←back to thread

M4 Macs can't virtualise older macOS

(eclecticlight.co)
176 points Brajeshwar | 9 comments | 16 Nov 24 16:12 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
doomlaser ◴[16 Nov 24 16:38 UTC] No.42157271[source]▶
Come on, Apple. What are you doing? I was thinking just the other day that Apple should virtualize older iPhones within the latest iPhone system software, so you could seamlessly open old apps and games (32-bit, anyone?) in their own containerized environments. I can't think why they haven't added this feature for any reason other than money grubbing.

You could even customize the containers to be completely closed off from the rest of the iPhone—no contacts, no Internet access (or high security Internet access), etc.

Come on, Apple. Do something good for once. Oh and bring back the headphone jack.

-Mark

replies(9): >>42157308 #>>42157317 #>>42157329 #>>42157337 #>>42157360 #>>42157361 #>>42157383 #>>42157388 #>>42157560 #
1. djha-skin ◴[16 Nov 24 16:43 UTC] No.42157308[source]▶
Apple does a lot of good stuff, But remember that their whole business model is selling hardware. They have no financial interest in making it easy to continue to use old phones.
replies(6): >>42157418 #>>42157421 #>>42157928 #>>42158066 #>>42158215 #>>42159770 #
2. samatman ◴[16 Nov 24 17:00 UTC] No.42157418[source]▶
For some value of 'old' perhaps.

In terms of length of official support, and aftermarket value, Apple is at the top of the game. Those strike me as the most important metrics here.

And while you might think that once official support is over, that's the end of the story, this is far from true. Those phones end up in developing markets, where there's an entire cottage industry dedicated to keeping them going. Jailbreaking is getting harder, so that might stop being an option eventually, but so far it's viable, and that's what happens.

3. downWidOutaFite ◴[16 Nov 24 17:01 UTC] No.42157421[source]▶
Or any interest in reducing the incentives to buy their $200 Bluetooth headphones.
4. asveikau ◴[16 Nov 24 18:12 UTC] No.42157928[source]▶
Old phones no, but old apps yes. If a developer has abandoned an app and hasn't been investing in the update treadmill, but end users still care about it, that can make people feel negatively about Apple.
replies(1): >>42158107 #
5. neodymiumphish ◴[16 Nov 24 18:25 UTC] No.42158066[source]▶
They have to maintain a balance that still incentivizes current purchases. Otherwise it’ll be a constantly trend of “don’t buy now, support might not last.”
6. JadeNB ◴[16 Nov 24 18:29 UTC] No.42158107[source]▶
> Old phones no, but old apps yes. If a developer has abandoned an app and hasn't been investing in the update treadmill, but end users still care about it, that can make people feel negatively about Apple.

On the other hand, it is well within the standard Apple approach to say "here's how we want people to use our hardware. We are well aware that this is not consistent with how some potential and past users want to use the hardware, but we are comfortable with losing those customers if they will not adapt to the new set-up."

replies(1): >>42158344 #
7. foldr ◴[16 Nov 24 18:43 UTC] No.42158215[source]▶
This isn't as true as it used to be, now that Apple is getting increased revenue from subscriptions. If your old iPhone continues to work well, then Apple has a better chance of selling you Apple Music, Apple TV, etc. etc.
8. asveikau ◴[16 Nov 24 18:57 UTC] No.42158344{3}[source]▶
I know it's not the Apple approach, I'm just pointing out an interpretation that it isn't particularly focused on end user needs in this area.

I feel like it's mostly an attitude about where to focus engineering resources, which is very "inside baseball", but people have post hoc justifications that it's really what end users want anyway.

9. tomjen3 ◴[16 Nov 24 22:05 UTC] No.42159770[source]▶
In this case, they only broke their newest hardware.