Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Dharma: Cocoa on Windows... Again?

Status
Not open for further replies.
BillyShears said:
Let's look at developers, since what benefits developers benefits Apple. (DEVELOPERS! DEVEOPERS! DEVELOPERS!!) This benefits Apple if more developers make apps in Xcode, thus being compatible with OS X and Windows.

But why would the developers do that? I don't think they would.

First, they're (most likely) not trained in Xcode or Cocoa.

....
Click to expand...

Well, it's not the 1st time Apple's done a carrot/stick on their developers, so it's not unprecedented ... (68k -> PPC : Start using Metroworks! PPC -> Intel : Start using XCode! MacOS X -> Yellow Box : Did we mention XCode?!!!)

If this is true, it doesn't necessarily mean more MacOS X apps on Windows.. Safari running on XP doesn't mean they'll release it, tho they could, article says it's used to demo the technology... It could just be Steve trying to leverage technology Apple already has, to lure one or two *specific* developers/companies to maintaining/developing an App he wants on MacOS X Intel. There have been many developer tools/features in the past that have died on the vine.. Besides or or two key apps Steve wants on Windows, or wants to lure to MacOS X, we may or may not see much come of this...

Shrug.


My $0.02


jwd
 
Big Mac Apps ARE xCode Apps

Everyone's asking the question, "what's going to make big developers switch to using xCode?". Remember when Steve stood on stage at WWDC and said the first step to making a Universal Binary for the intel switch was to get on xCode? Well, when the big companies do that (Adobe, Macromedia, Microsoft, etc) for their continued Mac support, they'll already have an xCode version of their program - what they consider their Mac version.

Steve can stand on stage at the following WWDC and say, "we're releasing a new version of xCode today for free, and guess what? All of your Mac apps are now compiled for free for Windows, so you can eliminate your Windows development teams and code." Think about that. Apple cuts their cross-platform developers costs by like 95% for them, and guarantees Mac versions of every application they make doesn't go away. Plus, said developer would then be crazy not to standardize future applications on xCode.

Yellowbox environment would of course be installed by iTunes (which any iPod-owning Windows user installs anyhow), QuickTime, or any other Cocoa-based application, if it wasn't already.
 
Cory Bauer said:
Steve can stand on stage at the following WWDC and say, "we're releasing a new version of xCode today for free, and guess what? All of your Mac apps are now compiled for free for Windows,
Click to expand...
Uhm, not exactly. Only Cacao apps can be compiled for free. I for one know that Microsoft Office is a carbon appplication and I would imagine adobe's apps also to be Carbon. I develop in Carbon myself and porting to Cacao (I can't even program in that language) is as hard as porting to windows. (well, almost)
 
Cory Bauer said:
Everyone's asking the question, "what's going to make big developers switch to using xCode?". Remember when Steve stood on stage at WWDC and said the first step to making a Universal Binary for the intel switch was to get on xCode? Well, when the big companies do that (Adobe, Macromedia, Microsoft, etc) for their continued Mac support, they'll already have an xCode version of their program - what they consider their Mac version.

Steve can stand on stage at the following WWDC and say, "we're releasing a new version of xCode today for free, and guess what? All of your Mac apps are now compiled for free for Windows, so you can eliminate your Windows development teams and code." Think about that. Apple cuts their cross-platform developers costs by like 95% for them, and guarantees Mac versions of every application they make doesn't go away. Plus, said developer would then be crazy not to standardize future applications on xCode.

Yellowbox environment would of course be installed by iTunes (which any iPod-owning Windows user installs anyhow), QuickTime, or any other Cocoa-based application, if it wasn't already.
Click to expand...

That is a good point. They will keep cross-platform developers, not gain Windows developers. I hadn't thought of that. The risk they are averting is that those companies that already make OS X apps would get rid of their Mac developers and say "just use WINE". Maybe I'm a little slow for not seeing that...
 
