> ... it is always a good idea when developing for public consumption to > develop for the (reasonably) lowest common denominator.
This works with the public. Not so much with a massive set of corporate enterprises where IT departments (all of them) will choose to test and roll out upgrades/updates not long (maybe a month) after its release. This is decided upon because of 2 main factors - 1. security measures implemented in the updates based on real world attacks; 2. The next minor update is hot on its heels. Apple release bêtas so that IT depts can do the main test ahead of time and then on gm they do a final check then release. (Actually, à lot of them wait for Apple to release a x.x.01 before release so that all the initial bugs are removed :p) As a supplier to these companies we have to sign off that we are not putting their devices and systems at risk by using out of date security measures and sdk’s. And so we must be capable of using the very latest Sdks and wares. But, fortunately, as Panos said, these newer oss and IDEs are covered by current releases (9.5.1 and 9.6dp2) although not mentioned in the release notes. And that is what was scaring me and potentially newbies off from making use of it. If it says it’s not supported I can’t risk installing it and end up not being able to revert easily or otherwise stop working. It’s just frustrating that these fixes have been sitting on the server waiting for release for a couple of months and not just pushed out in even a dp or rc form. It would enable us to Have time to test them thoroughly ahead of gm release. And even start putting them to use. Sean Cole Pi Digital > On 13 Mar 2020, at 15:44, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode > <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > Just to diverge a bit (as I am wont to do), when new browsers and features > began to be prolific, a lot of web devs would initially develop sites using > the new features. What resulted however is that they excluded vast numbers of > visitors who could not view their web sites, or had reduced capabilities. > > By reasonable, I mean for example, making sure an app will run in Windows 7 > or whatever version of iOS the Apple Store accepts. Unreasonable would be > trying to support iOS 7 of Windows XP or Vista. > > If using the latest SDK and Livecode version doesn't accomplish this, I would > consider maintaining an SDK and LC version that does, and avoid using > features in your apps that environment cannot support. > > My 2¢ > > Bob S > > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
