Fine, then run Windows in a VM. No need to dual-boot or install X11. Ugh.
If you direct people to use WINE you're just going to frustrate them.
I'm not. I would never direct people to use WINE. I would first try to get them to get Mac versions, if at all possible.
If that wasn't possible, and Crossover was available, I'd suggest that. If they NEEDED Windows (and some do), I'd suggest that they dual boot - if it can be done. We don't know that yet.
If it was an occasional program, and they didn't NEED power, then I'd suggest a VM, if available.
Lastly, I'd suggest that they find someone to install WINE and their program for them.
EDIT:
Just reread your post. Crossover will, hopefully, be running under Aqua on the x86 machines.
Then how do you know installing, running, an using WINE is a pain?
I didn't say I never used it. I'm just not a fan of whichever Linux distro is the flavor of the month at any particular time. The people who use Linux are not masochists, as was suggested. They like if for whatever reason they have.
It was interesting to learn, and play with. But if I used it more than just occasionally, I WOULD be a masochist.
I didn't say I never used it. I'm just not a fan of whichever Linux distro is the flavor of the month at any particular time. The people who use Linux are not masochists, as was suggested. They like if for whatever reason they have.
It was interesting to learn, and play with. But if I used it more than just occasionally, I WOULD be a masochist.
That's why I'm here, and not on a Linux site.
You'd be surprised how similar Linux and OS X are. Especially if you use GNOME.
I'm not. I would never direct people to use WINE. I would first try to get them to get Mac versions, if at all possible.
If that wasn't possible, and Crossover was available, I'd suggest that. If they NEEDED Windows (and some do), I'd suggest that they dual boot - if it can be done. We don't know that yet.
You're the only one suggesting dual-boot.
Quote:
If it was an occasional program, and they didn't NEED power, then I'd suggest a VM, if available.
VMs run Win2K very well. I don't understand why you think they lack "power."
The only reason to dual-boot is to run games, which ironically is the only practical reason why you would run WINE
Quote:
Lastly, I'd suggest that they find someone to install WINE and their program for them.
Only to have it break when they update WINE
Quote:
EDIT:
Just reread your post. Crossover will, hopefully, be running under Aqua on the x86 machines.
VMs run Win2K very well. I don't understand why you think they lack "power."
The only reason to dual-boot is to run games, which ironically is the only practical reason why you would run WINE
Only to have it break when they update WINE
Bullshit
I'm not suggesting anything that any intelligent person can't see for themselves.
Forget 2K. Think about XP, which is much slower under VM, and then Vista, which will be slower still.
There are reasons to dual boot. I'm happy to leave it up to those who wish to do so.
When they update WINE, if you knew about it, they add API's from Windows. It doesn't break. It's getting those API's to work in the first place that's the problem.
The project leaders have said that this is an objective on their site. A Quote:
" a strong interest in developing the quartzdrv (in order to replace the X11 driver in Wine)"
Jeremy White has also stated that they want Crossover to run in Aqua.
"Bullshit"???
You are a problem child, aren't you? And I thought we were doing so well.
The project leaders have said that this is an objective on their site. A Quote:
" a strong interest in developing the quartzdrv (in order to replace the X11 driver in Wine)"
Jeremy White has also stated that they want Crossover to run in Aqua.
"Bullshit"???
You are a problem child, aren't you? And I thought we were doing so well.
I'll believe it when I see it.
Note that they didn't say Crossover would run without X11. Why? Because it will.
Sure, we all 'want' it to run without X11, but who has actually coded anything to that effect?
(raises hand. Look around to see if anyone else has their hand raised)
Let me translate what that quote means in the real world:
"We're going to do a quick port of our WINE setup tool, I mean Crossover, and if someone were to develop a Quartz driver we would like that. Don't expect us to do it unless we see a huge market in it. After all we're in it for the money, dollar dollar bling y'all."
Are they developing a Quartz driver in complete secrecy as I type this? Perhaps, but I highly doubt it.
I'm not suggesting it takes a braniac to write one. Hell, I wrote and rewrote one. It doesn't take much brains, just lots and lots of toil.
If you want specific technical reasons why I don't think they are doing SHIT towards this effort, I might go on. However, you seem convinced with their talking points.
If you want specific technical reasons why I don't think they are doing SHIT towards this effort, I might go on. However, you seem convinced with their talking points.
