flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

flat assembler > Heap > Apple prepares macOS to drop 32-bit app support

Goto page Previous  1, 2

Should 32-bit support be dropped by all major OSes?
No, I still run DOS apps!
33%
 33%  [ 2 ]
No, I still run Win32 apps!
33%
 33%  [ 2 ]
Yes because I hate everything! Die, legacy, die!
33%
 33%  [ 2 ]
It's all Donald Trump's fault! Everything's his fault!
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
I prefer non-x86 cpus (e.g. ARM) anyways, so I don't care.
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Apple always knows what's best for us. Resistance is futile!
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
As long as Netflix, Spotify, Minecraft still work, I don't care.
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 6

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2311
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
Coty wrote:
in 2006 Apple released a completely refabbed line up. This new line up offered nothing other than x86-64 CPUs across the board.


I take it that they were unhappy with PPC's prospects for the future. Intel obviously is a powerhouse, so when they finally had a noticeable improvement over the horrible Pentium 4 (which didn't get much use in laptops, for instance, hence Pentium-M), Apple jumped ship. Supposedly, they'd been building for x86 anyways since year 2000 (based upon FreeBSD).

As long as VirtualBox (or xhyve or whatever) works for 32-bit on Mac (via hardware VT-X), then I can sympathize. Otherwise, no.

The lesson here is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

Quote:

(for better or worse, one could always argue that things like that need to have better legacy support, while one could also argue, that security is better than legacy.)


"Security" is a red herring. Certainly, nobody wants their bank account hacked. But a "secure" system that can't run anything (familiar or useful) is useless.

There's a fine line between stubbornness and lack of need (or time/energy).

Quote:

Plus if the rumors of Apple possibly switching to their ARM based chips in their notebooks yields any merit, I could see why apple would want to minimize their compatibility chain.


I've already seen ARM Chromebooks. And even some Chromebooks have partial Android support, too.

But throwing away compatibility at random is just asking for trouble.
Post 16 Feb 2018, 18:11
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Furs



Joined: 04 Mar 2016
Posts: 1315
Apple's policy is almost always something like "we don't give a shit about other developers, it's our platform, so you code OUR way or the highway" being a moving target too. I don't mean this with initial specs (that applies to everyone), I mean continuously. With almost any changes they do, they apply that principle.

X software that worked perfectly fine broke on new OS X? "It's not our fault, contact the developer of your app to fix his stupid app to use the new APIs!" is what you get in support (not personally, I've seen people whine about it though, and on the developer side).

Yeah, not Apple's fault at all, OS X changes by itself.
Post 16 Feb 2018, 18:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Coty



Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 545
Location: ␀
rugxulo wrote:
I take it that they were unhappy with PPC's prospects for the future. Intel obviously is a powerhouse, so when they finally had a noticeable improvement over the horrible Pentium 4 (which didn't get much use in laptops, for instance, hence Pentium-M), Apple jumped ship. Supposedly, they'd been building for x86 anyways since year 2000 (based upon FreeBSD).

Indeed, at the time IBM was raising the performance of their chips, but had little to no interest in lowering the thermal package and apparently didn't want to work with apple on improving. This resulted in the power mac (apples primary desktop based guns, renamed "Mac Pro" after the transition) needing to be shipped with water coolers and was joked about that you could use it as a space heater as it emitted noticeable heat even at idle especially if you got the top end dual socket configuration. This also meant that the notebook/laptop and compact desktop unit (the mac mini) needed to be severally under-clocked to achieve functional tempitures. This made even the P4 look enticing, but the core series was the nail in the coffin.

rugxulo wrote:
As long as VirtualBox (or xhyve or whatever) works for 32-bit on Mac (via hardware VT-X), then I can sympathize. Otherwise, no.

The lesson here is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

I don't see why it wouldn't. Just because apple is phasing out support for "native" 32bit, I see no reason industry standard virtualization would be blocked out...



rugxulo wrote:
"Security" is a red herring. Certainly, nobody wants their bank account hacked. But a "secure" system that can't run anything (familiar or useful) is useless.

There's a fine line between stubbornness and lack of need (or time/energy).

I agree. making something more secure shouldn't be an excuse. But it is. And given the choice between compatibility and security. I personally think that security is more important to me. Nothing stoping me from Using a VM in a controlled environment.

rugxulo wrote:
I've already seen ARM Chromebooks. And even some Chromebooks have partial Android support, too.

But throwing away compatibility at random is just asking for trouble.

I wouldn't say it's random, the ability for a company like Apple to make their own chips and control how the chips are could yield some great benefits, things like having a skew of chip designed exactly for X product. Plus right now the latest iPhone benchmarks with apples in house chips (currently the A11 Bionic) Are so fast that they are competing with Intels top range i7 quad core laptop CPUs in performance while using less power and not requiring a heat sync (granted this is short burst performace and the chips cannot hold the clocks for an extended time, but it's fricking crazy).

Furs wrote:
Apple's policy is almost always something like "we don't give a shit about other developers, it's our platform, so you code OUR way or the highway" being a moving target too. I don't mean this with initial specs (that applies to everyone), I mean continuously. With almost any changes they do, they apply that principle.

X software that worked perfectly fine broke on new OS X? "It's not our fault, contact the developer of your app to fix his stupid app to use the new APIs!" is what you get in support (not personally, I've seen people whine about it though, and on the developer side).

Yeah, not Apple's fault at all, OS X changes by itself.

Maybe on the iPhone... But the mac platform is different. I've yet to see any of my applications break compatibility in the last 4~5 years I've been using a mac (even my own code is still fine). The only application I've seen broken with an update was XCode (Apples IDE/programing environment). And it breaks on every major update. There is a new version of XCode released for every annual version of MacOS(X) witch is probably something to do with taking advantage of the new OS features or some crap I don't know. But it's free, so I don't care.

If you know macintosh devs that always complain about apples compatibility or whatever. They're probably lazy devs writing lazy code that barely works to begin with... And mind you, had they not been lazy, they would have been able to check their codes compatibility with the latest OS months in advance with a beta copy of macOS(X). Heck, you can even enroll in beta updates and get normal updates a week or two in advance (The larger less problematic periodic updates even roll out up to a month in advance). This would have allowed the afore mentioned devs time to plan their software updates.
Post 17 Feb 2018, 06:12
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2018, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.