I'm not disappointed in the slightest. 8-)
But the fact that it just popped up now was odd.
Richmond.
On 19.02.20 15:08, matthias rebbe via use-livecode wrote:
I am sorry to disappoint you, but that update was released in 2012
https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1585?viewlocale=en_US&locale=de_DE
I am sorry to disappoint you, but that update was released in 2012
https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1585?viewlocale=en_US&locale=de_DE
I have no idea why Macupdate blogs about it now.
-
Matthias Rebbe
Life Is Too Short For Boring Code
> Am 19.02.2020 um 13:56 schrieb Richmond via use-livecode
>
Here's a "little something" for all the "We have to endlessly update at
all costs" crowd:
https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/62001/os-x-lion-server-update
Who realised that Apple are STILL supporting MacOS 10.7.5 in some way?
Richmond.
On 19.02.20 9:12, Richmond wrote:
I would not expect a sof
I would not expect a software company to maintain any sort of backwards
compatibility unless they could
see any _significant financial advantage_ in that.
About a year ago someone waved $100 at me for a version of my Devawriter
Pro that would run on Mac OS 10.6 32-bit,
and as it took me all of
I suppose one could also make the counter argument that software companies do
not have oodles of money laying around to maintain endless backwards
compatibility with older operating systems. Something has to give.
Bob S
> On Feb 17, 2020, at 12:40 , Richmond via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> T
> On Feb 18, 2020, at 9:28 AM, Charles Szasz via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Richard,
>
> I have been a member of the LC community since roughly 2003. I have not seen
> the notes on LC 9.6.0 DP2. My main focus has been on updating my apps to 64
> bit Mac desktop apps and conquering notarizi
The prices for ESU double each year...
https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-much-will-staying-patched-on-windows-7-cost-you-heres-the-price-list/
-
Matthias Rebbe
Life Is Too Short For Boring Code
> Am 18.02.2020 um 18:06 schrieb Mark Talluto via use-livecode
> :
>
>> On Feb 18, 2020, at 8:08 AM,
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:07 AM Mark Talluto via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> Here is a fun sidenote. Windows 7 has also lost support from Microsoft as
> of Jan 14, 2020. Microsoft provides a program called Extended Security
> Updates.
>
> This program buys companies u
> On Feb 18, 2020, at 8:08 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Richmond wrote:
>> "The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that was
>> EOL'd many years ago."
>> And I replied by suggesting a version of LiveCode that would produce
>> standalones that would
Richmond wrote:
"The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
was EOL'd many years ago."
And I replied by suggesting a version of LiveCode that would produce
standalones that would work on that OS.
Do you have any idea how long Charles has been a member of this commu
"The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
was EOL'd many years ago."
And I replied by suggesting a version of LiveCode that would produce
standalones that would work
on that OS.
That is probably all the chap needed to know.
Richmond.
On 18.02.20 10:34, Richard G
Richmond wrote:
Banging on about endless upgrades is pretty pointless because, unless
one lives in a cave, one already knows about that.
What might be better is to offer the OP a practical solution to their
problem.
Enlighten us: what do you feel constitutes as "practical solution" to
Char
"Richmond as Dodo with ruffled feathers." Discuss. ;-)
Banging on about endless upgrades is pretty pointless because, unless
one lives in a cave, one already
knows about that.
What might be better is to offer the OP a practical solution to their
problem.
Richmond.
On 18.02.20 0:21, Richard
Richmond wrote:
> Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . sick of that stuff about endless upgrades; and,
> frankly banging on about them does not really help anyone who asks the
> sort of question the OP asked.
The OP asked about using the latest version of LiveCode on an OS that
was EOL'd many years ago.
I r
Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . sick of that stuff about endless upgrades; and,
frankly
banging on about them does not really help anyone who asks the sort of
question
the OP asked.
There is a simple fact that some people round "these parts" as well as
elsewhere overlook . . .
Not everyone has oddles
Charles Szasz wrote:
> Has anyone noticed that LC 9.6.0 DP2 creates 32 bit Windows
> standalones that are not compatible with Windows XP?
The Release Notes list these Win version as compatible with LC 9.6dp2:
- Windows 7 (both 32-bit and 64-bit)
- Windows Server 2008
- Windows 8.x (Desktop)
- Wi
16 matches
Mail list logo