Actually, I would like to know why you think they aren't, technically, of course, without the enthusiasm.
I've used GNOME, and that's a heaping helpful of fanciful BS.
GNOME...they're trying to be Windows so bad it's sad.
Frankly I believe you're confusing GNOME with KDE.
GNOME is quite okay Usability-wise, though certainly not quite at the point Mac OS has been for years. Drag&drop support, for one, is lacking. Window management is inferior. Etc.
But still, GNOME is in many ways ahead of Windows in the UI department. KDE, on the other hand, is beyond retarded.
Frankly I believe you're confusing GNOME with KDE.
GNOME is quite okay Usability-wise, though certainly not quite at the point Mac OS has been for years. Drag&drop support, for one, is lacking. Window management is inferior. Etc.
But still, GNOME is in many ways ahead of Windows in the UI department. KDE, on the other hand, is beyond retarded.
This is why I stay away. Each of the dozens of platforms has its adherents, and the progfams don't travel.
Actually, I would like to know why you think they aren't, technically, of course, without the enthusiasm.
First of all, if they were developing this driver as opposed to giving it lip service, they would have announced it instead of saying it would be a nice and interesting thing to have.
Secondly, if they were actively tinkering around with Darwine they wouldn't keep that a secret either. They certainly don't with WINE on Linux. They're not working on the bomb for crissakes.
Thirdly, there was a lot of 'talk' about this situation and making a true WINE 2D back-end blah blah, but nothing came of it. Why? Nobody is developing it.
As for ditching X11, it is complicated because WINE was developed on X11, and X11 is a (needlessly) complicated beast. A basic GDI driver has to do a crapload of things before you can even draw a line or blit bitmaps. The existing driver tries to do a lot of this in X11, which only complicates things because to do simple things in X11 requires a lot of tricks and instead of doing things in a graphics library agnostic way, WINE was grafted on X11 like an organ. It uses X11 to draw everything and manage simple types like bitmaps.
For example let's say you want to implement Win32 bitmaps. There is a back-end library GDI which uses the front-end X11 driver. However, because the ONLY front-end anyone is using is X11, the back-end is designed to make the front-end a simple(r) implementation. The back-end also assumes the only front-end supporting stuff like OpenGL/D3D is X11/GLX. The end result is a quartz-specific back and front-end will have to be written. Nobody is (I hope) going to do this without involving a larger effort to clean up both ends so the same code runs on both platforms.
Add to this the problem that you can't draw a lot of these primitives in Quartz and a bunch of other problems...
I was in the process of doing this on my own, but I got too frustrated with the lack of documentation (both Win32 and WINE). I kept having to simulate the behavior of the X11 driver in terms of handling bitmaps, and the internal behavior for Win32 and WINE are undocumented (and may not even agree). Not being a Win32 or X11 expert also led to frustration. Having some help would have been nice.
Eventually I'll get a head of steam and try it again, but I don't have much incentive to try that hard.
Frankly I believe you're confusing GNOME with KDE.
I'm not. I'm just not enamored with anything GNOME, although I am amazed how much memory GNOME apps consume.
Quote:
GNOME is quite okay Usability-wise, though certainly not quite at the point Mac OS has been for years. Drag&drop support, for one, is lacking. Window management is inferior. Etc.
Yea, you can thank the ICCCM for everything lacking and not working.
(Inter Client Communication Conventions Manual)
Quote:
But still, GNOME is in many ways ahead of Windows in the UI department. KDE, on the other hand, is beyond retarded.
My point is GNOME keeps trying to achieve the pinnacle of interface disasters which is Windows.
First of all, if they were developing this driver as opposed to giving it lip service, they would have announced it instead of saying it would be a nice and interesting thing to have.
Secondly, if they were actively tinkering around with Darwine they wouldn't keep that a secret either. They certainly don't with WINE on Linux. They're not working on the bomb for crissakes.
Thirdly, there was a lot of 'talk' about this situation and making a true WINE 2D back-end blah blah, but nothing came of it. Why? Nobody is developing it.
As for ditching X11, it is complicated because WINE was developed on X11, and X11 is a (needlessly) complicated beast. A basic GDI driver has to do a crapload of things before you can even draw a line or blit bitmaps. The existing driver tries to do a lot of this in X11, which only complicates things because to do simple things in X11 requires a lot of tricks and instead of doing things in a graphics library agnostic way, WINE was grafted on X11 like an organ. It uses X11 to draw everything and manage simple types like bitmaps.
