<strong>You get those things with Cocoa...not with Carbon</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorta, kinda, not really, no. From what (very little) I know about coding, it seems like you can get not only the same look and feel of Aqua in a Carbon app without too much pain, but some stuff is "automatic" to at least some extent. Carbon requires you to be more explicit, and you have to tie up loose ends more often. But yeah, while Appleworks runs better than some carbon apps I've tried, it was the epitome of the quick-n-dirty Carbon port, at least until 6.2.4, The problem is that it wouldn't have been as noticeable if everything weren't non-standard to begin with. A lot of things would have made the crossover to Aqua had they been standard Toolbox elements.
-------
Come to think of it, OS X provides much of Appleworks' functionality within the system itself.
You get those things with Cocoa...not with Carbon (unless you actually code the exact same thing yourself, like Apple did (sorta) with toolbars and the Finder.)
It's not like you can just shove those on, you'd have to rewrite the entire app in Cocoa.
And just to throw this out there...I hate Carbon. Hate it hate it hate it.
I am officially a toolbar whore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
that's not entirely true. mach-O carbon apps like word v.X can use many of the "cocoa features"
<strong>mach-O carbon apps like word v.X can use many of the "cocoa features"</strong><hr></blockquote>Well, yes and no.
Except for native toolbars, as was mentioned.
And the font panel, also as was mentioned.
Those are the only major features Cocoa still has over Carbon these days. Note that the Office v.X you mentioned has neither of these.
The color picker -- well, I need to check up on what code exactly was updated for it in Jaguar. The Carbon picker now *looks* like the Cocoa picker, but I'm not sure if it can change from a modal dialog to a floating panel, as the Cocoa picker is.
Services, though, have definitely been available to Carbon apps since 10.1. A shining example here is BBEdit.
i really cant say much, but the few times Ive used AppleWorks I've never had probs with it.
To be honest, MS should get their acts together to straighten out the friggen MS Office suite. Word and Entourage are memory hogs and I have to close Entourage after a few hours because it seems to slow everything down a bit. Same with Word. After I quit them, X seems more responsive. And its not like i have many other apps open... just Mozilla and a couple other small apps.
I use AW primarily as a word-processor (largely for text that's going to end up in DTP anyway), and the occasional HTML export for stuff I can't be bothered to do properly: the graphics side I have covered in oh-so-many ways, and it's perfectly adequate for the (very simple) spreadsheets I do.
However, it's rather dumb that AW has its own (pretty awful) spellchecker when there's another one sitting in the System, and it could handle some tidier icons.
There's been some speculation that, given the demise of the M$/Apple "agreement", SJ might go for Office's throat and roll out a really top-notch office suite, possibly split along the lines of, say, iWorks and ProWorks (iWorks being the iMac/eMac freebie, ProWorks being a standalone app).
I think this would make good sense, and give Apple an extra degree of market freedom, provided that it had really top-notch translators built-in for full Office interoperability.
<strong>To be honest, MS should get their acts together to straighten out the friggen MS Office suite. Word and Entourage are memory hogs and I have to close Entourage after a few hours because it seems to slow everything down a bit. Same with Word. After I quit them, X seems more responsive. And its not like i have many other apps open... just Mozilla and a couple other small apps.</strong><hr></blockquote>Word seems to take up lots of CPU when it has a document open - about 5% on my PB800. It is usually at 0% when there are no documents open.
I usually keep Word open, but just close any documents rather than keeping them minimized in the dock.
Comments
<strong>You get those things with Cocoa...not with Carbon</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorta, kinda, not really, no. From what (very little) I know about coding, it seems like you can get not only the same look and feel of Aqua in a Carbon app without too much pain, but some stuff is "automatic" to at least some extent. Carbon requires you to be more explicit, and you have to tie up loose ends more often. But yeah, while Appleworks runs better than some carbon apps I've tried, it was the epitome of the quick-n-dirty Carbon port, at least until 6.2.4, The problem is that it wouldn't have been as noticeable if everything weren't non-standard to begin with. A lot of things would have made the crossover to Aqua had they been standard Toolbox elements.
-------
Come to think of it, OS X provides much of Appleworks' functionality within the system itself.
<strong>
You get those things with Cocoa...not with Carbon (unless you actually code the exact same thing yourself, like Apple did (sorta) with toolbars and the Finder.)
It's not like you can just shove those on, you'd have to rewrite the entire app in Cocoa.
And just to throw this out there...I hate Carbon. Hate it hate it hate it.
I am officially a toolbar whore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
that's not entirely true. mach-O carbon apps like word v.X can use many of the "cocoa features"
<strong>mach-O carbon apps like word v.X can use many of the "cocoa features"</strong><hr></blockquote>Well, yes and no.
Except for native toolbars, as was mentioned.
And the font panel, also as was mentioned.
Those are the only major features Cocoa still has over Carbon these days. Note that the Office v.X you mentioned has neither of these.
The color picker -- well, I need to check up on what code exactly was updated for it in Jaguar. The Carbon picker now *looks* like the Cocoa picker, but I'm not sure if it can change from a modal dialog to a floating panel, as the Cocoa picker is.
Services, though, have definitely been available to Carbon apps since 10.1. A shining example here is BBEdit.
To be honest, MS should get their acts together to straighten out the friggen MS Office suite. Word and Entourage are memory hogs and I have to close Entourage after a few hours because it seems to slow everything down a bit. Same with Word. After I quit them, X seems more responsive. And its not like i have many other apps open... just Mozilla and a couple other small apps.
However, it's rather dumb that AW has its own (pretty awful) spellchecker when there's another one sitting in the System, and it could handle some tidier icons.
There's been some speculation that, given the demise of the M$/Apple "agreement", SJ might go for Office's throat and roll out a really top-notch office suite, possibly split along the lines of, say, iWorks and ProWorks (iWorks being the iMac/eMac freebie, ProWorks being a standalone app).
I think this would make good sense, and give Apple an extra degree of market freedom, provided that it had really top-notch translators built-in for full Office interoperability.
<strong>To be honest, MS should get their acts together to straighten out the friggen MS Office suite. Word and Entourage are memory hogs and I have to close Entourage after a few hours because it seems to slow everything down a bit. Same with Word. After I quit them, X seems more responsive. And its not like i have many other apps open... just Mozilla and a couple other small apps.</strong><hr></blockquote>Word seems to take up lots of CPU when it has a document open - about 5% on my PB800. It is usually at 0% when there are no documents open.
I usually keep Word open, but just close any documents rather than keeping them minimized in the dock.