Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant...
On Thursday, 22 December 2022 20:40:11 -03 Hamish Moffatt via Interest wrote: > On 21/12/22 06:38, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > On Montag, 19. Dezember 2022 16:59:41 CET Michael Jackson wrote: > >> So not really a “jolt every 3 years”. You have had 3 _total_ jolts over > >> the > >> course of 30 years. > > > > Except them dropping support for pre-AVX, pre-AVX2 CPUs, > > Big Sur (macOS 11), released 2.5 years ago and still supported, runs on > Macs dating back to 2013. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211238 Indeed, but Mid and Late 2013 is Apple obfuscated speak for "Intel 4th Generation Core", a.k.a. Haswell. Those support AVX2. So you're agreeing with Allan: Big Sur dropped support for pre-AVX2 machines. > I suffer from this problem too (users sticking to old OS releases), but > I don't think Apple is being too unreasonable in this particular case. No. The 2.5-year-old OS that is still supported supports hardware that is 8.5 years old now. The problem is whether less than 9 years old is reasonable. If you're used to the Windows or Linux world, it's not. Microsoft still supports the same processors that 64-bit Windows supported when it launched. They only increase the memory and disk space requirements, something that Windows users are often able to adapt to more than the processor. In fact, Microsoft is so fixed on compatibility that they even forego optimisations we've taken for granted in macOS and Linux, such as vectorised memcpy(). And on Linux, everything is supported. If you don't like that Red Hat 9 now requires SSE4.2, you can use other distros. Debian still supports non-SSE2 i386 (I know that because we broke it[*] again for 6.5; there's an open bug report). [*] read: "Thiago broke it again" -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Cloud Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant...
On 21/12/22 06:38, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: On Montag, 19. Dezember 2022 16:59:41 CET Michael Jackson wrote: So not really a “jolt every 3 years”. You have had 3 _total_ jolts over the course of 30 years. Except them dropping support for pre-AVX, pre-AVX2 CPUs, Big Sur (macOS 11), released 2.5 years ago and still supported, runs on Macs dating back to 2013. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211238 I suffer from this problem too (users sticking to old OS releases), but I don't think Apple is being too unreasonable in this particular case. Hamish ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant...
On Montag, 19. Dezember 2022 16:59:41 CET Michael Jackson wrote: > So not really a “jolt every 3 years”. You have had 3 _total_ jolts over the > course of 30 years. > Except them dropping support for pre-AVX, pre-AVX2 CPUs, constantly dropping support for GPUs older than 4 years all the bloody time with new software releases. Apple is not good at maintaining backwards compatibility on the computer front, even if their 4-5 year support is the best of the best for phones, it is the worst of the worst in laptops and desktops. 'Allan ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant...
Not to get into a flame war over Apple, but the processor changes actually were not so bad. Changing languages and frameworks was the biggest problem. Going Pascal to C++ was easy because our app was only in prototype stage, so we just started over. CodeWarrior was a joy, and they made it easy to move to PPC Carbon. Then they died. Moving to Intel wasn't too bad because all the byte-swapping was already written for the Windows version. The worst part was early XCode, but that gradually improved. Cocoa and Objective-C were a nightmare. 3 programmer-years and probably only 1/3 done. Mystery crashes. With Swift and SwiftUI on the horizon, writing native for Mac seemed doomed for an app with a lot of C++ business logic and small user base. Hence the switch to Qt. Hopefully it's not going from frying pan to fire. There was a time when the Mac Product Registry had at least a thousand great apps for Mac. Very few of them survived the jolts. Casey McD On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 10:59 AM Michael Jackson < mike.jack...@bluequartz.net> wrote: > Just some clarifications: > > > > Apple used 68K processors from 1984 to 1994. 10 Years of use. > > > > Apple Started using PPC in 1994 (Announced in 1992) and their last PPC > machine was in 2006. 12 Years of use. > > > > Apple started using x86 in 2006 and their last x86 machine was in 2020 > (which is still in production). 14+ years of use ( and macOS still > officially supports x86 releases) > > > > Apple started using Arm64 in 2020…. > > > > So not really a “jolt every 3 years”. You have had 3 _*total*_ jolts over > the course of 30 years. > > > > -- > > Mike Jackson > > > > *From: *Interest on behalf of Turtle > Creek Software > *Date: *Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 10:24 AM > *To: *Qt Interest > *Subject: *Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant... > > > > We sell to construction companies. They are not computer geeks, and often > run the original OS until the machine dies. Given the flakiness of some > Mac OS upgrades, that may be ideal policy. > > > > Apple moves far too fast with chip, OS and language changes. It's hard for > small developers to keep up. We started on 680x0, Pascal and Toolbox. > That's 3 chips, 3 languages and 3 OS frameworks ago. A jolt every 3 years. > > > > We gave up on Xcode/Cocoa since Obj-C seemed doomed and we have too much > C++ code to ever port to Swift and/or SwiftUI. I imagine Qt faces the same > problems, but on a more system level. > > > > If Qt Co does not have the resources to support more than 3 years of OS > versions, then please at least create some good stopping points that > solidly support older Mac OS versions. Explain which to use for which OS > ranges. Then, developers may need to build multiple apps. That kinda > sucks, but it's better than losing/annoying users because they don't want > the expense/pain of new hardware. > > > > Casey McDermott > > TurtleSoft.com > > ___ Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest > ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant...
