7 ms·

Apple is removing Rosetta from Macs during updates in certain countries

93 points by Gys 6y ago

simonh 6y ago
It looks like this is from pulling the strings from the binaries, there have not been any announcements and Rosetta hasn't actually been removed from anyone's Macs at this stage. Microsoft faced legal threats from Intel over x86 emulation in Windows 10 ARM so this may be related to action, or possible action from Intel, or well, who knows? If there was actual legal action we'd probably know about it, but not if Apple had just received a threatening letter. It's worrying but not a real issue for now.
- ginko 6y ago
  Yeah, my guess is they introduced the mechanism to disable it in some regions but aren't using it so far.
  - soganess 6y ago
    What region has stronger x86 licensing issues than the US? I'm not sure where else this would make sense.
- teekert 6y ago
  If this is from Intel, many of us are in the biggest vendor lock-in ever, we need to get off asap.
  - dmw_ng 6y ago
    Emulation has been a patent minefield going back 20+ years, there is a fairly good chance it's not due to Intel
thih9 6y ago
> Apple is removing Rosetta from Macs during updates in certain countries in Mac 11.3 beta 3. In what countries? Did anyone see that happening on their machine? Or perhaps found details on how these strings are being used?
ytch 6y ago
IIRC, Sony has lawsuit after remove boot to Linux in PS3. Is it possible to file a lawsuit against Apple if consumer buy a product for Rosetta, but it is removed?
- thatguy0900 6y ago
  Well, considering that all anyone got out of that lawsuit was 60$, I'm honestly not sure it matters if you can sue them or not. Unless you are a class action lawyer, at least.
_-___________-_ 6y ago
They may be in negotiations with some patent holder or similar, and just preparing for the possibility that they have to. Adding the strings is a few steps removed from actually removing Rosetta, so the title is misleading.
- nottorp 6y ago
  However it halves the utility of M1 Macs for the next 3-4 years. It’s going to cost some sales to techies.
  - neilalexander 6y ago
    It hasn't halved anything yet as it hasn't happened.
  - _-___________-_ 6y ago
    No, if it happens it might reduce the utility of M1 Macs (or more likely hasten the release of ports), but right now it's just some strings.
    - techdragon 6y ago
      “If I pull this trigger—” ... let’s not play a semantic game. The simple truth is that a portion (likely a very small portion) of the market for these devices will view this as too much additional risk. In addition to the numerous other than normal first generation new hardware risks, Apple’s ongoing public issues with software quality, concerns about longer term control over their hardware/computing devices... and many other risks both perceived and actual... these potential customers have decided that for their individual concerns the math didn’t add up. This is a concern, albeit a minor one at present because as you correctly said it’s just the strings... but for some that’s enough.
      - ViViDboarder 6y ago
        I mean, if this is due to some patent threat from Intel, then the company we should be wary of is them. Apple gains nothing by “pulling the trigger”.
andyjohnson0 6y ago
For those, like me, who are unfamiliar with Rosetta: its a dynamic binary instruction converter that allows applications to run on different hardware architectures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software)
SavageBeast 6y ago
Sipping my coffee this morning and planning to hit the Buy Button on a new M1 Mac Mini while I ponder how much RAM I really need ... and I just happen to read this. I know its not actually removed but the fact they even made any provision to do it ... you don't write code for absurd things you know are never going to happen. Not like I really needed a new machine anyhow I guess. Back to waiting for the things I use to get ported over I suppose. This is why we can't have Nice Things.
- Hnrobert42 6y ago
  Wow. Based on a tweet, you estimated the likelihood of Apple disabling Rosetta in your region as high enough that the potential value of harm outweighs the benefits of a computer you had already decided to buy?
  - devoutsalsa 6y ago
    I’d wait to buy a computer that might stop supporting software I wanted to use.
  - SavageBeast 6y ago
