Resolution independence: Do you think Leopard will give us this before I go blind?

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
With all the cool talk going around, Sun + Apple = ZFS (too bad we couldn't get more sharing between those two companies) how can one not ask the burning question just weeks before the answers may be given.



Will we or will we not get resolution independence so I don't have to have bionic eyeballs inserted in my sockets to read my wifes 23" display?



What say you!



PS Deep throats welcome...

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    I'm pretty sure Resolution Independence will be in 10.5 (Leopard).
  • Reply 2 of 14
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Assuming WWDC is as it always has been, developers will get the Leopard Developer Preview immediately after Teh Steve finishes the keynote.



    So we will know before long.



    I'm sure it will be in there. Most of it was already in Tiger, but the apps needed to be tweaked to use it. I assume that Apple has done the needed tweaking to the system's apps.





    As I recall, the only apps that absolutely won't get it are Carbon apps that are still using QuickDraw instead of Quartz 2-D.
  • Reply 3 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lundy

    As I recall, the only apps that absolutely won't get it are Carbon apps that are still using QuickDraw instead of Quartz 2-D.



    Indeed. It also seems likely that Carbon apps will go the way of the dinosaur this WWDC.
  • Reply 4 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by blackbird_1.0

    Indeed. It also seems likely that Carbon apps will go the way of the dinosaur this WWDC.



    Yeah, because Carbon's not used far, far, far more often and widely than Cocoa or anything like that...
  • Reply 5 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gregmightdothat

    Yeah, because Carbon's not used far, far, far more often and widely than Cocoa or anything like that...



    I think it was discussed on this forum for a month or so. I think there were no Carbon workshops listed on the WWDC schedule, or there was something about transitioning from Carbon.



    My apologies.
  • Reply 6 of 14
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,200member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by blackbird_1.0

    I think it was discussed on this forum for a month or so. I think there were no Carbon workshops listed on the WWDC schedule, or there was something about transitioning from Carbon.



    My apologies.




    Carbon has always been a transition API. A transition from Classic to Cocoa.

    The fact people are using Carbon not investing earlier rather than later into Cocoa will begin to bite them in the ass.



    Look around for the Carbon 1.0 API paper that explicitly states it as a transition API. I had to pass the damn thing out at WWDC '97.



    9 years later is plenty of time to move to Cocoa. Maintaining two sets has slowed down the advancements of OS X, btw.
  • Reply 7 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mdriftmeyer

    Carbon has always been a transition API. A transition from Classic to Cocoa.

    The fact people are using Carbon not investing earlier rather than later into Cocoa will begin to bite them in the ass.



    Look around for the Carbon 1.0 API paper that explicitly states it as a transition API. I had to pass the damn thing out at WWDC '97.



    9 years later is plenty of time to move to Cocoa.




    No. It was originally viewed as a transitional API. The real world says otherwise.



    There's lots of stuff you can't even do in Cocoa?I reguarly have to dip back into Carbon for even simple stuff like file handling where Cocoa's implementations are appallingly bad.



    Fact of the matter is, no serious developer is going to rewrite their code base for Apple's convenience.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by mdriftmeyer

    Maintaining two sets has slowed down the advancements of OS X, btw.



    No it hasn't. They only revise a small percentage of the API's each release. Further, when they add new API's, they base them on either Carbon (Core Audio, Spotlight) or Cocoa (Core Image, Core Data), seemingly at random. Again, the two API's don't really intersect as much as you seem to think. Cocoa's rather incomplete.

  • Reply 8 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by blackbird_1.0

    I think it was discussed on this forum for a month or so. I think there were no Carbon workshops listed on the WWDC schedule, or there was something about transitioning from Carbon.



    My apologies.




    Haha, sorry, I come across as mean sometimes



    My assumption for why it isn't on the WWDC schedule is that (a) it isn't particularly interesting and (b) nothing new has been added. That doesn't mean it's being deprecated, just that it's boring.
  • Reply 9 of 14
    No problem. I'd just heard that info about Carbon on this board, or some other.



  • Reply 10 of 14
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lundy

    As I recall, the only apps that absolutely won't get it are Carbon apps that are still using QuickDraw instead of Quartz 2-D.



    Actually, Apple's docs state:

    Quote:

    But if you use older technologies, such as QuickDraw, you may have to do some work to scale your graphics.

    [..]

    The scaling factors applied to the CGContext may change your QuickDraw content in unintended ways. Carbon applications that use QuickDraw should use the application-scaling mode instead.

    [..]

    Application-scaling mode is intended for developers who still use legacy technologies such as QuickDraw or for developers who prefer to handle scaling factors themselves.



    So, far cry from "absolutely not getting it"; it sure is supported, just more complicated to implement, and perhaps usually not worth the effort.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by mdriftmeyer

    Carbon has always been a transition API. A transition from Classic to Cocoa



    Oh dear, here we go again.



    You don't like Carbon. I don't really like Carbon either; proportionally, more apps written in it are of questionable quality compared to Cocoa apps, and as a developer, its development model is far less appealing to me than Cocoa's.



    But that has no bearing whatsoever on whether Carbon will go anywhere. Yes, Apple has been slowly phasing its support out; that's hard to deny. There's many developers who heavily rely on it, and there's many things that can't be done in Cocoa anyway. Heck, until before Tiger, there wasn't even a QuickTime API for Cocoa.
  • Reply 11 of 14
    I'm sorry. I didn't mean to cause an argument. \
  • Reply 12 of 14
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Not your fault, just an age-old discussion that keep cropping up
  • Reply 13 of 14
    amoryaamorya Posts: 1,103member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by blackbird_1.0

    I think it was discussed on this forum for a month or so. I think there were no Carbon workshops listed on the WWDC schedule, or there was something about transitioning from Carbon.



    My apologies.




    140: Carbon Programming Hands-On

    134: Carbon feedback forum

    211: programming with Quartz ("Whether you work with Carbon or Cocoa...")

    303: GCC, C++, and You



    OK, there's not as many with Carbon in the title, but plenty of others are relevant to Carbon just as much as Cocoa.
  • Reply 14 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorya

    140: Carbon Programming Hands-On

    134: Carbon feedback forum

    211: programming with Quartz ("Whether you work with Carbon or Cocoa...")

    303: GCC, C++, and You



    OK, there's not as many with Carbon in the title, but plenty of others are relevant to Carbon just as much as Cocoa.




    Ah, thanks for clarifying.
Sign In or Register to comment.