Dropping Rosetta is premature. Logic 8 for example needs Rosetta for the installer, even though it's a Universal Binary app. Quicken 2007 still hasn't been upgraded and my scanner software needs Rosetta.
This smells like Apple's "Vista" moment.
Logic 8 ? Released in 2007. Logic 9 released in mid-2009 have a PPC installer?
Quicken 2007 ?*Has since been replaced by Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010. The Quicken site does recommend that you use that version to track investment buys and sells, export to TurboTax, or to pay bills, but that?s Inuit?s fault, not Apple?s.
Scanner ? The last time I needed a scanner it was connected via a parallel cable and I was testing out a v.92 modem while reducing a potential blowout before my prom date with Sally in case it went well.
I really don?t see this as being a ?Vista moment.? I?d say this will be less of an issue to users than the transition of Vista to 7, but that?s just from the shear number of Windows users and the lack of control of the HW in play.
My group develops cutting edge (server side) enterprise java applications. I could not do this nearly as efficiently without a Mac. I could not do this at all without Java on my Mac. My organization has a good dozen developers running $3,000 Macs because they are the perfect platform to for this high end enterprise development. 5 years ago, all those developers were running Solaris boxes. BECAUSE Apple's Java support has improved so much over the years, we were able to switch.
Well, they did for 10.6. IMO QTX should have never seen the light of day until it was a suitable replacement for QT7 and they've given no indication that it will be.
I am sure we?ve been over this a few times. You appear to be operating under the premise that QTX is suppose to be a replacement for all the things that QT7 can do. I think we can say without a shadow of a doubt that Apple redesigned QTX to not be what QT7 was. I?m surprised it got any trimming capabilities at all.
Personally, the one feature I want QTX to have is the ability to remember the placement of an opened file, like in DVD player or Movist (though Movist only remembers the latest file played).
Is it just me, or do those new GUI controls (buttons, sliders, etc.) look cartoony and cheap?
It reminds me of those cheap Linux UI themes that tried to duplicate the Aqua look without copying it pixel for pixel.
You can't do better than Aqua. If they want to replace Aqua they're going to have to come up with something completely new and equally as refined. Just tweaking Aqua for sake of tweaking it will always look bad.
Logic 8 — Released in 2007. Logic 9 released in mid-2009 have a PPC installer?
Logic Studio 8 requires Rosetta to install. I don't know why, but I found this out when I got my new MBP and had to reinstall it. Its a $500 piece of software, not something you upgrade lightly.
Quote:
Quicken 2007 —*Has since been replaced by Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010. The Quicken site does recommend that you use that version to track investment buys and sells, export to TurboTax, or to pay bills, but that’s Inuit’s fault, not Apple’s.
I'm sure you're aware that Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010 don't exist for the Mac. There is Quicken Essentials, which is a baby version of Quicken and most people hate it. But yes, you're right that it's Intuit's doing, not Apple's.
Quote:
Scanner — The last time I needed a scanner it was connected via a parallel cable and I was testing out a v.92 modem while reducing a potential blowout before my prom date with Sally in case it went well.
That's great for you - my wife is a journalist and often scans magazines she has done editorials or writing for. We could get a new scanner, but that's hardly the point.
Quote:
I really don’t see this as being a “Vista moment.” I’d say this will be less of an issue to users than the transition of Vista to 7, but that’s just from the shear number of Windows users and the lack of control of the HW in play.
I'm honestly not sure - many people who use Macs are professionals who do more with their machines than pose in Starbucks, or ridicule people on forums like this for being worried. Professionals tend to have older gear, because they actually use it, rather than just 'have' it.
I am sure we’ve been over this a few times. You appear to be operating under the premise that QTX is suppose to be a replacement for all the things that QT7 can do. I think we can say without a shadow of a doubt that Apple redesigned QTX to not be what QT7 was. I’m surprised it got any trimming capabilities at all.
Surely having two apps called Quicktime for different tasks is not the solution. This has been done with iMovie and it's not a good setup because you end up jumping between very similar apps and it's annoying having the defaults open files in the wrong one.
QT Pro has things that aren't useful too like masking and even filters. Useful features include scaling, cropping, audio replacement, marking in/out points, cutting/pasting, trimming to selection, frame numbering/timecodes, import/export image sequences and export to multiple formats including pictures (not PICTs though). I think those can and should go in QTX.
