A:M fix for Mac OS "Mavericks"

[robcat2075]

Have any early adopters of the latest Mac OS version had any new issues with A:M on it?

 

 

Edit: See Post #71 for patch pending new installers.

[largento]

I'm in the middle of something and don't want to risk it. I'm sorely tempted, though.

[frosteternal]

Yeah, A:M won't run.

17g.

 

=(

 

Edit: version 16b does run, as do even older versions...however the finder file open/save as box doesn't seem to work properly. Can't open/save-as

 

EDIT: version 15j+ runs and I was able to export/save-as my work.

[largento]

Well, that's disappointing to hear. I've got Windows A:M running via Parallels, but I'm not quite ready to say goodbye to the Mac version. The Mac version was greatly improved in v16, so going back to v15 doesn't sound appealing.

 

I wonder if v18 works?

 

Maybe Steffen can say?

[frosteternal]

Well, that's disappointing to hear. I've got Windows A:M running via Parallels, but I'm not quite ready to say goodbye to the Mac version. The Mac version was greatly improved in v16, so going back to v15 doesn't sound appealing.

 

I wonder if v18 works?

 

Maybe Steffen can say?

 

I sent an email to support, perhaps they just need to recompile the mac version? It's a shame because I L O V E Mavericks. (Not like I can easily downgrade anyhow.)

[thefreshestever]

i cant tell, dont have mavericks installed, but i also intend to....

 

but steffen added a "fix" for the menu dialogue issues in v18. it´s actually more of a workaround than a fix. whenever a menu is stuck, you can now press command "Q", to get out. that´s mainly for the dialogue boxes within a:m, such as the edit cp-weights menu, or the options menu, things like that. that menue then just simply closes, and you can try again, hopefully with more luck this time . this has been a pain in v17, because it happenend a lot, and one couldn´t use the workaround of hiding a:m and then go back to it, because you were really stuck in that menu. for the "save as", "import" menus and stuff it´s more convenient to use the old workaround, hide a:m and then go back to it, so the dialogue will remain open and be active after that. however, i don´t know if v18 even works on mavericks.

 

steffen said he can´t really fix that dialogue issue, it would mean to re-code a:m completely for the mac, and that there are several system files on apples list of things they intend to neglect in the future that are necessary to run a:m in the first place... so it seems to be only a matter of time

[frosteternal]

i cant tell, dont have mavericks installed, but i also intend to....

 

but steffen added a "fix" for the menu dialogue issues in v18. it´s actually more of a workaround than a fix. whenever a menu is stuck, you can now press command "Q", to get out. that´s mainly for the dialogue boxes within a:m, such as the edit cp-weights menu, or the options menu, things like that. that menue then just simply closes, and you can try again, hopefully with more luck this time . this has been a pain in v17, because it happenend a lot, and one couldn´t use the workaround of hiding a:m and then go back to it, because you were really stuck in that menu. for the "save as", "import" menus and stuff it´s more convenient to use the old workaround, hide a:m and then go back to it, so the dialogue will remain open and be active after that. however, i don´t know if v18 even works on mavericks.

 

steffen said he can´t really fix that dialogue issue, it would mean to re-code a:m completely for the mac, and that there are several system files on apples list of things they intend to neglect in the future that are necessary to run a:m in the first place... so it seems to be only a matter of time

 

That's insane. I refuse to believe the code can't be updated. And pretty much a deal breaker. I just bought a second subscription for my other machine so I am quite pissed off. If the OS makes changes, you update the software. That's how it works. It isn't like the OS update was a surprise - beta versions have been available to developers for MONTHS. I've been using A:M since 1994. Guess it's time to recode from scratch or else it seems the Mac version is dead. :/ I hope not.

[thefreshestever]

it is a dealbreaker for me, too... i refuse to work in windows just because of a:m.

