Not a lot of good reasons to upgrade to 27. They removed Rosetta and you have to reinstall that if you want it. So is MacOS turning into something that more regular people are going to have to maintain in the future or end up with something like Windows 11?
I switched to MacOS 3 years ago because of Microsoft and the writing on the wall seems to say I got another year left before I'm forced into Linux. Because if I have to maintain my own OS then I might as well install Linux and do it once.
>Not a lot of good reasons to upgrade to 27.
There's a singular very good reason to upgrade to 27 and any new version (at least when a .1 minor version is out and the kinds have been ironed): the whole ecosystem works better when you are on the latest stuff.
So unless you have legacy app needs, or need ultra stability for stuff like running a video shop or something, it makes sense to keep up, or at least don't fall more than 1-2 versions behind.
>They removed Rosetta and you have to reinstall that if you want it.
And they'll kill it entirely in a future version. It's been like 6 years for getting apps to Apple Silicon versions. And it's generally not ideal to run both AS and Intel programs if you can avoid it (wastes double the system lib memories, Intel misses some extra protections, etc).
>I switched to MacOS 3 years ago
OK, this explains it. So macOS is not like Windows where you can have even 15 years old version of the OS and programs still work forever.
[dead]
Nearly everything is improved and the new Siri is great.
I wish I could revert to the old Siri on my iPhone 15 Pro. “Remind me in 2 hours to do XYZ” is dramatically slower now: not only does the operation take longer, but Siri consistently forgets the action and asks what I want to do in 2 hours.
Unless you're not running an M-series chip, then it's not really improving anything
If you're not running an Apple Silicon chip, you can't run macOS 27 at all.
That's 6+ year old hardware then, so even in Apple's world, that's pretty old.
If a temporary tool being retired is the reason you switch, then wait until you find out how many LOC are being deleted from the linux kernel this year and next
It's not a temporary tool for people who need it.
The alternative is maintaining backwards compatibility forever and then everyone will complain about some weird behaviour that still happens to retain that compatibility.
Keep in mind this is the second time they have switched arches and the second round of complaints of Rosetta removal.
Exactly, I remember getting similar replies - though probably on /. then - when the PPC emulator was removed, there are always some people eager to ridicule the idea and portray it as not being feasible. But it is. It is perfectly doable for a company like Apple with a net worth around $4.87 trillion and would probably take less disk space then the AI models their customers now try to remove because they don't need them. As ridiculous as this may sound to the naysayers, I desire very much for an operating system to keep backwards compatibility forever, it can be done and would be very useful for many people.
I didn't want the PPC emulator removed and I don't want the x86 emulator to be removed either. If that makes me a weirdo, so be it.
I’m not saying it’s not feasible. See Windows. The effort that Microsoft put into backwards compatibility was incredible. But it’s also questionable.
Even a good emulator might fix bugs that some piece of software relied on.
It’s certainly a shame if they got rid of Rosetta forever so hopefully it’s still available as an optional download.
I think they have a lot more reason to keep it around this time. PowerPC was a dead-end and x86 is most definitely sticking around.