https://eclecticlight.co/2023/09/16/how-the-mac-didnt-bring-programming-to-the-people/ Skip to content [eclecticlight] The Eclectic Light Company Macs, painting, and more Main navigation Menu * Downloads * M1 & M2 Macs * Mac Problems * Mac articles * Art * Macs * Painting hoakley September 16, 2023 Macs, Technology How the Mac didn't bring programming to the people Macs have brought a great deal to us over the years: desktop publishing, design, image editing and processing, multimedia, and more. One of the few fields where they have failed is programming, despite many attempts. Here I look back at some of those opportunities we missed. HyperTalk (1987) First released in 1987, Apple's hypertext authoring environment HyperCard contained its own scripting language, HyperTalk. For many of those who built brilliant HyperCard stacks, this new scripting language was the first programming language they had used. Sadly, although seriously cool in its day, HyperTalk was both limited and limiting, as most came to discover. By 2000, HyperCard and HyperTalk were all but dead. AppleScript (1993) In some respects a successor to HyperTalk, AppleScript was released in October 1993, with System 7 Pro version 7.1.1, making it almost thirty years old. Despite all the odds, and several determined attempts to strangle it, it's still supported in macOS Sonoma. The concept behind AppleScript is simple: scripts that compile to a series of instructions for dispatch by macOS to their destination application, which in turn is controlled by those commands to perform a co-ordinated sequence of functions. At their simplest, these can open a document and print it, for instance. At their most complex, they can automate intricate and repetitive tasks that are messy in a GUI. As a minimum, every application supports a small core of commands to play clean with the Finder and macOS. Those, and the suites of additional commands that bring joy to the scripter, are documented in standard formats within each application's dictionary, which can be browsed by Script Editor and other tools. Rather than having to locate additional documentation sets specific to each application, all a scripter should need to do is open the dictionary. Complexity comes because AppleScript is in fact an object-oriented language as sophisticated as Objective-C, as used by pro Mac developers; don't be deceived by its apparently relaxed and informal style, with examples such as tell application "System Events" set mailIsRunning to application process "Mail" exists end tell if mailIsRunning then -- do one thing else -- do another thing end if You might use that code to set up a script that interacts with the Mail app. It first asks macOS whether it knows that Mail is running, and depending on the answer it executes the code that you insert where the comments (prefaced by '--' characters) are placed. Unlike the majority of programming languages, punctuation marks are used sparsely in AppleScript, making it considerably easier to write code that works, rather than tripping over a missing semicolon. When ready to test your script, it compiles into intermediate code, and the editor automatically checks, formats and colours your source code, reporting any errors that it finds. When run, the intermediate code works through macOS to fire off AppleEvents (AEvents) to trigger the target applications to perform the actions. Although it was integrated into Apple's Xcode as AppleScript Studio, in recent years it has been left to languish, with occasional rumours of its demise. Prograph (1989) Innovative languages for Macs haven't been Apple's preserve. In 1989, the visual programming language Prograph was launched on the Mac. Sometimes described as a dataflow language, and thoroughly object-oriented, it won awards, was ported to Windows in the late 1990s, but was last seen running as Marten in Yosemite. marten1 In this example method, data flows from the top to the bottom. Normally terminals on the top 'shelf' of the method diagram represent the inputs to that method. Data then flows from the top shelf through the intermediate processes, until it reaches the bottom. If there are outputs from the method, they are gathered by connections made to terminals on the bottom 'shelf' in the method. Order of execution is not prescribed, and can take place whenever data is available; this allows for inherent concurrency, and the potential to exploit multiprocessor systems without the need for language primitives. Automator (2005) Even 'natural' programming languages like AppleScript have to be learned, a task that many find too verbal and mechanical. Recognising this, Apple introduced Automator in OS X 10.4 in 2005 to help produce custom workflows and apps using more intuitive visual tools. Although often assumed to be a development of AppleScript, apart from its ability to run AppleScript objects, Automator is actually very different. Instead of relying on AppleEvents and dictionaries, Automator's modular actions are separate code objects installed in the