 

as far as i understand the code CAN be updated, but it´s a money and manpower issue. a:m has been running on some sort of a shell on a mac so far, and was never properly coded for the mac. i don´t think we are supposed to talk about that here, but to me it seems unfair to all the mac users to let them just crash against a wall at some point. what if they are in the middle of an important project and then suddenly a:m stops working after a system update? either you invest money to guarantee it will work in the future, or you announce the bitter truth... for me that seem to be the only fair options.

 

but since v16 is running on mavericks as you said, i guess it´s possible to make v18 run on it as well, in case it doesn´t do yet.

[markw]

Well I've never been one to jump strait onto a new OS update. The first release is always a bit like a massive public beta test of the new OS! Better to wait till Apple have released an update or two before joining in!

So I'm not too concerned at the moment...

However my A:M sub runs out mid January and I really hope that Hash could give us Mac users some solid info as to the future of the Mac version. I really, really don't want to have to let it go!

[largento]

Jesse, have you tried starting up in safe mode and then trying 17g? Hold the shift key during startup.

[frosteternal]

Well I've never been one to jump strait onto a new OS update. The first release is always a bit like a massive public beta test of the new OS! Better to wait till Apple have released an update or two before joining in!

So I'm not too concerned at the moment...

However my A:M sub runs out mid January and I really hope that Hash could give us Mac users some solid info as to the future of the Mac version. I really, really don't want to have to let it go!

 

No, the public release of an OS is not like a public beta. That's what a beta is.

And the problem is not the OS...it is the software that must be configured to run on the OS, not vice-versa. That is the whole point of making the developer version of a new OS available first - to beta test as well as assure that the software will be ready to go on Day One. It's not just early adopters who are hurt - it's also people buying a new system, which includes only the newest OS.

 

If the software isn't compatible, that should be clearly stated on the website before one buys a license.

This whole experience has been nightmarish - I thought I had lost a week of work as I couldn't open my model, although stepping down to v15 is a life-saving workaround.

 

Largento - I have tried safe mode. No good, same crash.

[largento]

Unfortunately, the circumstance with A:M is now we only have one programmer working on A:M on a voluntary basis.

 

I know that when I first started using A:M (back in 2004), the Mac version was a separate app. There was a definite disparity between them not only in performance, but in features. Features would roll out on the Windows app first and then later be integrated into the Mac version.

 

I gather that was abandoned at some point and now the Mac version is a port of the Windows version. And the means of doing that apparently make use of code written for the PowerPC and slowly deleted from the Mac OS after the Intel switch. In fairness to Apple, they kept support for PowerPC for many years after the switch (in 2006.)

 

I'm in the middle of making a movie, so I'm going to have to stick with Mountain Lion until I have it finished and then consider my options after that.

 

Fingers crossed that Steffen can make v18 work with Mavericks, 'cause as you say, the Mac version will have to be dropped otherwise.

[robcat2075]

Steffen has been doing a wonderful job keeping A:M going in the face of many OS and hardware changes over the past five years or so and has managed to enable great performance improvements in both the Windows and Mac versions.

[thefreshestever]

Steffen has been doing a wonderful job keeping A:M going in the face of many OS and hardware changes over the past five years or so and has managed to enable great performance improvements in both the Windows and Mac versions.

 

that´s true, nobody said anything else... but that doesn´t solve the problem that the day will come when a:m won´t work on newer mac OS anymore.

[robcat2075]

My point is that if there is a problem, it's not because of incompetence or failure to notice that a new OS revision was coming out nor is it a sign of disinterest in Mac users, it's the result of what is possible to do so far with the available resources.

 

Microsoft and Apple both have enormous R&D and testing resources and yet they still put out software with showstopping problems. A:M doesn't have those resources and yet still works pretty well.

 

Stay calm for at least a little while.

[largento]

Nevertheless, some kind of advisory needs to be released to warn Mac Users that the software will stop working if they apply the Mavericks upgrade.

 

It would be irresponsible not to.

