I agree that it's not nice when old stuff stops working, but there does come a time when legacy software has to be pruned so that development and support activities can be focused more efficiently - especially when the legacy layers are likely to have significantly worse security attributes (due to outdated design, not defects). Not had any issues with current (as in, still supported) software working as expected (once I remembered that nf would have reverted to a clean copy).Ī few new security warnings have popped up when opening some apps, but they've not need anything more than a quick click to confirm that the action is expected and do not appear again. I knew there was a beta version I could use with 64-bit support, so went ahead anyway. I was warned that one of my apps would not work and given the option not to upgrade. I've (so far) upgraded one of my compatible systems (others are over 10 years old, so no expectations there!) without any issues. It's not as complete as Illustrator, but for all but the most demanding print work, it runs much faster, and it only costs seventy quid, Mac or PC. I Personally, when I faced this choice (moved from Mac to Windows, and thus lost access to my Illustrator CS6 licence), I bough Affinity Designer instead. There's very little cost in keeping a second architecture tested if you're testing the APIs already on another architecture: compilers are very, very good these days, and most functions will compile and run fine on any kind of modern CPU.Īdobe hopes that this will force people onto a subscription. The real reason Apple is dumping 32-bit is because it allows them to stop maintaining the "Carbon" API, and with it the last remnants of the original Mac Toolbox (yes, some of the Toolbox sources were ported straight into Carbon).
(Mainly the "make it run without crashing" kind of support, but there were some optimisations to use the 64-bit ALU) The IBM PowerPC 970, sold by Apple as the "G5", was a 64-bit CPU, and had limited OS support from MacOS 10.4 onwards.
Re: Apple only sold 32 bit Macs for ONE YEAR
If rumors are true and those are coming next year, getting everyone on 64 bit ahead of time makes sense. Perhaps part of it is that having to support only 64 bit will make porting easier for devs as and OS emulation of x86 on future 64 bit only ARM based Macs easier. They did a similar transition with iOS 11 two years ago and it caused much less trouble despite iOS being 32 bit only much more recently than macOS.Īs for why you go 64 bit only, it simplifies support having only one version of all the system libraries to maintain - and only one version is loaded into RAM (that's a bigger deal for phones than PCs, of course, but there are a lot more libraries on a PC and they are a lot bigger than on a phone) Apple made all developers and users aware of this 64 bit only transition for years, yet it still seems to have caught people off guard. I'm just astonished to hear that companies like Adobe are still releasing 32 bit only software in 2019.
They've supported both 32 and 64 bit applications side by side for over a decade. Had they waited one more year to go Intel they probably would have gone 64 bit only from day one and avoided this.
If we discover that there are similar problems on Windows, we will update this article.Way back in 2006. CC 2017 makes computer very very very slowĪt the time of this writing, this seems to be a macOS specific problem.
Several Isadora users reported a severe slowdowns, sometimes experiencing frame rates of 5 fps or less when simply dragging a single actor. The problems seem especially profound when using macOS High Sierra (v10.12.x) We strongly recommend that you disable Adobe Creative Cloud when using Isadora with macOS – and probably whenever you're using any software that requires good real-time performance. Solution home Tutorials Performance Optimization Turn Off Creative Cloud for Best Performance on macOS