I'm sure you're aware that Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010 don't exist for the Mac. There is Quicken Essentials, which is a baby version of Quicken and most people hate it. But yes, you're right that it's Intuit's doing, not Apple?s.
Yeah, I wasn?t aware of that. My query was a genuine query. It?s been since 2007 and Mac OS X has been steadily increasing in sales since then so I would imagine that Inuit has been working on a new Mac version for some time and that this Lion release will be the push they finally need to get it out the door in 2011. For your sake I hope that?s the case.
Quote:
That's great for you - my wife is a journalist and often scans magazines she has done editorials or writing for. We could get a new scanner, but that's hardly the point.
I know there are plenty of uses for scanning images these days. Faxing papers, too. Anytime I allude to masturbation I am attempting to be comical.
Still, I?d bet that so few would be hindered by the lack of scanner support to make this a Vista moment. MS also had a "64-bit moment" of their OS which simply didn?t affect Macs in a major way even though some surely were affected.
Logic 8 ? Released in 2007. Logic 9 released in mid-2009 have a PPC installer?
Scanner ? The last time I needed a scanner it was connected via a parallel cable and I was testing out a v.92 modem while reducing a potential blowout before my prom date with Sally in case it went well.
Surely having two apps called Quicktime for different tasks is not the solution. This has been done with iMovie and it's not a good setup because you end up jumping between very similar apps and it's annoying having the defaults open files in the wrong one.
QT Pro has things that aren't useful too like masking and even filters. Useful features include scaling, cropping, audio replacement, marking in/out points, cutting/pasting, trimming to selection, frame numbering/timecodes, import/export image sequences and export to multiple formats including pictures (not PICTs though). I think those can and should go in QTX.
I?m not arguing that as our desire for more Pro functionality in QuickTime X is clear, but I do think we need to look at it from Apple?s perspective. I think they have no intention of making it feel Pro in any way, shape or form, even if it hidden features.
This does give some savvy devs a chance to make an app to sell on the Mac App Store. We both have a pretty good idea what would make a simple and powerful quick editor, but I couldn?t code myself out of a_paper_bag.com if ?10' people to help me.
As for iMovie I don?t think Apple had any intention of re-releasing that previous version until too many people complained about the excessive change with some missing features. It?s a tool designed for editing so there are some differences. I think QT& being including as a separate install probably suffered a similar fate after developer/tester complaints of SL.
The last PPC Mac was sold in Fall of 2006. By the time Lion actually comes out, those machines will be nearly 5 years old. Support for machines older than that is typically dropped by Apple in that timeframe. The CDs and possibly early C2Ds will also be dropped. Typical.
All of this is inevitable. We complain about it all the time. We want our machines to last forever, but they don't and they can't.
What all of this really shows is how nice it would be if Apple just implemented some kind of virtual operating system box to run previous versions of OSX when a machine originally supported it. It should be simple. Allow SL to run inside Lion to run Rosetta apps or anything else Lion no longer supports. It would work for Tiger or Leopard, too.
For you guys with scanners, there's VueScan. This has been around forever. It supports just about every scanner ever made. It's in 32 and 64 bits, has versions for Linux, Max OS and Windows, and is available for PPC, and Intel for Mac.
I'm not affiliated with them, but I can recommend it highly.
No Rosetta? There are still a good number of great PowerPC games I still like to play. Starcraft chief among them. With Starcraft II in the wild, I don't know how much motivation Blizzard would have to make a UB for the original Starcraft.
Damned, I agree 100% with you. And Diablo 2 works just fine too, I happen to have done a Necromancer a few weeks ago... I hope we still get a way to run those apps...
No you're not. You have two choices. The first is to not upgrade.
The second is to acquire another HDD, either internal, or external, depending on your computer, and installing SL on that as a start-up drive, and put your ppc programs there.
Front Row - I hope there is a better system-wide entertainment mode in development. Gosh knows, I loathe hitting Cmd-Escape and bringing up Front Row when I'm trying to hit Cmd-Tilde during a frantic work session, but there have been a few times when I'm not working and I want to use my Mac's huge screen as an entertainment center.
