Maintaining PowerPC support on ARM Macs

[Spectrum]

I'm starting this thread now in order to collect resources/ideas for running PowerPC apps in advance of the ARM transition.

I currently have a single piece of legacy proprietary software (and hundreds of academic research files associated with it) that requires PowerPC support. I currently achieve this via a VM of 10.6.8 server in VMware. This runs fine on host macOS from at least 10.11–10.14.
I haven't yet upgraded to Catalina, but assume it will still work.
I also assume future macOS versions will also still work so long as the host is Intel x86 hardware.

I asked elsewhere about virtualising Intel VMs on an ARM host, and was pointed to the following document indicating that Intel x86 VMs will no longer work on the new ARM Macs:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Rosetta translation environment | Apple Developer Documentation

Learn how Rosetta translates executables, and understand what Rosetta can’t translate.

developer.apple.com

What Can't Be Translated?
Rosetta can translate most Intel-based apps, including apps that contain just-in-time (JIT) compilers. However, Rosetta doesn’t translate the following executables:

• Kernel extensions
• Virtual Machine apps that virtualize x86_64 computer platforms

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I am wondering what may be the best way to maintain access to this software/files over the next 10+ years?

Option 1. Maintain a stockpile of legacy Intel (or even just PowerPC) Mac hardware.
A) Use these as standalone physical machines with thumb drives to transfer processed data.
B) Access remotely in some way? (What are the options for seemless remote access?)

Option 2. Explore ways of virtualising/emulating legacy macOS on an ARM host?

Option 3. Explore having the software rewritten/updated for ARM.

Others?

 

[robbieduncan]

This is all theory right now!

However QEMU run on Mac OS and allows cross-architecture binary emulation. So you might be able to book x86 or even PPC OSX on ARM Mac OS (userland virtualisation). I’ve no idea how well this would work or even if you could get it working on Mac OS (it works on Linux on the Pi)

 

[SuperMatt]

Option 3 is definitely the best. The other ways involve risk of data loss. Also, I cannot imagine anybody is supporting software that old; it must be at least 15 years old if not older, since Intel Macs first appeared around 2005. If you get the software rewritten or updated, you will have support. If something goes wrong with an old, unsupported system and it goes south, good luck....

 

[Spectrum]

This is all theory right now!

However QEMU run on Mac OS and allows cross-architecture binary emulation. So you might be able to book x86 or even PPC OSX on ARM Mac OS (userland virtualisation). I’ve no idea how well this would work or even if you could get it working on Mac OS (it works on Linux on the Pi)

Thanks! What is “cross architecture binary emulation”? Does this mean just apps? Or of an actual virtual OS?

The app is old (2001), so really doesn’t need many hardware resources at all. Performance can (in relative terms) be really bad, and it would still be absolutely fine.
[automerge]1592944886[/automerge]

Option 3 is definitely the best. The other ways involve risk of data loss. Also, I cannot imagine anybody is supporting software that old; it must be at least 15 years old if not older, since Intel Macs first appeared around 2005. If you get the software rewritten or updated, you will have support. If something goes wrong with an old, unsupported system and it goes south, good luck....

Yeah it is from 2001. At the moment virtualising 10.6.8 works OK. We don’t work with the app every day. But I fully understand your point. It is far from ideal. No idea where to start with option 3 though...

 

[robbieduncan]

Thanks! What is “cross architecture binary emulation”? Does this mean just apps? Or of an actual virtual OS?

The app is old (2001), so really doesn’t need many hardware resources at all. Performance can (in relative terms) be really bad, and it would still be absolutely fine.

My understanding is you can run the whole OS as a guest. From their homepage

“Run operating systems for any machine, on any supported architecture”

 

[Spectrum]

QEMU looks good!

My understanding is you can run the whole OS as a guest. From their homepage

“Run operating systems for any machine, on any supported architecture”

 

[JulienBerthelot]

I'm starting this thread now in order to collect resources/ideas for running PowerPC apps in advance of the ARM transition.

I currently have a single piece of legacy proprietary software (and hundreds of academic research files associated with it) that requires PowerPC support. I currently achieve this via a VM of 10.6.8 server in VMware. This runs fine on host macOS from at least 10.11–10.14.
I haven't yet upgraded to Catalina, but assume it will still work.
I also assume future macOS versions will also still work so long as the host is Intel x86 hardware.

