COMPGROUPS.NET | Search | Post Question | Groups | Stream | About | Register

### Mavericks compatibility #2

• Email
• Follow

Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether
Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications,
drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart
<http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks
yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all
responses are welcome.

Any one? Bueller? NSA?


 1
Reply nmassello2 (169) 9/4/2013 12:49:07 PM

See related articles to this posting

On 2013-09-04, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether
> Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications,
> drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart
><http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks
> yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all
> responses are welcome.
>
> Any one? Bueller? NSA?
>

I don't think it would break compatibility for any application unless there
is some entirely new security system included.

--
Blah blah bleh...
GCS/CM d(-)@>-- s+:- !a C++$UBL++++$ L+$W+++$ w M++ Y++ b++

 0
Reply sal5504 (76) 9/4/2013 2:26:06 PM

In comp.sys.mac.system Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> asks:

> Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether
> Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications,
> drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart
> <http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks
> yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all
> responses are welcome.

It's probably still under a non-disclosure agreement.  I'd suggest
checking in the Apple developer forums, which are, as far as I know,
the only place it's ok to discuss stuff covered by an NDA.

Billy Y..
--
sub     #'9+1   ,r0             ; convert ascii byte
add     #9.+1   ,r0             ; to an integer
bcc     20$; not a number   0 Reply billy22 (786) 9/4/2013 3:49:20 PM In message <1l8nuh5.jdjx2fhnkxouN%nmassello@yahoo.com> Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote: > Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether > Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications, > drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart > <http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks > yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all > responses are welcome. The only thing I can say<1> is that 10.9 runs on every single machine that 10.8 runs on. You can take that as you will. <1> No, really, since it's been widely reported, I can say it. -- Real magic is the hand around the bandsaw, the thrown spark in the powder keg, the dimension-warp linking you straight into the heart of a star, the flaming sword that burns all the way to the pommel. --Moving Pictures   0 Reply g.kreme (3671) 9/4/2013 9:40:06 PM In article <slrnl2fa5m.1td.g.kreme@mbp55.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether > > Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications, > > drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart > > <http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks > > yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all > > responses are welcome. > > The only thing I can say<1> is that 10.9 runs on every single machine > that 10.8 runs on. You can take that as you will. > > <1> No, really, since it's been widely reported, I can say it. he wasn't asking about which machines will run mavericks, but rather which apps may have issues when running under mavericks. how many apps and which ones have issues may affect how soon he decides to upgrade. he no doubt has a machine that can run it, otherwise he probably wouldn't be asking. once mavericks ships, there will no doubt be a *lot* of compatibility information posted. i don't expect too many problems for recent apps, but older ones could have issues. it's not any different than other releases. most stuff works but a small number of apps don't. eventually, nearly all will be fixed, although it may require a paid upgrade.   0 Reply nospam59 (11094) 9/5/2013 11:08:40 AM nospam wrote: > In article <slrnl2fa5m.1td.g.kreme@mbp55.local>, Lewis > <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > >>> Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether >>> Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications, >>> drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart >>> <http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks >>> yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all >>> responses are welcome. >> >> The only thing I can say<1> is that 10.9 runs on every single machine >> that 10.8 runs on. You can take that as you will. >> >> <1> No, really, since it's been widely reported, I can say it. > > he wasn't asking about which machines will run mavericks, but rather > which apps may have issues when running under mavericks. > > how many apps and which ones have issues may affect how soon he decides > to upgrade. he no doubt has a machine that can run it, otherwise he > probably wouldn't be asking. > > once mavericks ships, there will no doubt be a *lot* of compatibility > information