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 one does not have to be so concerned about distributing for OS 9 > (or Classic). > b. Many people, though, may have OSX versions less than 3.9, so distributing > an application in Universal Binary would not help these users, if Universal > Binary requires OS X.3.9 or higher. One would then have to also include > PowerPC-only (for all versions of OSX) and Intel-only (for optimal performance > on > Intel) versions to reach most users. > c. Perhaps the ideal way of distributing might be a combination of > PowerPC-only and Intel-only versions. That should cover all PowerPC versions > as > well as Intel. It would not be necessary to include the Universal Binary > version. > Does this logic make sense? Certainly. Of course you could just make all three available with notes on the OS version restrictions... but it's your call! :-) Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
