Originally Posted by Mike Halloran
Unfortunately, you don’t understand the macOS as well as you think. There are no “universal binaries” that let an app run over Intel and Apple Silicon without Rosetta 2.

I'm really sorry Mike - I know you aim to be helpful but sometimes your actual ignorance of how these things work makes it so I ( and others maybe too ) I just have to respond - slightly frustratedly and correct you. Particularly when you seem to be acting as some PG representative - as if PG are incapable of speaking for themselves and defending the choices they have made - whether strategic wise or techicsally... whatever.

So here goes: check all this out yourself Mike - wiki it if you like :

Apple introduced the Universal 2 binary format to allow both x86_64 (Intel) and arm64 (Apple Silicon/M-series) code to be packaged into a single .app bundle. The macOS loader automatically selects the appropriate slice at runtime based on the underlying hardware. This approach is Apple's recommended method to support both architectures, ensuring users interact with only one app file without needing to consider their device's CPU type. A Universal 2 binary contains executable slices for both Intel and Apple Silicon Macs, making it a "fat binary". The OS loader transparently chooses the correct architecture to run, so the end-user only sees a single .app. Apple encourages developers to use Universal 2 as the standard for distributing apps compatible with both current Intel Macs and new Apple Silicon Macs. Distributing a Universal 2 .app ensures seamless user experience regardless of Mac architecture.

Now it's up to each company to decide and apply the necessary developer resources to write their code so they can build BOTH an intel and a Apple Silicon/M-series Native app and embed them in a Universal 2 binary. And while there is no reason why the Intel and Apple Silicon/M-series binaries of the bundled apps *have* to have *exactly* the same feature sets - it's clearly very helpful if they do. A case in point of the former is actually Apples own Logic Pro - where the Intel version doesn't support the new AI features in the latest version on Intel such as stem splitting which require AI neural net support not found in Intel macs. Logic Pro even has an option in which ( on an Apple Silicon Mac ) one can force Finder to launch the Intel version ( and thus automatically use Rosetta under the hood ) or the Apple Silicon/M-series version. Clearly on an Intel Mac only the Intel binary would be used. And this Intel version is of course that all Apple Silicon/M-series owners are forced for the time being to use.. under Rosetta.

The reason why we Apple Silicon/M-series series users have to use an Intel app binary under Rosetta is simply because PG Music simply haven't got - or have chosen not to apply - sufficient developer resources to properly converting their codebase to support Apple Silicon/M-series compiled binaries. For sure PG Music doesn't maybe have the financial resources or developer manpower of - for example the main DAW developers- ALL of who - Cubase, Ableton, Bitwig, Studio One, Reaper, Digital Performer, Studio One - now have Universal2 binary support or if not using a universal binary simply release two different versions of their app - one Intel the other Apple Silicon Native. NONE need for an M series Mac owner to use Rosetta to run their DAW.

We dont need excuses or spin here. We all love BIAB and Want PG music to succeed - BIAB being a unique product in a narrow market product category. And personally I can understand and be patient when companies are doing their best and thus things like M series support might just take time ( as for future ARA2 support ).
I just want PG reps or even the Gannons - to come out clean and simply state - where some feature or aspect XYZ - something typically found in most mainstream audio apps - simply isn't "there yet" - state ............... admit to us that its simply because they haven't had or have - for now *chosen NOT to* focus their dev resources on delivering *that* particular feature..... "for now".
I can live with that. Understand that. At least temporarily... smile .... because we all know - that eventually PG **WILL** do this. And when it happens their marketing team will for sure then extol - in the product release blurb - the benefits of extra (if not stunning) performance gains etc due to running Mx Native... Plus the marketing blurb will also say "hey look! now you no longer have to use Rosetta!".


but what I just can't stand is when PG reps are simply spinning - in effect pulling the wool over one's eyes as to why things aren't so and so.

And when some third party so and so - helps this - meaning well - acting as some kind of no-asked for PG-apologist - its really annoying

Oh and by the way I'm a retired developer who in the last 20 years have been coding solely for MacOS using Xcode.

Last edited by nonchai; 09/25/25 07:35 AM.
MacOS Sequoia, M4 Pro Mac Mini , 64GB RAM 512GB SSD ,
BIAB, Cubase, Ableton, Logic Pro, SCALER 3, GigLad, AnyTune, Synthesizer V Pro,Vienna Ensemble Pro, Audiofuse, Fractal FM3, KOMPLETE 15, StreamDeck, iReal Pro
White beard, beer belly, bald patch