• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: How viable is Cocoa development?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: How viable is Cocoa development?


  • Subject: Re: How viable is Cocoa development?
  • From: Bob Savage <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 23:31:04 -0600

on 1/25/02 10:50 PM, Erik M. Buck at email@hidden wrote:

>> the problem with GX, as Gregory mentions above, was not that GX
>> was lousy technology, it was that developers didn't adopt the
>> new technology. That is what killed GX.
>
> And how is that different from Cocoa within Apple ?

Yes. That was my point. It is not up to Apple to make Cocoa a success any
more; it is up to developers to adopt it.

One big difference between Cocoa and OpenDoc and GX, that your comment
obscures, however, is that Cocoa is an integrated part of MacoSX. OpenDoc
and GX were always an optional install. They were going to become required
in the Copland time frame. Apple would have a much harder time simply
dropping Cocoa from the next release of MacOSX.

Bob


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: How viable is Cocoa development?
      • From: Thomas Jahnsen <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: How viable is Cocoa development? (From: "Erik M. Buck" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: How viable is Cocoa development?
  • Next by Date: Re: How viable is Cocoa development?
  • Previous by thread: Re: How viable is Cocoa development?
  • Next by thread: Re: How viable is Cocoa development?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread