I never thought to check the system requirements until just now but it seems that my busted up mid-2009 MacBook Pro running El Capitan (the highest it can run) just didn’t make the cut for Xojo 2019 r3.2.
2019r3.2 is identical to 2019r3.1 in terms of features. The only change was to make it possible to run on macOS 11 and to do so, we had to drop 10.10 and 10.11.
Youll either have to use 2019r3.1 or upgrade your system to 10.12 or higher.
I’ve not noticed that before, but the website writes, it requires 10.12 minimum. Personally, I don’t miss supporting older macOS versions now (other than at the time when Xojo had to drop 10.6 support, in the past).
Nice to see compiled apps still work on 10.10+, but I don’t ask to keep this as well.
2019r.3.2 is just an Apple Silicon Update, for those who owns a Transition Kit yet:
60739 Build Fixed linker error that occurred on macOS Big Sur.
60794 Miscellaneous Xojo IDE no longer crashes/hangs at startup when run on Apple Silicon.
This is important for Xojo itself, we, um, would expect hope they get it to work for their customers.
Personal opinions, indeed. All my Macs can’t officially run on beyond 10.11 (3 of them are running 10.14 or later anyway; 1 is stuck with 10.11).
Macs being expensive, they are designed to keep going more than 10 years. 10.11 was the latest OS to support a large variety of Mac models.
In my case, if the IDE won’t run in 10.11, only one of my computers (a 2007 MacBook Pro) won’t be able to run it; not a big deal. However, at the same time, Xojo looks to be less supporting opening projects in earlier versions; sometimes, it’s not even possible.
Which means, the owners of Macs that can’t run 10.12 or beyond won’t be able to open 2019r3.2 projects, be it from other users or from other computers they have, running 10.12 or more.
I find this to be a big gap.
I do not saw this important information in the related Release Notes.
Personally, I always run macOS 10.19 so I don’t have these problems. I’m always ahead of the curve!
Companies (apparently Xojo is no exception) downplay/softpedal/hide changes in minimum OS requirements. So it’s “normal” =(
Greg, I think you got your 10 11 12 wrong? “The only change was to make it possible to run on macOS 11 and to do so, we had to drop 10.10 and 10.11.” ??? Time to get retrained on some Sesame Street. =)
Apple is saying that the next macOS BigSur is not going to be 10.16 but 11.0. So in order to run Xojo in 11.0 (10.16) they had to drop 10.10 and 10.11
just one question.
as xojo is compiled with xojo itself, then why compiled apps still works in 10.11 and not xojo itself ?
FYI, https://everymac.com/systems/by_capability/maximum-macos-supported.html shows the maximum macOS version by model.
Oh. =) My apologies to Greg (who is usually right anyway) and all. But I’m still running 10.19. =)
Fun story =( I used to use Apple’s Packagemaker to create Mac Installers, cause I had to - my app had some dependency files that requires them to be stored in other places. So back in the 10.6 days I made an Installer, and part of it I put in an OS check so someone running 10.3 (semi-common in those days) couldn’t install it. I put that installer on my distribution CD’s, manufactured 1000 of them, and sat back to make money.
Anyway, when Apple hit 10.10, that installer on the CD stopped working, because Apple used a STRING COMPARISON in the routine that compared OS’s in the OS check. So 10.10 looked to the installer like “10.1” and thus rejected anyone trying to install on 10.10 or above. Thus making my CD’s a lot less useful. Thanks Apple.
10.19 a typo?
Not necessary, actually. You could have moved/copied the required files the first time your app launched, even asking the user’s authentication for prohibited locations.
Was it only for the sake of change, or had they good reasons to use a string comparison? Especially since 10.10 is one character longer. I’m wondering whether the previous behaviour would have been broken if they had kept using it.
Was it only for the sake of change, or had they good reasons to use a string comparison? Especially since 10.10 is one character longer. I’m wondering whether the previous behaviour would have been broken if they had kept using it.[/quote]
In my opinion it’s just the lazy thought of thinkers today. I’m amazed that in real life when talking about numbers I hear people talk in decimals they still say 10s or 100s.
A logical (and possibly scientific / mathematical) mind would have used 10.0x in previous versions or have another dot (sub) version. I’d say it was always a string comparison and there would be no easy way to test for the version as a number even, not unless you split it into its components anyway. Because even mathematically, 10.10 and 10.11 come before 10.2, and it’s only as a string value that 10.1 and 10.10 are different.
[quote=497001:@Jean-Yves Pochez]just one question.
as xojo is compiled with xojo itself, then why compiled apps still works in 10.11 and not xojo itself ?[/quote]
Your apps dont include the compiler, linker and other bits that the IDE uses to make programs