why was support for 10.4 dropped? WTH?

[IvanQ]

I don't understand why support for OS X 10.4 has been dropped for version 1.0.0. (I guess I won't be surprised if support for powerpc gets dropped soon too.)

I wouldn't mind helping out with development, but seeing as how support for building VLC on 10.4 was dropped even earlier... ah fück.

VLC is great because it's cross-platform. Dropping support for older platforms is totally uncool. Why should I bother to submit bug reports anymore?

[ajmas]

The answer I got a while back was that this was because certain APIs (Apple's or other third-parties) which VLC used didn't support 10.4 or added features that meant incompatibilities, so a tough call was made and 10.5 is where the focus was put, since this is what appealed to the vast majority. Maybe with more MacOS X developers on the VLC team 10.4 could have been supported, but there is already a lot of work simply going forward.

[thannoy]

An explanation here:
http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/v ... 55860.html
http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/v ... 58321.html

[The DJ]

So to summarize, the core of VLC 1.0.0, uses technology that is only supported when we compile VLC with llvm. llvm then only supports 10.5 and higher. There is no way to avoid using this technology, it is an integral part of our future plans for VLC.

[IvanQ]

Thanks for the responses.

It sounds like this is basically Apple's fault for not providing a backwards-compatible compiler.

All the more reason for me to lift both middle fingers in Apple's direction and return to Linux. They already screwed me over once by switching to intel just after I bought a ppc machine.

[fkuehne]

Just to get this clear. IMO, we will support PowerPC-based Macs as long as we support Mac OS X 10.5. Thus, for quite some time...

[poopdeville]

It sounds like this is basically Apple's fault for not providing a backwards-compatible compiler.

All the more reason for me to lift both middle fingers in Apple's direction and return to Linux. They already screwed me over once by switching to intel just after I bought a ppc machine.

Yes, it is Apple's "fault" for working on the LLVM compiler and creating and using features GCC doesn't have. No, that was just sarcasm. It was basically the VLC developer's fault for choosing to switch to LLVM instead of targeting GCC with XCode, as they will continue to be able to do. On the other hand, it sounds that they will be using LLVM specific features, which GCC simply does not have. In that case, they developers made the right decision.

Have fun with Linux. I do too. But GCC is inferior to LLVM, and I look forward to the day Linux moves forward to LLVM.

Also, I am sorry to hear your PowerPC hardware broke the moment Apple released Intel machines. Otherwise, I am not sure what you are complaining about. You got what you paid for. A computer that still works, even all these years later.

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Right, the fact that there is no cancellation points in pthread on OS X.4 is VLC developers fault.

If Apple community could stop fanboyism, everyone would be better.

[The DJ]

Let's get this clear once and for all. The problem is that we use cancellation points in pthreads. Darwin pretends to fully support these, but in reality, if you use gcc, there are several rather important system calls that are not cancellable. I'm not sure if this is a bug in gcc, but considering the fact that llvm does work in this case indeed seems to indicate a bug in gcc. And if apple doesn't fix this in gcc, then we have no choice but to use llvm.

Also since we have known this for quite some time now, we have already started removing or replacing elements that were needed to keep running on 10.4 and added several new behaviours that are not supported on 10.4. So even IF apple fixes this now in gcc, it's gonna be a huge effort to get 10.4 support back. Remember there is no ideal world. The reason Windows has had so much trouble in the past 5 years was largely due to it's reluctance to update to newer technology for no reason other than backwards compatibility. Backwards compatibility stifles innovation, it's as simple as that.

[TheElf]

The reason Windows has had so much trouble in the past 5 years was largely due to it's reluctance to update to newer technology for no reason other than backwards compatibility. Backwards compatibility stifles innovation, it's as simple as that.

sorry im not a programmer, only a normal user. I have a Intel Mac C2D OSX Tiger, and a old Dell Laptop PIII 800 w/ windows 2000 SP4....

funny... i can run VLC 1.0 in this 10 year OS/Laptop, but not in a new Mac... and always gave me the impression that Tiger looked more modern than Windows 2000!

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

and always gave me the impression that Tiger looked more modern than Windows 2000!

But you were wrong
Sorry man. If someone wants to port 1.0.0 back to 10.4, he will be welcomed.

[ajmas]

sorry im not a programmer, only a normal user. I have a Intel Mac C2D OSX Tiger, and a old Dell Laptop PIII 800 w/ windows 2000 SP4....

funny... i can run VLC 1.0 in this 10 year OS/Laptop, but not in a new Mac... and always gave me the impression that Tiger looked more modern than Windows 2000!

Different operating systems, different philosophies. The evolution cycle on the Mac is much higher than on Windows, and so you are going to have stuff deprecated much sooner. There are stuff that 'suck' on both sides of the fence, its just a question of deciding what limitations and issues you are willing to put up with, in contrast to what you gain. As j-b says, if someone has the time, knowledge and motivation they are free to do the necessary work. Given a finite number of resources and the upcoming Snow Leopard release the focus is going to be in what most people are going to be using.

I wish I had a more favourable answer, but that's the reality as it stands.

[Skarabrae]

I don't understand why support for OS X 10.4 has been dropped for version 1.0.0. (I guess I won't be surprised if support for powerpc gets dropped soon too.)

Soooo, that is why I get this error message saying I can not use this program (VLC 1.0.0) on "this version of Mac OSX"...

Yes, I have a PowerPC (first generation - no kidding, hey it's a Mac, not Windows!) with 10.4

-oo-

Could you - VLC people - PLEASE change the text

"Download Now for Mac OS X PowerPC (19 MB)"

on the download page into something like

"Download Now for Mac OS X PowerPC (10.5) (19 MB)"?

...if you had done that, then I wouldn't have first deleted the previous version... and it would have saved me the trouble from having to return to the previous version (I can still find that, right???)

So, no more VLC for my pre-Intel Mac? Then what, dump my still-perfectly-fine working Mac in the trash and buy an Intel Mac?

I am very displeased. I am getting the same feeling as with Windows

-----
EDIT: yeah, alright, I found the previous version, for 10.4
Still...

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

So, no more VLC for my pre-Intel Mac? Then what, dump my still-perfectly-fine working Mac in the trash and buy an Intel Mac?

PPC on 10.5 works.

I am very displeased. I am getting the same feeling as with Windows

Well, VLC works with Windows 2000. Complain to Apple for breaking backward compatibility.

[ajmas]

So, no more VLC for my pre-Intel Mac? Then what, dump my still-perfectly-fine working Mac in the trash and buy an Intel Mac?

PPC on 10.5 works.

For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v ... quirements

[Thargok]

Older operating systems lose support, it happens. Previous versions still work as I am sure you know since you are running a previous version as your OS.

That stated my Powermac Quicksilver from 2001 runs Leopard, I would say that there is little room for complaint.

[fkuehne]

BTW. guys, please note that I'm still looking for bug-reports against VLC 0.9.9a as I'm preparing a 0.9.10 release fixing the most annoying bugs for the 10.4 people.