Maintenance for the week of December 2:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 2, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 4, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 4, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 2, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 4, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 4, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
Another patch gone by, another week of 32 bit Launcher
-
Carmina✭✭✭So I talked to Solid State Networks, and they said they have provided a 64 bit Launcher to ZOS some time ago..... Just putting it out there....
C.2 -
nathan_bri✭✭✭✭nathan_bri wrote: »
You work with Macs on a daily basis as a developer, yet you still refer to them as MACs, with all capitals, and think they are based on Linux? You either are not a very good developer or you a spinning a false tale here.
No spinning needed. Been doing this since before you were born. In fact been doing this since long before there was a LINUX. Been working with UNIX since the '70s. Been working with MACs since they were new. Owned one of the first SPARC workstations ever built.
FreeBSD "copied" a lot of stuff from Linux (which came a good 2 years earlier). I know, i was there ...
Oh dear.
First of all, Mr. “I am oh-so-smart,” it’s Macs, not MACS. Mac is not an acronym; it’s an abbreviation for Macintosh.
Secondly, it’s Linux, not LINUX. Again, Linux is not an acronym; it’s a concatenation of Linus and Unix, Linus Torvalds being the original creator of Linux. And Unix is now typically written as just Unix, not UNIX.
Thirdly, if you’ve been doing this since before I was born in 1964, that means you are now at least 73, since the only computers available then were at universities, large businesses, or the government. While possible, I think that’s unlikely.
Since you claim to know so much about FreeBSD and Linux, you might want to update their Wikipedia pages since they flatly disagree with you.
People like to boast on the internet due to anonymity, but if you are going to try to be a smarty pants, you should back it up with some actual intelligence.
Good day.Edited by nathan_bri on 16 August 2019 20:535 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
Sad as with Catalina each time new patch is released you need to install whole game one more time. Oh, wait... in order to install it you need a working launcher...Why is it sad? The launcher is only needed for patches and news. Most of us never use it to launch the game.
I would go so far as to say, using the launcher to.launch the game is sad. Or at least a waste of time.
I never have to do that. Nor does anyone else. Been playing since Beta.
Just reboot your.machine. it will resolve this.
Yes. Rebooting a machine is pretty much the first step in tech support almost all the time.1 -
This part is not exactly the truth and tbh it's true that someone with such experience in those systems should know that. FreeBSD was delivered in 1993 about one month after first actual Linux distribution if I remember correctly. Before that there were indeed some Linux distributions serving specifically kernel development purposes but that's it. FreeBSD development started for good in 1992 so about 1 year after start of development on Linux. Linux development started in 1991, this part is true. However what is not true is who borrow what. FreeBSD kernel was derived from kernel of BSD 1992 release. Also at that time Linux had really little to offer when it comes to borrowing from it. Just have a look at 0.99 version code and see for yourself.FreeBSD "copied" a lot of stuff from Linux (which came a good 2 years earlier). I know, i was there ...Edited by alterfenixeb17_ESO on 17 August 2019 11:054 -
Coorbin✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »- 64 bit system can run by default only 64 bit apps unless running other architecture is explicitly supported by kernel - with Catalina that support is dropped.
- 32 bit apps require 32 bit environment (mostly libraries - both static at compilation time as well as dynamic at runtime) - with Catalina all 32 bit libraries by Apple are dropped. No need for those since system cannot properly open those anymore.
With those above 32 bit launcher will NOT start EVER if user uses Catalina. It will not patch the game, it will not allow to install the game. If you claim that doing a simple reboot will resolve anything and suddenly will allow starting 32 bit apps in Catalina then you obviously do not know what you are trying to talk about.
Oh, your talking about Apples and a brand new OS that was just introduced a couple of months ago. I was talking about all those other computers. It would be nice if they do create support for the Catalina, but the OS has only been out a couple of months. And, given the limitation of no 32 Bit, I don't see this as being a huge OS for Apple right away.
