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

[dogslobber]

Memory, storage, bandwidth, quality control resources. Windows is the perfect example, the 32 bit Win 10 cumulative updates are half the size as the 64 bit versions, a difference of about 300 MB each month.

Windows 10 is irrelevant. The point here is neutering OS X by preventing 32-bit apps from running is lazy and reckless. Even if it were 300MB then that is a trivial amount of space. Let us hope this stupid move by Apple is for the Mac App Store only. People won't tolerate not being able to run arbitrary 32-bit apps downloaded from the internet.
[doublepost=1496798996][/doublepost]

With the next version of macOS after High Sierra, Apple will begin "aggressively" warning users about 32-bit apps before eventually phasing them out all together.

What does that even mean? Apple will be in your face if you try to run a 32-bit app? Will there be a "Do as your told, OS" button?

 

[The Mercurian]

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.

 

[GadgetDon]

I am pretty angry about this. Forcing phones to be updated, I get their reasoning (though I've got a few apps that I'll be sad to say goodbye to) - at least all apps did come through the app store so in theory there's a straightforward link for upgrades who will do it. But on the Mac? Where the App Store is relatively new and has NEVER been the only way to get apps? There are a lot of really good Mac programs out there, older versions with features removed from new versions, that will be killed.

Me, I've got an ancient MS Office that I only need when Pages and Numbers won't do, having to pay to upgrade solely because Apple made this arbitrary choice will be maddening. Same with Photoshop Elements 9. And I've got some programs that are absolutely abandoned, no new version will be coming (like Socialite) that work.

I wonder if this is one that Apple may back off of. One of the things Apple always likes to brag about is their adoption rate. With iOS 11, I suspect the rate is going to drop - and there will be some large customers who will pressure Apple for a downgrade capability.

 

[Tubamajuba]

So you want modern support for huge amounts of RAM or legacy support for all of your obsolete applications?

It's not inexcusable, it's a technical necessity. They're not doing it just to troll you or be mean.

Exactly. If you want a platform that consistently moves forward, it won't be a platform that bends over backwards to ensure compatibility with outdated and abandoned apps. Heck, Windows 10 still has bits and pieces of software from decades-old versions of Windows lying around in the System32 folder, two separate places to change system settings, and several different contrasting visual styles throughout the OS. MS is trying to improve every single part of Windows, but their hands will be tied behind their back as long as they keep going out of their way to not break 15 to 20 year old applications that should have been retired years ago.

I'm not trying to say Windows 10 is bad- on the contrary, I quite like it. But using Windows 10 simply doesn't compare to using any recent version of macOS due to the fact that Apple develops their operating systems with modern software and hardware in mind.

 

[groovyd]

Why would you EOL 32-bit userland apps? This is absurd and Apple is being lazy. Are you trying to tell me that the High Sierra successor won't have 32-bit versions of the libraries?

because people will eventually get over it or switch to windows or some other system and then they won't have to make sure they never break any 32-bit support every time they want to upgrade anything in the kernal or drivers. tons of old old apple internal code can just go away and the 15 people left there who remember how to keep it running will no longer hold sway. progress on the 'modern' side of the os will accelerate into the future and new 'modern' apps will come about to replace the ones that are no longer available but still have market value. the world will continue to spin around the sun and apple will continue to make heaps of cash they can't even bring back home.

 

[sudo1996]

At least it's better than the phasing out of PowerPC apps, Lion decided to just drop support for them out of nowhere without any warning, when Snow Leopard was the first system that was only compatible with Intel. Considering that Lion and newer systems require a 64-bit Mac, I think we got plenty of time to phase out 32-bit apps.

Yeah, Rosetta got dropped way too early and screwed a lot of people (including me) over. 32-bit got plenty of time to die this time.

 

[ProVideo]

Will the 32 bit apps and applications purchased from the iOS and Mac Store still be available to download under the purchased section? If I do a clean install of an older OS will I be able to still reinstall the apps that I have previously had or do I need to download all them now and archive them, just in case?

 

[Kaibelf]

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

Why should you? You used them and aren't being forced to update iOS. Does Microsoft refund people who bought software that worked on win95 and doesn't work now?

 

[sudo1996]

Why would you EOL 32-bit userland apps? This is absurd and Apple is being lazy. Are you trying to tell me that the High Sierra successor won't have 32-bit versions of the libraries?

