Mac UB standalones and OS versions

Shari shari at
Sun Jun 3 00:40:48 EDT 2007

>Now this is something I think we need to worry about less than 
>having a "Classic" potential; since most people who have OSX are 
>going to be moving up to the latest due to the ease with  which 
>Apple makes updating the OS. Or am I in the minority when I get 
>automatic updates from Apple on just about everything whenever there 
>is new software? I'd be willing to bet that there are many, many 
>fewer using OSX 2.8 than are using OS9.2.
>Joe Wilkins

I don't worry about Classic anymore.  Sales pretty much zeroed out 
for it so I've slowly been phasing out my Classic apps.

10.2.8 however...... if I remember correctly, at the time I was using 
that computer, Apple only gave out free OSX updates thru 10.2.8.  If 
you wanted to upgrade past that, you had to pay again.  So I never 
did.  I just eventually got a new MacPro :-)  But because the MacPro 
is of course Macintel, and LOTS of folks don't have Macintel, I use 
the other computer for my non-Macintel testing.  And there 
encountered the error.

I know there are a lot of folks out there, non-techie folks, the ones 
who are most likely to use my creations, who don't automatically 
update to the latest and greatest OS unless it's free.

I don't know if Apple ever finally started giving out free updates to 
boost 10.2.8 higher or not.  THAT would be the question, then.  I 
couldn't upgrade that computer past 10.2.8 without paying again, so 
there I stopped.  I don't know if it's still stopped there or not. 
But to me, a Universal build should work on all flavors of OSX, not 
just the newest ones.

I'd like to get away from having more than one Macintosh download to 
create, test and maintain.

Windows and Macintosh shareware games
BIackjack Gold

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list