M1 chip fast my ass...

[TiggrToo]

As for the Steam conversation, first of all, not all games crossed out by Steam for being 32-bit are *actually* 32-bit. They're just configured incorrectly in their Steam database. They will run just fine.

So that’s why My “The Journey Down” trilogy still plays - even though it was shown as 32 bit.

I had wondered, but was thankful nonetheless (still love that game).

 

[Skewlovevism]

don't fall for the hype

Not to be pedantic, but do you know how many second of delay is there on Mac boot, so you have plenty of time to go single user mode, recovery mode, … . With the chime on Mac, you know, it is almost half time waiting

 

[PlainBelliedSneetch]

And ruin a bunch of handy features along with it (Apple pay). So yeah, you can, just not the level people thought it might be.

Btw, M1 Mac never truly turn off, only into some sort of deep sleep mode. Even fingers moving on trackpad or pressing space bar turns on the Mac.

Most computers have circuitry that allows waking from various wake sources (Ethernet, USB, RTC, etc.).

That is different than Windows having shutdown operate in a mode that is essentially a hybrid sleep mode using suspend to disk so that people can claim it can cold boot faster.

 

[casperes1996]

Real coders use pure hexadecimal - non of this ASM mnemonic crap that the junior script-kiddies use

Sorry, I'll do better in the future :

Jokes aside though, when Linus Torvalds first started work on Linux he genuinely didn't know assemblers existed. So he first wrote out his code with mnemonics. Then afterwards typed all of it in as hex cause he thought it was the only way to do it, and the mnemonics were just there to make it easier to read, reason about and share program logic before turning it into machine operations by hand... He later did learn

So that’s why My “The Journey Down” trilogy still plays - even though it was shown as 32 bit.

I had wondered, but was thankful nonetheless (still love that game).

Yep! When you set up your Steam Store page for a title you have to mark it as 64-bit manually. Kinda silly that it doesn't auto detect the binary you submit or at least default new uploads to 64, but nope. And if you upload a demo as well as a full game you also need to do it for both. And if you'll excuse a shameless plug, this is something we've talked a little about here and there on the podcast I'm a part of, MacGameCast

 

[TiggrToo]

Sorry, I'll do better in the future :
View attachment 1861962
Jokes aside though, when Linus Torvalds first started work on Linux he genuinely didn't know assemblers existed. So he first wrote out his code with mnemonics. Then afterwards typed all of it in as hex cause he thought it was the only way to do it, and the mnemonics were just there to make it easier to read, reason about and share program logic before turning it into machine operations by hand... He later did learn

Yep! When you set up your Steam Store page for a title you have to mark it as 64-bit manually. Kinda silly that it doesn't auto detect the binary you submit or at least default new uploads to 64, but nope. And if you upload a demo as well as a full game you also need to do it for both. And if you'll excuse a shameless plug, this is something we've talked a little about here and there on the podcast I'm a part of, MacGameCast

I cut my eye teeth writing 6502 assembler with the Acorn Atom (using mnemonics embedded inside an Atom Basic program - now that was freaking revolutionary!) then Z80 on the ZX-Spectrum where I had to convert each line by hand into assembler (albeit pretty short bits of code) - That was before I convinced my mum that paying for Zeus assembler would be a worthwhile exercise because then I could use Mnemonic code.

Pretty sure I fired Zeus up twice then never again - oops!

 

[Joniz]

Your M1, your behind; what you do in the bedroom with your chips is your own business.

Though I don’t understand your need to post about it.

 

[Admiral]

My M1 machine runs everything I need and runs it better. I really don't understand your point. It's not about Photoshop, I don't care about photoshop. ...

Real-World Test: Photoshop for Apple Silicon is a Game-Changer

Adobe finally released the full version of Photoshop for Apple Silicon, and we have good news: it's fast... really, really fast.

petapixel.com

 

[vir]

I lost everything.

 

[Shirasaki]

I’ve about 50-60 games. I lost about 5 of them in the 32 bit purge.

Your claim of “statistically impossible” is pure conjecture.

Heh. I have 10 and lost all of them during this transition. And no, those companies developing those games are either dead or abandoned projects a while ago.

Hence, “statistically impossible” definitely holds water.

 

[TiggrToo]

Apple Possibly Exploring Open-Source Alternative to Arm Architecture

Apple may be exploring the possibility of using an open-source alternative to the Arm architecture, which it's been using in its products for...

www.macrumors.com

I had around 430 and lost about 385. Guess you have newer tastes than I. Even Feral purged about 70% of their Mac library from the Mac App Store, so you truly do have selective taste to do better with compatibility than a Mac porting house.

