Bancho answered your dilemma yesterday and it looks like you prefer to continue to whine about it as opposed to even acknowledge his fix. If you don't want to buy parallels server you can use virtualbox.
Quicken, for one. It's been pointed out many times that this is abandonware for the Mac, and nothing on the market currently can replace it. We use it for our company accounting. I also run an older version of FileMaker, which does fine in Rosetta. We use it for our company invoicing. So one is irreplaceable, and the other a costly upgrade.
I don't honestly know how many others, and I wasn't looking for an opportunity to find out.
I've got a similar situation. I have Filemaker Pro 7 (3 licenses running on 3 Intel Macs) which uses Rosetta to run. I use it for everything in the business. To upgrade (3) Filemaker Pro licenses is about $900 to "go Lion" with them.
I can attest for Acclivity (priorly MYOB) for MAC. We use it on all Macs and its Intel Mac supported.
Then there's Quicken 2007 for Mac - a PPC app. It has been updated for to Intel Mac, but it is pure junk and no one will buy it. Looked around for replacements for Quicken. Its a no-go right now. Offerings in the coming, but none print checks yet.
It is rumored Quicken is working with Apple on a "stripped-down" implementation of Rosetta for all the Quicken 2007 for Mac consumers (there's lots of them out there), but its still an if-and-when situation.
Could it be Rosetta breaks something in Lion? Or is it that Apple is just saying "to hell with our customers on PPC apps that have no way to upgrade them"? If that's the case, then the message of upgrade tough-love is really touch-luck when you CAN'T get the app in Intel form.
It is rumored Quicken is working with Apple on a "stripped-down" implementation of Rosetta for all the Quicken 2007 for Mac consumers (there's lots of them out there), but its still an if-and-when situation.
Could it be Rosetta breaks something in Lion? Or is it that Apple is just saying "to hell with our customers on PPC apps that have no way to upgrade them"? If that's the case, then the message of upgrade tough-love is really touch-luck when you CAN'T get the app in Intel form.
Apple is saying "to hell with laggardly developers who will drag the platform down through dated development practices." Many of these companies are stuck in the PC-first mentality of the 90s, when building a Mac app was treated as doing a favor for a niche audience. Today, the market has changed as Apple's adoption rate and market size have grown. With the demise of Rosetta, Apple is applying pressure to the development firms who can't be bothered to deliver a top-notch product for OSX. In the long-term, this will be good for users. Either companies, like Inuit, will build proper applications, or the market will respond to an opening and a strong competitor will emerge.
It seems crazy to me that Inuit would spend the resources to implement a one-off Rosetta layer, rather than just building a decent version of Quicken?nor can I see Apple supporting this. However, as a business owner who uses QuickBooks, I know that Intuit shows absolute disdain for its Mac base, and seems hell bent on delivering an inferior product at all costs. I only use Intuit's products because my accountant, like many, is QB-based.
Seems like a great addition to iWork would be a banking app that seamlessly imported Quicken files.
If there's one area that most Mac users seem to be in total agreement on, it's the woeful state of banking and bookkeeping software on the platform. Everyone seems to agree that Quicken has the feature set they want while being an absolutely abysmal Mac program, whereas various candidate replacements always seem to be shy a feature or two.
The longing for quality Mac banking/bookkeeping software seems acute enough, and widespread enough, to be a reasonable area of investment for Apple. I often read about this one failure as being a deal breaker, or forcing the otherwise Mac inclined to abandon the platform and/or run a PC for that one application.
The lack of response from Apple on this front seems a little puzzling. Given Intuit's utter disregard, I can't imagine they're unduly worried about offending them as a developer. Intuit's attitude towards the Mac seems very reminiscent of Quark's attitude toward everybody. What Apple needs is the banking equivalent of InDesign to come along and shake things up.
Not to worry, you're on topic. I think you're overlooking that, as far as we know, MobileMe syncing is going away for users who don't upgrade to Lion.
I don't know about you, but I used the Classic Environment for at least five years. When it finally went away, I didn't feel like the rug had been yanked out. This time IS different. We're being forced to choose between our PPC apps (which otherwise still work fine), or losing a service we've had for years. Neither seems necessary. The worst part of this problem is that it leaves us without either some mission-critical apps or services. We can't have both no matter what we do, except maybe spend a lot of money and time. An upgrade should not be a trip backwards, and we should not lose anything we've had if we choose not to upgrade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
In reality, they don't. They managed the 68k to PPC transition so seamlessly that few users even noticed. They did the same for Classic to OSX. They did it again for PPC to Intel. The Snow Leopard to Lion transition isn't as great in technological terms and yet they are forcing many users into a dilemma.