posted. i don't expect too many problems for recent apps, > but older ones could have issues. it's not any different than other > releases. most stuff works but a small number of apps don't. > eventually, nearly all will be fixed, although it may require a paid > upgrade. > There use to be a website you could go to and it would tell you what apps would work , which need update, and which would never work. Its been so long I have forgotten the name -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it" http://www.phillipmjones.net mailto:pjonescet@comcast.net   0 Reply pjonescet (208) 9/5/2013 3:17:01 PM In article <l0a79e$p9i$1@news.albasani.net>, PhillipJones <pjonescet@comcast.net> wrote: > >>> Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether > >>> Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications, > >>> drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart > >>> <http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks > >>> yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all > >>> responses are welcome. > >> > >> The only thing I can say<1> is that 10.9 runs on every single machine > >> that 10.8 runs on. You can take that as you will. > >> > >> <1> No, really, since it's been widely reported, I can say it. > > > > he wasn't asking about which machines will run mavericks, but rather > > which apps may have issues when running under mavericks. > > > > how many apps and which ones have issues may affect how soon he decides > > to upgrade. he no doubt has a machine that can run it, otherwise he > > probably wouldn't be asking. > > > > once mavericks ships, there will no doubt be a *lot* of compatibility > > information posted. i don't expect too many problems for recent apps, > > but older ones could have issues. it's not any different than other > > releases. most stuff works but a small number of apps don't. > > eventually, nearly all will be fixed, although it may require a paid > > upgrade. > > > There use to be a website you could go to and it would tell you what > apps would work , which need update, and which would never work. Its > been so long I have forgotten the name that site was mentioned in the original post and quoted above.   0 Reply nospam59 (11094) 9/5/2013 3:25:03 PM nospam wrote: > In article <l0a79e$p9i$1@news.albasani.net>, PhillipJones > <pjonescet@comcast.net> wrote: > >>>>> Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether >>>>> Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications, >>>>> drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart >>>>> <http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks >>>>> yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all >>>>> responses are welcome. >>>> >>>> The only thing I can say<1> is that 10.9 runs on every single machine >>>> that 10.8 runs on. You can take that as you will. >>>> >>>> <1> No, really, since it's been widely reported, I can say it. >>> >>> he wasn't asking about which machines will run mavericks, but rather >>> which apps may have issues when running under mavericks. >>> >>> how many apps and which ones have issues may affect how soon he decides >>> to upgrade. he no doubt has a machine that can run it, otherwise he >>> probably wouldn't be asking. >>> >>> once mavericks ships, there will no doubt be a *lot* of compatibility >>> information posted. i don't expect too many problems for recent apps, >>> but older ones could have issues. it's not any different than other >>> releases. most stuff works but a small number of apps don't. >>> eventually, nearly all will be fixed, although it may require a paid >>> upgrade. >>> >> There use to be a website you could go to and it would tell you what >> apps would work , which need update, and which would never work. Its >> been so long I have forgotten the name > > that site was mentioned in the original post and quoted above. > didn't notice Sorry! -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it" http://www.phillipmjones.net mailto:pjonescet@comcast.net   0 Reply pjonescet (208) 9/5/2013 3:47:38 PM On 13-09-05 07:08, nospam wrote: > how many apps and which ones have issues may affect how soon he decides > to upgrade. he no doubt has a machine that can run it, otherwise he > probably wouldn't be asking. The big change was SnowLeopard to Lion where lots of older apps stopped working because the PowerPC emulator was removed. I don't expect Mavericks to be a big step from Lion/Mountain Lion but you may have to explicitely tell your machine to allow unsigned apps. Some games might have problems with the computer's display targetted at a TV via AppleTV but I don't expect this to touch that many apps.   0 Reply jfmezei.spamnot (9469) 9/5/2013 6:34:37 PM nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > once mavericks ships, there will no doubt be a *lot* of compatibility > information posted. i don't expect too many problems for recent apps, > but older ones could have issues. it's not any different than other > releases. most stuff works but a small number of apps don't. > eventually, nearly all will be fixed, although it may require a paid > upgrade. As I stated, my primary concern is MS Office, particularly Excel. I'm currently using Office 2008 and would be quite happy to continue with it indefinitely. If Office 2008 breaks under Mavericks, I'll grudgingly move to Office 2011 -- unless it also breaks under Mavericks. Why do I ask now? Because Office 2011 is starting to become scarce, its price is creeping up, and I very nuch want to avoid Darth Ballmer's Office 365, otherwise known as Office Serfdom (Pay Me Forever Edition), as long as possible.   