[thefreshestever]

easy for you windowsy people to say

[Rodney]

although stepping down to v15 is a life-saving workaround.

 

Here's a clue.

 

The fact that v15 was working before and still is working on Mavericks is a great omen.

Steffen now just needs quality feedback to determine what got broke in Maverick that was working in previous releases of OSX.

As has been noted... it takes time to account for breaking changes in Apple and Microsoft code.

The good news is that because A:M was working before we are likely looking at a nasty bug rather than the end of the world.

[frosteternal]

although stepping down to v15 is a life-saving workaround.

 

Here's a clue.

 

The fact that v15 was working before and still is working on Mavericks is a great omen.

Steffen now just needs quality feedback to determine what got broke in Maverick that was working in previous releases of OSX.

As has been noted... it takes time to account for breaking changes in Apple and Microsoft code.

The good news is that because A:M was working before we are likely looking at a nasty bug rather than the end of the world.

The file open dialogues don't work consistently in v15...Can't import images at all. I exported my model, and moved to a different modeling program because I have a deadline.

[frosteternal]

My point is that if there is a problem, it's not because of incompetence or failure to notice that a new OS revision was coming out nor is it a sign of disinterest in Mac users, it's the result of what is possible to do so far with the available resources.

 

Microsoft and Apple both have enormous R&D and testing resources and yet they still put out software with showstopping problems. A:M doesn't have those resources and yet still works pretty well.

 

Stay calm for at least a little while.

 

I just purchased a 2nd license yesterday before I discovered the new issue, so I am annoyed. A:M isn't some free/open source program, it costs money, and I expect it to work even under the latest OS. I purchased a second license because I had a modeling job I needed to work on ASAP, and didn't want to be stuck on my laptop. Little did I know it wouldn't work - it activated just fine. There was no caveat listed in the store that it might not work on a recent OS. That is just silly. I understand there is a resource issue, but Mavericks was released as beta MONTHS ago. The last A:M release was March. More than enough time to test the new system and fix a launch exception bug.

As others have noted, there are issues with Mac file dialogs not working properly, except by a workaround - um...that's just half-assed. Certainly a non-standard file dialog could be used, like a few other 3D softwares use in their Mac versions. If the Mac support keeps slipping, then it shouldn't be sold for Mac.

 

I'm very frustrated because this surprise glitch threatened my ability to get this project done on time, and there is really no reason it shouldn't have been caught well in advance of the public release of the OS.

[Rodney]

Perhaps someone can get you (or other Maverick user) onto the v18 Alpha list so you can install that and see if the latest works in Maverick.

It's a long shot but -might- resolve the problem.

 

Whether the fix is incorporated yet or not... v18 will likely be the fix.

[largento]

The significant problem is that now every single new Mac sold has Mavericks loaded on it and there isn't an option to take it back to a previous operating system.

 

We don't know when v18 will be released and we're guessing that Steffen can solve the problem.

 

Some kind of notice needs to be put up on the store/website advising potential customers that A:M will not run under the current Mac OS. Rodney & Robert may not be aware that Mavericks is a free release and is recommended for Macs going back as far 2007. It's required to run all of the new Apple software (iLife apps & iWork apps anyway). Mac users are not like Windows users. Mac users upgrade their machines.

 

To not advise current and potential customers of this problem is only asking for more bad PR for A:M. People finding themselves in Jesse's situation aren't likely to just "stay calm" and wait for a "possible" fix.

 

They need to be advised in advance.

[Mechadelphia]

Perhaps someone can get you (or other Maverick user) onto the v18 Alpha list so you can install that and see if the latest works in Maverick.

It's a long shot but -might- resolve the problem.

 

Whether the fix is incorporated yet or not... v18 will likely be the fix.

 

I am one of the users actively participating in the v18 beta testing.

 

I have a Mac which is running Maverick but I use my A:M licence on my PC (since I prefer the way A:M's perfoms on a Windows PC).