Catalina has not yet been released as stable; it's currently in beta. But it will be released in final form in September, and every macOS user running Mojave is going to get an upgrade prompt saying "Would you like to upgrade to the latest and greatest OS?"
99% of users will click YES -- and why wouldn't they? There are a lot of awesome new features coming to Catalina. Staying on an old OS is a losing battle; eventually it will be obsolete and security updates will stop arriving. You can't live in the past; you have to keep moving forward, as software is always changing, and every release of software has a narrow window during which it's supported, after which continuing to run it is a security risk.
So basically, ZOS has about a month (give or take) to provide a 64-bit launcher for ESO, or nobody running macOS will be able to patch their ESO. If you can't patch the game, then as soon as ZOS releases a patch, you won't be allowed on the servers because you have an out of date ESO version. At that point, Mac support for ESO will basically be dead.
Historically, Mac users have a very high adoption rate on new operating systems. Within 3-4 months, 85% of users are upgraded to the latest major release. Half or more of the users get it within the first 2 weeks.
Clearly, if ZOS doesn't act soon to provide a 64-bit launcher, they are going to lose about 1-2% of their customer base (the folks who play ESO on a Mac). If they are making, hypothetically, $10 million a month (which they will even if they only had 500k subscribers), that's $200k down the drain per month. That $200k should more than pay for the salary of the developer (I say developer singular, because I doubt ZOS is paying for multiple ESO Mac developers) who is responsible for updating the launcher to 64-bit, so by not offering Mac support, they're losing money.
Also, a lot of Mac users tend to be the affluent sort who buy a lot of stuff in the in-game crown store, so I wager they're losing a lot more than $200k/month if they effectively drop Mac support.1 -
Coorbin✭✭✭So I talked to Solid State Networks, and they said they have provided a 64 bit Launcher to ZOS some time ago..... Just putting it out there....
C.
Just to translate this into layman's terms:
So basically, ZOS has the code they need from the launcher's software vendor, but for reasons unknown they're withholding that code from the players for months and making us wait until the official release of Catalina or later to let us play the game on Catalina? Because forget those Catalina beta players, right?
2 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭All nice and good, @jluchau. But.
As I said before (and yes, this thread is just to show to ZOS people are here waiting for it, so call me a primitive jerk, I assure you I can live with that):
1. The Launcher in 64 bit will be a new app. I expect it to not work from the get go. So, throwing that new Launcher out there the day Catalina is released is not a good idea.
2. I doubt the Launcher will be out there at all on release day.
As stated before, the information was out there for more than a year, ZOS did not give a ***.
C.
ZOS probably had to wait for the vendor to update the Mac version of the launcher/patcher to 64 bit, then it probably wasn't exactly compatible, and then there are probably custom bolt-ons need to be updated... On top of all this, they are planning to upgrade launcher software behavior in early 2020, if I remember the timeline. Lots of things going on in the launcher/patcher area right now...
0 -
I really hope you are wrong about this year 2020 part or that at least it does not include switching from 32 to 64 bits.lordrichter wrote: »All nice and good, @jluchau. But.
As I said before (and yes, this thread is just to show to ZOS people are here waiting for it, so call me a primitive jerk, I assure you I can live with that):
1. The Launcher in 64 bit will be a new app. I expect it to not work from the get go. So, throwing that new Launcher out there the day Catalina is released is not a good idea.
2. I doubt the Launcher will be out there at all on release day.
As stated before, the information was out there for more than a year, ZOS did not give a ***.
C.
ZOS probably had to wait for the vendor to update the Mac version of the launcher/patcher to 64 bit, then it probably wasn't exactly compatible, and then there are probably custom bolt-ons need to be updated... On top of all this, they are planning to upgrade launcher software behavior in early 2020, if I remember the timeline. Lots of things going on in the launcher/patcher area right now...
