Catalina

[OtinG]

According to an article on MacRumors, upgrading to Catalina can cause data loss in Apple Mail.

... updating Mail's data store from Mojave to Catalina sometimes says that it has succeeded, when in fact on closer inspection it turns out that large numbers of messages are incomplete or missing entirely.

I’m not running Catalina, but I do know that the Mail app in iOS and iPadOS 13.1 are acting strange. More sloppiness by Apple I guess.

[odamizu]

Originally Posted by maddz

What version of ADE runs on Catalina? I expect I’ll get the upgrade notification when I get home tomorrow, and given the issues around K4Mac I may switch my ebook purchasing to Kobo for a while...

Sadly, the ADE situation is also problematic. ADE 2.0.1 is 32-bit and will not run on Catalina. ADE 4.x is 64-bit but capable of the hardened DRM that Alf can't handle. From what I hear, Alf does work with ADE 4.x provided Kobo doesn't turn on the "hardened DRM switch", but if/when they do, you're stuck.

I'm staying away from Catalina on my primary Mac, but if there comes a point when I end up upgrading, I will probably use a Windows VM to run ADE 2.0.1 and K4PC for Alf purposes. Either that or an external boot drive running High Sierra.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by odamizu

Sadly, the ADE situation is also problematic. ADE 2.0.1 is 32-bit and will not run on Catalina. ADE 4.x is 64-bit but capable of the hardened DRM that Alf can't handle. From what I hear, Alf does work with ADE 4.x provided Kobo doesn't turn on the "hardened DRM switch", but if/when they do, you're stuck.

I'm staying away from Catalina on my primary Mac, but if there comes a point when I end up upgrading, I will probably use a Windows VM to run ADE 2.0.1 and K4PC for Alf purposes. Either that or an external boot drive running High Sierra.

The video showing the Catalina patcher shows Catalina being installed to a USB stick.

[pwalker8]

OpenAudible no longer runs on my main iMac. The installer can't be run since it's unsigned. Oddly enough, it still runs on my laptop though I haven't tried to run the instillation app. It's not a big deal for me since I only use it to get the list of audible books that I have with the narrators. Once I have my Calibre audiobook database (I have a database for my ebooks and a different database for my audiobooks) updated with all the narrators, I won't really need it. Still something to be aware of. If you have unsigned apps, they likely won't work with Catalina.

[OtinG]

When it comes to unsigned apps on Catalina, is Apple blocking the installers only, or are they also blocking apps that had an unsigned installer but were previously installed and running pre-Catalina? I’ve got several apps that were unsigned but trustworthy, and they are 64-bit, so I want them to run. Not every developer, especially for freeware, is willing to pay the extra expenses to get their apps officially signed. LibreOffice for example can be side-loaded and installed for free, but if you want to get the officially signed version from the Apple App Store it costs $10 to cover the extra costs. Many of my unsigned apps don't appear in the App Store though. If Catalina blocks them from running, even though they run fine in Mojave, then that is another reason for me to not install Catalina.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by OtinG

When it comes to unsigned apps on Catalina, is Apple blocking the installers only, or are they also blocking apps that had an unsigned installer but were previously installed and running pre-Catalina? I’ve got several apps that were unsigned but trustworthy, and they are 64-bit, so I want them to run. Not every developer, especially for freeware, is willing to pay the extra expenses to get their apps officially signed. LibreOffice for example can be side-loaded and installed for free, but if you want to get the officially signed version from the Apple App Store it costs $10 to cover the extra costs. Many of my unsigned apps don't appear in the App Store though. If Catalina blocks them from running, even though they run fine in Mojave, then that is another reason for me to not install Catalina.

But then what do you do if you want to run programs that need Catalina?

[odamizu]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

... The installer can't be run since it's unsigned ... l something to be aware of. If you have unsigned apps, they likely won't work with Catalina.

That's disappointing. Macworld is reporting that unapproved software can be run using control-click > Open. Are they mistaken?