GregA said:
Aren't you arguing the opposite to most people? I've never heard anyway say "I'm getting a Mac for the 3rd-party applications"... that's usually touted as the reason to get Windows.
Click to expand...

Well I was thinking they would release some iApps, too. But before Cocoa for Windows, OS X has OS X apps, and Windows has Windows apps. Then after Cocoa for Windows, OS X has OS X apps, and Windows has Windows and OS X apps. That was my point, they don't seem to gain anything.

However, I see now that they will likely keep cross-platform developers this way, not gain new developers. (Though they may gain SOME new developers.)
 
I've been thinking something like this would be a good idea, but having never heard of Yellow Box until today, I didn't think it was very likely.

Here's my thinking prior to this revelation: Apple needs to make a big push to bring in new developers now that WINE and the like tempt so many cross-platform applications to go Windows-only. Releasing something like "iCode" as a cross between Automator and Xcode with the standard iApp feel to get beginner programmers hooked on Macs. Xcode is already a pretty good environment for C, Obj-C, and Java so its a great place to start learning. Apple also needs to grow its developer community and place even more emphasis on the new Spotlight/Automator/Dashboard communities by offering new technologies to them. Xcode/iCode could get some new project types to speed up the development of these small third-party apps (such as with the rumored DashCode).

Now that I know there is a remote possibility of expanding the definition of "Universal Binary", it seems even more likely that Apple will make a big push to grow its developer base. For so long now Apple has looked like a consumer electronics company (not that I'm complaining per se). Hopefully once Intel hardware is more generally available (and in PowerBooks), Apple can get some momentum going towards developers. WWDC '06 should have a glimpse of OS X 10.5, a new Xcode with better Intel support, and hopefully something like iCode. If Yellow Box is coming, it should be available as soon as possible. Since its aimed (as far as I can see) at smaller cross-platform developers (ones that are under pressure to ax the Mac unit to cut costs), having Yellow Box available for the $999 Developer Boxes out now would not be necessary. Plus, Apple would want to work out as many of the kinks in the program first, not wanting to detract from the success of Rosetta and Xcode.

If Apple only releases consumer Macs with Intel in January, I wouldn't expect Yellow Box to come out at the same time. Apple might release some more Windows software developed in house with Yellow Box (like they've released iTunes for Windows) and try to get more Mac software into the Windows world. Safari has a shot, but Firefox has more momentum against IE. Porting the rest of iLife would be a great suprise, but a welcome one. iPhoto for sure has a place on a Windows desktop, as does iDVD. GarageBand certainly would be well recieved. If all these appss deposited the necessary Cocoa frameworks, it would pave the way for future Yellow Box apps to make a name for themselves.
 
I cannot see Apple releasing more of their Mac-only applications for Windows other than as a ploy to expand the Yellowbox userbase (which would be installed along with any Windows Apple application in order to run).

What's currently needed to convert a Carbon application into a Cocoa application? A complete rewrite? Would it be unthinkable for Apple to create some kind of Carbon-to-Cocoa converter in xCode? Or include Carbon support in the Windows Yellowbox environment?

Perhaps Apple is talking with big developers directly, telling them, "you know if you rewrite your program in Cocoa, this Yellowbox thing is gonna allow you to eliminate your Windows developers and expenses almost entirely". I think the Adobe Apps, and especially the Macromedia apps, could use a good rewrite anyhow.
 
Cory Bauer said:
I think the Adobe Apps, and especially the Macromedia apps, could use a good rewrite anyhow.
Click to expand...
Amen to that! Shoulda happened years ago! Hopefully they will now. Although there is only Adobe now. I'd still like to see some small third-party developer, using Cocoa and leveraging all of Core Image into the true Photoshop Killer and release it for $99. :cool:
 
longofest said:
Speaking of which, anyone else can't wait for tonight's episode??? I'm stoked!

EDIT: Bloody hell!!! It's a repeat! When's the next new one?
Click to expand...

Next year.

