On Aug 11, 2012, at 12:10 AM, Jayson Adams <jay...@circusponies.com> wrote:
> On Aug 10, 2012, at 8:02 PM, Charles Srstka wrote: > >>> Not everyone uses ARC, or the other recent additions Apple has made to the >>> language. >> >> Yes, but the fact that everything new that Apple adds assumes that you're >> compiling for 64-bit only really ought to tell you something. >>> > > Tell me what exactly? That 32-bit is going away in 10.9? That doesn't follow. > That 32-bit will get dropped eventually? That was already obvious. It tells us that Apple is no longer putting effort into 32-bit, which in turn tells us that its days are almost certainly numbered. > What it doesn't say anything about is the timing of the demise of 32-bit > support. Of course we don't know the exact timing, but it's entirely plausible that it could be removed in 10.9 or 10.10, and if you don't want to get a really rude surprise, you should be assuming that that is what will happen. What we can do is make an educated guess on the timing based on past history. OS X first came out in 2001. Apple dropped Classic with the introduction of the Intel Macs in 2006, five years later. Apple switched away from PowerPC to Intel in 2006. Apple dropped support for PowerPC binaries with Lion, in 2011, five years later. Apple discontinued its last 32-bit Mac in 2007. It's now 2012, five years later. Of course, I could be wrong, but given the information we have right now, to assume that 32-bit support will go on indefinitely (or even more than a year or so) is not a very good gamble at this stage, IMO. Charles _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
