Quite the contrary it is this behaviour which has saved Apple. It made sure they could move forward with new technology quickly.
MS moves slowely because they accumulate so much cruft pulling them down. That is the flip side of always being backwards compatible and "nice" to the customers.
Rosetta, Carbon and the Mac 68k Emulator are examples of the exact opposite.
Apple does not hesitate moving forwards, but historically they provided large amounts of backwards compatibility, just not as cruft inside the existing system.
How is that not similar? I can't still run Rosetta to this date...
4 years.
> How is that not similar? I can't still run Rosetta to this date...
iOS 11 removed 32b support to hardware which supports it, Rosetta added PPC support to hardware which did not.
Something similar to Rosetta would be emulating Aarch32 after having removed hardware support for it, not removing software support for Aarch32 despite the hardware implementing it.
Apple's cadence of releasing Mac OS upgrades was a lot slower back then. x86 Macs were introduced with 10.4. Two releases later (10.7) they dropped support for PPC apps and 32 bit Macs.