8 ms·

Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? I get it that macOS has to evolve, but that doesn't mean all apps have to dr

by alin23 5mo ago

Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? I get it that macOS has to evolve, but that doesn't mean all apps have to drop Intel support at the same time. On hardware-level apps like my Lunar app I have plenty #if arch(arm64) because some features like reading the brightness nits or reading ambient light is different or completely missing based on the architecture. I need to test the UI differences based on what features are available. I don't see it viable to stay on macOS 26 for this, especially if we're going to see breaking changes again with the display and window server subsystem like we did with Tahoe. M5 support for Gamma table changes is still broken after so many months [0] [0] https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/819331#819331021 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/819331#819331021

deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
htk 5mo ago
Keep an Intel Mac around?
- bombcar 5mo ago
  Arguably if you're shipping new fat binary code today, you should already have an Intel Mac around to test, because there might be subtle differences between Intel-on-Rosetta2 and Intel-on-Intel.
- fg137 5mo ago
  It works until that machine dies and you need to scramble for a solution (again).
stetrain 5mo ago
Keep a macOS 26 machine around for testing. All Intel Macs will be stuck on 26 as well, so testing under 26 is probably best anyway.
rimliu 5mo ago
Same way you test them now?
ryukoposting 5mo ago
> Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? You don't. You could stay on an old MacOS. Apple would prefer that you tell your customers to stop being poor and buy a new computer. They will make your situation increasingly unbearable until you do. The overwhelming majority of people haven't needed a new computer since 2016. The current economic situation makes a new computer a worse value proposition than it's been in 35 years. Vendors are responding to this situation by manufacturing obsolescence. Microsoft pulled the same stunt with Windows 11's TPM 2.0 requirement.
- scioto 5mo ago
  I still prefer my pre-2016 Intel Mac since I can do more things that I want to do on it than my newer M4.
- troad 5mo ago
  I think it's a stretch to call Apple's ARM transition "planned obsolescence". The M-series chips are very clear improvements on what came before and there is a clear rationale for that transition. We're talking here about an OS that hasn't even come out yet, that will get years of security support, for computers that Apple hasn't been selling for several years now. Seems pretty reasonable.
  - tsunamifury 5mo ago
    I have a MacBook from 2017 and and m3 air today. For day to day tasks there is no difference.
    - troad 5mo ago
      I have a MacBook Pro from 2016 and an M4 Pro from last year. There is a night and day difference. I think "M series chips are no better than ten year old Intel chips" is a take that would be somewhat difficult to sustain, given the data.
      - tsunamifury 5mo ago
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
forgotaccount3 5mo ago
> Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? Isn't this a general form of 'how do we deal with the transition from a to b?' If your client's can get intel Mac's, then you should be able to get one. If they can't, why do you need to keep supporting intel Mac's?
al_borland 5mo ago
Keep an Intel Mac around or drop support. They followed the same path when moving from PPC to Intel.
- mleo 5mo ago
  And 32-bit to 64-bit.
icelusxl 5mo ago
Virtualize macOS 26 for testing purposes: https://eclecticlight.co/2025/01/21/what-can-you-do-with-virtualised-macos-on-apple-silicon/ https://eclecticlight.co/2025/01/21/what-can-you-do-with-vir...
GeekyBear 5mo ago
> Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? In a older version of the OS running in a virtual machine?
- FireBeyond 5mo ago
  That's not going to solve the issue. You are trying to emulate x86 to test those builds. Rosetta doesn't emulate x86 hardware, but translates x86 instructions into ARM. The only thing your solution would get you is verification that the Intel build can work on Apple Silicon with Rosetta.
  - GeekyBear 5mo ago
    If testing on an Intel Mac is unacceptable, and testing on an ARM Mac using Rosetta is also unacceptable, then there was no reason to complain about Rosetta being deprecated in the first place.
mghackerlady 5mo ago
IIRC Apple supported 10.5 extra long because of it being the last PowerPC MacOS. I wouldn't be surprised if they do something similar here. Keep an intel mac around, and you should be fine
alsetmusic 5mo ago
> like my Lunar app Oh hey! Thanks for making this. I've been running this app for a while now, between one and two years. Very much something that I rely on and appreciate.
BrandonSmith 5mo ago
Continue to upgrade to the latest macOS on your host system, use something that leverages Apple's Virtualized.framework to run any version of macOS you want. For instance, consider https://tart.run/ https://tart.run/ All the Android / iOS devs on my team use Tart locally when we need to test mixed environments. Then we use Tart's sister Cirrus CLI to run our builds on our server.

