Report, edit, etc...Posted by DarkWizzard on 2005-10-03 at 16:55:37
I wonder what version of OSX i should target for the SCMD 2 - MAC Alpha 1 release, as well as for later releases.
Right now it requires OSX 10.3, but i think about using 10.4 features as well.
So yah, which version do you use?
(a 10.2 compatible version might be possible if there are enough people still using that)
Right now it requires OSX 10.3, but i think about using 10.4 features as well.
So yah, which version do you use?
(a 10.2 compatible version might be possible if there are enough people still using that)
Report, edit, etc...Posted by FrezZ on 2005-10-03 at 23:00:19
Basically nobody ( [Edit] , to clarify i doubt any sc users are really using os9 ) uses os9 as a main operating system anymore, and you can no longer boot directly to os9 on newer macs, so i dont think you have to worry about os9. I am sure there are a few die hards using it as their main operating system, but who cares about them.
I can still see a few people using 10.1, why i dont know.
Now 10.2 will probably account for maybe 30% of mac users?. ( uneducated guess, so don't quote me or anything ) I guess around that percentage of people use it, as anything bought before the last year or so came with 10.2 pre-installed ( example. my parents, and they are in no real hurry to upgrade to 10.3 or 10.4 anytime soon ) .
I personally use 10.3, right now, as programs have the most support for 10.3. With 10.4 being so new allot of programs are not properly supporting it yet, and it will be at least 6 months to a year before the majority of mac programs are properly supported ( I was specifically told this buy a Mac tech who himself still uses 10.3 )
I would say for now 10.3 is the main version of osx you should make SCMD2 for, as its not like making it for 10.3 will not allow 10.4 users to run it, only means 10.2 and below cant.
I can still see a few people using 10.1, why i dont know.
Now 10.2 will probably account for maybe 30% of mac users?. ( uneducated guess, so don't quote me or anything ) I guess around that percentage of people use it, as anything bought before the last year or so came with 10.2 pre-installed ( example. my parents, and they are in no real hurry to upgrade to 10.3 or 10.4 anytime soon ) .
I personally use 10.3, right now, as programs have the most support for 10.3. With 10.4 being so new allot of programs are not properly supporting it yet, and it will be at least 6 months to a year before the majority of mac programs are properly supported ( I was specifically told this buy a Mac tech who himself still uses 10.3 )
I would say for now 10.3 is the main version of osx you should make SCMD2 for, as its not like making it for 10.3 will not allow 10.4 users to run it, only means 10.2 and below cant.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2005-10-03 at 23:18:28
I use the non-Intel 10.4. I agree that 10.3 would probably be the best choice as it's likely the most used version at this point.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by notnuclearrabbit on 2005-10-03 at 23:31:59
[center]There's still an amazing ammount of people running pre-OS X.
I'm on 10.4, non Intel.[/center]
I'm on 10.4, non Intel.[/center]
Report, edit, etc...Posted by SI on 2005-10-08 at 21:48:07
there;s an amazing lack of votes =p
Report, edit, etc...Posted by FrezZ on 2005-10-09 at 01:56:51
The lack of replies/votes is very strange, i guess allot of the mac users waiting for SCM mac draft have forgotten about it, and at a time when completion seems imminent no less.
If this trend of no replies keeps up my suggestion is to simply make the base operating system it runs from 10.3, as then both 10.3 and 10.4 can use it without any added hassle ( for now ) of making it for both.
If this trend of no replies keeps up my suggestion is to simply make the base operating system it runs from 10.3, as then both 10.3 and 10.4 can use it without any added hassle ( for now ) of making it for both.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Wing-of-no-Wing on 2005-10-09 at 21:26:36
This particular computer is using OS X 10.4.2, upgraded from OS 10.3.8 when my hard drive and operating system disks simultaneously failed. My other Starcraft-capable Mac computer is running OS 8.6 (upgraded from an earlier OS 8 version in order to use more modern software), but I don't use it that often anymore...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by notnuclearrabbit on 2005-10-09 at 23:52:59
[center]Blizzard needs to consider porting SE to OS X. Hopefully SI/DW beat 'em to it.[/center]
Report, edit, etc...Posted by SI on 2005-10-10 at 07:00:34
I have it from a fairly good source that blizzard will not be porting it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2005-10-11 at 14:28:43
Blizzard is probably content with StarEdit running through Classic mode.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by FrezZ on 2005-10-11 at 15:41:24
Well I am not content having to load os9 everytime i want to run SE, although i guess at least I am no longer booting to os9 to run Se 
.
