And while this writer is not much of a gamer, we are told that a lot of games are still 32-bit and won't be updated. That was the main reason that Canonical backed down on dropping 32-bit support back in 2019.

Ostensibly the main driver (complaint) back then for keeping 32bit support was Wine, which needed 32-bit host libraries to run 32-bit programs (likely the vast majority of programs one would try and run under wine). Since then, Wine library loading has been completely reworked and you should "now" be able to use a single wine executable linked to your system's fully native 64-bit libraries and run 32-bit Windows binaries. However, 'tis true that Steam native Linux games are built against an Ubuntu LTS release which may or may not be 32-bit

Now, the last current browser for these old macOS releases is Firefox 115 ESR.

Which should be supported until a bit after Q1 2025

(On a personal note, I never thought I'd get to see the 32bit x86 mass extinction event this early. Mac is going through its 3rd to 5th such event -- 68k->PPC->x86(->amd64)->Arm, OS Classic -> OSX during the PPC days -- but it's a first for most x86 Windows/*Nix[1] users)

[1]: The only similar event(s) I can recall were on GNU/Linux before I had even heard of it: the switch from libc5 back to glibc, and on a smaller extent (with the same borkage capability), the switch from a.out to ELF.

>> The only similar event(s) I can recall were on GNU/Linux before I had even heard of it: the switch from libc5 back to glibc, and on a smaller extent (with the same borkage capability), the switch from a.out to ELF

You will see it a little with the introduction of Wayland. There will be a few few software titles (not necessarily games) that will fall through the cracks. Xwayland as an Xephyr replacement will help with some but as things progress more, you will see breakage. The problem is that games ultimately *aren't* important. There will be no real drive to maintain them.

But will Wayland ever reach Beta?

I can't understand why people who are not developing & testing Wayland would use it at all.

Will Wayland be like IPv6?

Windows dropped 16 bit support with their 64 bit OSs, but you could still install a 32 bit version up to Win 10 which would still allow compatibility.

Wasn't Microsoft that did this, well at least if I recall right. It is the x86 64 platform itself (hardware) that dropped support for 16bit while running in 64bit mode. I think it had to do with the registers on the CPU. I assume just a way to make things more simple (and cheaper),

So will Valve provide "official cracks" for those 32-bit mac games that will ultimately be rendered unplayable due to the older Steam DRM platform no-longer being supported (or activatable)?

The same happened to Windows XP. You had games on there that only ran on Windows XP or older but then the Steam DRM platform only ran on Windows Vista or newer. This disconnect killed a lot of effort, money, personal (digital) property.

... but the sort of rapid consumers who are happy to rent their games off the Steam DRM platform for an unspecified amount of time probably don't care. So I suppose they can do what they want and so can Valve.

That won't help, 32 bit games won't be usable either, unless the developer releases 64 bit binaries.

Valve can't permanently maintain an outdated version of the client for a small fraction of MacOS users who haven't updated their OS two years after it went out of support, eventually the plug has to be pulled.

Good Old Games [gog dot com/en/games?systems=osx] still has 2706 games on macOS.

I use Steam for games (on my linux systems) mostly because it is hard to plough through the various game review sites and publishers and find games I may enjoy which will run on Linux whereas using Steam I can run the compatibility mode which allows me to mostly ignore the intended OS. there is also the issue that very few games are available for full download to keep forever and anything claiming to be a AAA rated game will have an always online requirement meaning you have no idea how long before they turn of the validation server.

It has been many a year since I was able to buy a game from a bricks'n'mortar establishment and run it directly from the disc inside the box, only connecting to the internet for minor updates. The last game I bought as a downloadable was >30GB for the initial download and then needed to pull down a >40GB 'update'

That's been true for quite a while. My Windows box is a P4, 32 bit. A few months back I got a Linux magazine with cover disc for €1 (to shift old stock). Put it in, rebooted, saw a tiny text message saying I needed another 32 bits for it to work. Nowhere was this mentioned (I'd not have bought it if it said it was x86-64 as I know I don't have that). I think, these days, it's just assumed that all the ancient hardware is either dead, forgotten, or landfill.

About time.

The last 32-bit x86 processor was made in 2011, the last ACTUALLY USABLE one was something like 2004.

If you haven't migrated to 64-bit software (processor change likely not required if purchased in the last 2 decades!) yet, then you have some serious problems.

32-bit-only is dead, and has been for over a decade in terms of production, and 2 decades in reality.

That we're only just removing backwards compatibility TWENTY YEARS LATER is testament to quite how backward people can be in scrapping obsolete hardware that only runs on obsolete operating systems with obsolete software.

It's like wondering why you can't boot a ZX Spectrum (discontinued in 1992) to play titles from twenty years later (2012).

"That's been true for quite a while."

No, it hasn't.

"My Windows box is a P4, 32 bit. A few months back I got a Linux magazine with cover disc for €1 (to shift old stock). Put it in, rebooted, saw a tiny text message saying I needed another 32 bits for it to work. Nowhere was this mentioned (I'd not have bought it if it said it was x86-64 as I know I don't have that). I think, these days, it's just assumed that all the ancient hardware is either dead, forgotten, or landfill."

Seriously? The last Pentium4 that was 32bit only was Northwood which came out in 2002, that was *two decades ago*. Subsequent P4s all had intel64 (intel's variant of AMD's x64 extensions) and likely would have booted that Linux disc.

While I'm all for keeping older systems running, 22 years is really stretching it, especially when the processor in question has been a POS since the day it was released. And considering the horrific performance/Watt ratio of intel's dreadful NetBurst architecture, recycling is where anything with a Pentium 4 should have been (and mostly has been) headed many years ago.

Pretty much any PC that is given away for free to a willing taker is likely to run circles around that antique in terms of performance and energy efficiency. There is really no point holding onto that P4.

There were plenty of 32 bit only Atom powered Netbooks around in the early 2010's, and even when they started using 64 bit ATOMs some still had BIOSs which only allowed 32 bit OSs.

But with any Atom 64 bit OSs were more crippled than 32 bit, due to the stingy 2GB maximum RAM.

If I could find an alternative to iTunes / last.fm that works properly on Linux, I'd happily upgrade my Mac Mini. Until that time comes, nope.

(And does automatic management of the iPod, I don't want to have to drag and drop stuff all the time)

The answer to this surely, is emulation. Though later-and-later platforms get very hard to emulate, especially from a keeping enough software alive to run, and particularly that behind arbitrary corporate walls.

I'm saying that the updates for the G5 Steaming Brick tower are still downloadable from official sources to this day, which is a lot stronger than you can say than the abrupt end of life given to certain other systems.