0 Reply nmassello2 (169) 9/5/2013 6:37:01 PM In article <1l8q4ax.19s97ur1fzmg52N%nmassello@yahoo.com>, nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) wrote: > nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > once mavericks ships, there will no doubt be a *lot* of compatibility > > information posted. i don't expect too many problems for recent apps, > > but older ones could have issues. it's not any different than other > > releases. most stuff works but a small number of apps don't. > > eventually, nearly all will be fixed, although it may require a paid > > upgrade. > > As I stated, my primary concern is MS Office, particularly Excel. I'm > currently using Office 2008 and would be quite happy to continue with it > indefinitely. If Office 2008 breaks under Mavericks, I'll grudgingly > move to Office 2011 -- unless it also breaks under Mavericks. > > Why do I ask now? Because Office 2011 is starting to become scarce, its > price is creeping up, and I very nuch want to avoid Darth Ballmer's > Office 365, otherwise known as Office Serfdom (Pay Me Forever Edition), > as long as possible. Depending on your needs, you may be able to get by fine with one of the open source alternatives to MS Office. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR   0 Reply jollyroger (11020) 9/5/2013 10:15:57 PM Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote: > nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > once mavericks ships, there will no doubt be a *lot* of compatibility > > information posted. i don't expect too many problems for recent apps, > > but older ones could have issues. it's not any different than other > > releases. most stuff works but a small number of apps don't. > > eventually, nearly all will be fixed, although it may require a paid > > upgrade. > > As I stated, my primary concern is MS Office, particularly Excel. I'm > currently using Office 2008 and would be quite happy to continue with it > indefinitely. If Office 2008 breaks under Mavericks, I'll grudgingly > move to Office 2011 -- unless it also breaks under Mavericks. Note that MS has stopped issuing updates for Office 2008, so it is likely to be vulnerable to many security issues that may be discovered and fixed in Office 2011. > Why do I ask now? Because Office 2011 is starting to become scarce, its > price is creeping up, and I very nuch want to avoid Darth Ballmer's > Office 365, otherwise known as Office Serfdom (Pay Me Forever Edition), > as long as possible. Since Microsoft has released an Office 2013 for Windows, there is a good chance they will continue the pattern and also do an Office 2014 for the Mac, for those who want a standalone application rather than the online subscription to Office 365. If they don't, it would be another reason for Mac users to wean themselves off Microsoft Office where possible. -- David Empson dempson@actrix.gen.nz   0 Reply dempson (3814) 9/6/2013 12:13:27 AM In article <1l8rwvj.qqvqxa2q7udeN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>, David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote: > > Why do I ask now? Because Office 2011 is starting to become scarce, its > > price is creeping up, and I very nuch want to avoid Darth Ballmer's > > Office 365, otherwise known as Office Serfdom (Pay Me Forever Edition), > > as long as possible. > > Since Microsoft has released an Office 2013 for Windows, there is a good > chance they will continue the pattern and also do an Office 2014 for the > Mac, for those who want a standalone application rather than the online > subscription to Office 365. > > If they don't, it would be another reason for Mac users to wean > themselves off Microsoft Office where possible. the problem is if you have to interact with the rest of the world who uses microsoft office, the real thing is required. the alternatives, no matter how compatible they claim to be, are not compatible enough and do not work properly.   0 Reply nospam59 (11094) 9/6/2013 1:20:24 AM David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote: > Since Microsoft has released an Office 2013 for Windows, there is a good > chance they will continue the pattern and also do an Office 2014 for the > Mac, for those who want a standalone application rather than the online > subscription to Office 365. But likely at a higher price. Microsoft no longer ships the three-license physical media edition of Office 2011, and the new downloadable edition is roughly three times its per seat price. I did find a copy of the three-license Office 2011 Home & Student package for under$120. It's the current code version, so I assume
Microsoft will maintain its compatibility with Mavericks and perhaps
with Cucamonga (or whatever) beyond that.