Most of mine are classic Point & Click adventure games.

The ones I lost were games such as Half-life and Shadow Warrior Classic.

So even you yourself have proven that your claim was conjecture and/or hyperbole - which was my point.

There are over 5,600 Steam games available for the Mac. Ergo it is "statistically possible" (your phrase, not mine) to have 200 and not one being 32 bit. That's my point.

 

[TiggrToo]

Heh. I have 10 and lost all of them during this transition. And no, those companies developing those games are either dead or abandoned projects a while ago.

Hence, “statistically impossible” definitely holds water.

No, that's anecdotal evidence. To be "statistically impossible" there has to be no way, what so ever, for something to be true when looking at the raw numbers.

Let's pretend there were less than half the games in the steam store 3 years ago than there are now - say 2,500. Let's also pretend that 75% of those were 32 bit only (a totally crazy figure, but this is being ultra generous), then that still leaves 625 games with are 64 bit compatible.

So totally statistically possible.

Now, if you're talking probabilities then that's a totally different story. However the phrase being thrown around here is "Statistically impossible" - and that requires absolute proof.

So to claim that you HAVE to know the exact number of games affected. No one here does, hence the term cannot be used.

 

[casperes1996]

Most of mine are classic Point & Click adventure games.

The ones I lost were games such as Half-life and Shadow Warrior Classic.

So even you yourself have proven that your claim was conjecture and/or hyperbole - which was my point.

There are over 5,600 Steam games available for the Mac. Ergo it is "statistically possible" (your phrase, not mine) to have 200 and not one being 32 bit. That's my point.

I fundamentally agree with your main point, but to play devil's advocate here, we don't actually have enough information here to conclude either way. You'd need to know at least an estimate of the distribution of those 5,600 games that are 32-bit only. Then you could compute the likelihood of sampling 200 of those and never getting a 32-bit only one. "Statistically impossible" is different from entirely impossible. I'd argue that in a casual conversation like this, just a 10% or smaller chance of the event occurring would count, though if it were in a paper I might put it at .5 with statistically improbably at 5%

Anyways as I said I fundamentally agree with you just trying to play devil's advocate here

 

[casperes1996]

No, that's anecdotal evidence. To be "statistically impossible" there has to be no way, what so ever, for something to be true when looking at the raw numbers.

Let's pretend there were less than half the games in the steam store 3 years ago than there are now - say 2,500. Let's also pretend that 75% of those were 32 bit only (a totally crazy figure, but this is being ultra generous), then that still leaves 625 games with are 64 bit compatible.

So totally statistically possible.

Now, if you're talking probabilities then that's a totally different story. However the phrase being thrown around here is "Statistically impossible" - and that requires absolute proof.

So to claim that you HAVE to know the exact number of games affected. No one here does, hence the term cannot be used.

I think your definition of statistically impossible differs from what is more often used:

A statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 10−50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a rational, reasonable argument.

Statistically impossible != Impossible. Then it wouldn't be statistical. The phrase includes a notion of probabilistic behaviours. Especially because statistics are nearly always sampled from a smaller size than the group they talk about

 

[-BigMac-]

Comparing 2021 laptop vs 2020 m1?

even with that in mind, the m1 beats it in actual day to day speed?

what a clown thread

 

[TiggrToo]

I fundamentally agree with your main point, but to play devil's advocate here, we don't actually have enough information here to conclude either way. You'd need to know at least an estimate of the distribution of those 5,600 games that are 32-bit only. Then you could compute the likelihood of sampling 200 of those and never getting a 32-bit only one. "Statistically impossible" is different from entirely impossible. I'd argue that in a casual conversation like this, just a 10% or smaller chance of the event occurring would count, though if it were in a paper I might put it at .5 with statistically improbably at 5%

Anyways as I said I fundamentally agree with you just trying to play devil's advocate here

Oh I getcha, but I see this phrase thrown around so often and it bugs me.

The definition is "statistically impossible" is actually very nuanced and does nudge into probabilities at a very base level. I think it's something like less than a probability of 10**-50 which is so microscopic as to be insignificant.

It's certainly statistically possible to not have lost a single game. However you'd certainly be lucky to be in this position (unless you purposly avoided any 32 bit title).

Like I say, this phrase for me has taken on new meaning this year, and has been misused badly these last 12 months here in the USA.

 

[vir]

Always use safe words.

