Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

thetapedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 395 posts

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#251

Post by Smithalicious »

pembrook wrote: post #175
thomascgalvin wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killing 32 bit support is going to cost me about $600 per year, because I still have a pre-CC copy of Photoshop, In Design, and so on. I am absolutely furious at Apple for this.

This comment is a perfect illustration of the bizarre irrationality people have when discussing Apple. You’re stuck on a 6+ year old piece of software because Adobe moved to a higher priced cloud-based model...maybe you should be mad at Adobe...6 years ago...not Apple?

It's a perfectly reasonable thing to be mad about, since wanting to use an older version of software is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. 6 years isn't even that long of a time either.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#252

Post by damnyou »

na85 wrote: post #215
fiblye wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's face it you are cheap, Or, hear me out here, some people can’t afford to buy new Adobe software because it’s ridiculously expensive. They’re not wealthy enough to call themselves cheap.

Again, being angry at an OS vendor because Adobe overprices their software doesn't make sense.

Or you can treat both as part of the same engine of unrestrained, destructive capitalism that destroys people's livelihoods when they no longer align with business interests.

Apple can spend some of that massive cash reserve it has actually acting like a grown-up platform holder with responsibilities to its users.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#253

Post by scarface74 »

icedchai wrote: post #247
scarface74 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Market cap doesn’t say anything about fundamentals. That’s what profits are for. If you haven’t noticed, Microsoft is de-emphasizing Windows as a profit center.

Both companies have plenty of profits and the resources needed to maintain 32-bit compatibility indefinitely.

So I guess Apple should also have maintained support for 68K Macs indefinitely? Microsoft should have maintained support for 16 bit apps on 64 bit Windows? Should MS have also maintained support for running real mode 286 apps forever?

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#254

Post by dannyw »

na85 wrote: post #215
fiblye wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's face it you are cheap, Or, hear me out here, some people can’t afford to buy new Adobe software because it’s ridiculously expensive. They’re not wealthy enough to call themselves cheap.

Again, being angry at an OS vendor because Adobe overprices their software doesn't make sense.

When an OS vendor breaks something that works perfect for me before, I think I have a right to be at least 70% angry at them.

I can still run programs from the XP era on my Windows PC.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#255

Post by dannyw »

camillomiller wrote: post #150
thomascgalvin wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killing 32 bit support is going to cost me about $600 per year, because I still have a pre-CC copy of Photoshop, In Design, and so on. I am absolutely furious at Apple for this.

What is the value that photoshop is adding to your business? Is it conducive to you earning enough to maintain a subscription? If not, why do you use photoshop? If yes, why shouldn’t adobe maximize their profits with a subscription based business model? It’s the market baby. Not defending adobe here, just giving a different perspective. Moreover, why should Apple stick with legacy tech to appease users like you?

What about all the artists who aren’t a business? What about all the hobbyists? And finally... what about all the people that aren’t rich enough to spend $$$ a YEAR on photoshop?

Do they not deserve to keep using software they have already paid for, at great expense to them? Are they not worth “appeasing” because they’re not ~fortunate~ lucky enough in life, as you were?

Adobe has taken away this option. All power to them, but if you paid for a license, you have a right to keep using that software. Apple is the one here breaking software people have paid for.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#256

Post by dannyw »

dillonmckay wrote: post #184
clairity wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, it's been clear that that's where adobe was heading (adobe is where most of your ire should be directed, imho). pixelmator and affinity designer jumped into the market at the right time (a few years ago) to capture adobe refugees like me for my (mostly modest) visual design needs. in any case, you can stay on mojave to run creative suite for now, and perhaps via a VM in the future. catalina doesn't seem to have…

Can recommend Pixelmator Pro. I could not justify a CC subscription for how infrequent I need to edit images (every other month).

Bigger fan of Affinity Photo; a lot more powerful to me.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#257

Post by Smithalicious »

pembrook wrote: post #183
AndrewDavis wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that situation I'd be mad at both. But primarily Apple. Apple broke my working software. Emphasis on the working part. Upgrading even with one time payment software would still mean hundreds of dollars forked out because Apple broke it. If it wasn't broken I wouldn't upgrade.

Am I the only one who sees the absurdity of this? If you’re cool using 6+ year old, blurry non-retina software...why do you need to upgrade to Catalina? Just stay on Mojave and you’ll be fine. Did you really plan on using that 2012 edition of Photoshop until 2035?

This idea that "6+" years old is particularly old really irks me, because it's not. Most other things in my life that I rely on last longer than that. I also occasionally need to run software that's older than that.

6 years isn't nearly long enough to even consider dropping support on the OS level. Try twice that.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#258

Post by filesystem »

Smithalicious wrote: post #257
pembrook wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one who sees the absurdity of this? If you’re cool using 6+ year old, blurry non-retina software...why do you need to upgrade to Catalina? Just stay on Mojave and you’ll be fine. Did you really plan on using that 2012 edition of Photoshop until 2035?

This idea that "6+" years old is particularly old really irks me, because it's not. Most other things in my life that I rely on last longer than that. I also occasionally need to run software that's older than that. 6 years isn't nearly long enough to even consider dropping support on the OS level. Try twice that.

Apple is not looking at 6 year old applications and saying “It’s been long enough, time to drop support for this app”. They are looking at the 30+ year old architecture that is 32-bit x86.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#259

Post by icedchai »

scarface74 wrote: post #253
icedchai wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both companies have plenty of profits and the resources needed to maintain 32-bit compatibility indefinitely.

So I guess Apple should also have maintained support for 68K Macs indefinitely? Microsoft should have maintained support for 16 bit apps on 64 bit Windows? Should MS have also maintained support for running real mode 286 apps forever?

This is a bit different. Catalina is a casual upgrade. There is no warning during the install process. They'll see that something worked yesterday, same OS, same computer, and now it doesn't.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#260

Post by radmarshallb »

braindeath wrote: post #223
Cyberdog wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by “Mac games” you mean Mac-first games… Marathon! Frog blast the vent core, baby. Also, wasn’t Quake III very briefly a Mac exclusive?

> Also, wasn’t Quake III very briefly a Mac exclusive? Where the hell did you hear that? In any event, it isn’t true. Quake 3 was released shortly after Jobs was turning them around from circling the drain. They’re lucky somebody was porting it at all.

This may interest you.

https://web.archive.org/web/20000229083216/http://macweek.zd...

Post reply on HN