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

[Markus Krause]

To allow a more neutral discussion i updated the first post and added 'advantages for users and developer' with Catalina

--------------------
Please note: This is not an Apple vs PC thread. Please stick to the facts and keep the discussion as objective as possible. We all know that Microsoft's OS also has problems and shortcomings. But Windows will not be discussed here, because it is not the topic of this thread.


Advantages that end-users experience with Catalina

1) They can use Ipad-Apps

2) Enhanced security

3) Display Zoom

4) Sidecar



Problems that end-users will face in the future:

1) Nearly all plugins that use a re-sizeable GUI use a technology called OpenGL. Apple announced that it will not longer be supported in the future. As a result all plugins that use it will stop to operate. Only a small part of devs will provide updates, because it is not economic for them. All computer Games that use OpenGL will not longer work.



Advantages for developers

1) Code-signing and Notarisation makes it more difficult to crack their software

2) They do not longer have to compile and test 32-bit binaries

[Markus Krause]

Catalina suffers from downward compatibility problems. As a result a large number of audio developers have warned their users from upgrading to Catalina.
Now Apple is trying to do damage control and they sent out an email to the freelance developers what marketing language they should use to communicate Apple's shortcomings towards their customers.
Many devs think that Apple should start to take downward compatibility more serious and fix critical bugs in their tools.
This thread should create some public pressure on Apple to improve things in the future, because we devs want to be able to support Apple also in the future.

Please note: This is not an Apple vs PC thread. Please stick to the facts and keep the discussion as objective as possible. We all know that Microsoft's OS also has problems and shortcomings. But Windows will not be discussed here, because it is not the topic of this thread.


Technical facts:


Problems for end-users with 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) Lots of old software does not longer work

3) Old song projects can not longer be loaded, because there are no 64-bit versions available for many old plugins.

4) Audiounit validation is still not working properly. The computer has to be rebooted before an Audiounit is detected.

5) Many Freeware products will disappear, because it requires that the devs pay a fee of $99 per year. Furthermore the software has be be passed through a very complicated validation process which is a critical barrier for many hobby-developers


Advantages that end-users experience with Catalina

1) They can use Ipad-Apps

2) Enhanced security

3) Display Zoom

4) Sidecar


Problems that end-users will face in the future:

1) Nearly all plugins that use a re-sizeable GUI use a technology called OpenGL. Apple announced that it will not longer be supported in the future. So far it has not been communicated by Apple when support will completely dropped. If this should happen all plugins that use it will stop to operate. Only a small part of devs will provide updates, because it is not economic for them. All computer Games that use OpenGL will not longer work.


Security problems:

1) With Catalina Apple introduced 'software notarisation'. It should enhance security, however it can be bypassed by hackers with a shell script or other workarounds (which will not be published here).


Problems for developers:

1) They receive a massive amount of email from customers because the installation of AUs is not working properly (auval, a part of macOS the is broken since 2 years now). They have to explain to the customer that he must reboot the Mac or include a dirty hack-script to the installers which forces a restart of auval.

2) By default it is now not longer possible to install older software which is not notarized or signed. Lots of packages have to be notarized and redistributed to the customers

3) 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.

4) OpenGL is deprecated. They have to rewrite large parts of their software or their products will stop to operate as soon as Apple decides to drop it. It is unknown when this will happen. In the future a devs that does cross-platform development will have to maintain two APIs (Metal + most likely Direct2D)

5) The notarisation process is complicated and the tools are not always working flawlessly. The notarisation process itself is slow and problematic if large packages have to be signed, especially with a slower internet connection.

6) With software notarisation in Catalina macOS is not longer an open platform. Apple now got full control about what software is allowed to run on their system and which is not - at least for legit commercial software. Apple now has full control about the developers and their products. In the future Apple can force devs to sell though their own App-store only and take additional fees. Apple also can raise the annual $99 fee for developers to a higher price. From the technical side all developers are completely dependand on Apple. Apple gained full control over the distribution of software on macOS.