    Not exactly based on a tweet but absolutely based on the output of strings on the update itself. If I was an app developer running XCode as my main tool I'd feel differently but thats not the case for me. I cant justify spending $900 + tax + shipping + Apple Care to end up with a problem I can't readily solve and thats the real issue. For my needs, if it cant run Intel based binaries then its about as useful as a brick. Maybe they never do such a thing ... but if they do Im sitting on what amounts an expensive brick and not a damn thing I can do about it. By the time All The Things are ported to native M1 there will be an M2 for the same price as my old M1 that I never got any utility out of. The Linux box it would replace runs fine for its purpose (20.04 LTS isn't too bad). Its only crime is that it doesn't fit in the otherwise Apple ecosystem I'm running with.
- rvz 6y ago
  > Back to waiting for the things I use to get ported over I suppose. This is why we can't have Nice Things. Exactly. Like I said before [0][1] I'm always interested in what Apple doesn't tell us when it comes to their new products like the M1 Macs, Apple Watches, AirPods, etc. That's why it is better to wait for the hardware issues to be more stable and the software ecosystem to catch up and to just ignore the Apple early adopter hype trains. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26230801 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26230801 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26159495 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26159495
TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
Apple has added strings in case they need to. Title is misleading.
- traveler01 6y ago
  It may happen. A company will not write code unless they think it's gonna be needed.
  - SavageBeast 6y ago
    Agreed! Any code you write and ship increases potential bug footprint and for that reason less code is better. Even a lower testing footprint. Code never written cant malfunction on a customer device. The fact they shipped something that appears to at least contain the messages indicating Rosetta has been removed seems to indicate theres code in there to do exactly that. At best it's a negotiation tactic of saying "we already have code in the wild to remove the software should we be unable to arrive at a deal" - a kind of BATNA for Apple. At worst its there to do exactly what it seems.
michelb 6y ago
Except they are not (at this point). This is a message in a beta, that has appeared in december 2020 as well. Rosetta 2 has to be removed at some point, just like Rosetta 1 was.
- kaszanka 6y ago
  Yes, but the only reason for this removal to be regionalised like the strings suggest is stupid crap like software patents.
  - thih9 6y ago
    > the only reason for this removal (...) I'm not sure about that. For all we know this might be for an upcoming MacOS 11.99 that launches in 10 years when everything runs natively. It would be useful to know when these strings are actually being used, everything else seems speculation.
    - majewsky 6y ago
      Why would Apple be adding strings for such a change now?
      - thih9 6y ago
        I guess we could come up with a number of reasons; some unlikely, some very scary. My point was different, i.e. that nobody knows for sure yet.
    - kaszanka 6y ago
      I meant that that's the only reason for the strings to say "Rosetta is no longer available in this region".
      - thih9 6y ago
        True; thanks for explaining. Still, someone else [1] already suggested export restrictions. I guess we’ll see. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26331603 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26331603
laurent92 6y ago
What is Rosetta?
- SavageBeast 6y ago
  It's the emulation layer running on M1 equipped Macs and it allows the M1 chip architecture to run apps complied for the Intel chip architecture. Removing it would render new M1 Macs unable to run older applications - and even brand new ones that are not specifically ported over to the M1 instruction set.
- benlumen 6y ago
  It's Intel chip emulation. Apple ditched Intel chips because it can emulate their instruction set with software instead. Intel losing market share and increasingly desperate - legal action not unthinkable.
__warlord__ 6y ago
Well, no updates for a while. Hopefully Apple doesn't pull a Microsoft and decide to update my machine while I sleep. I hope they don't pull this off because my 2 week window to return my machine is gone and without Rosetta 2 my mac is just a brick. Question. Is it possible to download Rosetta 2 from somewhere else that is not Apple servers?
- g_p 6y ago
  I assume Rosetta 2 is downloaded as a .pkg installer on first use. Perhaps someone can capture the URL from network logs on a clean install. There might also be a way to find the files from the filesystem, if there is an "installer receipt" that lists what files were included in it. Hopefully someone is able to look into this, as it probably isn't too difficult to do as an insurance policy.

