Apple Seeds Fifth Beta of macOS High Sierra 10.13.4 to Developers [Update: Public Beta Available]

i was wondering why i haven't see any news about mac os beta lately then i decided to click on the mac blog section and boom there it is, but why is not in the front page, this is mac rumors about macs, mac os and apple products, i don't mind iOS but why we do get news about Samsung products in the front page, so mac rumors has become iOS rumors, Samsung rumors then at the bottom of the list mac rumors, well this look like apple that only care about iOS and don't care about mac os anymore, is Tim cook running mac rumors now. where is the respect for mac os? the respect for mac os is gone. well i still like and love mac os and prefer mac os over windows. don't forget where we came from, with out mac os we wouldn't have iOS.

https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06282017a

Reading through all this info it sounds more like Apple wants people to stop building 32-bit apps rather than the hardball '32-bit apps will not run after High Sierra'. Sounds like the main side effect for a typical apps is a performance hit when the first 32-bit app is loaded into memory. Or am I missing something? I would really like to know if 32-bit apps will no longer run at all after High Sierra, or if they will just have some known, and possibly acceptable, side effects. Anyone know for certain?

Guys, come on, please quit whining about the whole 32-bit situation already… Apple, for a change, is giving out warnings well in advance of the actual cut-off (you guys all talk about it as if it was as bad as their Carbon-64 shenanigans of yore with Adobe). If you have a Mac powerful enough for that (any model with a quad-core Intel CPU and 16 GB of RAM, really), running an older version of OS X (yes, not macOS, but [Mac] OS X, as in Mavericks or one of the older “cat” releases) under a VM will work great for all but the most demanding apps… And if you're such a power user that you need to run processor-intensive tasks in a professional environment, you will still be better served with modern, 64-bit applications anyway.

The same goes for reeeeeally old stuff (I'm talking pre-OS X stuff now); I've been pleasantly surprised with Sheepshaver and Basilisk II lately (not for myself, as my first Mac was an iMac G4 running Jaguar; I just had to do some data recovery and conversion for a client of mine, and was a bit lost at first, but had great sucess and ended up installing and playing old games too, anyway). If you really need access to old software, just keep a spare old machine around, and eventually the improvements to the hardware ecosystem will allow for emulation/virtualization to catch-up performance-wise, when those machines inevitably die. So… why don't you do the same for PowerPC (because you *can* indeed run Mac OS 10.6 Server and Rosetta on a VM) and (32-bit) x86 apps?

As for MS Office 2011…? Are you people for real? I'd rather switch to LibreOffice than expose myself to such an old version of MS Office… Anyway, their 1 TB OneDrive yearly plan is so competitive that I will very likely eschew iCloud Drive altogether and take advantage of the included Office 365 license, as soon as I finish my degree and my current plan expires (it's the same, except it's included in my fees whether I make use of it or not). Yeah, they've got me hooked up on OneDrive through my Uni (the crafty bastards… there are probably laws against that, or if there aren't, there should be), and Word is still the only word processor in the market that plays nice with both Mendeley *and* iOS, but I'll have to hand it over to them: even with all the occasional hiccups (and the blatant and inexcusable lack of hyphenation support on Word for iOS, as well as the – IMHO, untimely – deprecation of iOS 9 support by the Office team), their product is still more appropriate to my needs than Apple's; it's functionally good enough and the capacity blows everyone else's offerings out of the water.

No longer supporting 32-bit applications is a big deal but no larger than when Apple ceased supporting PPC architecture. As with any changes of this sort of magnitude there will be inevitably be significant complaints. The truth is however 32-bit has been on its way out for years now. Canonical has now stopped releasing 32bit releases of their Desktop operating system with the latest version Ubuntu 17.10 being only available in 64-bit ISO images.

Snow Leopard Server runs reasonably well in a virtual environment but from Lion onwards performance is throttled in a virtual environment due to lack of graphic acceleration along with the macOS platform demanding significantly more in the way of resources so there are limitations there.

Therefore the only solution to this would be Dual Booting two versions of macOS
http://osxdaily.com/2017/06/14/dual-boot-macos-high-sierra-beta-partition/

Not defending Apple on this, but how is this not being transparent?

Sorry, but I disagree. They are not being at all transparent. Being transparent would articulate what "with compromises" means for macOS 10.14, and confirm whether with 10.15 the intention is to prevent 32-bit apps from launching completely.

Nobody knows. Apple has not been transparent, but as briloronmacrumo ('https://forums.macrumors.com/members/briloronmacrumo.155696/') mentioned, they "hinted" that the next release (10.14) would run 32-bit apps in some way (with some kind of compromise), and the release after that (10.15) may not run 32-bit apps at all.



You should probably stop running Office 2011 already. No security updates makes it a ticking time bomb.

I agree the transition is going to be quite irritating for some favorite old apps that will never get updated. I wonder if Aspyr plans to update any old games...

Not defending Apple on this, but how is this not being transparent?

They have to be careful about what they say since everyone now jumps on every word that they say. They have given plenty of time for the switch and announce this quite some time ago.

The OS architecture has evolved, making 32-bit apps and drivers run with issues as the 64-bit structure becomes the OS’s foundation. Security issues and other things can drive the OS development away from the older Platform. Apple does not want to continue with 32-bit support. It is understood. Apple has given plenty of time for developers and companies to write 64-bit updates etc. to apps and drivers. They cannot say that 32-bit will stop working, but they at least covered themselves so when there are crashes or glitches, people will know why.

The complaints should go more to the developers and companies that don’t update their apps and drivers and want you to buy their latest and greatest. I understand the complaints. I have good apps and equipment that will not get updates or drivers, so next year they are completely dead....like iDVD....no equilivent out there... :(

But Yes, it is time to move on from the 32-bit architecture.

I would really like to know if 32-bit apps will no longer run at all after High Sierra, or if they will just have some known, and possibly acceptable, side effects. Anyone know for certain?

Only Apple knows. So far the most descriptive statement was the presentation at WWDC 2017 where the Apple presenter said High Sierra would be the last macOS to run 32-bit apps "without compromises". There were also hints about the level of support for macOS 10.14/10.15 too. However, the hints were only that and weren't definitive or detailed. The presentation hints 32-bit will be unsupported in 10.15. Apple has been warning developers to use Cocoa and not Carbon for 10 years+, so none of those WWDC announcements were surprising or unanticipated. Many developers built 64-bit versions of their apps but many apps will not be converted and users will need to find alternatives. Those users paying attention and planning ahead will experience little grief.