Does anyone know how to kill the nagger for updating to Catalina? I have a lot of money invested in 32-bit software, much of which is unlikely to be updated, and I have no intention of using Catalina. I also have been progressively more and more disappointed with the direction the macOS has been moving in. This Mac user since 1985 is seriously considering going to Linux or even a PC (shudder).
After trying the public betas of Catalina, I came to the conclusion that they may be the worst of all the betas Apple has released. When Catalina was released, I installed it on an external SSD. I managed to find my files, but it seems that I can no longer put them at root level as I have done since the old days. The days of the user being able to configure her or his Mac as they wished seem to be disappearing, if they're not already gone.I'm hearing grumbling on a listserve by nontechnical authors who have spent hours on the phone with Apple support trying to get their files back and their machines functioning after installing Catalina. I had posted a warning about the perils of installing Catalina, but Apple has been pushing upgrades hard. I don't know how widespread these problems are, but they seem to hit some people hard.
Brad, you seem to have left out the step where you sacrifice a virgin marsupial at midnight while facing Cupertino...I found this solution elsewhere that worked for me: 1) Quit Mail; 2) Shift-Launch Mail and Quit; 3) Repeat 2; 4) Reboot; 5) Launch Mail normally, and Search function was restored.
Affinity Publisher is certainly worth considering. It's inexpensive, and there's even a free trial available.Is there any Catalina replacement for InDesign?
If you find one, let us know!Is there a reasonable way back to Mojave?
CultOfMac said:Catalina update bricks some unlucky Macs
A seemingly small number of Mac users are reporting that their machines have been bricked after upgrading to macOS Catalina.
It is believed a potentially unsuccessful EFI firmware update is responsible for the issue. All affected users see nothing but a folder icon when attempting to boot up their Mac.
Catalina, like all of Apple’s most recent updates, has its fair share of teething problems. Many apps won’t work correctly. Some features are broken. Certain eGPUs no longer do anything.
Most of the problems are small but frustrating, and should be fixed relatively easily with future updates. But there’s one that has left a small number of Catalina users with no Mac at all.
Maybe some software developers can comment here, but moving to a 64-bit-only codebase is not trivial, nor is dealing with the new restrictions created by a read-only operating system. Both are good things in the long run but could require substantial work to change code (or start over from scratch in some instances), test, and regress any issues. The new OS moves from kexts in a privileged part of the OS to Endpoint Security/SystemExtensions; that means three new frameworks to learn (DriverKit, EndpointSecurity, and NetworkExtension), and then packaging the driver in the app bundle - new and different, unfamiliar and probably daunting to most driver developers, at least at first.... What I can't understand is this: surely, as vendors and developers themselves, that the music software companies should be testing the betas of upcoming OS upgrades to ensure that they work with their products, and have updates available when the OS comes out or not too long after?
This is doubly troubling as the upcoming Mac Pro update is supposed to only be able to run Catalina on launch - and I can't imagine those users will be wanting to boot into Windows to run their music and DAW tools.
Surely 64-bit code is an improvement? Are all these developers running 32-bit in Windows too? Are they maintaining completely separate codebases? 32-bit is arguably obsolete. It's not like they didn't see this coming for years. Many of my apps have been 64-bit for years. Considering what many music software vendors charge, I think they could be doing better than "we'll let you know after Catalina ships."...I suspect most developers of music software would prefer to add or improve features for their customers...
Probably less painful than switching to Windows, if your setup will allow it: try installing a pre-Catalina macOS on a second drive to run your 32-bit apps from.I'd like to do the update to Catalina, however, since I use a fair bit of music software, I can't. Just about every music software vendor I deal with (Steinberg, Native Instruments, IK, PlugIn Boutique, Arturia ) have sent me warnings that their products are currently not capable of running under the new Mac operating system and that I should be patient. In fact, one of the vendors I deal with, Melda, recently put up a page on their website suggesting that maybe it's time macOS users started switching over to Windows 10.
From what developer blogs I've read, a major issue is that macOS has become a moving target with inadequate documentation. Changing to 64-bit and the ever-increasing security are additional major issues, compounded by the lack of good documentation.... What I can't understand is this: surely, as vendors and developers themselves, that the music software companies should be testing the betas of upcoming OS upgrades to ensure that they work with their products, and have updates available when the OS comes out or not too long after?
Skylum said:MacOS 10.15 Catalina Compatibility
Apple has recently released macOS Catalina (10.15), a new desktop software operating system. For now, our apps are not fully compatible with Catalina, but we will fix all the compatibility issues in the upcoming updates.
