Re: EOF Advocacy, Open Source?
Re: EOF Advocacy, Open Source?
- Subject: Re: EOF Advocacy, Open Source?
- From: Finlay Dobbie <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:54:18 +0100
But Apple doesn't like opensourcing things, they like to keep their
"crown jewels" private and closed and cuddle up close to them on rainy
days, just because they can. It's stupid, yes. Difficult to use but
there is better than not there. Omni opensources their frameworks, but
there is no documentation, and no doubt certain bits of them are
difficult to use, but they are always willing to help people try to
understand them, and the community is there so people can get together
to figure things out. I don't see why the rules should be any different
for Apple, but apparently they just come up with crap like "it's too
difficult" or "going away" as a cheap cop-out.
It's lame, guys, and it won't get us anywhere.
-- Finlay
On Wednesday, August 15, 2001, at 02:03 am, Scott Anguish wrote:
On Tuesday, August 14, 2001, at 04:07 PM, Eric Peyton wrote:
On Tuesday, August 14, 2001, at 02:42 PM, Finlay Dobbie wrote:
There are lots of private frameworks that Apple really should make
public. It's silly, really. All that functionality is there, but if
we want to use it we are supposed to re-invent the wheel.
Or difficult to use (i.e. not documented), or on the road to going
away, or poorly implemented in the first place, or Apple just doesn't
want to support that SPI long term, or there is not time to clean the
framework, document it, test it, etc.
Well, then OpenSource them... they'll get supported and help
developers. few of these things would have any strategic value to
outside OSs.