Don't upgrade then. There is nothing forcing anyone to upgrade, so why upgrade if it'll lock you out of your software?
Apple probably could offer Rosetta, but I'm guessing that there is a cost attached to keeping Rosetta up to date and compatible. Why should Apple be obligated to maintain it, when upgrading to the latest OSX is an option for the user? (Eg - you don't have to upgrade).
Apple has millions of loyal users who are getting badly inconvenienced or left out in the cold by their fixation on "download only" for Lion. Apple now has grown to the point where they no longer give a damn about loyalty to their users. There was a time when Apple needed its fans and listened to their concerns. That Apple is dead and with the new Apple it's "my way or the highway."
First they turn quicktime into a joke now they want to take away Rosetta.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charley2
Just erase your hard drive and install snow leopard from your old computer's install discs
Exactly. But for new hardware released after the launch of Lion? Won't be possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by graubereich
I heard Apple perhapss allows bundeling Rosetta with installers of some Apps.
Perhaps then someone can hack it out?
What, so like Cider? Hideous. Disgusting. And for developers too lazy to actually port their code. The amount of work required to bundle Rosetta with old applications would be more than actually fixing the application with Intel code.
Don't upgrade then. There is nothing forcing anyone to upgrade, so why upgrade if it'll lock you out of your software?
Of course we are forced to upgrade. It is called evolution. Software and internet are not stationary, so we just don't have the luxury to not upgrade. The solution at this point is to keep an old machine around for the more or less frequent use of old software.
Because its not just Rosetta. Rosetta is just a translator for code. Apple would have to compile and test a PowerPC version of ALL the OS libraries. People think its just including some minor bit of code to make Rosetta work. Its not. Its Apple having to literally make two versions of its OS and test them. Most of that code will probably work just fine as its high level C, but some of it is assembly. And testing is where the real time sink is.
I know it is not just a translator. And regardless of how much complex Rosetta is, testing and cost to maintain it do not hold water as arguments. Apple could easily keep Rosetta and even make money from it by selling it from its store as an OS X add-on. People would groan and moan by being "forced" to buy it while it was free before, but those really in the need would end up buying it. But then this would mean that Apple tolerates software stagnation from the developers.
Apple just did not want to keep Rosetta alive. It is as simple as that. Besides, this is the only way Apple has to give some good lessons to lazy developers; like it did with Classic.
Hopefully some other solution will see the light of the day, like Sheepshaver which allows us to run OS 9 (and older) applications under OS X.
I don't think anyone has to worry about Java. OS X may not ship with Java anymore but Apple moved its Java stuff to someone else to handle it. They already handle it for other platforms.
Of course we are forced to upgrade. It is called evolution. Software and internet are not stationary, so we just don't have the luxury to not upgrade. The solution at this point is to keep an old machine around for the more or less frequent use of old software.
Apple got a lot of stick for bundling an old version of Java with SL, so they've done the right thing - thrown it back at the non Apple developers to sort out.
As for the Mac App Store, they make it perfectly clear about the user experience that is expected from developers.
Comments
Don't upgrade then. There is nothing forcing anyone to upgrade, so why upgrade if it'll lock you out of your software?
Apple probably could offer Rosetta, but I'm guessing that there is a cost attached to keeping Rosetta up to date and compatible. Why should Apple be obligated to maintain it, when upgrading to the latest OSX is an option for the user? (Eg - you don't have to upgrade).
Apple has millions of loyal users who are getting badly inconvenienced or left out in the cold by their fixation on "download only" for Lion. Apple now has grown to the point where they no longer give a damn about loyalty to their users. There was a time when Apple needed its fans and listened to their concerns. That Apple is dead and with the new Apple it's "my way or the highway."
If it requires Rosetta, this is impossible.
I heard Apple perhapss allows bundeling Rosetta with installers of some Apps.
Perhaps then someone can hack it out?
First they turn quicktime into a joke now they want to take away Rosetta.
Just erase your hard drive and install snow leopard from your old computer's install discs
Exactly. But for new hardware released after the launch of Lion? Won't be possible.
I heard Apple perhapss allows bundeling Rosetta with installers of some Apps.
Perhaps then someone can hack it out?
What, so like Cider? Hideous. Disgusting. And for developers too lazy to actually port their code. The amount of work required to bundle Rosetta with old applications would be more than actually fixing the application with Intel code.
Don't upgrade then. There is nothing forcing anyone to upgrade, so why upgrade if it'll lock you out of your software?
Of course we are forced to upgrade. It is called evolution. Software and internet are not stationary, so we just don't have the luxury to not upgrade. The solution at this point is to keep an old machine around for the more or less frequent use of old software.
Because its not just Rosetta. Rosetta is just a translator for code. Apple would have to compile and test a PowerPC version of ALL the OS libraries. People think its just including some minor bit of code to make Rosetta work. Its not. Its Apple having to literally make two versions of its OS and test them. Most of that code will probably work just fine as its high level C, but some of it is assembly. And testing is where the real time sink is.
I know it is not just a translator. And regardless of how much complex Rosetta is, testing and cost to maintain it do not hold water as arguments. Apple could easily keep Rosetta and even make money from it by selling it from its store as an OS X add-on. People would groan and moan by being "forced" to buy it while it was free before, but those really in the need would end up buying it. But then this would mean that Apple tolerates software stagnation from the developers.
Apple just did not want to keep Rosetta alive. It is as simple as that. Besides, this is the only way Apple has to give some good lessons to lazy developers; like it did with Classic.
Hopefully some other solution will see the light of the day, like Sheepshaver which allows us to run OS 9 (and older) applications under OS X.
I don't think anyone has to worry about Java. OS X may not ship with Java anymore but Apple moved its Java stuff to someone else to handle it. They already handle it for other platforms.
Have you heard of this?
This is exactly the shit that worries me.
Of course we are forced to upgrade. It is called evolution. Software and internet are not stationary, so we just don't have the luxury to not upgrade. The solution at this point is to keep an old machine around for the more or less frequent use of old software.
Have you heard of this?
This is exactly the shit that worries me.
Why?
Apple got a lot of stick for bundling an old version of Java with SL, so they've done the right thing - thrown it back at the non Apple developers to sort out.
As for the Mac App Store, they make it perfectly clear about the user experience that is expected from developers.