7 ms·

This isn't a new or unique move; Apple has never prioritized backwards compatibility. If you're a Mac user, you expect this sort of thing. If running neglected

by K7PJP 11mo ago

This isn't a new or unique move; Apple has never prioritized backwards compatibility. If you're a Mac user, you expect this sort of thing. If running neglected software is critical to you, you run Windows or you keep your old Macs around.

torstenvl 11mo ago
It's a bizarre assumption that this is about "neglected software." A lot of software is for x64 only. If Rosetta2 goes away, Parallels support for x64 binaries in VMs likely goes away too. Parallels is not neglected software. The x64 software you'd want to run on Parallels are not neglected software. This is a short-sighted move. It's also completely unprecedented; Apple has dropped support for previous architectures and runtimes before, but never when the architecture or runtime was the de facto standard. https://docs.parallels.com/parallels-desktop-developers-guide/software-development-specific-functions-of-parallels-desktop/using-rosetta-to-run-x86-64-linux-software-on-apple-silicon-macs https://docs.parallels.com/parallels-desktop-developers-guid...
- galad87 11mo ago
  Paralles x86_64 emulation doesn't depend on Rosetta.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
- mxey 11mo ago
  > If Rosetta2 goes away, Parallels support for x64 VMs likely goes away too. Rosetta 2 never supported emulating a full VM, only individual applications.
  - torstenvl 11mo ago
    You're right. It looks like the new full VM emulation in 20.2 doesn't use Rosetta. https://www.parallels.com/blogs/parallels-desktop-20-2-0/ https://www.parallels.com/blogs/parallels-desktop-20-2-0/ Nevertheless, running x64 software including Docker containers on aarch64 VMs does use Rosetta. There's still a significant valid use case that has nothing to do with neglected software. Edited my post above. Thanks for the correction.
    - mrpippy 11mo ago
      The OP only applies to Rosetta for running x64 Mac apps, not running x64 Linux software in aarch64 Linux VMs.
timw4mail 11mo ago
I seem to remember 68k software working (on PowerPC Macs) until Classic was killed off in Leopard? I'm likely misremembering the length of time, but it seems like that was the longest backwards-compatibility streak Apple had.

by K7PJP 11mo ago

torstenvl 11mo ago

It's a bizarre assumption that this is about "neglected software." A lot of software is for x64 only. If Rosetta2 goes away, Parallels support for x64 binaries in VMs likely goes away too. Parallels is not neglected software. The x64 software you'd want to run on Parallels are not neglected software. This is a short-sighted move. It's also completely unprecedented; Apple has dropped support for previous architectures and runtimes before, but never when the architecture or runtime was the de facto standard. https://docs.parallels.com/parallels-desktop-developers-guide/software-development-specific-functions-of-parallels-desktop/using-rosetta-to-run-x86-64-linux-software-on-apple-silicon-macs https://docs.parallels.com/parallels-desktop-developers-guid...

galad87 11mo ago
Paralles x86_64 emulation doesn't depend on Rosetta.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
mxey 11mo ago
> If Rosetta2 goes away, Parallels support for x64 VMs likely goes away too. Rosetta 2 never supported emulating a full VM, only individual applications.
- torstenvl 11mo ago
  You're right. It looks like the new full VM emulation in 20.2 doesn't use Rosetta. https://www.parallels.com/blogs/parallels-desktop-20-2-0/ https://www.parallels.com/blogs/parallels-desktop-20-2-0/ Nevertheless, running x64 software including Docker containers on aarch64 VMs does use Rosetta. There's still a significant valid use case that has nothing to do with neglected software. Edited my post above. Thanks for the correction.
  - mrpippy 11mo ago
    The OP only applies to Rosetta for running x64 Mac apps, not running x64 Linux software in aarch64 Linux VMs.

timw4mail 11mo ago

I seem to remember 68k software working (on PowerPC Macs) until Classic was killed off in Leopard? I'm likely misremembering the length of time, but it seems like that was the longest backwards-compatibility streak Apple had.