LC 9.6.0 DP2

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Has anyone noticed that LC 9.6.0 DP2 creates 32 bit Windows standalones that are not compatible with Windows XP?  The standalones did not have the screen resolution checkbox checked.

Sent from my iPad
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Charles Szasz wrote:

 > Has anyone noticed that LC 9.6.0 DP2 creates 32 bit Windows
 > standalones that are not compatible with Windows XP?

The Release Notes list these Win version as compatible with LC 9.6dp2:
- Windows 7 (both 32-bit and 64-bit)
- Windows Server 2008
- Windows 8.x (Desktop)
- Windows 10

Microsoft ended support for XP in Aug 2014, and strongly recommends
upgrading to a supported version.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.co

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . sick of that stuff about endless upgrades; and,
frankly
banging on about them does not really help anyone who asks the sort of
question
the OP asked.

There is a simple fact that some people round "these parts" as well as
elsewhere overlook . . .

Not everyone has oddles of money to endlessly upgrade, or the
inclination to do that.

There are an awful lot of people around and about (especially outwith
North America)
who are deploying supposedly out-dated operating systems to good effect;
and they also need software.

I use LiveCode 8.1.10 to produce standalones for Windows XP and MacOS
Lion because I have people who need
"stuff" to run on those systems.

Richmond.

On 17.02.20 22:08, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
> strongly recommends upgrading


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Invalid Image File / Original Image Size

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
What's the best way to know if I set the filename of an image control and
the file is either not an image or in an unsupported format? I'm getting
https links to unknown images so I check images before app deployment.

After resizing an image is there a way to know the original dimensions? Just
wondering? I now save the original x/y sizes in properties so I know them
after a resize.

Thanks

Ralph DiMola
IT Director
Evergreen Information Services
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Invalid Image File / Original Image Size

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Hi Ralph,

> Am 17.02.2020 um 22:08 schrieb Ralph DiMola via use-livecode <[hidden email]>:
>
> What's the best way to know if I set the filename of an image control and
> the file is either not an image or in an unsupported format? I'm getting
> https links to unknown images so I check images before app deployment.

not sure, but you can check "the result2 after setting the filename.
Will be EMPTY on success.

> After resizing an image is there a way to know the original dimensions? Just
> wondering? I now save the original x/y sizes in properties so I know them
> after a resize.

"the formattedheight of img XYZ" and "the formattedwidth of img xyz" will always return
the info about the original dimensions of an image. No need to save this info somehow.

> Thanks
>
> Ralph DiMola

Best

Klaus

--
Klaus Major
https://www.major-k.de
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Invalid Image File / Original Image Size

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Hi Ralph,

Certainly Klaus's approach will work. Here is another that works.

As you know, image files have "signatures" in their headers to identify
what kind of files they are:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_file_signatures
    (the "ISO 8859-1" column)


Once you know the signatures of the image file types you want to allow,
you could do something like this:

on mouseUp
     answer file "Pick an image file:"
     if it is empty then exit to top

     answer isSupportedImage(it)
end mouseUp


function isSupportedImage pPath
     # Allow JPG, PNG and GIF images.

     put byte 1 to 12 of url ("binfile:" & pPath) into tHeader
     switch
         case "JFIF" is in tHeader
         case "PNG" is in tHeader
         case "GIF" is in tHeader
             return true
             break
         default
             return false
             break
     end switch
end isSupportedImage


I have used this approach in projects before and it seems to work reliably.

Phil Davis



On 2/17/20 1:08 PM, Ralph DiMola via use-livecode wrote:

> What's the best way to know if I set the filename of an image control and
> the file is either not an image or in an unsupported format? I'm getting
> https links to unknown images so I check images before app deployment.
>
> After resizing an image is there a way to know the original dimensions? Just
> wondering? I now save the original x/y sizes in properties so I know them
> after a resize.
>
> Thanks
>
> Ralph DiMola
> IT Director
> Evergreen Information Services
> [hidden email]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>

--
Phil Davis
503-307-4363

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Richmond wrote:
 > Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . sick of that stuff about endless upgrades; and,
 > frankly banging on about them does not really help anyone who asks the
 > sort of question the OP asked.

The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
was EOL'd many years ago.

