Apple has stopped providing standalone updaters in macOS Big Sur

[Gogeta-Blue]

I have already been skeptical about Big Sur and previously has decided that I will wait until late 2021 (more or less after the last major system update to Big Sur has been released) to install and run Big Sur. I am franky becoming a bit tired of these annual OS updates on my computers as it does not seem to offer anything remotely useful over the current OS that I am using (It is also one of the main reasons I still refuse to adopt Windows 10 on my PCs.).

Another one of the reasons being, as a user of VMware Fusion using nested virtualization occasionally, the performance of VMware Fusion 12 on Big Sur when using nested virtualization is simply unacceptable :

Abysmal Performance in Fusion 12 after upgrade to macOS Big Sur

After upgrading to macOS Big Sur, performance on my VMs went from great to utterly abysmal. Remedial tasks like opening the Start menu, opening Notepad etc. can now take up to half a minute. Windows are drawn on the screen line-by-line with half second intervals. The host computer is a 2018 Mac...

communities.vmware.com

There are no significant performance degradations if you run VMware Fusion to use nested virtualization on older MacOS versions like Mojave and Catalina. It seems that it is after VMware Fusion adopts Apple's hypervisor framework on Big Sur that the performance plummets.

Now with Apple apparently deciding that there will be no more standalone updaters for Big Sur system updates (and perhaps the later Security Updates?), I consider the situation unacceptable, and my mind is made up that I won't upgrade to Big Sur. I will continue with MacOS Sierra / High Sierra / Mojave / Catalina, until such a time when running MacOS on Intel hardware is no longer tenable (and when that time comes I will probably simply go back to Windows full time). I will also no longer consider getting an Apple Silicon Mac, as they can only run Big Sur (and later). I shall see if Apple will reverse this decision in the future, and if so I might also reconsider.

According to Howard Oakley on The Eclectic Light Company :

Last Week on My Mac: Begging from Apple

We don’t know when Apple decided to introduce Big Sur’s SSV, but even now it hasn’t told users it won’t be releasing standalone updates for 11.0.1 or 11.1.

eclecticlight.co

The reason for this decision is apparently due to difficulties with the Signed System Volume (SSV) introduced with Big Sur. I particularly don't like the fact that Apple has apparently made this decision without bothering to inform Mac users. I agree with Howard Oakley who said "Those who, in the past, have relied on standalone installers to update multiple Macs or in any other workflow have just been abandoned, left to plead their case for reinstatement of a longstanding service."

I will also "plead my case" through Apple Feedback, but frankly I don't think Apple will change its mind, at least not with Big Sur.

I shall continue to watch this situation closely.

The problem with VM running Apple software, is that Apple doesn’t want to sign the video driver. That’s why you only get 128MB on most virtual machine with no GPU acceleration. I think everything from the metal era onward is not going to have video support.

If you install Windows on a virtual machine, you are going to have video support, not like running your GPU natively but at least usable.

Unfortunately, this is not the case with Apple. I did install Big Sur on a VM, but honestly is not worth it.

I think the Readon is why Apple does this is because they think, if a person can run macOS with GPU support on a VM, then they might not even buy a Mac.

of course you can run a VM and still have a mac but that’s the way apple think

every fully working VM is less money for us

 

[pastrychef]

I don't know which developed (aka 1st world) country where downloading a few gigabytes is a major problem. Those who are in undeveloped countries have other things to worry about than updating macOS.

You have dozens of Macs to update? Get the full installer and put it on a USB flash drive then sneakernet it. Problem solved.

Your internet connection consists of two cups and a string? Go to Starbucks or McDonald's and use their connection or tether off your cellphone. Oh, and look for a new ISP.

 

[scottkendall]

I don't know which developed (aka 1st world) country where downloading a few gigabytes is a major problem. Those who are in undeveloped countries have other things to worry about than updating macOS.

You have dozens of Macs to update? Get the full installer and put it on a USB flash drive then sneakernet it. Problem solved.

Your internet connection consists of two cups and a string? Go to Starbucks or McDonald's and use their connection or tether off your cellphone. Oh, and look for a new ISP.

I remember downloading Window 98 beta (540 megs or so) on a 56k connection talk about a long time.

 

[Gogeta-Blue]

I don't know which developed (aka 1st world) country where downloading a few gigabytes is a major problem. Those who are in undeveloped countries have other things to worry about than updating macOS.

You have dozens of Macs to update? Get the full installer and put it on a USB flash drive then sneakernet it. Problem solved.

Your internet connection consists of two cups and a string? Go to Starbucks or McDonald's and use their connection or tether off your cellphone. Oh, and look for a new ISP.

i get your point but why do i have to run a full installer just to run a small update

this can easily be fix by apple if they really want to

this is a software problem, the problem is the yearly rush, buggy, unfinished versions of mac os

by the time they reached a stable version of mac os then , then they star all over again with a new buggy version

the best or smart way to fix this problem isby staying on the latest version of mac os untill the new version reaches their last version

so if catalina last version was .6 or . 7 then stay there for another year untill big sur reaches version .6 or .8

that way you can run a stable version instead of a buggy one, the problem with that is that people always wants the newest or the latest

there is a saying, newer is not always better

some times it is but not always

 

[pastrychef]

I remember downloading Window 98 beta (540 megs or so) on a 56k connection talk about a long time.

