Mac Universal Binary

Hello,
I have an application that runs fine on my Mac where I developed it, it is an application package (.app) with Universal Binary files. I also ran it on a friend’s Mac and it ran just fine. This second Mac has never had Valentina or Valentina Studio or anything used to develop a Valentina application on it. Both these Macs are Mac OSX 10.5.6
Now, one of my client cannot even launch the application let alone run it. It crashes right before the screen even shows up. All you get is a message about "application quit unexpectedly" and when I look at the crash log, I see that there are errors related to the dylib files etc. He tried it on another Mac of his and same problem. I am puzzled, what could be going on? Has anyone come across this situation?
Vansh

I think your question would best be asked in the software developer section of the forum.
http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=728

Similar Messages

Mac Universal Binary Support (c'mon guys)

Lack of Universal Binary support for the Mac is kinda hard to
believe since there exists a version 8 universal binary in beta
form. No further Mac releases should be available without UB
support. Please let us know what your plans for UB support are
going forward.

I'll second that sentiment. It is frustrating enough
(although understandable) that Flex Builder is unavailable for any
Mac platform but not being able to even test content on my MacBook
Pro is just silly.
I finally took the time to install the SDK and setup Xcode to
provide code hinting for AS3 (still working on MXML) and compile
the .swf files but now I can't test. I guess I go back to Bootcamp
again or parallels workstation to run this stuff in an XP
environment. Major bummer.
Best regards,
Rob

HELP!!!--- Canon Pixma MG5420 Mac OS X 10.5.8 PowerPC Universal Binary Print Driver...... ---

Greetings Everyone!
I am a bit miffed at the moment.
I purchased a Canon Pixma MG5420 Print-Copy-Scan machine with the intention of using it with my Power Mac G5, PowerPC, Mac OS X 10.5.8.
But alas. Apparently it is not to be. The box in which the printer came cleary displays the Mac Logo and the Universal Logo, the Universal Logo looking like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_binary
The Mac OS X system requirements also notate the OS X to be a minimum of 10.5.8!
The driver CD only contains drivers for Mac OS X Intel.
So Someone....ANYONE!....please tell me why Canon has stooped to this low level of "False Advertising"???
Let's FLAG this issue and find out WHY!
NEED HELP!
....and could use working drivers!

IT"S OFFICIAL!---> Canon has stopped porting any of their drivers to the Universal Binary format for MAC OS X which is a combo installer for PowerPC and Intel machines.
The MG5420 MFP that I have was released in December 2012 and they *said* that I was the first person to "complain" of this issue!....REALLY!?!?....wow...so there is no one else out there using the PowerPC platform??? I find the G5 (model M9592LL/A) to be quite adequate and useable for what I do! I guess the engineers couldn't be bothered to "port" it to the PowerPC platform! Listen Canon, if you don't think the PowerPC is still useable, go visit http://www.macofalltrades.com/ and watch the "trend" of what sells and what doesn't.....or maybe you should call another authority of Apple products http://www.macsales.com/ and ask what volume of PowerPC compatible parts they sell?!
And Canon, I know you offered to buy back this "mistake", but for the $99 I bought it at, (extra set of ink not included) I may just hold on to it and do the "workaround" of scanning to and printing from a Windows XP PC shared folder...No, Canon, I'm not completely stupid!....I set-up MFP's for my job, so I know a little bit about networking! ...enough to be dangerous, at least! ;-) Any way, I just got this G5 a year or so ago and it is new to me...I probably wait a little longer and then get an Intel Mac, and THEN it will work natively with this INTEL CANON!....LOL!
What do you think?!.....Thoughts?.....Ideas?
Oh, and Canon.....get your "engineering" team and your marketing "box makers/printers" in Thailand to get their "info" to correspond and be accurate....that way there will be no false advertising and misrepresentation of Apple's "Intellectual Property" and "breach of contract!.....You darn well know they have an "Image" to uphold!
https://developer.apple.com/softwarelicensing/agreements/maclogo.html
CHEERS!
PS--you better watch your back Canon on this little faux pas!....Epson might use this to their advertising advantage!....they still support Universal Binary!

Will non-universal-binary Logic+plugins run on an Intel Mac?