Automator folder in a Library folder. macOS comes with a huge free library of actions that can accomplish tasks you might pay good money for, so familiarity can save you cost. Automator can also run AppleScript and shell scripts, to augment its capabilities.Automator can also run AppleScript and shell scripts, to augment its capabilities. Automator is highly extensible, as its actions can include both AppleScript code and Terminal shell scripts. Thus if you cannot find a standard action to do what you want, if it can be expressed in a suitable script, you can build that into your workflow. Nevertheless, in 2021 Apple announced that Automator was to be succeeded by Shortcuts. Swift Playgrounds (2014-16) From the early days of the Mac, Apple has invested in programming languages designed to make best use of its APIs. In Classic times, that was Object Pascal, and its open-source class library MacApp. In 2014, Apple released a new language destined to be its preferred choice across all its platforms, Swift. From those early days, Swift has had an interactive mode, based on the 'read-eval-print loop' (REPL) popularised by Lisp. This versatility has been developed in Swift Playgrounds, both within Xcode and as a standalone app targeted at children (and adults) learning to code for the first time. swiftscript41 As an introduction to Swift in education, this has been impressive, but it hasn't proved a gateway for those who didn't really want to learn how to use Xcode in the first place. Shortcuts (2014-21) Shortcuts started out in the winter of 2014-15 as Workflow by DeskConnect. Apple bought it in 2017, and it became Shortcuts the following year, when it was integrated into Siri in iOS 12. Its arrival in macOS 12 was announced at WWDC in 2021, as Automator's ultimate successor. shortcuts1 While Shortcuts on macOS can run AppleScript and shell scripts, the mechanisms involved in Shortcuts' actions are completely different from AppleScript and Automator. For an app to support all three well requires it to present four different interfaces: one for the user in the GUI, AppleEvents, Automator actions, and now Shortcuts actions. [shortcut1] While Shortcuts has attracted quite a following, its impact has so far been limited. Like all its predecessors, it hasn't yet brought programming to the people. Credits HyperTalk: Dan Winkler AppleScript: William R Cook and many others Prograph: Tomasz Pietrzykowski, Jim Laskey and others Automator: unknown Apple engineers Swift Playgrounds: Chris Lattner, Doug Gregor, John McCall, Ted Kremenek, Joe Groff and others Shortcuts: Ari Weinstein, Conrad Kramer and Nick Frey Share this: * Twitter * Facebook * Reddit * Pinterest * Email * Print * Like this: Like Loading... Related Posted in Macs, Technology and tagged AppleScript, Automator, HyperTalk, Marten, playground, programming, Prograph, shortcuts, Swift, visual programming. Bookmark the permalink. 27Comments Add yours 1. 1 [05105a4801a1] Andrew Reilly on September 16, 2023 at 7:33 am Reply Wasn't the point of the Mac, it's reason for existing, to bring computing to the people without requiring them to be programmers? I've used (and programmed) Macs since the Plus (in Programmers Workbench Object Pascal, which was lovely) and have never found the need to introduce myself to AppleScript. When you're doing GUI tasks it all works beautifully, IMO. Macs are (now) excellent _tools_ for professional programmers though. In my work environment, since IT relented from their Windows-only stance many years ago, I'd say that half of the developers now use Macs as their primary environment. I've never warmed to Xcode, and I know few who have, but VS Code is popular, as are the JetBrains IDEs, Matlab is well supported, for those of that persuasion. Or the old Unix die-hard approach that I favour myself: couple of terminal windows and a good editor like vim/ nvim/helix. LikeLiked by 1 person + 2 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 16, 2023 at 9:28 am Reply Thank you. I'm not sure programming ever came into it, although I was admittedly a relative latecomer, as I didn't come to the Mac until 1989. But prior to that, I was developing for PCs, and the Commodore Amiga. At that time, neither of those required users to be programmers, so I'm not sure there was contested ground. Where the Mac was initially targeted, though, was at those whose tasks were primarily visual rather than textual: graphic designers, and particularly at the new desktop publishing market. I think that was the first novel market that Apple aimed the Mac at, as an enabler that allowed a whole industry to set up with Macs and laser printers, and print what previously had been low-tech, slow and costly. It was only really with the advent of HyperCard that users wanted to write code, when they saw what could be achieved in their stacks. None of the modern tools that you mention go anywhere near 'programming for the rest of us' in the way that the languages above have attempted (and ultimately failed). There are many people who cut their