Re: itunes for windows HOWTO ???
Re: itunes for windows HOWTO ???
- Subject: Re: itunes for windows HOWTO ???
- From: Alex Perez <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:47:51 -0800
On Nov 10, 2003, at 8:19 PM, David Leimbach wrote:
I think you need a definition of FUD :)
I don't see Fear Uncertainty or Doubt.
On Nov 10, 2003, at 9:44 PM, Alex Perez wrote:
A reply to the FUDmaster follows...
[SNIP}
Important notes for GnuStep:
* It's incomplete (but improving all the time).
FUD. It's not perfect, but so much progress has been made in the last
year, and it really pisses me off when people assume that it has not.
Wow... you need to read. He said its not done but improving all the
time.
I don't read anything negative about that except your willingness to
call everything FUD.
I feel that the overall tone of the e-mail was highly negative, The
opinion that 99% of Cocoa devvers seem to hold is that it's incomplete
because it's not a total clone of Cocoa, which it is not intended nor
designed to be. Essentially, I looked at this comment within the larger
context of this e-mail.
* It's not based on Cocoa, but rather the much older OpenStep spec
from NeXT's days. Any Cocoa stuff which makes it in is purely
coincidental.
No, it's not, nor will it ever be, based on Cocoa. That being said,
it's probably 95% the same. We implement things from Cocoa we see as
useful. One of the things that will be implemented shortly is
NSToolbar, because many people find it useful.
That is nice to know. There are many new APIs that are in 10.3 only
for Cocoa that I have found and will probably use in my applications.
Having my apps work in GNUStep would be cool but its not a requirement
for the audience I intend stuff for.
Yep, and while we don't particularly think NSController's
implementation is very good, there's talk (and had been before 10.3 was
even out) of implementing it for the sake of compatibility, since it's
recognized that it will likely be highly utilized. My point is that we
don't live with our heads in the sand.
* (Last I looked) it had very little GUI stuff available, so again,
it's probably not entirely suited to the original poster's
requirements
Wrong, wrong wrong. I use GNUstep's GUI daily, and it works just
fine. GNUstep's AppKit works, and is being improved by the week. This
is pure FUD, and I believe this kind of misinformed FUD-slinging is
why more people don't look into it.
This was also qualified by "last I looked"... no FUD seen here.
By his statements, it's quite obvious it's been well over a year since
he 'last looked'. A totally out of date, slightly biased opinion is
often less valuable than none at all.
* They sometimes deviate and do things their own way, because they
feel the OpenStep method is not good enough (which may be the case,
but still, lost compatibility...)
Wrong. The OpenStep Spec is not a Holy Grail. There are instances
where things were implemented in sub-optimal ways, and we fix those
instances. There are also instances where Apple has implemented
certain things in sub-optimal ways. For what it's worth, often times,
if we come across a compatibility issue, we choose to go with the way
that Cocoa has implemented it, even if there's a technically better
way to do it. That being said, we're not in lockstep with Apple's
implementations, nor do we intend to be.
So in saying he was wrong about GNUStep having different
implementations due the "sub optimal" ways it was done in OpenStep you
are agreeing yet you still say he is wrong?
Your explanation sounds like you are:
1) Correcting problems you see in OpenStep [good for you]
2) Correcting problems you see in Cocoa [also good for you]
3) Compromise your own ideas because you like Cocoa better sometimes
[smart design decisions]
I didn't call this FUD, I called his assertion 'wrong.' See above. My
point, once again, is that we don't live with our heads in the sand,
and on a case-by-base basis the GNUstep team evaluates whether or not
certain concessions should be made in the name of improving design
quality and, separately, in improving compatibility where it is seen as
beneficial.
So... I hope you can see that what you are doing is deviation and that
my saying so isn't FUD. :)
Nope, my intention was only to clear the haze of misunderstanding that
many folks have about GNUstep. Lots of people don't even understand
what GNUstep is, and think it's a Desktop Environment, ala GNOME or
KDE, which is is not.
* They sometimes can get lazy and don't do things "properly" (e.g.
their Distributed Objects implementation works differently to
Apple's, for better or worse)
There are technical reasons for this that are beyond the scope of
this e-mail, and beyond the scope of my ability to clearly explain.
Someone over in email@hidden would be happy to explain it
to you if you really do care.
I think "properly" in quotes is used to express that Apple's way might
be seen as properly to many people as that is the
both the host and topic of this mailing list - Apple's implementation.
Quite possibly. I completely overlooked the quotes when responding to
this e-mail. Once again, it's not that we're hostile towards Apple in
any way, we (people who program and/or use GNUstep) just don't think
everything Apple does is gold-plated.
I wouldn't call GNUStep developers lazy at all and I think its a
low-blow of sorts to do so. That I would call FUD but you sure didn't
:)
Yes, and this is actually what got me quite irritated in one heck of a
hurry. These people don't get paid to do what they do, unlike Apple
(and previously NeXT) engineers. In a lot of ways, GNUstep fulfills the
objectives that OPENSTEP never did. GNUstep supports more platforms
than OPENSTEP ever did, yet it lacks in other ways.
Alex Perez
email@hidden
"Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat
it."
--Thomas Jefferson
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.