Which Skylum apps are going to be compatible with macOS Catalina? Luminar 4, Luminar 3, Luminar Flex and Aurora HDR 2019. We suggest you avoid upgrading to Catalina until the compatibility issues are fixed if they will impact your work.
Well, yes, you can. Rename it. Once it's been created with whatever clever name Apple decides to give it, don't try double clicking it in the sidebar (seems that's the way it used to work); single click on the name, wait for the list to display in the main window and then click the name there. What a waste of time, discovering that.More iTunes/Music annoyances: I cannot name a new smart playlist or change the clever name Apple has decided to bestow on it. ...
It is hard to tell how they can be this wrong. The first clue is the emphasis on "legacy" DLP (Data Loss Prevention) products. Code42 doesn't define this, even on their Next-Gen DLP product page. From the context, I think they use "legacy DLP" for "DLP products that use kernel extensions" (distinguished from their own product, which apparently does not).Code42 said:macOS Catalina Creates Kernel Crisis for Legacy DLP
- macOS Catalina entirely disallows kernel extensions
- Legacy DLP products will cease to work
- With the release of Catalina, Apple shifts the entire macOS to read-only, regardless of permissions
- Kernel extensions are completely disabled
How very "New Apple". I cannot understand consumers' increasing acceptance of subscription models for everything. Uber instead of owning a car, renting a PodShare instead of buying a home, subscription instead of permanent licenses for your software, streaming instead of owning a music and movie collection. Owning nothing, isn't that how serfs used to live?Another tip I discovered today. The new Music and TV apps (and presumably also Podcasts and the other devolved iTunes apps) search the Store by default. To search your library for a particular item or groups of items, use Show Filter Field in the View menu.
What I'm wondering is whether 64-bit Windows apps will already work.CodeWeavers said:So We Don't Have a Solution for Catalina... Yet
Catalina won't run 32-bit executables. It doesn't support 32-bit processes. It doesn't provide 32-bit system frameworks and libraries. In short, it won't run the 32-bit components that CrossOver has traditionally used to run 32-bit Windows applications.
So, we needed to find another way. We need to run 32-bit code within a 64-bit process which uses 64-bit system libraries to access OS functionality.
The CPUs in Macs still support the 32-bit-compatibility mode. Catalina does still provide a way for us to run certain specific code in this 32-bit mode in an otherwise 64-bit process.
Catalina kernels extensions are a major mess. See, for example:Second is why they think Catalina doesn't allow kernel extensions?
Objective Development said:How kernel prelinking works on macOS Catalina (or not)
In this article we’d like to outline some technical details about how the installation of a kernel extension works on macOS Catalina, about potential pitfalls in this process, what can go wrong, and what currently unfortunately does go wrong.
Eclectic Light Co. said:Why Catalina may have problems with extensions
... At WWDC 2019 back in June, Apple announced that it wants to move away altogether from third-party kernel extensions, and announced their replacement in the form of System Extensions, which should do away with at least some of these problems. However, so far Apple doesn’t appear to have made much progress in encouraging developers away from kernel extensions. Some developers who have applied for new security certificates with which to sign them haven’t heard anything back from Apple since June, so the delay isn’t with third-party developers.
Maybe it will be a while before we see third-party apps replacing KEXTs with SEXTs after all.
It depends entirely on how Epson supports the scanner. Some models (like my Perfection 4870) don't appear to have any device drivers. Every application (EpsonScan, SilverFast, VueScan) has its own built-in drivers that directly access the scanner via USB. Apple's Image Capture uses device drivers that must be supplied by Epson, but that's the exception here.I believe Epson does provide 64-bit drivers for Image Capture for my V750. (I can’t check from my iPhone.) Wouldn’t they also do so for the V500?
It's worth nothing that Microsoft appears to have no intent of dropping 32-bit support. Any Windows 10 system you find will almost certainly have a mix of both 32- and 64-bit apps. You can review them pretty easily because they are installed in different locations (C:\Program Files vs. C:\Program Files (x86)).Surely 64-bit code is an improvement? Are all these developers running 32-bit in Windows too? Are they maintaining completely separate codebases?
If you can switch the CPU into 32-bit mode (which appears to be possible), the apps can be run. When your environment sees requests to load DLLs or make system calls, it needs to trap them and redirect them into code that you provide (reverse-engineering all of the system libraries).I've been thinking that what we need is a WINE project that reverse-engineers and replaces the OS X Carbon APIs. Previously, I dismissed the idea, because how would you run 32-bit code if Catalina doesn't allow it? But CodeWeavers is showing there is a way to do that.
