Apple to Phase Out 32-Bit Mac Apps Starting in January 2018

[PinkyMacGodess]

Do we get our money back for our old apps that don't run ?

Or is there a way to get the source code for them so that someone can update them?

I number of apps that I use have been causing iOS to popup a 'This app needs to be updated' warning, and the developers are either gone, or the app has been forgotten. I wish there was a way to save them, and update them so they keep working! DAMN!!!

 

[photoj2754]

How do you check for 32 bit apps on your iMac? Thanks.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

How do you check for 32 bit apps on your iMac? Thanks.

Utilities directory - System Information... then navigate down the side tree to Software and under that Applications.... it will list everything and the architecture...

 

[M2M]

I can't update Pages and keynote without losing essential functionality for the work I do. For example, the newer versions of Pages don't have text box linking, among many other features, which makes layouts for books impossible. One of my my recent books was 824 pages with about 2,000 photos; anyone would be insane to do that using an app without text box linking. It's a pity, but so much of Apple's recent software updates have dropped pro-level functionality for the sake of Mac-iOS synchronisation, which reduces Mac apps to the level of tasks that can be done on an iPad - hardly the reason I bought a Mac!

Oh ok. I wasn't aware of that. That sucks !

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Or is there a way to get the source code for them so that someone can update them?

I number of apps that I use have been causing iOS to popup a 'This app needs to be updated' warning, and the developers are either gone, or the app has been forgotten. I wish there was a way to save them, and update them so they keep working! DAMN!!!

OH! DUH!!!

'Mac apps'.

Sorry...

Still, that warning drives me crazier than reality is so far...

 

[Plutonius]

Or is there a way to get the source code for them so that someone can update them?

I number of apps that I use have been causing iOS to popup a 'This app needs to be updated' warning, and the developers are either gone, or the app has been forgotten. I wish there was a way to save them, and update them so they keep working! DAMN!!!

I agree. Maybe Apple could get the source code from the developers and recompile them as 64 bit apps (Apple has the contact information and the means to recompile them).

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I can't update Pages and keynote without losing essential functionality for the work I do. For example, the newer versions of Pages don't have text box linking, among many other features, which makes layouts for books impossible. One of my my recent books was 824 pages with about 2,000 photos; anyone would be insane to do that using an app without text box linking. It's a pity, but so much of Apple's recent software updates have dropped pro-level functionality for the sake of Mac-iOS synchronisation, which reduces Mac apps to the level of tasks that can be done on an iPad - hardly the reason I bought a Mac!

Victims of their own koolaid... I don't want a 'big iPhone', I want a real computer!!!

 

[bkkcanuck8]

If I had to guess they will drop DVD Player rather than upgrade it to 64 bit

 

[GadgetDon]

Goodbye Carbon APIs, hello Cocoa-only future. This provides a great opportunity to do some final platform cleanup, and allows to focus more on rewrites in Swift, too. Probably a great move for platform health long-term.

Only if "make a large number of key productivity programs no longer available" is "a great move for platform health".

A Carbon app can share code with non-Mac apps much more easily. Converting a working complex Carbon App to a Cocoa App is almost "Let's write the whole thing from scratch" - leading to the question "Is it worth it" and a number of publishers choosing "no".

You all talk like Mac is the dominant platform, that any developer wanting to stay in business must dance to Apple's tune. It isn't and they don't. And if the programs aren't there, the users won't be either.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

Only if "make a large number of key productivity programs no longer available" is "a great move for platform health".

A Carbon app can share code with non-Mac apps much more easily. Converting a working complex Carbon App to a Cocoa App is almost "Let's write the whole thing from scratch" - leading to the question "Is it worth it" and a number of publishers choosing "no".

You all talk like Mac is the dominant platform, that any developer wanting to stay in business must dance to Apple's tune. It isn't and they don't. And if the programs aren't there, the users won't be either.

If they make money from the platform, they will upgrade it (if it is a big task they will charge an upgrade fee - which if they are a real going concern will likely provide short term cash flow bump). Carbon was deprecated 4 or 5 versions ago. If they have not moved already they never will - and they were going to fade away anyways. Relying on software on the edge..... not wise.