 0
Reply nmassello2 (169) 9/6/2013 7:02:47 AM

In message <5228cebe$0$61529$c3e8da3$f017e9df@news.astraweb.com>
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 13-09-05 07:08, nospam wrote:

>> how many apps and which ones have issues may affect how soon he decides
>> to upgrade. he no doubt has a machine that can run it, otherwise he

> The big change was SnowLeopard to Lion where lots of older apps stopped
> working because the PowerPC emulator was removed.

> I don't expect Mavericks to be a big step from Lion/Mountain Lion but
> you may have to explicitely tell your machine to allow unsigned apps.

Yes, that was the underlying implication in my original reply. Since
10.9 works on ALL machines that 10.8 works on, chances are very good
that all<1> 10.8 compatible apps will continue to work. Is it possible
that something will break? Sure, but it's not very probable. And it's
even less probable it will be something you use.

> Some games might have problems with the computer's display targetted at
> a TV via AppleTV but I don't expect this to touch that many apps.

I can neither confirm nor deny that WoW works perfectly over AirPlay.
Nope, can't do it, sorry.

<1> FSVO 'all'

--
And east is east and west is west and if you take cranberries and stew
them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does.

 0
Reply g.kreme (3671) 9/6/2013 3:00:30 PM

In article <slrnl2jrge.bj7.g.kreme@mbp55.local>,
Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> > I don't expect Mavericks to be a big step from Lion/Mountain Lion but
> > you may have to explicitely tell your machine to allow unsigned apps.
>
> Yes, that was the underlying implication in my original reply. Since
> 10.9 works on ALL machines that 10.8 works on, chances are very good
> that all<1> 10.8 compatible apps will continue to work. Is it possible
> that something will break? Sure, but it's not very probable. And it's
> even less probable it will be something you use.

You're being reasonable, informative, and articulate.  Please cease that
immediately; it's not allowed here.

--
All usenet users are quirky, but some are more quirky than others.

 0
Reply michelle14 (19020) 9/6/2013 3:34:12 PM

In article <slrnl2jrge.bj7.g.kreme@mbp55.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> Yes, that was the underlying implication in my original reply. Since
> 10.9 works on ALL machines that 10.8 works on, chances are very good
> that all<1> 10.8 compatible apps will continue to work. Is it possible
> that something will break? Sure, but it's not very probable. And it's
> even less probable it will be something you use.

just because mavericks works on the same hardware as mountain lion
doesn't mean apps that run under mountain lion will necessarily work
under mavericks.

mavericks has a number of changes that might affect some apps. most
will be fine, but like any os x upgrade (ignoring major changes such as
dropping rosetta), there will be a small number of apps that don't work
or will have minor issues.

 0
Reply nospam59 (11094) 9/6/2013 9:29:06 PM

On 2013.09.04 08:49 , Neill Massello wrote:
> Does anybody have any information, rumors, or speculation about whether
> Mavericks bruises or breaks any older but commonly used applications,
> drivers, or other software? The RoaringApps chart
> <http://roaringapps.com/apps:table> doesn't have a column for Mavericks
> yet. I'm mainly interested in MS Office 2008 and 2011, but (almost) all
> responses are welcome.

Mavericks looks like a lot of OS enhancement without subtraction.  So
existing apps will make the same calls to the same libraries and get the
same actions performed and same results back.

Existing apps won't use any new functions added to the framework(s), of
course and it would be up to those app co's to decide if it were worth
pursuing.

That said - major OS updates have a way of "revealing" weaknesses in
existing code.

An app update that would be welcome, for example (and not a Mavericks
related update per se), would be if Handbrake would use OpenGL/CL to
perform its conversions using the graphics processor(s) rather than the
CPU.  I would venture that a several fold improvement in speed would be
gained.

The best part of that is that it would be OS portable so it would work
on Windows and Linux as well.

--
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional,
illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end."
-Unknown

 0
Reply alan.browne (4546) 9/7/2013 2:00:21 PM

On 2013.09.07 10:00 , Alan Browne wrote:

> An app update that would be welcome, for example (and not a Mavericks
> related update per se), would be if Handbrake would use OpenGL/CL to
> perform its conversions using the graphics processor(s) rather than the
> CPU.  I would venture that a several fold improvement in speed would be
> gained.

Looks like there is a beta with OpenCL but doesn't appear to be in the
main release line to date.

--
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional,
illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end."
-Unknown

 0
Reply alan.browne (4546) 9/7/2013 2:10:44 PM

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <1l8rwvj.qqvqxa2q7udeN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>, David Empson
> <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
>
> > > Why do I ask now? Because Office 2011 is starting to become scarce, its
> > > price is creeping up, and I very nuch want to avoid Darth Ballmer's
> > > Office 365, otherwise known as Office Serfdom (Pay Me Forever Edition),
> > > as long as possible.
> >
> > Since Microsoft has released an Office 2013 for Windows, there is a good
> > chance they will continue the pattern and also do an Office 2014 for the
> > Mac, for those who want a standalone application rather than the online
> > subscription to Office 365.
> >
> > If they don't, it would be another reason for Mac users to wean
> > themselves off Microsoft Office where possible.
>
> the problem is if you have to interact with the rest of the world who
> uses microsoft office, the real thing is required. the alternatives, no
> matter how compatible they claim to be, are not compatible enough and
> do not work properly.

That's what I meant by "where possible". Those who need full
compatibility can run into problems unless they can run the same version
of Office on the same platform (and even then might have problems with
fonts).

Even Microsoft can't make Office versions which are 100% compatible
between platforms (or between versions on the same platform), but they
get closer than the alternatives.

