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

[Angus_FX]

There was always the lingering danger and implications of sandboxing and the resulting privileges for file access and shared memory.

Not sure about always..? That came in with the Mac App Store (and iOS before, but no plug-ins there).

There have always been possible issues with conflicting libraries and namespace collisions.

True, yet never such an issue on other platforms.. there's nothing special about macOS to make it more or less vulnerable to such things happening, but it seems to happen more anyway (ObjC class name collisions, problems unloading dylibs for a long time).. perhaps this overall approach to building applications just isn't as high priority on Apple's radar compared to those working on the equivalent parts of Linux and Windows.

I'm think that maybe the approach of application based extensions is something worth embracing. Haven't dealt with it yet, though.

For "big" plug-ins you're probably right - have your big VIs which need non-trivial filesystem access and other privileges run as separate processes; keep smaller and simpler things which don't need any special permissions in the main DAW process for efficiency. AUv3 seems to be headed in that direction?

[Urs]

There was always the lingering danger and implications of sandboxing and the resulting privileges for file access and shared memory.

Not sure about always..? That came in with the Mac App Store (and iOS before, but no plug-ins there).

Well, sandboxing is possible on other platforms too, and the work done in one plug-in might end up in nirvana when two instances enter competition on who's gonna have persistence.

There have always been possible issues with conflicting libraries and namespace collisions.

True, yet never such an issue on other platforms.. there's nothing special about macOS to make it more or less vulnerable to such things happening, but it seems to happen more anyway (ObjC class name collisions, problems unloading dylibs for a long time).. perhaps this overall approach to building applications just isn't as high priority on Apple's radar compared to those working on the equivalent parts of Linux and Windows.

Yeah, ObjC namespace fuckups are a particular nuisance.

But what about Intel's Math library? Plug-in can't use it if host (or other plug-in) uses different version, regardless of platform. It's an inherent problem with plug-in based architectures and libraries which need some sort of client exclusivity.

I'm think that maybe the approach of application based extensions is something worth embracing. Haven't dealt with it yet, though.

For "big" plug-ins you're probably right - have your big VIs which need non-trivial filesystem access and other privileges run as separate processes; keep smaller and simpler things which don't need any special permissions in the main DAW process for efficiency. AUv3 seems to be headed in that direction?

Yeah, I guess AUv3 is a step in that direction.

[Angus_FX]

But what about Intel's Math library? Plug-in can't use it if host (or other plug-in) uses different version, regardless of platform. It's an inherent problem with plug-in based architectures and libraries which need some sort of client exclusivity.

We've shipped MKL-enabled products & not encountered problems with that. I don't know why exactly - possibly because we use a local copy of the MKL DLL or static-link it, would have to investigate. Windows was rightly infamous for DLL Hell in the '90s, but I think a combination of MS using stricter versioning, plug-in developers adopting a strategy of "if in doubt, static link", and plug-in APIs which are sensible enough to use a basic "C"-style API and not pass CRT objects across boundaries, means that none of that has been much of an issue since the turn of the millennium.

(Incidentally, I lost several days a few years ago hunting down some bizarre behaviour in the Darwin symbol loader: we use libcrypto++ for license management, and I had a build exporting with symbols turned on for debugging. When loading in Bidule, it would crash with a mysterious stack trace.. turned out that for some reason, even though all libs were statically linked, it was dynamic-linking to to symbols exported by the host's executable, and they used a different and incompatible version of libcrypto++. I guess there are other objects where it could be a problem.. unix named pipes, mutexes and suchlike.. and yet that never seems to happen in practice).

[perpetual3]

I'm considering to impose subscription only licenses "exclusively" (sounds better) for mac users. While offering perpetual licenses only for windows. I think that's reasonable.

(personally, I'd prefer dropping Mac altogether, but it's still 30% of my audience)

The risk for any mac developer offering perpetual licenses is dangerously high. We'll likely stop. Changing licensing for mac only is a most pragmatic answer to it, and obviously mac users don't care too much about additional costs and paperwork anyway, according to Apple: just matter of the right wording ( ).

Ships sailing on the Apple sea predicable need more repairs. This has a price.

I really enjoy using the plugins I have of yours but with this attitude you can consider me a lost customer.

[fmr]

I really enjoy using the plugins I have of yours but with this attitude you can consider me a lost customer.

Which is kind of good for him, right? It's one less to annoy him with Mac related problems that he has nothing to do with...

And it's not like he would have any other revenue for keeping supporting the plug-ins you already own, which, OTOH, will mean a lot of work to keep macOS compatibility, while in Windows "they just work"

[perpetual3]

I really enjoy using the plugins I have of yours but with this attitude you can consider me a lost customer.