I asked elsewhere about virtualising Intel VMs on an ARM host, and was pointed to the following document indicating that Intel x86 VMs will no longer work on the new ARM Macs:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Rosetta translation environment | Apple Developer Documentation

Learn how Rosetta translates executables, and understand what Rosetta can’t translate.

developer.apple.com

What Can't Be Translated?
Rosetta can translate most Intel-based apps, including apps that contain just-in-time (JIT) compilers. However, Rosetta doesn’t translate the following executables:

• Kernel extensions
• Virtual Machine apps that virtualize x86_64 computer platforms

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I am wondering what may be the best way to maintain access to this software/files over the next 10+ years?

Option 1. Maintain a stockpile of legacy Intel (or even just PowerPC) Mac hardware.
A) Use these as standalone physical machines with thumb drives to transfer processed data.
B) Access remotely in some way? (What are the options for seemless remote access?)

Option 2. Explore ways of virtualising/emulating legacy macOS on an ARM host?

Option 3. Explore having the software rewritten/updated for ARM.

Others?

Yeah, I think you should be able to do it. I've been running Mac OS X 10.5 on iPadOS using the UTM app. It can emulate PPC & Intel using a fork of QEMU. Since there will be a bigger demand after the launch of ARM Macs, I guess you will find something very usable to emulate those old softwares!

 

[pshufd]

1) Do you have the source code?
2) Is it a character-cell application or does it use macOS GUI elements?
3) What language is it written in?
4) Does it have architecture-specific instructions? Altivec would be an example of this. Assembler or machine code would be another example of this.
5) Can you open source the software?
6) If it's only an executable, is it just one file?
7) Do you have a build environment for it - virtualized, emulated or other?
8) Can you just run the executable on a PowerMac G4 or G5 or PowerBook?

 

[pshufd]

Yeah it is from 2001. At the moment virtualising 10.6.8 works OK. We don’t work with the app every day. But I fully understand your point. It is far from ideal. No idea where to start with option 3 though...

Where did you acquire the software from? Is there a name or company associated with it? Do some research into the organization or author. Is it licensed software? Can you figure out who owns the license? Was it distributed on floppy disk or CD-ROM?

 

[2984839]

You could try running Leopard or whatever you need in qemu, but if it's not something you use all the time, I think it would be easier to just get a PowerBook or Power Mac and run it natively.

 

[pshufd]

PowerMacs are under $100 these days. The biggest problem is storage. You could stick them in a server room and VNC into them for use.

 

[Spectrum]

Yeah, I think you should be able to do it. I've been running Mac OS X 10.5 on iPadOS using the UTM app. It can emulate PPC & Intel using a fork of QEMU. Since there will be a bigger demand after the launch of ARM Macs, I guess you will find something very usable to emulate those old softwares!

This app? https://getutm.app
It does sound promising. Running 10.5 would be absolutely fine. The main issue for me would be:
1. Somethign supported and stable
2. Ability to FileShare between the guest 10.5 and the ArmOS host.

Is there a reason you are using 10.5 and not 10.6? Is it for fun, or for a particular need you have?
[automerge]1593036224[/automerge]

PowerMacs are under $100 these days. The biggest problem is storage. You could stick them in a server room and VNC into them for use.

Yes, this is an option. By VNC do you mean screenshare, or something more sophisticated? I find screensharing a bit clunky.

Regarding files, they are currently held locally on each Intel Mac, and then only opened on the guest via Filesharing. Would a server room PPC Mac (or, rather convolutedly, a server room Intel Mac running a 10.6.8 VM), be able to Fileshare with the external user's locally-held files?

It would be a pain to have to manually copy files back and forth. But doable.
[automerge]1593036302[/automerge]

You could try running Leopard or whatever you need in qemu, but if it's not something you use all the time, I think it would be easier to just get a PowerBook or Power Mac and run it natively.

Yes - only issue is multiple users. But we could have a single standalone machine that people copy files onto and off. Or put in a server room and connect to somehow (see comment above).
[automerge]1593036797[/automerge]

1) Do you have the source code?
2) Is it a character-cell application or does it use macOS GUI elements?
3) What language is it written in?
4) Does it have architecture-specific instructions? Altivec would be an example of this. Assembler or machine code would be another example of this.
5) Can you open source the software?
6) If it's only an executable, is it just one file?
7) Do you have a build environment for it - virtualized, emulated or other?
8) Can you just run the executable on a PowerMac G4 or G5 or PowerBook?

