Mobileread
OverDrive drops support for Mac
#11  pwalker8 10-03-2019, 04:10 AM
Quote CRussel
It's _always_ easier to simply drop support for legacy. And can often result in real savings in other ways, such as security and hardware. Apple, being a closed system, has no real compelling reason to want to provide legacy support -- they want you to buy new.

Microsoft faced this when they moved to 64-bit Windows. They dropped support for 16-bit apps, but supported 32-bit apps (and, in fact, continue to ship 32-bit versions of the consumer version of Windows to this day.)
There are two basic models for supporting legacy. One is to only support legacy for a limited time, which simplifies security and maintenance and makes it much easier to move in new directions, the other is to attempt to provide backward compatibility as much as possible, which makes it much more complex to move forward.

Microsoft and Windows is the classic example of the later and a big reason that many versions of Windows were so buggy. Many people get comfortable with something and resist change as much as possible. I know people who were still using DOS programs well over a decade after Windows 3.0 came out.

The big issue with operating systems is that to move forward, you have to change things including the internal API's. This causes programs not to work. The real issue with 32 bit programs and Apple isn't that they are 32 bit, it's that they haven't been upgraded. Apple moved to 64 bit almost a decade ago and has been telling app programs for well over a year that they were dropping 32 bit support. So if you have a program that isn't 64 bit, odds are pretty good it hasn't been upgraded in a while.

The real answer if you have some 32 bit program that hasn't been upgraded is not to upgrade the operating system. Of course that means that you won't get security updates and eventually certain programs that connect to backend systems such as iTunes will stop being able to connect to those backend systems. I have an old 32 bit mac mini that I keep at Sierra. I use it to run a couple of old legacy programs that broke when High Sierra came out.
Reply 

#12  JSWolf 10-03-2019, 05:33 AM
Apple's decision to go 64-bit only is not for security or ease of use. The reason Apple is going 64-bit only is to get people with older systems that won't run the new OSX will have to upgrade their hardware. It's a money making scheme. There's no reason Apple cannot keep support of 32-bit programs.

It's the same issue when a hardware company doesn't write a new driver for the new OS and the old driver no longer works. The hardware is perfectly OK, but the they want you to buy new hardware instead.

It's a scam and Apple is very good at playing it. They stop supporting older hardware when it will easily run the new OS. iPhones and iPads are a very good example of this.
Reply 

#13  pwalker8 10-03-2019, 01:45 PM
Quote JSWolf
Apple's decision to go 64-bit only is not for security or ease of use. The reason Apple is going 64-bit only is to get people with older systems that won't run the new OSX will have to upgrade their hardware. It's a money making scheme. There's no reason Apple cannot keep support of 32-bit programs.

It's the same issue when a hardware company doesn't write a new driver for the new OS and the old driver no longer works. The hardware is perfectly OK, but the they want you to buy new hardware instead.

It's a scam and Apple is very good at playing it. They stop supporting older hardware when it will easily run the new OS. iPhones and iPads are a very good example of this.
Yea, that's why Apple followed Microsoft's lead to charge $100 for an operation system upgrade. They are all about the money. Oh, wait. The OS upgrades are free.

Sigh. Yes, Apple is a hardware company and yes, Apple designed their operating systems to take advantage of the faster, more capable hardware. If you have faster, more capable machines, odds are pretty good you want an OS that can take advantage of it.

If you want to keep your 8 year old iPhone or mac, then don't upgrade the operating system. A 32 bit mac with Sierra still works just fine.
Reply 

#14  JSWolf 10-03-2019, 02:14 PM
Quote pwalker8
Yea, that's why Apple followed Microsoft's lead to charge $100 for an operation system upgrade. They are all about the money. Oh, wait. The OS upgrades are free.

Sigh. Yes, Apple is a hardware company and yes, Apple designed their operating systems to take advantage of the faster, more capable hardware. If you have faster, more capable machines, odds are pretty good you want an OS that can take advantage of it.

If you want to keep your 8 year old iPhone or mac, then don't upgrade the operating system. A 32 bit mac with Sierra still works just fine.
But a 32-bit only MAC won't work well once most of the programs and new programs are 64-bit only.

As for old iPhones and old iPads, there will come a point when you can no longer get updates on certain software that you use and new software is a forget it as well.

It is unfair to stop supporting older hardware when the OS will run no bother. It only becomes an issue if the new OS won't work or is too slow.
Reply 

#15  haertig 10-04-2019, 02:15 AM
Quote pwalker8
Sigh. Yes, Apple is a hardware company and yes, Apple designed their operating systems to take advantage of the faster, more capable hardware. If you have faster, more capable machines, odds are pretty good you want an OS that can take advantage of it.
Nobody said not to buy 64-bit hardware. Nobody said not to buy a 64-bit OS.

It is not unreasonable to ask for that shiny new 64-bit platform to continue supporting 32-bit apps, just like most every other 64-bit platform currently does. There is software that simply is not available in 64-bit. It could be because the developers are severely lagging in their updates. Or it could be because the software has been abandoned. Or maybe the user doesn't want to shell out more money to upgrade a program that works perfectly fine for them in 32-bit mode.