 

[casperes1996]

Oh I getcha, but I see this phrase thrown around so often and it bugs me.

The definition is "statistically impossible" is actually very nuanced and does nudge into probabilities at a very base level. I think it's something like less than a probability of 10**-50 which is so microscopic as to be insignificant.

It's certainly statistically possible to not have lost a single game. However you'd certainly be lucky to be in this position (unless you purposly avoided any 32 bit title).

Like I say, this phrase for me has taken on new meaning this year, and has been misused badly these last 12 months here in the USA.

I mean perfectly valid Whether "statistically possible" or not at least can't be definitively concluded without knowing the distribution of 32/64-bit titles, but I agree for it to be so improbable as to be "statistically impossible" even with looser bounds on that probability does seem unlikely

 

[casperes1996]

It really is quite boring to hang onto a choice of term and go full hog with it for multiple posts. Jesus, "not likely", feel better? Emotions under control with that replacement term? Are we in a safe place now?

I disagree on it being boring. But then again, I enjoy language and linguistic conversations.
But sure let's proceed

Regardless of how you slice it the "32-bit app-ocalypse" was a loss for games on the Mac. But it was also a benefit. Some titles that might not have otherwise been updated did get a facelift with performance improvement, and if you have a source for it I'd like to see where the "70% of Feral games" being dropped comes from. That's not me saying you're wrong, it's just that I'd like to see the source; If we again speak anecdotally, all but one of my games from Feral ran fine after the demise of legacy.
And have you tried installing the games that are crossed out by Steam? For quite a number of them Steam incorrectly shows it to be 32-bit only when in fact it is 64-bit.

Though again, as I said, regardless of how you slice it, yes it was a loss and games lost compatibility with newer releases of macOS. But without emulation, you also can't play old NES games on any modern hardware. 32-bit is a legacy technology and most players in the field agree. Ubuntu also no longer officially supports 32-bit.

 

[vir]

Many things don't work.

 

[casperes1996]

Ubuntu supports 32-bit just fine. I pulled 70% out of my ass and am probably wrong about that (shocker, someone can admit they are wrong and not stubbornly cling to an argument), but most of my Feral purchases stopped working, I had a bunch of Tomb Raider, Bioshock, and some Lego/Sega games all just gone. But the 70% holds when considering that x64 will be dropped too, and by then it will likely be more than 70%. I always seem to just throw all the x86 stuff together when talking about catastrophic loss, because well, the damage being done is still underway.

I really don't want to go through the experience of checking which Steam games are actually 32-bit and which aren't. Even the store page doesn't tell you that. You more likely than not will buy a game that doesn't even work. So that 5600 number is dramatically, and boy do I mean dramatically, smaller than what the official tally is. It's a terrible user experience and I'm done with dealing with that nonsense. I already left for greener pastures.

Ubuntu has mostly dropped official 32-bit support. They do not ship an i386 installer and the OS does not come packaged with 32-bit libraries anymore. Statically linked binaries and self contained binaries will run in 32-bit mode, yes, but the standard repo has no 32-bit libraries

Statement on 32-bit i386 packages for Ubuntu 19.10 and 20.04 LTS | Ubuntu

Thanks to the huge amount of feedback this weekend from gamers, Ubuntu Studio, and the WINE community, we will change our plan and build selected 32-bit i386 packages for Ubuntu 19.10 and 20.04 LTS. We will put in place a community process to determine which 32-bit packages are needed to support...

ubuntu.com

I may be wrong but I don't believe the original series of Tomb Raider games ever made it to Mac so I assume you mean the rebooted series. In which case, good news - all the Tomb Raider games Feral ported in the rebooted series work on Big Sur and Monterey. Whether they got updated after you tried them or they were incorrectly listed as 32 bit for a while or something I don't know, but fact is I tried Tomb Raider (2013) as recently as last week. If you do mean the original series however and I'm wrong and they were on Mac - yeah I don't expect that to ever work; Sorry for the loss.

