VOGONS


First post, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/01/apple … bit-app-support

If you distribute your apps outside the Mac App Store, we highly recommend distributing 64-bit binaries to make sure your users can continue to run your apps on future versions of macOS.

Pretty vague. No date and unknown what a compromise is.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Make your games work offline

Reply 2 of 24, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

Can we discuss this without the usual anti Apple banter?

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 3 of 24, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

This will hurt emulators the most, and also programs that never got updated for 64bit. These programs will probably run fine in any VM (perhaps Apple will go this way), but emulators will be badly impacted for a while.
Perhaps the good thing will be that the emulators are going to fully embrace 64bit and hopefully find ways to circumvent the incompatibilities.

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 4 of 24, by BeginnerGuy

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Is there a technical reason from an os design point of view? (Outside of my realm).. I do assume that all modern intel processors still have your basic segment registers going all the way down to real mode compatibility still ready to go.

Or is this just Apple's way of weeding out old abandonware by forcing a change?

Sup. I like computers. Are you a computer?

Reply 5 of 24, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

It's just Apple being Apple who likes to cut legacy stuff. Going full 64bit will probably allow them to cut corners and do away with their dual bit binaries. Since they have just done that for iOS it will probably make everything easier for them.
Most Linux distros have gone this way for a while now, making it hard to have both 32and64bit programs running.

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 6 of 24, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

Oh and apparently this could mean that Apple is going to shift away from intel and use its own ARM chips. These do not have the 32bit stuff at all (clear performance reason Apple abandoned 32bit on iOS).
Getting rid of 32bit programs on the next OS X version would pave the way for ARM Macs in two or three years. Highly speculative of course 😉

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 8 of 24, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator
Auzner wrote:
Dominus wrote:

It's just Apple being Apple who likes to cut legacy stuff.

See, a doctrine.

So how would this affect stuff installed with brew? I run just mostly linux stuff on macos.

Please keep away with your flame bait. 2nd warning.
You may say it sucks etc, but needless belittling of Apple users, I won't tolerate.

Brew will not really be affected unless you want 32bit stuff.

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 9 of 24, by spiroyster

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Dominus wrote:

Oh and apparently this could mean that Apple is going to shift away from intel and use its own ARM chips. These do not have the 32bit stuff at all (clear performance reason Apple abandoned 32bit on iOS).
Getting rid of 32bit programs on the next OS X version would pave the way for ARM Macs in two or three years. Highly speculative of course 😉

This speculation must have come from somewhere? I have been hearing this extact rumor from various Appleonions since they let go of Imagaintion, I reckon Qualcomm have quietly been quaking in their boots past couple of months. It would certainly make sense, and love it or loath it I think ARM has proved itself as a capable technology instead of x64. Apple don't do mahoosive number crunhing, nor do they brag about needing to, so x64 is becoming a bit redendant for their needs and anything that can enforce their ecosystem... me thinks they are going do. I don't think spectre was the trigger for all this, however I think it has helped the cause.

Reply 10 of 24, by NY00123

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I expect the support to be later removed even for apps not in the app store. As hinted by Dominus (with the dual bit binaries), this will imply a lot of disk space reserved by the OS can be reduced, by removing 32-bit executable code (including shared libraries) and other related code pieces.

This can also reduce memory usage in certain circumstances. More shared libraries' code currently has to be loaded when separate 32-bit and 64-bit exes are being run concurrently, even if they depend on 32-bit and 64-bit builds of the exact same shared libraries.

What's less clear, is if they can remove the support from the hardware. I suppose the answer is "No", as long as Intel and x86-64 are used. The situation is quite different with Apple's ARM-based processors, though. (x86-64 is essentially in extension of i386, whle ARM's AArch64/A64 is more-or-less separate from A32.)

Reply 12 of 24, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

Dynamic core has been upgraded for a while now and works in 64bit but has a performance penalty ;(

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 13 of 24, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Dominus wrote:

Most Linux distros have gone this way for a while now, making it hard to have both 32and64bit programs running.

Debian multi-arch, on the other hand, just keeps on going. AMD64 and i386 along with MIPS (big and little endian), ARM, PPC, and anything else supported by QEMU all in one box.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 14 of 24, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

It's in the name isn't it?

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 16 of 24, by schmatzler

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
robertmo wrote:

On the other hand Windows 10 still supports 16-bit applications.

Does it really?

There are many 16bit installers (even for 32bit games) that do not run on a 64bit Windows 10. Not even on Windows 7 x86_64.

"Windows 98's natural state is locked up"

Reply 18 of 24, by dr_st

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Dominus wrote:

Can we discuss this without the usual anti Apple banter?

It is sort-of impossible to discuss anything Apple without the usual anti-Apple banter. 🤣

But 32-bit should be EOLd eventually. I can't believe Microsoft still hasn't.

https://cloakedthargoid.wordpress.com/ - Random content on hardware, software, games and toys

Reply 19 of 24, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Dominus wrote:

It's in the name isn't it?

I'm confused. Which post were you replying to, specifically.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder