Contribute
Register

Clover -> OpenCore... On Working Systems? Why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that OpenCore will always be in "beta". I don't think that's a reason to avoid using it. It's very solid, maybe more so than Clover.
I concur wholeheartedly, even opencanopy is a far better option than what Clover has to offer, a picture is worth a thousand words. By the way, extrapolating the current "development" progress it will take another 39 months - 3 and 1/4 years - before opencore reaches version 7.0.0 - regardless, that which it offers already now, is totally adequate for
my particular needs and the hardware I deploy it under, besides, I consider the documentation available for opencanoy
to be world class, completely taking out the guesswork of a Clover to opencore transition.

Greetings Henties
 

Attachments

  • Haswell Big Sur Boot menu.png
    Haswell Big Sur Boot menu.png
    47.1 KB · Views: 53
  • Skylake Big Sur Boot menu.png
    Skylake Big Sur Boot menu.png
    112.7 KB · Views: 60
... because?

Opencanopy is cleaner and easier to setup, requiring a minimum of resources to constantly drag along. My attachments in #11 above refer. Each selectable boot entity is actually reflecting the kind of storage medium the particular opsys is installed on.

How long before version 1.0.0?

For as long as the developers require to phase in all aspects of the UEFI specification into their code, provided of cause that this is also their ultimate aim. In other words creating an UEFI boot manager that can ultimately be deployed for all the diverse operating systems that are floating around now and in the future. At least that is how I view their longer term efforts which are not directed exclusively towards macOS only.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top