Apple M4 compatible Plug-ins

[Morty-C-137]

Many plugins are M1 Native. But the installers require Rosetta. It's a little silly but welcome to the world of Mac!

This is what I hate. It's the developers leaving porting the installers on the table. Why make the plugins native but not the installers? What is then the point if Rosetta is then still required to install the mf'ers?

"We are apple silicon native"

I don’t think they are leaving anything but just needing to cover a user base that includes some on Intel and some on AS. So the installer is a universal binary and contains both versions, but it will only install the version you need. However it looks like when MacOs detects an installer containing Intel code it still requires Rosetta to be installed even though it isn’t going to be used to run the app

I wonder if Pacifist is a way round this for people who absolutely don’t want Rosetta in their systems?

Hmm .. that actually sounds plausible. To be honest I am not certain if macOS handles it that way.

[Alexander_D]

I am planing to buy Mac m4. Right now I am in windows. And does anybody know about these plugins. Does they need Rosetta?

1) Fabfilter Bundle
2) Wavesfactory
3) Valhalla
4) Soundtoys Bundle
5) U-HE stuff
6) Oek

Thanks

[aMUSEd]

Many plugins are M1 Native. But the installers require Rosetta. It's a little silly but welcome to the world of Mac!

This is what I hate. It's the developers leaving porting the installers on the table. Why make the plugins native but not the installers? What is then the point if Rosetta is then still required to install the mf'ers?

"We are apple silicon native"

I don’t think they are leaving anything but just needing to cover a user base that includes some on Intel and some on AS. So the installer is a universal binary and contains both versions, but it will only install the version you need. However it looks like when MacOs detects an installer containing Intel code it still requires Rosetta to be installed even though it isn’t going to be used to run the app

I wonder if Pacifist is a way round this for people who absolutely don’t want Rosetta in their systems?

Hmm .. that actually sounds plausible. To be honest I am not certain if macOS handles it that way.

Maybe not, I guess the warning could come from the installer, but it looks more like a system level warning to me from the screenshot like this:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/102527

Also that would be consistent with what the Boz dev was saying that their apps are Universal so contain both versions so the only reason I can think of to explain why that would set off a Rosetta warning, assuming the installer itself is native, is the system detecting the Intel code - but I'm open to my reasoning being faulty

[kidslow]

I wonder if Pacifist is a way round this for people who absolutely don’t want Rosetta in their systems?

That is my preferred installer and I am not ruthless about Rosetta. With Pacifist, 9 out of 10 plugin packages can be installed manually, if you pay attention to how they are constructed. Some of them are odd and inscrutible.

[Morty-C-137]

Many plugins are M1 Native. But the installers require Rosetta. It's a little silly but welcome to the world of Mac!

This is what I hate. It's the developers leaving porting the installers on the table. Why make the plugins native but not the installers? What is then the point if Rosetta is then still required to install the mf'ers?

"We are apple silicon native"

I don’t think they are leaving anything but just needing to cover a user base that includes some on Intel and some on AS. So the installer is a universal binary and contains both versions, but it will only install the version you need. However it looks like when MacOs detects an installer containing Intel code it still requires Rosetta to be installed even though it isn’t going to be used to run the app

I wonder if Pacifist is a way round this for people who absolutely don’t want Rosetta in their systems?

Hmm .. that actually sounds plausible. To be honest I am not certain if macOS handles it that way.

Maybe not, I guess the warning could come from the installer, but it looks more like a system level warning to me from the screenshot like this:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/102527

Also that would be consistent with what the Boz dev was saying that their apps are Universal so contain both versions so the only reason I can think of to explain why that would set off a Rosetta warning, assuming the installer itself is native, is the system detecting the Intel code - but I'm open to my reasoning being faulty

So in any case, for the ones that absolutely don't want Rosetta on their system (like I do), devs can compile an AS installer and an INTEL installer (a lot of them do provide that btw).

[sqigls]

what's the beef with rosetta? i really wanna know

[Morty-C-137]

what's the beef with rosetta? i really wanna know

I don’t like her, she cheated on me with my own brother!