1 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
I really hope you are wrong about this year 2020 part or that at least it does not include switching from 32 to 64 bits.lordrichter wrote: »All nice and good, @jluchau. But.
As I said before (and yes, this thread is just to show to ZOS people are here waiting for it, so call me a primitive jerk, I assure you I can live with that):
1. The Launcher in 64 bit will be a new app. I expect it to not work from the get go. So, throwing that new Launcher out there the day Catalina is released is not a good idea.
2. I doubt the Launcher will be out there at all on release day.
As stated before, the information was out there for more than a year, ZOS did not give a ***.
C.
ZOS probably had to wait for the vendor to update the Mac version of the launcher/patcher to 64 bit, then it probably wasn't exactly compatible, and then there are probably custom bolt-ons need to be updated... On top of all this, they are planning to upgrade launcher software behavior in early 2020, if I remember the timeline. Lots of things going on in the launcher/patcher area right now...
They have announced the 2020 launcher/patcher changes already and it is on their timeline.
They have not said anything more, that I have seen, on Catalina. Obviously, I am not dialed into their product plans and release dates. I assume they are going to do a Catalina drop before 1Q2020, but I would not put it past them to be late and/or not quite fully functional as Catalina crosses the finish line.1 -
Carmina✭✭✭So I talked to Solid State Networks, and they said they have provided a 64 bit Launcher to ZOS some time ago..... Just putting it out there....
C.
Just to translate this into layman's terms:
So basically, ZOS has the code they need from the launcher's software vendor, but for reasons unknown they're withholding that code from the players for months and making us wait until the official release of Catalina or later to let us play the game on Catalina? Because forget those Catalina beta players, right?
That is pretty much spot on, yes. Also, as usual, their information policy on this sucks. Would be easy to say "guys, we are working on this and will be releasing an updated Launcher [ENTER DATE HERE]." But that would be a first, since ZOS never really says anything, do they....
C.
2 -
Carmina✭✭✭lordrichter wrote: »alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
I really hope you are wrong about this year 2020 part or that at least it does not include switching from 32 to 64 bits.lordrichter wrote: »All nice and good, @jluchau. But.
As I said before (and yes, this thread is just to show to ZOS people are here waiting for it, so call me a primitive jerk, I assure you I can live with that):
1. The Launcher in 64 bit will be a new app. I expect it to not work from the get go. So, throwing that new Launcher out there the day Catalina is released is not a good idea.
2. I doubt the Launcher will be out there at all on release day.
As stated before, the information was out there for more than a year, ZOS did not give a ***.
C.
ZOS probably had to wait for the vendor to update the Mac version of the launcher/patcher to 64 bit, then it probably wasn't exactly compatible, and then there are probably custom bolt-ons need to be updated... On top of all this, they are planning to upgrade launcher software behavior in early 2020, if I remember the timeline. Lots of things going on in the launcher/patcher area right now...
They have announced the 2020 launcher/patcher changes already and it is on their timeline.
They have not said anything more, that I have seen, on Catalina. Obviously, I am not dialed into their product plans and release dates. I assume they are going to do a Catalina drop before 1Q2020, but I would not put it past them to be late and/or not quite fully functional as Catalina crosses the finish line.
Well, the point is the switch from 32 to 64 bit is not a feature upgrade. It is a required technical upgrade, and honestly, I expect the Launcher in 64 bit to look and feel exactly the same. It will just be using the new technology. I sincerely do not get why ZOS does not inform people about this.
Sad story, ZOS.
1 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭lordrichter wrote: »alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
I really hope you are wrong about this year 2020 part or that at least it does not include switching from 32 to 64 bits.lordrichter wrote: »All nice and good, @jluchau. But.
As I said before (and yes, this thread is just to show to ZOS people are here waiting for it, so call me a primitive jerk, I assure you I can live with that):
1. The Launcher in 64 bit will be a new app. I expect it to not work from the get go. So, throwing that new Launcher out there the day Catalina is released is not a good idea.
