The application in the "FAT format" of Universal Binary is compiled for several architectures. In this case, for 2 architectures - for x86_64 and ARM64. Accordingly, such an application weighs 2 times more and loads the system a little more at startup because you need to extract your architecture from fat binary files
If I remember correctly, the beta versions of Universal Binary on Mac with M1 were compiled so that the application could be run both in normal native mode and via Rosetta.
This makes some sense, because it happens that Intel/x86_64 versions of the application have some functions that work differently or vice versa.
But starting with the first release version of Universal Binary, there is no longer a "Run using Rosetta" checkbox in the application properties, although the application is compiled for both architectures.
https://forums.camerabits.com/index.php?topic=16478.0I suspect that it is impossible to run the application through Rosetta, because the Intel/x86_64 version of the program uses AVX instructions (and they cannot be emulated/translated into arm64)
What is the point/benefit for the end user in Universal Binary if only 1 architecture can be run?
The disk space is not rubbery and I would like to avoid storing something on the disk that will never be used.
If the application continues to compile in such a way that it cannot be run through Rosetta, then it makes sense to compile a separate application for each architecture