I guess not. You know, I don't think FreeBSD includes the 32-bit libraries by default. It's a waste of space.

 

[Kaibelf]

Aaaand CS4 for the Mac is 32 Bit, not 64. Yeah, I'm behind the times on updating, but I don't use it often enough to justify the $$$$$$ for the upgrades, let alone Adobe's "subscription" service; and honestly, all I need are Photoshop and Bridge, not the rest of it.

Definitely time to find alternatives. I have Affinity, I need to figure out how to use it.

This post is exactly why software companies are glad to move on. Why would someone with any sense provide top tier support to anyone who won't buy things for years and years and go to such lengths to not help them pay their bills? It's like being mad because you don't get great service in a store when you're known for just always looking at things and never buying. People work to make money.

 

[GadgetDon]

This post is exactly why software companies are glad to move on. Why would someone with any sense provide top tier support to anyone who won't buy things for years and years and go to such lengths to not help them pay their bills? It's like being mad because you don't get great service in a store when you're known for just always looking at things and never buying. People work to make money.

I don't expect top tier support indefinitely without paid upgrades and such (which is a flaw in the AppStore - companies can't put a small fee for updating the old software to be 64 bit, updates are all free). If I'm having a problem with PSE 9, I don't expect to call Adobe and tell me "Make it work". What is unreasonable is for Apple to arbitrarily make it so these perfectly functional apps suddenly become completely unusable. And High Sierra may be my last Mac OS.

 

[dogslobber]

This post is exactly why software companies are glad to move on. Why would someone with any sense provide top tier support to anyone who won't buy things for years and years and go to such lengths to not help them pay their bills? It's like being mad because you don't get great service in a store when you're known for just always looking at things and never buying. People work to make money.

Well, let me think a moment. When I BUY software I'm making a front-loaded purchase of a production which doesn't have a "best-before" date. You got all my $$$ on Day One so support me forever more.

No, I don't rent software. I buy software and it's mine and forever.

 

[groovyd]

Windows 10 is irrelevant. The point here is neutering OS X by preventing 32-bit apps from running is lazy and reckless. Even if it were 300MB then that is a trivial amount of space. Let us hope this stupid move by Apple is for the Mac App Store only. People won't tolerate not being able to run arbitrary 32-bit apps downloaded from the internet.
[doublepost=1496798996][/doublepost]

What does that even mean? Apple will be in your face if you try to run a 32-bit app? Will there be a "Do as your told, OS" button?

not lazy and reckless, just they don't care what people who still care about 32-bit apps thinks and that is pretty clear. as a software developer who has been in their position of having to support tons of archaic code only a few people ever use (people who usually don't buy anything anyway) i think it is a smart move by apple to be honest. technology is all about change and this is apples way of saying it is time for those who disagree to move on.

 

[jeremiah256]

How can anyone be surprised that 32bit apps are being shown the door when Apple just removed every port except USB-C on their laptops? Time and time again, they've proven that if they were a House on Game of Thrones, their motto would be, "Kill Your Darlings". This has been true, like forever. They are the George RR Martin of tech.

You should have heard the screaming and gnashing of teeth when Rosetta was no longer supported. The streets ran red with blood that day, I'll tell you.

 

[groovyd]

Well, let me think a moment. When I BUY software I'm making a front-loaded purchase of a production which doesn't have a "best-before" date. You got all my $$$ on Day One so support me forever more.

No, I don't rent software. I buy software and it's mine and forever.

exactly, when you buy software you are taking chances since it doesn't come with any guarantees of future compatibility. not by apple nor by the developer who you purchased it from.

 

[Tubamajuba]

Well, let me think a moment. When I BUY software I'm making a front-loaded purchase of a production which doesn't have a "best-before" date. You got all my $$$ on Day One so support me forever more.

No, I don't rent software. I buy software and it's mine and forever.

Yeah, that's not how software has ever worked. Have fun contacting a developer of software you bought 20 years ago and asking them for a Sierra or Windows 10 version of their software for free because you paid for it two decades ago. All software has a limited support window, and that's just the way it is.

 

[weup togo]

Apple's engineering reason for dropping 32-bit app support is that it will free them from having to continue to ship fat binaries for every framework 32-bit apps link against and many subsystems 32-bit apps communicate with.

