Apple’s macOS (formerly Mac OS, formerly OS X) generally offers good stability and outstanding security. But, every few releases Apple takes a big leap and intentionally “breaks” older software.
The migration from System 9 to OS X was bumpy, and eventually System 9 compatibility was removed. A few years later, the transition from PowerPC chips to Intel’s x86 chips required an OS upgrade that removed compatibility with aging applications.
Catalina removes 32-bit applications support, once again “breaking” aging applications. Users might dislike this, but there are valid reasons for Apple’s decisions.
There are two major myths regarding Apple’s updates:
1) Apple updates are meant to force customers to buy new hardware and software.
2) Apple easily could maintain emulation code to support older applications.
The first myth assumes that Apple can or should not embrace the latest technologies. One reason I like Apple is that the company does adopt the fastest ports, the best storage technology, and so on. Apple isn’t always first, but they often do lead the way. Sometimes the choices don’t work out as Apple hoped, but that’s the risk of leadership.
Apple led the way with USB, FireWire, Thunderbolt, and DisplayPort. As input/output technologies evolved, Apple left behind good technologies for better ones.
If you work with digital media, FireWire and Thunderbolt were justified even for a few years. I do not regret having FireWire 400/800 drives for video work. It was much better than any external I/O technology included with most computers. Every minute saved moving media files saves money.
Each time Apple migrates, I do have to buy adapters and ports. I quickly migrate data to the latest, fastest external storage and move forward. Computers are tools and media creatives need those tools to be as fast as possible.
Did Apple drop the 3.5-inch drive, the CD-ROM, and other technologies too quickly? I don’t believe so. They were ahead of most hardware vendors, and those companies later made the same choices.
The second myth assumes it is “easy” to maintain backwards compatibility. It isn’t. Emulation layers are complex and messy, never the ideal way to run applications.
Linux dropped 32-bit support a few years ago. Microsoft dropped 32-bit application support with Windows 10. Apple was actually slow to push developers to update software and drivers.
Apple warned developers three years ago that the 32-bit layer was going away. Apple explained that 64-bit apps offer more memory access, better performance, and other benefits.
Apple should not try to update their programming tools for both 32-bit and 64-bit targets. The company supports two chip architectures (ARM and x86), several operating systems (macOS, iOS), different user interfaces and user experiences, and various hardware.
I’m not updating to Catalina yet, because I cannot. Developers are to blame, not Apple.
Several applications I use have not been updated in years. Developers not updating they applications punish their loyal customers. Apple told developers to migrate to 64-bits and to add updated hardware support to applications. Developers who failed to update had three years, at least, to get ready for Catalina, the Metal graphics library, and so on.
Screenwriter 6.5, Dramatica Story Expert, Inspiration 9, Fetch, and several other programs I use remain 32-bit, non-native applications.
I also tell people, if you don’t pay for software, developers cannot afford to update applications. Updating software takes time and money — and employees. Paying a fair price for software (hopefully) ensures the software will be updated in a timely manner.
Apple’s being blamed for “breaking” things that should not have broken.
Now, if you ask me about the MacBook Pro… Apple did break that product line.