CocoaMSX and Snow Leopard support

Champion (328)

13-02-2016, 07:37

Hi! It's very possible that the next version of CocoaMSX will no longer work on Snow Leopard. Primary reason for this is that Sparkle (which the app uses to do updates) no longer supports it, but it would also help reduce the code maintenance, which is a pain. Please note that upgrading Sparkle isn't a minor issue, since older versions of it are vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack.

So what I'd like to know is, how many of you use 10.6 and how many use 10.7 and higher? I'll do my best to handle any concerns. Thanks!

!login ou Inscrivez-vous pour poster

Par gdx

Enlighted (6443)

13-02-2016, 08:16

10.6.8 for me

Is Dnssec-trigger is effective in protecting us from a man-in-the-middle attack?

Par Grauw

Ascended (10821)

13-02-2016, 13:10

10.11 for me. 10.6 is so outdated, and updates are free, I don’t really understand why one would stick with that version… Especially if it puts users like me in risk of MITM attacks (ouch), I would not hesitate to upgrade Sparkle.

Par Sylvester

Hero (593)

13-02-2016, 14:42

10.11 for me

Par nanochess

Master (222)

13-02-2016, 15:29

My Mac was 10.8 but now I'm 10.9.

I don't have updated to 10.10 because concerns of slowing down my computer and re-downloading the giant Xcode.

Par uberjack

Champion (328)

14-02-2016, 07:42

gdx wrote:

10.6.8 for me

Is Dnssec-trigger is effective in protecting us from a man-in-the-middle attack?

Actually, just running the feed off HTTPS is sufficient to fix that particular hole, but there may be additional issues going forward.

Par FX

Champion (264)

14-02-2016, 17:46

10.11...

Par uberjack

Champion (328)

04-03-2016, 06:36

Thanks for responding, everyone

Par Wild_Penguin

Hero (644)

04-03-2016, 15:12

[OT]

nanochess wrote:

I don't have updated to 10.10 because concerns of slowing down my computer and re-downloading the giant Xcode.

My MAC came with OS X 10.5, and I have upgraded since to Snow Leopard and up to OS X 10.9 IIRC. At that point I got an SSD and re-installed OS X 10.10 (or maybe it was at 10.9 point) and have subsequently upgraded to 10.11.3. I did the re-install just because I though the're may be some cruft left from previous installs (from 10.5 and onwards!), and there were a lot of software installed I didn't use anymore so it seemed more simple to start from scratch. Even with this mid-2009 MBP there's no slowdowns to speak of, so the never OS Xes scale quite well onto older hardware in my experience.

There's still the issue of huge X-Code download, which can be a bigger pain, if your network access is not that fast.... [/OT]

Par tvalenca

Paladin (747)

04-03-2016, 16:19

Grauw wrote:

Let me bring one major reason: If you don't have an SSD and 8GB RAM, installing anything higher than 10.6 will make your mac soooooo slow that you'll want to throw it through the window. Seriously. That's whats happening to my MacMini 3,1 (2,0GHz Core 2 Duo, upgraded with 4GB RAM but HDD still stock). My MacBookPro 5,3 (2,53GHz Core 2 Duo upgraded with 8GB RAM and 128GB SSD) runs OSX 10.9 so smoothly people don't belive thats a 7-year old computer. I think upgrading it to 10.11 on occasions, then I got cold feet about making my main computer near unusable like the Mac Mini I gave up trying to use.

Par Wild_Penguin

Hero (644)

04-03-2016, 19:12

tvalenca wrote:

Grauw wrote:

Let me bring one major reason: If you don't have an SSD and 8GB RAM, installing anything higher than 10.6 will make your mac soooooo slow that you'll want to throw it through the window. Seriously.

That's interesting... I have only 4GB of RAM. Well, I must admit my MBP has seen quite light usage, actually. And after I got the SSD, I've been dual booting into Mint Linux, so a lot of time has been spent there, too. And I originally bought the machine mainly for meetings etc. on the road, and it has served well for that kind (of light) usage. So the increased resource usage of newer OS X versions might show - or not - depending on what you are using the mac for - YMMV.