For example let's say you want to implement Win32 bitmaps. There is a back-end library GDI which uses the front-end X11 driver. However, because the ONLY front-end anyone is using is X11, the back-end is designed to make the front-end a simple(r) implementation. The back-end also assumes the only front-end supporting stuff like OpenGL/D3D is X11/GLX. The end result is a quartz-specific back and front-end will have to be written. Nobody is (I hope) going to do this without involving a larger effort to clean up both ends so the same code runs on both platforms.
Add to this the problem that you can't draw a lot of these primitives in Quartz and a bunch of other problems...
I was in the process of doing this on my own, but I got too frustrated with the lack of documentation (both Win32 and WINE). I kept having to simulate the behavior of the X11 driver in terms of handling bitmaps, and the internal behavior for Win32 and WINE are undocumented (and may not even agree). Not being a Win32 or X11 expert also led to frustration. Having some help would have been nice.
Eventually I'll get a head of steam and try it again, but I don't have much incentive to try that hard.
Ok, you have some good arguments there. But doing this in isolation as you say you have, is different than working a team with a monetary goal in mind. I've seen more difficult projects come to fruition.
If you are saying that Crossover isn't being developed on the Mac, you'd be wrong. That was a public announcement.
Jeremy Did state that they want to have it running under Aqua, though not in this statement. It was in an answer to a question. Will that come soon? Not likely. But that doesn't mean that it won't come at all. Remember that Crossover is a commercial product. If running it under Aqua gets them more customers, both OEM, and retail, that's an incentive.
You should go to the Darwine team, and contribute to that. I'm sure that they would be very happy to get your help (seriously).
Ok, you have some good arguments there. But doing this in isolation as you say you have, is different than working a team with a monetary goal in mind. I've seen more difficult projects come to fruition.
Like I said before, difficulty isn't the issue.
Quote:
If you are saying that Crossover isn't being developed on the Mac, you'd be wrong. That was a public announcement.
That press release says nothing of the sort. Quote the part where they say they are developing on Mac OS X.
Quote:
Jeremy Did state that they want to have it running under Aqua, though not in this statement. It was in an answer to a question. Will that come soon? Not likely. But that doesn't mean that it won't come at all. Remember that Crossover is a commercial product. If running it under Aqua gets them more customers, both OEM, and retail, that's an incentive.
If an "OEM" customer wants to port their windows app, they would likely strip out the GDI if they didn't want to use X11. This means they don't need a Quartz driver. This is especially true of any apps or games with OpenGL or D3D interfaces, or just a simple interface which can be written in any other API.
Quote:
You should go to the Darwine team, and contribute to that. I'm sure that they would be very happy to get your help (seriously).
That press release says nothing of the sort. Quote the part where they say they are developing on Mac OS X.
They are doing their work on Apple's developers kit. I suppose that's not enough? Even though they will initially have this under X11, it's still being done through OS X, evin if they Start by supporting Darwin through X11. From a June letter they sent out:
"and waiting for our dev kit to arrive )."
I suppose you'll figure out a way to say that it means nothing.
Quote:
If an "OEM" customer wants to port their windows app, they would likely strip out the GDI if they didn't want to use X11. This means they don't need a Quartz driver. This is especially true of any apps or games with OpenGL or D3D interfaces, or just a simple interface which can be written in any other API.
That's true, if they did that they wouldn't need a quartz driver. But the Darwine team is working on one anyway.
Comments
Originally posted by strobe
Fine, then run Windows in a VM. No need to dual-boot or install X11. Ugh.
If you direct people to use WINE you're just going to frustrate them.
I'm not. I would never direct people to use WINE. I would first try to get them to get Mac versions, if at all possible.
If that wasn't possible, and Crossover was available, I'd suggest that. If they NEEDED Windows (and some do), I'd suggest that they dual boot - if it can be done. We don't know that yet.
If it was an occasional program, and they didn't NEED power, then I'd suggest a VM, if available.
Lastly, I'd suggest that they find someone to install WINE and their program for them.
EDIT:
Just reread your post. Crossover will, hopefully, be running under Aqua on the x86 machines.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Then how do you know installing, running, an using WINE is a pain?