by alin23 5mo ago

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

htk 5mo ago

Keep an Intel Mac around?

bombcar 5mo ago
Arguably if you're shipping new fat binary code today, you should already have an Intel Mac around to test, because there might be subtle differences between Intel-on-Rosetta2 and Intel-on-Intel.
fg137 5mo ago
It works until that machine dies and you need to scramble for a solution (again).

stetrain 5mo ago

Keep a macOS 26 machine around for testing. All Intel Macs will be stuck on 26 as well, so testing under 26 is probably best anyway.

rimliu 5mo ago

Same way you test them now?

ryukoposting 5mo ago

> Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? You don't. You could stay on an old MacOS. Apple would prefer that you tell your customers to stop being poor and buy a new computer. They will make your situation increasingly unbearable until you do. The overwhelming majority of people haven't needed a new computer since 2016. The current economic situation makes a new computer a worse value proposition than it's been in 35 years. Vendors are responding to this situation by manufacturing obsolescence. Microsoft pulled the same stunt with Windows 11's TPM 2.0 requirement.

scioto 5mo ago
I still prefer my pre-2016 Intel Mac since I can do more things that I want to do on it than my newer M4.
troad 5mo ago
I think it's a stretch to call Apple's ARM transition "planned obsolescence". The M-series chips are very clear improvements on what came before and there is a clear rationale for that transition. We're talking here about an OS that hasn't even come out yet, that will get years of security support, for computers that Apple hasn't been selling for several years now. Seems pretty reasonable.
- tsunamifury 5mo ago
  I have a MacBook from 2017 and and m3 air today. For day to day tasks there is no difference.
  - troad 5mo ago
    I have a MacBook Pro from 2016 and an M4 Pro from last year. There is a night and day difference. I think "M series chips are no better than ten year old Intel chips" is a take that would be somewhat difficult to sustain, given the data.
    - tsunamifury 5mo ago

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

forgotaccount3 5mo ago

> Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? Isn't this a general form of 'how do we deal with the transition from a to b?' If your client's can get intel Mac's, then you should be able to get one. If they can't, why do you need to keep supporting intel Mac's?

al_borland 5mo ago

Keep an Intel Mac around or drop support. They followed the same path when moving from PPC to Intel.

mleo 5mo ago
And 32-bit to 64-bit.

icelusxl 5mo ago

Virtualize macOS 26 for testing purposes: https://eclecticlight.co/2025/01/21/what-can-you-do-with-virtualised-macos-on-apple-silicon/ https://eclecticlight.co/2025/01/21/what-can-you-do-with-vir...

GeekyBear 5mo ago

> Wait, so.. how are we supposed to test Intel builds of our macOS apps from now on? In a older version of the OS running in a virtual machine?

FireBeyond 5mo ago
That's not going to solve the issue. You are trying to emulate x86 to test those builds. Rosetta doesn't emulate x86 hardware, but translates x86 instructions into ARM. The only thing your solution would get you is verification that the Intel build can work on Apple Silicon with Rosetta.
- GeekyBear 5mo ago
  If testing on an Intel Mac is unacceptable, and testing on an ARM Mac using Rosetta is also unacceptable, then there was no reason to complain about Rosetta being deprecated in the first place.

mghackerlady 5mo ago

IIRC Apple supported 10.5 extra long because of it being the last PowerPC MacOS. I wouldn't be surprised if they do something similar here. Keep an intel mac around, and you should be fine

alsetmusic 5mo ago

> like my Lunar app Oh hey! Thanks for making this. I've been running this app for a while now, between one and two years. Very much something that I rely on and appreciate.

BrandonSmith 5mo ago

Continue to upgrade to the latest macOS on your host system, use something that leverages Apple's Virtualized.framework to run any version of macOS you want. For instance, consider https://tart.run/ https://tart.run/ All the Android / iOS devs on my team use Tart locally when we need to test mixed environments. Then we use Tart's sister Cirrus CLI to run our builds on our server.