Mac App Store Apps Can Now Drop Support for Intel Macs

[It’s always something]

Who even uses the Mac AppStore?

I used it with my last Mac, over a decade ago, and I will again when my Neo arrives next week. 👍 I expect I will supplement with HomeBrew and other sources again too.

 

[OldNewMBP]

noooo... Not my 2012 MBP Retina... I guess 14 years is a pretty good run 🙂

I'm with ya.

 

[Smartuser]

As one of the only large firms that uses all Macs, we'd love to transition everyone to Apple silicon Macs (already did for like 400), but replacing the remaining 100+ Macs that work perfectly fine for users is kind of expensive, especially since we use MacBook Pros and not Neos or even Airs.

The only valid logic in this is whether it's worth it per user. Otherwise everything is always expensive and countries with a billion or more people in them can never have breakfast if that costs $1 per person, because that's a billion a day!

 

[Smartuser]

As an Apple owner for decades, I've come to accept that these sorts of decisions are what make Apple products work so well.

By contrast, Microsoft has massive amounts of legacy code blended into Windows that break down or interfere with newer hardware and code. The fact that Windows still runs 32-bit code is a perfect example.

Apple did the reverse, and removed support for 32-bit Apps a long time ago, even though it would mean the end of some of their most popular 32-bit Apps such as iLife and Final Cut Pro.

The end result... A solid and reliable 64-bit operating system with minimal bloat to get in the way.

I must admit, I have mixed feelings about retiring my 2020 Intel based iMac. It's still a beast with a 10 core i9, 128 GB of RAM, 16GB GPU and 2 TB SSD, but 6 years is a long time and I'm looking forward to getting my new Mac Studio M5 Ultra to replace it. The M1 was released the same year, so I knew this day would come.

Eventually, even the M5 Ultra will be outdated. That's not a bad thing. That's why I chose the new upgrade / leasing option.

That's of course all heresy 🙂. But yeah, everyone here knew the deal going in, it's not like it's new, it's just a constant source of complaints on some forums.

Apple supports their Macs with current OSs for 6-8 years or so, followed by 2 years of security updates for the last OS that computer supports. In extreme cases, even longer (there was a security update for many old OSs earlier this year).

Ancient leftovers have to be dropped at some point, unless you want to be a Windows PC running Windows. They support every doorstop.

I happen to have the fully maxed-out version of that 27" iMac, with a 4 TB SSD and 10 GB ethernet and the nanotexture (you didn't mention whether you went for those). That came out in August of 2020, AFTER the ARM transition had already been announced at that year's WWDC and widely published. This means it was already living on borrowed time, which made it different from the Late 2019 16" MBP.

It's a wonderful computer and all that, but the Apple Silicon machines are running rings around it, and nobody could have seriously bought that and thought this was going to have an extremely long future given what was already announced.

 

[capamac]

Apple stopped updating 680x0 and 6502 earlier. : (

 

[KPOM]

I wonder if Intuit will finally recompile TurboTax as an Apple Silicon app, or if they will use Apple dropping Rosetta 2 support next year as an excuse to move everyone to the online version.

 

[boswald]

This is a blessing in disguise. Many apps are turning into bloatware and spyware anyway.

Sad but true. I've only got 1 third-party app installed anymore and that one keeps the rest of them out! It's like a gatekeeper for my gatekeeper.

 

[MacMorrison]

Which big app suite is going to be the first to drop Intel support? I think it will be Microsoft - their Mac Office has always been terrible anyway.

 

[TJFDenver]

I hear ya. I still use my 2012 non-retina MBP for occasional tasks. Possibly my favourite Mac model of all time and built in those good old days of inexpensive, DIY upgrades of RAM and SSD.

That 2012 MBP was also built like a tank. It accidentally slipped off my desk one time and hit the concrete floor. I thought it would be a goner, but aside from suffering a corner dent in its aluminum casing the computer has continued functioning flawlessly for 8 years since! (Don't try this at home, kids).

Still running 2012 MBPr 16gb/768ssd … occasionally I’ll load a Linux variant for fun … screen is still awesome after 18 years … trackpad has lost its spring though …

 

[sevoneone]

Which big app suite is going to be the first to drop Intel support? I think it will be Microsoft - their Mac Office has always been terrible anyway.

