Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

thetapedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 395 posts

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#351

Post by scarface74 »

pjmlp wrote: post #316
scarface74 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never said that .Net wasn’t great. I said it would be dumb to tie your career to .Net Framework that is Windows only and is maintenance mode instead of .Net Core. I’ve had enough conversations with you on HN that I know you know the difference. And I’ve said that most of the energy is going toward mobile, the web and services. No one outside of game makers are making money selling mobile apps. But they are makin…

.NET Framework and .NET Core are .NET. Windows is doing pretty well across 80% of desktop, laptop and 2-1 hybrid devices. As mentioned, I spent the last 5 years doing Forms/WPF/UWP, and there is plenty of work there. Just as there is for anyone wanting to bother with either Qt or macOS. At least in Europe no one starves by focusing on being a desktop developer.

Again, I know you know this stuff - you were involved in the discussion when it was posted here.

As mentioned, I spent the last 5 years doing Forms/WPF/UWP, and there is plenty of work there.

There were also jobs for Windows CE developers in 2015 after MS abandoned it in 2007, would that have been a good career move?

Microsoft said that they are only focusing on compatibility with Windows for .Net framework going forward and they will be adding features to .Net Core that won’t be ported to .Net Framework.

https://www.itwriting.com/blog/11291-state-of-microsoft-net-...

This is now changing. Microsoft has shifted its position so that .NET Framework is in near-maintenance mode and that new features come only to .NET Core. Last month, Microsoft’s Damian Edwards stated that ASP.NET Core will only run on .NET Core starting from 3.0, the next major version.

From the C# program manager.

Async streams, indexers and ranges all rely on new framework types that will be part of .NET Standard 2.1. As Immo describes in his post Announcing .NET Standard 2.1, .NET Core 3.0 as well as Xamarin, Unity and Mono will all implement .NET Standard 2.1, but .NET Framework 4.8 will not. This means that the types required to use these features won’t be available when you target C# 8.0 to .NET Framework 4.8.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#352

Post by mattigames »

dangus wrote: post #208
ratww wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This move destroys the reputation of Mac as a game platform, compared to Windows which can run decades old games fine. But this has happened before. Pretty much every pre-2007 Mac game stopped working in 2012 after they removed Rosetta, their PPC emulator. And 64-bit Intel has been available since Leopard, released in 2007. So that leaves a tiny window of 32-bit only releases. On the other hand, the removal of Open…

And it’s happened on the Windows side, too. You can’t just run transport tycoon, rollercoaster tycoon, or xcom without any sort of modification on Windows 10. You’re either using an open source drop-in game engine or a packaged DOSBox setup from Steam. Or in the case of Rollercoaster Tycoon, a rewritten game (RTC Classic). Windows 10 doesn’t run 16-bit applications, and Windows 10 doesn’t work nicely with a large amo…

16-bit applications?? Of course I don't expect Monkey Island 2 released 30 years ago to work on Windows 10, it would be nice but is easy to conclude it wouldn't work without even trying; what is being talked about here are game released few years ago and even just last year for mac.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#353

Post by jdnenej »

therealmarv wrote: post #340
cousin_it wrote: post #50

Funny thing about games: most revenue happens soon after release. It's like movies. A game from several years ago usually has low ongoing revenue, so there's little profit in updating it for a new OS. Many Mac games will just die. Especially indies, where the creator might have already moved on. Do you own any nice but not very successful Mac games? They'll die. This move destroys the reputation of Mac as a game plat…

Really sad I cannot play Leisure Suit Larry Reloaded on Catalina. I bought this game. Same for my old scanner. Both 32bit only. Seems I won't update to Catalina or I need to find a longterm solution with VMs.

Is your scanner supported by SANE on linux? Some people have put a surprising amount of work creating Linux drivers for scanners

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#354

Post by sjwright »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #343
josephg wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’ve heard rumours for a few years that Apple is considering shipping MacBooks which use the Ax ARM chips that power their phones and iPad pros. Those CPUs have excellent performance per watt, and decent performance overall. If they’re planning on repeating the Rosetta play that they pulled off during the PowerPC -> Intel transition, it might make a lot of sense to deprecate i386 applications first so there is less…

Apple has the ability to both support i386 software on x86 machines, and choose to not emulate that software on future ARM machines. If your supposition is correct, Apple is effectively crippling their current products in order to make their future products seem less bad by comparison. That's horrible. And in the process, Apple is asking developers to rewrite i386 code for an amd64 architecture which they ultimately…

Maybe. Maybe? I doubt they're motivated by malice or laziness, but nobody in this thread can say one way or the other. What I can say with high confidence is that unless we're in the meeting room at Apple we can only speculate based on little to no hard information. It's entirely possible that there are sound engineering reasons behind what they've done.