7) If you can control what software is running on your OS you can also control the market on this system. This is what Apple does on the IPhone, it is what Sony does with the Playstation, it is what Nintendo does, Google does, the XBOX does, ... : They all take a %xx percentage fee from the sale of every software that is sold from the developer. It is currently not the case for macOS but the door for this scenario has been opened for the future


Advantages for developers

1) Code-signing and Notarisation makes it more difficult to crack their software

2) They do not longer have to compile and test 32-bit binaries

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

To allow a more neutral discussion i updated the first post and added 'advantages for users and developer' with Catalina

--------------------
Please note: This is not an Apple vs PC thread. Please stick to the facts and keep the discussion as objective as possible. We all know that Microsoft's OS also has problems and shortcomings. But Windows will not be discussed here, because it is not the topic of this thread.


Advantages that end-users experience with Catalina

1) They can use Ipad-Apps

2) Enhanced security

3) Display Zoom

4) Sidecar



Problems that end-users will face in the future:

1) Nearly all plugins that use a re-sizeable GUI use a technology called OpenGL. Apple announced that it will not longer be supported in the future. As a result all plugins that use it will stop to operate. Only a small part of devs will provide updates, because it is not economic for them. All computer Games that use OpenGL will not longer work.



Advantages for developers

1) Code-signing and Notarisation makes it more difficult to crack their software

2) They do not longer have to compile and test 32-bit binaries

I do commend you for your efforts to bring this back to a more rational position.

However, I still find the title troublesome - Apple is seemingly not losing the backing of any developers, as far as I know. Even with all the angry conversations that I am sure you are privy to, behind-the-scenes, it looks like everyone is in the process of complying. Also, while a "closed system" may be where this is ultimately heading, it certainly is not where things currently stand.

And much in the same vein:

Nearly all plugins that use a re-sizeable GUI use a technology called OpenGL. Apple announced that it will not longer be supported in the future. As a result all plugins that use it will stop to operate. Only a small part of devs will provide updates, because it is not economic for them.

This type of speculation borders on fear-mongering. You have no way of knowing how many developers will provide updates. What is economical for each developer will depend on many factors, not least of which is how much business they would stand to lose by not providing updates. Nobody can guess that. Although, if the current situation is anything to go by, there will be a lot of behind-the-scenes (even public) frustration, followed by compliance.

[Haptix]

"Just bend over, it will hurt only once" - Apple

[Markus Krause]

Fact is that the transition from OpenGL to Metal is not trivial and means lots of work for a developer. Every dev will have to decide for him self if it is worth the effort. Many devs will prefer to invest their time in creating new products instead of rewriting the GUI for an old product

This is what gaming devs think - currently they face the same problem:
https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/commen ... ng_opengl/

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Many devs will prefer to invest their time in creating new products instead of rewriting the GUI for an old product

But what they would prefer to do could be very different to what they end up doing. You are familiar with this, as a developer who is currently complying with Apple's new policies despite clearly having a preference not to

[Urs]

If 99$ a year sounds like a hell of a lot for a hobby developer, I wonder what hobby musicians think about plug-in prices.

What a comparison.. I have to admit that it hurt a bit hearing that from someone like you. I can sleep better when i know that the money i spend to some indie dev stays there and doesn't move on to a greedy global player just because they can.

Now you're really trolling me, no? All I say is, I find 99$ year rather cheap for a "hobby" in comparison to other hobbies, such as making music. I think the argument, coming from a developer who *lives* from hobbyists shelling out money, may seem rather hypocritical, don't you agree? As I said before, when I started out it cost me tenfold of that. Hence I can only mildly chuckle when I see people oozing with entitlement of what should be free and what shouldn't.