I agree with other posters who have said this is most likely a money ploy by Apple. Everything else they do pretty much is, so why not this? Apple makes good stuff. Way overpriced. Proprietary. And the company seems to have high disdain for their customers. So it's not out of character for them to drop support for 32-bit programs. Did anyone really expect different behavior?
Reply 

#16  pwalker8 10-04-2019, 07:34 AM
Oh come now, that's absurd. You think that Apple should support 32 bit forever and a day? Why stop there? By your logic they should still be supporting the old 16 bit programs, I mean it's only been 28 years (1991) since they went 32 bit.

Apple rolled out their first 64 bit machine in 2006. The last 32 bit machine was discontinued in 2010, almost 10 years ago. Yea, it's not out of character for Apple to drop support 32 bit a decade after the last 32 bit machine. I'm surprised they supported it this long. They have been warning developers that 32 bit was going away for a couple of years now.

I have two applications on my machine that at 32 bit, an old, old copy of Adobe reader and an old copy of the Kindle app. I have the 64 bit version of both as well. Didn't cost me a dime to upgrade them. Some of my 64 bit apps are over a decade old.

If you want to keep using 32 bit apps, the answer is simple, don't upgrade. Apple didn't drop support for Yosemite (released in 2014) until this year, so odds are they will continue to support Mojave for another 5 years.
Reply 

#17  JSWolf 10-04-2019, 10:25 AM
Quote pwalker8
Oh come now, that's absurd. You think that Apple should support 32 bit forever and a day? Why stop there? By your logic they should still be supporting the old 16 bit programs, I mean it's only been 28 years (1991) since they went 32 bit.

Apple rolled out their first 64 bit machine in 2006. The last 32 bit machine was discontinued in 2010, almost 10 years ago. Yea, it's not out of character for Apple to drop support 32 bit a decade after the last 32 bit machine. I'm surprised they supported it this long. They have been warning developers that 32 bit was going away for a couple of years now.

I have two applications on my machine that at 32 bit, an old, old copy of Adobe reader and an old copy of the Kindle app. I have the 64 bit version of both as well. Didn't cost me a dime to upgrade them. Some of my 64 bit apps are over a decade old.

If you want to keep using 32 bit apps, the answer is simple, don't upgrade. Apple didn't drop support for Yosemite (released in 2014) until this year, so odds are they will continue to support Mojave for another 5 years.
The way it works is you have a 32-bit OS. That 32-bitOS supports 16- and 32-bit programs. You move to a 64-bit OS and that OS supports 32- and 64-bit programs. That's how it is supposed to work. But Apple has decided that in order to get people to dump perfectly working Apple hardware that they are going 64-bit only. That's the reality.
Reply 

#18  odamizu 10-04-2019, 03:13 PM
Quote pwalker8
... Apple didn't drop support for Yosemite (released in 2014) until this year, so odds are they will continue to support Mojave for another 5 years.
Where are you getting this data?

As much as I'd like to think High Sierra has 4 more years ahead of it, as far as security updates go, Apple seems to drop support after roughly 3 years. The last security update Yosemite received was Sept 2017. The last security update El Capitan received was July 2018.

The most recent macOS security update, released 9/26/19, included only Sierra, High Sierra and Mojave.

At this rate, Mojave only has 2 more years, and High Sierra will stop receiving security updates next fall.

But I'd like to be wrong about this since I'm clinging to High Sierra.

from Apple Security Updates
Reply 

#19  haertig 10-04-2019, 06:49 PM
Quote pwalker8
Apple rolled out their first 64 bit machine in 2006. The last 32 bit machine was discontinued in 2010, almost 10 years ago. Yea, it's not out of character for Apple to drop support 32 bit a decade after the last 32 bit machine.
I thought I was clear before, but maybe not. I am talking about dropping support of 32-bit software, which is entirely different from dropping support of 32-bit hardware

I agree with you - if someone is still running on 32-bit hardware, then it is appropriate to recommend that they simply not upgrade the OS.

But in the case of software, we are talking about a 32-bit program ... Overdrive ... that is not available in 64-bit. This is not something that a user is going to be able to fix. And it really is not appropriate, IMHO, to tell users that they simply should not update the OS in this case. Sure, that would "fix" the problem, but it's a pretty rude "slap 'em in the face" fix. It's not like Apple has to add support for these older programs. They already have it. What they are doing now is taking away that support. And my question to Apple is, "Why?" You would have to work to find many prominent 64-bit OS'es that don't continue to support 32-bit software (again, different from hardware support). What is Apple's reason for wanting to be the Black Sheep in the bunch? Maybe it's a good reason. So why don't you tell us what that reason is, Apple?
Reply 

#20  JSWolf 10-04-2019, 07:11 PM
This is just one more reason to go Windows.
Reply 

 « First  « Prev Next »  Last »  (2/3)
Today's Posts | Search this Thread | Login | Register