Hi,
this may sound like a dumb question, but I haven't found a straightforward answer on this question yet: will my Logic 7.1 (not Universal Binary) install on an Intel-Mac?? Our local Mac store expected that Rosatta will take care of everything, and that only performance will suffer a bit.
That would mean that all non-universal-binary plugins would run, too??!!
Just curious...
Thanks!
Regards,
Jaap
eMac Mac OS X (10.3.9) Logic Express

Hi Jaap,
In a word, nope!
It seems you're more informed than your local dealer, :o)
Rosetta will not handle the plug-ins & third party (AU) need the (U B) upgrades. You need the 7.2 (U. Binary) to run logic on the new Intel machines.
Best regards,
Jorge

Mac os X Server Universal Binary install upgrade possible ?

Has anyone attempted the following upgrade pattern with the new mac pros with mac os X Universal Binary build ?
Take your PowerPC mac os X server build to an external hard drive (Carbon Copy clonning or via SuperDuper). Tie in the external hard drive to the Mac Pro . Upgrade the Mac os X server install via the DVD install for mac os X server coming with the mac pro . CCC it back to the mac pro ... watch the fireworks ?
I am still in waiting the machine but there are loads of data i would like to transfer from our my present mac os X server quad setup to the upcoming MacPro and doing this manipulation might make the transition soooo much easier than having to transport everything ...
I hope there are no other already started threads concerning this procedure but if such would be the case i apologize for the inconvinience caused and would be glad if reffering threads would be posted here ...
G5 Quad 2.5 7TB xraid 16GB of ram. Mac OS X (10.4.7) Mac os X server 10.4.7

From the looks of it the upgrade from Mac os X server PPC to Mac os X server Universal Binary is not possible from install disk .... i backed up a whole PPC drive loaded my Mac os X Server UB in the machine and booted off the CD on a MBP ... and the installer just wont take the PPC build as upgradable .. once again apple leaves us in the middle of the transition ... WHY ???? For those of us getting mac pros to run mac os x server applications this would be a great benefit to all parties involved and help solve the many dog heared problems we have faced all along in 10.4.
Edit: Same thing from a PPC standpoint a PPC build wont upgade to a Universal Binary build at all as it seems ... i am calling Apple support and hope to get further information to share ... wish me luck
I dare hope leopard behaves better than 10.4 has been especially on the server side which broke many functions that 10.3 got right pretty quickly and neatly .
G5 Quad 2.5 7TB xraid 16GB of ram. Mac OS X (10.4.7) Mac os X server 10.4.7

Flash for Mac: How Long Before Universal Binary?

I have an iMac G4 1 GHz PPC and am contemplating purchasing
Flash 8 (or some software containing Flash) for my son. I recently
found a good educational source with a decent price. To my
understanding the current version of Flash is PPC only, but it may
be able to run under Rosetta on the new Intel Macs. I have heard
that Adobe will not release a universal binary update to Flash 8
and that Flash will likely not run natively on Intel Macs until the
next major release of Flash (I guess that will be 9). I plan to
keep my G4 for quite a while but I can see some handwriting on the
wall that indicates we'll probably get another Mac (Intel) within
the year.
A few questions. Has anyone run Flash under Rosetta on an
Intel Mac? How does it run? Do you think I should just go ahead and
buy Flash 8 now and start getting some good use out of it (the edu
discount makes it a pretty good deal anyway)? When is the next
version of Flash expected in an ordinary development cycle?
Thanks very much.

Well, from a switchers point of view, I have never run Adobe
products under PPC as I was always a Unix and Windows user,
however, as of recently I have switched all my systems to Intel
based Macs, and I have to say, that although I can not run my
business without Flash 8, its performance under Rosetta is dismal
at best.
On an average day of 4-5 hours of developement, Flash 8 will
crash for no reason every 15 to 20 minutes. I have to save my
changes every few minutes or I am bound to lose my work. The speed
is reduced more than 50%, so unless you can deal with the feeling
that you are developing underwater with the speed issues and the
constant crashes, I would highly suggest waiting for Flash Pro 9.
An as a final note, this going to Adobe, who refuses to even
give a tentative release date, I am appauld at your lack of concern
for your customers. Every other major company has already released
updates to their products as Universal Binaries, yet you talk like
your products are so more advanced then any other products on the
planet, that it requires you to do strick beta testing to ensure it
runs properly. My answer to that is this... ANYTHING that is native
to Intel Mac has got to run better than your products under
Rosetta. Crashing every 15-20 minutes and running like a snail is
NOT an alternative to possibly bugs that may have occured by
releasing a universal upgrade for Flash 8. So that is simply an
excuse on your part for not supporting your customers.

