Mountain Lion focuses on Cocoa, drops X11 and deprecates Carbon Core

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 98
    Deprecating Carbon also adds another list of good but older games that will also be deprecated. Unlike professional software that is maintained and upgraded every few years or so.



    Games have a business model of build it, support for maybe 1-2 years and then move to the next game. Sometimes if we are lucky we get a game ported to work with OSX when Apple decides to change something, but considering many are windows ports and licensed for a set amount of years many games we play have a set expiration on them that is not seen on any other platform.



    I'm surprised developers release software on the mac, not only do we have a smaller market share, but Apple requires continuos support far beyond what one would need for windows. (Obviously they are making a profit.)



    And I don't doubt in 3 or 4 years, some Cocoa library will become deprecated, or Apple will switch to ARM, etc.



    You don't think we need the towers? Hell we'll need the towers to run vmware or virtual box on the metal and run OS 10.5, 10.6, 10.7... just so we have access to all our software. Who wants to rebuy everything, every 2 years? Or have a room filled with macs... with their hardware slowly dying.
  • Reply 62 of 98
    ksecksec Posts: 1,569member
    Since M.Lion is only av as download. This would be another step to reduce the download size.
  • Reply 63 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by doh123 View Post


    Wireshark...



    Wine.. including Crossover and Wineskin... but they bundle their own X11 builds inside, but still rely on some of XQuartz being installed.







    really? thats very short sighted. Java is a major software language that needs to be supported... X11 is also major on other *nix systems since it is THE windowing system on Linux, BSD, etc... it helps in easily making ports. Many current apps still using some Carbon, including stuff like MS Office 2011... hopefully they'll leave it as deprecated for a few versions before removing anything.



    You thinking just cuz Apple is getting bigger that they can force the whole world to change to exactly what they want is very short sighted. Just because you have an idea of "proper" doesn't mean its right.



    Beyond all that I'm sure some day all of Apple devices will become like iOS devices... slightly better than they are now.. much worse than Macs are now. While I do know ObjC/Cocoa well, and really do like it... as a computer user and not a Phone/Pad user for my main computing... I'm pretty sure in a few years I'll have to go back to Linux, or even use Windows more... Apple is trying to get out of the actual personal computer business and just wants to make an iPad-like focus.



    Force the whole world to change? They already did that with iOS - play with Apple's rules or don't.



    500k apps and 24bn downloads later and I think Apple are quite valid in thinking that they can (and will) dictate how people develop software on their platform.



    As for X11 - we've managed to name 3 applications that need it. As for Academia wanting/needing X11 - they can still download an open source. However, having a sister who just bought an MBP for university, I can assure you that any idea that X11 is needed across academia is misguided and dated. They are more interested in whether you run Word than X11.



    But my point for X11 still stands - developers like GIMP have had plenty of time to get themselves onto the OSX platform properly. No one is stopping you downloading an open source, just Apple aren't going to support it themselves.



    Does anyone (care to) remember OpenOffice and NeoOffice? Someone at Neo took the time and trouble to recode the OpenOffice interface to Apple APIs (and did a fine job as well), and now OpenOffice does it as standard. So why does GIMP continue to use X11?



    And lets stop pretending X11 is some fantastic windowing platform. It's a total nightmare on the Mac - ala Gimp. None of the controls work properly (eg file manager), non of the keystrokes work the way you want or are use to. It's a pile of crap that should long have support OSX UI APIs.





    As for Java, another crap platform. I have rarely met a Java application that I've liked, or felt was very stable. But I've met plenty on both the OSX and Windows platform that are total garbage - and from mainstream software developers (like HP, IBM and bunches of others). They are buggy as hell, inconsistent UI (because they are determined to draw their own buttons rather than call the OS), and so forth.
  • Reply 64 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ksec View Post


    Since M.Lion is only av as download. This would be another step to reduce the download size.



    Lion didn't care much about that. Physical size is way less important than active resources used. If they could get it to sip RAM and CPU cycles, it can balloon to 8GB for all I care.
  • Reply 65 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tru_canuk View Post


    You shouldn't care or be worried really. But there are people who just want a reason to complain so they'll do it even when there's no reason to.



    Nope. There are also people who really need this.