MS Office, Adobe, Affinity, Omni... The problem for any devs that have gone to a subscription based model is that making a decision like that potentially means cutting off paying customers... And it is not like computers are cheap right now, so they can't assume users will just upgrade to keep access to their tools.

 

[capamac]

Still running 2012 MBPr 16gb/768ssd … occasionally I’ll load a Linux variant for fun … screen is still awesome after 18 years … trackpad has lost its spring though …

I bought a new replacement track pad from ifixit for ny 2015. Used ones on ebay probably better. Ifixit one is 98% as good as oem. (Trackpad surface on oem has smoother finger friction)

 

[CouponPages]

I think a lot of people are reading this announcement entirely wrong.

All they said is that developers are *no longer required* to support Intel based Macs. They didn't say developers are *required to drop* support. There's a big difference here.

By requiring developers to include Intel support, they often needed to maintain older code that also inflated their app sizes to support Intel models.

This simply gives the developer the choice to include, or exclude support for older Intel models.

A rule of thumb is that the best applications are designed for the latest hardware, so Apple's own Apps will clearly all require Apple Silicon in the very near future. Developers can decide when they decide to do likewise. The only change is that they are no longer REQUIRED to support Intel models.

 

[fahlman]

I did years ago. It still tells me I need Rosetta to run the actual app that handles scanning whenever I try to scan a document though.

Have you tried Image Capture.app? Maybe it fulfills your needs.

 

[duncandb]

Apple themselves are still supporting the Intel Macs for another 2 years though, the lifecycle of patches for MacOS 26, and app developers usually support a Mac at least as long as Apple themselves do.

 

[fahlman]

As one of the only large firms that uses all Macs, we'd love to transition everyone to Apple silicon Macs (already did for like 400), but replacing the remaining 100+ Macs that work perfectly fine for users is kind of expensive, especially since we use MacBook Pros and not Neos or even Airs.

500 Macs! There are corporations and universities that use many, many, many times that number. Many years ago IBM said they had nearly 300,000 and were deploying almost 2,000 per week.

 

[sdfox7]

I think a lot of people are reading this announcement entirely wrong.

All they said is that developers are *no longer required* to support Intel based Macs. They didn't say developers are *required to drop* support. There's a big difference here.

By requiring developers to include Intel support, they often needed to maintain older code that also inflated their app sizes to support Intel models.

This simply gives the developer the choice to include, or exclude support for older Intel models.

A rule of thumb is that the best applications are designed for the latest hardware, so Apple's own Apps will clearly all require Apple Silicon in the very near future. Developers can decide when they decide to do likewise. The only change is that they are no longer REQUIRED to support Intel models.

True, but smart developers want the broadest reach to a client and customer base.

When you cut compatibility, you're only hurting yourself, because fewer clients and customers can access what you offer.

Some of the most popular free apps on the App Store support all the way back to iOS 15 and even older. The only exception to that is YouTube, and many of the AI tools. The lack of compatibility of AI tools on iOS 15 makes sense, as most of them did not even exist until long after iOS 15 was no longer "cutting edge".

I have no idea why YouTube "requires" iOS 16, itself an old operating system. The last compatible version on the App Store works fine on iOS 15.

 

[Smartuser]

True, but smart developers want the broadest reach to a client and customer base.

When you cut compatibility, you're only hurting yourself, because fewer clients and customers can access what you offer.

Some of the most popular free apps on the App Store support all the way back to iOS 15 and even older. The only exception to that is YouTube, and many of the AI tools. The lack of compatibility of AI tools on iOS 15 makes sense, as most of them did not even exist until long after iOS 15 was no longer "cutting edge".

I have no idea why YouTube "requires" iOS 16, itself an old operating system. The last compatible version on the App Store works fine on iOS 15.

Supporting old hardware and OSs is a tradeoff between making efforts to write exceptions for them or delaying new features on one side and what you're getting for that on the other. From a business perspective, I wouldn't expect the people who hold on to hardware or OSs from the Pleistocene to be the most eager customers.

The lament of "why does this not run on this older OS" is as old as computing itself.

 

[GregoryPeckEPA]

This is a blessing in disguise. Many apps are turning into bloatware and spyware anyway.

“Turning.” Apple’s own apps, every single one of them, across every OS, have unique identifiers. Like, when the eff did that happen!?! Since when does a privacy focused company like Apple need to weave in so much telemetry!? Starting to think the ginko they are selling me is just dandelion 😑🫠🌊