OS X Support Query

As you may know, we've been fixing up our OS X VM support for two reasons:
first, the current VM is not as stable as we'd like, and second, Apple is
switching to the x86 CPU. This question deals more with the PPC platform
though: is 10.2.x level support important to you, or would having VW
support 10.3 and up be sufficient? Thanks.


<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
James Robertson, Product Manager, Cincom Smalltalk
http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/blog/blogView

I'm very certain that 10.2 support will be needed for my Mac customer base
which I expect will consist in good part of k12 schools with many old G3
Macs.

-Carl Gundel, author of Liberty BASIC
http://www.libertybasic.com

...... Original Message .......
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 11:27:58 -0400 James Robertson <[hidden email]> wrote:

James Robertson wrote:
> As you may know, we've been fixing up our OS X VM support for two
> reasons: first, the current VM is not as stable as we'd like, and
> second, Apple is switching to the x86 CPU. This question deals more
> with the PPC platform though: is 10.2.x level support important to
> you, or would having VW support 10.3 and up be sufficient? Thanks.
Hello James,

I'm happy when the OS X VM is ready and stable (both PPC and Intel), no
matter if there's support for 10.2. Our customers are
(semi-)professional media producers/studios who usually update their
systems regulary.

I'm however not quite certain what you mean by "no support". If it means
"doesn't run", then it could perhaps be a problem. If it means "it runs,
but we don't care if future releases also run" then it's definately ok
with us.

I'm glad to see that the Mac platform development is moving forward.

Greetings,
Andre

Should we be expecting a badly needed performance kick along with the
improved stability?  Also when should we expect to see the VM?

Thanks,

-Carl
...... Original Message .......
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 11:27:58 -0400 James Robertson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>As you may know, we've been fixing up our OS X VM support for two reasons:
>first, the current VM is not as stable as we'd like, and second, Apple is
>switching to the x86 CPU. This question deals more with the PPC platform
>though: is 10.2.x level support important to you, or would having VW
>support 10.3 and up be sufficient? Thanks.
>
>

James Robertson wrote:
> As you may know, we've been fixing up our OS X VM support for two
> reasons: first, the current VM is not as stable as we'd like, and
> second, Apple is switching to the x86 CPU. This question deals more with
> the PPC platform though: is 10.2.x level support important to you, or
> would having VW support 10.3 and up be sufficient? Thanks.

Currently, supporting >= 10.4.x would be sufficient for us, potential
customers / in-house users are usually die-hard Mac users that will
upgrade their OS whenever Apple releases a new version. I'd rather like
to see a 100% rock solid VM instead of a 99% solution that supports 10.2.

Andre,

>I'm glad to see that the Mac platform development is moving forward.

FWIW, it's always been moving forward, it's just that no one has been able to
see it. The whole Graphics and Event internals of the VM have been re-written
from scratch.

The issue James is talking about is related to a graphics context
synchronization API that didn't exist in 10.2.3 but does in 10.3.x.

                                And So It Goes
                                     Sames
______________________________________________________________________

Samuel S. Shuster [|]
VisualWorks Engineering, GUI Project
Smalltalk Enables Success -- What Are YOU Using?

Samuel S. Shuster <[hidden email]> wrote:
> FWIW, it's always been moving forward, it's just that no one has been able to
> see it. The whole Graphics and Event internals of the VM have been re-written
> from scratch.
>  
Great!

> The issue James is talking about is related to a graphics context
> synchronization API that didn't exist in 10.2.3 but does in 10.3.x.
>
>  


Isn't there a Framework available from the Mac community to emulate this
API outside the VM? I'd prefer if the new VM is fully 10.3.+ optimized.
If there are still 10.2. users out there, as Carl mentioned, dragging a
Framework to the /Library folders could perhaps be a viable solution for
them.

Stuffing the brand new VM with quirky backward compatibility stubs is
perhaps not so sexy.

Andre

Hi James:

I want 10.4.x both PPC and Intel.  I don't need to go back to 10.2.x.

On Apr 6, 2006, at 8:27 AM, James Robertson wrote:

Thanks!!
Joseph Bacanskas [|]
--- I use Smalltalk.  My amp goes to eleven.

10.3 is fine for us: from what I can see from our users, we'd be better
off with higher performance graphics than backwards compatibility.

Steve