    I use Crossover/Wine a lot and not having X11 would be very bad. However, it's not when it is downloadable.



    Sometimes there actually are reasons to complain... today isn't one of them. :-)
  • Reply 66 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mgsarch View Post


    The arrogance in this sort of assessment is just laughable. I use X11 every day. I'm a programmer.



    Apple continues to cater to consumerism while ignoring the wants of their pro users. This is not the last straw for me but this trend is becoming worrisome for people like me that have enjoyed using OS X as an alternative to a real development systems like .. linux.



    I am not the only developer that feels this way.



    You should be glad about this not angry. As a programmer I'm sure you'd want to be on feature parity with other developers which you aren't as it stands currently.



    Is it just me or are developers not entirely objective in their approach to changes? Surely if something is going to make your life better and easier you'd want it wouldn't you?
  • Reply 67 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by darrynlowe View Post


    Nope. There are also people who really need this.



    I use Crossover/Wine a lot and not having X11 would be very bad. However, it's not when it is downloadable.



    Sometimes there actually are reasons to complain... today isn't one of them. :-)



    No one is preventing you from running X11 though! Apple are just saying that you have to press a button to download if you need it, and that they are passing the role of support off onto the community that created it.







    edit, apologies for quoting you, i've managed to quote the wrong person.
  • Reply 68 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by maciekskontakt View Post


    Sure. Those who do not want commercial Photoshop may be using GIMP that is X11 application and very powerful alternative to basic Photoshop Elements. I do use it because it is free... and even though on other Mac (for design buisness) we have whole slew of licensed pro apps from Adobe and Quark I prefer something lightweight most of the time.



    I prefer Pixelmator. Trounces Photoshop and GIMP in terms of speed and requirements, leverages OS X features (hence most of the speed), and is quite cheap.
  • Reply 69 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lightknight View Post


    I don't know if that is good or bad, but anyway I'm not getting ML.



    I can't tolerate to have a world where computer makers decide if I may, or not, install stuff on my machine as is the case on the iPhone. If Apple starts doing that, how long will it be before Microsoft and friends do it? Yeah right.



    I'm really scared that people go "oh, security is so much better like that, let's go walled garden as with the iPhone". Wake up call, this is computing. This is BAD. Yeah, Big Brother's seems a great world to live in. Secure and all. It's still BAD.



    And please people, don't go "it's optional". It's optional IN ML. Next release, it might not be. Worse, it's the STANDARD setting! I hope Apple changes their mind. If they don't, I'll have to go back to Microsoft when ML is standard on Apple machines (I dare not call them "computers"... if they're not anymore).



    Apple, think different? They're turning into a worse IBM than IBM ever was, a more controlling Google than Google ever was.



    This is scary.



    This post is ridiculous. OS developers do this all the time INCLUDING Linux. They always give you options though and Apple is no different. Why does Apple have to do everything when others can do the job better? Why does Apple have to develop its own version of Java when Oracle can do it better? Why does Apple have to develop their version of X11 when X11 can provide a better version?



    Apple is trimming the fat that isn't needed by the majority. Let me ask you this. What version of Windows comes with Java, Flash Player, and X11? NONE. There never has been a version with these features so why get upset when Apple makes that same decision?



    It's far better that the developers do their own work rather than rely on Apple doing the dirty work for them. That way people can choose if they need it or not.
  • Reply 70 of 98
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by darrynlowe View Post


    Why does Apple have to do everything when others can do the job better?



    But when Apple does include something it can value they get accused from controlling too much. They can't win with some people.
  • Reply 71 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Lion didn't care much about that. Physical size is way less important than active resources used. If they could get it to sip RAM and CPU cycles, it can balloon to 8GB for all I care.



    But Lion was mostly a ground up rewrite so it needed to be larger in file size. If Mountain Lion can come in as a kind of delta upgrade then the file sizes will only need to be huge when reinstalling from scratch as you have to download an entire OS.
  • Reply 72 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz View Post


    Bold steps to take leaps forward > legacy support.



    If it was worth having then, its been remade for the now.



    I couldn't agree more and this has been something I always admired about Apple vs other OS alternatives.
  • Reply 73 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by darrynlowe View Post


    But Lion was mostly a ground up rewrite so it needed to be larger in file size.



