I bought a new iMac in October last year which still had High Sierra on it. Thanks the gods. YMMV
Catalina is slowly getting better. However, I can still make the Finder crash by selecting a file. It still makes my computer hot after running an update. And don’t ask what I think about those stupid security warnings.
Beatrix Willius wrote: “And don’t ask what I think about those stupid security warnings.”
I’ve been calling it MacOS Vista.
It’s comforting to know that others have issues with the new OS. Some apps I use so infrequently that I can’t justify spending money on them. Others like the old pages that had the simple and advanced find and replace feature of formatting codes like paragraph, spaces,etc. I get files from a client that needs to be reformatted to be used elsewhere. Then there’s this great floating app: iData Pro that I use constantly for quick copy and paste info. Has anyone ever used it? I use to add info regarding software purchases, order numbers dates, etc.
What will happen if I create a bootable disk in, say, High Sierra and boot from that in a new Mac?
Is the hardware so constructed that it will not run earlier OSs? Or 32 bit applications?
As I mentioned earlier, a newly purchased Mac will only be able to boot the version of macOS that it originally shipped with when introduced. So if that Mac was first shipped with Mojave, it will not boot High Sierra. Firmware is what prevents it and 32-bit restrictions are an OS thing, not directly hardware related.
The older OSes are often missing drivers needed for the newer hardware.
My concern is that for me the consequence of the 64 bit requirement is that it is going to cost me a bunch of money. I wonder f Apple has thought at all that the switch in a number of cases is going to force many of us to switch to subscription based software even for software we already own, at great expense to us. For instance, I own a copy of microsoft office which is 32 bit and Microsoft is not going to up grade it to 64 bit. Instead I am now going to owe Microsoft a monthly fee if I want to use Office. Microsoft is no longer even going to sell a stand alone version of office. It is all subscription. Similarly with Adobe, I own the CS6 Adobe suite which I use daily as an artist. Fortunately Photoshop is 64 bit, but InDesign is not. If I continue using Indesign which is a crucial part of my work, I’m going to have to spring for a hefty monthly bill to Adobe, even though I already paid them a hefty sum for the software I already bought from them which they are not going to upgrade to 64 bit. I hope Apple isn’t colluding in this situation. It is another huge transfer of wealth from us to the corporate world. Salesforce, who is driving all this subscription stuff, was motivated by the fact that the switch to subscription based software has generated a huge convenience and big savings to enterprise clients. It made Salesforce a multi-billion dollar company in less than a decade. For us individuals, however, there is no savings. It is a huge increase in cost for us. Everyone is trying to get in on the gold rush of getting everyone beholden to a monthy payment to them. Even small software companies. It is preclusively expensive for me and, I’m sure, many others. Thank goodness not all software makers are doing this. I wish Apple would do something like they did with Rosetta stone and make the new systems backward compatible with 32 bit software. It would be a kind gesture to loyal customers.
They are still selling a stand-alone version.
I own a copy of microsoft office which is 32 bit and Microsoft is not going to up grade it to 64 bit. Instead I am now going to owe Microsoft a monthly fee if I want to use Office.
I’m in the same boat. I tried transitioning to Pages, etc. but couldn’t get used to it. Office seems to have become ingrained in my memory. I also found that stuff created in Pages and Numbers will not render properly when reformatted for Windows and opened on a PC.
Microsoft is no longer even going to sell a stand alone version of office. It is all subscription. Similarly with Adobe, I own the CS6 Adobe suite which I use daily as an artist. Fortunately Photoshop is 64 bit, but InDesign is not.
RATS (and other bad words)!!! I have CS5, and heavy Photoshop user friends told me the Suite would be 64k. I checked, and you’re right, and I feel like I got hit in the head with a sledgehammer. I need InDesign and Illustrator too.
If I continue using Indesign which is a crucial part of my work, I’m going to have to spring for a hefty monthly bill to Adobe, even though I already paid them a hefty sum for the software I already bought from them which they are not going to upgrade to 64 bit.
Even though shelling out a flat fee for Adobe CS had, and would, make a significant dent in my bank account, I think that over the years it is more cost effective than shelling out big monthly fees.
I hope Apple isn’t colluding in this situation. It is another huge transfer of wealth from us to the corporate world. Salesforce, who is driving all this subscription stuff, was motivated by the fact that the switch to subscription based software has generated a huge convenience and big savings to enterprise clients.
Apple got nice commission fees when they sold Adobe CDs in their Stores. They don’t get cuts on subscriptions. And not all the advertising and production enterprises I’ve worked with were happy about subscriptions, big houses were able to get good deals on bulk purchases.
It made Salesforce a multi-billion dollar company in less than a decade.
I worked for a company that jumped on to Salesforce when it got started. Although I am a devoted and loyal FileMaker user and lover, I thought Salesforce was a close second. However, it’s not nearly as easy to put together a customized database, but it does scale well for large and small businesses. And it was the first database system that ran quickly and easily in the cloud, even with huge, complicated and convoluted databases.
For us individuals, however, there is no savings. It is a huge increase in cost for us. Everyone is trying to get in on the gold rush of getting everyone beholden to a monthy payment to them. Even small software companies. It is preclusively expensive for me and, I’m sure, many others.
Personally, I’m in 100% agreement. But from the perspective of a company like Adobe, there are a lot of people like me who are happily puttering along with CS5, etc. and don’t desperately need the features in the upgrades.