[Audiority]

I don’t think they are leaving anything but just needing to cover a user base that includes some on Intel and some on AS. So the installer is a universal binary and contains both versions, but it will only install the version you need. However it looks like when MacOs detects an installer containing Intel code it still requires Rosetta to be installed even though it isn’t going to be used to run the app

Well, it's actually simpler than that and, at the same time, error prone from a dev point of view.
The universal binary 2 plugin contains BOTH Intel and Arm version in the same binary, so it's not the installer that decides which one gets installed. The installer asking for Rosetta issue comes down to this single line:

Code: Select all

<options customize="always" hostArchitectures="x86_64,arm64"/>

Usually you didn't have to add the hostArchitectures parameter, so that's easy to miss that. If that parameter is not specified, the installer assumes that the software about to be installed is Intel and it pops up that window. Once added that hostArchitecture parameter to the Distribution.xml file, the installer will know what to do and won't ask for Rosetta any longer.

Cheers,
Luca

[Tj Shredder]

Just as a counterpoint: I think developers might say, "this is what I hate about end-users! What's the big deal if the installer needs Rosetta? It doesn't hurt anything. The plugin is native. Why do they care about the installer? Just install Rosetta and it's a complete non-issue. Why should I waste time updating all my installers instead of working on the actual plugins?"

if it IS just the installer then the issue isn't really that big.
Still, it requires me to download and install something else, I wouldn't need if it really was native. It also requires me to ask on a forum, what the hell is up with that...

Blame Apple! Why do they not install Rosetta??? I would like to even have the old Rosetta, that can play PPC code. They dictate, they want to prove if there still anybody needs Rosetta. Please even if you don‘t need Rosetta install it! It might save the life of somebody by forcing them to support it in ongoing OS releases…
I want my machine to just work. Getting rid of backward compatibility just creates anger…
And also developers just do not create Mx compatible installers! Best would be never! I want Rosetta until I leave this place for a better world…

[jens]

What is then the point if Rosetta is then still required to install the mf'ers?

The point is obviously that plugins run faster without Rosetta i.e. use less cpu cycles to run.

For the installer however this is pretty irrelevant, which is why it's perfectly fine that the installer requires Rosetta as long as the actual plugin doesn't.

One would think this is fairly obvious, n0?

[Raketenbauer]

I am planing to buy Mac m4. Right now I am in windows. And does anybody know about these plugins. Does they need Rosetta?

1) Fabfilter Bundle
2) Wavesfactory
3) Valhalla
4) Soundtoys Bundle
5) U-HE stuff
6) Oek

Thanks

I’m running Fabfilter, Valhalla and u-he plugins on my M2 MacBook without having Rosetta installed.

If done correctly, a universal binary installer doesn‘t need Rosetta!

I had a problem with one of the apps from the Korg collection, the installer insisted on installing Rosetta where all the other apps from the collection installed fine. After contacting the developer the installer was fixed a few weeks later.

If you run into the Rosetta required problem, just let the developer know. Maybe they aren’t aware of the situation.

[electro]

Wouldn't it be easier to make a list of all developers that don't support silicon at this point?

[Alexander_D]

I am planing to buy Mac m4. Right now I am in windows. And does anybody know about these plugins. Does they need Rosetta?

1) Fabfilter Bundle
2) Wavesfactory
3) Valhalla
4) Soundtoys Bundle
5) U-HE stuff
6) Oek

Thanks

I’m running Fabfilter, Valhalla and u-he plugins on my M2 MacBook without having Rosetta installed.

If done correctly, a universal binary installer doesn‘t need Rosetta!

I had a problem with one of the apps from the Korg collection, the installer insisted on installing Rosetta where all the other apps from the collection installed fine. After contacting the developer the installer was fixed a few weeks later.

If you run into the Rosetta required problem, just let the developer know. Maybe they aren’t aware of the situation.

Thank you very much!

[Audiority]

Wouldn't it be easier to make a list of all developers that don't support silicon at this point?

Today I found out that I need Rosetta to install Native Access. I need my RX license and i'm stuck.

[Funky40]

Wouldn't it be easier to make a list of all developers that don't support silicon at this point?

yes, there is.

viewtopic.php?t=556728

217 pages !
they started it early on