 

I have also been wondering about the status of the Mac version because I have considered switching to the Mac for my A:M work.

 

(I run Windows just for A:M)

 

I will contact Hash to see if I can get a temporary licence to also run to run the beta on my Mac so that I can try to help resolve any problems that may be present in it now.

 

I will keep you posted...

[Fuchur]

Perhaps someone can get you (or other Maverick user) onto the v18 Alpha list so you can install that and see if the latest works in Maverick.

It's a long shot but -might- resolve the problem.

 

Whether the fix is incorporated yet or not... v18 will likely be the fix.

 

I am one of the users actively participating in the v18 beta testing.

 

I have a Mac which is running Maverick but I use my A:M licence on my PC (since I prefer the way A:M's perfoms on a Windows PC).

 

I have also been wondering about the status of the Mac version because I have considered switching to the Mac for my A:M work.

 

(I run Windows just for A:M)

 

I will contact Hash to see if I can get a temporary licence to also run to run the beta on my Mac so that I can try to help resolve any problems that may be present in it now.

 

I will keep you posted...

 

> Try the trial: A:M Trial

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[jimd]

16.0 works on Maverick

i did a few tests everything works so far no issues with save or save as or filling in dialogue boxes

i will try something a bit more complicated

 

version 17 will not

 

I duel boot my mac so I can switch back and forth between upgrades

makes life easy

 

j

[largento]

Jesse, here's another thing to try.

 

I'm reading that people are having trouble with Parallels not starting after upgrading to Mavericks. The solution they are going with is to uninstall the software, use Disk Utility to Repair Permissions to your boot drive, restart and reinstall the software.

 

They say the problem is that the OS X upgrade is corrupting Parallels system files.

[frosteternal]

Jesse, here's another thing to try.

 

I'm reading that people are having trouble with Parallels not starting after upgrading to Mavericks. The solution they are going with is to uninstall the software, use Disk Utility to Repair Permissions to your boot drive, restart and reinstall the software.

 

They say the problem is that the OS X upgrade is corrupting Parallels system files.

 

I don't use Parallels, but thanks for the confirmation on v16... It wasn't saving models from the save dialog box for me when I tried to export my model to ObJ. Good to know that I can cobble together functionality across two versions though. I had to move to another program to finish the project but look forward to v18 or other possible fix, hopefully sooner than later :/

[largento]

I was meaning A:M. Appzapper tells me that there are some preference files that A:M places in the Library that could have been corrupted in the same way as Parallels' system files were corrupted.

[Fuchur]

I was meaning A:M. Appzapper tells me that there are some preference files that A:M places in the Library that could have been corrupted in the same way as Parallels' system files were corrupted.

 

As I understand it: Try to uninstall A:M and re-install it after the OS update.

If the preference-files are only corrupted while updating the OS (not constantly while using it) it may be as simple as that.

Worth a try if you ask me.

 

Be sure to move your master0.lic to another location before uninstalling to be able to put it back into the same folder after you have reinstalled.

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[frosteternal]

I was meaning A:M. Appzapper tells me that there are some preference files that A:M places in the Library that could have been corrupted in the same way as Parallels' system files were corrupted.

 

As I understand it: Try to uninstall A:M and re-install it after the OS update.

If the preference-files are only corrupted while updating the OS (not constantly while using it) it may be as simple as that.

Worth a try if you ask me.

 

Be sure to move your master0.lic to another location before uninstalling to be able to put it back into the same folder after you have reinstalled.

 

See you

*Fuchur*

That does not fix the crashing on launch problem. I tried it just to be sure. =(

However, an unistall and reinstall of v16 (which is odd, because it was a fresh install to begin with) yields a working A:M.

So something within v17 crashes while 16 does not. Odd.

[yoda64]

I have installed now Maverick on my developer mac and can't reproduce the problem , that V17 or V18 are not working .

Here I need the crashlog , to see, where the problem occurs .