10 posts were merged into an existing topic: Dashboard is history in Catalina
I wish Apple would do something like they did with Rosetta stone and make the new systems backward compatible with 32 bit software.
They have been doing exactly that. Apple has been making their systems backward compatible with 32-bit software for more than ten years. Catalina is the end of the transition, not the beginning. They have been making clear to developers since at least Leopard (2007) that they need to move to 64-bit. In the last few years, they have also been warning users with increasing urgency.
Apple has made many transitions over the years, but they never do it abruptly without providing a transition period. The transition period usually lasts a few years, but it is not forever. Classic support ended, as did Rosetta. I think the 64-bit transition has lasted longer than most.
Neither Microsoft or Adobe ignored the transition. Both upgraded their products to 64-bit years ago. But a developer’s efforts won’t help a user who doesn’t accept the upgrades.
I, too, use irreplaceable Apps that are 32bit. Luckily my iMac is 2015 and MacBook Pro is mid 2012. I have been upgrading Hard drives, adding RAM and replacing batteries on the MacBook and use that primarily for Photography, Music and Video production. The studio people I know have put all their legacy Apps on custom built Hackintosh computers that are more robust and versatile than the current Mac Pro’s. If and when I can no longer keep my MacBook operating, I will be moving to a Hackintosh and just drop in the 1T SSD that I am using in this MacBook Pro. That is a possibility you may look into.
Microsoft and Adobe have not upgraded their software to 64 bits. They are forcing users to pay a monthly subscription to use their software because their exisitng software doesn’t run 64 bit. Transition or not, I have not control over that, other than springing for more donations to those companies.
The transition period doesn’t do away with the huge cost involved in moving to subscription software. I was happily using a 2014 version of Office which will no longer run. Why do software makers deserve regular payments from us users into the future? Doesn’t the cost of the software we have purchased cover its development? I think it does. Companies were making huge profits already during time we bought our software. As much as companies may be expected to watch their bottom line, we should not be expected to fund their future when it involves paying for software we don’t need or want.
I’m also not sanguine about all of the OS upgrades that get so bloated with features I don’t care about that my computer becomes obsolete, not because it is deficient, but because of the demands of new operating systems. The same with cell phones. I have an iphone SE that i love that is starting to work erratically because of changes in cell phone protocols and my provider wants me to spend $700 on a new cell phone that is larger than my SE and that holds no interest for me. I don’t want a bigger phone. I feel like someone must feel who is constantly plagued by pick-pockets. Billionaire companies forcing me to give them even more money, money I can’t easily afford and that is simply funding third and fourth homes, private jets or fascist politicians. Give me a break…transition as a kind gesture?
I hear you. But there isn’t much we as users can do. There is no real alternative to Adobe. And renting you software (with the power to turn it off at any time for any reason) iOS the new model. No different than car leasing.
Now if you use the software to make money, paying to rent the software isn’t a big burden as your revenues should cover the tax deductible expense. If you use the software to make money you should pay for it.
The people who suffer are startups with no revenue, students trying to learn the software and occasional users. Luckily, there are still some underground ways ways to avoid the monthly payment if you look hard enough.
I cannnot agree with you on hardware. The power of integrated circuits doubles every 18 months. New hardware and operating systems to take advantage of it are good. That’s progress.
And I saw this as a user who has never been able to sync Apple photos on Mac OS to iCloud since Mojave. I am frustrated enough that I have been researching how to dump Photos and iCloud for Google.
I am not a fan of Tim Cook and Apple is hiring some mediocre engineers. The best engineers are not choosing to work for Apple these days, especially with the stock in the tank and employees options under water.
Regarding the loss of support for 32-bit apps, I can’t help but think of the fairly well-established rumor that Apple is pretty far along the pathway to switching Macs to use its own CPUs rather than continuing with Intel. If that is the case, there will probably be some extended period of the new machines having an Intel compatibility layer, and the 32-bit support is not something that is likely to be ported to the new architecture.
(I have a 2010 iMac, refreshed with an SSD in 2017. I’m now hoping it holds out until after the CPU shift, and until Apple’s built-in SSD expansion prices come down out of the stratosphere. I’d hate to buy one of the last generation of machines before the CPU shift.)
Whenever a user shows up and criticizes something New Apple does, and the replies deflect to privacy I get a strong suspicion there’s no real argument.
Privacy is great and if Apple truly gets it that’s awesome. But that has nothing to do with usability or professional products. There’s nothing mutually exclusive about it. You don’t have to choose between good privacy and good engineering. Apple marketing might want us to think we do. But nobody should subject themselves to this false dichotomy. We can expect Apple to honor privacy and still do better elsewhere. In fact, we should. Otherwise, we could just as well choose MS over Google and assume we’re done with the topic.
I feel as you do. I’m not using programs that I used in years past as often. At this time in my life it’s not financially sound to spend money on updating apps.
Well, I ordered the new retina 27” iMac with 512 SSD drive, 16gigs. I don’t know much about comparison of SSD drive storage and what I’m familiar with - 1 terabyte HD storage. Anyone want to educate me? Thank you for your conversations. Very comforting that I’m not alone.
There’s no difference in terms of what you can store between SSD and HD, so your new iMac will have half the storage space. The SSD is faster than a HD though, so it contributes to the overall performance of the system. But if you were using more than 40% or so of your old 1 TB HD, I think you’ll likely need an external drive where you can offload some files. Make sure you also have a backup plan that takes account of the external drive as well as the internal SSD.
Jolin, thank you for informing me.