    No, it wasn't. And it wasn't any larger or smaller than any other recent OS X release.
  • Reply 74 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Oh no! Now people who have never used X11 will complain about not having X11 even though it's still installable and people that have old Carbon apps will complaint that it's Apple's fault that their 10 year old app won't work properly.



    People get angry at apple but really they should get angry at the lazy developers who don't even take the time to adjust to simple changes like building a package installer vs drag n drop. We work with professional vendors for window platforms who are just now putting resources into moving their product to Win 7.
  • Reply 75 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    No, it wasn't. And it wasn't any larger or smaller than any other recent OS X release.



    I was thinking in the sense that the whole thing was written for 64bit. Snow Leopard was still largely implementing 32bit. As such Lion required a full upgrade to a lot of system stuff to be 64bit.



    With the underlying infrastructure being 64bit it now only needs to be stuff they've changed since which can in fact be done in a sort of delta-update fashion as opposed to a massive upgrade like what happened with Lion.
  • Reply 76 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by darrynlowe View Post


    I was thinking in the sense that the whole thing was written for 64bit. Snow Leopard was still largely implementing 32bit. As such Lion required a full upgrade to a lot of system stuff to be 64bit.



    Not all of the Lion system stuff is 64-bit, that's for sure. Trust me on that one.
  • Reply 77 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by darrynlowe View Post


    I was thinking in the sense that the whole thing was written for 64bit. Snow Leopard was still largely implementing 32bit. As such Lion required a full upgrade to a lot of system stuff to be 64bit.



    With the underlying infrastructure being 64bit it now only needs to be stuff they've changed since which can in fact be done in a sort of delta-update fashion as opposed to a massive upgrade like what happened with Lion.



    Snow Leopard was the re-write that brought you 64 bit Cocoa and legacied Carbon to 32 bit only.



    Grand Central Dispatch, LLVM/Clang, OpenCL, CUPS, etc., all came with Snow Leopard.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Snow_Leopard
  • Reply 78 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jasenj1 View Post


    Inkscape. GIMP's drawing sibling. As Illustrator is to Photoshop. I use both GIMP and Inkscape regularly.



    And this change won't bother me. Anyone nerdy enough to know what GIMP or Inkscape are, is nerdy enough to install XQuartz. If you know you need it, you can install it. Otherwise it doesn't take up space.



    - Jasen.



    Inkscape is getting ported to GTK+ 3.x which has Compliant Interfaces to Cocoa.



    When the port get's more volunteers to make this happen it will no longer need Xorg on OS X, period.



    The same goes for GIMP.



    Blender has a Cocoa port.



    KDE utilizing Qt 4.8 and 5.x have Cocoa options to make their interfaces mesh with Cocoa.



    The sooner they get build scripts for LLVM/Clang the sooner these ports will improve.



    Blender already has work on it. There are plenty of Cmake examples inside LLVM/Clang to leverage.
  • Reply 79 of 98
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    Snow Leopard was the re-write that brought you 64 bit Cocoa and legacied Carbon to 32 bit only.



    All the system apps were 64-bit but I recall a lot of the processes were still showing up as 32-bit.
  • Reply 80 of 98
    ecsecs Posts: 307member
    I come from the commercial UNIX workstation market, so I've a lot of software which runs with X11 (both own code and third-party code). I've always liked OSX because it's the kind of rock-solid OS I've always used to with UNIX workstations.



    However, I've seen a direction change in Apple for the last year. They want to change OSX in a way opposite to its natural evolution. First it was Lion, introducing broken behavior that you can't customize (Autosave and Versions), and now it's X11. While the bundled X11 version is outdated, I firmly believe Apple should have invested in X11, developing in it a way that X11 software could be made Aqua-friendly if you wish so.



    Well, it's now nonsense to argue an Aqua-friendly X11 development, since they're getting rid of Aqua anyway.



    I'm not against merging iOS and OSX. Please merge them, but do it in the right way.



    Anyway, this is no longer Apple. This is Microsoft with a fruit logo.



    I've serious doubts I'll be using OSX two years from now.



    Sad because it was a great OS, but if they trash it I'm not going to use a trashed OS, of course.
Sign In or Register to comment.