 

But installing Maverick was a absolute bad idea , now I'm not able to compile A:M on the mac :angry:

[jimd]

16 works but .jpg won't render they show up in render window but can't find them any place

I tried saving to another disk but no luck

here is a screen shot showing render in progress

 

 

17 won't work tried the permission thing and reinstall no luck there

here is the log report

report.rtf

[thefreshestever]

I have installed now Maverick on my developer mac and can't reproduce the problem , that V17 or V18 are not working .

Here I need the crashlog , to see, where the problem occurs .

 

But installing Maverick was a absolute bad idea , now I'm not able to compile A:M on the mac :angry:

 

the first part of that post is really good news

[robcat2075]

 

Edit: Don't send your crash logs any more... see message from Stefen below.

[yoda64]

Have to update my last post , both version have worked , while I had done a update installation for 10.9 over 10.7 , here some libraries in /usr/lib not overwritten , thatswhy it has worked .

After a fresh install for 10.9 on another partition (without transfering the data from the existing 10.7 installation) , I see the problem now .

It looks like Apple has changed functions/entrypoints in the libstdc++ :-(.

I'm looking for a solution to solve this , but can't promise that I have success .

There is no need for more crashlogs for 10.9 .

And the reason why 16.0 is working is simply that this version is compiled with the apple gcc 4.2, starting from V17 A:M is compiled with a homebrew gcc 4.7.

[robcat2075]

Well, that's scary.

[largento]

Not being at all savvy about such things, but could there be a possibility of copying those libraries and making it so we can add them to our installs?

[thefreshestever]

[largento]

I wonder if I updated, if those files would still be there for me, too? I think I started with Snow Leopard and updated to Mountain Lion (I skipped Lion.)

[markw]

I wonder if I updated, if those files would still be there for me, too? I think I started with Snow Leopard and updated to Mountain Lion (I skipped Lion.)

I would urge extreme caution for now Mark! Lets wait and see what Steffen comes up with first.

The folder Steffen referred to is normally hidden as its part of the OS. Nor dose he say which are the relevant files/folders to look for when you get there. In mine there is a mix of 243 files and folders to choose from!

At the moment there's still nothing out there that will only run on Mavericks, (its way too soon for that!) so I'm still going to wait for an update or two from Apple. I see lots of Mavericks bugs being reported not only on Apples forums but on the forums of other apps I use too.

[largento]

Agreed, Mark.

 

One thing I just discovered is that using Parallels, I can install a virtual machine of OS X Mountain Lion. This would be aggravating that both versions of A:M would have to run through virtual machines, but it would let me to update to Mavericks and still run A:M in Mountain Lion.

 

I think I might go ahead and try this (installing the VM, not updating to Mavericks). One question I was considering was attempting to install an older Mac OS, rather than Mountain Lion. I do have the disc for Snow Leopard (10.6). Since each new version seems to affect A:M, I wonder if it would run better on an older OS?

[higginsdj]

I'm disappointed with Apple rather than Hash..... Install of the Maverick upgrade has broken a lot of my installed applications.... I'm back to using Windows.

 

Cheers

[robcat2075]

What does Apple typically do when an upgrade is breaking other programs? Nothing?

[largento]

How far back were you before you upgraded, David? Sounds like your apps may have been PPC apps.

 

The only real apps I use are the Adobe apps and A:M.

 

I haven't checked in the last few days, but initially Adobe announced that there weren't any issues. 'Course, nowadays, Adobe is updating the apps every 2 seconds with this cloud thing.

 

Robert, I wouldn't know the particulars, but my understanding is that software developers can download early versions of the Mac OS and work with Apple to make their apps work in advance of the OS being released to the public.

 

Since Steffen only just installed Mavericks, I'm assuming that Hash isn't in that system. It may be that you have to be developing an actual Mac application. I believe that's why A:M can't be sold through the Mac App Store. It would have to be entirely written as a Mac app, using Cocoa.

