OpenXTalk Forums

Just an idea (maybe a bad idea?) - any takers for an OpenXTalk Lite "Legacy" version? - One that will run on OSX 10.5 PPC?
(based on an *even older* v6.6.6(!) engine).

Is that aimed at Mac junkies like me?

OK, OK, let's be at least vaguely sensible and focus on the component 'junk' in junkie, and ask a few questions:

1. As there are legacy versions of free LC that function on MacOS 10.4 & 10.5 what would be the utility of a PPC version of OXT Lite that would basically offer nothing more?

2. Who the FF uses old PPC Macs for anything except for nutters like me?

3. The ONLY reasons I can see for you to make a PPC Mac version of OXT Lite are:

3.1. An intellectual exercise.

3 2. You are also nutty.

I probably am a bit nutty
I know, it sounds like a strange idea - and there's probably not many takers for it. So thought I'd put the question 'out there' before I got too far into it.

However, it's not as hard as the "Retro" edition was - I mean the Tools palette (paint, vector graphics etc) all work already as they should. They don't need fixing
The only point would be for someone to be able to use a largely de-branded xTalk IDE in 'legacy' versions of OSX. Also has the ability to build standalones for PPC macs. Again though, the audience for that is even narrower possibly.

I just thought it would be an easier proposition to support earlier MacOS versions than more modern ones. (which as it turns out, absolutely is).

I added the middle-click tool changing option to 'Retro', just so it keeps up with the rest of OXT Lite a bit more. This will take the retro build to this version:

Self-invited and inescapable guests this evening: luckily they only speak Norwegian, Bulgarian, and English: so I'll be practising my Scots.

(Norwegian, Bulgarian, and English: talk about kinky combinations.)

So, tomorrow, after 'church' (watering the tomatoes), I'll fire up both the 32-bit Snow Cone iMac (10.6.8) and the 64-bit Toothless Lion iMac (10.7.5) and try to compile a suitably abusive list . . . of failings: probably compensate for the cr*p going down this e'en, oh, and the inevitable hangover when Richmond hides his complexes behind an alcoholic curtain . . .

Is it a requirement to wear leathers, false eye-lashes, and pearls to play with OXT Lite-And-Frothy 'Retro'?

I should point out that any 'failings' (?) of the "Retro" version will likely be down to the engine, and other numerous things that were fixed after 8.2.0 dp2 was released. This is just a way to run a de-branded LCC, with (OXT lite slant) on retro MacOS versions. (It's not at the top of my to-do list by any means)

When replacing various lines of script, I noticed I couldn't do many things the same way I would in a 9.x engine, so had to find alternative ways of implementing things that would be compatible with an 8.x engine. So, if you try something and it doesn't work - it's probably down to the engine.

Also, bear in mind I think it was yourself that asked for this version....so, here you go!

"It is what it is" as the saying goes.

I "asked" for that? Did I?

Good thing a certain litigious American isn't around: we'd all end up in court.

I 'think' I stated that it would be 'nice' (and, as my Granny from Dundee said about 'nice' . . .) were OXT Lite to run on versions of MacOS pre-10.9.

I am beginning to appreciate Donald Trump's approach to things . . .

See you in prison.

richmond62 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:16 pm I "asked" for that? Did I?
...
I 'think' I stated that it would be 'nice'
...
See you in prison.

Okay, you requested it. Is that any better?
I don't know why it seems to be the case on here, but every time something vaguely helpful is posted (example stacks, xTalk engine implementations etc), they are immediately buried under a pile of spurious posts - normally criticising whatever has been posted. Then lost in multiple subsequent posts, making it nigh-on impossible for new users to find anyway.

I don't understand this. I thought the idea of this forum was to encourage contributions, no matter what skillset.

Anyway, OXT Lite 'Retro' exists, but don't compare it to something running on a 9.x series engine - it'd be like comparing an old van to a new one. The old one is slower but has less to go wrong. It's missing a lot of the stuff you might now take for granted, but it'll get you there. (There's an analogy for you)

BS litigation or not, I don't do all that
If I've got a problem, I'd tell anyone in no uncertain terms - so they are left in no doubt whatsoever.

Sorry, 'darling', but my brain at least is full of cross-wiring, and all sorts of guff crops up whenever and wherever: as my Mum said, when at 18 I took an I Q. test and got 142, "Thank God you didn't get 148 because, as a genius, you'd be insufferable."

A teenager at my school, who'd suffered 9 years of full-on 'me' once told a new 16 year old (in front of me): "Don't you know that this place is not just about learning English? If you can survive his cognitive dissonance, you'll be set up for anything the world can chuck at you."

That's also why my current 'Turtle Challenge' is proving so tough for me, as a teacher once said, "Cut the crap Mathewson and get to the point."

