Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard Compatible?
Re: so...
Well, as we've said multiple times in the thread. 1800 PST.aikidoka wrote: can we talk about it now? or are we waiting for 1800EDT?
Try my software!
#define ADIUMX pimp //by me
#define QUESTION ((2b) || (!2b))
Have you hugged a programmer today?
#define ADIUMX pimp //by me
#define QUESTION ((2b) || (!2b))
Have you hugged a programmer today?
-
relaxedguy
- Harmless
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:57 pm
Preference pane not loading in 10.5
In 10.4 Growl preference pane would not load. I did an archive and install when I upgraded to 10.5 yesterday and the pref pane still will not install. Sometimes its blank, others it looks like it's hanging when trying to load.
I removed pref pane from /Library and ~/Library then did a fresh Growl 1.1 install.
Any ideas or should I just wait until next version?
I removed pref pane from /Library and ~/Library then did a fresh Growl 1.1 install.
Any ideas or should I just wait until next version?
Re: Preference pane not loading in 10.5
It should only be in a single location, not both.relaxedguy wrote:I removed pref pane from /Library and ~/Library then did a fresh Growl 1.1 install.
Try my software!
#define ADIUMX pimp //by me
#define QUESTION ((2b) || (!2b))
Have you hugged a programmer today?
#define ADIUMX pimp //by me
#define QUESTION ((2b) || (!2b))
Have you hugged a programmer today?
-
relaxedguy
- Harmless
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:57 pm
Understood, pref pane lives under ~/Library.
Found this in Console:
10/29/07 12:23:48 PM System Preferences[1461] *** Assertion failure in -[NSTextFieldCell _objectValue:forString:errorDescription:], /SourceCache/AppKit/AppKit-949/AppKit.subproj/NSCell.m:1338
0/29/07 12:23:48 PM System Preferences[1461] Invalid parameter not satisfying: aString != nil
Found this in Console:
10/29/07 12:23:48 PM System Preferences[1461] *** Assertion failure in -[NSTextFieldCell _objectValue:forString:errorDescription:], /SourceCache/AppKit/AppKit-949/AppKit.subproj/NSCell.m:1338
0/29/07 12:23:48 PM System Preferences[1461] Invalid parameter not satisfying: aString != nil
-
timberfish
- Harmless
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:15 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
Re: What?
Not trying to be nit-picky here and I know the issue is moot now, but I thought I'd shed some light for future situations. Verifying that your app is compatible with an upcoming OS under NDA is not in violation of that NDA. I see the logical connection you're trying to make, but it's okay to do this. The major software companies (when interviewed and sometimes just on their sites) openly discussed their Leopard compatibility plans with news organizations.Disclosing whether Growl functions or not could disclose an api change. Logically this could be considered an NDA violation. please resepect logic+truth.
But more importantly this issue specifically even came up in the ADC discussions I was involved in and the direct message from Apple to us was that it's fine to divulge that information.
I do respect your decision to be overly safe with the timing. I think people just read the initial responses (as I did) as though your hands were tied, not as though it was a decision you guys were making based on your interpretation.
This may help when making future decisions. Just trying to help. All the best.
Re: What?
We can't just go and do things based on this. We'd need them to post on their site or communicate in a better way that it's ok to do things like this.timberfish wrote:Not trying to be nit-picky here and I know the issue is moot now, but I thought I'd shed some light for future situations. Verifying that your app is compatible with an upcoming OS under NDA is not in violation of that NDA. I see the logical connection you're trying to make, but it's okay to do this. The major software companies (when interviewed and sometimes just on their sites) openly discussed their Leopard compatibility plans with news organizations.Disclosing whether Growl functions or not could disclose an api change. Logically this could be considered an NDA violation. please resepect logic+truth.
But more importantly this issue specifically even came up in the ADC discussions I was involved in and the direct message from Apple to us was that it's fine to divulge that information.
I do respect your decision to be overly safe with the timing. I think people just read the initial responses (as I did) as though your hands were tied, not as though it was a decision you guys were making based on your interpretation.
This may help when making future decisions. Just trying to help. All the best.
-
timberfish
- Harmless
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:15 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
Re: What?
I understand that. You guys want to be careful and I get it. They could certainly be more clear about the little details. Just thought I'd share what they said to my team, but I know you can't make big decisions based on a forum contributorWe can't just go and do things based on this. We'd need them to post on their site or communicate in a better way that it's ok to do things like this.
Cheers.