The splash screens hang around longer than with the beta 2: but THAT is all.
With your 'no menubar' standalone, that you've said works on Sonoma, do you really get NO menu bar at all? Or do you actually get some default menubar (File,Edit,View, etc.)?
Can you try using a Status Menu (making sure to include the Extension in SB settings)? That uses Builder's FFI to create its NSMenu object and I was thinking that a Builder lib could possibly be worked into temporary workaround for this issue with Sonoma. I'm really curious about this, it can't be hard to fix. Eventually I'll get a copy of Sonoma installed on some Mac, but I just haven't had the time yet.
The Windows version of LC 963 works perfectly on MacOS.
WINE is great for a lot of things, however it doesn't really turn a Windows exe into a Mac App, it's running in a VM (maybe WINE is more like a compatibility layer than a VM, but still...). anything that required 'native' APIs, even just the 'macOS Native Text Field' widget, would not work as expected because it is in fact a Windows exe running with Windows APIs.
richmond62 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 4:14 pm
I was referring to the IDE rather than standalones.
As I "don't do widgets", I wouldn't know.
But, I only play with LEGO, without additions developed by other companies.
Actually 'Widgets' would work fine in WINE, only native things like mac-darkMode or the CoreMIDI extension would not, although the bundled Windows version of libFluidSynth Extension should work. Losing CoreMIDI access is kind of a deal breaker for me. I'm not sure if WINE has some sort of MIDI pass-thru capabilities or not (I'm thinking it might emulate a SoundBlaster16 or something like that.
Probably time for there to be something like WINE wrapper but for macOS apps and APIs from days gone by that won't run on modern macOS. I know there's a couple of projects with that idea in mind.
Even with M-series ARM64 macs, thanks to same QEMU (anyone remember DarWINE for PowerPC?) multi architecture emulation the latest macs can run (with a nice UTM UI front end) VMs to boot OSes for intel machines (and PowerPC too ).
The FACT is that all of these 'work arounds' [a dirty, dirty phrase if ever I heard one], are, ultimately rubbish, and what IS needed is a 'tweak' in the engine so that any Mac versions of OXT can function on MacOS 14 exactly the same as they function on previous versions of MacOS.
If you're using something like WINEBottler you could make an mac.app bundle out of it. That could be really useful (including for Developing the Windows version under macOS too).
If you could do a walk-through write up or otherwise document how-to install/running the IDE in WINE, that would be awesome. IMO, the more ways we have to keep an xTalk running on as many platforms as possible, the better!
richmond62 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 5:30 pm
The FACT is that all of these 'work arounds' [a dirty, dirty phrase if ever I heard one], are, ultimately rubbish,
I totally disagree, at least when it comes to WINE. WINE can run OpenGL FPS games like GTA and do it on totally unsupported platforms, it's very not rubbish.
richmond62 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 5:30 pm
What IS needed is a 'tweak' in the engine so that any Mac versions of OXT can function on MacOS 14 exactly the same as they function on previous versions of MacOS.
Totally agree, we need to get that done, one way or another. I plan to try myself, but I'm also not against trying to crowd fund campaign to hire a pro-dev-consultant (wonder how much it would cost to hire Dr. Peter Brett? )
richmond62 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 5:49 pm
WINE is not rubbish, but running OXT on WINE because we cannot get it to run natively on MacOS 14 is rubbish.
Maybe, I haven't tried it so I don't have an opinion on that. But OXT wrapped in WINE on something like freeBSD (helloSystem!) could be great. And it could also be very useful for developing OXT for Windows while not running Windows.
IFF the single problem is tied up with OXT/LC & its menus interfering with Mac Snores' new way of doing the Mac menu . . . then, if one could get the IDE's menus to line up on the menuBar stack (as per Linux and Windows) rather than on the top of the Mac window, might the IDE launch and function properly?
Currently:
1. In bed, typing on my Xubuntu laptop.
2. Possessing NO energy to hop out of bed and go into my study, fire up the Mac 12 iMac and 'rape' a virgin copy of LC 963. Transfer it over to the Mac 14 Mac Mini and see if anything gives.
BUT, why do I feel it might be 'just' a matter of editing a single line of the menuBar script-only stack?
Obviously 'thunk' insufficiently as 'had a bash' (changing 7 items in the .liveCodeScript file) with LC 8.1.10 at work on my machine running MacOS 10.7 "Tired Lion":
-
Screen Shot 2023-10-19 at 12.44.27 pm.png (115.84 KiB) Viewed 1644 times
-
Most of this is due to my complete and utter ignorance about how to build a Macintosh menu with LC/OXT: and, as a corollary, how to unbuild one.
I suppose the first question I should ask is whether it is possible to make a stack that runs on Macintosh with an 'in-stack' menu.
And by 'in-stack' menu I do NOT mean a bunch of buttons: I mean something that runs a menu along the top of a standalone as it would on Windows or Linux.
-
Well, weirdly enough, I think it's there on the mac already - at least I think I caught sight of it in the script editor window. On the mac, if you open the script editor, you can just see about 1 or 2 pixels of the menubar appearing. It seems to get pushed up and out of the way on the mac, but I'm pretty sure it's there.
Will double check that.
I also had another weird idea - this occurred to me when I was backing up a MacOS 12 macbook today. As I don't like to deal with the AppleBS (and bandwidth is limited), I use Clonezilla to make a complete clone of the EFI, rescue partition, and OS. I can then restore on however many macs I choose without re-downloading.
This got me thinking, why not have an OXT-Distro? Since Clonezilla / Rescuezilla boots happily on Windows computers, All intel 64-bit macs I've tested it on, and countless other weird hardware, why not just make our own distro and run OXT inside it? You could just boot off a USB and boot into an updated x64 linux distro containing OXT - the nice thing about this is it could contain all the prerequisites for building Android standalones (if that's your thing) and I'm sure it could be kept under the 4GB mark so could fit on a DVD for older non-efi based computers too.
This was after Apple have quietly sunsetted my MacBook air 2017 as it won't go past MacOS 12 Monterey - thanks Apple!
It'll happily boot an up to date copy of MX Linux, or Debian no problem at all though - and will continue to long after Apple has decided that they want to wash their hands of the hardware.
Just a random thought about how we ensure OXT remains available for as many people as possible.
).