4 ms·

Yes or Linux. Either that or change licensing so people can create Apple VMs and I can spin one up online. At the time I was looking at this problem (2012) th

Yes or Linux. Either that or change licensing so people can create Apple VMs and I can spin one up online. At the time I was looking at this problem (2012) the only viable solution was to buy a piece of Apple hardware and install it in the office and have the auto-build system call back into the office from the cloud to build the package as a particular step in the build. So I have to worry about power, about the safety, about hardware, about updates, all because I can't use an arbitrary x86 processor to build an executable targeting an x86 processor. It made me so fucking cross. Let us not forget that other platforms don't have this mandatory requirement.

scarface74 7y ago
Microsoft offers Mac build servers as part of Azure Devops. And there is Mac Mini Colo. And you want to force a company to release a product for other operating systems?
- Quarrelsome 7y ago
  or make their OS available for virtualization. Remember this was 2012 so our entire build process was done via cloud vms and Mac's requirements were a nasty welt on an otherwise exceptionally smooth process because there were no options available at the time.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    It is available for virtualization - on Mac hardware.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - Quarrelsome 7y ago
      wait you can now finally virtuaise them but you have to do it on Mac hardware? Its like someone didn't give them the manual or something. I guess that explains why some companies can finally offer "macs on a rack" because they are literally macs. The point remains that its a bunch of hoops they force people to jump through, BECAUSE THEY CAN. Not for any good technical reason.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Yes. Apple is fully in its right to decide how to distribute its software. Just like an open source software license can dictate how their software is used. If you want to use MacOS you have to use a Mac.
        Quarrelsome 7y ago
        You misunderstand. If you want to build a product for MacOS you have to use a Mac. That's what bugs me because it doesn't fit into typical auto-build arrangements, at least it was a needless, awkward pain to do that when I wanted to do it in 2012. There was no technical reason to have to jump through those hoops beyond the typical Apple "fuck you because I can".
        scarface74 7y ago
        How does that not fit in “auto build arrangements”? You have a Mac as a build server to build Mac software just like you need a Windows Build server to build a Windows app. If your business can’t afford a $700 Mac Mini, you’re not running a business. Besides, are you not doing any local testing in the simulator?
        Quarrelsome 7y ago
        You don't need a windows build server to build a windows app, its just an executable that targets a given cpu architecture or run-time. Its not about affording a Mac Mini its about being forced to do IT on some build servers when the rest are visualised in the cloud. Having your cloud servers ping back into your physical office to do the Mac build is stupid. For context, this is an online service where we wanted to build two native apps for Android and IPhone. Android was easy (I didn't need a Google approved device to build it), IPhone was a fucking pain in the ass. > Besides, are you not doing any local testing in the simulator? You want to build the product on a dev box? That's not good CI. You want these environments to be clean and preferably spun up fresh each build.

scarface74 7y ago

Microsoft offers Mac build servers as part of Azure Devops. And there is Mac Mini Colo. And you want to force a company to release a product for other operating systems?

Quarrelsome 7y ago
or make their OS available for virtualization. Remember this was 2012 so our entire build process was done via cloud vms and Mac's requirements were a nasty welt on an otherwise exceptionally smooth process because there were no options available at the time.
- scarface74 7y ago
  It is available for virtualization - on Mac hardware.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - Quarrelsome 7y ago
    wait you can now finally virtuaise them but you have to do it on Mac hardware? Its like someone didn't give them the manual or something. I guess that explains why some companies can finally offer "macs on a rack" because they are literally macs. The point remains that its a bunch of hoops they force people to jump through, BECAUSE THEY CAN. Not for any good technical reason.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      Yes. Apple is fully in its right to decide how to distribute its software. Just like an open source software license can dictate how their software is used. If you want to use MacOS you have to use a Mac.
      - Quarrelsome 7y ago
        You misunderstand. If you want to build a product for MacOS you have to use a Mac. That's what bugs me because it doesn't fit into typical auto-build arrangements, at least it was a needless, awkward pain to do that when I wanted to do it in 2012. There was no technical reason to have to jump through those hoops beyond the typical Apple "fuck you because I can".
        scarface74 7y ago
        How does that not fit in “auto build arrangements”? You have a Mac as a build server to build Mac software just like you need a Windows Build server to build a Windows app. If your business can’t afford a $700 Mac Mini, you’re not running a business. Besides, are you not doing any local testing in the simulator?
        Quarrelsome 7y ago
        You don't need a windows build server to build a windows app, its just an executable that targets a given cpu architecture or run-time. Its not about affording a Mac Mini its about being forced to do IT on some build servers when the rest are visualised in the cloud. Having your cloud servers ping back into your physical office to do the Mac build is stupid. For context, this is an online service where we wanted to build two native apps for Android and IPhone. Android was easy (I didn't need a Google approved device to build it), IPhone was a fucking pain in the ass. > Besides, are you not doing any local testing in the simulator? You want to build the product on a dev box? That's not good CI. You want these environments to be clean and preferably spun up fresh each build.