There are improvements and optimizations that can only occur in those frameworks and subsystems once they are x86_64-only. There are also the freebie benefits like lowering resident memory and freeing up disk space.

There are still a huge number of users on Microsoft Office 2008, because everybody bought it to be Intel compatible and didn't see a good reason to "upgrade" to newer versions, which sacrificed functionality in some areas.

Another ugly part of the problem is that for years after 64-bit came around, even developers who shipped fat binaries for their main apps frequently continued shipping 32-bit auxiliary bits like Spotlight importers, small faceless helper tools, and so forth. The failure modes for these lingering auxiliary pieces won't be nearly as clean as an "This app isn't compatible" dialog.

It's going to be a painful transition for long-time Mac users. But Apple knows there really aren't many of those left relative to today's user base. They also know exactly how many 32-bit binaries are in use on users' systems today. The breakage will be a calculated trade-off at user expense for a handful of engineers' gain. Lots of teams have been demanding this for many years.

Oh, and it's another checklist item on the road to the ARM transition.

 

[janil]

So you want modern support for huge amounts of RAM or legacy support for all of your obsolete applications?

It's not inexcusable, it's a technical necessity. They're not doing it just to troll you or be mean.

I don't see how it is a technical necessity. Since the OS is 64-bit, it doesn't limit the amount of RAM the system can access. I see how it reduces the amount of QA work they have to do. There's a bunch of C/C++ code used to learn programming that is not 64-bit friendly. What does it hurt to allow a 32-bit process to be spun up? There's an additional cost for the context switching, but it's not like most people would notice.

In the end, though, if 32-bit software is removed it really doesn't make a huge difference. Anyone that needs 32-bit support can virtualize an older version of macos or OS X.

 

[Good Buddy]

Great! Does this mean Apple will finally drag Compressor for FCPX into the 21st Century and create a 64 bit version?

 

[bloodycelt]

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.

Older games are very likely to not get updated, and some of them are still ones people play:

For instance: American McGee's Alice, I've managed to keep THAT one running with patches from MacOS 9 all the way to x86.... I doubt there will be a 64bit patch.

One of the reasons why OSX hasn't been good for game developers is that, they don't expect to support a game past 1-2 years at most.

I don't exactly use my mac for much gaming, but I have a handful of very well-played titles.

While I don't think people should be screaming at apple to keep 32 bit support, I also think folks should appreciate that every transition has loses, and modern apps don't always replace older ones.

 

[Jetson]

It is amazing that so many Apple fanboys come out in droves to shout down anyone who expresses dissatisfaction with something Apple is doing.

At risk of being called "an idiot" or "a troll" for expressing my view, here are a few problems that I have with this conversion to 64-bit only iOS:

1. Whenever I launch an iOS 32-bit app I get presented with the message "Such and such app needs to be updated. This app will not work with future versions of iOS. The developer needs to update it to improve its compatibility". I wonder if Apple is contacting the developers?
2. Many of my favorite legacy apps may disappear forever, especially cherished games such as: Tetris, Missile Command, Wolfenstein, wonderful pinball games Cyrstal Caliburn II and Tristan by Littlewing, Chess Quest, and many others, etc.
3. The "reasons" many of the so-called experts here give for not supporting 32-bit apps seem to be made up reasons: takes up too much space, it will slow down the device, we need a modern architecture, it's too much work for Apple to make sure every app works with new iOS updates, get with the program, etc. It is all nonsense - excuses and guesses with no facts whatsoever to back up any of them.
4. I'm on a fixed income. So the choice presented to me is to retire my current iOS devices frozen in time with iOS 10 or upgrade the iOS and lose some of the reasons I enjoy using my iPad.

I am hoping that all of the developers will make the updates before iOS 11 is released - that would be ideal! But some of these developers aren't around anymore. In that case it will be a sad loss.

And why? Apple could easily work around this. After all, Apple is a $trillion company and can afford it. We customers are what made Apple so wealthy, and many of us old timers stuck with Apple when it was just about to go belly up. How about showing a little more loyalty towards us?

 

[C DM]

It is amazing that so many Apple fanboys come out in droves to shout down anyone who expresses dissatisfaction with something Apple is doing.

