3 ms·

This distinction does not seem very useful. Regardless of whether it was a good idea, developers had to decide at some point whether they should prepare for the

by spsful 7y ago

This distinction does not seem very useful. Regardless of whether it was a good idea, developers had to decide at some point whether they should prepare for the transition or cease macOS development (unless they wanted to continue supporting old versions with a dwindling userbase). This decision could have been made years ago. It seems to me that anyone complaining the change is too soon or too sudden is forgetting the sheer amount of time they had to decide their best course of action. It should be a question of whether to continue development at all, since that should include a transition to 64-bit. If not, then deprecate the project. I understand may situations will not be this black-and-white, but it seems like many of them are.

wwweston 7y ago
> anyone complaining the change is too soon or too sudden Notably, that's not my complaint or my point. This isn't about the timing (which is why the distinction was important). No matter how much time someone has to prepare for a change, there's a cost to making it. And if the benefits of the change don't outweigh those costs for the developer (and the user), then a complaint sure makes sense from those perspectives. This does intersect the issue of timing, because in a resource-constrained situation, you inevitably have to defer some efforts until they're absolutely necessary (and simply rule out doing others). But timing is not the fundamental issue, cost-benefit tradeoffs are. > [development] should include a transition to 64-bit. Why? What's the benefit to ending 32 bit application support?