Java - Eliminating the special hooks in Mac OS X for Java is a VERY good thing. I know that it's going to hurt, but ultimately it's good for everyone. Java development needs to be driven by Oracle rather than Apple. And Apple benefits from better security by not having Java integrated at such a low level in the OS. Pain will ensue in this transition, but it's for the best.
Rosetta - I can see why they're dropping it; they could probably make PowerPC only apps continue to work, but the apps would be oblivious to all the new Lion functionality. That's probably worse to Apple than the development effort to get Rosetta working on Lion. Alas, I'll say goodbye to a lot of apps that I know won't be updated e.g. LineForm, old web browsers I use for testing, and most of the software than came with my printers. I understand the reasons, but this is the one that will hurt the most.
The last PPC Mac was sold in Fall of 2006. By the time Lion actually comes out, those machines will be nearly 5 years old. Support for machines older than that is typically dropped by Apple in that timeframe.
In all fairness, the complaints are from the apps that still only support PPC, not the Macs that support PPCs. While this does shorten the window for an acceptable timeframe I do think that any apps still not compiled to at least be Universal are not Apple’s fault or responsibility. Maybe those with PPC apps can look for alternatives or write the app makers, assuming the companies are still in business.
Quote:
The CDs and possibly early C2Ds will also be dropped. Typical.
From what I read Lion will not support any 32-bit "Yonah” C2D processors. This is completely expected. What I haven’t been able to get a clarification on is if Lion supports the Macs that were 64-bit architecture, but still had the 32-bit system memory addressing “Merom” processors. IIRC C2D wasn’t full on 64-bit until “Penryn”.
PS: It’s been fun. See you all in a month or two or three. Later!
Yep. I still use Quicken 2006 since I'm tired of paying Intuit for upgrades that never fix anything. I looked at some alternatives like MoneyDance, but, (heh), it's a Java app.
In all fairness, the complaints are from the apps that still only support PPC, not the Macs that support PPCs. While this does shorten the window for an acceptable timeframe I do think that any apps still not compiled to at least be Universal are not Apple?s fault or responsibility. Maybe those with PPC apps can look for alternatives or write the app makers, assuming the companies are still in business.
Huh! I just asked my PPC apps, and they're not complaining. I guess I've prepared them well for this day.
Comments
Dropping Rosetta is premature. Logic 8 for example needs Rosetta for the installer, even though it's a Universal Binary app. Quicken 2007 still hasn't been upgraded and my scanner software needs Rosetta.
This smells like Apple's "Vista" moment.
Logic 8 ? Released in 2007. Logic 9 released in mid-2009 have a PPC installer?
Quicken 2007 ?*Has since been replaced by Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010. The Quicken site does recommend that you use that version to track investment buys and sells, export to TurboTax, or to pay bills, but that?s Inuit?s fault, not Apple?s.
Scanner ? The last time I needed a scanner it was connected via a parallel cable and I was testing out a v.92 modem while reducing a potential blowout before my prom date with Sally in case it went well.
I really don?t see this as being a ?Vista moment.? I?d say this will be less of an issue to users than the transition of Vista to 7, but that?s just from the shear number of Windows users and the lack of control of the HW in play.
Java? Who cares.
WHOA! Easy their chief.
My group develops cutting edge (server side) enterprise java applications. I could not do this nearly as efficiently without a Mac. I could not do this at all without Java on my Mac. My organization has a good dozen developers running $3,000 Macs because they are the perfect platform to for this high end enterprise development. 5 years ago, all those developers were running Solaris boxes. BECAUSE Apple's Java support has improved so much over the years, we were able to switch.
There are tens of thousands of companies like us.
Who cares???
Well, they did for 10.6. IMO QTX should have never seen the light of day until it was a suitable replacement for QT7 and they've given no indication that it will be.
I am sure we?ve been over this a few times. You appear to be operating under the premise that QTX is suppose to be a replacement for all the things that QT7 can do. I think we can say without a shadow of a doubt that Apple redesigned QTX to not be what QT7 was. I?m surprised it got any trimming capabilities at all.
Personally, the one feature I want QTX to have is the ability to remember the placement of an opened file, like in DVD player or Movist (though Movist only remembers the latest file played).