All my "major" apps are already 64-bit, the ones still at 32 bits are things like Adobe Flash, Cisco VPN client (which will be upgraded), the rest are more "personal" apps like Reunion 9 (which is niche and not that important; geneology); MacGourmet which has probably as good or better competitors now for maybe $20.... oh and Pokerstars (but then not a great loss).

 

[GadgetDon]

Try Pixelmator on the app store, it is cheaper than Adobe CC and powerful enough.
BBEdit was on the app store a while ago, but may now be only on their website. It is still being updated as far as I know.
If you are doing website uploading on FTP, then Rapidweaver 7 has FTP publishing built in.

The things I'm doing, Rapidweaver isn't even close to acceptable. Plus, after dropping support for Socialite - never doing business with that company again.

 

[Rocketman]

I maintain old hardware and software to run legacy apps. I suggest looking into https://www.powermax.com as a vendor as well as http://resale.headgap.com.

 

[GadgetDon]

If someone needs to run software that hasn't been updated in years can't they just run them in a Virtual Machine?

I have software that's been updated in the past month that's still 32 bits. And why the hell SHOULD I have to bother with all the hassle of virtual machines when the ability to run both 32 and 64 bit apps is pretty much standard in the industry these days? All of these "solutions" are "Yes, Apple will completely break something that's working flawlessly, but with spending enough on software and work on setting stuff up right and extra steps in launching an app you can still make it work". Screw that, I don't want Apple to break what's working.

 

[dogslobber]

The new version of MS Office is really worth it, much better interface and features compared to 2011. Surprises me folks want to keep running 2011, it was such turd.
[doublepost=1496840085]

People don't want to spend money to keep their current functionality.

[/doublepost]

So run old OS X in a VM if you cant find a replacement you like...or just use old computers and software natively. Problem solved.

I don't want to. This is Apple's problem but they and everybody on here want to make it mine. No, that's not acceptable to come up with these half-assed excuses which tries to dodge Apple's fundamental problem. Their irrational policy and refusal to support users in the long term.

 

[Thunderhawks]

Do we get our money back for our old apps that don't run ?

Maybe somebody with a lot of free time on their hands can develop an emulator like they are available for old Atari and Nintendo games?

 

[chrfr]

I think that is only for paid Extended Support.

No, that's free security updates until then.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

I don't want to. This is Apple's problem but they and everybody on here want to make it mine. No, that's not acceptable to come up with these half-assed excuses which tries to dodge Apple's fundamental problem. Their irrational policy and refusal to support users in the long term.

If you are fine relying with out of date software, you really should be fine running out of date operating system versions as well.... I don't see much of a difference.

As a company, if software is not being updated -- it is a big red flag. If the company does not test their software for every platform that comes out - that is another red flag. The software would be dropped from the approved list, the company contacted to get an idea on their plans and if nothing is firm and either we determine if we should just drop it or look for a new vendor. Out of date software that is not really fully supported is a security risk.

 

[chrfr]

Goodbye Microsoft Office 2011. Of course, I could pay to RE-BUY it, but the newer version doesn't really do anything I need that it doesn't do now.

Office 2011 goes out of support in October 2017. Microsoft isn't blocking it from running in 10.13, but they won't be providing any support or fixing any bugs for it. Office 2011 may not even run at all by the time 10.14 is released.

 

[chrono1081]

Anyone else find it annoying how quickly Apple obsoletes older software on their platforms?

Um, they don't? Where do you get this "quickly" idea from?

Its the developers responsibility to update their app. Advancements in technology and speed can't be made if we keep holding onto legacy code so a few users can use an obscure app that likely has a replacement.

Adding/keeping backwards compatibility is not a trivial task. Mac OS has been 64 bit for a long time now (over a decade), its up to the developers to keep up, they had plenty of time.

 

[ani4ani]

I'm also not seeing an issue here. You can't expect them to support things forever. 10 years since they moved to 64bit seems good to me.

Presumably the reason they are doing this is so that they don't have to keep writing 32bit support into the OS. THat probably takes a lot of manpower each time you update the OS.

