Why would I complain to a the developer of a 10+ year old game they see no revenue from that they should completely rewrite it because Apple is penny-pinching, againg?
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 Rosetta 2 Starting With macOS 28 as Intel Era Ends
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They are not losing a function they were sold with, if you need Rosetta you can continue to run Sequoia for another 2-3 years or so fully supported. And then you can choose to upgrade or not, if you need to keep it.
That's the conclusion I came to in post #146 (last page).
What happens to the new 2027 MacBooks shipped with MacOS 27? Do they only get one year of Rosetta 2 support if they plan to upgrade to MacOS 28?
Yes, the same as any other Mac that supports macOS 28. Running macOS 27 in a virtual machine may be an option, particularly on Macs that shipped with macOS 27 or earlier. x86-64 apps will have gotten 7 years of support after Apple shipped the first Apple Silicon Macs. That’s 3 years longer than PowerPC apps were supported after Apple shipped the first Intel Macs.
I got to own the 2020 Intel i5 MacBook Air and the 2020 M1 MacBook Air back to back. Identical machines on the outside but the user experience was just night and day. I would fight that Intel Air to get even 5 hours battery life out of it and it would be gasping and wheezing the whole time. The M1 brought triple the battery life, zero fan, zero heat, and felt at least 2x as fast. By far the most dramatic computer upgrade I've ever experienced.
Last edited:
If the developer isn’t making money on it, then why should Apple continue to clutter up their OS support obsolete hardware and software. I worked for a company years ago that had machine tools controlled by Windows 3.1. Guess what happened when the computers that controlled the machines coughed up massive hairballs and died. Yep, massive upgrade of hardware and software because no PC hardware available run Windows 3.1 and the machine tool vendor had already updated their software and hardware to run Windows 7. If you want a game that will never be obsoleted by a software upgrade, buy a board game like Monopoly or Risk🤣
I was just at a conference where somebody mentioned that their organization's electron microscope isn't compatible with the new OS. $3M machine now obsolete. Note the company is still in business but the old software won't work with the new OS and the new software won't work with the old machines. Same specs on the hardware though.
I think it's getting ridiculous. Are we headed for cars that will be deemed obsolete because you can't open the doors without a phone but new phones will drop support for cars without the requisite version of CarPlay? Homes that have to be torn down because they aren't compatible with some new version of HomeKit?
Meanwhile a 1960s Cadillac can still drive all over this great nation. I guess no one thought to make new roads incompatible with old cars.
Are you talking about "the new" macOS? Why would that microscope be obsolete? Their new software won't work with the old machine anyway so that's where the problem lies. They won't need to upgrade to macOS 26 either. The microscope will keep working fine with Sequoia until it brakes.
I originally scrolled past this MR article, thinking I'd never ever need Rosetta, but was grateful for Rosetta yesterday while installing the most recent (Catalina) printer driver for my laser printer found on the manufacture's support site.
Because I, the user, who paid for their hardware and exorbitant upgrade prices wants to use that game. And if they want me to do it again, they better kiss my a** instead of increasing their margins a tiny bit, that's why.
It is up to the developers to keep their apps current with the newer operating system.
As the OS evolves, some internal libraries get replaced with new ones; this process takes a few years, as Apple will maintain the old libraries available along with the new ones for a a while to give developers the opportunity to stay current.
Then when the time comes those deprecated libraries get removed from the OS.
The problem with some equipment vendors is that their primary focus is to sell equipment, and if a new version comes up, they may lose the interest to continue updating their software.
Those kind of companies are years behind with their software. Imagine! Windows 7 has been obsolete for 5.5 years, and Windows 10 will be obsolete in less than 3 months.
I've been at a new client recently, they are using a Database app written in Alpha Four (released in 1991) and wonder why their are having issues... Why haven't they migrated to something new? Because their IT for decades has been using it and don't know anything else.
Who's to blame here?
I don't know the details -- if the OS was macOS or another. The OS was already older so it's not that it still has a few more years it's that the OS is already at EOL.
Then the security requirements of the institution -- in order to comply with various laws and regulations -- don't allow keeping unsupported devices on the network.
The more general issue is that we're now creating durable goods that depend on computers/OS with much shorter support cycles. What OS are going to be supported for the life of a car (20-30 years) or a house (50+ years)?