See, back in the old days, television shows were broadcast throughout the dull, gray months of Winter and Spring, giving a hard working nation something to look forward to after a bone-chilling day. Then Neilson came around and decided we should figure out how much of which shows people are watching. Only, all winter and spring is a really long time, and monitoring tv watching habits for that long could be really expensive, so Neilson picked two months somewhat at random - November and February - to track.

The television studios noticed that Neilson's ratings were cold, callous, and harsh. And no one wanted to buy advertising on the show that only Ma Earle in Kentucky watched the entire month of November. And the studios noticed that if they put a repeat showing of any show on, the viewership rating would drop significantly that week. November and February were suddenly far too important for this.

And so, November and February get the best, the brightest, the newest shows with the biggest cliff-hangers and most you're-gonna-be-lost-if-you-miss-it story arc transformations. Then the writers and producers need to rest. This leads to a pretty dull December and March, January being a half-hearted warm-up to February (gotta keep people interested in a show otherwise they won't care that the story's gonna change and they won't be able to follow it if they miss an episode), and April/May being a mini-runup to get people interested enough in a show to come back to it again in the fall.

So, right now, we're in the pits of December. Take any new content which happens your way with a toothy grin and a "thank you sir, may I have another?" But you can't have another, silly peon. Not until January.
 
MacNeXT said:
Yeah Dharma & Greg is dumb and hinduism is cool ofcourse.

Anyway, for good measure:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma_and_Greg

... raised by hippie parents ... (which would be Steve da man himself, obviously) ... compromise of their different values... (windows <> Apple) ...episodes take place in San Francisco... (duh)

I could go on, but my point is made.

;)
Click to expand...

But... Dharma was the cool one, and Greg had a stick up his butt. So wouldn't the Windows version of Cocoa be called "Greg" instead?
 
skellener said:
Amen to that! Shoulda happened years ago! Hopefully they will now. Although there is only Adobe now. I'd still like to see some small third-party developer, using Cocoa and leveraging all of Core Image into the true Photoshop Killer and release it for $99. :cool:
Click to expand...

That is the case with many of these popular applications that have become rather long in the tooth. In many cases we see small-scale examples of the MS Windows problem.... Billion of lines of code and bloatware options, everything built on top of something else, none of it working quite like it should for that reason. A good ground-up rewrite would do these programs a lot of good.
 
Sunrunner said:
A good ground-up rewrite would do these programs a lot of good.
Click to expand...
And with companies like Adobe who have a large Mac and Windows customer base, the idea of standardizing on xCode and being able to code for all platforms at once (Windows, Mac PowerPC, Mac Intel) is probably enough incentive to take the time and money to rewrite their apps in Cocoa. Yes it would be a huge undertaking, and they'd probably tackle it one application at a time, but once completed the development cost and time saved would be mind-boggling. And with their purchase of Macromedia, they're probably looking at rewriting applications, or building new replacements that merge features, anyhow.
 
Recent news articles showed that in 2000 when OS X first came out that Steve Jobs was wanting to switch to Intel then, but was sold the G5 from IBM. I remember reading this fourm and the reason that the yellow box might have been pulled was because they were hoping to switch to intel at that time then got sold the G5 and decided to pull it. Now that they are switching to Intel there is new interest to run Mac apps on windows. Maybe this is why they might be creating something to run the universal binaries on windows. They might announce this in Jan. which would allow not only people to maybe buy mac's with intel, but people on windows to run mac apps. That would be nice to be able to convince people to buy mac programs and run them on wintel boxes.
 
This seems like a pretty long and detailed email to be a hoax... of course, it could also be some lonely crackpot going on and on and on...
 
scottie924 said:
Recent news articles showed that in 2000 when OS X first came out that Steve Jobs was wanting to switch to Intel then, but was sold the G5 from IBM. I remember reading this fourm and the reason that the yellow box might have been pulled was because they were hoping to switch to intel at that time then got sold the G5 and decided to pull it. Now that they are switching to Intel there is new interest to run Mac apps on windows. Maybe this is why they might be creating something to run the universal binaries on windows. They might announce this in Jan. which would allow not only people to maybe buy mac's with intel, but people on windows to run mac apps. That would be nice to be able to convince people to buy mac programs and run them on wintel boxes.
Click to expand...

