I have tested an universal app made with Rev on an old iMac G3 with
10.2.8 and it does work.
Thierry
On 2006, Oct 3, at 05:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps someone can clarify whether the Universal Binary version of
Rev
standalones will work on all versions of OS X or only on OS 10.3.9
Precisely why marketers would have a keen interest in quantifying
this. It would be invaluable to know the percentages of those likely
to buy products for OS X and those who haven't bought a new computer
in more than half a decade.
If the number of people using OS 9 is anything close to as
What else are you going to run the 'Journeyman Project' on?
Cheers,
Luis.
On 3 Oct 2006, at 20:10, Robert Brenstein wrote:
Precisely why marketers would have a keen interest in quantifying
this. It would be invaluable to know the percentages of those
likely to buy products for OS X and
On 1 Oct 2006, at 15:52, Malte Brill wrote:
One reason might be filesize. Universal apps are twice as big.
Some thought and tests show that that's simply not true... ;-) I've
seen this idea floating around plenty of times on Mac forums, but was
a bit surprised to see it mentioned on a
On 10/2/06 4:16 AM, Ian Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1 Oct 2006, at 15:52, Malte Brill wrote:
One reason might be filesize. Universal apps are twice as big.
Some thought and tests show that that's simply not true... ;-)
Actually I think what Malte was trying to say is that Universal
Ken Ray wrote:
On 10/2/06 4:16 AM, Ian Wood revlist at azurevision.co.uk wrote:
On 1 Oct 2006, at 15:52, Malte Brill wrote:
One reason might be filesize. Universal apps are twice as big.
Some thought and tests show that that's simply not true... ;-)
Actually I think what Malte was trying
I don't see that anyone has pointed out the fact that a Universal Binary IS
a PowerPC version and an Intel version merged together (so your option c IS
a UB). I believe Universal Binaries will run on version of OS X prior to
3.9. It will just use the PowerPC verson. The whole point of a UB
On 2 Oct 2006, at 15:06, Ken Ray wrote:
On 10/2/06 4:16 AM, Ian Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1 Oct 2006, at 15:52, Malte Brill wrote:
One reason might be filesize. Universal apps are twice as big.
Some thought and tests show that that's simply not true... ;-)
Actually I think what
Apologies if that was the case! I've just seen too many people saying
that UB apps are twice as big and assumed it was the same this time...
No need to apologize Ian, I should have worded it clearer. Ken is right though.
I meant to say it carries 2 engines. I am glad you cleared this up.:-)
Perhaps someone can clarify whether the Universal Binary version of Rev
standalones will work on all versions of OS X or only on OS 10.3.9 and above.
There seems to be a difference of opinion in the forum. If Universal Binary
will work on all versions of OS X, then Universal Binary would
Regarding which of the standalone versions to include in distributing one's
built applications, please correct me if my logic is wrong here:
a. I assume that very few Mac users have operating systems that are earlier
than OS X, so one does not have to be so concerned about distributing for OS 9
On 10/1/06 3:10 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regarding which of the standalone versions to include in distributing one's
built applications, please correct me if my logic is wrong here:
a. I assume that very few Mac users have operating systems that are earlier
than OS X, so
Steve,
I still know very many people, schools, firms etc. who still haven't
spend the resources on replacing their ancient hardware, their
philosophy being, if it aint broke, don't fix it (plus the fact that
especially schools are on a tight budget). If you can release
software for Mac
Mark Schonewille wrote:
I still know very many people, schools, firms etc. who still haven't
spend the resources on replacing their ancient hardware, their
philosophy being, if it aint broke, don't fix it (plus the fact that
especially schools are on a tight budget).
Does Apple or any
Problem is, people who are on a tight budget are not very interesting
to marketeers.
Mark
--
Economy-x-Talk
Consultancy and Software Engineering
http://economy-x-talk.com
http://www.salery.biz
Get your store on-line within minutes with Salery Web Store software.
Download at
On 10/2/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regarding which of the standalone versions to include in distributing one's
built applications, please correct me if my logic is wrong here:
a. I assume that very few Mac users have operating systems that are earlier
than OS X, so one does
Mark Schonewille wrote:
Mark Schonewille wrote:
I still know very many people, schools, firms etc. who still haven't
spend the resources on replacing their ancient hardware...
Does Apple or any authoritative EDU body publish market stats
quantifying this?
It would be help ROI projections
In my classroom I have 6 machines. Systems: 8 (1 machine), 9 (3
machines), 10.3 (Emac) and 10.4 (iBook). All are on our LAN. Both
the latter machines access Classic mode from time to time. Schools
still run OS 9 in many cases. Quantifiable stats I don't have, but I
know it's true.
System 8 :-O
this is like seeing BeOS BeBox or Acord Risc Pcs... last time I used
system 8 (and it was 8.5) was in my old university where we had some
old macs for DTP classes...
by the way, shouldn't the release of runrev engine for classic be near?
Andre
On Oct 1, 2006, at 9:41
Andre wrote:
by the way, shouldn't the release of runrev engine for classic be
near?
I certainly hope so! Been looking out for it...
Marian
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe,
Yeah, I know. Pretty funny. I think it's 8.5 and the 9's are 9.2,
but I can't remember off the top of my head. The amazing thing is
that the thing keeps chugging along, and for a terminal it still
functions... slwwwly. No one is doing any work on it.
Mark
On Oct 1, 2006, at 6:13
21 matches
Mail list logo