I didn't say I never used it. I'm just not a fan of whichever Linux distro is the flavor of the month at any particular time. The people who use Linux are not masochists, as was suggested. They like if for whatever reason they have.
It was interesting to learn, and play with. But if I used it more than just occasionally, I WOULD be a masochist.
That's why I'm here, and not on a Linux site.
Originally posted by Chucker
Wine will eventually work over Quartz. It's just a matter of time.
Sure, these things 'just happen'...
My Quartz driver for WINE 'works', so long you're only drawing black lines
Originally posted by melgross
I didn't say I never used it. I'm just not a fan of whichever Linux distro is the flavor of the month at any particular time. The people who use Linux are not masochists, as was suggested. They like if for whatever reason they have.
It was interesting to learn, and play with. But if I used it more than just occasionally, I WOULD be a masochist.
That's why I'm here, and not on a Linux site.
You'd be surprised how similar Linux and OS X are. Especially if you use GNOME.
Originally posted by melgross
I'm not. I would never direct people to use WINE. I would first try to get them to get Mac versions, if at all possible.
If that wasn't possible, and Crossover was available, I'd suggest that. If they NEEDED Windows (and some do), I'd suggest that they dual boot - if it can be done. We don't know that yet.
You're the only one suggesting dual-boot.
If it was an occasional program, and they didn't NEED power, then I'd suggest a VM, if available.
VMs run Win2K very well. I don't understand why you think they lack "power."
The only reason to dual-boot is to run games, which ironically is the only practical reason why you would run WINE
Lastly, I'd suggest that they find someone to install WINE and their program for them.
Only to have it break when they update WINE
EDIT:
Just reread your post. Crossover will, hopefully, be running under Aqua on the x86 machines.
Bullshit
Originally posted by Gene Clean
You'd be surprised how similar Linux and OS X are. Especially if you use GNOME.
I've used GNOME, and that's a heaping helpful of fanciful BS.
GNOME...they're trying to be Windows so bad it's sad.
Originally posted by strobe
GNOME...they're trying to be Windows so bad it's sad.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
You have no idea what you're talking about.
O RLY?
Taskbar? Check.
MDI interface apps? Check.
Hideous frames/tabs interfaces? Check.
Take a step back and look at that monstrosity!
Originally posted by strobe
You're the only one suggesting dual-boot.
VMs run Win2K very well. I don't understand why you think they lack "power."
The only reason to dual-boot is to run games, which ironically is the only practical reason why you would run WINE
Only to have it break when they update WINE
Bullshit
I'm not suggesting anything that any intelligent person can't see for themselves.
Forget 2K. Think about XP, which is much slower under VM, and then Vista, which will be slower still.
There are reasons to dual boot. I'm happy to leave it up to those who wish to do so.
When they update WINE, if you knew about it, they add API's from Windows. It doesn't break. It's getting those API's to work in the first place that's the problem.
The project leaders have said that this is an objective on their site. A Quote:
" a strong interest in developing the quartzdrv (in order to replace the X11 driver in Wine)"
Jeremy White has also stated that they want Crossover to run in Aqua.
"Bullshit"???
You are a problem child, aren't you? And I thought we were doing so well.
Originally posted by melgross
It doesn't break.
The project leaders have said that this is an objective on their site. A Quote:
" a strong interest in developing the quartzdrv (in order to replace the X11 driver in Wine)"
Jeremy White has also stated that they want Crossover to run in Aqua.
"Bullshit"???
You are a problem child, aren't you? And I thought we were doing so well.
I'll believe it when I see it.
Note that they didn't say Crossover would run without X11. Why? Because it will.
Sure, we all 'want' it to run without X11, but who has actually coded anything to that effect?
(raises hand. Look around to see if anyone else has their hand raised)
Let me translate what that quote means in the real world:
"We're going to do a quick port of our WINE setup tool, I mean Crossover, and if someone were to develop a Quartz driver we would like that. Don't expect us to do it unless we see a huge market in it. After all we're in it for the money, dollar dollar bling y'all."
Are they developing a Quartz driver in complete secrecy as I type this? Perhaps, but I highly doubt it.
I'm not suggesting it takes a braniac to write one. Hell, I wrote and rewrote one. It doesn't take much brains, just lots and lots of toil.