My user group's secretary complains about the formatting of our rather
simple committee minutes getting stuffed up when I edit them on Office
2011 (Mac) while she is using Office 2010 (Windows), but I don't know
exactly what the problem is.

Microsoft Office is a bad de facto standard. Unfortunately the near
monopoly of Windows and Office propogates it and those on the outside
have to deal with it.

--
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

 0
Reply dempson (3814) 9/8/2013 4:33:24 AM

Im running mavericks Gold beta and Office doesn't work. Crashes every time I try and open it. i just get a pop up asking if i want to send the info to Microsoft

 0
Reply andremoore74 (1) 10/9/2013 2:31:57 AM

In article <e333692e-2b1f-477d-8f25-02f58057c6a5@googlegroups.com>,
andremoore74@gmail.com wrote:

> Im running mavericks Gold beta and Office doesn't work. Crashes every time I
> try and open it. i just get a pop up asking if i want to send the info to
> Microsoft

What version of Office are using?

 0
Reply xyz6528 (45) 10/9/2013 2:45:19 AM

In article <e333692e-2b1f-477d-8f25-02f58057c6a5@googlegroups.com>,
andremoore74@gmail.com wrote:

> Im running mavericks Gold beta and Office doesn't work. Crashes every time I
> try and open it. i just get a pop up asking if i want to send the info to
> Microsoft

Ain't  Mavericks proper out??? Go 'n goog 4 it!
--
teleportation kills

 0
Reply here20 (76) 10/9/2013 9:10:23 AM

On 09/10/2013 10:10, android wrote:

> Ain't  Mavericks proper out??? Go 'n goog 4 it!

No, it ain't. As the fact that you have to 'goog 4 it' would suggest.

--
Xbox: GallusNumpty  Steam: scottishwildcat

 0
Reply com.gmail (151) 10/10/2013 10:58:01 AM

In article <l3617m$uan$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> wrote:

> On 09/10/2013 10:10, android wrote:
>
> > Ain't  Mavericks proper out??? Go 'n goog 4 it!
>
> No, it ain't. As the fact that you have to 'goog 4 it' would suggest.

I'm big enough to admit a mistake...  http://tinyurl.com/mkbx4zl Stay
tuned! Didn't really need to Goog that one! ;-p
My advice to the OP is to stick to the NeoOffice  for the time being.
--
teleportation kills

 0
Reply here20 (76) 10/11/2013 4:40:51 AM

Office 2008 crashes. Hard.

There is no reference to Office anything in the link above.

Numbers is a different product, makes my saved .csv file incompatible.

Numbers doesn't accept pasted data like Excel does.

 0
Reply nbbooks (1) 11/27/2013 3:38:24 PM

 0
Reply nmassello2 (169) 11/27/2013 7:25:35 PM

On 2013-11-27 19:25:35 +0000, Neill Massello said:

> <nbbooks@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Office 2008 crashes. Hard.
>>
>> There is no reference to Office anything in the link above.
>
> Other users don't seem to have many problems using MS Office 2008 in
> Mavericks.
>
> <http://roaringapps.com/app/microsoft-office-2008>

If I'm reading that right, it means that 5 people have reported that it
works fine.  That's hardly indicative of much.

My own experience?  Excel 2008 crashed repeatedly under Mavericks.  I'd
been meaning to remove Office 2008 and replace it with 2011 (which I
already have on the other machines) for a good while, and Mavericks was
the last straw.

And it was pretty solid under ML and previous OSs.

FWIW.

2011 has been completely solid.


 0

 0
Reply xxx613 (1369) 11/28/2013 3:49:37 PM

 0
Reply joedid1 (3) 11/28/2013 4:49:09 PM

29 Replies
287 Views

Similar Articles

11/30/2013 3:09:10 AM
page loaded in 4203 ms -0

Similar Artilces:

Compatibility with 49G+
I have had HP-25, HP-11C, and a HP-32SII for the last 15 years or so. The HP-32 has just given up on me and I purchased a few weeks ago as a replacement a brand new HP-49G+. My question to this group is: which programs are likely to be compatible with this new machine? As you know, a lot of programs are on line for older machines such as HP-39G, HP-48GX, & HP-49G. So without trying them all which machine is likely to use programs that are native to the HP-49g+? Thanks for the help. Jacques All of the HP-48GX user RPL programs should be compatible, but sysRPL probably will not, d

