Why Mojave is a 2-year OS

Discussion in 'macOS Mojave (10.14)' started by rezwits, Aug 2, 2019.

  1. rezwits macrumors 6502a

    rezwits

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    #1
    Here is my take, I have 5 systems that are my main Macs that I use everyday. I have 3 of those systems that have extensions and apps that are lingering 32-bit still. I have 1 of those Macs that does have Catalina Beta installed but that's just a checker.

    So the situation is, by the time next year, sometime around July 2020, maybe all but 1 or 2 app(s)/ext(s) will STILL not have been upgraded. But I will just wait till the macOS after Catalina and do all my upgrades then.

    So no 10.15.x (Catalina) have to skip this one even tho I really would like to get the advantages and such but, not having all my machines (4 out of 5) in sync (macOS wise), I just can't do it...

    So start the thread I guess "Waiting for macOS 10.16"...

    Laters...
     
  2. NastyNatex macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2018
  3. dwfaust, Aug 6, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2019

    dwfaust macrumors 603

    dwfaust

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    #3
    Your failure, unwillingness or inability to upgrade from Mojave has absolutely no bearing on the age of an OS. So you are skipping Catalina... what is the point of this post?
     
  4. Bending Pixels macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    #4
    double dittos to that

    Apple has been warning/advising developers for some time now (since WWDC 2018) that support for 32bit app's is going bye bye. Developers have had plenty of time to get their stuff together and update their app's to 64 bit.

    Also, Apple is already working on the alpha for next year's (and probably the following year also) macOS version.

    I'd be contacting the developers of the 32bit app's you use to find out what they're doing to upgrade to 64bit
     
  5. haralds macrumors 6502a

    haralds

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Location:
    Silicon Valley, CA
    #5
    My problem is that Xcode 11 Mojave support will stop with 11.1 or 11.2.
     
  6. applCore macrumors regular

    applCore

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #6
    Some of us are already very, very upset (angry) at Apple. They are refusing to fix some Mojave bugs that bring horrible performance problems to systems. Some people I've talked to even use 2010 Mac Pros that are not supported by Catalina and Apple is telling them to upgrade to Catalina to receive the fix for the problems they've reported!!!!! Very worrisome behavior from Apple and I'm already hearing discussion of moving away to Windows now that they're doing some things with WSL. Ugh, I absolutely hate Windows and I can't tolerate that kind of discussion, but Apples' behavior is jarring especially for systems that really still should be fine and run Mojave great.
     
  7. fisherking macrumors 604

    fisherking

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Location:
    ny somewhere
    #7
    apple is telling people that won't be able to run catalina to upgrade to catalina? did this come in an email or something? and when you say 'some of us', how many people are you talking about? and what about all the people who run mojave and don't have 'horrible performance problems'...??? :rolleyes:
     
  8. rezwits thread starter macrumors 6502a

    rezwits

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    #8
    The point of the post, is 'None of you have ANY 32-bit apps" that are just "Insanely Great?" and Won't Work on Catalina? Well I am sorry I have like 2 (3) right now that I 100% need, 1 I just want. AND NO, no replacement. Every App you have just "Has a an alternative replacement?" Man WTH, I can't believe I have to explain. Basically DAY 1, I am not going to be able to just jump on board, due to this, and I am sure some of the older developers are going to "slowly" get there but, in the meanwhile I'll be waiting. How hard is this to see? I use like 50+ apps easily... it's not that hard to see that 1 or 2 "Essential" apps would be stuck on 32-bit for a bit, or AM I MISSING SOMETHING?
     
  9. fisherking macrumors 604

    fisherking

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Location:
    ny somewhere
    #9
    then you can wait untl those developers catch up, or not update. or find something else. what's the problem?

    EDIT: also, there's lot of good ppl on this forum; maybe list the important 32bit apps you need, and someone will have some suggestions...
     
  10. ThunderSkunk macrumors 68030

    ThunderSkunk

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2007
    Location:
    Milwaukee Area
    #10
    Well, we and a lot of architecture firms are in the same boat. Apple has left us with a choice, which is, either kiss access to the last 30 years of data goodbye, which is not possible or even legal, or start a software company to write new 64bit programs capable of working with legacy filetypes & data files written by long gone companies, or try to convert millions of original data files into new formats and rebuilding all the incompatibilities by hand, or just dump Apple completely and move on back to Windows which is awful but still actually functions in a way that a business depends on.

    So we can’t upgrade to Catalina either, which means we can’t purchase any Apple machines that ship with it or forward of that date either. Apple set an End of the Line marker knowing what the effects would be, and decided that hemorrhaging whatever users it costs them is worth it to not have to spend the $ supporting 32bit apps. C’est la vie. At the end of the day, computers are just things, after all.
     
  11. fisherking macrumors 604

    fisherking

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Location:
    ny somewhere
    #11
    we're talking apps, not data. the data should be readable by newer apps. so... which apps?

    perhaps we need a thread of something like "32-bit app replacements"; someone in need: start one!

    also, check with the developers of the 32-bit apps you'd need to update or replace.
     
  12. ThunderSkunk macrumors 68030

    ThunderSkunk

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2007
    Location:
    Milwaukee Area
    #12
    I don’t find repeating myself adds to the conversation, so maybe just try reading that again.
     