I never owned any systems that could run any version of Windows before XP. That was a hand-me-down system that I barely ever turned on before trashing it.

I only really started to use Windows for games when Windows 8 was current and I updated to Windows 10 once it was available.

 

[pastrychef]

i get your point but why do i have to run a full installer just to run a small update

this can easily be fix by apple if they really want to

this is a software problem, the problem is the yearly rush, buggy, unfinished versions of mac os

by the time they reached a stable version of mac os then , then they star all over again with a new buggy version

the best or smart way to fix this problem isby staying on the latest version of mac os untill the new version reaches their last version

so if catalina last version was .6 or . 7 then stay there for another year untill big sur reaches version .6 or .8

that way you can run a stable version instead of a buggy one, the problem with that is that people always wants the newest or the latest

there is a saying, newer is not always better

some times it is but not always

See post #4.

What's the difference between running the full installer vs an update other than a few gigabytes difference in size?

Updates are not a sign of instability. Every modern operating system has continuous updates. If you believe updates equate to instability, use Mac OS 9 or Windows 95. Those don't get updates anymore, they must be super stable.

 

[scottkendall]

See post #4.

What's the difference between running the full installer vs an update other than a few gigabytes difference in size?

Updates are not a sign of instability. Every modern operating system has continuous updates. If you believe updates equate to instability, use Mac OS 9 or Windows 95. Those don't get updates anymore, they must be super stable.

In all fairness the only time I ever had an issue with any version of windows was in the era of (Win Hardware). The hardware was super cheap like $10-$15 for modem, or sound cards, or Graphics, etc. But that stuff always caused IRQ error and crashes. Once I learned that, I saved for the good stuff! Creative, ATI, US Robotics, Etc. Never had a crash after that. Windows 95/98/2000,XP, were good there was a version around 2000 that was called ME that however, was a dumpster fire, inside a nuclear meltdown, on the surface of the sun. Even 8 and 8.1 were not unstable they just did some drastic stuff to the UI and everyone lost there minds.

 

[scottkendall]

i get your point but why do i have to run a full installer just to run a small update

this can easily be fix by apple if they really want to

this is a software problem, the problem is the yearly rush, buggy, unfinished versions of mac os

by the time they reached a stable version of mac os then , then they star all over again with a new buggy version

the best or smart way to fix this problem isby staying on the latest version of mac os untill the new version reaches their last version

so if catalina last version was .6 or . 7 then stay there for another year untill big sur reaches version .6 or .8

that way you can run a stable version instead of a buggy one, the problem with that is that people always wants the newest or the latest

I think the full install over the existing install takes the same amount of time as the patch install. I have had no issues with Mojave from beta to Catalina. Catalina Beta had a good deal of issues but I had no issues after release. I had only a few problems with Big Sur during beta mostly with Adobe apps those have since went away.

 

[Gogeta-Blue]

pastrychef
you misunderstood me
you are taking it to the extreme

many mac users wait at least untill version .2 or .3 before moving to the next new version of mac os, just to avoid all the bugs that comes with a new os

others simply don’t care and jump to the ship at the first realease

this is the part that you don’t want to accept or understand

if this has always been the case about the full installer and apple never offered any smaller update with the option to update multiple macs then nobody has the right to say anything because it was always like that

but that is not the case, apple provided those updates and this new move is not better, is worse

i don’t know what’s the real reason behind this change

but when you had something that worked for many years
to then change it for something that doesn’t work, you can’t expect users to be a bit upset or dissapointed, why? because it doesn’t make things better, it makes them worse, but apple expects every mac user to be a millionaire and run fiber

this is very simple, some people will not see anything wrong about this chage, while others will, so i guess we both righ and both wrong

it just depends on the way you see it

for me is a flaw in their software, they made so many changes and they broke something

 

[pastrychef]

In all fairness the only time I ever had an issue with any version of windows was in the era of (Win Hardware). The hardware was super cheap like $10-$15 for modem, or sound cards, or Graphics, etc. But that stuff always caused IRQ error and crashes. Once I learned that, I saved for the good stuff! Creative, ATI, US Robotics, Etc. Never had a crash after that. Windows 95/98/2000,XP, were good there was a version around 2000 that was called ME that however, was a dumpster fire, inside a nuclear meltdown, on the surface of the sun. Even 8 and 8.1 were not unstable they just did some drastic stuff to the UI and everyone lost there minds.

It wasn't instability that kept me away from Windows. It was the UI and my lack of understanding of how Windows worked. I still don't have a grasp of what all those dll and IRQs mean.

I was far more comfortable with macOS. All I needed was Conflict Catcher to help me manage everything.