6 ms·
macOS 27 won’t be supporting Intel anymore
https://xcancel.com/Lina_Hoshino/status/2046112493320458649 https://xcancel.com/Lina_Hoshino/status/2046112493320458649
- HelloUsername 6mo agoRelated? "Apple will phase out Rosetta 2 in macOS 28" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45692116 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45692116 24-oct-2025 335 comments
- icf80 6mo agoexecutive decision
- kalleboo 6mo agoI hope they keep around the underpinnings for Rosetta 2 (without the macOS parts) just to keep supporting Intel virtualization for things like Docker. Heck then anyone who really needs to run some old Intel app can run a virtualized older version of macOS. But I wonder if they're eager to drop support for the Intel TSO memory model from their CPUs.
- zitterbewegung 6mo agoApple will keep Rosetta 2 support for Intel virtualization. See https://developer.apple.com/documentation/apple-silicon/about-the-rosetta-translation-environment/ https://developer.apple.com/documentation/apple-silicon/abou...
- andor 6mo agoThe page doesn’t actually say that explicitly
- mrpippy 6mo agoTrue, Apple's developer and support pages are not all fully up-to-date or explicit. From the macOS 26.4 release notes (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-notes/macos-26_4-release-notes https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-note...): > There will continue to be support for older, unmaintained gaming titles leveraging Rosetta along with software running Intel binaries in Linux VMs.
- kalleboo 6mo agoOh yeah, I had forgotten about the weird "games" exception. At least that means they'll keep parts of Rosetta 2 around in the code, but they could also end up doing some weird whitelisting for the specific games they want to support and not let anyone else keep using it.
- piperswe 6mo agoI suspect they're keeping the translator itself around, but not the x86_64 versions of system libraries
- mrpippy 6mo agoNo, those need to stay (at least the ones needed to run the targeted "old unmaintained games"). What can go is all the x86_64 slices of system binaries (i.e. bash, perl, etc etc)
- stetrain 6mo agoI read somewhere that the part that allows a virtual machine to use Rosetta inside the VM is sticking around. MacOS on ARM can't directly virtualize an Intel OS using Rosetta today using the native virtualization framework, you need something like qemu for that. But you can use an ARM linux VM with the Rosetta framework installed internally to run x86 containers, which is I think how docker desktop and similar alternatives are handling it.
- mrpippy 6mo agoCorrect, that is staying around. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-notes/macos-26_4-release-notes https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-note...: > There will continue to be support for older, unmaintained gaming titles leveraging Rosetta along with software running Intel binaries in Linux VMs.
- lxgr 6mo agoSame here. Would be very sad to lose Wine capabilities as well, and presumably these have minimal macOS dependencies.
- jeroenhd 6mo agoWine can run on aarch64 with FEX reasonably well already, no special instructions or hardware acceleration required. There's a bit of extra overhead, but that shouldn't be a problem for old games on modern hardware, they should run about as well.
- lxgr 6mo agoInteresting, do you know if performance is roughly comparable with Rosetta 2, i.e., are we talking about a few percent of overhead or something more dramatic? (For CPU-bound code; I understand that the overall effect will be smaller due to GPU code probably being executed host-side in native code etc.)
- jeroenhd 6mo agoFEX isn't done yet, but Valve's people seem to suggest an overhead between 10-20%. Not great for getting the most out of a CPU, but small enough to compensate say the difference between an M1 and an M5 chip.
- lxgr 6mo agoThat's really promising, I expected much worse. Thanks for highlighting!
- ralphc 6mo agoIf Intel virtualization works for Docker, why doesn't it work for things like VMWare or VirtualBox for Intel VM's?
- nerdjon 6mo agoThis seems less about why it won't be supporting Intel and more about why Rosetta 2 will be going away, which seems mostly related to cleaning up code that is no longer necessary once Intel is not supported.
- skywhopper 6mo agoBad headline. This tweet attempts to explain why Rosetta 2 will no longer work. Which is because the OS no longer supports the Intel platform. That does not explain why the OS does not support the Intel platform.
- Ygg2 6mo agoBecause Apple is the King of Deprecations. And they get away with it.
- stetrain 6mo ago> Because Apple is the King of Deprecations. Google might wear that particular crown: https://killedbygoogle.com https://killedbygoogle.com
- atroon 6mo agoApple is the King of Hardware Deprecations. Google is the King of Software Deprecations. You're both right.
- Ygg2 6mo agoThey are the Kings of Apple Ecosystem Deprecations - not just hardware. I'm comparing them to the x86 and the Windows ecosystem. Google is the God-King of Killing software.
- lxgr 6mo agoBut it does? > Rosetta 2 requires almost the entire OS to have Intel support. The implication here being that (almost) the entire OS having Intel support is not trivial.