teeth with simple automation using AppleScript, then went on to craft larger programs, or switch to other 'production' languages. But I don't think that's likely to happen with Shortcuts, for instance. Howard. LikeLike o 3 [05105a4801a1] Andrew Reilly on September 16, 2023 at 8:40 pm Reply At first, the PC followed its immediate predecessors, the Apple II series, the TRS-80 series, the C64 and by booting into a BASIC REPL (although I never heard it called that at the time). DOS followed pretty quickly though, so that immediate need to know a programming language was fairly brief. That previous generation, including the ZX80, BBC and Atom are arguably what got a whole generation programming, and you're right that it probably won't happen again. Low-level, clean-sheet programming isn't even being taught widely in Universities any more. That's now a very specialized skillset. These days it's all about lashing things together with python scripts. LikeLiked by 1 person # 4 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 16, 2023 at 9:17 pm Thank you - yes, it was the BBC/ZX80/Atom period that drew many into programming. Of course that was one of the purposes of the BBC too. I agree with the python problem too, even in fields such as ML and AI. Howard. LikeLike o 5 [20f514763553] Ricardo Banffy on September 17, 2023 at 5:42 pm Reply Initially, IIRC, it wasn't possible to program for the Mac on a Mac. At first, one would need a Lisa (or a Mac XL) to do it. LikeLiked by 1 person # 6 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 17, 2023 at 7:10 pm Thank you. I'm not sure how that's relevant to this subject or article, but, yes, you're correct, and I think the language required was Lisa Pascal, that then developed into Object Pascal thanks to Larry Tesler and Niklaus Wirth. But that was a relatively short period. Howard. LikeLike 2. 7 [86984107e672] Jeff Johnson on September 16, 2023 at 11:48 am Reply I have a different idea of bringing programming to the people. The *only* reason that I'm a programmer today is that my iMac G4 came with the Xcode developer tools on the install discs. I find it sad that Macs no longer come with the developer tools, and my impression is that there are a lot fewer amateur Mac programmers today than there were back in the 2000s. You can of course download Xcode from the Mac App Store, but most Mac users will have no awareness of the existence of Xcode, and the Mac App Store itself is a bit of a ghost town. It's just not the same as having the tools come in the box with the Mac. LikeLiked by 2 people + 8 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 16, 2023 at 7:06 pm Reply Thank you, Jeff. I agree completely, and think your impression is both accurate and worrying. Many of us came to programming as amateurs, yet Apple, like all major vendors, shows not the slightest interest in encouraging those. Indeed, it erects barriers to scare amateurs away. Notarisation is but one example: while it has plugged away repeatedly that Mac 'developers' must sign up, get their certificate, and notarise, it hasn't told amateurs that those 'rules' don't apply to them. I have repeatedly seen the advice given that the only way you can develop anything for macOS is to pay your subscription and notarise, which must be a huge deterrent to many. I also suspect that the Xcode you cut your programming teeth on wasn't as formidable as it is today, and was probably far better documented too. It's all very well encouraging and supporting programming in education with platforms like Swift Playgrounds, but it's so important to encourage everyone. Howard. LikeLiked by 1 person o 9 [86984107e672] Jeff Johnson on September 16, 2023 at 9:45 pm Reply "I also suspect that the Xcode you cut your programming teeth on wasn't as formidable as it is today" Well, I'd say yes and no. On the one hand, code signing wasn't an issue back then, as you mentioned. Also, there was only one platform, Mac, rather than the four or five platforms today. On the other hand, Xcode 3 and earlier was more of a "pro" app in my opinion than Xcode 4 and later. It allowed more pro workflows, it was more configurable, it didn't try to cram everything in one window, Interface Builder was a separate app, etc. In those respects, I'd actually love to have Xcode 3 back again. "and was probably far better documented too." Probably. LikeLiked by 1 person 3. 