At risk of being called "an idiot" or "a troll" for expressing my view, here are a few problems that I have with this conversion to 64-bit only iOS:

1. Whenever I launch an iOS 32-bit app I get presented with the message "Such and such app needs to be updated. This app will not work with future versions of iOS. The developer needs to update it to improve its compatibility". I wonder if Apple is contacting the developers?
2. Many of my favorite legacy apps may disappear forever, especially cherished games such as: Tetris, Missile Command, Wolfenstein, wonderful pinball games Cyrstal Caliburn II and Tristan by Littlewing, Chess Quest, and many others, etc.
3. The "reasons" many of the so-called experts here give for not supporting 32-bit apps seem to be made up reasons: takes up too much space, it will slow down the device, we need a modern architecture, it's too much work for Apple to make sure every app works with new iOS updates, get with the program, etc. It is all nonsense - excuses and guesses with no facts whatsoever to back up any of them.
4. I'm on a fixed income. So the choice presented to me is to retire my current iOS devices frozen in time with iOS 10 or upgrade the iOS and lose some of the reasons I enjoy using my iPad.

I am hoping that all of the developers will make the updates before iOS 11 is released - that would be ideal! But some of these developers aren't around anymore. In that case it will be a sad loss.

And why? Apple could easily work around this. After all, Apple is a $trillion company and can afford it. We customers are what made Apple so wealthy, and many of us old timers stuck with Apple when it was just about to go belly up. How about showing a little more loyalty towards us?

They could also still include CD and floppy drives too.

 

[kalsta]

Aaaand CS4 for the Mac is 32 Bit, not 64. Yeah, I'm behind the times on updating, but I don't use it often enough to justify the $$$$$$ for the upgrades, let alone Adobe's "subscription" service; and honestly, all I need are Photoshop and Bridge, not the rest of it.

Definitely time to find alternatives. I have Affinity, I need to figure out how to use it.

Haha, I can relate… I have the Affinity apps installed, but tend to revert to what I know—CS6 Illustrator and Photoshop. This day marks another reason to start learning how to use those Affinity apps!

And having played around in Designer a bit now, I'm excited. In some ways it's already better than Illustrator. Can't wait to see what they've done with Affinity Publisher when it finally comes out. It won't be a day too soon, because the only CS6 app of mine that isn't 64 bit is InDesign. Even so, it'll be a long time before I can switch to an OS that doesn't support 32 bit, because of archived work—unless Affinity creates a way of reliably importing InDesign files (like Adobe did with Quark files when they released InDesign all those years ago.)

This post is exactly why software companies are glad to move on. Why would someone with any sense provide top tier support to anyone who won't buy things for years and years and go to such lengths to not help them pay their bills? It's like being mad because you don't get great service in a store when you're known for just always looking at things and never buying. People work to make money.

Hey everyone has to make cost-benefit decisions when it comes to upgrading. My beef here is not with Apple, but with Adobe. Adobe no longer allows you to purchase an upgrade. If you want a newer version you must commit to the eternal subscription process, whereby your apps (and access to all your files) will vanish like a cloud if and when you fail to pay your monthly subscription fees. No thanks. Some of us have said no to Adobe, and are looking forward to the new and affordable choices opening up thanks to Affinity.

 

[Victor Mortimer]

Wow, you literally have no idea how technology works, especially if you think Macs should still run pre OS X apps.

Phasing out old architecture makes the OS run smoother. Look what a convoluted mess Windows is by comparison.
[doublepost=1496798391][/doublepost]A pure 64-bit OS executing no 32-bit code. Now that's an OS I want.

Welcome to the 21st century.

I do technology for a living. If you think making a 64 bit OS run 32-bit code is somehow hard, you don't understand what 32-bit or 64-bit means in terms of user-space apps.

And here's a little bit of trivia: Macs absolutely DO still run pre OS X apps. See this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SheepShaver

Apple could absolutely do it, Apple could make it a lot smoother than SheepShaver. For most people? It doesn't matter about apps that old. But there are absolutely valid business cases for making that happen, and I have helped users do it.

 

[weup togo]

• The "reasons" many of the so-called experts here give for not supporting 32-bit apps seem to be made up reasons: takes up too much space, it will slow down the device, we need a modern architecture, it's too much work for Apple to make sure every app works with new iOS updates, get with the program, etc. It is all nonsense - excuses and guesses with no facts whatsoever to back up any of them.

Your post would be credible if you deleted this bullet point. You're 100% wrong across the board.