If you want specific technical reasons why I don't think they are doing SHIT towards this effort, I might go on. However, you seem convinced with their talking points.
Originally posted by strobe
If you want specific technical reasons why I don't think they are doing SHIT towards this effort, I might go on. However, you seem convinced with their talking points.
Actually, I would like to know why you think they aren't, technically, of course, without the enthusiasm.
Originally posted by strobe
I've used GNOME, and that's a heaping helpful of fanciful BS.
GNOME...they're trying to be Windows so bad it's sad.
Frankly I believe you're confusing GNOME with KDE.
GNOME is quite okay Usability-wise, though certainly not quite at the point Mac OS has been for years. Drag&drop support, for one, is lacking. Window management is inferior. Etc.
But still, GNOME is in many ways ahead of Windows in the UI department. KDE, on the other hand, is beyond retarded.
Originally posted by Chucker
Frankly I believe you're confusing GNOME with KDE.
GNOME is quite okay Usability-wise, though certainly not quite at the point Mac OS has been for years. Drag&drop support, for one, is lacking. Window management is inferior. Etc.
But still, GNOME is in many ways ahead of Windows in the UI department. KDE, on the other hand, is beyond retarded.
This is why I stay away. Each of the dozens of platforms has its adherents, and the progfams don't travel.
Originally posted by melgross
Actually, I would like to know why you think they aren't, technically, of course, without the enthusiasm.
First of all, if they were developing this driver as opposed to giving it lip service, they would have announced it instead of saying it would be a nice and interesting thing to have.
Secondly, if they were actively tinkering around with Darwine they wouldn't keep that a secret either. They certainly don't with WINE on Linux. They're not working on the bomb for crissakes.
Thirdly, there was a lot of 'talk' about this situation and making a true WINE 2D back-end blah blah, but nothing came of it. Why? Nobody is developing it.
As for ditching X11, it is complicated because WINE was developed on X11, and X11 is a (needlessly) complicated beast. A basic GDI driver has to do a crapload of things before you can even draw a line or blit bitmaps. The existing driver tries to do a lot of this in X11, which only complicates things because to do simple things in X11 requires a lot of tricks and instead of doing things in a graphics library agnostic way, WINE was grafted on X11 like an organ. It uses X11 to draw everything and manage simple types like bitmaps.
For example let's say you want to implement Win32 bitmaps. There is a back-end library GDI which uses the front-end X11 driver. However, because the ONLY front-end anyone is using is X11, the back-end is designed to make the front-end a simple(r) implementation. The back-end also assumes the only front-end supporting stuff like OpenGL/D3D is X11/GLX. The end result is a quartz-specific back and front-end will have to be written. Nobody is (I hope) going to do this without involving a larger effort to clean up both ends so the same code runs on both platforms.
Add to this the problem that you can't draw a lot of these primitives in Quartz and a bunch of other problems...
I was in the process of doing this on my own, but I got too frustrated with the lack of documentation (both Win32 and WINE). I kept having to simulate the behavior of the X11 driver in terms of handling bitmaps, and the internal behavior for Win32 and WINE are undocumented (and may not even agree). Not being a Win32 or X11 expert also led to frustration. Having some help would have been nice.
Eventually I'll get a head of steam and try it again, but I don't have much incentive to try that hard.
Originally posted by Chucker
Frankly I believe you're confusing GNOME with KDE.
I'm not. I'm just not enamored with anything GNOME, although I am amazed how much memory GNOME apps consume.
GNOME is quite okay Usability-wise, though certainly not quite at the point Mac OS has been for years. Drag&drop support, for one, is lacking. Window management is inferior. Etc.
Yea, you can thank the ICCCM for everything lacking and not working.
(Inter Client Communication Conventions Manual)
But still, GNOME is in many ways ahead of Windows in the UI department. KDE, on the other hand, is beyond retarded.
My point is GNOME keeps trying to achieve the pinnacle of interface disasters which is Windows.
Originally posted by strobe
First of all, if they were developing this driver as opposed to giving it lip service, they would have announced it instead of saying it would be a nice and interesting thing to have.
Secondly, if they were actively tinkering around with Darwine they wouldn't keep that a secret either. They certainly don't with WINE on Linux. They're not working on the bomb for crissakes.
Thirdly, there was a lot of 'talk' about this situation and making a true WINE 2D back-end blah blah, but nothing came of it. Why? Nobody is developing it.