  13. fisherking macrumors 604

    fisherking

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Location:
    ny somewhere
    #13
    repeating what? am pointing out that files should open in newer apps; the files aren't the issue, the (32bit) apps are. also, you didn't answer my question: which apps?

    no need for an attitude; am trying to help... o_O
     
  14. ApfelKuchen macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2012
    Location:
    Between the coasts
    #14
    Seems clear to me - the data formats generated/readable by those 32-bit apps would require conversion in order to be used with available 64-bit apps. Absolutely, that can be a huge issue. However, this is the kind of situation that any business may have to deal with every few decades. Technology moves on, and the existing investment in older technology can mean large costs when the time finally comes to convert.

    I've seen a lot of this over the years, both in my family's accounting practice (the practice itself, and its clients) and in my own career (corporate IT during the Y2K days, and as a computer user going back to the early 1970s). As painful and expensive as the conversions can be, in the end it's generally not a matter of whether, but when.

    One could blame Apple for pushing change, or one can blame the user for reluctance to change... but one way or the other, this is not an isolated situation; it's a condition of using technology going back before the advent of the steam engine, before printing presses with moveable type. Since there's always a lead-time for change one has a choice of anticipating/accommodating that change or avoiding it for as long as possible.
     
  15. Honza1 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2013
    Location:
    US
    #15
    This is quite significant problem for lots of companies and you are not alone. Kind of similar, when Apple went to OSX + Intel chips and eventually abandoned older system versions and Motorola compatibility. I lost few good programs there.
    The good news is, that there is short term solution - and same today as in the past. Virtualization. Use software virtual machines (like Parallels) to run older OSX versions and software tools which are abandoned. That will cover you for few years even when on new hardware, as long as virtualization software does support older systems. It may actually run quite well...
    In a long run, however, every data custodian needs to realize, that his responsibility is to keep data readable. The custodian needs to develop strategy for converting old data format to newer ones which can be read by supported tools - same as they are responsible for backup of data against disasters. That does cost significant money, but is critical part of being responsible data custodian. Nothing can be done - it is data custodian responsibility. Apple (as well as Linux or Microsoft) will not stop developing new systems and obsoleting the old ones, they are not responsible for old data.
     
  16. rezwits thread starter macrumors 6502a

    rezwits

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    #16
    There is no problem per se, and yeah I am going to have to wait, I was just trying to point out that this is a bit of a situation or could be for some of us out there, especially if the "word" doesn't get out.

    Actually you are right, no freakin' "Rosetta" or anything like a mild emulator, I guess Mojave turned out to be the emulator? Because I remember when they released Mojave Beta, and warned that apps had to be 64-bit, and then Mojave ended up being able to still run them still but giving us the "notice: These apps aren't gonna work..."

    I'll be ok because what I normally do is relegate duties to older machines but... it's gonna be tight, I gotta a RAID that needs a KEXT... fingers crossed!
     
  17. ThunderSkunk, Aug 10, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2019

    ThunderSkunk macrumors 68030

    ThunderSkunk

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2007
    Location:
    Milwaukee Area
    #17
    You really can’t help this. If I seem to be dismissive and uninterested in your help it’s because this is a fairly deep decades old problem coming to a head, and you’re responding to me as if I don’t know the difference between a file and an application. The files are indeed the issue here, since they were created in proprietary formats, some of which don’t migrate, the rest of which don’t migrate in tact, because the applications publishers held legal stranglehold’s on their format IP dating back to the Cold War, and either went out of business leaving nothing to migrate to, or buried their legacy filetypes in aggressive planned obsolescence schemes run amok in the 90s. ...these are not static files, or even singular applications. These large design & engineering projects are comprised of thousands of files of various types externally linked to each other between multiple applications concurrently, utilizing various types of intelligence and functionality, from parametric data shaping 3d model geometry, visualization, materials data, structural, standards compliance, BIM data, scheduling, collaboration, revision & lifecycle tracking with legal tie-ins supporting, etc etc etc. Today there are giant software applications that attempt to do all this. In the past, this required tying all this functionality together out of many small fragmented applications. Many of those software companies appeared simply to release a small application, and close down after just a few years, leaving their extremely simple, effective, and reliable applications to continue on ever since without update. Many have been replaced, many have not. When one of these old projects ends up back in court again, we all need to go in and present the original, unmodified files using the original software they were created in. We’ll keep old macs to access the projects that were built on the Mac, but since windows will continue to support ancient legacy applications indefinitely, the path forward is clear.

    ...and at least as critical, the Wacom 3 digitizers we use, the last pointing device with absolute coordinates and programmable 5 button mouse anyone ever made, is not being updated to 64bit, because Wacom is a derelict zombie.

    This is more time describing this than I need to spend. OP, the point was, there are others in your situation and worse too. If you can’t migrate to 64bit, Catalina represents a clean break, either from your 32bit applications and your data locked in them or from the platform. As others have said, it’s as big of a deal as dropping PPC for intel was.
     
  18. fisherking macrumors 604

    fisherking

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Location:
    ny somewhere
    #18
    fair enough. so, you can keep old hardware for the older files/apps. and move to a newer OS/hardware if/when needed. but the changes will keep coming, and we adapt.. or don't. there's not much else, really. we survived the move from scsi to usb (and a lot of really-expensive umax scanners became great paperweights); we survived the power pc-to-intel move. we will, inevitably, survive this.

    good luck, for real!
     
  19. cmstuber macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 6, 2015
    #19
    wait... there's intel Macs now? ;)
     

Share This Page

18 August 2, 2019