Re: question
Re: question
- Subject: Re: question
- From: Karl Kuehn <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:49:00 -0400
I think before going any farther you are going to have to decide/tell
the list which route you are going to use to mac a "native MacOS X"
application. Your basic choices are:
Obj-C Cocoa: considered the most "native" MacOS X application.
Basically non-portable to any other operating system (not completely
true... but good enough for this conversation).
Java Cocoa: you can use your understanding of the Java language and
library of java code, but the interface is done with Apple's classes,
and you often use Apple frameworks because they are available. Can be
slightly more portable.
Carbon (MacOS X only): In this form of Carbon you get to use your old
code, but re-fit it with many of the new technologies in MacOS X: Core
Graphics, Large Files, New Frameworks, ObjC++. Problem is, it will not
run in MacOS 9.
Carbon (Compatible): This is the route that many of the big name apps
have gone (more or less). It is using a subset (loosely defined) of the
old Macintosh Toolbox, and is almost always a C or C++ application. You
get to run on MacOS X or 9 and get the memory protection in 10. But you
miss out on most of the other advantages.
AppleScript Studio: Small applications written with snippets of
AppleScript, often used to glue other small tools together to get some
work done. Very easy to make an interface to a faceless background
application (and looks and behaves like a MacOS X app... because it is
one). Useable only on MacOS X, and there are some caviets as you look
at different versions of MacOS X.
Cocoa bridged applications: These include a number of other languages
that are bridged to Cocoa, language such as Perl (CamelBones), Ruby,
Python, etc. These applications usually are written to allow already
written applications in those languages a nice GUI in MacOS X. These
are semi-native.
These are the big, "native" choices. Then you get a bunch of other
choices:
Unix apps. Here I am grouping all of the command line and X11
applications that have been ported to (or written for) MacOS X. The
command line group includes some massive applications such as the
Apache web server, and as small as shell scripts. And there is a
similar range in the X11 apps with the GIMP topping off that list for
me.
These applications don't generally have a nice Mac look or feel to
them, but are very powerful tools available on MacOS X.
Java applications: very cross platform, but there are some performance
issues when it comes to user interface, as well as not having the same
look and feel of a MacOS X app.
QT, WebApps, Revolution, etc.. there are a whole number of small
cross-platform methods of programming that are available. Each with
strengths and weaknesses.
Classic Applications: as the name implies, classic MacOS 9
applications that don't directly touch hardware. They work, but with
all the down sides of MacOS 9.
Now... care to ask the list a more specific question?
Karl Kuehn
email@hidden
On Tuesday, September 2, 2003, at 01:00 PM, Tehrani, Henry wrote:
I am creating a native application under OSX and have some problems
that I
did not have under OS9.
_______________________________________________
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.