As for ditching X11, it is complicated because WINE was developed on X11, and X11 is a (needlessly) complicated beast. A basic GDI driver has to do a crapload of things before you can even draw a line or blit bitmaps. The existing driver tries to do a lot of this in X11, which only complicates things because to do simple things in X11 requires a lot of tricks and instead of doing things in a graphics library agnostic way, WINE was grafted on X11 like an organ. It uses X11 to draw everything and manage simple types like bitmaps.
For example let's say you want to implement Win32 bitmaps. There is a back-end library GDI which uses the front-end X11 driver. However, because the ONLY front-end anyone is using is X11, the back-end is designed to make the front-end a simple(r) implementation. The back-end also assumes the only front-end supporting stuff like OpenGL/D3D is X11/GLX. The end result is a quartz-specific back and front-end will have to be written. Nobody is (I hope) going to do this without involving a larger effort to clean up both ends so the same code runs on both platforms.
Add to this the problem that you can't draw a lot of these primitives in Quartz and a bunch of other problems...
I was in the process of doing this on my own, but I got too frustrated with the lack of documentation (both Win32 and WINE). I kept having to simulate the behavior of the X11 driver in terms of handling bitmaps, and the internal behavior for Win32 and WINE are undocumented (and may not even agree). Not being a Win32 or X11 expert also led to frustration. Having some help would have been nice.
Eventually I'll get a head of steam and try it again, but I don't have much incentive to try that hard.
Ok, you have some good arguments there. But doing this in isolation as you say you have, is different than working a team with a monetary goal in mind. I've seen more difficult projects come to fruition.
If you are saying that Crossover isn't being developed on the Mac, you'd be wrong. That was a public announcement.
http://www.codeweavers.com/about/gen...s/?id=20050622
Jeremy Did state that they want to have it running under Aqua, though not in this statement. It was in an answer to a question. Will that come soon? Not likely. But that doesn't mean that it won't come at all. Remember that Crossover is a commercial product. If running it under Aqua gets them more customers, both OEM, and retail, that's an incentive.
You should go to the Darwine team, and contribute to that. I'm sure that they would be very happy to get your help (seriously).
Originally posted by strobe
My point is GNOME keeps trying to achieve the pinnacle of interface disasters which is Windows.
I cannot agree with that at all.
Originally posted by melgross
Ok, you have some good arguments there. But doing this in isolation as you say you have, is different than working a team with a monetary goal in mind. I've seen more difficult projects come to fruition.
Like I said before, difficulty isn't the issue.
Quote:
If you are saying that Crossover isn't being developed on the Mac, you'd be wrong. That was a public announcement.
http://www.codeweavers.com/about/gen...s/?id=20050622
That press release says nothing of the sort. Quote the part where they say they are developing on Mac OS X.
Quote:
Jeremy Did state that they want to have it running under Aqua, though not in this statement. It was in an answer to a question. Will that come soon? Not likely. But that doesn't mean that it won't come at all. Remember that Crossover is a commercial product. If running it under Aqua gets them more customers, both OEM, and retail, that's an incentive.
If an "OEM" customer wants to port their windows app, they would likely strip out the GDI if they didn't want to use X11. This means they don't need a Quartz driver. This is especially true of any apps or games with OpenGL or D3D interfaces, or just a simple interface which can be written in any other API.
Quote:
You should go to the Darwine team, and contribute to that. I'm sure that they would be very happy to get your help (seriously).
Gee, why didn't I think of that
Originally posted by strobe
That press release says nothing of the sort. Quote the part where they say they are developing on Mac OS X.
They are doing their work on Apple's developers kit. I suppose that's not enough? Even though they will initially have this under X11, it's still being done through OS X, evin if they Start by supporting Darwin through X11. From a June letter they sent out:
"and waiting for our dev kit to arrive )."
I suppose you'll figure out a way to say that it means nothing.
If an "OEM" customer wants to port their windows app, they would likely strip out the GDI if they didn't want to use X11. This means they don't need a Quartz driver. This is especially true of any apps or games with OpenGL or D3D interfaces, or just a simple interface which can be written in any other API.
That's true, if they did that they wouldn't need a quartz driver. But the Darwine team is working on one anyway.
Gee, why didn't I think of that
Narcissum perhaps?