Indications are that Steve was all set to stick with IBM until it became clear they werent interested in developing the efficient and more spacialized chips that Aple wanted for the laptops and such.
 
Sunrunner said:
Indications are that Steve was all set to stick with IBM until it became clear they werent interested in developing the efficient and more spacialized chips that Aple wanted for the laptops and such.
Click to expand...
Indications are also that Apple has been prepared for the day IBM poops out and kept OS X platform independent. :)
 
scottie924 said:
Maybe this is why they might be creating something to run the universal binaries on windows. which would allow not only people to maybe buy mac's with intel, but people on windows to run mac apps. That would be nice to be able to convince people to buy mac programs and run them on wintel boxes.
Click to expand...
More importantly, it would make switching from Windows to Mac much easier for someone who has thousands of dollars invested in professional applications when they find out the copies they own are Universal binaries, and will run on Windows or Mac. Thus, eliminating the need to repurchase their software library. Even more so for a corporation with money invested in multiple user licenses. This of course being half a decade or more in the future.
 
ctachme said:
Umm... the Apps ARE the reason I get a Mac. I get a Mac because it has Safari, and iChat and iMovie and all of those great Apple Apps. If those apps were on windows, what modivation do I have to get a Mac? And for evey app ported to windows, that's one less reasion to get a Mac.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we're talking about 3rd-party applications. Not Apple's applications.

We were talking about whether releasing an Xcode which compiles to Windows would drive users to Windows (since every Mac app is also on Windows).

Apple's decision to port any of its apps to Windows is a separate issue as they can do it without releasing Xcode-to-windows, and even if they release Xcode-to-windows they don't have to port their apps.
 
I still have my Yellow Box install disk

Well, I'm not sure if this rumor is true or not, but moving OS X to Intel does have that major, major, WINE threat problem. I have been very worried about Apple retaining top cross-platform developers.

Having the NS/Cocoa APIs on Windows makes sense to me, logically, because NeXT spent inordinate amounts of time developing all this stuff; I highly doubt they are just going to throw good technology away.

In the late NeXT years, with its apps running on top of Windows (OpenStep), it was quite an amazing technical feat, really. The strategy didn't work out for NeXT, but I believe that's got as much to do with their mindshare and lack of viable brand as anything else.

Steve came back to Apple, and Mac OS X is, basically, NeXT version 10 more than it is Mac OS version 10. I see no reason they haven't kept the OpenStep tools alive, even while they created whizbang new technologies like CoreImage and so forth. Apple spends zillions per year on R&D, and in a fast-paced industry like this, Apple would be stupid not to maintain any potential weapons it has in its arsenal.

It's funny, the logic of some of the posters in here is silly: "I think if Apple were going to revive Yellow Box, they'd have shown us by now." Oh really? So, by that logic, Apple wouldn't be moving to Intel, either.

I'm sure there's lots of cool **** in Apple's labs that won't be announced until the time is right, or perhaps the time will never be right, but, to me, this is one of the plausible-enough ones. I wouldn't bet my life on it, but it wouldn't much surprise me either.
 
kainjow said:
Indications are also that Apple has been prepared for the day IBM poops out and kept OS X platform independent. :)
Click to expand...


Always better to be prepared than to be caught with your junk hanging in the breeze, thats for sure... :p
 
Finally, the windowz users will have nothing to say when we say Mac's are better.


#1 Windowz argument: but I can play more games on a windows compyooter
#1 (new) Apple user answer: not any more universal binaries= games that can be written for both OS's simultaniously.


Most Major Computer Game companies would jump for ****in' joy if that happened. it would cut dev. costs in half for them (only the ones that try to port their games to mac)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back