It reminds me of those cheap Linux UI themes that tried to duplicate the Aqua look without copying it pixel for pixel.
You can't do better than Aqua. If they want to replace Aqua they're going to have to come up with something completely new and equally as refined. Just tweaking Aqua for sake of tweaking it will always look bad.
Logic 8 — Released in 2007. Logic 9 released in mid-2009 have a PPC installer?
Logic Studio 8 requires Rosetta to install. I don't know why, but I found this out when I got my new MBP and had to reinstall it. Its a $500 piece of software, not something you upgrade lightly.
Quicken 2007 —*Has since been replaced by Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010. The Quicken site does recommend that you use that version to track investment buys and sells, export to TurboTax, or to pay bills, but that’s Inuit’s fault, not Apple’s.
I'm sure you're aware that Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010 don't exist for the Mac. There is Quicken Essentials, which is a baby version of Quicken and most people hate it. But yes, you're right that it's Intuit's doing, not Apple's.
Scanner — The last time I needed a scanner it was connected via a parallel cable and I was testing out a v.92 modem while reducing a potential blowout before my prom date with Sally in case it went well.
That's great for you - my wife is a journalist and often scans magazines she has done editorials or writing for. We could get a new scanner, but that's hardly the point.
I really don’t see this as being a “Vista moment.” I’d say this will be less of an issue to users than the transition of Vista to 7, but that’s just from the shear number of Windows users and the lack of control of the HW in play.
I'm honestly not sure - many people who use Macs are professionals who do more with their machines than pose in Starbucks, or ridicule people on forums like this for being worried. Professionals tend to have older gear, because they actually use it, rather than just 'have' it.
I am sure we’ve been over this a few times. You appear to be operating under the premise that QTX is suppose to be a replacement for all the things that QT7 can do. I think we can say without a shadow of a doubt that Apple redesigned QTX to not be what QT7 was. I’m surprised it got any trimming capabilities at all.
Surely having two apps called Quicktime for different tasks is not the solution. This has been done with iMovie and it's not a good setup because you end up jumping between very similar apps and it's annoying having the defaults open files in the wrong one.
QT Pro has things that aren't useful too like masking and even filters. Useful features include scaling, cropping, audio replacement, marking in/out points, cutting/pasting, trimming to selection, frame numbering/timecodes, import/export image sequences and export to multiple formats including pictures (not PICTs though). I think those can and should go in QTX.
My Macbook is connected to my old -school TV via S-video, and to my Harman Kardon receiver via optical audio ... I watch all my media this way.
Sad to see it go away because Apple want's another $100 (Apple TV) for this functionality.
I'm sure you're aware that Quicken 2008, 2009 and 2010 don't exist for the Mac. There is Quicken Essentials, which is a baby version of Quicken and most people hate it. But yes, you're right that it's Intuit's doing, not Apple?s.
Yeah, I wasn?t aware of that. My query was a genuine query. It?s been since 2007 and Mac OS X has been steadily increasing in sales since then so I would imagine that Inuit has been working on a new Mac version for some time and that this Lion release will be the push they finally need to get it out the door in 2011. For your sake I hope that?s the case.
That's great for you - my wife is a journalist and often scans magazines she has done editorials or writing for. We could get a new scanner, but that's hardly the point.
I know there are plenty of uses for scanning images these days. Faxing papers, too. Anytime I allude to masturbation I am attempting to be comical.
Still, I?d bet that so few would be hindered by the lack of scanner support to make this a Vista moment. MS also had a "64-bit moment" of their OS which simply didn?t affect Macs in a major way even though some surely were affected.
Logic 8 ? Released in 2007. Logic 9 released in mid-2009 have a PPC installer?
Scanner ? The last time I needed a scanner it was connected via a parallel cable and I was testing out a v.92 modem while reducing a potential blowout before my prom date with Sally in case it went well.
Damn that was funny.
Surely having two apps called Quicktime for different tasks is not the solution. This has been done with iMovie and it's not a good setup because you end up jumping between very similar apps and it's annoying having the defaults open files in the wrong one.
QT Pro has things that aren't useful too like masking and even filters. Useful features include scaling, cropping, audio replacement, marking in/out points, cutting/pasting, trimming to selection, frame numbering/timecodes, import/export image sequences and export to multiple formats including pictures (not PICTs though). I think those can and should go in QTX.