I replied that the LC version he's asking about doesn't run on XP. That
older versions do is self-evident.

What exactly ruffles your feathers about providing an accurate answer to
the question?


 > There is a simple fact that some people round "these parts" as well as
 > elsewhere overlook . . .
 >
 > Not everyone has oddles of money to endlessly upgrade, or the
 > inclination to do that.

I agree it would be ideal if OS vendors supported every version forever,
but as a practical matter they simply don't.  It isn't LC's fault, and I
can't even blame the OS vendor.

If there's any "bad guy" here it's the literal bad guys:

We can reply on nearly every popular OS version to be patched forever,
but after EOL the only new patches are coming from organized crime.

As long as the machine isn't connected to the open Internet it may be
safe to use.

Beyond that, yes, it's unfortunate that OS vendors will drop support for
hardware, and fortunate that Linux is available to give a second life to
hardware abandoned by its maker.

With such a vast ecosystem behind it, there's probably a Linux version
for just about any computing device made in the last 20 years.

Linux is free and open, ready to step in whenever another OS vendor lets
you down.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
"Richmond as Dodo with ruffled feathers." Discuss. ;-)

Banging on about endless upgrades is pretty pointless because, unless
one lives in a cave, one already
knows about that.

What might be better is to offer the OP a practical solution to their
problem.

Richmond.

On 18.02.20 0:21, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:

> Richmond wrote:
> > Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . sick of that stuff about endless upgrades; and,
> > frankly banging on about them does not really help anyone who asks the
> > sort of question the OP asked.
>
> The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
> was EOL'd many years ago.
>
> I replied that the LC version he's asking about doesn't run on XP.
> That older versions do is self-evident.
>
> What exactly ruffles your feathers about providing an accurate answer
> to the question?
>
>
> > There is a simple fact that some people round "these parts" as well as
> > elsewhere overlook . . .
> >
> > Not everyone has oddles of money to endlessly upgrade, or the
> > inclination to do that.
>
> I agree it would be ideal if OS vendors supported every version
> forever, but as a practical matter they simply don't.  It isn't LC's
> fault, and I can't even blame the OS vendor.
>
> If there's any "bad guy" here it's the literal bad guys:
>
> We can reply on nearly every popular OS version to be patched forever,
> but after EOL the only new patches are coming from organized crime.
>
> As long as the machine isn't connected to the open Internet it may be
> safe to use.
>
> Beyond that, yes, it's unfortunate that OS vendors will drop support
> for hardware, and fortunate that Linux is available to give a second
> life to hardware abandoned by its maker.
>
> With such a vast ecosystem behind it, there's probably a Linux version
> for just about any computing device made in the last 20 years.
>
> Linux is free and open, ready to step in whenever another OS vendor
> lets you down.
>


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Richmond wrote:

> Banging on about endless upgrades is pretty pointless because, unless
> one lives in a cave, one already knows about that.
>
> What might be better is to offer the OP a practical solution to their
> problem.

Enlighten us: what do you feel constitutes as "practical solution" to
Charles' question?

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems


> Richmond.
>
> On 18.02.20 0:21, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>> Richmond wrote:
>> > Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . sick of that stuff about endless upgrades; and,
>> > frankly banging on about them does not really help anyone who asks the
>> > sort of question the OP asked.
>>
>> The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
>> was EOL'd many years ago.
>>
>> I replied that the LC version he's asking about doesn't run on XP.
>> That older versions do is self-evident.
>>
>> What exactly ruffles your feathers about providing an accurate answer
>> to the question?
>>
>>
>> > There is a simple fact that some people round "these parts" as well as
>> > elsewhere overlook . . .
>> >
>> > Not everyone has oddles of money to endlessly upgrade, or the
>> > inclination to do that.
>>
>> I agree it would be ideal if OS vendors supported every version
>> forever, but as a practical matter they simply don't.  It isn't LC's
>> fault, and I can't even blame the OS vendor.
>>
>> If there's any "bad guy" here it's the literal bad guys:
>>
>> We can reply on nearly every popular OS version to be patched forever,
>> but after EOL the only new patches are coming from organized crime.
>>
>> As long as the machine isn't connected to the open Internet it may be
>> safe to use.
>>
>> Beyond that, yes, it's unfortunate that OS vendors will drop support
>> for hardware, and fortunate that Linux is available to give a second
>> life to hardware abandoned by its maker.
>>
>> With such a vast ecosystem behind it, there's probably a Linux version
>> for just about any computing device made in the last 20 years.
>>
>> Linux is free and open, ready to step in whenever another OS vendor
>> lets you down.
>>
>
>
>     Previous message (by thread): LC 9.6.0 DP2
>     Next message (by thread): Invalid Image File / Original Image Size
>     Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>
> More information about the use-livecode mailing list