- icedchai 6mo agoBecause it costs them money to maintain it, and they'll make more money when people upgrade to M series? In all seriousness, it's a little lame. Consider that the Intel Mac Pro (2019 model) was still selling in 2023! That's not that long ago, and those were their highest end machines in terms of memory capacity. The "new" Mac Pro has since been discontinued...
- kirb 6mo agoThe official statement from Apple (emailed to developers 10 days ago) is that macOS 27 is the “final release to support Rosetta”, so the title is a bit off. They also say: > Please note that Rosetta functionality for older, unmaintained gaming titles that rely on Intel-based frameworks will continue to be supported. I interpret that to mean just enough of Rosetta and Intel frameworks will continue to be around, at least for macOS 28. Not specified which ones, or whether it stays any longer than that. I’m pretty curious of what that will look like exactly, because there’s a fair amount of system frameworks/libraries needed to get to a bare minimum “hello world” AppKit app. Add on top any number of other frameworks that might be used by “older, unmaintained” games that Apple sees fit to keep supporting. Does this ensure OpenGL is kept on life support? Will they consider Wine important enough to support, perhaps even after they drop native Intel games?
- pram 6mo agoApple seems to slightly care about supporting Codeweavers/CrossOver from things I've seen, which indirectly makes Wine, Rosetta 2, and GPTK "important enough to support" since they're important features
- andrewmcwatters 6mo ago[dead]
- ieie3366 6mo agoI bet it must feel good for the macOS engineers to remove the intel support. Probably much easier to do development for the OS as well
- 404mm 6mo agoAs a consumer, I’d like to see the end of “universal” builds for various apps. It made sense for a while but downloading and installing ~60% larger bins just doesn’t make sense 6 years later.
- mghackerlady 6mo agoIf it's anything like the last time they dropped intel, I wouldn't be surprised if they make sure darwin still builds on x86. Going all arm all the time is good business, but it isn't like apple to not have some kind of fallback
- ryandrake 6mo agoThe developer's feelings should not play a role in whether or not to drop support for devices that actual customers bought and use.
- alin23 6mo agoWait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? I get it that macOS has to evolve, but that doesn't mean all apps have to drop Intel support at the same time. On hardware-level apps like my Lunar app I have plenty #if arch(arm64) because some features like reading the brightness nits or reading ambient light is different or completely missing based on the architecture. I need to test the UI differences based on what features are available. I don't see it viable to stay on macOS 26 for this, especially if we're going to see breaking changes again with the display and window server subsystem like we did with Tahoe. M5 support for Gamma table changes is still broken after so many months [0] [0] https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/819331#819331021 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/819331#819331021
- htk 6mo agoKeep an Intel Mac around?
- bombcar 6mo agoArguably if you're shipping new fat binary code today, you should already have an Intel Mac around to test, because there might be subtle differences between Intel-on-Rosetta2 and Intel-on-Intel.
- fg137 6mo agoIt works until that machine dies and you need to scramble for a solution (again).
- stetrain 6mo agoKeep a macOS 26 machine around for testing. All Intel Macs will be stuck on 26 as well, so testing under 26 is probably best anyway.
- rimliu 6mo agoSame way you test them now?
- ryukoposting 6mo ago
- tyingq 6mo agoI'm curious what options that leaves for docker. I assume the pattern of building/running linux/amd64 containers on MacOS is pretty widespread. Edit: "Apple says that it will continue to support older, unmaintained gaming titles with Rosetta along with software running Intel binaries in Linux VMs beyond macOS 27 . There could also be future security fixes." - https://www.macrumors.com/2026/02/16/macos-tahoe-26-4-rosetta-2-warnings/ https://www.macrumors.com/2026/02/16/macos-tahoe-26-4-rosett... No Apple citation shown for that, though seems plausible.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- akreal 6mo agoAFAIK all ways of running docker on MacOS rely on a amd64 virtual machine with Linux kernel in it.
- tyingq 6mo agodocker --platform linux/arm64 depends on amd64 ?
- mrpippy 6mo agoSee https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-notes/macos-26_4-release-notes https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-note...
- whatever1 6mo agoWhatever. We have public utility OS, all the hardware vendors should be forced to provide open-source working drivers after they stop supporting their hardware. If they are afraid of IP leak, well, they can continue support. My desktop I built in 2012 is still working running ubuntu, even after Intel & MS decided that it is EOL with the release of windows 11.
- rootsudo 6mo agoWow and darn I guess last support update to fully depreciate intel MacBooks. Used prices already are cratered. They are great heavily supported Linux machines though. They work out of the box gorgeously with numerous distros and being usbc is nice. For $100-200 for a mint condition model, it isn’t so bad.
