You can via emulators unless Apple break them with this move to 64-bit only. A lot of emulators for retro computers, arcades, game consoles, etc. are going to break and the community is unlikely to put in the effort to update them.
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
You can via emulators unless Apple break them with this move to 64-bit only. A lot of emulators for retro computers, arcades, game consoles, etc. are going to break and the community is unlikely to put in the effort to update them.
The switch to HD digital video had clear and specific advantages. Higher Definition, clearer picture, ability to have more channels. And with an adapter box being given out for free, nothing lost other than memorizing the new channels - people watch the TV the way they always did just with using a different remote to change the channel.
Killing 32 bit apps has no clear advantages for the user. And the downside is significant - the 32 bit apps they depend on are suddenly gone (no, for 99% of the customer base they aren't going to deal with virtualization or double-booting). A number of developers will have to decide on whether it's worthwhile to rework everything in Cocoa to meet Apple's arbitrary decision - and many will decide to say goodbye to the Mac. By installing High Sierra their computer becomes more annoying to use (modal dialogs about "this app may stop working") and the next it becomes less functional.
Here's mine:
Adobe Flash Player Install Manager
BasiliskII
DVD Player (Apple)
Google Earth
Img2icns
InkServer (Apple)
Mini vMac
quicklookd32 (Apple)
SecurityFixer
SuperDuper!
Wish (Apple)
Looks like Apple still needs to update some of their internal apps, especially DVD Player. A lot of people depend on DVD Player using their external DVD drives to watch DVD movies.
I do hope BasiliskII, Mini vMac, and SuperDuper! will release 64-bit versions soon. Only app I'm really worried about losing access is Google Earth, as Google recently discontinued creating their Earth application, switching to Internet-only instead, but the application is much more feature-rich.
The solution for me would be to either virtualize or create an external HD and boot to macOS High Sierra or whatever, but once High Sierra loses security updates, it may be a risk connecting to the Internet. However, who knows, by then maybe Google would have moved all features from the original Earth application to their online Earth app. I'd guess by maybe 2019 or so, we'd lose access to 32-bit apps... but it's not even clear if this is really for ALL 32-bit apps, OR only App Store-specific apps.
Another thing I hope Apple doesn't do is use this as an excuse to move to a truly locked down macOS App "garden" – no external apps from anywhere other than the App Store.
It's not like the developers are going broke paying $99 for a license to release their 64bit version for $$ on the mac app store and can get people to upgrade to earn back their $99 and development hours to recompile it after some tweaking.
I just checked, it's almost 50% no and 50% yes on my 2009 iMac with el capi
I just checked, it's almost 50% no and 50% yes on my 2009 iMac with el capi
Apple is not going to make Gatekeeper work from the App Store only. Never. That ship sailed long ago.
What I could see Apple doing is requiring all software to have a developer certificate -- regardless of whether it is through the App Store or not (re: Handbrake fiasco). What Apple should do is waive the $99/year fee for any project that is open source and free.
I could see stricter sandboxing requirements for all apps regardless of being on the App Store -- but they would need to work out some kinks on applications that don't quite fit in that round hole.
One of their 2 mirrors for that you download Handbrake from was breached and the version that was there had malware embedded in it for a few days until the developer noticed. Anyone downloading Handbrake during that period had a 50/50 chance of downloading malware. Handbrake does not use certificates (unidentified developer) so nothing looked out of the ordinary for people that downloaded it. If the software used certification - the software would go from identified to unidentified. And if Gatekeeper did not allow for unidentified software it would not have been able to be installed. If for some reason both their mirror and their internal build system with certificate was compromised.... Apple could have just revoked that certificate and issued a new one.... and all malware Handbrakes would just not launch.
Adobe acrobat pro, illustrator, Microsoft office 2011, super duper , feels like the subscription hammer is closing in faster , combined with non upgradeable throw away "premium" Macs- What is the end goal, subscription only Apple computers running subscriptions software from big brother mega server?
...or you could place the blame on developers for not updating their products from 32-bit to 64-bit.
This isn't about killing 32-bit apps any more than the HD digital TV switchover was about killing SD analog.
The clear advantages are in having a 64-bit OS and associated hardware without having to carry the baggage to also enable 32-bit software.
You have the option to maintain legacy hardware and a legacy OS to continue using your legacy apps. No one is stopping you from doing that.
64 bit is so legacy, Apple should just decree everything should move to 128 bit. Sarcasm aside, Apple still uses 5400 rpm spinners and they don't even blush! Apparently some legacy tech is better than others. Dongles, on the other hand, must have some legacy proof mojo, Apple so loves them.
The only subscription software I run is IntelliJ IDEA - which is worth it to me anyways since I would be upgrading it regularly anyways and it is one of my important development environments for enterprise development (actually paid up until sometime in late 2018 or early 2019 I think). They do it so that if you end your subscription (and have subscribed for at least a year) you still have a license for the version at the start of the subscription. The subscription fee drops by 20 or 30% after 2 years I think... anyways it is an interesting model.