[frosteternal]

What does Apple typically do when an upgrade is breaking other programs? Nothing?

Apple encourages and makes it easy for developers to update their software along with the operating system. In advance of a new OS, developers (who pay a subscription fee of $99 a year) are given first access to betas and development tools are automatically updated so that native mac apps just need to be recompiled. When features are deprecated, a list of the out of date libraries is made available far in advance.

Apple is VERY developer friendly.

However, in exchange for this ease of development, they also demand that you build using xCode (the free Apple dev tools) and keep your code up to date and modern.

It's a different ecosystem than windows. An old windows app is expected to be able to run on new systems, but not vice versa, an old Mac app is expected to be updated.

There are disadvantages and advantages to each approach. The Apple way allows Apple to strongly encourage compliance with new systems, which helps apple, who sells the hardware, and promotes a good user experience because apps are generally kept in step with new OS versions. (I was a long-time windows user - rabidly anti-mac, but I decided to give apple a go and found it more suited for my needs)

Also, as several people have pointed out, Mac users actually update their OS, Windows users drag their feet because the cost of updating is prohibitive.

 

So why would a Mac user update? I updated because Mavericks 1) streamlined multi-monitor setups to great advantage, which I really needed 2) actually runs faster and more efficiently, and 3) increases the battery life on my Macbook significantly. (about 25% more time between charges!)

I didn't know at the time that A:M was not written directly in native mac code.

[jimd]

AM is not the only software that is not (shall we say current )

I have more apps then most and only recently they are catching up ( mostly on the plug end side )

one such plugin took about 14 moths to go 64 bit so I duel booted to use it

and to be sure some are not ready for Maverick at all.

 

Now I'm using 10.6.8 on one drive and I did the Maverick upgrade from Lion just cause on the other

this keeps everything on an even plain and bouncing back and forth does have its advantages

 

1 it works, easy to set up and fast

2 your never out of touch or out of date ( you can take advantage of the new Mac apps )

3 allows Mac and developers to catch up and your not hit by it

4 you can try new stuff without F'n up your stuff ( thats a biggie )

5 you also have a nice backup if anything goes bad ( which it will)

 

 

bty my second drive only has a few apps compared to the first drive

look at it as a Beta drive the more it becomes stable you can migrate to it

 

 

j

[Fuchur]

Apple is VERY developer friendly.

 

Sorry, but just not right. They force you to use a Mac-System with the current MacOS, pay money to be able to develope for their platform, use their IDE and so on.

It really is not developer friendly. Play after their rules and everything is fine, but try to play outside of them (like using a Linux or Windows system, use a OS which is not current, etc.) and you are not able to develope at all.

This has some advantages (at least for apple) but all in all it is very hard for someone who wants to develope for different platforms.

 

For Windows you can at least compile many applications (MFC-based once are tricky, everything else is not) from other OSes without having to use their IDE (Visual Studio is only needed for MFC-based applications) if the compiler runs on it

(like GCC+, which runs on Macs, Windows and Linux and is free).

 

For Linux you can compile with any OS and any IDE you want.

 

Apple may be developer friendly for (no other but current) Mac-developers, but that is the only aspect they tolerate at all. It is a pure "one to rule the world"-approach and the biggest disadvantage Macs have if you ask me.

And it is important for a developer that the OS is backward compatible which ApplesOS is not that good at. This is a advantage for developing the OS (or for Apple) because you do not have to careful about what you change, but it is a real pain in the ass for developers...

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[largento]

As a consumer, I'm not so interested in whether they are "developer friendly" or not.

 

Clearly all the tools are provided by Apple, so it's really more a case of whether or not the developer has the resources or wants to commit the resources to writing and maintaining the app. I think it's a terrible time for software companies, because nobody really wants to pay for the software anymore. Consumers expect it to be free or dirt cheap.