Universal binary CF for the Mac

I have spent the last few days attempting to install CF 7.2
on an Intel Mac with the 'work around unsupported hacks' suggested
on a few sites. I have not been able to get it to work. I have been
seeing articles about CS3 being universal binary and available
sometime first part of 2007. However, that doesn't seem to include
CF. Anyone hear any rumors on when CF might be updated for Intel
Macs? I have been attempting to use Flex Builder 2 beta with the
Adobe Training from the Source for Flex Builder that just came out,
but find it all but unusable without being able to install CF. I
know I could use BootCamp and install a Windows partition and run
Flex and CF over there, but I do not want to buy a Win license
especially since there has been no definitive answer as to whether
I can transfer that license to Mac at a later point in time.
Without an Intel version of CF, it makes me wonder why they are
bothering with a Mac version of Flex Builder 2.

This should help..
http://webmages.com:80/cfmxIntelOSXguide.html
Brendon
"WantToProgFlex" <[email protected]> wrote
in message
news:ej1u6h$sf3$[email protected]..
>I have spent the last few days attempting to install CF
7.2 on an Intel Mac
> with the 'work around unsupported hacks' suggested on a
few sites. I have
> not
> been able to get it to work. I have been seeing articles
about CS3 being
> universal binary and available sometime first part of
2007. However, that
> doesn't seem to include CF. Anyone hear any rumors on
when CF might be
> updated
> for Intel Macs? I have been attempting to use Flex
Builder 2 beta with
> the
> Adobe Training from the Source for Flex Builder that
just came out, but
> find it
> all but unusable without being able to install CF. I
know I could use
> BootCamp
> and install a Windows partition and run Flex and CF over
there, but I do
> not
> want to buy a Win license especially since there has
been no definitive
> answer
> as to whether I can transfer that license to Mac at a
later point in time.
> Without an Intel version of CF, it makes me wonder why
they are bothering
> with
> a Mac version of Flex Builder 2.
>

Universal Binary Shockwave for Mac? Is Director on its way out?

Anyone have any thoughts about if and when there will be a
universal binary version of shockwave for the Mac?
Also, Director seems to receive very little attention from
Adobe. Anyone know anything or care to speculate about Adobe's
commitment to maintaining Director. I'm guessing that adobe will
eventually ad 3D capabilities to Flash and do away with Director.
My company use to do a lot with Director, now we have a scant few
clients who bring us work that requires it.
As the Art Director for my company I have had a somewhat
passive role with Director, creating art and presentations that
only require basic navigation and animation and handing off to a
true programmer when more complex functionality is needed. Our
programmer has left and it seems on some level I am now assuming
the role of main director person, at least unofficially. I also
have a beginner to intermediate level of proficiency with Flash.
I'm pretty much left to teach myself what ever programming our
clients need as it is needed. My plate is full and I'm trying to
determine if I need to invest time in really learning lingo beyond
my rudimentary working knowledge, or just concentrate on expanding
my Flash knowledge base. If Flash did 3D, I would probably forget
about Director because it seems like it is on it's way out and most
of the things our clients need I think can be done in Flash
although for standalone presentations, I prefer the seamless flow
of Director to the "wait to load" result of Flash.
Any thoughts on this?