The point I'm making is that Apple is giving me a choice between two types of pain. If I don't upgrade to Lion I lose my syncing services. If I do upgrade, I lose my PPC apps. This is something new in my long experience with Apple, and very unwelcome.
Trouble is that the transition to Intel was 5.5 years ago now (wiki puts the start at Jan2006).
Apple have a good history of orphaning users so that the cutting edge (so to speak) stays a cutting edge without being blunted by continually having to offer support to historical platforms. PPC is historic and 5.5 years in technology is a lifetime.
So you can hardly fault Apple for doing what they've always done in the past.
I'm assuming that whatever solution you have running that requires Rosetta, was put in a long time before Jan 2006, so personally speaking, I think you've had full value for money if you have a bit of software running for 6+ years.
It is for me. I run too many PPC apps, some of which are not replaceable. A move to Lion would be extremely painful.
What's worse, Apple has notified MobileMe users that "iCloud is free for iOS 5 and OS X Lion users." What does that mean for MobileMe subscribers who don't migrate to Lion? Will we get cut off from the services we've used for years as MobileMe and .Mac? Apparently so, as the notice also says that our MobileMe subscriptions are automatically extended until the end of June 2012. After that it seems to be Lion or nothing.
That's like telling us we can shoot ourselves or cut our throats. Thanks for the choice, Apple!
I agree I think this is a huge downfall i dont know why apple could not include PPC into Lion. Im going to hold off for it right now. maybe down the road get it and make a partition for it. what a let down. first they cut off OSX to ppc but still made some stuff for ppc support. i think Apple should have waited for at least another update before toasting Rosetta.
I agree I think this is a huge downfall i dont know why apple could not include PPC into Lion. Im going to hold off for it right now. maybe down the road get it and make a partition for it. what a let down. first they cut off OSX to ppc but still made some stuff for ppc support. i think Apple should have waited for at least another update before toasting Rosetta.
Cmon, they've waited 5.5 years to cut it off! If software developers can't keep pace (not a particularly fast pace at that) why should Apple continue to support them?
And why should Apple wait? If a developer hasn't rolled out an update in 6 odd years (considering they probably had access to some developer tools before the Intel change), why should they have any update available in another 2 years?
Developers are simply putting off the day of reckoning and using the users and pawns.
Don't bitch at Apple that your application has been abandoned, moan at the developers of your application!
Don't bitch at Apple that your application has been abandoned, moan at the developers of your application!
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
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).
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
Freehand is also a popular example.
I hope there will be a way to install Freehand in Lion.
If there won't be a way thousands of Designers can't upgrade to Lion.
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
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.
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by graubereich
Freehand is also a popular example.
I hope there will be a way to install Freehand in Lion.
If there won't be a way thousands of Designers can't upgrade to Lion.
Including myself :-(
You are relying on software that was discontinued over 4 years ago. I know this is mean spirited to say this - but if you want Lion (and every other update after Lion), you will have to bin Freehand.
You are relying on software that was discontinued over 4 years ago. I know this is mean spirited to say this - but if you want Lion (and every other update after Lion), you will have to bin Freehand.
I hope there will be any Hack or Workaround bringing Freehand to Lion.
If theres no solution after 3-6 Months Lion is on the market i think you are right.
Incorrect. Only new hardware is rendered unbootable in older versions of the OS. All current hardware will run Snow Leopard even if Lion is preinstalled.
Just erase your hard drive and install snow leopard from your old computer's install discs
Comments
http://osxdaily.com/2010/05/05/run-m...th-virtualbox/
I guess if you want to stay totally legit you need a copy of SLS vs just SL.
Quicken, for one. It's been pointed out many times that this is abandonware for the Mac, and nothing on the market currently can replace it. We use it for our company accounting. I also run an older version of FileMaker, which does fine in Rosetta. We use it for our company invoicing. So one is irreplaceable, and the other a costly upgrade.
I don't honestly know how many others, and I wasn't looking for an opportunity to find out.