- compounding_it 6mo ago>They are great heavily supported Linux machines though. Since the release of Touch Bar based Macs (which contain apple silicon) this has not been the case. The Macs that are well supported by linux and work very well were abandoned long time ago.
- bombcar 6mo agoHe explicitly said Intel Macs - which are great Linux machines if you can accept the performance. Would the M* be much better? Obviously, but that's not (yet) in the cards.
- opan 6mo agoTouch Bar predates Apple Silicon and most AS models do not have a Touch Bar.
- spectre3d 6mo agoThe T2 chip is Apple silicon, and marked the beginning of really locking down the OS running on a Mac (as opposed to iOS, which was always locked down that way, and Intel Macs which of course could run anything). It was the first mass market SoC hardware test of their new Mac chip design and it seems it was also to prep macOS for the M line. The level of control Apple gave it makes repair and refurbishing very difficult without Apple’s authorization. T2 Overview PDF https://www.apple.com/jp/mac/docs/Apple_T2_Security_Chip_Overview.pdf https://www.apple.com/jp/mac/docs/Apple_T2_Security_Chip_Ove...
- opan 6mo ago
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- nntwozz 6mo agoFocusing is about saying no. — Steve Jobs https://youtu.be/H8eP99neOVs https://youtu.be/H8eP99neOVs (WWDC '97) This is something Microsoft will never learn, it's not in their DNA.
- al_borland 6mo agoMaybe Microsoft will finally update the Minecraft launcher to support Apple Silicon. Last I looked they tried to close the bug report, someone reopened it, then there was a system migration and I lost track of it. It’s almost like they did the work to get the actual game running on Apple Silicon, but installed Rosetta in the process, then just forgot about the launcher. I always refused to install Rosetta on my Mac, so I could get a big warning if I was about to install something that wouldn’t work in the not too distant future.
- tonyedgecombe 6mo agoHopefully Sonos will finally get around to it as well.
- bombcar 6mo agoDo people even use the Microsoft launcher on Mac? Everyone I know (which may say more about me than the market) uses a third-party launcher.
- al_borland 6mo agoI use a 3rd party launcher only because the Microsoft one doesn’t support Apple Silicon. The 3rd party launchers seem to exist mostly for modding. I don’t care about this. I play very infrequently, usually just with my nephews at the point, so I would rather have the simplicity of the 1st party launcher vs trusting a 3rd party and having a bunch of extra bloat I’m never going to use. All of this is besides the point that Microsoft should have a functional launcher for a game they are charging people money for, that they claim supports Apple Silicon. If 3rd party launchers exist, it’s clearly not a technical issue that can’t be overcome. They just haven’t done it. That’s pretty pathetic considering how big Minecraft is.
- bombcar 6mo agoI've been using 3rd party so long I didn't even know the launcher wasn't a Java program itself; is it a compiled executable? Maybe I should download Minecraft directly ...
- jmclnx 6mo agoI am missing something ? If I read the link in xcancel.com correctly, it says what I would look at as "intel emulation" will be removed in the next release. So, it looks to me application vendors who depends upon this emulation was given proper notice of this removal. So I think you should complain to the vendors instead of Apple. Most times I tend to criticize Apple, but this time seems Apple just moving on to avoid "bloat" and "cruft" from being carried forward in future releases. OpenBSD does things like this all the time and they get praised for it, which I agree with. Apple did the same with this and some people are upset :)
- troad 6mo agoAnonymous mirror: https://xcancel.com/Lina_Hoshino/status/2046112493320458649 https://xcancel.com/Lina_Hoshino/status/2046112493320458649
- fennecfoxy 6mo agoBecause they've invested billions into making their own chips? And those chips have pretty damn good performance/power draw/cooling etc. I think the answer is pretty straightforward.
- angerman 6mo agoTime to share my little side project... https://hyper-linux.app https://hyper-linux.app which I hope will continue to be able to rely on the remnants of rosetta.
- thegagne 6mo agoThis looks great, and possibly useful, but I'm curious, what was the main problem you were trying to solve, or what does this enable for you?
- angerman 6mo agodocker is too heavy handed for me. And I’m a long term fan of wine. The primary usecase is Darwin -> Linux cross compilation. It does supposed xeyes and similar via XQuartz; I gave up trying to make xmms work though. That would have been some fun.
- tengbretson 6mo agoI just want Linux on my T2 mbp.
- jimrandomh 6mo agoThis sort of thing makes the lack of a downgrade process a real problem. If you rely on something that uses Rosetta, you aren't likely to find out until after you've upgraded, at which point it's too late, you're stuck with it and lose that app. Which means that if you _don't know_ whether you're relying on Rosetta (which most people won't), upgrading is a risky proposition, which people will want to avoid.