4 ms·

But there are lots of apps that aren't actively maintained, and so will never get recompiled, even if they could be. And even the ones that are actively maintai

by _bxg1 6y ago

But there are lots of apps that aren't actively maintained, and so will never get recompiled, even if they could be. And even the ones that are actively maintained might not be ready and recompiled on day 1. Emulation would go a long way to make the transition less painful.

jkestner 6y ago
Bitcode[1] would’ve been a good way to handle that, if Apple had ever supported it for Mac apps in addition to their other platforms. 1. https://thenextweb.com/apple/2015/06/17/apples-biggest-developer-news-at-wwdc-that-nobodys-talking-about-bitcode/ https://thenextweb.com/apple/2015/06/17/apples-biggest-devel...
- therockhead 6y ago
  I don’t see how that helps apps not in the App Store, as bitcode need to changed to a platform specific type .... unless this was done on the fly on the host platform.
  - htfu 6y ago
    Apart from a return of the dreaded Win-style endless installer progress bar surely doing it on the host, once, wouldn't be a problem. The "issue" would be squaring the result with notarization and bundle integrity, but that solves itself since it means Apple is already sitting on the (in this case bitcode) app whether it's in store or not. But they'd probably use it as an incentive to drive stuff further towards the app store.
- gsnedders 6y ago
  The bitcode is basically just LLVM IR, is it not? And that encodes plenty of platform-specific behaviours. Though with both being little-endian and both LP64 maybe there's less of an issue there? https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2011-October/043724.html https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2011-October/04372... is still my go-to pointer for the portability of LLVM IR (and bitcode); I don't know how Apple have dealt with the instability between LLVM releases of bitcode, but there's certainly plenty of potentially shortcomings if you want to compile for a different architecture.
tinus_hn 6y ago
Apple is not Microsoft, if you don’t maintain your software you’re left behind.
- qppo 6y ago
  It's not a problem for devs so much as users. If I'm not maintaining my software it's probably because I can't afford it, but the people that use it still want it installed.
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
I agree with the sentiment, but I feel as though 75% of the unmaintained stuff already got killed in Catalina.

by _bxg1 6y ago

jkestner 6y ago

Bitcode[1] would’ve been a good way to handle that, if Apple had ever supported it for Mac apps in addition to their other platforms. 1. https://thenextweb.com/apple/2015/06/17/apples-biggest-developer-news-at-wwdc-that-nobodys-talking-about-bitcode/ https://thenextweb.com/apple/2015/06/17/apples-biggest-devel...

therockhead 6y ago
I don’t see how that helps apps not in the App Store, as bitcode need to changed to a platform specific type .... unless this was done on the fly on the host platform.
- htfu 6y ago
  Apart from a return of the dreaded Win-style endless installer progress bar surely doing it on the host, once, wouldn't be a problem. The "issue" would be squaring the result with notarization and bundle integrity, but that solves itself since it means Apple is already sitting on the (in this case bitcode) app whether it's in store or not. But they'd probably use it as an incentive to drive stuff further towards the app store.
gsnedders 6y ago
The bitcode is basically just LLVM IR, is it not? And that encodes plenty of platform-specific behaviours. Though with both being little-endian and both LP64 maybe there's less of an issue there? https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2011-October/043724.html https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2011-October/04372... is still my go-to pointer for the portability of LLVM IR (and bitcode); I don't know how Apple have dealt with the instability between LLVM releases of bitcode, but there's certainly plenty of potentially shortcomings if you want to compile for a different architecture.

tinus_hn 6y ago

Apple is not Microsoft, if you don’t maintain your software you’re left behind.

qppo 6y ago
It's not a problem for devs so much as users. If I'm not maintaining my software it's probably because I can't afford it, but the people that use it still want it installed.

Wowfunhappy 6y ago

I agree with the sentiment, but I feel as though 75% of the unmaintained stuff already got killed in Catalina.