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.
Mac OS X Lion: Drops PowerPC Emulation, Adds QuickTime Pro Features, Much More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In general, it can't be done. New machines have hardware (CPUs, GPUs, chipsets, devices) not supported by older versions of Apple OSX.
Typically, Apple does not back-port new hardware support to older OS versions, so you're SOOL.
Last edited:
Both statements are incorrect. Apple notified developers and even sold a "transition" tool kit right after WWDC 2005 ( I was there ). So, there was definitely notice. It was definitely described as a temporary bridge. Assuming Rosetta would go on indefinitely when Apple told everyone it was a temporary bridge is clearly a mistake.
Apple does NOT provide exact dates for new software or for old software being removed. It never has AFAIK. It did provide enough obvious clues that most developers noticed.
No such implication at all. Developers have all kinds of reasons ( some justified, some financial, etc. ) for not creating another version of their software. I'm just saying the one excuse they don't have is: "I wasn't notified" because every developer was back in 2005.
the problem is Apple did not give a set date on what EOL was going to be. Apple should of then gave a rough date on when it would be drop and that can always be pushed back. Apple doing something like this is very piss poor an yet another example of why enterprise will never trust Apple. They pull BS like that and do not give any real form of time.
Transtion be 1 year or 5 years. Fact that Apple never said anything is a problem and a big problem when you are used to standard that are like 10 years or longer in what you can count on stuff being supported.
Apple should of given at least a 2 year noticed. Not this bomb shell people find out the hard way.
Please provide links to Apple's 2005 statements that support this idea. "I was there" isn't good enough even for Wikipedia.
ps: Instead of posting three consecutive replies, please use "multi-post" (the
2 years is the bare minimum. Companies like Adobe have 12-18 month product cycles.
You can't tell them in March that your June release will drop long-standing support.
Even worse, you can't release a beta in March without the support as the first notice!
Last edited:
This was Apple's announcement in June 2005. I'm sure Adobe got the message:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
btw: much of what I know from WWDC is covered by Apple NDA but you can be sure that large developers were there and received all the notifications ( and possibly had the information in advance ) about Apple's intentions. Even the public press release, although not explicit, is clear enough. Apple never indicated they planned to continue support of PowerPC indefinitely. There was nothing subtle, disingenuous or misleading from Apple. They were making a change and the developers needed to get on board. Everybody got the message.
That announcement doesn't even mention Rosetta. It's irrelevant to the question of when did Apple tell developers that Transitive (Rosetta) was a temporary bridge.
Try again, please.
Seriously?? OFFICE is the last straw for you??
I'm marginally disappointed they're canning Rosetta emulation, but it's not exactly shocking either. People should have been able to see the writing on the wall if they paid attention.
What I don't get, though, is your insistence on never buying another upgrade to MS Office? If you really feel that way, why don't you switch products? I'm just saying, Microsoft has ALWAYS had the Office business model designed in a manner where you're eventually pushed to upgrading to a newer version. That's equally true for Windows and Mac users. If you hold out with an older version, you finally reach a point where all the people who DID upgrade keep sending you documents you can't open anymore - plus you miss out on a lot of little improvements that are worthwhile if you're really a regular user of the application.
I realize Rosetta works pretty darn well, but still, I've never really felt comfortable relying on it as a long-term solution. It's still an emulator, meaning you've got extra code running beneath whatever app you're using that makes it work. It just makes sense to upgrade programs to versions that don't need that "help" to work on your machine and OS, if they're available -- especially when you use the app often AND the upgrade adds a LOT of new features.
I'm marginally disappointed they're canning Rosetta emulation, but it's not exactly shocking either. People should have been able to see the writing on the wall if they paid attention.
What I don't get, though, is your insistence on never buying another upgrade to MS Office? If you really feel that way, why don't you switch products? I'm just saying, Microsoft has ALWAYS had the Office business model designed in a manner where you're eventually pushed to upgrading to a newer version. That's equally true for Windows and Mac users. If you hold out with an older version, you finally reach a point where all the people who DID upgrade keep sending you documents you can't open anymore - plus you miss out on a lot of little improvements that are worthwhile if you're really a regular user of the application.
