sowens
Member
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 284 |
quote: Originally posted by Eug
I guess I should have been more clear. I didn't mean to say that carbon = native, but it does mean that a carbon program can be made to look as if it runs natively. Unfortunately, the Finder was not written to make full use of all of the carbon potential. A big drawback of this program is that it doesn't even support Services, even though this program is one of the core programs of OS X. A true Cocoa program should support Services by default, but a carbon program can be made to support them too. One other big limitation of some carbon programs (like Office v.X and AppleWorks 6) is a <32 character filename limit. Very irritating.
Um, explain "natively". All programs that run on the Mac are native PPC binaries. Whether they run under OS9 or OSX, they use the same basic instruction set (obviously G4's have the Altivec extensions, among other architectural differences). The reason programs won't run under OSX is because the API's have changed.
Now, I'll admit that my development experience in OSX is limited (but growing), but it was always my understanding that Carbon was a C++ API that allowed developers with OS9 programs to recompile with very few changes to their code. The API was supported under both OS9 and OSX via the Carbon dynamically loadable library so that the programs could work in either environment. This, to me, points to the fact that a Carbon program is, by definition, native to either environment.
To be considered a true Cocoa app, a program needs to be rewritten in Objective C, as this is the language used to write the Cocoa API. That's the only requirement that I'm aware of. Services don't even factor into it.
quote:
Well, it's at best a very early release. There are still some significant speed issues with my G3 600. eg. windows resizing, program load speed, etc. Re: Windows resizing - I suspect the reason that Office v.X doesn't use real time windows resizing is because of this speed issue. It chose to use just outlines instead. Plus some niggling bugs persist. See my Finder directory display bug.
G3's were always considered the low end of the spectrum in terms of running OSX. The G4's Altivec instructions give it a considerable advantage when it comes to certain operations, and I'm sure OSX takes advantage of that where it can. Given that, though, for the length of time I played with the iBook at CompUSA yesterday, I never noticed any of these issues when compared to my 450Mhz G4 Cube with 896Mb of memory. In fact, given it's size and weight, I was quite impressed with the performance of OSX on the iBook.
quote:
After rereading this it sounds like I'm pretty down on the OS. Don't get me wrong. OS X.1 is my favourite OS of all time. It's cool, intuitive, and stable. What I can say about Windows 2000 is only that it's stable.
Agreed. Coming from both a Windows and a Unix background, OSX is probably the best OS I've dealt with yet in terms of user experience (Oh man, I'm starting to spout Apple-speak ). Now that I've switched, I don't ever want to look back.
__________________
It's gotta be weather balloons. It's always weather balloons. Big, fiery, exploding weather balloons.
-- ComaVN (from Slashdot)
|