I'm not sure I can answer many of those questions. It is called ImageGauge and was written by FujiFilm.
The app is tiny, 3.2MB: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4qnvzsjayfayod3/AAD9OL22cxmMSoFzTpiSMUYZa?dl=0
I just click it and it runs (on a supported PPC MacOS or 10.6.8 with Rosetta).

This is the closest link I can find to the software manual (for PC).

http://www.imb.sinica.edu.tw/core/publicfacilities/pdf/Image%20Gauge%20Ver.4.0.pdf

Notably, the PC version cannot open Mac files, so that isn't an option.

 

[MagicBoy]

PowerMacs are under $100 these days. The biggest problem is storage. You could stick them in a server room and VNC into them for use.

You'd be better off using a recent Mac mini that'll run 10.14, then virtualise server 10.6 on that - as it's running currently. Putting critical data on 15+ year old PPC hardware is a bad idea.

Best solution is to look at moving the data to something current and supported.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

You'd be better off using a recent Mac mini that'll run 10.14, then virtualise server 10.6 on that - as it's running currently. Putting critical data on 15+ year old PPC hardware is a bad idea.

...I don't really understand why that would be.

In terms of security, you're running an old OS either way. A VM is a good way to limit access to the outside world, but a dedicated machine does that to.

If the concern is that the machine could give up the ghost at any moment, well, so could all computers. What's important is having a backup strategy in place. No data should ever live only on a single machine, regardless of that machine's age.

 

[pshufd]

I had a look at the user manual and looked around the web for the software. It appears to be an IHC analysis tool (my son has described some of the stuff discussed in the user manual from his workplace with me in the past). The user manual also indicates that it's licensed software and you're limited to installing it on one computer.

It appears that the newer version of the software is called Multi Gauge but I don't know if it's maintained or in development today.

The license explicitly says that you can't decompile or otherwise try to rebuild it.

It would seem like the best approach would be to run it as is unless you can find a newer, supported version on current operating systems.

It may be worthwhile trying to figure out the difference in file formats between OSX and Windows so that you could use a converter to run it on the Windows version.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

The license explicitly says that you can't decompile or otherwise try to rebuild it.

Fwiw, just about every software license in the world says this. It's likely legally unenforceable—and if it's not, a whole lot of game mods are breaking the law.

It doesn't matter much though, because rebuilding a closed-source app for a different cpu architecture would be a monumental amount of work.

 

[pshufd]

Fwiw, just about every software license in the world says this. It's likely legally unenforceable—and if it's not, a whole lot of game mods are breaking the law.

It doesn't matter much though, because rebuilding a closed-source app for a different cpu architecture would be a monumental amount of work.

If you're a professional making a living off software license sales, then you're less likely to violate license terms.

As far as a conversion goes, it's just a port. But it depends on the APIs used. If it's simple character-cell stuff, then it should be a lot easier than if it uses GUI APIs.

 

[xraydoc]

If you're a professional making a living off software license sales, then you're less likely to violate license terms.

As far as a conversion goes, it's just a port. But it depends on the APIs used. If it's simple character-cell stuff, then it should be a lot easier than if it uses GUI APIs.

No other option for mission-critical software than a no-longer supported 19 year old app?

 

[christiann]

I'm starting this thread now in order to collect resources/ideas for running PowerPC apps in advance of the ARM transition.

I currently have a single piece of legacy proprietary software (and hundreds of academic research files associated with it) that requires PowerPC support. I currently achieve this via a VM of 10.6.8 server in VMware. This runs fine on host macOS from at least 10.11–10.14.
I haven't yet upgraded to Catalina, but assume it will still work.
I also assume future macOS versions will also still work so long as the host is Intel x86 hardware.

I asked elsewhere about virtualising Intel VMs on an ARM host, and was pointed to the following document indicating that Intel x86 VMs will no longer work on the new ARM Macs:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Rosetta translation environment | Apple Developer Documentation

Learn how Rosetta translates executables, and understand what Rosetta can’t translate.

developer.apple.com

What Can't Be Translated?
Rosetta can translate most Intel-based apps, including apps that contain just-in-time (JIT) compilers. However, Rosetta doesn’t translate the following executables:

• Kernel extensions
• Virtual Machine apps that virtualize x86_64 computer platforms

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I am wondering what may be the best way to maintain access to this software/files over the next 10+ years?