Backward compatibility
Hi, I've gooled this newsgroup on this topic, but haven't found any topic on it. If you release frequently, you can easily have completely different needs for storing data in the x-th release as you had in the first release. But as users are able to use your software in production already with the first release, they want to keep using the data which was created in the first release. This seems to me that one must ensure backward compatibility of using all data ever stored with previous releases. A huge and ever-growing task, which even can lead to situations where it=92s technical impossible to re-use data of old versions. Let me try to show an example: The first release of a drawing program only could draw points, and stored a drawing as a stream of X,Y co-ordinates. The second release added the drawing of circles. Data was stored as pairs (for points) and threesomes (for circles), separated by CR+LF. This second release must be able to read streams of co-ordinates to re- use drawings made by the first release. (does it have to be able to write drawings as a stream of XY co-ordiantes too?) A third release adds the drawing of rectangles. Data is stored in an XML-file

Leopard compatibility?
FileMaker Inc. have published a page on their web site warning that FileMaker products may have compatibility issues with Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard". They are working on updates for the FileMaker 9 series, but the situation is uncertain for earlier versions and there might be no official word. <http://filemaker.com/support/leopard.html> Just a heads-up at this stage. Don't rush to install Leopard on development or production computers. Does anyone recall similar problems with earlier major updates of Mac OS X? I'm able to run FileMaker Pro 6 and 7 on Tiger and I'm...). Compatibility between Mac OS X 10.5 and FileMaker Pro 5.5 and later is as yet unresolved. The main problem might be the web viewer in 8.5 and 9. There was a compatibility issue with the Safari 3 public beta, and Mac OS X 10.5 comes with Safari 3. If that is the only issue then 5.5 through 8.0 will probably work fine. -- David Empson dempson@actrix.gen.nz David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote: > FileMaker Inc. have published a page on their web site warning that > FileMaker products may have compatibility issues with Mac OS X 10.5 > "Leopard". They are working

motherboard compatibility
hi, can you tell me what's the difference between the 355478-001 and 326682-001 motherboards? I want to change the one (the 355478-001) in my laptop (ze5730us) because it's broken beyond repair and i don't have many for a new laptop. On ebay I see more of the second type, which however looks exactly the same - with the same chipset, fans, and everything - as the old one that I removed from my laptop last night. If I only knew if I could plug the old celeron 2.8ghz (478 pins, 128 L2 cache) on a 326682-001. well, thanx do <thegoodwizard@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1

upward compatibility
Hi - I generated a module on our system. (Aix 5.2) with xlX.aix50.rte 6.0.0.0 The following is the ldd output /usr/vacpp/lib/libC_r.a(shr3.o) /usr/vacpp/lib/libC_r.a(shr.o) /usr/lib/libc_r.a(shr.o) /usr/vacpp/lib/libC_r.a(ansi_32.o) /usr/vacpp/lib/libC_r.a(shr2.o) /usr/lib/libpthreads.a(shr_xpg5.o) /usr/mqm/lib/libmqic_r.a(mqic_r.o) /usr/vacpp/lib/libC.a(shr.o) /usr/vacpp/lib/libC.a(ansi_32.o) /usr/vacpp/lib/libC.a(shr2.o) /unix /usr/lib/libcrypt.a(shr.o) /usr/lib/threads/libc.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ COMPATIBILITY TEST ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
browser compatibility test bone marrow compatibility test tests relationship compatibility compatibility religious spirituality test glucometer test strip compatibility chart relationship compatibility tests blood transfusion compatibility test big five compatibility test lesbian love compatibility tests free teen compatibility test online compatibility test vista hardware compatibility test presidential compatibility test types of compatibility test professional tests of compatibility birthday compatibility test puppy compatibility test relationship advice compatibility test harry potter compatibility tests free sign compatibility test compatibility test for lesbians vista router compatibility test free canadian name compatibility test couples compatibility test free career compatibility test 20 web browser compatibility test love percentage astro compatibility test compatibility tests free love and compatibility tests online free couple compatibility test dog compatibility test dog finder tests compatibility marriage test free online compatibility tests personality tests compatibility compatibility test for relationships compatibility test online compatibility

subcaption and compatibility
Hi friends, Please check the pasted "minimal" latex file. its bit big, because I have included "all" packages I use. The problem is: 1) while compiling, it is giving error: Package caption Warning: \caption will not be redefined since it's already (caption) redefined by a document class or package which is (caption) unknown to the caption package. See the caption package documentation for explanation. ! Package caption Error: The subcaption' package does not work correctly (caption) in compatibility mode. See the caption package documentation for explanation. Type H <return> for immediate help. ... =20 =20 l.67 \begin{document} =20 ?=20 I can get rid of that error by putting=20 \captionsetup{compatibility=3Dfalse} But then, I am getting an warning: Package caption Warning: Forced redefinition of \caption since the (caption) unsupported(!) package option compatibility=3Dfalse' (caption) was given. See the caption