They didn't move to 64 Bit 10 yards ago...they started their journey then. They were still selling 32 Bit products 3 years ago

 

[GadgetDon]

If you are fine relying with out of date software, you really should be fine running out of date operating system versions as well.... I don't see much of a difference.

As a company, if software is not being updated -- it is a big red flag. If the company does not test their software for every platform that comes out - that is another red flag. The software would be dropped from the approved list, the company contacted to get an idea on their plans and if nothing is firm and either we determine if we should just drop it or look for a new vendor. Out of date software that is not really fully supported is a security risk.

(1) "Out of date software" - you mean "Software that was updated last week". Anything written with Carbon (that'll be a lot of cross-platform programs) can't be delivered as 64-bit software. Apple could provide 64 bit Carbon libraries, but they don't. Yes, they'd like everyone to use Cocoa (and as someone who has programmed in Cocoa, it is a nice system) but it's going need a nearly complete rewrite ($$$$$) of their program. Many vendors will say "Not worth it, sorry Mac users"

(2) But yes, in some cases, I do use out of date software because the out of date software works just fine and I'm not in the habit of spending money to replace something that's working. Photoshop Elements 9 does everything I need, why should I spend $100 to upgrade (even assuming the new Photoshop Elements is 64 bit). I also use a piece of software, Socialite, abandoned by Apparent Software (after Realmac software pawned it off on them) - I'm never doing business with either of them. It treats my twitter feed as an inbox as well as giving my RSS feeds in the same list. There is no other software that combines both and the ones that do just Twitter don't do it as well. So yes, I'm fine relying on it.

But that doesn't mean I don't want security updates (and improvements) to Safari, don't want the latest iTunes, don't want the OS security updates and improvements. And if I have to completely rework the way I do things - maybe I should rework it on Windows. This is coming from a guy who bought his first Apple in 1977, has had an Apple computer as my main if not always only computer ever since, has been a developer and a big supporter.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

They didn't move to 64 Bit 10 yards ago...they started their journey then. They were still selling 32 Bit products 3 years ago

They supported 64-bit apps on macOS from 10.5, the kernel was 64-bit from 10.6 -- 10 years ago. i.e. the foundation that 3rd party apps relied on was 64-bit for 10 years. Other apps (like DVD Player which is still 32 bit -- and likely gone rather than upgraded) which developers do not depend on.... may have still been 32-bits.

 

[photoj2754]

Utilities directory - System Information... then navigate down the side tree to Software and under that Applications.... it will list everything and the architecture...

Thanks.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Anyone else find it annoying how quickly Apple obsoletes older software on their platforms?

Even annoying-as-hell Windows can often run 20 year old binaries. TWO DECADES ago.

Right now the oldest binaries MacOS can run are from the PowerPC -> Intel switch era, circa 2006. Whatever macOS comes after High Sierra will probably obsolete 32 bit x86 binaries, which will pull the date even more forward.

They don't seem to care about preserving the functionality of legacy software. Some apps will never be updated because the developers no longer care about it, went out of business, etc... This software is lost to time. This is even MORE the case on iOS where you can't even GET the software anymore. At least on macOS you can keep archives of old apps around.

Yes it's annoying, but it is one of the reasons I love macOS. If you want endless backwards compatibility, get Windows. If you want a lean OS with no legacy baggage, get macOS.

 

[2013.1]

Anyone else find it annoying how quickly Apple obsoletes older software on their platforms?

Even annoying-as-hell Windows can often run 20 year old binaries. TWO DECADES ago.

Right now the oldest binaries MacOS can run are from the PowerPC -> Intel switch era, circa 2006. Whatever macOS comes after High Sierra will probably obsolete 32 bit x86 binaries, which will pull the date even more forward.

They don't seem to care about preserving the functionality of legacy software. Some apps will never be updated because the developers no longer care about it, went out of business, etc... This software is lost to time. This is even MORE the case on iOS where you can't even GET the software anymore. At least on macOS you can keep archives of old apps around.

Maybe virtualizing OS X Leopard 10.5.x or Snow Leopard 10.6.x helps? I use the latter e.g. for Adobe Macromedia Freehand to open old files and for a bunch of other reasons as old printers and so on.
http://download.parallels.com/desktop/v12/docs/en_US/Parallels Desktop User's Guide/