If I was a user of an operating system which has all my contacts, camera access, location services, a password manager, my credit card information and a photo library, and if I was living in a world where companies like Camebridge Analytica exist, where anything as stupid as a simple freeware game could harvest hundreds of millions of aforementioned data sources, where a well trained AI needs one photo from my home to suss out more about me than my friends know, I'd sleep a lot deeper if I knew that access entitlements for random software were somewhat managed for most of us..

Somewhat managed? Are you serious? Afair Cambridge Analytica has company harvested the personal data of millions without their consent and used it for political advertising purposes. What has this to do with OS?

Now you're also twisting things around. I gave you an example of how an attacker can harvest humungous amounts of data from people without their consent, if a system does not manage entitlements.

Also "political advertising purposes" is a quite the understatement...

[Markus Krause]

Many devs will prefer to invest their time in creating new products instead of rewriting the GUI for an old product

But what they would prefer to do could be very different to what they end up doing. You are familiar with this, as a developer who is currently complying with Apple's new policies despite clearly having a preference not to

If you want to be sure if your products are safe for the future you must ask the Plugin developer if he will provide a free update that supports Metal instead of OpenGL.

[Urs]

"a large number of audio developers have warned their users from upgrading to Catalina" does not equal "Apple looses backing of many audio-developers".

So far I know of no audio developer who's pulling out of the Apple platforms. I think I could leave this cumbersome discussion alone if I hadn't had the feeling that someone tries to speak for me, with a message I don't subscribe to.

If you want to start a grassroots movement, get developers to sign an open letter. So far it looks more like an attempt of astroturfing to me.

[Markus Krause]

I will update the thread title with your proposal

If you got more pro / contra facts to add let me know. I will add them to the first post

[parricide]

maybe apples time is coming to an end?
i, for one, would be happy.

[WordClock]

i decided to make due with the upgrade to check it and report duely that all of the plugins except anarchyfx.com's 64 bit freeware plugins function fine and scan in in both cubase and studio one in addition to reason 10.4. the option to allow unsigned installations still exists although it was indicated there is a large fee to use unsigned applications. Every best app should function fine in Catalina but it seems pointless to install anyhow based on the feature list. In spite of virus claims it's known that the computer virus is known as marketing at best.

[stratology]

Technical facts:

Wow, a thread that attempts to start a rational discussion. With at least some reasonable responses (thanks Urs!). Great.


The Arstechnica Catalina review is a good starting point for some basic underlying information:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/10 ... ca-review/


Some points:
- Apple started the transition from 32bit to 64bit in 2003.
- OpenGL was deprecated (not removed) in Mojave last year, but has been stuck on an old version since 2010 (Metal was introduced in 2014).
- kexts will be replaced by System Extensions and DriverKit in the future, the transition started with Catalina
- SwiftUI
- SIP changes
- new Firmlinks in APFS
- read only OS partition
- Notarisations

[WordClock]

it's known that apple is for anyone who can afford it and none the less.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Many devs will prefer to invest their time in creating new products instead of rewriting the GUI for an old product

But what they would prefer to do could be very different to what they end up doing. You are familiar with this, as a developer who is currently complying with Apple's new policies despite clearly having a preference not to

If you want to be sure if your products are safe for the future you must ask the Plugin developer if he will provide a free update that supports Metal instead of OpenGL.

If you need to turn industry convention on it's head to make a point, then perhaps you're on shaky ground. Why would it be up to the end-user to ask developer's about possible future compatibility issues? And if you think that's a realistic expectation, then it should be easy for you to declare what your position is on Metal support...right here

But first, let's clear up one issue: Please point out where I have ever said, or where I have given any indication, that I would expect that developers take on such a huge burden, for free?

Convention, thus far, has been that a developer will continue to maintain compatibility, right up to the point where they are not prepared to, at which point they will advise their customers. At such a time that developers advise Mac users that their products will no longer be supported, I will again decide whether they are important enough for me to change up my Operating system. Until then...