Draft version of OpenXTalk Lite "Retro" (download link here)

Well, 'Draft' or 'Daft': I have just fired up my 64-bit MacOS 10.7.5 iMac to give the thing a whirl . . .

And after that, if my wife doesn't manage to pop the strait jacket over my head, I'll have a go on the 32-bit MacOS 10.6.8 iMac.

Oh, and as LC 8.2 DP 2 runs on my MacOS 12 machine, I'll try the Retro thing 'here' as well.

'Read Me.rtf':

It's a 32-bit version

Ah: are you sure it is not a 'fatty'?

Lumpy Custard on MacOS 12:
- - -
Mind you . . . no 'off-colour' comments about the app being 32-bit: so it has to be a 'fatty'.

MacOS 10.7.5 64-bit iMac.

Runs 'like a charm'.

BUT (and, face it, you'd have been disappointed if there were not a 'but'); this is a bit wonky:
- -
1. Upgrade Options.

2. Cluster 'Fudge; with those icons between 'Errors' and 'Tutorials'.

Here's the 'standard' OXT Lite menubar for a quick compare:
- -
No 'funky-monkey' grab bar on the left either.

I've gotta be bonkers:
- -

32-bit iMac running Snow Leopard:

Just the same as on the 64-bit iMac running MacOS Lion:

Same 'crit' about the menubar.

I would argue that 'things' are problematic insofar as it does not run on MacOS 12 (while LC 820 DP does): after all, in theory at least, it should be possible to author software with 'retro' that would work on MacOS 10.6 right up to MacOS 12 (if not beyond) using one IDE; and this would be its greatest utility.

And I assume that 'Retro' has problems with MacOS 12 means any standalone generated from it will also be problematic on '12'.

richmond62 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 8:42 am Mind you . . . no 'off-colour' comments about the app being 32-bit: so it has to be a 'fatty'.

Yes, it is a fat binary of sorts.
Please see:
viewtopic.php?p=9069#p9069

richmond62 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:06 am 1. Upgrade Options.
2. Cluster 'Fudge; with those icons between 'Errors' and 'Tutorials'.

Sounds a weird question, but did you run the applescript first before opening 'retro'?
If you did, did you already run a version of LCC or OXT on that test machine?
If the answer is yes, then the script won't overwrite the prefs file needed by 'retro' - what I'm saying is this is really intended for an old mac that hasn't been used to test multiple versions of OXT on it. I didn't want to junk your prefs file from 'lite' or 'heavy' if that already exists, and overwrite it with an older version, because that would have been a bit heavy-handed of me. (...and also a bit destructive if I'd not asked for permission first).

It only copies the prefs file if it doesn't exist. This should sort out your menubar issue, although I can probably make that more robust.

You can check this though. If you go to ~/Library/Application Support/Runrev/ (off the top of my head), and look in the subfolder containing the preferences folder - is it labelled with a colour? If not, then you are using the prefs from a previous copy of 'lite' or 'heavy' - which may not be fully compatible with 'retro' (different engines and different prefs-writing between various LCC versions).

richmond62 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:06 am No 'funky-monkey' grab bar on the left either.

No, I've not implemented that yet for 'retro'. It's not simply a case of swapping stacks in, it's almost recreating bits because the engine does things differently and refers to things that aren't there in earlier versions.

Feel free to tweak the revmenubar stack - but don't take the one from the 'lite' version (running in a 9.x series engine) or the one from 'heavy' and put it into 'retro' because it won't like it. It really won't like it.

With the 'openxtalk lite retro' is from an unsigned developer errors:
That's to be expected. This is really for running on MacOS 10.6.8 to 10.9. For versions above that, we have 'lite' or 'heavy' which are 64-bit, with lots of other in-engine and in-stack improvements.

I wonder if this is going to 'sit' as it is, or be upgraded?

Because:
- -

Feel free to make any upgrades and I can make them available as part of the automated update for anyone who might be using it. As mentioned though, it can be hard work as the engine uses different methods for some things - so you can't just swap in stacks that have come out of the v9.6.3 engine for example.

Feel free to make any upgrades

I think the ONLY thing I will change will be the MenuBar stack.

As per this above, might also be worth working on a mac with no previous LCC or OXT install - so you aren't picking up any weird settings from a stray prefs file (different engines and what-have-you).
I used a completely fresh install of Snow Leopard, and can't replicate that weird revmenubar appearance as yet.
The revmenubar looks this way on that freshly installed Snow Leopard mac:


Because there wasn't a lot of people asking me about it, I've not spent any more time on it. It seems that the demand for a 'retro' mac version is quite low. Everyone else seems to be on Apple's upgrade train.