I?m not arguing that as our desire for more Pro functionality in QuickTime X is clear, but I do think we need to look at it from Apple?s perspective. I think they have no intention of making it feel Pro in any way, shape or form, even if it hidden features.
This does give some savvy devs a chance to make an app to sell on the Mac App Store. We both have a pretty good idea what would make a simple and powerful quick editor, but I couldn?t code myself out of a_paper_bag.com if ?10' people to help me.
As for iMovie I don?t think Apple had any intention of re-releasing that previous version until too many people complained about the excessive change with some missing features. It?s a tool designed for editing so there are some differences. I think QT& being including as a separate install probably suffered a similar fate after developer/tester complaints of SL.
I have a ton of apps that require Rosetta.
I am so screwed.
All of this is inevitable. We complain about it all the time. We want our machines to last forever, but they don't and they can't.
What all of this really shows is how nice it would be if Apple just implemented some kind of virtual operating system box to run previous versions of OSX when a machine originally supported it. It should be simple. Allow SL to run inside Lion to run Rosetta apps or anything else Lion no longer supports. It would work for Tiger or Leopard, too.
I'm not affiliated with them, but I can recommend it highly.
http://www.hamrick.com/
No Rosetta? There are still a good number of great PowerPC games I still like to play. Starcraft chief among them. With Starcraft II in the wild, I don't know how much motivation Blizzard would have to make a UB for the original Starcraft.
Damned, I agree 100% with you. And Diablo 2 works just fine too, I happen to have done a Necromancer a few weeks ago... I hope we still get a way to run those apps...
Yikes, no Rosetta ??!!
I have a ton of apps that require Rosetta.
I am so screwed.
No you're not. You have two choices. The first is to not upgrade.
The second is to acquire another HDD, either internal, or external, depending on your computer, and installing SL on that as a start-up drive, and put your ppc programs there.
Annoying, but not impossible.
Java - Eliminating the special hooks in Mac OS X for Java is a VERY good thing. I know that it's going to hurt, but ultimately it's good for everyone. Java development needs to be driven by Oracle rather than Apple. And Apple benefits from better security by not having Java integrated at such a low level in the OS. Pain will ensue in this transition, but it's for the best.
Rosetta - I can see why they're dropping it; they could probably make PowerPC only apps continue to work, but the apps would be oblivious to all the new Lion functionality. That's probably worse to Apple than the development effort to get Rosetta working on Lion. Alas, I'll say goodbye to a lot of apps that I know won't be updated e.g. LineForm, old web browsers I use for testing, and most of the software than came with my printers. I understand the reasons, but this is the one that will hurt the most.
The last PPC Mac was sold in Fall of 2006. By the time Lion actually comes out, those machines will be nearly 5 years old. Support for machines older than that is typically dropped by Apple in that timeframe.
In all fairness, the complaints are from the apps that still only support PPC, not the Macs that support PPCs. While this does shorten the window for an acceptable timeframe I do think that any apps still not compiled to at least be Universal are not Apple’s fault or responsibility. Maybe those with PPC apps can look for alternatives or write the app makers, assuming the companies are still in business.
The CDs and possibly early C2Ds will also be dropped. Typical.
From what I read Lion will not support any 32-bit "Yonah” C2D processors. This is completely expected. What I haven’t been able to get a clarification on is if Lion supports the Macs that were 64-bit architecture, but still had the 32-bit system memory addressing “Merom” processors. IIRC C2D wasn’t full on 64-bit until “Penryn”.
PS: It’s been fun. See you all in a month or two or three. Later!
Uh oh, I seem to remember Quicktime 7 requesting that Rosetta be installed before running.
You remember incorrectly.
QuickTime 7 installation/usage definitely doesn't depend on Rosetta. [edit: as mentioned by someone else]
In all fairness, the complaints are from the apps that still only support PPC, not the Macs that support PPCs. While this does shorten the window for an acceptable timeframe I do think that any apps still not compiled to at least be Universal are not Apple?s fault or responsibility. Maybe those with PPC apps can look for alternatives or write the app makers, assuming the companies are still in business.
Huh! I just asked my PPC apps, and they're not complaining. I guess I've prepared them well for this day.