10 [22c6cf9c5b8b] Ralf on September 16, 2023 at 1:38 pm Reply It's just been a year that I've been a bit more involved with programming for mac automation. Automator was suspicious to me because I had the impression I was sitting on a dead horse. AppleScript, in its effort to be understandable, is a pain because I keep stumbling over little errors where it's absolutely not clear how it's correct. Shortcuts is great on the one hand because the shortcuts works for iPhone and Mac (partially at least). On the other hand, it is awkward to change variables, sometimes program code is lost and I have to program on the iPhone or Mac on a tiny screen. Shortcuts urgently needs an editor, preferably a text editor mode. The name Shortcuts is unfortunate as searches look for keyboard shortcuts. My start to more programming was to build scripts into shortcuts. I built larger Bash and Ruby scripts and kept the number of shortcuts actions limited. The end of the story is that I now mainly build scripts in the terminal and only trigger individual actions via Apple Script and shortcuts. Maybe sometime I am ready to try Swift in Xcode. Apple should make a binding and clear statement about the future of the approaches. Unfortunately, Apple never says anything. LikeLiked by 1 person + 11 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 16, 2023 at 7:08 pm Reply Thank you. Yes, that has been the downfall of so many of these. After a few years, Apple drifts away and that platform/language is abandoned, and other major vendors are no better. Roadmaps of where AppleScript and Shortcuts are heading would be so helpful. Howard. LikeLike 4. 12 [4133700ed631] Joel on September 16, 2023 at 4:01 pm Reply Prograph is by far and away the most productive and enjoyable programming environment I ever used. A friend and I used it to dynamically generate webpages in the early days of the Internet - for which we received an innovation prize :-). It took away all the pain points normally associated with programming as it is still, sadly, practiced. I know that Apple actually considered adopting it, but the difficulties of versioning and performing diffs at the time meant it didn't make the cut. IMO, contemporary programming languages are as flint axes compared to Prograph. A prince among the pawns. LikeLiked by 1 person + 13 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 16, 2023 at 7:09 pm Reply Thank you. Yes, its demise is a tragedy. I'm still hopeful that someone will design another visual programming language as powerful. Howard. LikeLike 5. 14 [7ed8affb918d] elmimmo on September 16, 2023 at 5:34 pm Reply Quartz Composer? LikeLiked by 1 person + 15 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 16, 2023 at 7:10 pm Reply Thank you. Maybe, although I'm here aiming more at general purpose languages, with the exception of HyperTalk. Howard. LikeLike o 16 [a57a02ba0224] donatj on September 17, 2023 at 8:29 pm Reply This reply didn't popup until I posted my other one - I was a heavy user of Quartz Composer and it really was more general purpose than it got credit for. I personally used it to inspect HID devices because of how unreasonably easy it made the process. LikeLiked by 1 person # 17 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 17, 2023 at 8:43 pm Thank you. I think you have made your point. However, Quartz Composer isn't a general purpose programming language. Making screensavers easily or inspecting HID devices don't qualify it. Could you, for instance, write a database using it? It also hasn't brought programming to many Mac users, has it? What percentage of Mac users do you reckon have used it, let alone become programmers as a result? AppleScript, for all its shortcomings and history, has in its day been popular among those who wouldn't have considered themselves to be programmers, and quite a few of those have gone on to develop substantial Mac apps using it. Similarly for the other languages considered above. Howard. LikeLike + 18 [a57a02ba0224] donatj on September 17, 2023 at 8:26 pm Reply I came to the comment section to ask how they could have completely missed Quartz Composer. It was the BEST way to make screensavers back in the day with ZERO coding. LikeLiked by 1 person 6. 19 [01b0fad51f3b] Warren Nagourney on September 16, 2023 at 10:46 pm Reply It seems that Apple is intending Swift Playgrounds to be their current means of introducing new people to programming. I have had some programming experience over the last 50 years and do not consider Swift to be a good language for beginners, especially with the poor documentation they provide. The language is very complicated and includes some concepts which are obscure at best - (Optionals is an example). I was interested in the concept of Object Oriented Programming some 25 years ago and read the book on the subject where the analogy to "software integrated circuits" was made. Constructing a program using Swift is similar to building a circuit using ICs without a manual which provides pinouts and circuit examples. The situation is even worse using Metal and using things like the Complex Data type whose documentation is extremely hard to find. I recently had the very frustrating of using Swift and Metal to update some physics demo apps I originally wrote in the Mac some 20 years ago. The recent experience was not a pleasant one. I really wish Apple would invest some of its fortune in better documentation. LikeLiked by 2 people + 20 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 17, 2023 at 7:43 am Reply Thank you. I sort of agree about Swift, but I'm an old stick-in-the-mud and still hark back to Object Pascal. Swift is accommodating enough much of the time to let you code plainly. Although there are times when dealing with the API and more idiomatic features that you do need to use some of those new-fangled things, much of the time you can write plain code that might almost pass as Object Pascal. Just because a language has those features doesn't mean you have to use them everywhere. Much of Swift is actually better documented than most of macOS. There are also abundant resources online. Where it gets more scant is in coding asynchronous processes, for example, which has been changing quite rapidly. But I do still hanker after the clarity of Object Pascal. Howard. LikeLike 7. 