93 points by Gys 6y ago

It looks like this is from pulling the strings from the binaries, there have not been any announcements and Rosetta hasn't actually been removed from anyone's Macs at this stage. Microsoft faced legal threats from Intel over x86 emulation in Windows 10 ARM so this may be related to action, or possible action from Intel, or well, who knows? If there was actual legal action we'd probably know about it, but not if Apple had just received a threatening letter. It's worrying but not a real issue for now.

ginko 6y ago
Yeah, my guess is they introduced the mechanism to disable it in some regions but aren't using it so far.
- soganess 6y ago
  What region has stronger x86 licensing issues than the US? I'm not sure where else this would make sense.
teekert 6y ago
If this is from Intel, many of us are in the biggest vendor lock-in ever, we need to get off asap.
- dmw_ng 6y ago
  Emulation has been a patent minefield going back 20+ years, there is a fairly good chance it's not due to Intel

thih9 6y ago

> Apple is removing Rosetta from Macs during updates in certain countries in Mac 11.3 beta 3. In what countries? Did anyone see that happening on their machine? Or perhaps found details on how these strings are being used?

ytch 6y ago

IIRC, Sony has lawsuit after remove boot to Linux in PS3. Is it possible to file a lawsuit against Apple if consumer buy a product for Rosetta, but it is removed?

thatguy0900 6y ago
Well, considering that all anyone got out of that lawsuit was 60$, I'm honestly not sure it matters if you can sue them or not. Unless you are a class action lawyer, at least.

_-___________-_ 6y ago

They may be in negotiations with some patent holder or similar, and just preparing for the possibility that they have to. Adding the strings is a few steps removed from actually removing Rosetta, so the title is misleading.

nottorp 6y ago
However it halves the utility of M1 Macs for the next 3-4 years. It’s going to cost some sales to techies.
- neilalexander 6y ago
  It hasn't halved anything yet as it hasn't happened.
- _-___________-_ 6y ago
  No, if it happens it might reduce the utility of M1 Macs (or more likely hasten the release of ports), but right now it's just some strings.
  - techdragon 6y ago
    “If I pull this trigger—” ... let’s not play a semantic game. The simple truth is that a portion (likely a very small portion) of the market for these devices will view this as too much additional risk. In addition to the numerous other than normal first generation new hardware risks, Apple’s ongoing public issues with software quality, concerns about longer term control over their hardware/computing devices... and many other risks both perceived and actual... these potential customers have decided that for their individual concerns the math didn’t add up. This is a concern, albeit a minor one at present because as you correctly said it’s just the strings... but for some that’s enough.
    - ViViDboarder 6y ago
      I mean, if this is due to some patent threat from Intel, then the company we should be wary of is them. Apple gains nothing by “pulling the trigger”.

andyjohnson0 6y ago

For those, like me, who are unfamiliar with Rosetta: its a dynamic binary instruction converter that allows applications to run on different hardware architectures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software)

SavageBeast 6y ago

Sipping my coffee this morning and planning to hit the Buy Button on a new M1 Mac Mini while I ponder how much RAM I really need ... and I just happen to read this. I know its not actually removed but the fact they even made any provision to do it ... you don't write code for absurd things you know are never going to happen. Not like I really needed a new machine anyhow I guess. Back to waiting for the things I use to get ported over I suppose. This is why we can't have Nice Things.

