[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC

Subject: Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC
From: Tim McGaughy <email@hidden>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:23:54 -0500
Delivered-to: email@hidden
Delivered-to: email@hidden
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; bh=vdPJILqi7lXnhfvxnw1ogKDV0mtoepYFnwvvCq72XkU=; b=YXb2ygBHYPDLg9XUyMjAwf+WqfDM0HPfWFgYmgIQCg0swfwhwvJ/LtnJy1a9yLq2Q5xaTwC175/Vef7XYIH53YBaRblGbftjmJ/ze74xpghquVxiZDek5BgbsGgjmm07FEwP+yUklvnP8MjMtAnIPOlKcJ/NpmVKJoFdaaLh0XQ=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=pEXW0BCIudFytpePVOAAAkWQ+iGBTU8aeGnQrVdimFRqmS5+oi68FzzTb1CJInzjNIpFNYE72HgQ7G6uOkYkFG6lRyws8d+XI4oLpbxyzMU7epM9GbkipFwIYHiqr6SDDImoMhT31j7xszK7hByXi1ZecYdcOIDovIRRM8twMCc=


On Apr 8, 2008, at 4:44 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote:

On 08 Apr 2008, at 22:53, Tim McGaughy wrote:
On Apr 8, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Jack Small wrote:
On Apr 8, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Tim McGaughy wrote:
I don't think it's really ever been a secret that Carbon was intended primarily as a bridge for OS9 apps to port to OS10.
That is absurd and inflammatory. It is revisionist history in every sense of the term.
No, it isn't. Back when OS10 was first introduced, Apple's developer pages kept suggesting that new projects be started using Cocoa rather than Carbon.
They backpedalled a lot on that over the years, and after a while started introducing all sorts of new and shiny Carbon APIs. Jobs even said at of the more recent WWDCs (in '06 in the context of announcing that both would get a 64 bit overhaul?) that Carbon and Cocoa were both first class citizens on Mac OS X.

I guess they changed their minds, then. And obviously, they've returned to their original position.

I think John Nack of Adobe explains it better than I - as he would say - Cocoa is not the One True Way™.

<http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/04/photoshop_lr_64.html>
They're going to release a 64 bit version, and it's going to use Cocoa. They're just going to be a little late with it. So? He doesn't seem to be ranting at Apple.
He explains why they're going to be late, and how people shouldn't complain to them because Apple only let them know at WWDC07 that they'd have to ditch their Carbon code and move everything over to Cocoa if they wanted 64 bits support (he indeed doesn't mention that Apple previously publicly stated that this would not be needed).

If you didn't think Apple had abandoned Carbon as useless, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Why do you keep claiming that Carbon is useless while it obviously isn't? Just to get people worked up so you can then complain about them ranting and tell them to chill?

1. I did not claim anything of the sort. I made a comment about Apple's perception of Carbon, not my own. If I personally felt that Carbon was totally ludricrous, I wouldn't even be on the list.

2. I did not tell you to chill. If you want to work yourself into a foaming frenzy, then knock yourself out.

Really, objective C isn't that hard to learn.
Non sequitur. Neither is Portuguese.
Portuguese isn't nearly as similar to English as Objective C is to C++ and plain old C. If you know C++, you're already most of the way there.
He was merely saying that your statement was besides the point. The main issue is not that it is supposedly difficult to learn Objective-C, but a) the fact that people are forced to do it without seeing a good reason for doing so (it's like me telling you to stop using Apple Mail and to switch to Thunderbird, even though you may prefer Apple Mail for various reasons and even though it works perfectly well for you; and while Thunderbird is not a typical Mac app, it isn't difficult to learn either) b) the fact that learning Objective-C is not even a tenth of the work. The main work is learning the Cocoa APIs (and forgetting the Carbon ones) c) all existing Carbon/C(++) (and Carbon/Pascal, of which there appears to be more around than I'd ever thought) code is not going to rewrite itself into Cocoa/Objective-C code nor debug itself along the way

The fact remains that the Carbon list gets a little over 500 messages in a month's time, while the Cocoa list gets well over 2000 in the same period. You can keep complaining that the conversion to Cocoa is too difficult if you want, but huge numbers of programmers are doing exactly that.

The fact also remains that if you want advanced features provided by the Cocoa framework, you only need learn enough objective C to interact with the objects and classes it provides. You can write the rest of your program in whatever other language you wish.

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Carbon-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/carbon-dev/email@hidden

This email sent to email@hidden

References:
	>No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: "ZhaoYu" <email@hidden>)
	>Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: Jack Small <email@hidden>)
	>Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: Bill Bumgarner <email@hidden>)
	>Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: "parag vibhute" <email@hidden>)
	>Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: Tim McGaughy <email@hidden>)
	>Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: Jack Small <email@hidden>)
	>Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: Tim McGaughy <email@hidden>)
	>Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC (From: Jonas Maebe <email@hidden>)

Prev by Date: Re: Does deprecated Drag Manager API SetDragItemFlavorData() stillwork with "typeFileURL" flavor type on Leopard OS?
Next by Date: Re: Does deprecated Drag Manager API SetDragItemFlavorData() stillwork with "typeFileURL" flavor type on Leopard OS?
Previous by thread: Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC
Next by thread: Re: No session about Carbon in WWDC
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Home