Re: Don't be so glum . . .


	/-/S'pht-Translator-Active/-/

Re: Don't be so glum . . .

Posted By: Forrest of B.org Date: 6/6/05 1:17 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Don't be so glum . . . (Steve Levinson)

: The thing that really excites me about this move in the long term is that the
: move could encourage traditional PC developers to write software for the
: Mac. We already saw this with the transition to OS X in which we picked up
: a large number of traditional Unix/Linux developers. I had hoped that
: Apple would introduce a Windows compatibility layer but if so, it
: certainly wasn't revealed today. I just hope that Apple won't be so myopic
: as to fear that porting portions of Cocoa to Windows would amount to
: giving away their prime assets. By making some version of Cocoa and Xcode
: available to traditional PC programmers for free, Apple would be
: encouraging developers to write software that can run under either Windows
: or OS X. There is nothing Apple could do that would have a greater impact
: on increasing market share than this single action. Buy a Mac - run all
: your favorite apps. And for a lot of people like me who have to use
: Windows at work, being able to run it natively on my PowerBook would be a
: Godsend.
Cocoa for Windows sounds like a great idea for everybody (except MS), but Windows compatibility in OSX, while good for everyone at first sight, will be very bad for both Apple and Mac users in the end. After all, if someone only has to code for Win32 or its ilk, and it'll run "just fine" (if butt-fugly and with all bass-ackwards behaviors) on OSX, why code a native OSX app then? Some folks say Windows compatibility killed OS/2, because nobody made OS/2 apps that only ran on OS/2, only Windows apps that ran on both. And then, why not just run Windows if all your apps are Windows apps already?
However, Cocoa for Windows, if it gains sufficient momentum, could be enough to offset the negative effects of a Windows VM in OSX, which would then leave you with only the positive effects. But that is a really, really big "if", especially given one of the dominant major app developers is MICROSOFT, and they would likely never code in Cocoa (for Mac or Win) if they could keep it "Windows-native" (with no Apple dependencies) and still sell to the Mac market.

[ Post a Reply | Message Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg ]
Pre-2004 Posts

Replies:

Apple to use Intel? (OT) Steve Levinson 6/5/05 5:06 p.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Kyjel 6/5/05 5:24 p.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) D-M.A. 6/5/05 7:56 p.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Reiginko 6/5/05 8:46 p.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) D-M.A. 6/6/05 5:15 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Bob-B-Q 6/6/05 5:23 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Adam Ashwell 6/6/05 9:56 a.m.

From his own mouth - it's true! *NM* Steve Levinson 6/6/05 8:33 a.m.

bye apple - it was nice knowing you! *NM* D-M.A. 6/6/05 8:36 a.m.

Don't be so glum . . . Steve Levinson 6/6/05 9:03 a.m.

Re: Don't be so glum . . . D-M.A. 6/6/05 10:44 a.m.

Re: Don't be so glum . . . Forrest of B.org 6/6/05 11:04 a.m.

Re: Don't be so glum . . . Steve Levinson 6/6/05 11:46 a.m.

Re: Don't be so glum . . . Kanen Faud'r 6/6/05 12:58 p.m.

Re: Don't be so glum . . . Forrest of B.org 6/6/05 1:17 p.m.

Toasted... Tasnu Arakun 6/7/05 11:41 p.m.

I can see the ads now... Callie21V 6/6/05 5:10 p.m.

Re: I can see the ads now... Kyjel 6/6/05 5:49 p.m.

Best post I've read in a long time! :) *NM* Reiginko 6/7/05 2:16 a.m.

Re: I can see the ads now... Forrest of B.org 6/7/05 8:14 a.m.

Tua consilia omnia nobis clariora sunt quam lux Tyler 6/6/05 1:34 p.m.

Re: Tua consilia omnia nobis clariora sunt quam lu Purple Penguin 6/6/05 9:10 p.m.

Re: Tua consilia omnia nobis clariora sunt quam lu Kanen Faud'r 6/7/05 6:42 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Vid Boi 6/8/05 2:07 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Reiginko 6/8/05 5:44 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Johannes Gunnar 6/8/05 9:29 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Speaker-To-Animals 6/8/05 10:31 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Speaker-To-Animals 6/8/05 10:30 a.m.

Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT) Bob-B-Q 6/8/05 11:16 a.m.