 

This "one ring to rule them all" perception is inaccurate. Apple wants the consumer to have a trouble-free experience. Presumably software companies should want the same for their customers. So it stands to reason that Apple wouldn't want to have tons of legacy code and have the consumer running unreliable applications. I think we've seen here that when there's a problem with the software, it's Apple that is going to be the one getting the complaint. They don't want complaints.

 

That's the point of the Mac App Store, too. They're encouraging consumers to only purchase apps from the store because that way they can confirm that they don't include any faulty code or malware. I suspect Windows is going to move that direction, too. Given all the bad stuff out there, the average consumer (the ones who mostly bought their software in boxes) doesn't want to download applications from various websites.

 

Frankly, whose fault it is that A:M no longer runs on the Macintosh doesn't matter at all to me.

 

I'm not angry, I'm sad.

 

If you are a Windows user, clearly this doesn't effect you, but were the tables turned and the Windows version had stopped working and the only alternative you were given was to switch to a Mac, I suspect you would be far more vocal in your disappointment than we have been.

 

For many years now, I've been an A:M enthusiast, not just a user. I fell in love with A:M so hard that I quit my job just to spend more time with it. :-) It may not effect you, but it sure as Hell effects me.

[frosteternal]

Apple is VERY developer friendly.

 

Sorry, but just not right. They force you to use a Mac-System with the current MacOS, pay money to be able to develope for their platform, use their IDE and so on.

It really is not developer friendly. Play after their rules and everything is fine, but try to play outside of them (like using a Linux or Windows system, use a OS which is not current, etc.) and you are not able to develope at all.

This has some advantages (at least for apple) but all in all it is very hard for someone who wants to develope for different platforms.

 

For Windows you can at least compile many applications (MFC-based once are tricky, everything else is not) from other OSes without having to use their IDE (Visual Studio is only needed for MFC-based applications) if the compiler runs on it

(like GCC+, which runs on Macs, Windows and Linux and is free).

 

For Linux you can compile with any OS and any IDE you want.

 

Apple may be developer friendly for (no other but current) Mac-developers, but that is the only aspect they tolerate at all. It is a pure "one to rule the world"-approach and the biggest disadvantage Macs have if you ask me.

And it is important for a developer that the OS is backward compatible which ApplesOS is not that good at. This is a advantage for developing the OS (or for Apple) because you do not have to careful about what you change, but it is a real pain in the ass for developers...

 

See you

*Fuchur*

 

Yeah, except that is *how* you write a program for a Mac. If one don't use the proper tools in the first place then one can expect things to break. Just because one can use whatever IDE etc for developing on X system doesn't mean that that approach does, or should be expected to work for another system.

That's like driving the wrong way on a one way street and then getting mad at the road when you get in an accident.

There is a right way and a wrong way to develop for the Mac.

It's annoying that one of my favorite software programs doesn't follow developer standards and now is broken because of it.

It's annoying that no testing was done in the six months that a beta of the new OS has been available to developers.

It's annoying because I purchased a brand new second license an hour before finding out that A:M does not run on current OS X. (I feel I am due a refund, which I have requested.)

Actually no.

It's just sad. This one's a dealbreaker.

 

Bye guys. It's been fun. =(

[thefreshestever]

i don´t think the issue here is wether apple is developer friendly or not, the reason why a:m won´t run forever on a mac is that a:m is maintained and developed by one single person in his spare time. given those circumstances it is amazing how a:m has developed the last couple of years. but when you compare this development to other apps where several coders are working on it full time, well... you´ll see the difference. i´d rather pay more for a:m to be sure the money goes into development than paying just 79$ a year and don´t even know if it will run on my mac at all in the future. what if steffen gets hit by a bus tomorrow? i really hope that won´t happen, but then the pc-users would have to panic as well... i think there are several different options for hash here (investing money, advertise and raise the price, or make it free, open source, or sell it etc...), the way it´s been handled right now can´t possibly last forever. but that´s not my decision to make, i just have to consider my options. right now it seems a:ms future is quite foggy, and i need something to rely on.