Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Emoji updates have nothing to do with Apple, they're Unicode standard updates that Apple has to support, unless you want to see "☐" whenever someone's send you a new emoji from a device that did have the updated Unicode. Everyone chill the **** out.
I don't know about you, but I would rather see that box than suffering kernel panics with my new 2019 $4,500 iMac where Mojave and Windows 10 has no issues so it is not the hardware.
 
Emoji updates have nothing to do with Apple, they're Unicode standard updates that Apple has to support, unless you want to see "☐" whenever someone's send you a new emoji from a device that did have the updated Unicode. Everyone chill the **** out.
Simple solution. Apple needs to stop making a big deal out of it and focus on the OS and fixing it. Until they do, we will keep torching them. This entire cycle of OS releases has been a mess. I just want email to work again.
 
Would you rather that Apple simply ignores the new emojis that the Unicode Consortium put together every few months? Hint: It's not Apple that drives the development of new emojis; they are responding to an ever-evolving standard that is devised by an international consortium.

Yep, I couldn't give a toss about emojis. I'd prefer that OS updates focussed on more important things in updates than telling us that there are new emojis.
 
UTF encoding needs no modification to accommodate codepoints of up to 4 byte blocks. There’s nothing magical about these emojis. All are represented by simple codes.

Wrong again. If you actually read the link, it would show you an example of a code change that was necessary, driven by a proposal by Apple

Earlier this year, Emoji 12.0 added options for mixed skin tone support for any of the people holding hands. One part of this implementation determined that it was unnecessary, for example, to support both 👩🏿+ 👩🏻 as well as 👩🏻 + 👩🏿 when holding hands.

The result of this change will mean that each of the hand-holding person-person, woman-woman, man-man, and woman-man will have 25 skin tone combinations. Emoji 12.0 listed 25 combinations for woman-man, but only 15 for the same-gender couples.

Basically, Emoji 12 had to have code to specifically ignore the order of skin tones of same-gender hand-holding people. Apple had the spec changed so that now order matters.
 
Yes. Apple is disappointing me so much lately. Meanwhile my $4,500 2019 iMac gets 4+ kernel panics a day. But let’s release an update for AirPods and emojis. Great work Apple.

Its just odd that theyre not even 'supported' on Mojave. Its not even seemingly a hardware requirement but rather some piece of code in Catalina to make them work.
 
The "consortium" is two editors. One of whom is a Senior Software Engineer at Apple.

No, the Emoji Subcommittee votes and decides. The editors of a standard just help the process move along, they're equivalent to a speaker or chairman.
 
No, the Emoji Subcommittee votes and decides. The editors of a standard just help the process move along, they're equivalent to a speaker or chairman.

Yes, I agree there are many players involved. Several more from Apple as well. I think it's reasonable to state that Apple carries a non-insignificant influence over the development of 51.
[automerge]1572390186[/automerge]
Ignore them. They are worse than teenagers.

All a matter of perspective. Don't ignore the couple of other groups in these threads looking for the build number, is the new Mac in there somewhere, and whatever other repetitive garbage. All those topics ignore real issues, specifically in the latest release. Things like deleted mail, eGPU driver issues, software compatibility, and so on.

By the way, can someone explain to me why knowing the build number in like post 5 is of any importance whatsoever? Happens every thread. Why would anyone need that information?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Equitek
Hello, is your album art in tact? Mine was not when I first 'upgraded' to Catalina.

Cheers bud.

yes it is
[automerge]1572390524[/automerge]
one issue that I note that is still present is that my series 4 Apple Watch is still not unlocking; ill report back if it starts to work
 
  • Love
Reactions: joelovesapple
yes it is
[automerge]1572390524[/automerge]
one issue that I note that is still present is that my series 4 Apple Watch is still not unlocking; ill report back if it starts to work

Whoa!!! Is this a known issue with the watches not unlocking, or is this just happening to you?

I have my new Series 5, and I would be super annoyed to install Catalina (I am still on Mojave, but downloading Catalina 10.15.1 as I type this) and not be able to unlock my MacBook Pro with my AW!!!

Thanks in advance.

:apple:
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjini
one issue that I note that is still present is that my series 4 Apple Watch is still not unlocking; ill report back if it starts to work

It consistently breaks after every system update. You have to go to Security in System Preferences, disable the feature, exit, go back in and reenable it. That always fixes it for me.
 
By the way, can someone explain to me why knowing the build number in like post 5 is of any importance whatsoever? Happens every thread. Why would anyone need that information?

It's for people on the beta to know if they need to update or not. Ideally, the final beta release should be exactly the same as the public release, but that's not always the case.

It also is used to identify if any changes were made between public and developer betas. That is if somebody reports developer build 123 severely breaks something, and public beta is also 123, then people who the bug affects are likely to skip it.
 
Last edited:
Running pretty well so far. This alongside iOS 13.2 are the versions of the 2019 operating systems that should have been released in the first place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjini and iGeneo
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.