Which is kind of good for him, right? It's one less to annoy him with Mac related problems that he has nothing to do with...

And it's not like he would have any other revenue for keeping supporting the plug-ins you already own, which, OTOH, will mean a lot of work to keep macOS compatibility, while in Windows "they just work"

Sure, that’s one way to look at it. What a way to treat a customer.

[hivkorn]

No more perpetual licence ? ... does it mean subscription ?

[fmr]

I really enjoy using the plugins I have of yours but with this attitude you can consider me a lost customer.

Which is kind of good for him, right? It's one less to annoy him with Mac related problems that he has nothing to do with...

And it's not like he would have any other revenue for keeping supporting the plug-ins you already own, which, OTOH, will mean a lot of work to keep macOS compatibility, while in Windows "they just work"

Sure, that’s one way to look at it. What a way to treat a customer.

It was you who brought menaces to the table. Fabien sells fantastic plug-ins at a price that has no competition. And he offers perpetual upgrades. He was kind of thinking out loud that he would probably have to rethink that policy regarding the macOS platform due to the burden it means to keep the plug-ins compatible. WHICH IS APPLE FAULT, ENTIRELY.

Yet you came in whining and menacing with a "lost customer". I just demonstrated you that its your loss, not his.

[perpetual3]

I really enjoy using the plugins I have of yours but with this attitude you can consider me a lost customer.

Which is kind of good for him, right? It's one less to annoy him with Mac related problems that he has nothing to do with...

And it's not like he would have any other revenue for keeping supporting the plug-ins you already own, which, OTOH, will mean a lot of work to keep macOS compatibility, while in Windows "they just work"

Sure, that’s one way to look at it. What a way to treat a customer.

It was you who brought menaces to the table.

“Brought menaces?” What does that even mean?

[fmr]

“Brought menaces?” What does that even mean?

English is not my first language, but i think you understood what that means

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

I'm considering to impose subscription only licenses "exclusively" (sounds better) for mac users. While offering perpetual licenses only for windows. I think that's reasonable.

(personally, I'd prefer dropping Mac altogether, but it's still 30% of my audience)

The risk for any mac developer offering perpetual licenses is dangerously high. We'll likely stop. Changing licensing for mac only is a most pragmatic answer to it, and obviously mac users don't care too much about additional costs and paperwork anyway, according to Apple: just matter of the right wording ( ).

Ships sailing on the Apple sea predicable need more repairs. This has a price.

I really enjoy using the plugins I have of yours but with this attitude you can consider me a lost customer.

Well, he seems to want to drop Mac, altogether, if only it weren't for that pesky 30%. Every lost Mac customer gets him a step closer to living the dream. I'd say dropping your support for his products is the least you could to help

[Urs]

WHICH IS APPLE FAULT, ENTIRELY.

I would really love to know how 3 lines on the command line are such a hardship that some developers get to these crazy conclusions. Because that really is the penultimate difference Catalina makes for most plug-in developers, in terms of workload.

(some developers have spent more time ranting about it here than it would actually have taken to get things over with)

[fmr]

WHICH IS APPLE FAULT, ENTIRELY.

I would really love to know how 3 lines on the command line are such a hardship that some developers get to these crazy conclusions. Because that really is the penultimate difference Catalina makes for most plug-in developers, in terms of workload.

(some developers have spent more time ranting about it here than it would actually have taken to get things over with)

I didn't imply that it was easy or difficult. There is a "law" in computers (I'm sure you know it ): "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Yet Apple is "fixing" things EVERY year, and every year it breaks things, and every year developers have to fix them, and, as if that wasn't enough, have to excuse themselves to customers because they aren't fast enough in fixing things (in reality, cleaning the mess Apple created) and preventing things to break.

If that doesn't piss you, I don't know what will...

[mladi]

I slowly feel the strong urge to get rid of all my u-he licenses.

[Zaphod (giancarlo)]

WHICH IS APPLE FAULT, ENTIRELY.

I would really love to know how 3 lines on the command line are such a hardship that some developers get to these crazy conclusions. Because that really is the penultimate difference Catalina makes for most plug-in developers, in terms of workload.

(some developers have spent more time ranting about it here than it would actually have taken to get things over with)

I didn't imply that it was easy or difficult. There is a "law" in computers (I'm sure you know it ): "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Yet Apple is "fixing" things EVERY year, and every year it breaks things, and every year developers have to fix them, and, as if that wasn't enough, have to excuse themselves to customers because they aren't fast enough in fixing things (in reality, cleaning the mess Apple created) and preventing things to break.

If that doesn't piss you, I don't know what will...

Ahahahahahahah