@RDPetruska wrote:
No, I believe that if a hardware company is making MAJOR changes to their hardware, they have an obligation to inform their customers exactly WHAT is changing and HOW that will impact them! If I'm in a store and a salesperson is trying to sell me the latest and greatest product - the main question they should be answering for me is "Why is this such a great product versus your competitor's?" - i.e. "Why should I buy this product?" And part of the obligation of that salesperson is to inform the potential customer of both the pros AND the cons of said product. I feel that Apple did a much better job of this when they switched from Motorola/PowerPC architecture to Intel/x86 architecture.
We differ in opinion and perspectives, and that's OK. I come from a non-Apple sales support technical background. From what I learned in a 40+ year career, the quickest way to throw monkey wrenches in a deal is to get into a feature comparison or "why are you better than your competition" discussion. We were taught to focus on the user's needs, and explain how our solution met them. That's the attitude I've taken in the documents that I've written in this forum for community consumption.
Apple IMO did a good job in masking over the differences in architectures with Rosetta 2 so that they did not have very many exceptions or need for lengthy explanations to a majority of their customers. Most users therefore are unaware that Apple changed the brains of the Mac as it doesn't matter to them. But as you say, there are some corner cases where the change matters. And I agree that Apple could have been more transparent on that.
However, we're somewhat caught between rock and a hard place here if Apple did provide that level of transparency. On one hand, the places where this matter require an explanation that assumes the reader to understand some technical detail. On the other we have customers that don't have the background to understand the technical detail.
Reality says no operating system or hardware vendor tests out every application to make sure they run when changes occur. That falls back on the software vendor. That's one of the reasons that Apple provided Apple Silicon development kits, software betas and developer support.
To me, the disclaimer from Apple should have been "most applications will run without issue under Rosetta 2. There are applications that do x y and z where Rosetta won't work for you. Please check with your software vendor to ensure that applications that run on Intel Macs will work on Apple Silicon Macs as we do not test every application for compatibility with Apple Silicon Macs.
- Paul (Technogeezer)
Editor of the Unofficial Fusion Companion Guides