21 [01b0fad51f3b] Warren Nagourney on September 17, 2023 at 1:23 pm Reply What I was looking for when writing Swift code was a list of classes and all of their methods and instance variables with a brief description of what each does. Example code would have been welcome. The Apple docs did not provide this, or perhaps did but I didn't use them properly . The online description of Swift was very good but a bit abstract - I missed coding examples and needed to use Stack Overflow, which actually solved one of my most thorny problems (communication between instances of two different classes - it took me a week and multiple requests to the community to solve this). To make my Metal code work I needed to search for an inline tutorial and modify it to work for me. There is a lot of "boilerplate" that needs to be done in Metal and I was able to use my existing OpenGL ES code for the rest. Of course, online Metal references were oriented toward games - I needed to render mathematically defined surfaces, which has different requirements. One of my routines absolutely needed Complex to be able to be coded economically. I used Swift Numerics and the refusal of Swift to use mixed type expressions made for very ugly code compared to the C code I had used originally. Adding a real and complex number is totally unambiguous and Swift required various casts to make it work. So I agree that one can write Swift code in a straightforward fashion (like C), but the code was much harder to read and required highly verbose constructions. While I understand formally what Optionals do, most online code is full of them and I never understood why they were needed. For example, why is an automatically generated outlet always a forcibly unwrapped optional? Swift docs frown on using this kind of thing. I eventually got the app to work, but it's performance was little better that it was on my original app which used Objective C and OpenGL on the Mac was was fairly easy to write. I suspect there are inefficiencies all over the place. My original code ran well and smoothly on a PowerPC G4 laptop. Sorry about the length of my response. LikeLiked by 1 person + 22 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 17, 2023 at 7:04 pm Reply No problems. Do you use Dash? A combination of that for reference and Apple's free Swift books goes a long way, supplemented by online sources including some of the many Swift tutorials. Howard. LikeLike o 23 [01b0fad51f3b] Warren Nagourney on September 17, 2023 at 10:19 pm Reply Thank you. I have Dash on my phone mainly for LaTeX help. It is no longer supported on iOS so I will download it on my Mac. Excellent idea. LikeLike 8. 24 [9d6364fcd0ae] Darwin on September 17, 2023 at 6:41 pm Reply Hypercard was a huge success which everyone who was around at the time already knows. LikeLiked by 1 person + 25 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 17, 2023 at 7:13 pm Reply Thank you. Yes, I used it extensively myself. But HyperCard was an application, not a programming language. The underlying scripting language was HyperTalk. If you used that much, then you will well remember its severe limitations. As I wrote above, its big benefit was that it later formed part of the model for AppleScript. Howard. LikeLike 9. 26 [1c3c60294103] diimdeep on September 17, 2023 at 6:47 pm Reply Perhaps you've forgotten, but every macOS version has come with numerous pre-installed interpreters, bindings to Apple technologies, and other developer software, suitable for both learning programming and development right out of the box. To name a few: Perl, Python, Ruby, PHP, Apache, Emacs, Vim--all available in Terminal.app. It's only recently that Apple decided to stop including Python, Ruby, and Perl with macOS. More information here https:// developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-notes/ macos-catalina-10_15-release-notes#Scripting-Language-Runtimes When compared to Windows, it's clear that Mac has been a significant driver for bringing programming to people. LikeLiked by 2 people + 27 [87cc8acbb0b9] hoakley on September 17, 2023 at 7:17 pm Reply Perhaps you've forgotten that all those are cross-platform languages. I look forward to seeing your evidence that they accomplished on the Mac for programming what the Mac did for desktop publishing, for example. And you're only referring to Mac OS X and macOS anyway; I don't recall Classic Mac