Jump to content
1699 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, eSaF said:

This is my T-919, no problem, no hassle. I stupidly destroyed my Apple wifi/b-tooth card and the replacement I ordered would take a month or so to be delivered so as a quick fix I asked @miliuco knowing he had one in his rig his advice. This is the one he recommended (see attached). I don't know how true this is but I have read that there are some T-919 Clones knocking around and the performance can be very flaky hence the reason the T-919 has a bad Rep in some circles...

@MorenoAv

I have also read some negative comments about Fenvi T919, especially about Bluetooth weak signal, but in my case it has worked perfectly OOTB from High Sierra to Monterey without Issues. I have the same card that @eSaF.

  • Thanks 1
2 hours ago, miliuco said:

@MorenoAv

I have also read some negative comments about Fenvi T919, especially about Bluetooth weak signal, but in my case it has worked perfectly OOTB from High Sierra to Monterey without Issues. I have the same card that @eSaF.

Thank you both, @miliuco, @eSaF,

For your help and suggestions but I have a bcm943602CS not the bcm94352 that I mentioned in my other post, and it is that that I'm using at the moment, but it don't work too.

I have another one bcm94360ng that replaces the wifi/bluetooth intel, but for that I have to disassemble all the pc, and sometime soon I'll have to do that...

Edited by MorenoAv
  • Like 1
26 minutes ago, MorenoAv said:

Thank you both, @miliuco, @eSaF,

For your help and suggestions but I have a bcm943602CS not the bcm94352 that I mentioned in my other post, and it is that that I'm using at the moment, but it don't work too.

I have another one bcm94360ng that replaces the wifi/bluetooth intel, but for that I have to disassemble all the pc, and sometime soon I'll have to do that...

Fenvi T919 has 94360CD.  I suppose you have the 943602CS with an adapter, right? It seems a mac compatible card.

1 hour ago, Matgen84 said:

I update to Beta 3 (Z390 config). Since Beta 2, my Windows HDD shows as external drive (with grey icons). 
Someone has the same problem! An idea to solve it...

As @antuneddu, I boot macOS with Windows volume unmounted from fstab.

But when mounting this disk, macOS sees it as an internal physical disk. I don't know what may be the cause of the behavior that you say.


The only strange thing that I have noticed is that, in the info of the Windows volume, in format it reads Unknown (lifs) although it is actually NTFS. On the other hand, when I boot Windows it seems to work fine.

lifs.png.920424cae5ab49eadd97367a58c45ba5.png

 

31 minutes ago, HenryV said:

Quien quiere pagar dos, tres, cuatro veces mas para hardware de Apple?

 

You have written in Spanish! 🙂

Edited by miliuco
  • Like 1
1 hour ago, Matgen84 said:

Hi @all

I update to Beta 3 (Z390 config). Since Beta 2, my Windows HDD shows as external drive (with grey icons). 

Someone has the same problem! An idea to solve it.

Please

Capture d’écran 2021-07-15 à 12.48.50.png

ditto here

since the first beta dev in Monterey always present the Windows disk recognized as yours

Spoiler

443951312_Capturedecran2021-07-15a14_40_02.thumb.png.ef6644a9b9f53931e2c3f49fa5be512c.png

 

  • Thanks 1
1 hour ago, miliuco said:

The only strange thing that I have noticed is that, in the info of the Windows volume, in format it reads Unknown (lifs) although it is actually NTFS. On the other hand, when I boot Windows it seems to work fine.

lifs.png.920424cae5ab49eadd97367a58c45ba5.png

 

Transcript from one of the WWDC 2019 sessions (719 - What’s New in File Management and Quick Look):

 

When a document is stored on a USB drive or remote SMB server, LIFS is reported instead of the file system the media is formatted as. It's likely that your app should not worry about the underlying file system. Instead you should check the file system capabilities to know which file system operations are supported. LIFS is a file system abstraction and it do not look for its presence directly. To know more about LIFS, we recommend that you look at the What's New in File Systems session.

