RW 8.9.3 & macOS Tahoe viability

1

I’m at a crossroads here. I’m looking for comments regarding viability using RW (specs in the title). I’m starting to notice that my setup is beginning to feel its age. As a matter of fact it was feeling its age when RW ‘Classic’ was launched. To me my current set up feels ‘clunky’. Is RW Elements worth the upgrade? Yes, I do not subscribe to service based apps (aka subscriptions). One of my favourite stacks developers (Stacks4stacks) shuttered awhile ago and although he does continue to offer support for his legacy products, I feel that both the stacks community and RW (8.9.3) are being left behind as the web evolves. I know RW was left behind awhile ago, but I think you (The community) know what I mean.
I guess my question is can I still continue to use my current set-up to keep a website modern in the face of evolving web standards?

I’ve invested hundreds of $$ over the years in stacks and really don’t want to move to elements to start all over again. That and the feeling of abandonment by the creator of RW. On another note the stacks app seems to have stopped? No updates in a long time… like many. many web years ago. Any idea if development will ever continue or is that beating a dead horse? I’m too old to re-learn shit and would prefer to stick to my current set-up but again, to reiterate my concerns - is there hope to stick with 8.9.3 (stacks app, Joe workman, etc) or move on (which is what I really don’t want to do).

1 Like
2

Since you asked I just opened my last version of RW which is 8.9.3-- In 2026 I have only six updates all from JW.

If you want to use Joe Workmans stacks you could wait till Stacks App 6.0 is released
Many have been waiting for an update to the public beta for over a year. “Please note that the developer version is being updated” It’s interesting to think of all the developers that have left the Stacks add-ons business over the last 4 years.

As for value for what we bought, like with so many things… We bought, it used & now many of the developers have now moved on. I too have 2953 stacks on an older Intel Mac.
I should add up the true cost of orphaned stacks someday.

On my newer system I am only running about 1054 stacks to keep my legacy sites running.
I keep trying new html development tools & still struggling to recommend any.

1 Like
3

Mark,

You are definitely not alone. My personal investment in the Stacks plugin and third-party stacks from talented independent devs has been continuous since 2009.

This combination has allowed me to “Make Great Sites” (© J. Workman) and scrape an income as a freelance designer. Believe me, developers and designers alike are just as concerned as you about the future.

Let’s break it down:

1) RW Classic to RW Elements

Not a realistic option for anyone with a deep investment in the Stacks universe. RW Elements is certainly aiming to become a powerful alternative, but right now it lacks the sheer depth and breadth of creative add-ons that Stacks offers.

Such a shame that Dan and Isaiah couldn’t have merged their talents a while back.

2) RW Classic for the Foreseeable

RW 8 and 9 work. Yes, in a somewhat “clunky” way, but sticking with it is viable—many of us are doing just that with only minor niggles.

The reality is that Realmac shifted focus around RW8.x, mostly shipping incremental maintenance fixes.

The introduction of the subscription model in RW9 (~$90/year for minimal noticeable improvement) felt like a misstep that lost them respect—and sales—from many veteran users.

3) Subscriptions vs. Pay-Per-Version

Coming from professional experience in other design media, I firmly believe a modern recurring model for creative software is The Way.

It gives developers reliable income for their hard work, incentivizing them to listen, learn, and release meaningful upgrades regularly—not just standard bug fixes. It’s a fair way to compensate small enterprises for tools that allow us designers to shine.

For a long time, many stacks were under $20 a pop. In a niche market, that pricing model eventually led to burnout for devs and confusion for users.

Now, prices have adjusted to reflect true development costs, but we’ve landed in a wild range—from ~$9 all-in to ~$150+ for a single-site license (for a tool still in development, no less!). It’s no surprise some devs and users are taking a hike.

Which brings us to…

4) Stacks the App

There is something almost biblical about the gestation period of Stacks the App. Lord only knows when a production-ready release will actually drop. We get occasional updates from Isaiah and Joseph alongside early betas, but progress feels slow.

I suspect Stacks the App hasn’t been a primary income stream, which naturally affects development momentum. How different might things look if it had a full subscription model behind it where delays equal lost revenue?

Having said all that, Mark… I’m still hanging on for Stacks the App.

