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.
Rosetta May Be Removed From M1 Macs in Some Regions on macOS 11.3
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MATLAB - really popular with students
MATLAB
The official home of MATLAB software. MATLAB is the easiest and most productive software environment for engineers and scientists. Try, buy, and learn MATLAB.
I only found one patent (which might or might not be relevant) with quick googling (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140297991A1/en) and it contains phrases like:
So I assume that the lawyers have covered all their bases and that similar wording can be found in all the patents relevant to the matter ...
That’s not a patent - just an application. What matters is the claims -that’s what determines whether you infringe.
Claims 15-25 seem, at first glance, to require that the hardware does the work. Claim 1 is probably the broadest, claiming a method. A lot depends on how the claims are construed, but I note this language in claim 1:
“responsive to executing the single occurrence of the single instruction, storing data in the single general purpose register...”
The “single general purpose register,” is defined earlier in the claim - it’s an architectural register. By itself, it seems to me that an “architectural” general purpose register can be an abstraction. But when the claim says you have to actually store stuff IN IT, that implies to me that the general purpose register has to be an actual register, not a simulated register.
Again, a much more detailed analysis is required, but at first glance this patent application doesn’t seem too scary.
Remove Rosetta and kiss the professional audio industry goodbye. If you record music you know most audio interfaces, plugins and so much more aren’t even Big Sur certified and use Rosetta.
A truly stupefying idea is to think they will force vendors to do anything other than drop support for the Mac platform moving forward.
A truly stupefying idea is to think they will force vendors to do anything other than drop support for the Mac platform moving forward.
Is there a big professional audio industry using macs in North Korea? Iran? Maybe Russia, I suppose. Those are the places where this might happen. Not the US, or most of europe or asia.
No one knows at this stage apart from Intel & Apple.
I understand the first part but that applies to all Apple products. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense to me is why the Department of Commerce would allow the sales of Macs to some region in general but disallow Rosetta specifically. What's so special about Rosetta that could warrant such treatment?
Intel has nothing to do with it. They don’t even have patents on x86-64.
HTTPS is covered under some exemption, but you still have to disclose it, and they say to file some report to the govt.
It actually doesn't imply anything at all.
If it's a patent issue, it could well be the U.S. or the EU, we just don't know, whether to panic or not until Apple says what they are doing. You're guessing on the meaning of region just as much as the panickers...
If you are panicking based on incomplete information, then that’s the definition of *not* reasonable especially as the information we do have doesn’t conform to the notion of Apple actually removing Rosetta. They’re not. I’d argue that people panicking based on incomplete information where, again, the information we do have even contradicts the worst case scenario (this message is not new and declares it for certain regions and no one outside of a reported bug has actually experienced it) is why we can’t have nice things.
Also the worst case scenario of them pulling Rosetta 2 before the transition is even complete never mind giving it a buffer afterwards is ... well extremely silly. I mean, I’m sorry but at this point silly is the kindest word for it.
Rosetta 1 lasted for *5 years*. It wasn’t removed until Lion in 2011 after being introduced in 2006. Rosetta 2 will likely last as long if not longer as this transition is going to take longer to complete. Apple is still selling Intel macs and will be well into 2022.
Last edited:
No he’s not. Think about it, we would’ve heard of a court case of this were a patent issue. The patents around x86 and x64 either already have or are just about to expire and no company has lodged any other kind of complaint either. Again, Apple would be fighting a patent/copyright infringement claim in court before removing Rosetta. This is Apple. They ain’t exactly afraid of litigation are they?
Further no one, aside from someone who experienced a bug, has actually reported seeing this message, it was fixed with a reboot, and it’s actually not new. It’s been in here since December. So it’s been months.
My thought initially.. whoever let that rumour out is trying to get good price for their old Intel Mac, because they want to buy an M1 one.Intel-based Macs just went back up in value.
I have, and he is. And we may not have heard about a patent case -- it may have been a threat of one and Apple decided that yes, it probably was an infringement, so they proactively did something about it. Who knows. My real bet is copyright with the name rosetta itself, who knows, certainly not me, and that could be enough to get it pulled until that is resolved.
We just don't have enough information about region, or why it's being removed. or if it's being removed!
Well, strictly speaking Apple are doing the right thing now. There is already Windows on ARM and Microsoft are actively working on ensuring it emulates x86 and x64 Windows software. So if Apple have licensing issues with Intel/AMD so would Microsoft... But the point is, that you would be able to run again both Windows and other OSs virtualised on the M1 Macs. No need for Boot Camp anymore, because Apple had included the VM management interface in the OS API already. So if there are someone who might lose business here this is the various virtualisation vendors.
That’s not what Apple has done even in cases where they went on to lose badly. They’ve never just given up and fully removed a feature without fighting it. Again no one has actually experienced this message *for real* and it’s been in macOS since December. I agree that we don’t *know* the reason but, unlike the chicken littles, his educated guess is not unreasonable.
Trademark with the name wouldn’t force the app to removed.
I agree that we don’t have all the information, but I’d say that it’s pretty clear from what we do have that the panicking is overblown.
Last edited:
What regions? I said a while ago that these macs are targeted to specific audience. My prediction comes through, except the audience now shrinks in size. Joke aside I was hoping Apple will make somehow VM of X64 Windows to run on M1, instead they went exactly the opposite route. Or maybe this code would not be implemented?
Mine has the benefit of history. Apple has done this sort of thing in the past, for exactly that reason, as have many other companies.
Thank you for this. It just seems like forums and really conversations in general have gotten worse over the years. Why do we have 11+ pages of this panic and hating on Apple when it isn't even confirmed. Let alone how ridiculous the claim is that they would remove Rosetta in 3 months?!Oh for pity's sake people.
As at least one person has already posted, this message has been in the code since at least December when some people saw it due to a glitch (that went away after rebooting):
Error: Rosetta is not currently available… - Apple Community
discussions.apple.com
...so it has most likely been there from day #1 of the M1 Macs, and for all we know it could have been there since Rosetta 1 went away in MacOS Lion. Whatever - there's no reason tho think this is some new, imminent plan to dump Rosetta.
Of course, Rosetta 2 will go away in a few years' time just as Rosetta 1 did, but not until it has been clearly announced as "depreciated" for a suitable period (just as happened with Rosetta 1, Carbon, 32-bit support etc...).
...and just as with Apple's rules on vintage/obsolete equipment and servicing, it is entirely plausible that some regions will insist on it being supported for longer than (say) the US. Then there's the equally plausible possibility of tech import/export controls in some regions, that some people have suggested.
Buy, yeah, of course it is more likely that Apple have gone bat-poo insane and decided to yank a major plank of the Apple Silicon transition just 3 months in... (I mean, plenty of people have pointed out how devastating that would be - you just have to go the extra step and realise that means that it is probably not true).
Or maybe Intel have found a way to get an injunction against Apple (which would also set a nasty precedent for Microsoft and Windows on ARM) without a single breath of it leaking out into the press (oh, but which Apple was able to anticipate in December) - sure, no laws of Physics would be broken, but really not very likely.
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.
Now I'm off to the far side of the sun to get my teapot back.
It just seems exhausting lately being part of these conversations.
Absolutely. It doesn’t help that context is not provided in the original macrumors post, so people read it and think the worst. Even worse are people who don’t read it - they ignore “region” and assume it means everywhere, etc. And then there are people who don’t understand intellectual property law who jump to all sorts of worst-case scenarios.
Presumably this will affect very few people and will be something Apple would do only if required by some law.