That's the wrong question. Why should the spend the time and effort to look after 32bit libraries for a few old applications? Why should they not take the chance to free some space and get rid of the past?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Phase Out 32-Bit Mac Apps Starting in January 2018
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple is in the moneymaking business, not helping the customer business. Anything that could drive people to move to its own apps, re-purchase newly "compatible" apps - is in Apple's interest. Not to keep people using paid for apps for a long time. I am even surprised Apple allows for app "purchases", I was thinking they would go subscription everything everywhere, billed monthly.
They better not get rid of DVD Player, though. I have a rMBP and an external DVD drive, so I'm sure plenty of people still use DVD Player to watch movies.
You're right, but it isn't as bad as you paint it on the Windows side. The registry (may it burn in hell) is being marginalized in Windows 10 with the UWP API. All new UWP and older Win32 API apps converted to UWP, are sandboxed and never touch the registry. It's going to be long and boring process, but apps on Windows are being pushed into an API which does not allow access to the registry.
So it's bad, but slowly improving.
Apple isn't going to do what you consider to be the "decent and correct thing", so good luck.
So does this mean any DVD player other than Apple's won't work after this? Thanks.If I had to guess they will drop DVD Player rather than upgrade it to 64 bit
Yeah Apple step to the plate and do the right thing. I have an old version of MS Word on floppy disk that I would like refunded as well. It cost a ton more than any of these old apps, and none of the current operating systems will run it. Heck, I can't seem to find any of the current hardware that has a floppy disk drive. What's up with that??
I can't think of any legacy apps i remotely care about anymore. I use the latest adobe and apple apps as well as various media conversion apps all of which are regularly updated.
Being able to keep your apps in iTunes aside I agree.
Some years ago you could argue that macOS is so much more stable and it might result from keeping its support so limited, however Windows has matured a lot over the years and that WITH being able to run applications that are decades old.
I can KIND of live with this strategy on iOS which is a toy OS anyways for me, but on macOS where I run applications to get stuff done I don't want to worry about Apple throwing a hissy fit about a blown up installation size and all that.
My Mac has a 1TB system partition, 32GB of RAM, short story: don't care at all about having the 32bit frameworks still loading.
CHOICE is key, because sometimes your customers DO know better due to specific use cases.
Glassed Silver:win
why watch dvds anymore? download a 1080p version of whatever it is or rip the disc
Seoras is blissfully unaware that this is a macOS thread not iOS.
I use some small tools like AppCleaner, CheatSheet, etc that I'm guessing aren't 64bit. Is there a quick way of checking?I guess I'd take the bellyaching here in stride. Some people even got worked up when Apple dropped 1880s headphone jack design from the iPhone.
On the one hand, people get upset when their 15-year old app might not be accommodated in a future version of MacOS, and at the same time, others (maybe some of the same people) complain that the latest hardware updates aren't specced to incorporate every last emerging bell and whistle, while also using an entirely modular design so that they can swap out for new components every couple of weeks. For some reason, there's an expectation out there that their computer is supposed to be a rolling archive of the history of technology, while also operating flawlessly and securely at the fastest possible speed.
Personally, I'm disappointed that my new MBP doesn't have a built-in paper tape reader.
On the one hand, people get upset when their 15-year old app might not be accommodated in a future version of MacOS, and at the same time, others (maybe some of the same people) complain that the latest hardware updates aren't specced to incorporate every last emerging bell and whistle, while also using an entirely modular design so that they can swap out for new components every couple of weeks. For some reason, there's an expectation out there that their computer is supposed to be a rolling archive of the history of technology, while also operating flawlessly and securely at the fastest possible speed.
Personally, I'm disappointed that my new MBP doesn't have a built-in paper tape reader.
Pretty glad I already switched to Windows a few months ago. It's actually a bonus because it runs better than Mac OS ever did, and I have a Mac Mini.
Microsoft managed to keep Windows snappy and stable with strong legacy support. I'm sure Apple could have figured it out too.
Microsoft managed to keep Windows snappy and stable with strong legacy support. I'm sure Apple could have figured it out too.
I don't understand the hate either. This is a great move. I can't grasp how people have become so technologically illiterate that they don't realize legacy apps can't be supported forever.
Which is exactly why I wouldn't want to run CS4 in the first place, I get chills in my bones when I think about when it was updated the last time.
I'm just a bit confused when I hear people praise the backwards compatibility of Windows. It has required a **** load of work from Microsoft to stay compatible during the years. Those resources could have been used for something useful instead.
Sure is a lot of hate for something that's going to happen to the successor of the OS that was just ANNOUNCED. By the time its phased out, it'll probably be 2 years from now.
Everyone saying how its Apple being lazy... at some point you cut off support. That's it. At some point it doesn't make sense technically or financially. People were bitching how OSX/macOS was stagnating and how Apple wasn't innovating. Well here you go, this is them innovating.