Unigraphics Compatibility
I am involved in a project where my deliverable is a set of Unigraphics 3-D files and 2-D drawing files. Does anybody know of some sort of converter, or how best to take the Solidworks files and convert them to a Unigraphics format complete with a drawing tree. I also need to convert 2-D files over to Unigraphics. I may have access to 1 Unigraphics seat, but that is questionable. To save yourselves time, I know that I can save the 3-D files as a Parasolid, but I need to maintain a drawing tree. YouGoFirst wrote: > I am involved in a project where my deliverable is a set of Uni

Compatibility #2
Hi In one PC server unix with Motherboard Intel PR440FX with Adaptec 7880 SCSI Controller, I wont to mount a new hard disk drive, but I find only U320 hard disk. I have in this server stlill mounted an Hadr Disk U160 68pin and it works well. Now, is the U320 68pin hars disk compatible with Adaptec 7880 scsi controller? Is there someone who can help me? Many thanks in advance Marco Dell'Oca I have solved my problem, I have installed a Matrox HD scsi U320 10000r UW IV 68 pin. I have clone my old Sco Unix Informix Disk ( with g4u ghost for unix http://www.feyrer.de/g4u/) and everythincs

Struct compatibility
Hi all, Let's say I have typedef struct { bool b1; bool b2; int n1; int n2; } data1_t; typedef struct { bool b1; bool b2; int n1; int n2; int n3; int n4; } data2_t; data1_t *p1; data2_t *p2 = new data2_t; p2->b1 = true; p2->b2= true; p2->n1 = p2->n2 = p2->n3 = 100; p1 = p2; due to compatibility issue in my application, I want to be able to access the data2_t through p1, like p1->b1, p1->n1, etc. I compile a test program that implemented the above scenario and it works, however...; > int n3; > int n4; > } data2_t; > > data1_t *p1; > data2_t *p2 = new data2_t; > > p2->b1 = true; p2->b2= true; p2->n1 = p2->n2 = p2->n3 = 100; > p1 = p2; I suppose you wanted to write: p1 = reinterpret_cast<data1_t*>(p2); Which gives unspecified results anyway. > due to compatibility issue in my application, I want to be able to > access the data2_t through p1, like p1->b1, p1->n1, etc. There is a problem. Standard explicitly allows such a thing when two POD-structs sharing the initial sequence

binary compatibility
under /usr/vac/lib >> >>Your chances to produce compatible binaries are much better, but it is >>unsupported. Trial and error, but works most times. > > > Huh ? Is this a novel feature ? > In the past 15 years or so, code compiled on 4.x didn't work on 3.x, > not even 4.x did work on 4.y ( for x > y ). Version 3 and 4 were very different Version 4 and 5 are very different Subversions changes (between 4.3.2 and 4.3.3 or 5.2 and 5.3) have a chance of compatibility. sol Michael Kraemer wrote: > In article <438b5757$0$27881... ). Version 3 and 4 were very different Version 4 and 5 are very different Subversion changes (between 4.3.2 and 4.3.3 or 5.2 and 5.3) have a chance of compatibility if your code wasn't doing something that dependant on something in the later libraries, especially if you were usng the same compiler version on both systems. sol sol gongola schrieb: >> Huh ? Is this a novel feature ? >> In the past 15 years or so, code compiled on 4.x didn't work on 3.x, >> not even 4.x did work on 4.y ( for x > y ). > No it's not a feature, it's a dirty hack. >

LCD compatibility...
Hi Group, A friend lightly crushed her Acer Aspire 1202XC, which resulted in the screen breaking. The screen is an Idtech ITXG77H, though I think that there were other screens fitted as well. Is there a resource anywhere that gives equivalents? I have seen an Idtech ITXG76H for sale at an attractive price, and it's only one digit out :-) To buy a new screen would cost more than the laptop is worth... Cheers, -- Regards, Will. Try www.screentekinc.com "Will" <not.me@no.way> wrote in message news:MPG.1ea5ed001702c968989685@news.individual.net... > Hi

