Why is this apple's fault? It isn't their job to make their hardware compatible with 3rd party software. It is up to the developers to make their software work with new OS releases. It's part of their jobs. Who knows what kind of janky hacks Adobe is using with their ancient code base.
I didn't say it was only their fault but they certainly share some of the blame. It wasn't that long ago that Apple told developers to go ahead and count on 64 bit carbon then a year later decided to pull the plug on that causing delays in 64 bit software such as some of Adobe's products. http://arstechnica.com/apple/2007/06/64-bit-support-in-leopard-no-carbon-love/
As far as working with developers go, Apple is no angel. Only a true Apple fanboi could take the position it is all Adobe's fault.
The APIs were intentionally removed. The damage done was inadvertent.
We can't assume that yet, unless you have some information from Apple stating so. I've see this happen before, over the years, and then Apple ended up putting them back (with different API's or Kext's).
Even if it were intentional, I'd like to know, from Apple, not a poster here making assumptions, that these were indeed private API's. The other question is whether Apple should be having private API's for this sort of thing, or whether they should be made public.
If these were removed intentionally, then Apple usually says so to developers, and either provides another, newer framework for doing what these did, or tells why they are no longer used, and suggests alternative methods for accomplishing the same, or similar result.
It's also very unusual to remove API's in a point update, as this is usually done through an upgrade.
I wouldn't be surprised to find other software suffering the same problem from this. Adobe is just the most noticeable right now.
You can't be serious, right? Apple's products function just fine; it's Adobe who's relying on private APIs that they shouldn't be relying on anyway that crash their software. Why would Apple have any obligation to clean up after purely third party software issues?
If it was indeed a private API, then you are correct and I would withdraw the part of my comment that refers to this incident. However, where in the original article is there mention the API was private? The only mention of that I have seen is someones supposition.
We can't assume that yet, unless you have some information from Apple stating so. I've see this happen before, over the years, and then Apple ended up putting them back (with different API's or Kext's).
Even if it were intentional, I'd like to know, from Apple, not a poster here making assumptions, that these were indeed private API's. The other question is whether Apple should be having private API's for this sort of thing, or whether they should be made public.
If these were removed intentionally, then Apple usually says so to developers, and either provides another, newer framework for doing what these did, or tells why they are no longer used, and suggests alternative methods for accomplishing the same, or similar result.
It's also very unusual to remove API's in a point update, as this is usually done through an upgrade.
I wouldn't be surprised to find other software suffering the same problem from this. Adobe is just the most noticeable right now.
I'll play the wait-and-see approach and hope Apple makes some official statement of what the API was. In the past with OS updates that Apple puts out to the developer community, I've always read the API update documentation of times past and Apple always mentions the rules of using it, deprecate, etc... I find it really, really hard to believe that Apple would just make an API disappear without telling anyone. It's not their style. No proof yet, but I am leaning more to Adobe doing something with an API it wasn't supposed to do, but I'll wait and see.
If it was indeed a private API, then you are correct and I would withdraw the part of my comment that refers to this incident. However, where in the original article is there mention the API was private? The only mention of that I have seen is someones supposition.
I haven't seen any reports of public APIs being removed. So where is the information suggesting that Apple removed a public API? Historically, when they remove public APIs, they announce it, but not when they remove private APIs.
Furthermore, Apple has been working with developers for a long time on Mountain Lion - probably a year. Developers are supposed to test their apps to see if they work. It is not up to Apple to test every conceivable app - but rather, it's the developer's responsibility. So why didn't Adobe catch this?
We have no idea whether this was a private API or not, but you'd think if it wasn't, more applications would be having this issue with the update.
They could be. But adobe is big, with very popular, and high visibility software. Even if it were a private API, we can expect that a lot of companies would use them, as they have in the past.
Sometimes, I have thought that Apple should see how many companies are using a private API, and if the interest is high, and there's no harm done, except to Apple's exclusivity, then they should declare them public.
I haven't seen any reports of public APIs being removed. So where is the information suggesting that Apple removed a public API? Historically, when they remove public APIs, they announce it, but not when they remove private APIs.
Furthermore, Apple has been working with developers for a long time on Mountain Lion - probably a year. Developers are supposed to test their apps to see if they work. It is not up to Apple to test every conceivable app - but rather, it's the developer's responsibility. So why didn't Adobe catch this?
It's very possible that they removed it at the last minute. After all, this was just gone as of 10.7.4, and apparently, just for the newest machines. As Adobe, and others haven't received the new machines before anyone else, there would be no way for them to have known about this problem.
