Catalina: Apple turns macOS into a closed platform; many audio-devs warned from the upgrade

DSP, Plug-in and Host development discussion.
BlueprintInc
KVRist
98 posts since 9 Apr, 2017

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:52 am

MrBauer wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:07 am
Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:58 am
I changed the title of the thread


Here are some facts about Catalina:


1) Apple did drop 32 bit support. All 32 bit plugins and every other 32 bit software has stopped working. It is also not longer possible to use a bit-bridge.

2) Old song projects which use 32 old bit plugins can not longer be loaded.

3) With Catalina Apple introduced 'software notarisation'. Apple advertises that this technology should enhance security, however it is easy to bypass for hackers.

4) By default it is now not longer possible to install older software which is not notarized or signed

5) Existing software, especially plugins which are not code-signed and are currently still working because of a 'grace period' might soon stop working. It is currently unknown when this grace period will end.

6) With Catalina MacOS is not longer an open platform. The notarisation gives Apple the complete control over all software which is running on their systems. If they do not like a developer or product they can simply discontinue the development contract (costs $99 per year) and the developer is not longer able to distribute software on this platform.


Further facts:

7) Apple tagged OpenGL as 'deprecated' and introduced 'Metal'. A massive number of plugins (espcially those with a resizeable GUI) use it. It is currently unknown when OpenGL will be dropped completely and the plugins will stop to operate.

8.) The Audiounit validation is buggy since several years now. It is not been fixed by Apple. As a result plugins are not detected by Logic. The user first has to reboot the computer or the developer has to include a hack (a shell script which forces a restart of the validator) to the installer.

9) Apple quickly deprecates technologies. With every new OS update there is a significant chance that the plugins of various developers and songs can not longer be loaded.
That's the real facts. :tu: Let's add that

10) free plugins will vanish because their hobby devs will not spend 100 bucks a year to buy the necessary signing and notarization stuff.

11) their "improved" security already makes 3rd party copy protection unsecure or even fail.
12) the unnecessary (it's patchable for guys deep in IT and shows the macOS is running smoothly) need for new hardware to run the macOS.

User avatar
JunSev
KVRian
817 posts since 14 Sep, 2017

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:57 am

Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:58 am
I changed the title of the thread


Here are some facts about Catalina:


1) Apple did drop 32 bit support. All 32 bit plugins and every other 32 bit software has stopped working. It is also not longer possible to use a bit-bridge.

2) Old song projects which use 32 old bit plugins can not longer be loaded.

3) With Catalina Apple introduced 'software notarisation'. Apple advertises that this technology should enhance security, however it is easy to bypass for hackers.

4) By default it is now not longer possible to install older software which is not notarized or signed

5) Existing software, especially plugins which are not code-signed and are currently still working because of a 'grace period' might soon stop working. It is currently unknown when this grace period will end.

6) With Catalina MacOS is not longer an open platform. The notarisation gives Apple the complete control over all software which is running on their systems. If they do not like a developer or product they can simply discontinue the development contract (costs $99 per year) and the developer is not longer able to distribute software on this platform.


Further facts:

7) Apple tagged OpenGL as 'deprecated' and introduced 'Metal'. A massive number of plugins (espcially those with a resizeable GUI) use it. It is currently unknown when OpenGL will be dropped completely and the plugins will stop to operate.

8.) The Audiounit validation is buggy since several years now. It is not been fixed by Apple. As a result plugins are not detected by Logic. The user first has to reboot the computer or the developer has to include a hack (a shell script which forces a restart of the validator) to the installer.

9) Apple quickly deprecates technologies. With every new OS update there is a significant chance that the plugins of various developers and songs can not longer be loaded.
Markus points are very reasonable, now people should see the attitude of some of the apple users here, or should I say religious servers of a dark cult?

As Markus is responding with reasons they want to turn everything around like a meme and trying to make their position as "Im very important, you will loose everything if you decide to ditch apple" sort of attitude; but apple doesn't even care about developers, or perhaps not even the users (they are selling the apple stand for $1,000... for a monitor stand https://youtu.be/YuW4Suo4OVg ... ridiculous, but blind people will buy it because has the apple logo in it. Usually I don't come to this conclusion but after all the evidence about the bad moves of apple bad politics and overpriced products, and the fact that some people seems willing to die for it... this really looks like a cult (not all of them).

Again guys, think different before buying your next laptop or music production system, wake up:

https://youtu.be/AUaJ8pDlxi8

Just to add that this sort of way of "let's eliminate this... let's eliminate that..." is not the way to do things, I don't buy my plug-ins with the idea to leave the next year because incompatibility issues, I'm buying with the mindset: this will last me a good time because I'm not a trending jumper or a "propaganda driven" person moved for the last overpriced releases, I use the reason and think about the substance of things.

I mean maybe some of you guys should think different.

With all respect.

User avatar
Hink
Rad Grandad
29739 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:06 am

tempted to lock this now but I'll wait, please stop flaming this thread with mac vs pc and stay on topic
Albert Einstein may have been a genius but his brother Frank was a monster

nordickvr
KVRian
1186 posts since 29 Sep, 2013

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:08 am

Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:51 am
----

We can guarantee Catalina support for these products:

Icarus2
Electra2
Nemesis
Saurus2
Gladiator3
UltraSpace
Akustix

These products are not compatible with Catalina:

FilterBank
BiFilter
Warmverb Multi-FX
Many thanks for keeping us informed with those infos.