_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
"The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
was EOL'd many years ago."

And I replied by suggesting a version of LiveCode that would produce
standalones that would work
on that OS.

That is probably all the chap needed to know.

Richmond.

On 18.02.20 10:34, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:

> Richmond wrote:
>
>> Banging on about endless upgrades is pretty pointless because, unless
>> one lives in a cave, one already knows about that.
>>
>> What might be better is to offer the OP a practical solution to their
>> problem.
>
> Enlighten us: what do you feel constitutes as "practical solution" to
> Charles' question?
>


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Richmond wrote:
> "The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
> was EOL'd many years ago."
>
> And I replied by suggesting a version of LiveCode that would produce
> standalones that would work on that OS.

Do you have any idea how long Charles has been a member of this community?

That older software works with older software is self-evident, and
Charles can be safely assumed to have had firsthand experience with
older versions since he's been here the whole time.

That may be why he asked about compatibility with the most recent build,
where I offered a reminder that compatible OS versions are in the
Release Notes.

While it's self-evident that older software runs with older software,
the implications of using older software are apparently less well known.
A sentence at the end about staying current with patches to known
vulnerabilities did not seem out of place.

Please understand that your personal belief that unpatched OSes are
somehow fine for developers has been well established on this list.
Thankfully for end-users, most of the industry holds a different view.
Newspapers are filled with stories of the exceptions: Unpatched systems
are the leading cause of exploits.

While all of us here make software, not all of us study security.  We
are all constructively minded, and generally don't have a habit of
looking at things from the perspective of the bad guys. I value the
insights in the newsletters, blogs, and books I read on security,
helping me better understand the implications of my choices as a
developer of systems for others to use.  Distilling a slice of that to a
gentle reminder about staying current with patches to known
vulnerabilities seems useful.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
> On Feb 18, 2020, at 8:08 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Richmond wrote:
>> "The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that was EOL'd many years ago."
>> And I replied by suggesting a version of LiveCode that would produce standalones that would work on that OS.
>
>
> While all of us here make software, not all of us study security.  We are all constructively minded, and generally don't have a habit of looking at things from the perspective of the bad guys. I value the insights in the newsletters, blogs, and books I read on security, helping me better understand the implications of my choices as a developer of systems for others to use.  Distilling a slice of that to a gentle reminder about staying current with patches to known vulnerabilities seems useful.

Here is a fun sidenote. Windows 7 has also lost support from Microsoft as of Jan 14, 2020. Microsoft provides a program called Extended Security Updates.

This program buys companies up to three years of support. It is my understanding that the program is expensive. The program is for big businesses and not available to individuals.

So, if you are developing for organizations that rely on Windows 7, this may be useful for your next meeting with IT. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4527878/faq-about-extended-security-updates-for-windows-7 <https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4527878/faq-about-extended-security-updates-for-windows-7>


Best regards,

Mark Talluto
livecloud.io <http://livecloud.io/>
nursenotes.net <http://nursenotes.net/>
canelasoftware.com <http://www.canelasoftware.com/>

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:07 AM Mark Talluto via use-livecode <
[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Here is a fun sidenote. Windows 7 has also lost support from Microsoft as
> of Jan 14, 2020. Microsoft provides a program called Extended Security
> Updates.
>
> This program buys companies up to three years of support. It is my
> understanding that the program is expensive. The program is for big
> businesses and not available to individuals.
>
> So, if you are developing for organizations that rely on Windows 7, this
> may be useful for your next meeting with IT.
> https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4527878/faq-about-extended-security-updates-for-windows-7
> <
> https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4527878/faq-about-extended-security-updates-for-windows-7
> >
>

Thanks for sharing that Mark. I wasn't aware that Microsoft had this
program.