Thats why SCM Mac draft 2 will be such a glorius program.
.Thats why SCM Mac draft 2 will be such a glorius program.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2005-10-11 at 15:49:38
Yeah, I've been waiting anxiously since early July, when I first learned of the porting. StarEdit blows.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by warhammer40000 on 2005-10-11 at 17:00:02
As long as its not on 9... Jesus christ...
By the way, im 10.3.
By the way, im 10.3.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Shadow-Killa_04 on 2005-10-11 at 20:46:10
I'm on 10.4 (what is intel?)
10.4 was kind of a waste of money. 10.2 was where 10 started to get good and 10.3 was ka. 10.4 I think is a $100 for a lot of useless features. I hope 10.5 is more useful. I think I'm only going to get every other version of it for now on probably.
I also have a PC so as a side note so I'm not looking that forward to scmdraft 2 because I can just use it on a pc amongst the other useable programs.
10.4 was kind of a waste of money. 10.2 was where 10 started to get good and 10.3 was ka. 10.4 I think is a $100 for a lot of useless features. I hope 10.5 is more useful. I think I'm only going to get every other version of it for now on probably.
I also have a PC so as a side note so I'm not looking that forward to scmdraft 2 because I can just use it on a pc amongst the other useable programs.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2005-10-11 at 23:39:22
Apple is switching the processor from whatever they use now to Intel processors. Not really sure what difference it will make yet..
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DevliN on 2005-10-12 at 00:04:54
I'm on 10.3.9.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rantent on 2005-10-12 at 02:50:47
10.4 I got it for free! 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by notnuclearrabbit on 2005-10-12 at 09:06:58
[center]Requesting more info on free 10.4, and the Apple --> Intel processor switch.[/center]
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rantent on 2005-10-13 at 00:31:52
I asked my school for a copy of the cd, and they gave it to me..
Switching to intell processors sounds like a bad idea to me, although I haven't seen it yet.
Switching to intell processors sounds like a bad idea to me, although I haven't seen it yet.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by blisspirate on 2005-10-15 at 22:41:18
Both the Macs I use for running Starcraft are unable to run 10.4 without some hacking... And it does not have any features that I MUST have... So I'll be stuck (like many others) with old hardware for which 10.3.x is the terminal OS...
I won't be buying a new mac... well, maybe a mini... until the Intel Powerbooks come out... that's my next buy. (Though still, might wait for 6 months after they are introduced for some of the bugs to be worked. out...)
I won't be buying a new mac... well, maybe a mini... until the Intel Powerbooks come out... that's my next buy. (Though still, might wait for 6 months after they are introduced for some of the bugs to be worked. out...)
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2005-10-24 at 18:06:17
I'm running 10.3 here.
Those widgets do look nice though, as does Spotlight.
Those widgets do look nice though, as does Spotlight.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Peyn on 2005-10-25 at 22:37:56
Widgets look like another dumb invention that would only slow my computer down. My mac would be a lot cooler if it wasnt so goddamn slow... ...by the way, I'm runing 10.3.9.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by notnuclearrabbit on 2005-10-26 at 05:04:13
[center]The new operating system is designed to wrok best with the new hardware. The dual processor G5's are scary.[/center]
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Haplo on 2006-02-12 at 22:00:47
10.4 is faster in many respects than 10.3. Also, widgets only load if you open dashboard after starting up. There are various other ways of disabling as well. Just check macupdate.com.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Doodle77(MM) on 2006-04-29 at 15:27:38
The reason Apple switched to Intel x86 processors is because G5's were too hot, and so they were unable to clock G4s faster than 1.4ghz in laptops, and they didnt put a g5 in one.
EDIT:
i dont think the
EDIT:
i dont think the