Originally Posted by Aquatic
Was there a valid reason not to include Rosetta? I wonder if some enterprising Mac hacker will eventually port it over.
Presumably, Apple could include emulators that allowed users to continue to use legacy software that dates all the way back to the original 128 K Mac. Any decision to drop support for any version of the OS will leave some elements of the installed base high and dry. In my case, two mission critical applications prevent me from going totally to Lion. For one, the developer dropped support for the Mac with MacOS 9. For the other, the developer dropped support for the Mac prior to the Intel transition. In both cases, the developer continues to develop for Windows. I can't just abandon the applications because it would mean abandoning files that date back to 1989. But, I digress...
Apple began the Intel transition in 2006--two computer lifetimes ago. Does this constitute a mandate to drop Rosetta? Of course not. However, Apple under Steve Jobs II is about the future, not the past. New technologies are adopted, old ones abandoned, and Apple makes money faster than the Government can print it.
I may love my iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro. I may wish that Apple continues to support the technologies that enable software whose developers long ago abandoned them. However, the bottomline is the bottomline. The bottomline is that Apple is following a strategy that is now projected to carry it past ExxonMobil as the World's highest capitalized company.
Think of the alternative. IBM lost its lead in Intel-based PCs partially because it insisted on continued support for the Intel 286 processor. If you run Windows, then you may continue to run commandline MS-DOS applications. Microsoft now fades in Apple's rearview mirror. However, memories of slavery to the the past are still fresh in the memory of Apple. The thing that brought Apple to its knees in the 1990s was its insistence that System 8 [Copland] be 100% compatible with System 7 while also supporting all of the marvelous new technology that Apple intended to incorporate into the new OS.
Engineering is about design choices. None comes without a price. What we have seen is that we may abandon the past. However, the risk is that we may alienate the installed base. The alternative is to do everything that we can to support the installed base. The risk is that we are passed by competitors who are not encumbered by legacy support.
Is there a reason that Rosetta was removed from Lion? Yes, the bottomline.