Can any of you Catalina users check this?Reddit said:catalina 10.15 problem?
updated to catalina 10.15 today and now unable to airdrop anything over 30 seconds from my mac to my iphone (which is also up to date). this is only a problem as of the update as yesterday i airdropped over 30 mins of go pro footage to my iphone from my mac but now unable to do anything. i’ve reset the mac twice - is there a fix to this? also before anyone asks i have 70gigs of storage on my iphone free so a 3 minute video should definitely not be a problem.
I have an Epson V330, and when I look that up on VueScan’s extensive list of scanners supported, the support page saysIt appears that the V500 is different. In addition to the EpsonScan app, Epson provided actual device drivers, and nothing can access the scanner without those drivers. Epson would need to release 64-bit versions of them, which they don't seem interested in doing for this model.
which appears to mean that for Catalina it just doesn't work until suitable 64-bit drivers are developed.You need to install the Epson driver to use this scanner on Windows x86 and Mac OS X. On Mac OS X, this is normally already installed by Software Update, so VueScan should just work.
I've been using InDesign CS3 (way old) on a Snow Leopard VM. Her version of InDesign will work on a Mojave VM (or whatever OS she was using before the upgrade). I also recently switched most of my work to Affinity Publisher (referenced in the Adobe topic on this site). It doesn't open InDesign files directly but does edit PDFs very well. Workflow isn't exactly like InDesign, but close enough that my productivity hasn't suffered. I'm not a power user (CS3 was good enough for me, after all), but I strongly recommend giving Affinity a shot. Good price, no software extortion... er... rental.I should have added: does anyone have any suggestions for her? Is there any Catalina replacement for InDesign? Is there a reasonable way back to Mojave?
You now have to double-click on the name in the right side when the Smart Playlist is selected - it seems you can't rename it in the list of playlists on the left side any longer. (I created a new one just to test this - took a few tries to find where you could rename it now.)More iTunes/Music annoyances: I cannot name a new smart playlist or change the clever name Apple has decided to bestow on it. Seems to be based on the selection criteria as parsed by Apple's (almost intelligent) AI (absolute ignorance). Existing smart playlists appear to continue to function. Play counts/dates are updated. Changes applied.
No cloud music here at all; it's all on my Mac and, by extension, my iDevices. No subscription to Apple Music. Or Match. If that matters.
So I'm wondering if this is just me? And, thank god this isn't a production machine. And this isn't production software.
That page explains the problem in the last section:In fact, one of the vendors I deal with, Melda, recently put up a page on their website suggesting that maybe it's time macOS users started switching over to Windows 10.
Melda said:Switching from OSX to Windows
So what is the problem with Apple anyway?
Imagine you are a builder (the software developer of a DAW/plugin...) and you started creating a big factory some time ago. You have built the foundations, walls, started putting some equipment for various companies (your customers, the users) in it. And obviously the factory needs a roof, right? You started building your factory with a very specific roof manufacturer (Apple) in mind, which uses some odd roof attachment system, not a perfect one, but it does the trick. But suddenly this manufacturer comes in and says "sorry, we have a new attachment system, for which you need to make your factory one meter shorter and change the attachment bolts". Of course you, being the builder, know this is a total nonsense and all they need to do is a little gadget (converter) from the old roof attachment system to the new one. But they just won't do that, and even worse, they won't let you do that either. They just won't install the roof until you remake the entire factory. So you as a builder are in trouble. Your customers asked for this roof, which isn't special in a way, it just has a specific colour that other roof manufacturers don't make (and there are many of them, cheaper and often better ones). But to make it all work, you have to spend a huge amount of time rebuilding your factory for no good reason and after that some equipment (ProTools 10) now won't even fit in, because the factory will be too small. That's a situation without a reasonable solution and it happened several times before, but it seems to be getting worse than ever.
So the real question is, do you want the developers of your DAW and plugins to spend their days trying to fix the problems arising from system upgrades, or to improve their own software products, making them more functional, more powerful, faster, stable and easier to use? If it's the latter one, then the only solution seems to switch to Windows. The only one, who can make a difference is you, the customer.
I’m using it on one of my two work computers (2018 Mac Mini i7) to use it in a production setup and test it before our regular users do (they have been told to hold off on updates until around x.x.3 as normal - for most of them I just tell them when it's safe).I have to ask, is anyone up here really using Catalina? All through the public beta, I had Catalina running on two volumes, a "clean" volume, and a volume that is a clone of my "working" volume. There have been gross differences in the function between the two volumes with different things breaking between each.
On the "working" volume with the release of Catalina, the Dock will not display; although, checking Activity Monitor, it is running. "Killall Dock" will cause it to display. When I click on the Mail icon in the Dock, only the Activity window opens. A second click on the icon will open the main Mail window....
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.