Why did Apple omit Rosetta?

[5097842]

Apple wants developers writing 64 bit Cocoa apps for Lion. Apps that have Full Screen support, Auto-Save and Versions support, and use technologies like OpenCL. These apps showcase OS X and drive sales of hardware.

Rosetta costs money to support, and does not drive sales of new hardware. Apple makes money selling hardware. If someone needs Rosetta, then Snow Leopard will remain viable for several more years.

 

[Soliber]

Frankly, I wish the whole tech industry had the same forward-going drive as Apple.
Imagine, just imagine, how many problems related to legacy crap would instantly go away... Ah well, a man can dream
Granted, there'd probably be a new set of problems, but still...

 

[Skwink]

Why drop Rosetta?

What was the point of dropping Rosetta? Did it drag down our computers? I was a big fan and user of it.

 

[Skwink]

Thank you for that insightful answer. I still don't see why we should stop supporting apps for no reason. Taking out useful features isn't moving forward.

 

[0007776]

because it would be too much of a pain for Apple to update the code to make it work with Lion, and there is no real need for it still, most apps have been updated and if someone is still using an old version and need to run that version they can just use an old version of the OS. Plus it probably keeps the OS more secure, all the backwards compatibility is one of the things causing problems with windows.

 

[Lokheed]

Thank you for that insightful answer. I still don't see why we should stop supporting apps for no reason. Taking out useful features isn't moving forward.

Do I look like I'm invited to board meetings or sit on the board of directors? How should I know? Probably because it was built entirely to support applications that were built for the PPC arch. So when Apple moved to Intel, 99% of their apps would still work.

Fast forward 5 years and they've moved entirely to pure 64bit systems, and their latest OS takes full advantage of those machines. Moreover, it is likely that every developer has by now updated their software to run on Intel.

So if you're one of those that accepts that, but doesn't want to upgrade their copy of Office or Photoshop because it's just too damned expensive, then your whines fall on deaf ears. I don't pay a premium for new hardware to have it run software built in 2005 (and poorly I might add). And no one is forcing you to update to Lion. Run Snow Leopard till you're lowered into the cold cold ground.

Apple's entire philosophy is to push the envelop and build a bright future, not cling to the relics of the past.

Either way, it's gone and never to return. Whining about it won't change that. And you have options (SL). Steve Jobs didn't come to your house and take Rosetta from you, did he now?

Does that work better for you?

 

[Skwink]

because it would be too much of a pain for Apple to update the code to make it work with Lion, and there is no real need for it still, most apps have been updated and if someone is still using an old version and need to run that version they can just use an old version of the OS. Plus it probably keeps the OS more secure, all the backwards compatibility is one of the things causing problems with windows.

Many applications have not been updated.

----------

Do I look like I'm invited to board meetings or sit on the board of directors? How should I know? Probably because it was built entirely to support applications that were built for the PPC arch. So when Apple moved to Intel, 99% of their apps would still work.

Fast forward 5 years and they've moved entirely to pure 64bit systems, and their latest OS takes full advantage of those machines. Moreover, it is likely that every developer has by now updated their software to run on Intel.

So if you're one of those that accepts that, but doesn't want to upgrade their copy of Office or Photoshop because it's just too damned expensive, then your whines fall on deaf ears. I don't pay a premium for new hardware to have it run software built in 2005 (and poorly I might add). And no one is forcing you to update to Lion. Run Snow Leopard till you're lowered into the cold cold ground.

Apple's entire philosophy is to push the envelop and build a bright future, not cling to the relics of the past.

Either way, it's gone and never to return. Whining about it won't change that. And you have options (SL). Steve Jobs didn't come to your house and take Rosetta from you, did he now?

Does that work better for you?

We're just talking about a computer application man.

 

[marc11]

Does anyone EVER read ANYTHING posted here or search for ANYTHING before starting a new thread?? EVER?

 

[Fozziebear40]

I would keep SL but it doesn't run properly on the new Mini's.

 

[blackhand1001]

You're wrong.

Support costs money. Rosetta would need re-testing and fixing for every new piece of hardware and every new OS. Just keeping it isn't 'free' at all.

One of Apple's great advantages over Microsoft is the limited range of hardware and limited combinations of software they need to test against. Microsoft's testing costs alone must be astronomical.

Sorry to say it but this arguement no longer makes sense. Most hardware actually performs much better in windows, particularly graphics cards and wireless cards. The drivers are usually that much better. Also rosetta does not require any special testing. All it needs is an x86 processor which all the new machines use. It works on hackintoshes too without any trouble. For hackintoshes unlike things like graphics drivers and network cards which sometimes don't work out of the box, rosetta always worked if installed which proves that it doesn't rely on special drivers.

 

[ljonesj]

Well i found a work around for my issue with diablo 2. If you install it on a windows machine then update it to the point that it does not require the cd. if you copy all your .mpq files over to the install folder. Then copy the install folder over you can use wine and get it up and running cause if you try running the disk in osx it just brings up the mac side of the disc.

 

[BlackMangoTree]

Quite simply that's complete bollocks.

Why would you want to run ancient software on a shiny new Mac? If you're upgrading your hardware you should bring the software into line.

Snow Leopard is very stable, Lion is very unstable.

Lion has actually made the reason i bought a MacMini 2011 useless. So much for using it as a media centre when the digital audio craps it self all the time.

Would be fantastic to install Snow Leopard on it.

