Support for Mac OS X 10.1 Officially Dropped

Support for Mac OS X 10.1.x has been dropped. Current CVS code (including the forthcoming Firefox 1.1) will not run correctly if at all on 10.1.x for any products. See bug 298430 for details. Don’t spam that bug with complaints please – its done. This is a great move as far as I’m concerned.

14 thoughts on “Support for Mac OS X 10.1 Officially Dropped

  1. So, will it still work? For example, Windows 95 is not officially supported, and it hasn’t been for quite a while. However, it still works, and the occasional bug fix is still taken to support it.

  2. Good move – there are few machines that run 10.1 but not 10.2. Anything that will make quartz/cocoa improvements easier is music to my ears.

  3. Please explain how support for less people is great. If it brings improvements, then it’s necessary, but not “great”.

  4. Red: Probably not. A big reason to drop support for 10.1 is that many missing APIs and bug workarounds are making some things awkward, inefficient, or nearly impossible; doing those things right will mean breaking 10.1 compatibility.

    paul: Read the justification in the bug he referenced. Why can’t a move that will noticably improve things going forward for 90% (and growing) of people be “great”? Would you rather have a product get better faster for a vast and growing majority, or be held back by catering to a small and shrinking minority?

  5. Paul,

    I haven’t keep that up-to-date with the going ons with current CVS code… however two points.

    1.) if your not going to update your os your not likly to keep your browser up-to-date… its not a lazy not knowing thing but you see it as a “stable” knowen platform.

    2.) with each revision of the OS 10.0.x -> 10.1.x -> 10.2.x -> 10.3.x -> 10.4.x many things change as a result your able to improve your code and produce a faster more efficient code… and you can, in some cases, elimilate bugs. I would also assume dropping 10.1 support would also help moving everyting from QuickDraw to Quartz.

    Dropping support for 10.1 is a great move as it helps to keep your moving forward and not tied down to the past… just as it was great for m.o to drop 8.x & 9.x support.

  6. Is there anybody out there even using 10.1? I didn’t think there was much that still ran on that old thing.

  7. Mozilla products on the trunk from now on WILL NOT RUN on 10.1. We have explicity removed the hacks and workarounds that allowed it to run.

  8. Good riddance! There was much rejoicing the day we removed 10.2 support from the Adium trunk code; I can’t imagine how bad supporting 10.1-10.4 must have been.

  9. Anyway given the list of problem with 10.1 and the lack of ressources to test on it, it’s not even proven the previous releases actually worked correctly on it.

    On all Mac OS X bug’s report, I’ve never seen complains about how it works in 10.1, some peoples mention using 10.2 but nobody 10.1. Used version of 10.2 seems to available for really cheap.

  10. Won’t run under 10.2.8 either… not since the last 4 releases (guesstimate). The first 2 or so releases did run, but not since then.

  11. paulc : it still runs on Mac OS X 10.2.8 (Jaguar). I do all my testing on that OS (can’t/won’t install a newer version).

  12. As a developer, I think the decision to eliminate 10.1 was justifiable though not desirable. I try to support 10.1 if my app was around back then and I’m not bumping a major version number.

    I really don’t think Firefox should have ever released a 10.1 product but since they did I’m disappointed they’re dropping support for it. Since Camino hasn’t reached 1.0 yet, I think it’s perfectly acceptable to drop 10.1 like a hot potato.

    I know Firefox is a cross-platform browser and version numbering can be awkward since it really only describes the firefox platform changes rather than OS specific ones (e.g. a major Windows bug due to a botched installer may have no changes on the Mac client other than a version number bump).

    Since Camino is Mac specific, it probably fits in better with people’s expectations about version numbering being related to the version of their OS. Heck, if Camino wanted to take advantage of some cool Tiger-Only API’s I wouldn’t complain a bit if they dropped Jaguar and Panther support for some extremely cutting edge functionality available only in Tiger. That’s unlikely but if it ever happened a major Camino overhaul would get a major version number bump and thus still meet the expectations of it’s users.

    Unfortunately, I think Firefox set expectations that it wanted to be a 10.1 compatible browser and I’m disappointed (though not suprised) that it’s retroactively dropping this support.

  13. Excellent! Now it would be cool if performance on 10.2 was no longer considered an issue when there is a way of doing something in a more correct way, but the correct way is believed to be fast only on 10.3 and 10.4.

  14. To the people who don’t understand why someone would still be using 10.1.5: I’m one of those people and the reason is that I think of Moz as my platform and the underlying operating system is kind of insignificant. It costs money to buy Panther or Tiger and so far, I haven’t really needed it. Now that Moz requires these, I will be purchasing the latest OS X. Another advantage of upgrading OS X is that I’ll be able to use the latest Terminal, which includes splitable screens. Moz and Terminal are pretty much the only *local* apps I run. My guess is that in the future most people will live in their browser and the underlying OS will become even less significant.

    Long live Moz! Long live FLOSS!

Comments are closed.