Hmmm. I'd say being called a MS fanboy or an fanDroid counts as being insulted, so this rule might be dangerous ^^
/me hides behind his not-yet-Retina screen.
This isn't always a sharp line in the sand. Since the term "fanboy" is so widely used, the mere usage isn't enough to cause a problem. We all use it from time to time. Same thing with the word "troll". But if it's used with other seriously depreciating comments, it's different.
We tend to have lively discussions here, though we don't allow what we often have seen on Slashdot, and some other sites.
Although not up to Photoshop features, Pixelmator is a great program and is programmed lean and mean to run fast in Mac OSX. People are finding alternatives to the Adobe bloatware and ridiculous upgrade prices. We need more app developers that produce excellent products like Pixelmator at reasonable prices.
They could be. But adobe is big, with very popular, and high visibility software. Even if it were a private API, we can expect that a lot of companies would use them, as they have in the past.
Sometimes, I have thought that Apple should see how many companies are using a private API, and if the interest is high, and there's no harm done, except to Apple's exclusivity, then they should declare them public.
They will probably get it resolved soon since that is a major bug which prevents users in professional publishing from completing their projects. Apple has apparently completely revamped their icon related API with many new sizes as well as animations. There are dozens of new API calls related to this.
There are also issues with other software experiencing problem related to icon in the dock. Apparently there are reports from last week of even Xcode suffering with crashes and not launching from the dock icon on 10.7.4 installed on rMBP.
Certainly, Apple supplies developers with software before it's released, but that's not true with hardware. Not even Adobe is given hardware in advance, so you can blame this one on Apple's "ship and test hardware" policy.
Although not up to Photoshop features, Pixelmator is a great program and is programmed lean and mean to run fast in Mac OSX. People are finding alternatives to the Adobe bloatware and ridiculous upgrade prices. We need more app developers that produce excellent products like Pixelmator at reasonable prices.
It's a very nice little program for amateurs who shouldn't be using PS anyway. But if you consider it to be anywhere close to PS for the professional work we use it for, then it just shows that you aren't as familiar with PS as you think you are.
They will probably get it resolved soon since that is a major bug which prevents users in professional publishing from completing their projects. Apple has apparently completely revamped their icon related API with many new sizes as well as animations. There are dozens of new API calls related to this.
There are also issues with other software experiencing problem related to icon in the dock. Apparently there are reports from last week of even Xcode suffering with crashes and not launching from the dock icon on 10.7.4 installed on rMBP.
I'm not surprised. This isn't actually an "Adobe" problem. But Adobe might use these calls more than some other developers.
Certainly, Apple supplies developers with software before it's released, but that's not true with hardware. Not even Adobe is given hardware in advance, so you can blame this one on Apple's "ship and test hardware" policy.
Other than the lack of reports of this happening on Ivy Bridge PCs, I guess.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647
Why is this apple's fault? It isn't their job to make their hardware compatible with 3rd party software. It is up to the developers to make their software work with new OS releases. It's part of their jobs. Who knows what kind of janky hacks Adobe is using with their ancient code base.
I didn't say it was only their fault but they certainly share some of the blame. It wasn't that long ago that Apple told developers to go ahead and count on 64 bit carbon then a year later decided to pull the plug on that causing delays in 64 bit software such as some of Adobe's products. http://arstechnica.com/apple/2007/06/64-bit-support-in-leopard-no-carbon-love/
As far as working with developers go, Apple is no angel. Only a true Apple fanboi could take the position it is all Adobe's fault.
-kpluck
We can't assume that yet, unless you have some information from Apple stating so. I've see this happen before, over the years, and then Apple ended up putting them back (with different API's or Kext's).
Even if it were intentional, I'd like to know, from Apple, not a poster here making assumptions, that these were indeed private API's. The other question is whether Apple should be having private API's for this sort of thing, or whether they should be made public.
If these were removed intentionally, then Apple usually says so to developers, and either provides another, newer framework for doing what these did, or tells why they are no longer used, and suggests alternative methods for accomplishing the same, or similar result.
It's also very unusual to remove API's in a point update, as this is usually done through an upgrade.
I wouldn't be surprised to find other software suffering the same problem from this. Adobe is just the most noticeable right now.
We have no idea whether this was a private API or not, but you'd think if it wasn't, more applications would be having this issue with the update.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartfat
@cnocbui
You can't be serious, right? Apple's products function just fine; it's Adobe who's relying on private APIs that they shouldn't be relying on anyway that crash their software. Why would Apple have any obligation to clean up after purely third party software issues?