DirectX Compatibility
I have an old HP4535 PC which came with the following Windows 98SE Intel i810 chipset (w integrated video) Celeron 400 Maxtor 10GB EIDE HD 320 MB PC100 SDRAM 8x CD-ROM floppy drive I also added the following as aftermarket items ... Diamond Monster MX300 Soundcard (vortex 2 chip) USR 56K modem (controller based) I have checked with both Intel and HP and they both give the green light for updating DirectX from its current version (6) to version 9. However, since I installed both the sound card and the modem as aftermarket items could either cause a conflict with DX9? What components doe

Hardware Compatibility.
Hello, I have just started looking over Labview 7.0 and I am trying to find out what types of hardware connections are compatible with this software. I will probably be using an Omega Data acquisition board as the hub for the inputs of my system. If anyone can help I'd appreciate your input. Thanx. Just about any type of hardware that you can think of can be compatible with LabVIEW. What you have to consider is how much effort you want to put into it. For example, LabVIEW includes drivers for all DAQ boards from NI. Also included with LabVIEW are functions on palettes for these boa

Mac Safari compatibility questions
Hi, I have a big script that doesn't work in Safari 1.3, but does work in FF, and IE. I've given up going to my local Uni. to use their Macs (they've prevented the Debug menu from appearing after running that widely known hack), and so I want to buy my first Mac to do this properly. Being a PC person I am generally ignorant of Mac OS issues; a) it looks like Safari 2 only works with OSX v10.4, is this true? b) it also appears that Safari 1.3 ONLY works with OSX 10.3 - will it work on 10.4, and if it will, is it obtainable (ie. public download?). c) if answer to b) is 'no&

linux driver compatibility
I just bought a new computer, and I've never had to install new drivers with my old ones, so I'm very new at this. If I install linux drivers for XFree86 for my VIA KN400 video card, will I need to run the linux emulation layer for them to function? If so, is it any different from running the layer for an application? Is there a specific command for installing new drivers? Donna Troy <l4dyA.D.A@gmail.com> wrote: > I just bought a new computer, and I've never had to install new drivers > with my old ones, so I'm very new at this. If I install linux drivers > for XFree86 for my VIA KN400 video card, will I need to run the linux > emulation layer for them to function? If so, is it any different from > running the layer for an application? Is there a specific command for > installing new drivers? In NetBSD land, drivers are usually in the kernel. If you plug your shiny new card in and NetBSD doesn't detected it on boot -- even in some downgraded "compatibility mode" -- you are generally screwed. If you want to use L***x plug-in drivers then you want that other newsgroup. ;-) "Donna Troy" <l4dyA.D.A@gmail.com>

help with controller compatibility ..
I went out half cocked and bought a adaptec 2940uw scsi controller the plan being to buy a 2nd hand 10k or 15k scsi drive from ebay and put in my system to improve performance slightly .Thats all well and good but most of the scsi i see out there for sale are u160 the card i bought can handle SCSI-1, SCSI-2, SCSI-3, Wide UltraSCSI . 68 pin . does that mean that a u160 drive will not work with this controller ? if that is the case can someone give me the name or model of a hdd that will so i can get my bearings on what im looking for , Im really confused about what is the right hdd for the co

Pagmaker 6.5/7.0 compatibility
Hi I'm totally new to Pagemaker and I've been given a 6.5 template file (*.p65) to work with. I've only got version 7.0 where template files seem to be *.pmt. I can load the template though (apart from being prompted for a *.eps file - what's that?) What I want to know is - can I use Pagemaker 7.0 to work with this Pagemaker 6.5 template and deliver the finished product in Pagemaker 6.5 format? Thanks! Mark On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 17:17:10 +0100, Mark Lewin <mark.p.lewin@virgin.net> wrote: >Hi > >I'm totally new to Pagemaker and I've been given

MPS 1270A compatibility
Are the escape sequences of the MPS 1270A printer somehow compatible with the other printers? Is it possible to emulate the MPS1270A with another printer?

Browser Compatibility Help
Just wondering if anybody is aware of the css bug I'm experiencing. http://www.brogan.ca/invoices/invoice.html The page looks correct in firefox and mostly in opera (opera doesn't seem to respect table td width requests), internet explorer 5.5 is a no go, but I don't care about that... The main problem is internet explorer 8, and anything that uses webkit. Internet Explorer only looks right when the doctype is html 4.01 strict, although the page only validates for transitional. I've left the doctype as strict as neither webkit, opera, firefox, or any other brows