4 ms·
Wouldn't "10.16 and higher" work for both 10.16 and 11?
by gregoriol 6y ago
Wouldn't "10.16 and higher" work for both 10.16 and 11?
- GekkePrutser 6y agoYes it would. But there is no guarantee that every package vendor does it that way. And this is only one example I can think of. It will mess up reports as well. Data from Macs is used outside of the Mac itself as well. I'll add that to my post, I'm only just now thinking of the implications. So far I hadn't thought of this as I assumed it would be fixed before release. In fact most Enterprise software for Mac (think Palo Alto GlobalProtect, Zscaler, antivirus packages) are horribly badly packaged and I expect many issues here. PS: Good point from tobr below too.. These things are not as simple as they seem.
- gregoriol 6y agoWell, they'll anyway need to "do" something about the new arm macs, so it'll probably not be an issue to fix version checks at the same time if broken...
- etaoins 6y agoExisting Intel software (with potentially broken version checks) will work on ARM Macs under emulation. Once they rebuild with the new SDK they'll get the receive the correct version.
- tobr 6y agoWhat if next year is 12.0 and 10.17?
- gregoriol 6y agoYour comment made my day :-D
- klodolph 6y agoI don’t think this is a plausible scenario. You might also ask, “What if next year Apple releases Mac OS 9.3?”
- mattl 6y agoThey should. And they should release a new version of Rhapsody. The Rhapsody community (and it is a community) would love that.
- steviedotboston 6y agoDon't get me excited now...
- torarnv 6y agoThe more plausible scenario would be 11.1 and 10.17 The trick of checking version >= 10.16 to cover both 10.16 and 11.0 would not work then, as version >= 10.17 would cover 11.0 (10.16) too. Then what..?