If it was indeed a private API, then you are correct and I would withdraw the part of my comment that refers to this incident. However, where in the original article is there mention the API was private? The only mention of that I have seen is someones supposition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
We can't assume that yet, unless you have some information from Apple stating so. I've see this happen before, over the years, and then Apple ended up putting them back (with different API's or Kext's).
Even if it were intentional, I'd like to know, from Apple, not a poster here making assumptions, that these were indeed private API's. The other question is whether Apple should be having private API's for this sort of thing, or whether they should be made public.
If these were removed intentionally, then Apple usually says so to developers, and either provides another, newer framework for doing what these did, or tells why they are no longer used, and suggests alternative methods for accomplishing the same, or similar result.
It's also very unusual to remove API's in a point update, as this is usually done through an upgrade.
I wouldn't be surprised to find other software suffering the same problem from this. Adobe is just the most noticeable right now.
I'll play the wait-and-see approach and hope Apple makes some official statement of what the API was. In the past with OS updates that Apple puts out to the developer community, I've always read the API update documentation of times past and Apple always mentions the rules of using it, deprecate, etc... I find it really, really hard to believe that Apple would just make an API disappear without telling anyone. It's not their style. No proof yet, but I am leaning more to Adobe doing something with an API it wasn't supposed to do, but I'll wait and see.
I haven't seen any reports of public APIs being removed. So where is the information suggesting that Apple removed a public API? Historically, when they remove public APIs, they announce it, but not when they remove private APIs.
Furthermore, Apple has been working with developers for a long time on Mountain Lion - probably a year. Developers are supposed to test their apps to see if they work. It is not up to Apple to test every conceivable app - but rather, it's the developer's responsibility. So why didn't Adobe catch this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
We don't actually have a trolling policy here. As long as forum users aren't being insulted or accosted, they can say whatever they want.
We do have a Feedback subforum, though!
Hmmm. I'd say being called a MS fanboy or an fanDroid counts as being insulted, so this rule might be dangerous ^^
/me hides behind his not-yet-Retina screen.
The last time I reported a bug that crashed InDesign, and Adobe confirmed it, their "solution" was the purchase the upgrade.
Especially making pdf's triggered the error.
The error disappeared
They could be. But adobe is big, with very popular, and high visibility software. Even if it were a private API, we can expect that a lot of companies would use them, as they have in the past.
Sometimes, I have thought that Apple should see how many companies are using a private API, and if the interest is high, and there's no harm done, except to Apple's exclusivity, then they should declare them public.
It's very possible that they removed it at the last minute. After all, this was just gone as of 10.7.4, and apparently, just for the newest machines. As Adobe, and others haven't received the new machines before anyone else, there would be no way for them to have known about this problem.
This isn't always a sharp line in the sand. Since the term "fanboy" is so widely used, the mere usage isn't enough to cause a problem. We all use it from time to time. Same thing with the word "troll". But if it's used with other seriously depreciating comments, it's different.
We tend to have lively discussions here, though we don't allow what we often have seen on Slashdot, and some other sites.
Although not up to Photoshop features, Pixelmator is a great program and is programmed lean and mean to run fast in Mac OSX. People are finding alternatives to the Adobe bloatware and ridiculous upgrade prices. We need more app developers that produce excellent products like Pixelmator at reasonable prices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
They could be. But adobe is big, with very popular, and high visibility software. Even if it were a private API, we can expect that a lot of companies would use them, as they have in the past.
Sometimes, I have thought that Apple should see how many companies are using a private API, and if the interest is high, and there's no harm done, except to Apple's exclusivity, then they should declare them public.
They will probably get it resolved soon since that is a major bug which prevents users in professional publishing from completing their projects. Apple has apparently completely revamped their icon related API with many new sizes as well as animations. There are dozens of new API calls related to this.
There are also issues with other software experiencing problem related to icon in the dock. Apparently there are reports from last week of even Xcode suffering with crashes and not launching from the dock icon on 10.7.4 installed on rMBP.
Right, like the zero notice they gave Adobe on depreciating 64-bit Carbon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morky
Right, like the zero notice they gave Adobe on depreciating 64-bit Carbon.
But was that really a shock to anyone?
It's a very nice little program for amateurs who shouldn't be using PS anyway. But if you consider it to be anywhere close to PS for the professional work we use it for, then it just shows that you aren't as familiar with PS as you think you are.
I'm not surprised. This isn't actually an "Adobe" problem. But Adobe might use these calls more than some other developers.
Other than the lack of reports of this happening on Ivy Bridge PCs, I guess.