On 1/12/01 9:09 PM, "Peter Gort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> on 13/1/01 12:18 PM, Omar Shahine at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On 1/12/01 2:19 PM, "Remo Del Bello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> on 1/12/01 12:28 PM, Dan Crevier deftly typed out:
>>>
>>>>>> No, that's not what it means. Office for X will only work on OS X.
>>>>>> Carbon
>>>>>> makes it *possible* to write an app that will run on both, but that is
>>>>>> very
>>>>>> difficult.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you're saying that Office for OS X is a Cocoa app? ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> What he's saying is that Carbon makes it possible to write an app for both
>>> OS 9 and X, but not necessary. An application can be made OS X native by
>>> using the Carbon APIs, but without additional effort won't necessarily still
>>> run in OS 9. I'm getting the impression that it'll be OS X only.
>>
>> Yes.
> Not being privy to Microsoft's code I can't say for sure, but for example:
>
> The move to OSX means that the "extensions" that MS installs in your system
> folder cannot be used in the same way. OSX tries REALLY HARD to make
> developers put all needed resources in their application, not in "the
> system". If an application's capabilities need to be shared with other
> applications, then several alternatives are available, "services" being one
> of them. So because MS cannot just move the "extensions" over to OSX, they
> must re-engineer them in one of the OSX ways (shared libraries probably),
> which makes it almost impossible to make a single application for both
> platforms.
Office does not share any extensions in the extensions folder (with the
exception of the web download of Microsoft Office Manager). It only
installs shared libraries, which are fully supported on Mac OS X. The
Services stuff is only available in Cocoa apps, not Carbon apps.
Dan
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