Option 1. Maintain a stockpile of legacy Intel (or even just PowerPC) Mac hardware.
A) Use these as standalone physical machines with thumb drives to transfer processed data.
B) Access remotely in some way? (What are the options for seemless remote access?)

Option 2. Explore ways of virtualising/emulating legacy macOS on an ARM host?

Option 3. Explore having the software rewritten/updated for ARM.

Others?

Now this caught my eye. That’s nice to see some way to get PowerPC apps on ARM chips, Even if that BEFORE intel!

 

[Spectrum]

No other option for mission-critical software than a no-longer supported 19 year old app?

Nothing we have found has as useful functionality, and nothing that will open the original analysis files. Even the Windows version won't open the Mac files becasue I think the file is split into separate file and hidden resource fork (or something like that). I think this was fairly standard practice in PPC days (perhaps a hangover from OS9?).

 

[MagicBoy]

...I don't really understand why that would be.

Simple, it's in the quote!

"Putting critical data on 15+ year old PPC hardware is a bad idea."

Sometimes there's no other option, but mainly that's due to physical interface hardware.. My work have a couple of bits of hardware that require a custom interface card, and they won't run on anything past Windows XP due to the card. There's a member on here who's work run scientific instruments and, again they require specific hardware which seems unhappy when run any anything past a Sawtooth PowerMac.

For pure software support then virtualisation is a better solution. It can be backed up, and you're not left scratching around for used and expensive spares for 15+ year old kit.

 

[Spectrum]

Simple, it's in the quote!

"Putting critical data on 15+ year old PPC hardware is a bad idea."

Sometimes there's no other option, but mainly that's due to physical interface hardware.. My work have a couple of bits of hardware that require a custom interface card, and they won't run on anything past Windows XP due to the card. There's a member on here who's work run scientific instruments and, again they require specific hardware which seems unhappy when run any anything past a Sawtooth PowerMac.

For pure software support then virtualisation is a better solution. It can be backed up, and you're not left scratching around for used and expensive spares for 15+ year old kit.

Yeah, despite it being more complicated from a user perspective, if push came to shove, I think it would be better to place a 2018 mac mini in a server room and virtualise 10.6.8 on it (like we currently do) that to use an old PPC Mac.

I also suspect that our ITS people will be muchhappier to put an Intel Mac on their network than an old PPC Mac.

Moreover, my perception is that the software actually runs smoother and faster when virtualising 10.6.8 on a 2018 mini that it ever ran on an original PPC G3 or G4.

But, regardless: I do appreciate all the comments and ideas!👍

 

[JulienBerthelot]

This app? https://getutm.app
It does sound promising. Running 10.5 would be absolutely fine. The main issue for me would be:
1. Somethign supported and stable
2. Ability to FileShare between the guest 10.5 and the ArmOS host.

Is there a reason you are using 10.5 and not 10.6? Is it for fun, or for a particular need you have?
[automerge]1593036224[/automerge]

Yup that app, right now, this app can only emulate PPC Mac system, it can also emulate x86 and x86-64 Windows, but not Mac curiously. I think with the rising popularity of ARM Macs, maybe something like UTM will be developed and will be more stable, they did the work on UTM in like 3 months. If I remember correctly, you can file share although I haven't tried it.

 

[Spectrum]

Yup that app, right now, this app can only emulate PPC Mac system, it can also emulate x86 and x86-64 Windows, but not Mac curiously. I think with the rising popularity of ARM Macs, maybe something like UTM will be developed and will be more stable, they did the work on UTM in like 3 months. If I remember correctly, you can file share although I haven't tried it.

Well, for my purpose, 10.5 would be absolutely fine! Fileshare is obviously goong to depend on the final implementation of macOS on ARM, and how it can interact with a VM. Overall, though, I am fairly optimistic. Two days ago, I wasn't!

 

[salamanderjuice]

Have you had a look at this? Seems like somebody has had the same problem and wrote something to dupe functionality of imagegauge in an opensource and modern way. No idea if it does everything you want but might be worth a look.