3 ms·

> But I think that's not nearly as important anymore I used Macs during Classic to OSX and PPC to Intel transitions but I'd argue it's actually way more import

> But I think that's not nearly as important anymore I used Macs during Classic to OSX and PPC to Intel transitions but I'd argue it's actually way more important this time. Back during previous transitions fully native apps were really the only option but now... Almost all modern actively developed software on Macs is just electron wrappers Only a few exceptions of actively developed cocoa apps come to mind, Sketch, Omni Group, etc. The other half of the Mac ecosystem is exist outside of electron apps or cocoa good citizens and that's old but essential power user applications the Adobe suite, 3d software, science software and audio software which all have extensive custom Intel code and all the plugin infrastructure runs on Intel. To bring After Effects, for example to ARM is going to be an insane amount of work and a lot of it is going to sit outside of Adobe's control because so much of the application relies on plugins which all have to be recompiled too. I feel Apple might have lost the plot here a bit and has convinced themselves that this functionality vacuum is going to be filled with catalyst iPad ports, reality is if the computer can't run these apps people require for their jobs then they'll just buy windows machines.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
Almost all modern actively developed software on Macs is just electron wrappers Which is exactly what Apple doesn't want to see prospering on its platform.
- whywhywhywhy 6y ago
  I'd agree 100% but the state of how janky and alien their own Catalyst ports feel don't give me much hope. If they want this platform to remain the world class computing experience they actually have to invest in it fully not just hope that some work can be skimmed off the top of their iPad investment. Where is the example of a best in class 2020 Mac desktop app? Because it certainly isn't News.app.
nextos 6y ago
I think also code using x86_64 vectorization (AVX, SSE) is going to be non-trivial to port. Same applies to JITs, which I guess are a lot less mature on ARM due to lack of users at the minute.
mpweiher 6y ago
> it's actually way more important this time. How so? All the old legacy apps that nobody wants to (or can) recompile were just jettisoned in the 64 bit transition, as TFA duly noted. "In retrospect, the move to 64-bit software may have been made not just for its own sake, but in contemplation of the ARM transition."
- whywhywhywhy 6y ago
  32 bit is going back a lot longer, although my machine which I haven't upgraded to Catalina still has a few 32bit applications kicking around on it including one that I was using in my professional work only 6 months ago. Plenty of 64 bit software exists that isn't being updated often or at all anymore.
  - mpweiher 6y ago
    I didn't say there was no 64 bit legacy software. I just don't see it as being a "bigger" problem, due to the cutting off of the 32 bit legacy.
scarface74 6y ago
Apple sold both 68K and PPC Macs in parallel for years giving time for companies to port their apps. There is no reason that they can’t do a dual processor strategy. Heck they shipped Apple // computers and Macs simultaneously for eight years.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago

Almost all modern actively developed software on Macs is just electron wrappers Which is exactly what Apple doesn't want to see prospering on its platform.

whywhywhywhy 6y ago
I'd agree 100% but the state of how janky and alien their own Catalyst ports feel don't give me much hope. If they want this platform to remain the world class computing experience they actually have to invest in it fully not just hope that some work can be skimmed off the top of their iPad investment. Where is the example of a best in class 2020 Mac desktop app? Because it certainly isn't News.app.

nextos 6y ago

I think also code using x86_64 vectorization (AVX, SSE) is going to be non-trivial to port. Same applies to JITs, which I guess are a lot less mature on ARM due to lack of users at the minute.

mpweiher 6y ago

> it's actually way more important this time. How so? All the old legacy apps that nobody wants to (or can) recompile were just jettisoned in the 64 bit transition, as TFA duly noted. "In retrospect, the move to 64-bit software may have been made not just for its own sake, but in contemplation of the ARM transition."

whywhywhywhy 6y ago
32 bit is going back a lot longer, although my machine which I haven't upgraded to Catalina still has a few 32bit applications kicking around on it including one that I was using in my professional work only 6 months ago. Plenty of 64 bit software exists that isn't being updated often or at all anymore.
- mpweiher 6y ago
  I didn't say there was no 64 bit legacy software. I just don't see it as being a "bigger" problem, due to the cutting off of the 32 bit legacy.

scarface74 6y ago

Apple sold both 68K and PPC Macs in parallel for years giving time for companies to port their apps. There is no reason that they can’t do a dual processor strategy. Heck they shipped Apple // computers and Macs simultaneously for eight years.