Orphanage for Intel apps?

[romanof]

I (we) have a serious decision to make when MacOS 27 arrives. What to do about all the Intel code that will no longer work? I am not talking about mere utilities, but for serious software that has no Arm version and for which there are at present no alternatives - other than moving to Windows, which is not to be thought of for most on this site.

I am trying to determine which can be run on my very capable Linux desktop as an option. Some can, some can't.

Keeping or buying an older Mac and staying on OS26 or earlier is a thought, but eventually that runs out of support and in this day and age, connecting to the Net without every last option for security enabled is not wise. Even so, that is the only plan that I have come up with as yet and viable because I have a couple of quite usable Arm Macs

Some apps can stay on an old Mac that is air gapped from the outside world, but again, some cannot.

But fortunately, Tahoe will get updates for what? Three years maybe? So the need is not immediate, but eventually it will be decision time.

 

[conmee]

Tahoe will get two more years of security updates beginning this October. That's it. And I wan't very impressed with the performance of Tahoe on my 2019 16" MBP (Core i9, 64GB, 2TB, 8GB VRAM). I've luckily been able to move to Win11ARM in Parallels for current work-related things that require Windows, but I don't have demanding requirements or software that requires x86 anymore. Having said that, I am keeping my 2019 15" MBP mainly because it was the last Intel MBP to run Mojave - I keep it for Mojave and 32-bit apps, Bootcamp with Win10, and Parallels runs WinXP and Win7 games from decades ago. So it's more of an archive/museum of older software but not something I would daily drive anymore since getting an M5 Pro MBP.

Unless ISVs produce ARM-compatible (macOS or Windows via virtualization) products, it's end of line. An Intel Mac for professional-grade commercial applications is not a long-term solution. So realistically, two more years on a Tahoe-compatible Intel Mac (1 more year on a Sequoia-compatible Intel Mac) before updates end. The Intel Macs won't stop working after that time but no further updates.

 

[SteveOm]

You can virtualize Sequoia under Tahoe using a tool like VirtualBuddy, UTM or Parallels. It runs at full ARM speed and includes Rosetta 2. Virtualized Sequoia seems likely to be supported under future MacOS for a while anyway. The one problem is that it doesn’t work for App Store apps. If your Intel-only apps came from anywhere else though they should run fine unless they need some special hardware access.

I cited Sequoia because of @conmee’s concern about performance. You can also virtualize Tahoe on Tahoe and presumably later MacOS, and that would include Rosetta.

 

[!!!]

but eventually that runs out of support and in this day and age, connecting to the Net without every last option for security enabled is not wise

Unless you've gone into your router and opened ports, there shouldn't be any danger just running an outdated system.

Possible ways an attacker could gain access to your computer:

• You visit a malicious website and it exploits your browser
• You download malware, intentionally or otherwise
• You expose ports to the internet and leave services running

If the machine is staying on an older OS specifically for running certain apps, I don't see how 1 or 2 is relevant, you're not installing any new software and it's not your "daily browsing" machine. If the software you're using doesn't require you to open ports to the internet, then that's not a problem either. In fact, if your software doesn't require internet at all, then you don't need to connect it to the internet at all.

This problem isn't new, it happened with PowerPC, then Intel 32 apps.

 

[romanof]

Unless you've gone into your router and opened ports, there shouldn't be any danger just running an outdated system.

Thats true. Obviously you would be surfing and doing daily stuff on a new or newer system, leaving your older gear to do local tasks. But at this state the of Internet with horrible hacks and AI capability of finding new zero days - and especially drive-bys - by the dozen and almost daily, I would still be nervous of allowing an older machine to connect.

 

[ClaraStahlbaum]

Will MacOS 27 fully support intel apps? Is it the last version that will do so?

 

[CoastalOR]

Will MacOS 27 fully support intel apps? Is it the last version that will do so?

Here is a quote from a recent MacRumors article "What to Expect From WWDC 2026: Gemini-Powered Siri, iOS 27, macOS 27 and More":

"Apple is also phasing out Rosetta 2 support, and macOS 27 will be the last version of macOS that includes it. Rosetta 2 lets Apple silicon Macs run apps built for Intel Macs, so older apps that still have the outdated architecture will no longer work in macOS 28."

 

[smithrh]

If you have Intel-only apps, suggest also contacting the developer to see what they're doing.

That is, it's not only users that need to pay attention to the changeover, but the developers and vendors of apps as well.

If they don't feel any pressure from users - especially users that have paid - the decision could be to do nothing. What Apple is doing is another form of pressure on devs - and they've been saying Rosetta support will be going away for years, a very consistent message.

If you do have Intel-only abandonware, then you might use this opportunity to look for alternatives. Not fun, can carry expense and may not be 100% what you need, want or have gotten used to, but there you go.

Got lucky here, I had one and only one Intel-only app. Even though it looked like abandonware (website not updated in years, no mention of AS binaries, etc) I hit the built in "check for updates" function in the app and boom, there was a universal binary version offered. But before that, I was in the same boat, looking for alternatives - and not really finding anything that I liked.