Request: Native macOS Apple Silicon (arm64) build — what’s blocking this in 2025?

[fernandoie]

Hi all,

We’re in 2025 (heading into 2026) and Bisq on macOS still requires Rosetta on Apple Silicon. For a security-sensitive app, this adds friction (first-run Rosetta prompt) and unnecessary performance overhead on modern Macs.

Previous context: an older request for Apple Silicon support was closed (see Refs #6180). Has the position changed since then? Intel Macs are effectively legacy; Apple no longer ships Intel machines.

Why this matters?
• UX & performance: native arm64 removes Rosetta translation, improves startup/idle CPU, and avoids extra prompts.
• Platform direction: Apple Silicon is the standard; aligning with it future-proofs Bisq should Rosetta be deprecated.
• Security posture: fewer translation layers and native dependencies simplify the stack for users transacting with real funds.

Reference: Refs #6180

Thanks!

[HenrikJannsen]

Bisq 1 is stuck to Java 17 due a UI framework which did not get updates anymore. Dev efforts are on Bisq 2. There I think it was only a missing tor binary as hurdle but I guess that is not the case anymore.

[maltokyo]

Will bisq1 get incorporated in bisq2 at some point?

[HenrikJannsen]

We are working on the MuSig protocol for Bisq 2. Once that is out it will be the superior version to Bisq 1.

[maltokyo]

Approximately when would that be out, would you know?

[HenrikJannsen]

I hope in next 3 months