Apparently my post regarding the status of the "keyDown" event spawed a new thread wherein the longevity of Carbon was called into question. So let's throw this out there: 1. Is Carbon here to stay? 2. If Cocoa is the way of the future, what benefits does it have over Carbon? Let me first preface the discussion with a few thoughts: Carbon, to me, appears to be a natural way to code. I was around since the "Inside Macintosh: Volume I" days, originally coding in Pascal on a 128 K Mac. Ok, that makes me a dinosaur, so be it But the Carbon API had its seeds in that command structure, and so much of Apple's documentation, even today, fits the "Carbon profile." Now when I look at Cocoa, I admit, I am lost! The flowery, overly verbose modifiers and prefixes and suffixes just don't make sense to me. They look like a Windows C++ tome painted over with wide brush strokes. For me, and I would assume for most Carbon diehards, making such a transition is non-trivial. We would, in fact, be functionally at "Programming the Macintosh: Day 1", and this is not a happy thought. So, given that other developers would probably be in the same boat, I ask the group, what is there to gain by undergoing "programming brain surgery" to learn Cocoa? What can a Cocoa application do/offer/perform that a Carbon app cannot? Feel free to discuss at length, but please, where you are injecting opinion, please so state.