My company recently announced that we are dropping official support for
Windows 7 with our next desktop update. We won't stop it from working but
we will no longer test new features on it. We haven't had anybody write
back requesting that we continue to support it. As a reference, our
customer base is made up of small to medium businesses as well as larger
corporations.

--
Trevor DeVore
ScreenSteps
www.screensteps.com
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
The prices for ESU double each year...
https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-much-will-staying-patched-on-windows-7-cost-you-heres-the-price-list/


-
Matthias Rebbe
Life Is Too Short For Boring Code

> Am 18.02.2020 um 18:06 schrieb Mark Talluto via use-livecode <[hidden email]>:
>
>> On Feb 18, 2020, at 8:08 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Richmond wrote:
>>> "The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that was EOL'd many years ago."
>>> And I replied by suggesting a version of LiveCode that would produce standalones that would work on that OS.
>>
>>
>> While all of us here make software, not all of us study security.  We are all constructively minded, and generally don't have a habit of looking at things from the perspective of the bad guys. I value the insights in the newsletters, blogs, and books I read on security, helping me better understand the implications of my choices as a developer of systems for others to use.  Distilling a slice of that to a gentle reminder about staying current with patches to known vulnerabilities seems useful.
>
> Here is a fun sidenote. Windows 7 has also lost support from Microsoft as of Jan 14, 2020. Microsoft provides a program called Extended Security Updates.
>
> This program buys companies up to three years of support. It is my understanding that the program is expensive. The program is for big businesses and not available to individuals.
>
> So, if you are developing for organizations that rely on Windows 7, this may be useful for your next meeting with IT. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4527878/faq-about-extended-security-updates-for-windows-7 <https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4527878/faq-about-extended-security-updates-for-windows-7>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Mark Talluto
> livecloud.io <http://livecloud.io/>
> nursenotes.net <http://nursenotes.net/>
> canelasoftware.com <http://www.canelasoftware.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
I suppose one could also make the counter argument that software companies do not have oodles of money laying around to maintain endless backwards compatibility with older operating systems. Something has to give.

Bob S


> On Feb 17, 2020, at 12:40 , Richmond via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There are an awful lot of people around and about (especially outwith North America)
> who are deploying supposedly out-dated operating systems to good effect; and they also need software.
>


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Invalid Image File / Original Image Size

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Another one for the Utility behavior! :-)

Bob S


> On Feb 17, 2020, at 13:57 , Phil Davis via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> function isSupportedImage pPath
>     # Allow JPG, PNG and GIF images.
>
>     put byte 1 to 12 of url ("binfile:" & pPath) into tHeader
>     switch
>         case "JFIF" is in tHeader
>         case "PNG" is in tHeader
>         case "GIF" is in tHeader
>             return true
>             break
>         default
>             return false
>             break
>     end switch
> end isSupportedImage


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
I would not expect a software company to maintain any sort of backwards
compatibility unless they could
see any _significant financial advantage_ in that.

About a year ago someone waved $100 at me for a version of my Devawriter
Pro that would run on Mac OS 10.6 32-bit,
and as it took me all of 15 minutes, I was able to run them off a
standalone using LiveCode 8.1.8.

Without the incentive of $100 it would have depended on which side of
bed I had got out of that morning. ;-)

Richmond.

On 19.02.20 1:01, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote:

> I suppose one could also make the counter argument that software companies do not have oodles of money laying around to maintain endless backwards compatibility with older operating systems. Something has to give.
>
> Bob S
>
>
>> On Feb 17, 2020, at 12:40 , Richmond via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> There are an awful lot of people around and about (especially outwith North America)
>> who are deploying supposedly out-dated operating systems to good effect; and they also need software.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
Here's a "little something" for all the "We have to endlessly update at
all costs" crowd:

https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/62001/os-x-lion-server-update

Who realised that Apple are STILL supporting MacOS 10.7.5 in some way?

Richmond.