I realize Rosetta works pretty darn well, but still, I've never really felt comfortable relying on it as a long-term solution. It's still an emulator, meaning you've got extra code running beneath whatever app you're using that makes it work. It just makes sense to upgrade programs to versions that don't need that "help" to work on your machine and OS, if they're available -- especially when you use the app often AND the upgrade adds a LOT of new features.
Uh, no.. it's NOT coming ... not like that ....
I keep hearing this nonsense repeated, and there's absolutely NOTHING to even hint that it has a grain of truth to it!
Apple is keeping the iOS as the product used on the electronic devices and gadgets, while OS X is the operating system used on their full-blown computers. I could easily see them adding iOS app support to OS X. (I still think it'd be kind of slick if, like Dashboard, you could bring up a screen with a keypress that shows your iOS applications running on it, just like the "widgets" do today. Anything you purchased for an iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad would be allowed to run on that screen too.)
But those iOS app developers still need an actual computer and OS to DEVELOP the apps on, right? If nothing else, that's one reason OS X isn't going away.
There's actually kind of a parallel here, BTW, from Microsoft. They had their "Windows CE" product, which was used in all kinds of devices like GPS systems, car stereos and more. Yet, they never really tried to market notebook computers running CE as the "future of computing" or pretended it was a suitable replacement for regular versions of Windows.
I keep hearing this nonsense repeated, and there's absolutely NOTHING to even hint that it has a grain of truth to it!
Apple is keeping the iOS as the product used on the electronic devices and gadgets, while OS X is the operating system used on their full-blown computers. I could easily see them adding iOS app support to OS X. (I still think it'd be kind of slick if, like Dashboard, you could bring up a screen with a keypress that shows your iOS applications running on it, just like the "widgets" do today. Anything you purchased for an iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad would be allowed to run on that screen too.)
But those iOS app developers still need an actual computer and OS to DEVELOP the apps on, right? If nothing else, that's one reason OS X isn't going away.
There's actually kind of a parallel here, BTW, from Microsoft. They had their "Windows CE" product, which was used in all kinds of devices like GPS systems, car stereos and more. Yet, they never really tried to market notebook computers running CE as the "future of computing" or pretended it was a suitable replacement for regular versions of Windows.
would it be possible for a third party devoliper to come up with a replacement for rosetta on Lion?
So photoshop CS5 will stop working? Or will bits and pieces suddenly fail to work?
I guess I'll find out soon enough.
No, Photoshop CS3 (or older) will stop working as they are PPC based. They have worked under Rosetta up until now. Upgrades are typically $200.
Then what is all this talk about parts of CS5 requiring Rosetta?
Edit: I see, I misread your post at the bottom of the previous page. I thought others were saying that CS5 isn't entirely native too. Maybe not...
Last edited:
I don't really use Mac OS X on my MacBook anymore, but I like to keep it up to date.
I plan to get Lion as long as it's reasonably priced, but the lack of Rosetta is making me think twice about that.
I have Office 2008 and I'm very happy with it. I simply don't use Office on Mac OS X enough to justify buying an upgrade to the 2011 version.
The installer for Office 2008 using PowerPC is a concern.
I plan to get Lion as long as it's reasonably priced, but the lack of Rosetta is making me think twice about that.
I have Office 2008 and I'm very happy with it. I simply don't use Office on Mac OS X enough to justify buying an upgrade to the 2011 version.
The installer for Office 2008 using PowerPC is a concern.
To all those saying that getting rid of Rosetta is a good thing because it stops the forward march of progress.....can I ask why? What is possible in Lion that was not possible when developing Snow Leopard because it was 'saddled' with Rosetta?
Unless I am very mistaken the answer is, that other than saving a little bit of disk space absolutely nothing. It may cost Apple a few $$$ in quality control and support, but there is not not one new feature in lion that is now possible because they dropped Rosetta. So can we please stop it with the 'holding progress back' argument. Its ridiculous.