As Adobe says itself:
A new version of Director will be released in the first half
of 2007. It
will be sold under the name Adobe Director. No features list
available yet.
That's the only information we have and you'll have to live
with it until
the release (or beta program just before).
Adobe doesn't have anything else in its product range that
comes close to
Director and Shockwave. Shockwave 3D is still to this day the
most reliable
Web 3D plugin available (even if it has not the best
rendering quality but
sufficient for games, e-learning and 3D product assembly
instructions).
Adding 3D to Flash Player would mean a heavier download
(Flash Player 9 is
already 1 MB without the Yahoo toolbar).
The other news it that Tom Higgins, the Director Technical
Product Manager
left. I believe his position has already been filled
internally by someone
else at Adobe (it's a huge company) or will be soon (haven't
seen any job
offer yet for this role).
Best regards,
Karl Sigiscar.
http://www.chromelib.com/

Universal Binary..Once and For All

I know this topic has been discussed, but I'm still a little confused. I want to put this issue to rest, at least from my perspective.
If you install a Universal Application via download or CD/DVD does it install an application that would be able to run of BOTH an Intel or PPC Mac. I know that the file size isn't exactly doubled, but does it still add extra unneeded code.
I'm on a PPC Mac and I want to know if I download a Universal App am I getting the Intel version too. I really don't want this because I want my drive to be a slim as possible.
If the Universal App does install both version (which I think was clearly evident in the huge increase in size of iLife '06 and iWork) is the only way to get the Intel version off to use "Trim the Fat".
I don't really want to get into the nitty gritty...I just want to know if unneeded code is being installed and taking up space on my iBook because of this new Universal App thing.
Thank you so much.

I don't really want to get into the nitty gritty...I just want
to know if unneeded code is being installed and taking up
space on my iBook because of this new Universal App thing.
The answer is yes.
Universal binaries typically include both PowerPC and x86 versions of a compiled application.
Universal binaries are usually substantially larger than single-platform binaries, because two copies of the compiled code must be stored. The size of the resulting universal binary is usually not double (roughly a 30% increase in size) as a significant portion will be resources which are shared between the two architectures.

Deleting Universal Binary Files

I have just downloaded OS X Lion and I am trying to delete some file on my Macbook to speed things up. I have downloaded cleanmymac and it had found universal binary files. Can i delete theses. I am using a mac with 2.4 GHz intel core 2 duo.

I have some spareparts from my first car, 2th and 3th car, 5th and 6th car... from the 70s and 80s and 90s and we can never know - perhaps one day we need it.... I never dit use one single part yet, because the new cars use more smart devices and parts - the old will never fit... but still I keep all this stuff. My new car have to stay outside, there is no space left in my garage or the carport, because all the spareparts.
I have also spareparts from my first 8086 PC, Apple II Apple III Lisa 1 + 2, the Commodore 64, Amiga 2000 and all PC and PPC and Mac sience. The parts will not fit in any of the new iPad Post PC Devices anyway. But never know, perhaps one day.... I have to find soon another house - there is no space for me in my bedroom anymore - more spareparts from the first iMac and the MacBooks I do not use anymore because of the iPad...
So better keep all the Universal Binaries - never know - perhaps one day we need it... ;-)

Old school, has anyone here been able to install and run Logic Pro 9.1 on a dual 1.8 G5 PPC? I know LP9 is not officialy supported on non Intel CPUs, But 9.0.0 and 9. 02 are ok on the G5 PPC as it is universal Binary, while I hear 9.1 wont work

has anyone here been able to install and run Logic Pro 9.1 on a dual 1.8 G5 PPC? I know LP9 is not officialy supported on non Intel CPUs, But 9.0.0 and
9. 02 are ok on the G5 PPC as it is universal Binary, while I hear 9.1 wont work.

ok thanks, that's what I tought,looks like apple machines are only good for two - three years, the software developers are ahead of the hardware to a certain point, love macs but this is forcing us to buy new macs just to keep up with development. There was a time it was the opposite.
By the time we get up on new stuff it's time to change again. Gotta be rich to deal with macs ...LOL

Laser GUN effects FCE HD ((Universal Binary)

About to shoot the big laser (gun) battle.
Is there a good/popular way or effect to allow me to add the "shooting lasers" with FCE HD (Universal) ??
Sorry for the n00b questions.
Randy
MAcBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Thanks for the help/info!
Actually I'm just trying to add simple beams from laser pistols (not a full light sabor fight). Let me ask this rephrased question:
So is there an FCE HD effect plug-in (currentley universal binary avaliable)to do this?
Randy
just another, happy FCE junkie
MAcBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.6)
MAcBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Why won't XCode 2.2.1 produce a Universal Binary of my program?

