL. Mojave crawling on its hands and knees with vultures circling.
 
Tom_N said:
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
Mark B UK said:
Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
Click to expand...
I stuck with the i7. 40GB of RAM.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's quite a lot of memory, but I guess needed given how much bigger RAW files have become in recent years and will probably keep doing so.
Click to expand...
He probably didn't need that much RAM. 32 GB of third-party RAM costs less than $200 these days, making it a temptation to err a bit on the "too much RAM" side.
Tom_N said:
Was going to specify 32GB; now wondering if that's enough given that I hope a new Mac will last 9-10 years as the current one has.
Click to expand...
If you get a 27" iMac, you're not locked into the initial amount of RAM. You don't need to buy it all from the factory (at prices that are about 4x those of third-party RAM), and you don't need to start off with the amount that you might be using 10 years from now.

According to Apple, a 2019 27" iMac can take up to 64 GB (4 x 16 GB) of RAM. According to OWC, it can take up to 128 GB (4 x 32 GB). EIther way, it's very unlikely that you need to start with that much now.
Click to expand...
Absolutely true. You can add RAM if and when you decide to do so. I got 2x16GB from OWC. With 4 RAM slots available, I simply added those to the existing 2x4GB to wind up with 40GB. Definitely no need to order a new machine with extra RAM from Apple, where memory costs more than anywhere else.
 
bathgate said:
Tom_N said:
Mark B UK said:
bathgate said:
Mark B UK said:
Out of interest did you specify an i7 or i9 processor for your new Mac, and how much memory did you go for?
Click to expand...
I stuck with the i7. 40GB of RAM.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's quite a lot of memory, but I guess needed given how much bigger RAW files have become in recent years and will probably keep doing so.
Click to expand...
He probably didn't need that much RAM. 32 GB of third-party RAM costs less than $200 these days, making it a temptation to err a bit on the "too much RAM" side.
bathgate said:
Was going to specify 32GB; now wondering if that's enough given that I hope a new Mac will last 9-10 years as the current one has.
Click to expand...
If you get a 27" iMac, you're not locked into the initial amount of RAM. You don't need to buy it all from the factory (at prices that are about 4x those of third-party RAM), and you don't need to start off with the amount that you might be using 10 years from now.

According to Apple, a 2019 27" iMac can take up to 64 GB (4 x 16 GB) of RAM. According to OWC, it can take up to 128 GB (4 x 32 GB). EIther way, it's very unlikely that you need to start with that much now.
Click to expand...
Absolutely true. You can add RAM if and when you decide to do so. I got 2x16GB from OWC. With 4 RAM slots available, I simply added those to the existing 2x4GB to wind up with 40GB. Definitely no need to order a new machine with extra RAM from Apple, where memory costs more than anywhere else.
Click to expand...
I have read and the place where I purchased it told me that it is better to have RAM from the same manufacturer. Apparently it can cause issues but I really don't for sure. Might be certain brands that don't et along. I also purchased OWC and did take the Apple RAM out. The place I where purchased to knew I wasn't going to buy it from them so they had no stake in it.
 
Is it possible to upgrade the RAM in the new 21 inch iMac in the same way you are discussing here?
 
miklmar said:
Is it possible to upgrade the RAM in the new 21 inch iMac in the same way you are discussing here?
Click to expand...
The RAM in the current 21.5-inch iMacs is socketed. But there are just two sockets, and they are sealed in. Disassembling the iMac to get to them probably voids the warranty.

So with a 27-inch iMac, you might buy 16 GB of third-party RAM, and add it to the 8 GB that came with the machine, for a total of 24 GB.

With a 21.5-inch iMac, you would buy 16 GB of RAM and pay a service place to install it in place of the factory RAM. This would give you 16 GB of RAM, at a higher cost, with less room (if any) to expand further.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top