If we go by history, Rosetta 1 was dropped when basically everything anyone ever used ran natively on Intel. I assume the same to hold for Rosetta 2. Most maintained software is already ARM native and we only have a single chip out and Intel Macs are still actively being sold. Games will go because games are not maintained software. They are made, shipped played and archived. It's a shame. But even though I had music on CDs I'm also content with not having a CD drive in my laptop anymore. Or a tape drive... Or a vinyl record spinner attached to the side of my MacBook. - Actually that'd be pretty cool to have as an extension thingy, but never mind that right now.
Actively maintained software running on macOS now will also run on macOS when Rosetta falls. Because the CPU architecture matters very little. Porting from WinForms (or whatever) to AppKit is where the effort lies, not from one CPU architecture to the other. In the majority of cases that'll just work. Legacy Mac software no longer maintained will fall. That sucks if you rely on it. But this is what happens in tech. You also don't run System 7 software anymore, And as time moves on virtualising the necessary environment to run those older titles at good performance also becomes more feasible anyway. You won't expect NES games to run natively on any hardware today, but you can emulate them. For many consoles there's a gap where it's old enough to be unsupported legacy but not old enough to feasibly be emulated. M1 can already run a lot of unsupported games fairly well through Parallels and CrossOver - This is not me saying I think you will be able to easily or even at all play 32-bit games; It's just to say that I don't think this is whole a threat to software archival and it's the natural evolution of technology to leave behind legacy that only slows you down, increases the threat vector and makes the system less maintainable.

The store pages really should tell you when a game *isn't* supported. They just won't always tell the truth about supported titles. If it says it isn't supported, it might work anyway. If it says it is supported though, I've never seen it not work. So you won't wind up buying something non-functional as far as I've seen, though I'll gladly be corrected with an example.
But there are actually quite a few games on there that are listed as 32-bit only that will work (hassle to check I agree. I usually don't bother either. Valve should make Steam able to auto detect the executable rather than relying on manual entries by the dev that don't get updated). Furthermore there are even games that don't have a Mac symbol at all that *still* will work on macOS with official support. In some cases the Mac port was made, officially there for some time, then a license expired so they weren't legally allowed to actively market it, but it's still there and perfectly functional.

Games never have been the greatest strength of a Mac though, and I do have Windows installed through BootCamp on my iMac because of it. macOS for everything other than games, boot Windows for games. - Even games available on macOS will frequently run worse than their Windows counterpart due to less prioritised optimisation.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Just having a friendly back and forth Use whatever system you prefer to use

 

[vir]

Mac software selection lacks.

 

[mi7chy]

Congrats, a $2800 laptop is a few seconds faster at booting than one half the price.

$500 Lenovo Yoga 6 boots much faster than my MacBook Air M1. On top of that, fingerprint unlock works on cold boot on the Yoga 6 unlike the MBA M1. At least Apple finally fixed the 5 sec delay that prevented you from actually typing in the password when the prompt shows.

As for Linux on M1, it's unviable until it gets full accelerated hardware drivers because unaccelerated GPU drivers is a substandard experience.

 

[im_to_hyper]

Replace Mojave Intel Mac with “any Intel PC” and you can say the same thing.

But I can somehow understand your point, x86 softwares are accessible by most users, so it may seems like there are “wealth of x86 software”. However, as a developer, I can tell you that there is not that much “architecture dependent” code because most of us are writing high-level code which hide the CPU specific stuff and can automatically make our code run on different CPUs(most of the time). There are more “(Software)platform dependent code” than “(Hardware)architecture dependent code”. By using the same CPU architecture does not make it easier to port a software for another OS. Most Windows software are compiled for x86-64 because most Windows computers run on that architecture, but Linux has a completely different division of CPU architecture support which is not bound to x86 at all as there are so many non-x86 machines runs Linux.

macOS follows the similar pattern, when enough users are on arm64, macOS software will be compiled for arm64. It is OK to lose some vintage software, just like it’s OK to not run PPC software on an Intel Mac.

I have:

1) A large variety of software for System 6 through Mac OS 9.x.
2) A large variety of software for Mac OS X through Mac OS X 10.5
3) A large variety of 32-bit Intel Mac software

To solve this issue I run:

1) Mojave on my primary machine with as much 32-bit software as it can handle.
2) Snow Leopard in a VM. This with Rosetta (1) handles my PowerPC programs
3) Sheepshaver within Snow Leopard with Mac OS 9.1 to handle legacy Mac apps.

I suppose going forward on an M2/M2X/M3 CPU I will have VMs for Mojave and Snow Leopard independently, but will still be able to access my legacy software as wanted

That being said it’s never “been OK not to run PPC software on an Intel Mac” due to 10.6 being the only Intel-Exclusive (sans beta) version to have Rosetta.

That transition happened during university years for me so luckily I could get software cheaply - otherwise I would have lost thousands of dollars having to re-purchase.

 

[Kung gu]

The M1 chip is limited sadly.

 

[vir]

I love tactics.