I've got a similar situation. I have Filemaker Pro 7 (3 licenses running on 3 Intel Macs) which uses Rosetta to run. I use it for everything in the business. To upgrade (3) Filemaker Pro licenses is about $900 to "go Lion" with them.
I can attest for Acclivity (priorly MYOB) for MAC. We use it on all Macs and its Intel Mac supported.
Then there's Quicken 2007 for Mac - a PPC app. It has been updated for to Intel Mac, but it is pure junk and no one will buy it. Looked around for replacements for Quicken. Its a no-go right now. Offerings in the coming, but none print checks yet.
It is rumored Quicken is working with Apple on a "stripped-down" implementation of Rosetta for all the Quicken 2007 for Mac consumers (there's lots of them out there), but its still an if-and-when situation.
Could it be Rosetta breaks something in Lion? Or is it that Apple is just saying "to hell with our customers on PPC apps that have no way to upgrade them"? If that's the case, then the message of upgrade tough-love is really touch-luck when you CAN'T get the app in Intel form.
Then there's Quicken 2007 for Mac - a PPC app...
It is rumored Quicken is working with Apple on a "stripped-down" implementation of Rosetta for all the Quicken 2007 for Mac consumers (there's lots of them out there), but its still an if-and-when situation.
Could it be Rosetta breaks something in Lion? Or is it that Apple is just saying "to hell with our customers on PPC apps that have no way to upgrade them"? If that's the case, then the message of upgrade tough-love is really touch-luck when you CAN'T get the app in Intel form.
Apple is saying "to hell with laggardly developers who will drag the platform down through dated development practices." Many of these companies are stuck in the PC-first mentality of the 90s, when building a Mac app was treated as doing a favor for a niche audience. Today, the market has changed as Apple's adoption rate and market size have grown. With the demise of Rosetta, Apple is applying pressure to the development firms who can't be bothered to deliver a top-notch product for OSX. In the long-term, this will be good for users. Either companies, like Inuit, will build proper applications, or the market will respond to an opening and a strong competitor will emerge.
It seems crazy to me that Inuit would spend the resources to implement a one-off Rosetta layer, rather than just building a decent version of Quicken?nor can I see Apple supporting this. However, as a business owner who uses QuickBooks, I know that Intuit shows absolute disdain for its Mac base, and seems hell bent on delivering an inferior product at all costs. I only use Intuit's products because my accountant, like many, is QB-based.
If there's one area that most Mac users seem to be in total agreement on, it's the woeful state of banking and bookkeeping software on the platform. Everyone seems to agree that Quicken has the feature set they want while being an absolutely abysmal Mac program, whereas various candidate replacements always seem to be shy a feature or two.
The longing for quality Mac banking/bookkeeping software seems acute enough, and widespread enough, to be a reasonable area of investment for Apple. I often read about this one failure as being a deal breaker, or forcing the otherwise Mac inclined to abandon the platform and/or run a PC for that one application.
The lack of response from Apple on this front seems a little puzzling. Given Intuit's utter disregard, I can't imagine they're unduly worried about offending them as a developer. Intuit's attitude towards the Mac seems very reminiscent of Quark's attitude toward everybody. What Apple needs is the banking equivalent of InDesign to come along and shake things up.
Not to worry, you're on topic. I think you're overlooking that, as far as we know, MobileMe syncing is going away for users who don't upgrade to Lion.
I don't know about you, but I used the Classic Environment for at least five years. When it finally went away, I didn't feel like the rug had been yanked out. This time IS different. We're being forced to choose between our PPC apps (which otherwise still work fine), or losing a service we've had for years. Neither seems necessary. The worst part of this problem is that it leaves us without either some mission-critical apps or services. We can't have both no matter what we do, except maybe spend a lot of money and time. An upgrade should not be a trip backwards, and we should not lose anything we've had if we choose not to upgrade.
In reality, they don't. They managed the 68k to PPC transition so seamlessly that few users even noticed. They did the same for Classic to OSX. They did it again for PPC to Intel. The Snow Leopard to Lion transition isn't as great in technological terms and yet they are forcing many users into a dilemma.
The point I'm making is that Apple is giving me a choice between two types of pain. If I don't upgrade to Lion I lose my syncing services. If I do upgrade, I lose my PPC apps. This is something new in my long experience with Apple, and very unwelcome.
Trouble is that the transition to Intel was 5.5 years ago now (wiki puts the start at Jan2006).