I just YESTERDAY upgraded to Sierra. Up until now i've been running Yosemite. Why? Because it worked well and I didnt NEED any of the new features. Plus Apple was still releasing security updates.
Nothing is forcing you to upgrade to the OS thats at least 2 years away.
Everyone saying how its Apple being lazy... at some point you cut off support. That's it. At some point it doesn't make sense technically or financially. People were bitching how OSX/macOS was stagnating and how Apple wasn't innovating. Well here you go, this is them innovating.
I just YESTERDAY upgraded to Sierra. Up until now i've been running Yosemite. Why? Because it worked well and I didnt NEED any of the new features. Plus Apple was still releasing security updates.
Nothing is forcing you to upgrade to the OS thats at least 2 years away.
I hear ya bro... I have QuarkXPress 3, which came in a huge box with a big wad of floppy disks. I'm a little steamed at Apple letting me down cuz it doesn't run on my 5K iMac. And then there's Deneba Canvas - don't get me started on that. Wah... Somebody take care of me...
I wish all the perpetual whingers in this thread who keep threatening to move to Linux or Windows would just do it already and leave the rest of us in peace.
What was the 32 bit Mac product Apple was selling in 2014? All Macs were transitioned to 64 bit by 2007.
What apple should do is automatically cross recompile the old apps to work on the new hardware. There are a lot of old apps that are excellent but will never get updated, a great many for small business, games and a huge inventory of educational applications. Nobody else will bother to write a replacement but cause the original creator was inspired and it is a small market in many cases. Yet, they are still great apps. Apple is doing this again on both iOS and MacOS. This same problem has happened before when Apple abandoned earlier MacOS versions. They are nearly a trillion dollar company. They could easily put forth the effort to bring the old apps, all the way back to the Lisa, onto the modern operating systems with recompiling. Shame on Apple for creating deadwood.
For those who think it's too hard a problem, you're wrong. I'm a programmer and have written both compilers and cross compilers. You don't need the source code. If you have the final program you can run it through a cross compiler, a just-in-time compiler or just emulate to run it on different hardware. That list is in order of efficiency and preference. This is not a hard task. Apple has done it before.
Apple should be interested in doing this is it adds value for their customers because the software you use today will run tomorrow and because it maximizes the Apple application ecosystem which Apple likes to crow about in their marketing materials, ads, etc.
With the extraordinary computing power of todays devices this is all very easy and even emulated software can run faster than it did on the original hardware.
Imagine a world where all your old books, music, photos and other documents are no longer accessible because Apple and other companies drop support.
It is time for two pieces of legislation:
1) If a company or an individual wants to release a program they must also accept that their copyright and patents end within two years of their stopping supporting the software. Same thing for hardware. In other words, shorten the protection time dramatically. This will make it so other people can pickup the product and support it if they want to as fans or as another vendor.
2) If a company is above a certain threshold, which should be very low, then they must also release the supporting documentations for source code, maintenance, etc so that other people can pick it up.
3) If a company is at the high level of Google, Microsoft, Sun, Apple and the like then they must continue to offer legacy support for a minimum of 50 years in addition to #1 and #2 above.
For those who think it's too hard a problem, you're wrong. I'm a programmer and have written both compilers and cross compilers. You don't need the source code. If you have the final program you can run it through a cross compiler, a just-in-time compiler or just emulate to run it on different hardware. That list is in order of efficiency and preference. This is not a hard task. Apple has done it before.
Apple should be interested in doing this is it adds value for their customers because the software you use today will run tomorrow and because it maximizes the Apple application ecosystem which Apple likes to crow about in their marketing materials, ads, etc.
With the extraordinary computing power of todays devices this is all very easy and even emulated software can run faster than it did on the original hardware.
Imagine a world where all your old books, music, photos and other documents are no longer accessible because Apple and other companies drop support.
It is time for two pieces of legislation:
1) If a company or an individual wants to release a program they must also accept that their copyright and patents end within two years of their stopping supporting the software. Same thing for hardware. In other words, shorten the protection time dramatically. This will make it so other people can pickup the product and support it if they want to as fans or as another vendor.
2) If a company is above a certain threshold, which should be very low, then they must also release the supporting documentations for source code, maintenance, etc so that other people can pick it up.
3) If a company is at the high level of Google, Microsoft, Sun, Apple and the like then they must continue to offer legacy support for a minimum of 50 years in addition to #1 and #2 above.
I don't need luck, I need 32-bit support to continue unhindered and un-Apple'd.
It's about time, I've had 64bit processors in my main computer since about 2003. All macs I've owned have been 64bit. There cant be that much software that is 32bit only and even if it there is a VM should be sufficient for the small number of users who need something legacy, they shouldn't hold the rest back.