Dropping Rosetta is simply not user friendly. Ill use my Dad as an example. He has an an appleworks database of his book collection since 1998. He has been happily using it over all that time...through the OS9->OSX transition and through the PPC to Intel transition without any problems at all. Now he loves buying Apple's latest OS on day 1, he loves to be up-to-date with that kind of stuff even though he has no real technological knowledge. Now without me telling him that his program would no longer run, he would have NO idea what was going on when he would try launching it after his install of Lion only to find out it wouldn't open. I'm sure he would have been distraught that his 8000 entry database was now completely useless without any warning whatsoever.
My question is simple, how many other casual users are in my Dad's shoes? Maybe not with Appleworks but with Office 2004 or Quicken or any older program that they use because it works just fine for them. How many of these people are going to get a rude shock when they get Lion? Its easy for people like you who visit this forum to check what programs are PPC on their computer but most people wouldn't have a clue how to do that. Every-time they open up one of their older programs on Lion for the first time they are going to be crossing their fingers hoping it will open just fine. At least when classic support went the way of the do-do people could tell there older programs wouldn't work because when they double clicked on them there was an indication given that this was using an older technology (the macos 9 boot screen).
I dont consider this behaviour to be user friendly at all and for a company that prides its self on user friendliness that is a problem indeed.
Unless I am very mistaken the answer is, that other than saving a little bit of disk space absolutely nothing. It may cost Apple a few $$$ in quality control and support, but there is not not one new feature in lion that is now possible because they dropped Rosetta. So can we please stop it with the 'holding progress back' argument. Its ridiculous.
Dropping Rosetta is simply not user friendly. Ill use my Dad as an example. He has an an appleworks database of his book collection since 1998. He has been happily using it over all that time...through the OS9->OSX transition and through the PPC to Intel transition without any problems at all. Now he loves buying Apple's latest OS on day 1, he loves to be up-to-date with that kind of stuff even though he has no real technological knowledge. Now without me telling him that his program would no longer run, he would have NO idea what was going on when he would try launching it after his install of Lion only to find out it wouldn't open. I'm sure he would have been distraught that his 8000 entry database was now completely useless without any warning whatsoever.
My question is simple, how many other casual users are in my Dad's shoes? Maybe not with Appleworks but with Office 2004 or Quicken or any older program that they use because it works just fine for them. How many of these people are going to get a rude shock when they get Lion? Its easy for people like you who visit this forum to check what programs are PPC on their computer but most people wouldn't have a clue how to do that. Every-time they open up one of their older programs on Lion for the first time they are going to be crossing their fingers hoping it will open just fine. At least when classic support went the way of the do-do people could tell there older programs wouldn't work because when they double clicked on them there was an indication given that this was using an older technology (the macos 9 boot screen).
I dont consider this behaviour to be user friendly at all and for a company that prides its self on user friendliness that is a problem indeed.
Hmmm, I stand corrected. It seems it is a Universal Binary, after all (CS2 was PPC only). Office 2004 still runs on my MBP under Rosetta, though. It will break under Lion. It is cheaper to upgrade Office than Photoshop, but it's still an expense given I rarely use it these days.
Such an endeavor would encounter many roadblocks. It would require Apple's cooperation because any tool written would still need to emulate toolbox calls that are currently provided as PowerPC compiled frameworks. It might take a financial incentive for someone to embark on such a venture. We'll see. Right now the best approach is to plan your computing so Rosetta's demise in Lion is not an issue. Keeping a machine with Snow Leopard is one obvious approach.
Good points. Two thoughts:
(1) Rosetta's demise is not final because Lion is not finalized and Apple has not announced anything public on the topic.
(2) If you have an AppleID, a bug report may be filed at: http://bugreporter.apple.com
I'm new here but I thought I would chime in. I've been using the developer build for about a week now and I got hit with a few or my software no longer working. It wasn't too big a deal, I just looked and found a replacement software.
