Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #17352 > unrolled thread

Mavericks compatibility

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps

Contents

  Mavericks compatibility nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2013-09-04 06:49 -0600
    Re: Mavericks compatibility Salvatore <sal@yojimbo.hack.invalid> - 2013-09-04 14:26 +0000
    Re: Mavericks compatibility billy@MIX.COM - 2013-09-04 15:49 +0000
    Re: Mavericks compatibility Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-09-04 21:40 +0000
      Re: Mavericks compatibility nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-05 07:08 -0400
        Re: Mavericks compatibility PhillipJones <pjonescet@comcast.net> - 2013-09-05 11:17 -0400
          Re: Mavericks compatibility nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-05 11:25 -0400
            Re: Mavericks compatibility Phillip Jones <pjonescet@comcast.net> - 2013-09-05 11:47 -0400
        Re: Mavericks compatibility JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-09-05 14:34 -0400
          Re: Mavericks compatibility Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-09-06 15:00 +0000
            Re: Mavericks compatibility Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-09-06 08:34 -0700
            Re: Mavericks compatibility nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-06 17:29 -0400
        Re: Mavericks compatibility nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2013-09-05 12:37 -0600
          Re: Mavericks compatibility Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-09-05 15:15 -0700
          Re: Mavericks compatibility dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2013-09-06 12:13 +1200
            Re: Mavericks compatibility nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-05 21:20 -0400
              Re: Mavericks compatibility dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2013-09-08 16:33 +1200
            Re: Mavericks compatibility nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2013-09-06 01:02 -0600
    Re: Mavericks compatibility Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-09-07 10:00 -0400
      Re: Mavericks compatibility Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-09-07 10:10 -0400
    Re: Mavericks compatibility andremoore74@gmail.com - 2013-10-08 19:31 -0700
      Re: Mavericks compatibility Gerry <xyz@abc.com> - 2013-10-08 19:45 -0700
      Re: Mavericks compatibility android <here@there.was> - 2013-10-09 11:10 +0200
        Re: Mavericks compatibility Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> - 2013-10-10 11:58 +0100
          Re: Mavericks compatibility android <here@there.was> - 2013-10-11 06:40 +0200
    Re: Mavericks compatibility nbbooks@gmail.com - 2013-11-27 07:38 -0800
      Re: Mavericks compatibility nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2013-11-27 12:25 -0700
        Re: Mavericks compatibility Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2013-11-27 15:41 -0800
          Re: Mavericks compatibility gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2013-11-28 07:49 -0800
            Re: Mavericks compatibility Joe Di Domenico <joedid@invalid.com> - 2013-11-28 11:49 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#17352 — Mavericks compatibility

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? 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#17354

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++

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17355

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17356

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17359

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17360

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17361

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17362

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17364

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17374

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
>> 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.

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17375

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17376

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17365

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. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17367

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17368

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17369

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17381

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17372

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. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17377

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17378

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.apps

csiph-web