From: Andrew Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 02:16:11PM +1000, John Wiltshire wrote:
>> In
>> effect there will be very little gain to the OSS community
>from application
>> written for Carbon or Cocoa (such as IE or OE). These apps
>still require a
>> major porting effort to work on X/KDE/Gnome/whatever.
>
>Except for whichever of those toolboxes is the one that feels
>like NeXT-Step. Is that still called Yellow box? Something
>like that anyway. It mightn't be too hard to get those apps to
>run on top of open-step.
That's true. The API you are thinking of is Cocoa. OSX (pronounced "Oh Ess
Ten") supports 3 GUI APIs:
Classic - The original Mac API which runs full screen inside a VM (kinda
like the original versions of Windows on OS/2). Previously called Blue Box.
Carbon - The "safe" Classic APIs which have been tweaked a little to make
them work on a 'real' OS with protected memory and preemptive multitasking.
Cocoa - Derived from OpenStep, previously called Yellow Box.
Now that Darwin supports XFree, you might find that OSX will also run X
applications natively as well. :-)
>Not that that has anything to do with Microsoft, though. As you
>say: they'll just use the compatability libraries.
They seem to have gotten a bit more serious about Mac support. The
compatibility libs are still there of course, but they've gotten a lot
better since the original IE. In a lot of ways I prefer IE5 on the Mac to
IE5 on 'doze.
John Wiltshire
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
