Re: itunes for windows HOWTO ???
Re: itunes for windows HOWTO ???
- Subject: Re: itunes for windows HOWTO ???
- From: Alastair Houghton <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:48:06 +0000
On 11 Nov 2003, at 10:13, Brian Hannan wrote:
>
On Nov 11, 2003, at 1:24 AM, Alastair Houghton wrote:
>
>
>> * (Last I looked) it had very little GUI stuff available, so again,
>
>> it's probably not entirely suited to the original poster's
>
>> requirements
>
>
>
> (I'm assuming that you mean that the Windows support is incomplete?)
>
>
>
> From what I've heard, the X11 support works on Windows, so you *can*
>
> use an X server to take advantage of the more stable GUI
>
> implementation
>
> under X.
>
>
Cygwin. X11. GnuStep. Etc, etc.
>
>
If you're playing around with getting a Cocoa app on Windows that
>
might be good enough.
>
>
But if you're serious about building a native Windows app with native
>
Windows look and feel, with the UI a Window's user expects, then build
>
a Win32 frontend app. Factor out the backend into C/C++, Java or some
>
other language that's easily portable for you. Just as a MacOS X user
>
would prefer a Cocoa or Carbon app obeying human interface guidelines
>
and using native widgets such as toolbars, drawers, sheets, etc so
>
will a Window's user enjoy the equivalent on their platform.
Sure. In fact, that would be the approach I would probably recommend
myself if anybody is going to try to write a cross-platform app with
Windows support... but the comments Wade made were specifically about
GNUStep.
>
Cocoa isn't a cross platform application framework.
Well, it *was*, in the past.
>
And it isn't API compatible with GnuStep.
Not 100%, no. But if you only want one set of GUI code, it's currently
the best we've got (in the Cocoa world, that is).
>
And for all the noble effort going into GnuStep, from what's been said
>
here and what I've seen on their website, you won't get the same
>
stability and reliability as opposed to building a native Windows
>
frontend using Win32 APIs.
I don't think that it's fair to make comments about GNUStep's stability
and reliability on Windows without actually have used it on Windows
(which is why I have avoided doing so). Yes, they say that their
Windows UI code is in a very early stage of development, but I don't
think you can use that statement to infer things about its robustness.
>
No, I'm not a Windows lover. But if you have the time and concern for
>
users on that platform, I'd say give them the native UI and experience
>
they expect.
There's nothing inherent in the Cocoa framework itself that says what
the UI should look like. In OPENSTEP days, OPENSTEP apps supposedly
looked and acted pretty much like proper Windows apps, and I imagine
that Sun probably had OPENSTEP apps looking like Motif applications.
I do agree that it may be a bit premature to use GNUStep as a
portability layer for many people, although equally if commercial
developers (like us) want to port to Windows in the future, it might be
worth some of us contributing code to GNUStep to get what *we* want
(i.e. native Windows UI). It's a balancing act between the effort of
maintaining two (or three) separate UI implementations and the effort
required to make GNUStep behave how we need.
Kind regards,
Alastair.
[demime 0.98b removed an attachment of type application/pkcs7-signature which had a name of smime.p7s]
_______________________________________________
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.