I know that it is unreasonable to expect any specific help with the information provided below, but I hope that someone can point me in the right direction for more effective troubleshooting than I've been able to do on my own. Perhaps there is something obvious I am missing.
Here are the facts:
Using Cocoa and XCode 2.2.1 to make a Universal Binary of a small application.
1. The previously compiled PPC version (560KB) runs under Rosetta.
2. A simpler version (108KB) was sucessfully compiled as a Universal version.
3. The expanded version (identical program logic and form - just more of the same - additional variables, objects and methods) appears to compile with two prebind ignore warnings (despite having prebinding disabled).
4.When the compiled app is run in XCode, the interface window correctly appears, but the app menu bar does not. Selecting an input field places the insertion point correctly, but typed input is displayed in the Run Log window, not in the field text box. Executing a calculation method via a button gives a result consistent with no data in the input fields.
5. The app/build/Release/App.app file does not have a processor type tag in the Finder Get Info window (ppp or universal).
6. Double clicking the App.app file produces the error message "You cannot open the application "App" because it may be damaged or incomplete."
7. The Contents of the App appear to be reasonable in number, names and size compared to the original ppc and simple versions.

Thanks - I had earlier done what you suggested, with no effect. I finally decided to use a bigger hammer and copy the program files to a new project in XCode/Interface Builder. The most significant labor was re-establishing all the connections in the interface. This version compiles successfully as a Universal (ppc & i386) without compiler errors.
I am troubleshooting some (now) obvious calculation errors in the original program code that do not affect the results in the ppc version (but should?), and do cause incorrect results in the i386 version.
MacBookPro 2.16GHz Mac OS X (10.4.5)

CS3 - Publishing Mac Universal Binaries

I've noticed in CS3, when I publish to a Mac Flash Projector
the file size is enormous. I assume this is due to Flash publishing
a Universal Binary. Does anyone know of a way to publish to only
PPC or Intel Mac? The file sizes on the projectors are way too
large now. I've seen several files now when published via CS3 are
up to 300% the size of the same files published via Flash 8
Pro.

quote:
Originally posted by:
Rothrock
I just had time to test it. Wow. 9.7 megs. That is hefty. It
seems a bit large. The windows projector is 2.3 megs. And even if
you put two of those together to get PCC and Universal you still
aren't close.
Exactly... and that's not even for a large Flash project.
I've got one that includes a little music, and even when really
really compressed to 48kbps, the projector CS3 spits out is over
13MB. Same file published using Flash 8 produces a projector
weighing in under 4MB.
quote:
There is something else going on. BTW, why do you care?
Projectors aren't really for distribution on anything that it will
matter much.
I regularly work on projects that need to be delivered via
downloadable .exe and Mac projector files in addition to offering
online versions. The downloads end up getting used and passed
around in a variety of ways. When they're kept relatively small
that's not a big deal, but I can't suddenly start dumping files
that 2-3 times as large as they should be. I can always just use
Flash 8 to publish PPC projectors alone, but that means I'm not
pushing out native Intel Mac versions, and that means I have to
retain compatibility with Flash 8 in all my work. It's a workable
solution, it's just not a good one.

Swf and Universal Binary

I've produced a application (standalone player) on Mac for PC
customers. It's pretty heavy, it includs videos and flash
didactical sequences. All play fine on my 2 computers (G4 bipro
1,25Ghz and G5 1,8 Ghz) and on the customer computers.
But I've to install it on a MacBook Laptop (with only 512Mo)
and then problem...
The video and animations are slow, even if I play the swf
separately the simple animations are slow, so I think that the
standalone player uses Rosetta...
How to solve that problem ?
Is there a Flash 9 player installer (not only for browser) ?
If I found a Flash player 9 to compile again the projector
will it works on Universal Binary computers ?
Thank for your help ;)

Look like it's done! In the download page :
http://www.adobe.com/support/flashplayer/downloads.html
There is a link to download the INTEL version of the Flash
Player (release and debug!). But in fact, it's a Universal Binary
app, not just Intel !.
So, they should flush the link for the PowerPC version...
It's working fine on my G5 powerPC too.
Link to the UB:
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/updaters/9/sa_flashplayer_9_all_release_ub. dmg

Mac Universal Binary

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for