2. I doubt the Launcher will be out there at all on release day.
As stated before, the information was out there for more than a year, ZOS did not give a ***.
C.
ZOS probably had to wait for the vendor to update the Mac version of the launcher/patcher to 64 bit, then it probably wasn't exactly compatible, and then there are probably custom bolt-ons need to be updated... On top of all this, they are planning to upgrade launcher software behavior in early 2020, if I remember the timeline. Lots of things going on in the launcher/patcher area right now...
They have announced the 2020 launcher/patcher changes already and it is on their timeline.
They have not said anything more, that I have seen, on Catalina. Obviously, I am not dialed into their product plans and release dates. I assume they are going to do a Catalina drop before 1Q2020, but I would not put it past them to be late and/or not quite fully functional as Catalina crosses the finish line.
Well, the point is the switch from 32 to 64 bit is not a feature upgrade. It is a required technical upgrade, and honestly, I expect the Launcher in 64 bit to look and feel exactly the same. It will just be using the new technology. I sincerely do not get why ZOS does not inform people about this.
Why doesn't ZOS communicate what they are doing? Many theories on that one, ranging from we don't need to know the details, to they don't know them, either.
1 -
Carmina✭✭✭Problem is some companies even today have not understood the fact that it is better to inform people. Even if there are problems, people are happy to accept them as long as they know someone looks at them.
The way ZOS does it now is "let's just ignore all the problems they tell us about, we will fix them in a couple years anyway", and they do not get that that is exactly what makes people unhappy. It feels like there are problems, and ZOS just does not give a ***. That is company policy for a lot of companies where the CEO just does not care what is going on.
Unfortunately, this is the way you did business 20 years ago, and in the computer world companies are confronted with customers who are used to a much more open form of communication. ZOS is a dinosaur, they believe in the fact that people do not care if the company does not acknowledge the problem.
Since the beginning of ESO being a thing the communication was rotten. People call themselves communications manager, and in fact all they do is ignore what is going on. As usual, the big thing would be if everyone would stop paying their subscriptions. Sadly enough, that is never gonna happen, and ZOS is just like Blizzard: Let's squeeze every last Biot of money out of these players without investing anything more than necessary. Why make customers happy, if you can still make top dollar?
Tbh, this rant can go on for hours, it will not change anything, so I will just stop right here. Maybe someone at ZOS with the balls to change something reads this, and maybe next year Christmas and Easter will be on the same day.
C.1 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Problem is some companies even today have not understood the fact that it is better to inform people. Even if there are problems, people are happy to accept them as long as they know someone looks at them.
The way ZOS does it now is "let's just ignore all the problems they tell us about, we will fix them in a couple years anyway", and they do not get that that is exactly what makes people unhappy. It feels like there are problems, and ZOS just does not give a ***. That is company policy for a lot of companies where the CEO just does not care what is going on.
Unfortunately, this is the way you did business 20 years ago, and in the computer world companies are confronted with customers who are used to a much more open form of communication. ZOS is a dinosaur, they believe in the fact that people do not care if the company does not acknowledge the problem.
Since the beginning of ESO being a thing the communication was rotten. People call themselves communications manager, and in fact all they do is ignore what is going on. As usual, the big thing would be if everyone would stop paying their subscriptions. Sadly enough, that is never gonna happen, and ZOS is just like Blizzard: Let's squeeze every last Biot of money out of these players without investing anything more than necessary. Why make customers happy, if you can still make top dollar?
Tbh, this rant can go on for hours, it will not change anything, so I will just stop right here. Maybe someone at ZOS with the balls to change something reads this, and maybe next year Christmas and Easter will be on the same day.
C.
They are doing better. Really, they are. They still have a ways to go, but one thing that they are still all NSA Galactic Utter Top Secret about is release schedule dates. These things often just get sprung on us, like they don't even know until the last minute. I dunno... Maybe they don't know.