From Macworld:

... If it isn’t approved by Apple, the Gatekeeper feature of macOS won’t let it run—at least, not by default. Instead, it’ll display an alert that Apple can’t scan the app for malware and tell you to contact the developer for more information ... To launch an app that hasn’t been approved, control-click on it and choose Open. You’ll see a similar alert about malware and contacting the developer, but now there will also be an option to just go ahead an open the app. Once you’ve opened an app once using this method, it’ll never bother you about that app again.

https://www.macworld.com/article/344...-catalina.html

[lxpose]

Originally Posted by odamizu

That's disappointing. Macworld is reporting that unapproved software can be run using control-click > Open. Are they mistaken?

It looks as though they sre correct:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202491

"How to open an app that hasn’t been notarized or is from an unidentified developer

Running software that hasn’t been signed and notarized may expose your computer and personal information to malware that can harm your Mac or compromise your privacy. If you’re certain that an app you want to install is from a trustworthy source and hasn’t been tampered with, you can temporarily override your Mac security settings to open it.

In macOS Catalina and macOS Mojave, when an app fails to install because it hasn’t been notarized or is from an unidentified developer, it will appear in System Preferences > Security & Privacy, under the General tab. Click Open Anyway to confirm your intent to open or install the app.

The warning prompt reappears, and you can click Open.*

The app is now saved as an exception to your security settings, and you can open it in the future by double-clicking it, just as you can any authorized app.

*If you're prompted to open Finder: control-click the app in Finder, choose Open from the menu, and then click Open in the dialog that appears. Enter your admin name and password to open the app."

[odamizu]

Excellent! Thank you lxpose!

Originally Posted by lxpose

It looks as though they sre correct:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202491

How to open an app that hasn’t been notarized or is from an unidentified developer

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by odamizu

That's disappointing. Macworld is reporting that unapproved software can be run using control-click > Open. Are they mistaken?

From Macworld:

... If it isn’t approved by Apple, the Gatekeeper feature of macOS won’t let it run—at least, not by default. Instead, it’ll display an alert that Apple can’t scan the app for malware and tell you to contact the developer for more information ... To launch an app that hasn’t been approved, control-click on it and choose Open. You’ll see a similar alert about malware and contacting the developer, but now there will also be an option to just go ahead an open the app. Once you’ve opened an app once using this method, it’ll never bother you about that app again.

https://www.macworld.com/article/344...-catalina.html

Son of a gun, works like a champ. Thanks for the pointer, I was unaware of the work around.

[odamizu]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Son of a gun, works like a champ. Thanks for the pointer, I was unaware of the work around.

Yay!!

[OtinG]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But then what do you do if you want to run programs that need Catalina?

What apps NEED Catalina? I know of none off the top of my head. Catalina is necessary for new features, but I don't know of any specific apps that require it.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by OtinG

What apps NEED Catalina? I know of none off the top of my head. Catalina is necessary for new features, but I don't know of any specific apps that require it.

Maybe not yet, but it will happen.

[OtinG]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Maybe not yet, but it will happen.

I’m still able to run all my apps on my High Sierra mini, so I’m not concerned about Catalina apps being so different that they won’t run on Mojave. I realize I won’t be able to run the iPad apps that get ported to Catalina, but to be honest, I cannot think of any of my iPad apps that would be as good as a native Mac OS app on my Macs. Why pay for a ported iPadOS app that will have limited usability on a Mac compared to a native Mac app? I’ll just keep using native Mac apps on my Macs and iPadOS apps on my iPad.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by OtinG

I’m still able to run all my apps on my High Sierra mini, so I’m not concerned about Catalina apps being so different that they won’t run on Mojave. I realize I won’t be able to run the iPad apps that get ported to Catalina, but to be honest, I cannot think of any of my iPad apps that would be as good as a native Mac OS app on my Macs. Why pay for a ported iPadOS app that will have limited usability on a Mac compared to a native Mac app? I’ll just keep using native Mac apps on my Macs and iPadOS apps on my iPad.

I don't really know of any particular reason that one should have to upgrade at this time. Maybe in the future. Apple tends to have a high upgrade rate because it's free and relatively seamless. That reduces the support expenses for Apple. Definitely a different business model than Microsoft who charged for upgrades back when I was still using Windows. This also means that developers will start to use new features fairly quickly.

If I recall correctly, the last time we saw a MacOS release that broke a lot of programs, it was High Sierra, which used a new security model that caused many programs not to work correctly.