That's when it hit me. That's what Apple wants us to do. They want us to find/buy new software from the App Store. They're basically eliminating other possible sources for software to make their app store that much more successful.
So I think phil1984 is right. "There is not not one new feature in lion that is now possible because they dropped Rosetta." In my opinion their dropping Rosetta is for their financial gain and nothing more.
That's when it hit me. That's what Apple wants us to do. They want us to find/buy new software from the App Store. They're basically eliminating other possible sources for software to make their app store that much more successful.
So I think phil1984 is right. "There is not not one new feature in lion that is now possible because they dropped Rosetta." In my opinion their dropping Rosetta is for their financial gain and nothing more.
You have to understand that the "average" Mac user is fairly ignorant about computers in general. due to the OS being easier to use, it attracts a lot of people that don't want to know the inner workings, etc. That, however, does not stop them from being fanatical about the Mac over time. That fanaticism generally does not mean they are taking the time to learn more about computers in general. It simply means they are opinionated and their emotional attachment to the Mac drives their fanaticism online. Thus, this is the reason we see so many posts that show enthusiasm about ditching 32-bit CPUs and 32-bit anything. I've seen posts that indicate things like 'one more step towards 64-bit nirvana' or similar that tell me that they think there is something inherently magical about ditching support for 32-bit apps and/or processors. Given 99% of apps don't need to address more than 3GB of ram, it's utterly meaningless in the grand scheme of things, but instead of rooting for a faster GPU or more expansion options or even a larger selection of BTO hard drive options (things that could potentially make a HUGE performance difference to the user), we see people rooting for Apple to DROP features and compatibility with existing software for near meaningless gains.
This is akin to blaming our teachers and their unions for our recession instead of the giant elephant in the room known as Wall Street and their unbelievable greed. And yet in both cases, much of the relatively uneducated masses seem to be easily fooled into accepting any commercial propaganda given to redirect their attention to the least important items imaginable.
In Apple's case, they don't support Blu-Ray because they want you to buy from the iTunes store (but redirect the blame on now dirt-cheap licensing fees as a "bag of hurt" and then hope you forget all about it) or by making license agreements to 3rd party content providers for iOS that insist the same cost or lower through iTunes even though iTunes means their costs are much higher since they have to give Apple 30% of the revenue cut for otherwise identical services. Or they tell you USB3 isn't taking off (despite the fact most newer external hard drives support it already) and they cannot be bothered to support a tiny controller chip in their computers while making space for a relatively giant Thunderbolt controller that has zero device support in the real world.
Apple does what is good for Apple. Rich people do what's good for rich people. The problem isn't that they are acting out of character in either case, but rather the deception they use to obtain their goals. That is what is immoral and unethical. If certain politicians in the news would just say they want to take $300 million from education and give it as a tax break to the rich (instead of talking about deficit reduction that doesn't actually happen), they would be honest. If Apple would just admit they don't want Blu-Ray because they want you to be forced to buy their movies off iTunes instead (rather than blame it on some now cheap licensing fees), they would be honest. But they know if they're honest, you might not support them (because they're not representing your best interests) so they use deception just-in-case hoping you won't notice, probably because most people cannot be bothered to learn the truth themselves. They're too busy texting and talking on the phone about nothing even to the point where they don't have time to drive (since they are busy texting) and get into an accident. Such a person doesn't have time to educate themselves for goodness sake. They need to know that Terry tweeted she's getting an ice cream at Dairy Queen. THAT is what is important in life, after all. Like OMG! You're kidding! I'm at the Gap buying jeans!
WTF is "PowerPC Emulation"? Classic went away with Leopard I thought! UPDATE: That sucks, first Classic and now Rosetta? You're moving the wrong way APPLE!!!
Also, who honestly uses Quicktime anymore? VLC is free and open source, is there anything Quicktime can do that VLC can't? Also, when I use the two, Quicktime uses more computational resources.
I think you are confused about Classic/Rosetta.
As for Quicktime...Content consumers might not care, but professional content creators use it all the time, and rely on it for many things. It's also under the hood in all the pro apps.