 

[ljonesj]

Well from what i can tell just looking the specs the macbook pro base and the mini base are the same. So u could in theory get it to work. You could get the mac mini in target disk mode and have your macbook install snow leopard if it came with it and get it to work.

 

[0007776]

Many applications have not been updated..

yes, but those applications are obviously dead, you should move to a more modern application or just use old hardware and software to run your old applications. You probably don't need new OS features to run your old software.

 

[xraydoc]

Also rosetta does not require any special testing. All it needs is an x86 processor which all the new machines use. It works on hackintoshes too without any trouble. For hackintoshes unlike things like graphics drivers and network cards which sometimes don't work out of the box, rosetta always worked if installed which proves that it doesn't rely on special drivers.

Why would you presume this? You know for a fact that Rosetta doesn't hook in to the OS? I think that's a very naive presumption. I would submit that Rosetta is a very complex bit of software that very much depends on the OS. Apple may have decided that architecture changes planned for Lion required too much work to make compatible with Rosetta. Or, really, that Rosetta would have required too many changes to function with Lion, making support/development costs too much for their approval based on how much Rosetta is used. I have zero doubt Apple has very detailed usage numbers/

 

[Mak47]

I just read an article about how Microsoft is struggling to keep up with all of the old machines running XP--because IT departments and stubborn users simply refuse to upgrade to new hardware or to a modern OS. The writer said something like it was so full of security holes that it's now more patch than it is OS.

Users hold on tight because they don't want to change, refuse to spend the money, or have problems moving employees away from ancient apps that won't work on the newer OS. These concerns are all valid, but leave those users (consumers and businesses) in a very bad position where they are running systems that simply don't meet today's security needs. This problem exists because MS has continued to support ancient applications and an ancient OS despite the fact that technology has moved on.

Apple's choice to pull support for PPC apps is just a part of a larger strategy that enables them to avoid situations like the one described above. By regularly updating their OS, and doing so at a reasonable price, it's easy for users to make the decision to stay up to date. This pulls greater numbers of users onto the new OS, making those holding on to the older versions the minority--exactly the opposite of what MS experiences with XP (half the world's computers still run it).

There are sacrifices to make, namely the elimination of old apps, but in the long run this is a very good thing for the ecosystem as a whole.

 

[Skwink]

yes, but those applications are obviously dead, you should move to a more modern application or just use old hardware and software to run your old applications. You probably don't need new OS features to run your old software.

Yeah, Battlefield 1942 and Age of Empires 2, to name a few, are really dead.

 

[0007776]

Yeah, Battlefield 1942 and Age of Empires 2, to name a few, are really dead.

Well they aren't getting any new upgrades, and if you want to play them why not keep an old PPC computer hanging around, they aren't that expensive.

 

[Fozziebear40]

Well from what i can tell just looking the specs the macbook pro base and the mini base are the same. So u could in theory get it to work. You could get the mac mini in target disk mode and have your macbook install snow leopard if it came with it and get it to work.

Yes, that's what some people have been doing. You CAN get SL to run on the new Mini's but apparently it runs like a dog with a bad leg, maybe 40% of the performance it should have.

 

[Huntn]

I have not scanned this entire thread, but with an intel Mac are there any options for running some kind of 3rd party Rosetta emulation under Lion? My Appleworks 6 documents can be opened in Pages so I can still access older docs. However, I have some highly formatted AW6 docs that I've been dragging my feet trying to get them adjusted to Pages. So looking at options on the best way to proceed before upgrading to Lion.
Thanks!

 

[jbrown]

Surely an enterprising software developer could write a Rosetta-style patch that would get these programs running again. I'd pay a few £ for that

 

[Tom in London]

Absolutely

Obviously all the fanboys are home users and have never run a business.

Yes- that's so obvious from the way they talk about Rosetta and the way they blindly believe that "new" always means "better". So naive. They really should try running a business for, say, 15 years, archiving all their old databases and project files and then suddenly needing to refer back to them.

We're dealing with children here.

 

[firestarter]

Yes- that's so obvious from the way they talk about Rosetta and the way they blindly believe that "new" always means "better". So naive. They really should try running a business for, say, 15 years, archiving all their old databases and project files and then suddenly needing to refer back to them.

We're dealing with children here.

End of life hardware and software is a fact of life, and something which a responsible business owner needs to manage. If you have a data retention requirement, you have to either upgrade your archives on a rolling basis or retain your older hardware.

Sorry, but it's naive to expect a software manufacturer to keep compatibility for 15 years.

 

[Mackilroy]

Yes- that's so obvious from the way they talk about Rosetta and the way they blindly believe that "new" always means "better". So naive. They really should try running a business for, say, 15 years, archiving all their old databases and project files and then suddenly needing to refer back to them.

We're dealing with children here.

Or they realize that if you're running a business and the company whose products you use announces they won't be supporting – in advance mind you – something that you use frequently, you either don't upgrade or you find a way to put your information in a newer format.

 

[old-wiz]

Surely an enterprising software developer could write a Rosetta-style patch that would get these programs running again. I'd pay a few £ for that

I used to work with hardware emulators a long time ago. You really have to have deep knowledge of both systems and how the various applications make system calls on both systems. Worse there could be calls from the PPC that don't translate well, if at all.

My only problem with Lion is Quicken 2007, but I'm managing with Quicken Essentials but I have only upgraded 1 of 4 machines to Lion so far.