On 19.02.20 9:12, Richmond wrote:

> I would not expect a software company to maintain any sort of
> backwards compatibility unless they could
> see any _significant financial advantage_ in that.
>
> About a year ago someone waved $100 at me for a version of my
> Devawriter Pro that would run on Mac OS 10.6 32-bit,
> and as it took me all of 15 minutes, I was able to run them off a
> standalone using LiveCode 8.1.8.
>
> Without the incentive of $100 it would have depended on which side of
> bed I had got out of that morning. ;-)
>
> Richmond.
>
> On 19.02.20 1:01, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote:
>> I suppose one could also make the counter argument that software companies do not have oodles of money laying around to maintain endless backwards compatibility with older operating systems. Something has to give.
>>
>> Bob S
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 17, 2020, at 12:40 , Richmond via use-livecode<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> There are an awful lot of people around and about (especially outwith North America)
>>> who are deploying supposedly out-dated operating systems to good effect; and they also need software.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
I am sorry to disappoint you, but that update was released in 2012

https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1585?viewlocale=en_US&locale=de_DE

I have no idea why Macupdate blogs about it now.


-
Matthias Rebbe
Life Is Too Short For Boring Code

> Am 19.02.2020 um 13:56 schrieb Richmond via use-livecode <[hidden email]>:
>
> Here's a "little something" for all the "We have to endlessly update at all costs" crowd:
>
> https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/62001/os-x-lion-server-update
>
> Who realised that Apple are STILL supporting MacOS 10.7.5 in some way?
>
> Richmond.
>
> On 19.02.20 9:12, Richmond wrote:
>> I would not expect a software company to maintain any sort of backwards compatibility unless they could
>> see any _significant financial advantage_ in that.
>>
>> About a year ago someone waved $100 at me for a version of my Devawriter Pro that would run on Mac OS 10.6 32-bit,
>> and as it took me all of 15 minutes, I was able to run them off a standalone using LiveCode 8.1.8.
>>
>> Without the incentive of $100 it would have depended on which side of bed I had got out of that morning. ;-)
>>
>> Richmond.
>>
>> On 19.02.20 1:01, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote:
>>> I suppose one could also make the counter argument that software companies do not have oodles of money laying around to maintain endless backwards compatibility with older operating systems. Something has to give.
>>>
>>> Bob S
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Feb 17, 2020, at 12:40 , Richmond via use-livecode<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There are an awful lot of people around and about (especially outwith North America)
>>>> who are deploying supposedly out-dated operating systems to good effect; and they also need software.
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LC 9.6.0 DP2

Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
I'm not disappointed in the slightest. 8-)

But the fact that it just popped up now was odd.

Richmond.

On 19.02.20 15:08, matthias rebbe via use-livecode wrote:

> I am sorry to disappoint you, but that update was released in 2012
>
> https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1585?viewlocale=en_US&locale=de_DE
>
> I have no idea why Macupdate blogs about it now.
>
>
> -
> Matthias Rebbe
> Life Is Too Short For Boring Code
>
>> Am 19.02.2020 um 13:56 schrieb Richmond via use-livecode <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Here's a "little something" for all the "We have to endlessly update at all costs" crowd:
>>
>> https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/62001/os-x-lion-server-update
>>
>> Who realised that Apple are STILL supporting MacOS 10.7.5 in some way?
>>
>> Richmond.
>>
>> On 19.02.20 9:12, Richmond wrote:
>>> I would not expect a software company to maintain any sort of backwards compatibility unless they could
>>> see any _significant financial advantage_ in that.
>>>
>>> About a year ago someone waved $100 at me for a version of my Devawriter Pro that would run on Mac OS 10.6 32-bit,
>>> and as it took me all of 15 minutes, I was able to run them off a standalone using LiveCode 8.1.8.
>>>
>>> Without the incentive of $100 it would have depended on which side of bed I had got out of that morning. ;-)
>>>
>>> Richmond.
>>>
>>> On 19.02.20 1:01, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote:
>>>> I suppose one could also make the counter argument that software companies do not have oodles of money laying around to maintain endless backwards compatibility with older operating systems. Something has to give.
>>>>
>>>> Bob S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 17, 2020, at 12:40 , Richmond via use-livecode<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> There are an awful lot of people around and about (especially outwith North America)
>>>>> who are deploying supposedly out-dated operating systems to good effect; and they also need software.
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode