LiveCode Forums

It might be a good idea to open a section in the Forums for users to report
their success (or lack of it) at getting LiveCode up-and-running on various
hardware and software configurations.

This would prove an important reference point for developers.

I would imagine the number of posts about OSes LC *doesn't* run on would be low.

We do get a few posts about RPi now and then, and hopefully we'll see a bounty come together to get that one up to date.

But as for the others, rather than make a new section for each category of thing people might post about, let's see if we start seeing a large number of threads first. I can always move them later, like I did with list year's taxonomy overhaul.

OSes LC *doesn't* run on would be low

RISC OS http://riscos.com/

Haiku https://www.haiku-os.org/

MorphOS https://morphos-team.net/

UNIX https://www.opengroup.org/membership/fo ... tform/unix

PPC Linux

AmigaOS https://www.amigaos.net/

Tizen https://www.tizen.org/

to name but a few.

You forgot "number of posts about...".

Most of the posts I've seen about low-market-share OSes have been from yourself.

If we see posts from others racking up even just 2% of discussion here I'll consider making an entire section for it.

Most of the posts I've seen about low-market-share OSes have been from yourself.

Guilty as charged.

HOWEVER; like it or not, we might find ourselves in trouble if there is not an ARM version
that will function on the new Apple machines.

richmond62 wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 7:30 pm

HOWEVER; like it or not, we might find ourselves in trouble if there is not an ARM version that will function on the new Apple machines.

Do you really think LC would not supply a version that runs on ARM when Apple releases the first ARM machine?

Do you really think LC would not supply a version that runs on ARM when Apple releases the first ARM machine?

No, I don't.

But it would be even better if LiveCode were to release a version for Macintish INTEL, Windows and Linux that allowed
developers to run off Macintosh ARM standalones to test on the developer models before that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developer ... %20Silicon.
-

Richmond, think about what you're asking for. I don't think the team has the capacity to provide macOS emulation. And I don't think anyone has the legal team that would stand up to Apple's for attempting emulation of their intellectual property.

With Rosetta functioning as well as it is reported to, the mothership has at least two years to deal with moving to a native ARM branch for the Mac. All of us can just keep developing for Mac and the OS will translate behind our backs to make things "Just work"™ as it always has.

Richmond, think about what you're asking for.

I always do.

After all, I'm sure that Adobe, Microsoft and so on, are digging their sweaty paws into developing versions of their
stuff for Macintosh ARM "as we speak."

With Rosetta functioning as well as it is reported to

I take it you mean the version of Rosetta that will run Macintosh INTEL apps on Macintosh Silicon machines.

Yes. It really ought to be called Rosetta2, but Apple just reused the name as well as the concept. My point is that it but time before the major move I absolutely required.

but = buys !!!autocorrect

My point is that it but time before the major move I absolutely required.

Something definitely wrong with your syntax. I cannot understand that at all.

Do you really think LC would not supply a version that runs on ARM when Apple releases the first ARM machine?

As the LiveCode Team have been almost 100% "below the radar" for quite some time, it would be nice if
one of their representatives could tells us a few things, and, maybe update the Roadmap.

I am the LiveCode Community Liaison, and I can report that the team is fully aware that Apple will be changing CPU architecture again, and will be updating the LiveCode engine to handle it just as they have with all earlier CPU architecture changes.

I've been in touch with them about the Road Map. It was updated a few weeks ago last time you complained about it, but since there's a lot of change happening that they need to accomodate (like Apple's latest change of CPU architecture), and that the number of people complaining about Roadmap update frequency is one, I would not expect that they'll be able to maintain it to your satisfaction.

If there's anything else you have a question about, I'm in touch with the team regularly for the purpose of being able to answer your questions while the engineers stay focused on engineering.