User avatar
el-bo (formerly ebow)
KVRAF
15243 posts since 24 May, 2009 from A galaxy, far far away

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:21 am

Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:51 am
Currently we in the lucky situation that we're not in a plight.
Should that matter? If you're making a stand on principal, then why not be proactive, rather than reactive. As it is, you are leaving it very unclear for your users just when their software will happen to disappear off of your compatibility list :shrug:
Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:51 am
I will not longer recommend MacOS to our customers.
Would you see it as acceptable for your products to no longer be recommendable for Mac users?

User avatar
Forgotten
KVRAF
5945 posts since 15 Apr, 2019 from Nowhere

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:22 am

JunSev wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:57 am
...or should I say religious servers of a dark cult?
No, you shouldn’t.

Thanks for asking though.

User avatar
vurt
addled muppet weed
54696 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:24 am

Forgotten wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:22 am
JunSev wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:57 am
...or should I say religious servers of a dark cult?
No, you shouldn’t.

Thanks for asking though.
it was a goo...

oh wait. no, it wasnt.

User avatar
Forgotten
KVRAF
5945 posts since 15 Apr, 2019 from Nowhere

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:29 am

vurt wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:24 am
Forgotten wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:22 am
JunSev wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:57 am
...or should I say religious servers of a dark cult?
No, you shouldn’t.

Thanks for asking though.
it was a goo...

oh wait. no, it wasnt.
:hihi:

User avatar
el-bo (formerly ebow)
KVRAF
15243 posts since 24 May, 2009 from A galaxy, far far away

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:36 am

JunSev wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:57 am
Markus points are very reasonable, now people should see the attitude of some of the apple users here, or should I say religious servers of a dark cult?
Most of the recent threads that have been created off of the back of this current Catalina issue demonstrate that most Apple users are platform-agnostic, with many of us having used Windows concurrently with MacOS. It is very clear that the cult-like behaviour to which you keep eluding is not as common as you'd wish to believe; at least, not on KVR. In fact, if you did go back over these threads, looking for Apple Cult-like mentality, please stop to take note of the overwhelming majority of Anti-Mac sentiment - A prime candidate for a cult, of which you are a fully paid-up, drooling at the mouth, loon :scared:

Moreover, if you wanted to make the case for serving the dark cult, then maybe direct your attention towards Markus, himself. He can't stand having to develop for Apple. However, not only is he going to keep 'bending the knee', but now is going to literally start paying for the privilege ($99 pa) :shrug:

Markus Krause
KVRist
270 posts since 2 Jul, 2018

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:44 am

el-bo (formerly ebow) wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:21 am
Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:51 am
Currently we in the lucky situation that we're not in a plight.
Should that matter? If you're making a stand on principal, then why not be proactive, rather than reactive. As it is, you are leaving it very unclear for your users just when their software will happen to disappear off of your compatibility list
I posted a detailed compatibility list in our forum when Catalina was released. I even guaranteed compatibility and free updates if new unknowm problems should arise.
I also posted a list within this thread...
Tone2 Audiosoftware https://www.tone2.com

User avatar
el-bo (formerly ebow)
KVRAF
15243 posts since 24 May, 2009 from A galaxy, far far away

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:51 am

Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:44 am
el-bo (formerly ebow) wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:21 am
Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:51 am
Currently we in the lucky situation that we're not in a plight.
Should that matter? If you're making a stand on principal, then why not be proactive, rather than reactive. As it is, you are leaving it very unclear for your users just when their software will happen to disappear off of your compatibility list
I posted a detailed compatibility list in our forum when Catalina was released. I even guaranteed compatibility and free updates if new unknowm problems should arise.
I also posted a list within this thread...
That's encouraging to hear, but it wasn't my main point.

User avatar
Forgotten
KVRAF
5945 posts since 15 Apr, 2019 from Nowhere

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:06 am

I’m not sure that any of the recent Catalina threads have been beneficial to anyone.

It’s been no better than any attempts to discuss Massive X a couple of months ago. :shrug:

Markus Krause
KVRist
270 posts since 2 Jul, 2018

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:08 am

Please stick with the technical facts. You can find a detailed listing in the bottom of my first post within this thread.

As a developer i also got the right to have an own opinion.
When i am honest with our customers i can not continue to recommend an operating system to them which frequently has broken compatibilities in the past and that most likely will continue to break compatibilities in the future.
Tone2 Audiosoftware https://www.tone2.com

User avatar
Forgotten
KVRAF
5945 posts since 15 Apr, 2019 from Nowhere

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:18 am

Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:08 am
When i am honest with our customers i can not continue to recommend an operating system to them which frequently has broken compatibilities in the past and that most likely will continue to break compatibilities in the future.
You don’t have a mailing list for them?

User avatar
el-bo (formerly ebow)
KVRAF
15243 posts since 24 May, 2009 from A galaxy, far far away

Re: Apple 'recommends' developers what language they must use because of Catalina incompatibilities

Post Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:24 am

Markus Krause wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:08 am
When i am honest with our customers i can not continue to recommend an operating system to them which frequently has broken compatibilities in the past and that most likely will continue to break compatibilities in the future.
But, in reality, this is meaningless.

The only way this could serve you is if you have a threshold below which you will be happy to cut your losses on Mac development. But until such a threshold were to be met, you would still have to ensure compatibility, so what difference should that make to the Mac user?

If we assume that the Mac user has very clearly established reasons for sticking to their chosen platform, they will just hold off upgrading until you either do or don't manage to achieve compatibility. If you haven't got it done by the time they need a new Mac, or Logic Pro compatibility forces an upgrade, then you are gambling on whether or not your plugins are unique enough to make that user drop everything.

Advising users to switch to Windows is condescending in it's assumption that somehow Mac users are unaware of this 'Brave New World' of the Windows operating system. At best people will just be neutral about your advice, but at worst you'll just lose customers.

Return to “DSP and Plug-in Development”