AMD64 is going to be around for a very long time; any developer that is having difficulty migrating code from i386 has more fundamental problems than Catalina.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#355

Post by sjwright »

blub wrote: post #337
nightfly wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't own _any_ video games, you have a license and might happen to have physical media.

A pedantically correct, but ultimately pointless observation. One can install and play a game bought from gog.com any time one wants, unlike with games bought from Steam, which have DRM, have to be activated online and must ping the Steam servers periodically.

Technically correct is the best kind of correct.

Your example is valid, but there are plenty of other examples pushing in the opposite direction—for example PS4 and XB1 games delivered on physical media. Yes they'll play out of the box "forever" ... but in order to download important (occasionally critical) software patches you need the explicit blessing of Sony or Microsoft servers. And you could lose these for reasons that are wholly unrelated to your legitimate ownership of physical game media.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#356

Post by scarface74 »

pjmlp wrote: post #315
coldtea wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> App store gold rush is gone. Depends what "gold rush" means. The App Store makes more money than ever.

For the top 1% of app developers that try their luck, out for people living in first tier countries. And if we remove the FAANG related products even less. The world is a little bigger than that.

It’s not just the 1% of app developers making money developing apps. There are plenty of mobile developers making money working for companies that sell services that customers use on mobile devices. I was making a living over a decade ago doing “mobile development” working for a company deploying to ruggedized Win CE devices.

The only way to make money from people using “computers” in developing countries is by targeting services at people using mobile devices. They definitely aren’t using Windows PCs and the companies creating services aren’t hosting on Windows.

As far as “FAANG” related products, none of those companies are making most of their money from selling apps on the App Store. They are also making money from services/advertising that people access via the cell phone.

You don’t make money statistically as a mobile developer by trying to sell an app on the store. You make money from working for a company as a mobile developer just as you do from being a web developer.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#357

Post by scarface74 »

Mikhail_Edoshin wrote: post #327
scarface74 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple’s Mac sales are minuscule though in the grand scheme of things and only a small part of their revenue.

I remember one story about a computer store in old days that carried lots of systems and parts. The new management decided to optimize this and carry only the popular choices and thus increase the profits. But the profits dropped instead. Before that the place was frequented by tech lovers. When their non-tech friends asked what and where to buy, they referred them there. Once the place was not good for tech people,…

Developers will buy Macs and write apps for iOS regardless because that’s where the money is. Just like game developers use to buy expensive, obtuse, proprietary setups to write games for mobile.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#358

Post by sarbaz »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #345
armadsen wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first 64-bit Macs came out 16 years ago. The first 64-bit Intel Macs came out 13 years ago. The 32-bit to 64-bit transition on the Mac has not been an abrupt one.

I think we're looking at this the wrong way. The reason Microsoft killed 16 bit support (In 64 bit editions of Windows) is that very few people were actually running 16 bit apps at that point. Where Microsoft made a decision based on what their users were actually doing, Apple has a made a decision based on what it wants their users to be doing. The amount of time isn't really relevant. If lots of your users rely on…

The true reason is that intel didn't support coexistence of Virtual 8086 mode with 64-bit mode. So adding 16 bit app support would require loads of work to get it working as part of a 64 bit OS.

Regular protected mode code has built in support that allows easily running 16 bit apps, so maintaining compatibility was a no-brainer. The moment the trade-off changed, Microsoft decided to drop support for 16 bit apps.

Personally, I don't mind that very much, because dosbox is a great product that bridges the gap perfectly.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#359

Post by dangus »

shakna wrote: post #242
dangus wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That ultimatum is idealistic at best. Not only that, the recourse of inspecting and modifying the code isn’t realistic to most people. Many open source projects die just because literally nobody with the skills required to maintain them are interested. Then you get to certain types of programs where open source provides no benefit: specifically, games. Games are largely just artistic content. Making games open source…

id [0] seems to get by fine by open sourcing their game engines. And doing so has lead to a number of ports that wouldn't exist otherwise. The artists are still compensated fine. Because they separate the engine from the assets. If you want to play the original game, fine, but own it. But now the community gets to port the game easier to a new platform. Which is one of the reasons that it's easy to port DOOM to every…

They open source the product long after it has any revenue potential.

Re: Apple's list of 235 apps that are incompatible with macOS Catalina

#360

Post by scarface74 »

ohiovr wrote: post #329
scarface74 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So which platform supports 8 bit software?

Emulators support nearly everything. I can even run a TI994a program on a PC, Mac, or Linux. If you can't run emulators on Mac that is sad news to me. Maybe bad example, it was technically 16 bit, but it was well over 30 years old. Here is a pet emulator: https://www.masswerk.at/pet/ Just the other day my brother told me he met a really talented graphics designer that still primarily uses some 25 year old sign design…

Of course you can run emulators. But that has nothing to do with OS vendors maintaining backwards compatibility.

Are you really arguing that Windows is compatibility with the Super Nintendo because you can run an emulator?

Post reply on HN