 

(To watch the videos, these links might require a valid developer account)

Spoiler

1279291087_ScreenShot2021-07-15at10_11_29AM.png.7b9fe6c0a99341232865b6f4c9d469e0.png

 

Edited by Alex HQuest
  • Like 1

I have PTT enabled in Bios, and I updated successfully  to macOS Monterey beta 3, the only thing that I did was change csr config to 0x0 in clover and it updated right away...

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
3 hours ago, miliuco said:

As @antuneddu, I boot macOS with Windows volume unmounted from fstab.

But when mounting this disk, macOS sees it as an internal physical disk. I don't know what may be the cause of the behavior that you say.


The only strange thing that I have noticed is that, in the info of the Windows volume, in format it reads Unknown (lifs) although it is actually NTFS. On the other hand, when I boot Windows it seems to work fine.

lifs.png.920424cae5ab49eadd97367a58c45ba5.png

 

 

You have written in Spanish! 🙂

Honestly, it bothered me a bit to see 3 NTFS volumes mounted at boot and then I disabled it via / etc / fstab .. mount them when I need  😆

I didn't notice that in the finder info it shows as Unknown (lifs) format , however in Diskutility it is shown correctly ... I think it is due to a finder problem / bug

as well as automount as an external disk

 

850631941_Schermata2021-07-15alle18_00_50.thumb.png.fcd8d7eb53796b0369ec0194be22da3d.png

Edited by antuneddu
  • Like 3
23 hours ago, antuneddu said:

Tried disabling the TPM too? Alternative try with Clover 🤗

 

I was able to install Beta 3 but with an odd twist.  When I tried to install it using OC 0.7.2, the install failed because the installation process did not complete the stage following the first reboot.  Instead, it went to the last stage of the installation process and when I got to the desktop, it was still the Beta 2 version.  The second time I tried to install Beta 3, I booted to Clover but only for the stage following the first reboot.  That stage completed properly and after that, I allowed my laptop to reboot to OC and finish the process, which was completed successfully.  From this, I conclude that there must be a setting in OC that is preventing the installer from writing to a portion of the operating system that must be protected somehow.  Does anyone know OC well enough to be able to tell me what might be preventing the installer from patching the OS?

 

I understand that I might be successful disabling TPM in my laptop's BIOS but if I don't need to do that to install with Clover, the problem I'm having is not in the BIOS but in my OC settings.  Thanks for any help/insight you can offer.

 

EDIT:  I should add that I have SIP disabled in both Clover and OC.  I didn't think that SIP has any impact on the installation process, only whether it shows up as an update.  True?

Edited by mnfesq
2 hours ago, mnfesq said:

 

I was able to install Beta 3 but with an odd twist.  When I tried to install it using OC 0.7.2, the install failed because the installation process did not complete the stage following the first reboot.  Instead, it went to the last stage of the installation process and when I got to the desktop, it was still the Beta 2 version.  The second time I tried to install Beta 3, I booted to Clover but only for the stage following the first reboot.  That stage completed properly and after that, I allowed my laptop to reboot to OC and finish the process, which was completed successfully.  From this, I conclude that there must be a setting in OC that is preventing the installer from writing to a portion of the operating system that must be protected somehow.  Does anyone know OC well enough to be able to tell me what might be preventing the installer from patching the OS?

 

I understand that I might be successful disabling TPM in my laptop's BIOS but if I don't need to do that to install with Clover, the problem I'm having is not in the BIOS but in my OC settings.  Thanks for any help/insight you can offer.

 

EDIT:  I should add that I have SIP disabled in both Clover and OC.  I didn't think that SIP has any impact on the installation process, only whether it shows up as an update.  True?

For some reason, Secure boot model seems to be causing issues again with this update, though I haven't tried the update yet on my system to confirm at all (look at some of the previous posts in here which suggests this though). You need to turn SecureBootModel off and then download the update again (don't just run macintosh HD again), then it should work in OC.

 

SIP (specifically Apple internal and one other flag) just prevents the updates from being shown I think.

Edited by 1Revenger1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...