Apple have a good history of orphaning users so that the cutting edge (so to speak) stays a cutting edge without being blunted by continually having to offer support to historical platforms. PPC is historic and 5.5 years in technology is a lifetime.
So you can hardly fault Apple for doing what they've always done in the past.
I'm assuming that whatever solution you have running that requires Rosetta, was put in a long time before Jan 2006, so personally speaking, I think you've had full value for money if you have a bit of software running for 6+ years.
It is for me. I run too many PPC apps, some of which are not replaceable. A move to Lion would be extremely painful.
What's worse, Apple has notified MobileMe users that "iCloud is free for iOS 5 and OS X Lion users." What does that mean for MobileMe subscribers who don't migrate to Lion? Will we get cut off from the services we've used for years as MobileMe and .Mac? Apparently so, as the notice also says that our MobileMe subscriptions are automatically extended until the end of June 2012. After that it seems to be Lion or nothing.
That's like telling us we can shoot ourselves or cut our throats. Thanks for the choice, Apple!
I agree I think this is a huge downfall i dont know why apple could not include PPC into Lion. Im going to hold off for it right now. maybe down the road get it and make a partition for it. what a let down. first they cut off OSX to ppc but still made some stuff for ppc support. i think Apple should have waited for at least another update before toasting Rosetta.
I agree I think this is a huge downfall i dont know why apple could not include PPC into Lion. Im going to hold off for it right now. maybe down the road get it and make a partition for it. what a let down. first they cut off OSX to ppc but still made some stuff for ppc support. i think Apple should have waited for at least another update before toasting Rosetta.
Cmon, they've waited 5.5 years to cut it off! If software developers can't keep pace (not a particularly fast pace at that) why should Apple continue to support them?
And why should Apple wait? If a developer hasn't rolled out an update in 6 odd years (considering they probably had access to some developer tools before the Intel change), why should they have any update available in another 2 years?
Developers are simply putting off the day of reckoning and using the users and pawns.
Don't bitch at Apple that your application has been abandoned, moan at the developers of your application!
first they cut off OSX to ppc
Because none are fast enough to be primary work machines anymore.
but still made some stuff for ppc support.
To give developers four more years of grace to port their code properly. Those that haven't deserve their fate.
i think Apple should have waited for at least another update before toasting Rosetta.
Transitions are messy, but to get them done, they actually have to be done, not put off.
I can still run OS 9 on my Mac Pro, even in Lion, thanks to proper x86 Cocoa code.
Don't bitch at Apple that your application has been abandoned, moan at the developers of your application!
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
I can still run OS 9 on my Mac Pro, even in Lion, thanks to proper x86 Cocoa code.
I don't see what you mean. Running OS 9 on Intel machines is possible using Sheepshaver; do you have other ways?
I don't see what you mean. Running OS 9 on Intel machines is possible using Sheepshaver; do you have other ways?
Nope, that's it. But it's an Intel app, so it works perfectly in Lion.
Nope, that's it. But it's an Intel app, so it works perfectly in Lion.
Cool.
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
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).
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
Freehand is also a popular example.
I hope there will be a way to install Freehand in Lion.
If there won't be a way thousands of Designers can't upgrade to Lion.
Including myself :-(
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
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.
This is not possible for applications that are cannot be updated anymore. The most common example is old games, and people that liked them are likely to play them for many years.
Apple could certainly offer Rosetta as an optional installation under Lion but they chose not to.
Freehand is also a popular example.
I hope there will be a way to install Freehand in Lion.
If there won't be a way thousands of Designers can't upgrade to Lion.
Including myself :-(
You are relying on software that was discontinued over 4 years ago. I know this is mean spirited to say this - but if you want Lion (and every other update after Lion), you will have to bin Freehand.
You are relying on software that was discontinued over 4 years ago. I know this is mean spirited to say this - but if you want Lion (and every other update after Lion), you will have to bin Freehand.
I hope there will be any Hack or Workaround bringing Freehand to Lion.
If theres no solution after 3-6 Months Lion is on the market i think you are right.
I hope there will be any Hack or Workaround bringing Freehand to Lion.
If it requires Rosetta, this is impossible.
Incorrect. Only new hardware is rendered unbootable in older versions of the OS. All current hardware will run Snow Leopard even if Lion is preinstalled.
Just erase your hard drive and install snow leopard from your old computer's install discs