Big Sur and PureBasic

Mac OSX specific forum
User avatar
deseven
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:48 pm
Location: Serbia
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by deseven »

fsw wrote:After reading a few reviews about M1 hardware/software I suspect that (with the help of Rosetta 2) PureBasic compiled x86 apps might work just fine.
it's not a solution anyway, Rosetta 2 will be dropped in several years.
User avatar
fsw
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1572
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 9:18 pm
Location: North by Northwest

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by fsw »

deseven wrote:
fsw wrote:After reading a few reviews about M1 hardware/software I suspect that (with the help of Rosetta 2) PureBasic compiled x86 apps might work just fine.
it's not a solution anyway, Rosetta 2 will be dropped in several years.
Are you sure about this?

If this is true then the only way for PureBasic to serve future Macs would be to add another backend.
Now it has ASM and JS... will LLVM be next?
Or if it's easier, clone the JS backend and modify it to export C or Go...

I am to provide the public with beneficial shocks.
Alfred Hitshock
User avatar
Danilo
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3037
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:26 am
Location: Planet Earth

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by Danilo »

@fsw: Do you mean SpiderBasic as „JS backend“?

Fred said he is already working on ARM target. Maybe that is the M1 support?
User avatar
fsw
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1572
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 9:18 pm
Location: North by Northwest

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by fsw »

Danilo wrote:@fsw: Do you mean SpiderBasic as „JS backend“?
Yes Danilo, this is what I meant.
In my simple mind SpiderBasic is another backend of the same core PureBasic uses.
Danilo wrote: Fred said he is already working on ARM target. Maybe that is the M1 support?
Thanks for the link, didn’t know that.
Wasn’t in this forum in several years, so I missed a lot probably.

Besides an ARM backend the TouchBar UI needs to be addressed as well.
As far as I remember PureBasic cannot handle macOS devices with TouchBar properly because of internal workings of the PureBasic UI core.
(Maybe changes were made in my absence, I don’t know)

Also the ODBC interface is broken after PureBasic versions 5.4x...

I am to provide the public with beneficial shocks.
Alfred Hitshock
User avatar
deseven
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:48 pm
Location: Serbia
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by deseven »

fsw wrote:Are you sure about this?
As sure as you can be when talking about Apple. First Rosetta was released in 2005 and deprecated in 2009, this time Apple says the whole transition will take "about two years", so probably with 2 years of support on top it will be the same 4 years in total.
User avatar
fsw
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1572
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 9:18 pm
Location: North by Northwest

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by fsw »

deseven wrote:
fsw wrote:Are you sure about this?
As sure as you can be when talking about Apple.
Good point.
deseven wrote: First Rosetta was released in 2005 and deprecated in 2009, this time Apple says the whole transition will take "about two years", so probably with 2 years of support on top it will be the same 4 years in total.
IMHO you are spot on with this as well.

Apple has a vision, and sometimes they follow this vision no matter how big the collateral damage.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this.

I am to provide the public with beneficial shocks.
Alfred Hitshock
jack
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 11:10 pm

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by jack »

@wilbert
I wonder if you could install macOS Big Sur on a VM using Parallels Desktop?
I successfully installed Catalina on a VM in my mid 2010 Mac pro
have not used the Mac much since I bought a x64 PC with Windows, but I think I will give it a try
User avatar
mk-soft
Always Here
Always Here
Posts: 5313
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 6:51 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by mk-soft »

Should go.
With me High Sierra runs as VM under Parallels
My Projects ThreadToGUI / OOP-BaseClass / EventDesigner V3
PB v3.30 / v5.75 - OS Mac Mini OSX 10.xx - VM Window Pro / Linux Ubuntu
Downloads on my Webspace / OneDrive
User avatar
Paul
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 1243
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 4:34 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by Paul »

fsw wrote:After reading a few reviews about M1 hardware/software I suspect that (with the help of Rosetta 2) PureBasic compiled x86 apps might work just fine.
Many report that Rosetta 2 is not an acceptable solution.
Large number of software packages won't install/not compatible or if you mange to get something working it could run up to 50% normal speed or be sluggish and unresponsive.
Image Image
User avatar
deseven
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:48 pm
Location: Serbia
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by deseven »

Paul wrote:Many report that Rosetta 2 is not an acceptable solution.
Large number of software packages won't install/not compatible or if you mange to get something working it could run up to 50% normal speed or be sluggish and unresponsive.
Any sources for that? I saw completely different reports.
wilbert
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 3870
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 5:21 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by wilbert »

jack wrote:@wilbert
I wonder if you could install macOS Big Sur on a VM using Parallels Desktop?
I successfully installed Catalina on a VM in my mid 2010 Mac pro
have not used the Mac much since I bought a x64 PC with Windows, but I think I will give it a try
My Parallels was very old so I tried it with the free version of VMware Fusion.
I got BigSur running. A bit slow but it works.
Last edited by wilbert on Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Windows (x64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
User avatar
Paul
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 1243
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 4:34 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by Paul »

deseven wrote:
Paul wrote:Many report that Rosetta 2 is not an acceptable solution.
Large number of software packages won't install/not compatible or if you mange to get something working it could run up to 50% normal speed or be sluggish and unresponsive.
Any sources for that? I saw completely different reports.
Just do a search for 'M1 honest review' and instead of getting a review sounding like Apple gave the exact same script to each 'fan boi' reviewer telling them to praise the new hardware, you see reviews like this...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickmoo ... d05135786a
https://mspoweruser.com/too-good-to-be- ... 1-laptops/
Image Image
User avatar
deseven
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:48 pm
Location: Serbia
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by deseven »

Paul wrote:Just do a search for 'M1 honest review' and instead of getting a review sounding like Apple gave the exact same script to each 'fan boi' reviewer telling them to praise the new hardware, you see reviews like this...
Um... You're talking about biased reviews while posting a link to a website called "mspoweruser" which mostly mirrors the Forbes article author's twitter? Interesting.
Well, there is a community list of app compatibility with Big Sur/M1 in case you want to see real data collected by real users.

UPD 26.11.20: here is another project that tries to keep track of the current state of things - https://isapplesiliconready.com/
Last edited by deseven on Thu Nov 26, 2020 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Paul
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 1243
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 4:34 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by Paul »

deseven wrote: Um... You're talking about biased reviews
Best of luck then :wink:
Image Image
User avatar
deseven
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:48 pm
Location: Serbia
Contact:

Re: Big Sur and PureBasic

Post by deseven »

I don't think you understood me correctly, but sure, let's not dive into that.
Post Reply