Just some clarifications: Apple used 68K processors from 1984 to 1994. 10 Years of use. Apple Started using PPC in 1994 (Announced in 1992) and their last PPC machine was in 2006. 12 Years of use. Apple started using x86 in 2006 and their last x86 machine was in 2020 (which is still in production). 14+ years of use ( and macOS still officially supports x86 releases) Apple started using Arm64 in 2020…. So not really a “jolt every 3 years”. You have had 3 _total_ jolts over the course of 30 years. -- Mike Jackson From: Interest on behalf of Turtle Creek Software Date: Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 10:24 AM To: Qt Interest Subject: Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant... We sell to construction companies. They are not computer geeks, and often run the original OS until the machine dies. Given the flakiness of some Mac OS upgrades, that may be ideal policy. Apple moves far too fast with chip, OS and language changes. It's hard for small developers to keep up. We started on 680x0, Pascal and Toolbox. That's 3 chips, 3 languages and 3 OS frameworks ago. A jolt every 3 years. We gave up on Xcode/Cocoa since Obj-C seemed doomed and we have too much C++ code to ever port to Swift and/or SwiftUI. I imagine Qt faces the same problems, but on a more system level. If Qt Co does not have the resources to support more than 3 years of OS versions, then please at least create some good stopping points that solidly support older Mac OS versions. Explain which to use for which OS ranges. Then, developers may need to build multiple apps. That kinda sucks, but it's better than losing/annoying users because they don't want the expense/pain of new hardware. Casey McDermott TurtleSoft.com ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant...
Hi, One clarification: we are not talking about stopping support for macOS 10.15 in the already released version of Qt. It continues to be supported target with Qt 5.15 LTS and Qt 6.2 LTS as well as Qt 6.4. Of course within reasonable limits as Apple itself has already stopped supporting it. The discussion in this email thread has been about whether or not it should be supported in the next Qt release: Qt 6.5 coming in ~3,5 months from now. Yours, Tuukka From: Interest on behalf of Turtle Creek Software Date: Sunday, 18. December 2022 at 17.27 To: interest@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant... We sell to construction companies. They are not computer geeks, and often run the original OS until the machine dies. Given the flakiness of some Mac OS upgrades, that may be ideal policy. Apple moves far too fast with chip, OS and language changes. It's hard for small developers to keep up. We started on 680x0, Pascal and Toolbox. That's 3 chips, 3 languages and 3 OS frameworks ago. A jolt every 3 years. We gave up on Xcode/Cocoa since Obj-C seemed doomed and we have too much C++ code to ever port to Swift and/or SwiftUI. I imagine Qt faces the same problems, but on a more system level. If Qt Co does not have the resources to support more than 3 years of OS versions, then please at least create some good stopping points that solidly support older Mac OS versions. Explain which to use for which OS ranges. Then, developers may need to build multiple apps. That kinda sucks, but it's better than losing/annoying users because they don't want the expense/pain of new hardware. Casey McDermott TurtleSoft.com ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant...
We sell to construction companies. They are not computer geeks, and often run the original OS until the machine dies. Given the flakiness of some Mac OS upgrades, that may be ideal policy. Apple moves far too fast with chip, OS and language changes. It's hard for small developers to keep up. We started on 680x0, Pascal and Toolbox. That's 3 chips, 3 languages and 3 OS frameworks ago. A jolt every 3 years. We gave up on Xcode/Cocoa since Obj-C seemed doomed and we have too much C++ code to ever port to Swift and/or SwiftUI. I imagine Qt faces the same problems, but on a more system level. If Qt Co does not have the resources to support more than 3 years of OS versions, then please at least create some good stopping points that solidly support older Mac OS versions. Explain which to use for which OS ranges. Then, developers may need to build multiple apps. That kinda sucks, but it's better than losing/annoying users because they don't want the expense/pain of new hardware. Casey McDermott TurtleSoft.com ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Qt 6.5 Is Irrelevant for More than 95% of Mac Desktops
Hi, I totally subscribe this statement from Robert. We are starting to develop a new application with Qt 6.4.1. Qt 6 is still very bug prone and we will keep stumbling on them and you will probably keep releasing new version of Qt 6 rather fix versions of Qt 6.4.X Our users are very conservative about upgrading Mac OS because usually new version of Mac OS contain bugs and incompatibilities of existing software and no one wants to risk breaking their music setup at each Mac OS release. This seems like a total non-sense decision. What are the fundaments for such decision? Thank you! Best regards, Nuno Santos Founder / CEO / CTO www.imaginando.pt > On 16 Dec 2022, at 12:20, coroberti wrote: > > Hi, > Since Qt 6.5 drops Mac OS 10.15 Catalina, > it apparently starts to be irrelevant for at least 95% of Mac Desktops. > > https://gs.statcounter.com/macos-version-market-share/desktop/worldwide > > Google Analytics data of visitors for some web-site, where I have access, > also supports the above observations. > > To keep Qt-6 being still relevant for Mac Desktop open-source > development, please > consider keeping Mac OS 10.15 as a target. > Thanks. > > Kind regards, > Robert Iakobashvili > > ___ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
