Was just about to pull the trigger on 2025 Audiophile (been a fan/customer for 20+ years.) I'll most certainly wait for an ARM-native version before dropping $500 on an upgrade, regardless of how "well" the Rosetta version runs. Frankly, the only other time I've ever seen companies drag their feet to this extent when it came to updating their code was when OS X was released. Over the years, when it comes to BIAB, I've conceded to living with the now quite antiquated Windows '95 UI and the clunky, multi-windowed, multi-styled, multi-sized, multi-colored, and multi-fonted workflow, simply because the product is so unique in a fairly crowded space. I've also accepted that at PG, Mac is second fiddle to Windows, and tends to be an afterthought, whether we're willing to admit it or not. That much is clear not only from the UI itself, but also by the inequity of the OS compatibility of the sellable software catalog. But avoiding "abandoning the user base with older machines" is the official reason that we're still rocking a Rosetta app? Really? There are companies with much larger footprints in the industry (both software-only and hardware/software models) who I'd think would need to worry about balancing backwards compatibility and 'abandoning' users of older machines vs. keeping up with the competition and staying on the cutting edge, feature-wise far more than PG Music needs to.

With no disrespect intended in any way, is the Mac user base of BIAB genuinely so heavily weighted towards users with older, generally unsupported machines that they unwaveringly take business decision precedence over the users with current hardware/software who are regularly willing to spend what it takes in order to keep their studios up-to-date (such that it actually affects development and compatibility with everything else that's out there?) Genuine question.