Hnrobert42 6y ago
Wow. Based on a tweet, you estimated the likelihood of Apple disabling Rosetta in your region as high enough that the potential value of harm outweighs the benefits of a computer you had already decided to buy?
- devoutsalsa 6y ago
  I’d wait to buy a computer that might stop supporting software I wanted to use.
- SavageBeast 6y ago
  Not exactly based on a tweet but absolutely based on the output of strings on the update itself. If I was an app developer running XCode as my main tool I'd feel differently but thats not the case for me. I cant justify spending $900 + tax + shipping + Apple Care to end up with a problem I can't readily solve and thats the real issue. For my needs, if it cant run Intel based binaries then its about as useful as a brick. Maybe they never do such a thing ... but if they do Im sitting on what amounts an expensive brick and not a damn thing I can do about it. By the time All The Things are ported to native M1 there will be an M2 for the same price as my old M1 that I never got any utility out of. The Linux box it would replace runs fine for its purpose (20.04 LTS isn't too bad). Its only crime is that it doesn't fit in the otherwise Apple ecosystem I'm running with.
rvz 6y ago
> Back to waiting for the things I use to get ported over I suppose. This is why we can't have Nice Things. Exactly. Like I said before [0][1] I'm always interested in what Apple doesn't tell us when it comes to their new products like the M1 Macs, Apple Watches, AirPods, etc. That's why it is better to wait for the hardware issues to be more stable and the software ecosystem to catch up and to just ignore the Apple early adopter hype trains. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26230801 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26230801 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26159495 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26159495

TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago

Apple has added strings in case they need to. Title is misleading.

traveler01 6y ago
It may happen. A company will not write code unless they think it's gonna be needed.
- SavageBeast 6y ago
  Agreed! Any code you write and ship increases potential bug footprint and for that reason less code is better. Even a lower testing footprint. Code never written cant malfunction on a customer device. The fact they shipped something that appears to at least contain the messages indicating Rosetta has been removed seems to indicate theres code in there to do exactly that. At best it's a negotiation tactic of saying "we already have code in the wild to remove the software should we be unable to arrive at a deal" - a kind of BATNA for Apple. At worst its there to do exactly what it seems.

michelb 6y ago

Except they are not (at this point). This is a message in a beta, that has appeared in december 2020 as well. Rosetta 2 has to be removed at some point, just like Rosetta 1 was.

kaszanka 6y ago
Yes, but the only reason for this removal to be regionalised like the strings suggest is stupid crap like software patents.
- thih9 6y ago
  > the only reason for this removal (...) I'm not sure about that. For all we know this might be for an upcoming MacOS 11.99 that launches in 10 years when everything runs natively. It would be useful to know when these strings are actually being used, everything else seems speculation.
  - majewsky 6y ago
    Why would Apple be adding strings for such a change now?
    - thih9 6y ago
      I guess we could come up with a number of reasons; some unlikely, some very scary. My point was different, i.e. that nobody knows for sure yet.
  - kaszanka 6y ago
    I meant that that's the only reason for the strings to say "Rosetta is no longer available in this region".
    - thih9 6y ago
      True; thanks for explaining. Still, someone else [1] already suggested export restrictions. I guess we’ll see. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26331603 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26331603

laurent92 6y ago

What is Rosetta?

SavageBeast 6y ago
It's the emulation layer running on M1 equipped Macs and it allows the M1 chip architecture to run apps complied for the Intel chip architecture. Removing it would render new M1 Macs unable to run older applications - and even brand new ones that are not specifically ported over to the M1 instruction set.
benlumen 6y ago
It's Intel chip emulation. Apple ditched Intel chips because it can emulate their instruction set with software instead. Intel losing market share and increasingly desperate - legal action not unthinkable.

__warlord__ 6y ago

Well, no updates for a while. Hopefully Apple doesn't pull a Microsoft and decide to update my machine while I sleep. I hope they don't pull this off because my 2 week window to return my machine is gone and without Rosetta 2 my mac is just a brick. Question. Is it possible to download Rosetta 2 from somewhere else that is not Apple servers?

g_p 6y ago
I assume Rosetta 2 is downloaded as a .pkg installer on first use. Perhaps someone can capture the URL from network logs on a clean install. There might also be a way to find the files from the filesystem, if there is an "installer receipt" that lists what files were included in it. Hopefully someone is able to look into this, as it probably isn't too difficult to do as an insurance policy.