The rest of the software I tend to support newer entrants with good products - that are not subscription. I rather quite like Affinity Designer.... Dropped using Microsoft Office.... and Office 2008 which was patched for a while to continue running on newer macOS versions..... but it was long in the tooth and it was not worth it to me. I just use Pages and Numbers - which has enough for me. For the few documents from work (some Libre format some Office format) that will not load directly I just use Libre Office.
Applying subscription models to things that are just things like utilities -- will end up hurting those companies.... New companies will enter and take over .... maybe not as full featured, but there are enough people like me that feel not quite right paying monthly fees for every small app. The few companies that do bundling of apps for subscription could be worth a look - but not for me... not for the foreseeable future.
I turn of cloudy features - I turn off Desktop and Documents cloud folder mirroring etc. I do proper backups (at least 3 copies, 1 offsite) and my own security and don't trust others with my security.
[doublepost=1496888036][/doublepost]
They will probably be phased out before the 32 bit apps stop working on macOS. They are there in fusion format (which Intel seems to be focusing on with Optane right now).... for those that can't quite swallow the price of all SSD for larger drives....
bkkcanuck8,
I hope you are right about the phase out, the sooner the better. It seems price is the last thing Apple considers when it comes to users. Perhaps one day that will change.
I hope you are right about the phase out, the sooner the better. It seems price is the last thing Apple considers when it comes to users. Perhaps one day that will change.
I disagree that price is the last thing Apple considers. They are very much against competing on price and having a race to the bottom. They are not willing to sacrifice too much with regards to build quality, and they are not willing to "discount" competition... which has a side affect of hurting brand image.... BUT Apple is very much about having very stratified options that have a few options in each of the different price slots that they compete in - they are very aware of price of products with regards to each of these slots.
I also stated using affinity, I have libre, but have not spent too much time with it, perhaps it's time for me to give it a hard look and what limitations or pluses it may have. I also prefer my own security and back up all my own data redundantly.
Like you mentioned, all those little subscriptions add up. With no other choices, raising the prices on a dependent subscriber becomes easy, a darling profit model for corporate greed.
Like you mentioned, all those little subscriptions add up. With no other choices, raising the prices on a dependent subscriber becomes easy, a darling profit model for corporate greed.
Well then it is on them to update those apps. They still have plenty of time to get with the program. If they choose not to, that's on them.
Yeah, I think they will:
1. require all store apps to be 64 bit
2. non-store apps can run 32 bit, but you have to manually install the 32 bit support
Too many businesses probably have in-house or very important software that is 32-bit only, so I doubt they would risk alienating their userbase.
I doubt they will support 32 bit at all on the new OS (which will be maybe 27 months from now), they likely will have the ability for corporations to turn off warnings in High Sierra's successor.
I remember learning a valuable lesson at one bank who was a customer a long time ago.... where they had to stay back on an old version for longer.... not because requirements changed.... but because we did not tell them at least 18 months in advance. It is not the cost that was the issue, it was that they need time to budget for it in advance. 27 months should be more than enough time to budget and fix or find replacements for offending applications.
Note: Actually probably 33+ months since I don't know many enterprises that change stuff like the OS on the release date.... they need time to test it and they need time to wait for the guinea pigs to sink or swim....
Last edited:
Please be specific. What are the advantages to the user for Apple not "having to carry the baggage to also enable 32-bit software"
There goes a bunch of video editing tools I rely on to convert. Its already complicated with Sierras security which i bypassed on. Apples current lineup isn't feasible because they do re encoding, while these tools don't.
But that's what you get when you are dealing with sources that aren't made today, which people still rely on including other type of apps.
I don't expect newbies to understand, as they dont do the type of work back then and think its easy to jump ship, its not. BTW hail QuickTime 7, it gives you more encoding and plugin options than X!
But that's what you get when you are dealing with sources that aren't made today, which people still rely on including other type of apps.
I don't expect newbies to understand, as they dont do the type of work back then and think its easy to jump ship, its not. BTW hail QuickTime 7, it gives you more encoding and plugin options than X!
How so? Seems doubtful Swift or any of the standard Cocoa frameworks ( i.e. Foundation, AppKit ) rely on Carbon?
[doublepost=1496902267][/doublepost]
32-bit apps run faster on newer processors than they do on older processors, so maybe the poster will elaborate.
We're discussing macOS not iOS and many analogies don't apply. 32-bit apps will only dynamically load Carbon but if you don't run a 32-bit app nothing is loaded even if Carbon is available. In that case there is NO impact on "memory resources" ( the Carbon framework disk space foot print is approximately 27 MB, so disk space is not really an issue )
This simply is not an accurate generalization. As noted above, the Carbon framework takes little disk space and the only time it is loaded is when a 32-bit app requests it. Where's the bloat?