Bets on Christmas anyone?

4 Likes
4

What odds are you offering?

1 Like
5

The year was not specified but 2028 looks about right

4 Likes
6

I reckon it’s odds-on Nigel.

But then I am the eternal optimist :woozy_face:

1 Like
7

@Geoff I totally agree with your summary. This has basicall been my experience. A few months back I moved from Foundry & RW to Elements. It became a huge learning curve and meant that I would typically have to upload twice as many files for the same project on RW. It was a real disaster. I moved back to RW but went for Foundation 6 due to the huge investment in stacks over many years. Now we have been waiting, I think , for 3 years for Stacks 6 to launch but nothing in site nor has a time line been released by Isaiah. I am just in limbo, like many others. Your Head did release Stacks 5.3.3h when after Tahoe was released due to the outcry from people due to Stacks not working and crashing all the time. Just unacceptable and not professional in my opinion. In summary, we are all in a bind.

7 Likes
8

« Di Stacks the App la gestazion si fa sì lunga,
che par che ’l tempo suo non trovi meta,
e ’l fine a l’intelletto si prolunga.

Sol Dio sa quando l’opra fia compiuta,
ché ’l mastro ancor lavora ne la cuna,
e la “produzion” par che ci scuta.

Così l’attesa di Stacks the App è fatta artiglio,
divenuta un cerchio de lo 'Nferno cupo,
per gli utenti sospesi in gran periglio. »

— Dante Alighieri

« Of Stacks the App the gestation grows so long,
that time itself seems bound to lose its shore,
and to our minds the end is further borne.

God only knows when production shall be born,
for still the master labors in the cradle,
and the final release appears to mock our scorn.

Thus the wait for Stacks the App becomes a claw,
turning into a ring of dark Hell’s deep domain,
for users suspended in anxious, heavy pain. »

— Dante Alighieri

7 Likes
9

PoetryWeaver

10

Coming back to the original post, did anyone test RW 8.9 with macOS 27 ?

1 Like
11

Thanks for the comments.
I’ve decided on a temporary solution, hoping that the stacks app will come to fruition one day. I just can’t stand trying to run it under tahoe.

I have dug out an old 2018 Intel Mac mini and loaded with macOS Monterey. It has 32gb of ram and although it is an i3, seems to run very well, not only that I’ve yet to have to restart RW 'cause of a hang that would occur frequently under Tahoe.
Cheers

12

I have a working Intel MacBook Pro system for legacy RW/Stacks as well…
Always nice to have a Plan-B

But no, I am not running the MacOS 27 beta…

13

I’ve even held off Tahoe for RW, so no :pleading_face:

14

Don’t know what macOS 27 is, but the latest update I have is macOS Tahoe 26.6. RW Classic works with that version.

15

To add my situation to this conversation, I have totally dropped RW for newer sites. I make all new sites with Codex and two other systems I have, one even lives on my computer. That one is free. I am still a sentimental RW user though, and I still use it for updating sites that are made with it. Using ai, and particularly Codex installed as an app on one’s Mac, that is some powerful stuff. I am getting the feeling that nothing is impossible with that. It is not just vibe coding anymore; it has expanded into a full programming system that is nothing close to what we understood as vibe coding just a few months ago. I do not see how stacks apps and even the new RW can survive this development without becoming more expensive to use, as also mentioned here. Developers will have a lot less incentive to make anything for RW without taking a hefty price.

As a sidenote, I have made several custom stacks also with AI, but I abstain from making any for the RW users since I do not want to compete with our esteemed developers. Just to be fair to them.

1 Like
16

When Apple updates their system software moving forward it will have the same number of the year. The question only matters since Apple likes to break things as they change things with the operating system. Many developers are testing new & old software against the beta to have a smooth migration for the users.

MacOS 27 is set to be released in September 2026.

MacOS 26 = 2026
MacOS 27 = 2027
MacOS 28 = 2028
MacOS 29 = 2028

iOS 26 = 2026,
iOS 27 = 2027
iOS 28 = 2028
iOS 29 = 2028

17

I moved from PC and Microsoft for this very reason, too many updates that break things, with the updates being mostly useless. Do developers feel the same way, or are they as frustrated as I when it comes to these “annoying” updates?