OS coming with support for any of those (and I'm not sure that some of them like Ruby even existed). Does the average Mac user really write their own Python code, or perl? I don't think so. Even advanced users are unlikely to. Howard. LikeLike Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] D[ ] This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Quick Links * Downloads * Mac Troubleshooting Summary * M1 & M2 Macs * Mac problem-solving * Painting topics * Painting * Long Reads Search Search for: [ ] [Search] Monthly archives * September 2023 (44) * August 2023 (72) * July 2023 (79) * June 2023 (73) * May 2023 (79) * April 2023 (73) * March 2023 (76) * February 2023 (68) * January 2023 (74) * December 2022 (74) * November 2022 (72) * October 2022 (76) * September 2022 (72) * August 2022 (75) * July 2022 (76) * June 2022 (73) * May 2022 (76) * April 2022 (71) * March 2022 (77) * February 2022 (68) * January 2022 (77) * December 2021 (75) * November 2021 (72) * October 2021 (75) * September 2021 (76) * August 2021 (75) * July 2021 (75) * June 2021 (71) * May 2021 (80) * April 2021 (79) * March 2021 (77) * February 2021 (75) * January 2021 (75) * December 2020 (77) * November 2020 (84) * October 2020 (81) * September 2020 (79) * August 2020 (103) * July 2020 (81) * June 2020 (78) * May 2020 (78) * April 2020 (81) * March 2020 (86) * February 2020 (77) * January 2020 (86) * December 2019 (82) * November 2019 (74) * October 2019 (89) * September 2019 (80) * August 2019 (91) * July 2019 (95) * June 2019 (88) * May 2019 (91) * April 2019 (79) * March 2019 (78) * February 2019 (71) * January 2019 (69) * December 2018 (79) * November 2018 (71) * October 2018 (78) * September 2018 (76) * August 2018 (78) * July 2018 (76) * June 2018 (77) * May 2018 (71) * April 2018 (67) * March 2018 (73) * February 2018 (67) * January 2018 (83) * December 2017 (94) * November 2017 (73) * October 2017 (86) * September 2017 (92) * August 2017 (69) * July 2017 (81) * June 2017 (76) * May 2017 (90) * April 2017 (76) * March 2017 (79) * February 2017 (65) * January 2017 (76) * December 2016 (75) * November 2016 (68) * October 2016 (76) * September 2016 (78) * August 2016 (70) * July 2016 (74) * June 2016 (66) * May 2016 (71) * April 2016 (67) * March 2016 (71) * February 2016 (68) * January 2016 (90) * December 2015 (96) * November 2015 (103) * October 2015 (119) * September 2015 (115) * August 2015 (117) * July 2015 (117) * June 2015 (105) * May 2015 (111) * April 2015 (119) * March 2015 (69) * February 2015 (54) * January 2015 (39) Tags APFS Apple AppleScript Apple silicon backup Big Sur Blake bug Catalina Consolation Console Corinth diagnosis Disk Utility Dore El Capitan extended attributes Finder firmware Gatekeeper Gerome HFS+ High Sierra history of painting iCloud Impressionism iOS landscape LockRattler log logs M1 Mac Mac history macOS macOS 10.12 macOS 10.13 macOS 10.14 macOS 10.15 macOS 11 macOS 12 macOS 13 malware Mojave Monet Monterey Moreau MRT myth narrative OS X Ovid painting Pissarro Poussin privacy realism Renoir riddle Rubens Sargent scripting security Sierra SilentKnight SSD Swift Time Machine Turner update upgrade Ventura xattr Xcode XProtect Statistics * 15,418,041 hits Blog at WordPress.com. Footer navigation * About & Contact * Macs * Painting * Language * Tech * Life * General * Downloads * Mac problem-solving * Extended attributes (xattrs) * Painting topics * Hieronymus Bosch * English language * LockRattler: 10.12 Sierra * LockRattler: 10.13 High Sierra * LockRattler: 10.11 El Capitan * Updates: El Capitan * Updates: High Sierra and later * LockRattler: 10.14 Mojave * SilentKnight, silnite, LockRattler, SystHist & Scrub * DelightEd & Podofyllin * xattred, Metamer, Sandstrip & xattr tools * 32-bitCheck & ArchiChect * XProCheck, T2M2, Ulbow, Consolation and log utilities * Cirrus & Bailiff * Taccy, Signet, Precize, Alifix, UTIutility, Sparsity, alisma * Revisionist & DeepTools * Text Utilities: Nalaprop, Dystextia and others * PDF * Keychains & Permissions * LockRattler: 10.15 Catalina * Updates * Spundle, Cormorant, Stibium, Dintch, Fintch and cintch * Long Reads * Mac Troubleshooting Summary * LockRattler: 11.0 Big Sur * M1 & M2 Macs * Mints: a multifunction utility * LockRattler: 12.x Monterey * VisualLookUpTest * Virtualisation on Apple silicon * LockRattler: 13.x Ventura * System Updates Secondary navigation * Search Post navigation High: Vanishing glaciers Saturday Mac riddles 221 Search for: [ ] [Search] Begin typing your search above and press return to search. Press Esc to cancel. * Follow Following + [croppe] The Eclectic Light Company Join 3,318 other followers [ ] Sign me up + Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now. * + [croppe] The Eclectic Light Company + Customize + Follow Following + Sign up + Log in + Copy shortlink + Report this content + View post in Reader + Manage subscriptions + Collapse this bar Loading Comments... Write a Comment... [ ] Email (Required) [ ] Name (Required) [ ] Website [ ] [Post Comment] %d bloggers like this: [b]