My legacy problem

[richmond62]

I spun off the latest (and greatest) version of Devawriter Pro last night from LiveCode 9.5.0
and found that the standalone (32 & 64 bit cocktail) did NOT function on my school iMac running
MacOS 10.7.

Poking in the pList . . .

See that it won't run on anything under 10.9.

Does this mean that to get a standalone that functions on 10.7 I'll have to spin off from LC 8.1.10?

[richmond62]

AND . . .

when you think of things, if LiveCode 9.5.0 can provide Macintosh standalones
that will ONLY perform on 10.9 or above WHY does the standalones setting stack
allow one the option of a 32-bit build?

[FourthWorld]

Unfortunately Apple is the only major OS vendor that doesn't publish EOL dates, so it isn't possible for their customers to know whether a given version is still supported with updates.

But as a general rule, we see that Apple tends to support three versions at any given time, the current release and the two just before it.

If the latest version of LC is compatible back to macOS v10.9, LC Ltd is supporting more than twice as many macOS versions as Apple themselves.

Part of this may relate to the tooling needed to compile for a given OS version. Over time, the tooling itself becomes incompatible with older versions. So if LC were to support OS versions older than those supported by required build tools, that would require maintaining a separate build system just for those older OS versions Apple has rendered too dangerous for normal use ( without patches for published known issues).

From time to time there may be good reason to run an unsupported OS version. But given the risks such cases are few,. That sort of decision is usually made by technically savvy people for very specific reasons, for which the developer can choose to maintain support for those older versions with a second build of their standalone made with an older LC version compatible with the EOL'd OS version.

As for why LC 9.5 produces 32-bit apps even though it requires 64-bit OSes, that may be to provide support for third party externals which have not yet been updated.

[richmond62]

Thanks for the extremely comprehensive and useful reply.

HOWEVER . . .

It might not be a bad idea if the 32-bit build option for MacOS was marked with a "footnote' to the
effect that a 32-bit build built by an LC 9 series version will only "fit" somewhere between MacOS 10.9 and 10.14,
that, frankly, it would probably be better all told to go for a 64-bit build, and, that should on want to build anything
to run on any version of MacOS pre 10.9 a standalone needs to be built using LC 8.1.10 or earlier.

[FourthWorld]

Thanks for the extremely comprehensive and useful reply.

HOWEVER . . .

It might not be a bad idea if the 32-bit build option for MacOS was marked with a "footnote' to the
effect that a 32-bit build built by an LC 9 series version will only "fit" somewhere between MacOS 10.9 and 10.14,
that, frankly, it would probably be better all told to go for a 64-bit build, and, that should on want to build anything
to run on any version of MacOS pre 10.9 a standalone needs to be built using LC 8.1.10 or earlier.

The Release Notes for each version include a list of supported OS versions.

Given how few people choose to run very old unsupported OSes, I'm reluctant to submit an enhancement request for the team to add that.

It may even be that only one person is affected, and now he knows what he needs to know.

[richmond62]

It may even be that only one person is affected, and now he knows what he needs to know.

Now I wonder who that might be?

Why is my ego "so small" that I think other people might also be targetting older systems?

[FourthWorld]

...I think other people might also be targetting older systems?

No doubt. But hopefully not many. When an OS stops getting updates from the vendor, the only people patching it are organized crime and hostile states. Vulnerabilities are known, with more discovered weekly, all unaddressed. The moment it connects to the Internet it's at risk, and so much of what we do with software these days involves the Internet.

And anyone who's spent that much time with Apple products knows that this sort of compatibility upheaval happens from time to time with that platform. So they're accustomed to reading things like the Release Notes for any software they rely on.

[richmond62]

The moment it connects to the Internet

I wouldn't doubt that for a minute.

But I know of schools in poor countries that run lots of software for educational purposes on
old machines with old, unsupported, systems where there is no internet connection available.

I, myself, run a wide variety of Macintoshes from a G4 Mac Mini 'forwards' that I do NOT connect to the
internet, but are useful for running software that I regularly use which doesn't run on my 2018 Mac Mini.

The 'problem' in my title to this thread is only to know when to "shift back" to an earlier version of LiveCode.

I send builds of my in-house EFL stuff out to a friend who works in a school near Gaberone in Botswana
where he runs a motley collection of old Macs and old PCs (running Linux), and for that I have always to remember to spin
off both PCC and early INTEL standalones for Macintosh.

[FourthWorld]

The 'problem' in my title to this thread is only to know when to "shift back" to an earlier version of LiveCode.

Understood. And as you noted, there are likely others caught up in this latest of Apple's planned obsolescence as well. As nice as it is that there's a Linux version for nearly any hardware made in the last 15 years that can add new life to machines abandoned by the manufacturer, Macs are harder to install Linux on than most PCs, and holding onto old hardware is often accompanied by dependency on old software, for which a Linux version may not be available.

I think the simplest solution is the one in place, noting version compatibility in the Release Notes. That keeps all the dependency info in one place, the team is already set up to maintain that, and users have one place to get it.

[richmond62]

holding onto old hardware

Well, except for a few nutty fruitcakes like myself I don't think THAT is the problem.

The main problem is that poorer countries are getting older hardware dumped on them which is a "sin" to bury in a landfill and
too much like hard work to efficiently recycle. So the sensible thing is to push those "oldies but goldies" into the school systems
of those countries and put them to good use.

dependency on old software, for which a Linux version may not be available.

Having paid good money for specialist software to run on Apple hardware it feels a bit tough
when that no longer runs except on some 14 year old machine: especially if it is being used for some
sort of non-profit activity.

My biggest "beef" is with Bryce 7; software that runs on MacOS 10.4 - 10.6 PPC/Intel and cost quite
a bit at the time (2004) and has no real equivalent for Linux nor a later version for Macintosh.

I know a woman round the corner who runs a machine with Windows 98 on it because the software she
uses for Medical Imagery doesn't work on anything more up to date.