I say that above as someone who has been harping at them about communicating with the customer here in the forum since 2014. I have seen them improve, then fall back, then improve again.... It's maddening. It's like a toddler that won't take to potty training. You hope they will eventually get it, and it cannot come too soon. 1 -
lolmer✭✭So it's now September and Catalina is Officially coming out in "about" 22 days (September 23 is the current estimate). We may want a launcher to test on both Mojave (to make sure you don't break existing non-updated OS X) and Catalina (for those of us on the insider beta program (often to help test other projects))...Edited by lolmer on 2 September 2019 02:581
-
jeroenhmgSoul Shriven
That makes no damn sense. MAC OS is Linux under the hood and any 64-bit Linux OS can run 32-bit apps.
The benefit of a 64 bit launcher is that it will run on macOS 13, which is being released this fall (public beta now). No 64 bit, no go.
There's a gazillion 32-bit apps and libraries for the Mac, why in the world would they try to prevent them from running?
MacOSX/macOS is UNIX, not Linux: https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
It still amazes me how often the "OSX is Linux" line pops up.1 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
That makes no damn sense. MAC OS is Linux under the hood and any 64-bit Linux OS can run 32-bit apps.
The benefit of a 64 bit launcher is that it will run on macOS 13, which is being released this fall (public beta now). No 64 bit, no go.
There's a gazillion 32-bit apps and libraries for the Mac, why in the world would they try to prevent them from running?
MacOSX/macOS is UNIX, not Linux: https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
It still amazes me how often the "OSX is Linux" line pops up.
Yup. Mac OS X derives from BSD, not Linux.
Linux is a very well known brand, so can people be forgiven for thinking that consumer-level Unix-like operating systems are all based on Linux. Sort of like how people use "Kleenex", "Xerox", "Coke" ... when they are not.
Meanwhile, I am wondering if today's patch will include a new Mac launcher.1 -
Deeprave✭✭FreeBSD "copied" a lot of stuff from Linux (which came a good 2 years earlier). I know, i was there ...
Heh, I wasn't going to buy into this, but that is plain BS. It has nothing to do with the timeline and all to do with code licensing and copyright.
FreeBSD was forked from 386BSD, based on the original Intel port of AT&T Unix after much rewriting to exclude AT&T copyrighted code.
Absolutely nothing was "copied" from Linux, certainly nothing of the kernel that is the real "Linux", but even userland utilities in popular Linux distributions were built from code from the GNU project which had far more prohibitive licensing than the original Berkeley open license the FreeBSD userland enjoyed.
The FreeBSD core team went out of its way specifically to _avoid_ copyleft-tainted code. So "copied" is the exact opposite of the truth.
I was there too, even served as a FreeBSD committer in the mid 1990s.
Edited by Deeprave on 3 September 2019 12:181 -
Carmina✭✭✭Just came back for a short peek. Still love WoW classic. And of course still no sign of a 64 bit Launcher So happy this time this did not happen when I had just spent money for six months of Plus... 1
-
demerdecanswrath✭✭✭The October Mac event corresponds to a late-late October Catalina release. It would be inexcusable not to have a proper functioning launcher by then. Update 24 perhaps?
Still, judging from the way things have been going around here I would not be surprised if there wasn't a 64-bit launcher at all when the time comes. Or even if there is, it wouldn't be heavily tested and QA'd enough. Just shoving things out the digital door as usual..
At what point are all those assumptions though? After a year of developer update messages I can count on one hand and constant sighing these are logical conclusions!
Oh and I'm not talking about performance specifically. This has been a valid issue for all platforms for quite some time. I'm talking about the experience on the Mac. The app controls, the I/O, the integration.. A drum I'll be banging every time I post in these forums until it's fixed.Characters:- Arien Larethian (High Elf Templar)
- Relus Demerdecan (Redguard Dragonknight)
- Elisia Bonaire (Breton Nightblade)
Proudly playing and producing content on a 2018 15" MacBook Pro.1
