Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- This seems to basically only apply to full-fledged GUI apps and excludes e.g. games, so potentially stuff like Rosetta for CLI isn't going anywhere eitherby nasretdinov
- That means Steam will release a native Apple Silicon client circa 2028. Exciting!by pohl
- Phasing out Rosetta 2 seems like a reasonable move. Maintaining backward compatibility indefinitely adds complexity and technical debt. Apple has supported Intel-based systems for a long time, and this step aligns with their goal of keeping macOS streamlined for Apple Silicon.by kburman
- Seems premature. My scanner software, SnapScan, still regularly updated, requires Rosetta. Abbyy FineReaser, the best Mac OCR, requires Rosetta. Although they may be related, as the SnaScan software does OCR with the FineReader engine.by gumboshoes
- Well this kinda screws me over running docker on macos. Not all images I use have an arm version.by t_sawyer
- Ah, I guess it was wise for the original developer of Rosetta 2 to quit earlier this year. One of the people that I look up to.by markus_zhang
- They barely just released Containerization Framework[0] and the new container[1] tool, and they are already scheduling a kneecapping of this two years down the line.
Realistically, people are still going to be deploying on x64 platforms for a long time, and given that Apple's whole shtick was to serve "professionals", it's really a shame that they're dropping the ball on developers like this. Their new containerization stuff was the best workflow improvement for me in quite a while.
by luizfelberti - I'm guessing they don't want to maintain and build and test x86_64 versions of all the macos libraries like Appkit and UIKit (including large changes like liquid glass) when they are no longer shipping x86_64 macOS versions. Which is not entirely unreasonable as I'm sure it takes a lot of effort to keep the whole ui library stack working properly on multiple archs.
Perhaps that's what they're hinting about with the note about a "subset of Rosetta". So maybe there is hope that the core x86_64 binary translator will stick around for things like VM and emulation of generic (linux? wine?) binaries, but they don't want to maintain a whole x86_64 macOS userspace going forward.
Space savings from not shipping fat binaries for everything will probably also be not insignificant. Or make room for a new fat binary for a future "arm64v2" :)
by 0x0