[ Post a Reply | Message Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg ]
Pre-2004 Posts

Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:
: Cocoa for Windows sounds like a great idea for everybody (except MS), but : Windows compatibility in OSX, while good for everyone at first sight, will : be very bad for both Apple and Mac users in the end. After all, if someone : only has to code for Win32 or its ilk, and it'll run "just fine" : (if butt-fugly and with all bass-ackwards behaviors) on OSX, why code a : native OSX app then? Some folks say Windows compatibility killed OS/2, : because nobody made OS/2 apps that only ran on OS/2, only Windows apps : that ran on both. And then, why not just run Windows if all your apps are : Windows apps already? : However, Cocoa for Windows, if it gains sufficient momentum, could be enough : to offset the negative effects of a Windows VM in OSX, which would then : leave you with only the positive effects. But that is a really, really big : "if", especially given one of the dominant major app developers : is MICROSOFT, and they would likely never code in Cocoa (for Mac or Win) : if they could keep it "Windows-native" (with no Apple : dependencies) and still sell to the Mac market.

If you'd like to include a link to another page with your message,
please provide both the URL address and the title of the page:
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:

If necessary, enter your password below:
Password:

Problems? Suggestions? Comments? Email maintainer@bungie.org
Marathon's Story Forum is maintained with WebBBS 5.12.

Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Steve Levinson	6/5/05 5:06 p.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Kyjel	6/5/05 5:24 p.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	D-M.A.	6/5/05 7:56 p.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Reiginko	6/5/05 8:46 p.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	D-M.A.	6/6/05 5:15 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Bob-B-Q	6/6/05 5:23 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Adam Ashwell	6/6/05 9:56 a.m.
From his own mouth - it's true! NM	Steve Levinson	6/6/05 8:33 a.m.
bye apple - it was nice knowing you! NM	D-M.A.	6/6/05 8:36 a.m.
Don't be so glum . . .	Steve Levinson	6/6/05 9:03 a.m.
Re: Don't be so glum . . .	D-M.A.	6/6/05 10:44 a.m.
Re: Don't be so glum . . .	Forrest of B.org	6/6/05 11:04 a.m.
Re: Don't be so glum . . .	Steve Levinson	6/6/05 11:46 a.m.
Re: Don't be so glum . . .	Kanen Faud'r	6/6/05 12:58 p.m.
Re: Don't be so glum . . .	Forrest of B.org	6/6/05 1:17 p.m.
Toasted...	Tasnu Arakun	6/7/05 11:41 p.m.
I can see the ads now...	Callie21V	6/6/05 5:10 p.m.
Re: I can see the ads now...	Kyjel	6/6/05 5:49 p.m.
Best post I've read in a long time! :) NM	Reiginko	6/7/05 2:16 a.m.
Re: I can see the ads now...	Forrest of B.org	6/7/05 8:14 a.m.
Tua consilia omnia nobis clariora sunt quam lux	Tyler	6/6/05 1:34 p.m.
Re: Tua consilia omnia nobis clariora sunt quam lu	Purple Penguin	6/6/05 9:10 p.m.
Re: Tua consilia omnia nobis clariora sunt quam lu	Kanen Faud'r	6/7/05 6:42 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Vid Boi	6/8/05 2:07 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Reiginko	6/8/05 5:44 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Johannes Gunnar	6/8/05 9:29 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Speaker-To-Animals	6/8/05 10:31 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Speaker-To-Animals	6/8/05 10:30 a.m.
Re: Apple to use Intel? (OT)	Bob-B-Q	6/8/05 11:16 a.m.



	Your Name:
	Your E-Mail Address:
	Subject:
	Message: : Cocoa for Windows sounds like a great idea for everybody (except MS), but : Windows compatibility in OSX, while good for everyone at first sight, will : be very bad for both Apple and Mac users in the end. After all, if someone : only has to code for Win32 or its ilk, and it'll run "just fine" : (if butt-fugly and with all bass-ackwards behaviors) on OSX, why code a : native OSX app then? Some folks say Windows compatibility killed OS/2, : because nobody made OS/2 apps that only ran on OS/2, only Windows apps : that ran on both. And then, why not just run Windows if all your apps are : Windows apps already? : However, Cocoa for Windows, if it gains sufficient momentum, could be enough : to offset the negative effects of a Windows VM in OSX, which would then : leave you with only the positive effects. But that is a really, really big : "if", especially given one of the dominant major app developers : is MICROSOFT, and they would likely never code in Cocoa (for Mac or Win) : if they could keep it "Windows-native" (with no Apple : dependencies) and still sell to the Mac market.
	If you'd like to include a link to another page with your message, please provide both the URL address and the title of the page:
	Optional Link URL:
	Optional Link Title:
	If necessary, enter your password below:
	Password: