Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac OS X 10.5 Details?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
FearFactor47 said:
You make some good points there. The only one that bothers me the most is something you didn't bring up in iTunes. When you search for a song, say Britney spears
, and hit enter it only plays through the songs found. I want to be able to do a quick search for a song, jump to it and play but when finished it should return to the full library without having to click the x in the search box. Maybe there is a shortcut to do this but i don't know it.
aranhamo said:
I wasted quite a few days working on improving this aspect of the software I'm working on. I have a process that is constantly running (well, idling with a timer), so it couldn't be part of the application bundle - or you wouldn't be able to trash the app.
So, thanks to some helpful advice from the guys on comp.sys.mac.programmer.help, I implemented a simple yet effective solution. Copy this 'helper' process to a folder in Application Support. This helper checks now and then to see if the main application has been removed, if so it deletes itself and exits. Simple to code and effective, and no need to implement our own uninstaller. The only thing it leaves behind is the user defaults file, and the helper could easily delete that too if needed.
dr_lha said:Except NeXT computers used Motorola 680x0 chips, not Intel. Surely if Job's was so mad keen on Intel from back in the NeXT days NeXTCube's would have been Intel based. The only reason NeXTSTEP ran on Intels was because NeXT tried to save themselves from bankrupcy by becoming a Software company, and hence had to release an OS that ran on commodity hardware (i.e. Intel CPUs). They failed of course, but their loss is our gain.
Having worked at NeXT I can say simply that you are wrong on all counts except the obvious 68K Moto for NeXT Black Hardware. NeXT for Intel was in development in 1992. NeXT for HP and SPARC were right there as well.
It was the political struggle between Intel, Sun and HP who all wanted more control over the partnerships with NeXT that made NeXT a specialty shop for the enterprise markets only.
When we were about to go IPO and focus on a WebObjects Services Company, Apple began talks and the rest is history. Any idiot can forsee a much greater upside merging with Apple.
The amount of technology Apple has received hasn't even fully been revealed.
Hell when Finder gets rewritten in Cocoa [should I say, redeployed?] amongst the myriad research projects that work but need refinement to fit in line with Spotlight and other key technologies, then we'll see an OS with a much more respectable label, "The Most Powerful Operating System in the World."
I personally hope Finder mergers with some ideas from Workspace.app and if they incorporate portions of designs from MECCA (Never released Openstep) then I'll be happy.
What needs to happen? JUNK CARBON COMPLETELY.
TBi said:...When you search for a song, say Britney spears
I think a great feature would be when you search for a song with Britney Spears in it, it will simply delete the song, and move on to the next song (just in case you accidently import it into your library)
Windows Vista will be so much like Bloat Wear of The Century for it to be any good.
And of course it has already got viruses that can attack it before it is actually released.
I wouldn't use anything other than OS X or previously OS 9.2.2
I have always been a Mac User and always will be.
Just my 2¢
And of course it has already got viruses that can attack it before it is actually released.
I wouldn't use anything other than OS X or previously OS 9.2.2
I have always been a Mac User and always will be.
Just my 2¢
Well, I think unfortunately the mac legacy forbids that from happening...mdriftmeyer said:
What I do think should happen is carbon should have its bugs fixed and then left in the fridge. If developers want a procedural interface fine, wrap all the cocoa objects in opaque core foundation "objects" and leave it at that.
I cant image the time wasted at apple for having to support 3 environments (cocoa/carbon/java) hopefully sun will have a runtime available for intel so apple doesn't have to keep rolling thier (always behind) own version.
There was tons and tons of innovative stuff in next step, and its sad it hasn't made its way to OS X yet.
mdriftmeyer said:
why not to say junk Carbon and Cocoa completely?
and to use just bsd and CoreGraphics apis?
that issue Cocoa/Carbon was discussed many-many times
they both are using underlying unix's infrastructure
they are not independent anymore
cocoa api use carbon and vice versa
there are some file system related api that Cocoa just doesn't have
from where that confidence that carbon free finder will be faster?
quite opposite I think carbon finder should be faster then cocoa based one:
there won't be zillion objc messages flying around
Cocoa as object oriented framework and Carbon as C api can live and work together
and as far as I know they really do so
for developing some applications Apple decided to use Cocoa for another Carbon
Apple ported java from carbon to cocoa and
you know what: maybe they solved many problems but they sure got many other problems instead
and performance is one of them
carbon isn't just legacy apiFukui said:
quicktime, core foundation core graphics api opengl and others
are not Cocoa based
Cocoa has some interfaces classes to access qt, cg and opengl features
core foundation and cocoa have many-many structures that you can use
in both api
I won't be surprised if Cocoa classes itself implemented via C++
Apple's engineer once explained me that core foundation api was implemented with C++
There is absolutely no way AFAIK core foundation/cocoa is implemented in C++.dmarkman said:
You can download the source to core foundation and see if there is even one C++ file in there. Carbon is basically procedural C, but carbon apps ususally implemented in C++.
I've never seen a C++ call in a cocoa stack trace except for a very few cases where cocoa and carbon have been integrated such as NSMenu, the Print Panel and a very few others.
Of course they're not. OpenGL is not carbon. QT is not carbon. Carbon is there to support legacy apps. It does burden apples engineers to have to re-implement say a browser view in Cocoa, then in Carbon, then in Java have some equvalent object as well.dmarkman said:
I don't mind core foundation, but the legacy stuff like the Toolbox etc are like MFC in windows... notice they (MS) are not upgrading that anymore, but you can access the new apis through other languages than C#, thats IMO the stance apple should take for carbon. One implementation, one basic API, multiple language bindings.
sorry you are looking at the Carbon very narrowly (if it's possible to say)Fukui said:
take a look at the carbon development list and you'll see that it is quite alive
Carbon is umbrella for the many frameworks. I don't think Carbon will be dead any time soon
I'm not saying its dead, and of course it is an umbrella for multiple frameworks, but it primarily exists to satisfy MS/Adobe/Macromedia/Intuit and other companies that refused to port thier apps to cocoa.dmarkman said:
The problem with carbon is that it duplicates the efforts already underway in cocoa. Why does there have to be two different and incompatible event mechanisms (NSEvent and Carbon Events), two different window managers (not talking about quartz), two different view mechanisms (NSView HIView) , different threading API's etc...
ryanw said:
I totally know what your talking about! I mean come on now they added a removal tool for the dashboard but nothing else!
robert05au said:
I haven't always been a mac user... I don't know I have actually caughten a few viruses on my apple! I know it's rare and everything. But I do see what you mean.
bi0metric said:
I wasn't aware they were actually viruses, so what viruses did you actually catch on your system? How did you know you had a virus and how did it infect your system?
ryanw said:
Come on now, that is a little harsh. I'm sure you are familiar with all the big steps forward Tiger took compared to past OS X versions since you are obviously well versed in packagement systems. Give Apple a chance. Don't be so quick to throw blame and criticism. Step back for a minute and look what you have gotten...one incredible operating sytem. You are probalby using one of the most modern, if not the most modern, *nix system today. Don't let a package management system deficiency, which is probably short-termed in nature, cause you to sling negatives at Apple. In due time my friend. Apple is approaching the top of their game in many years. Good things are coming. Be thankful you are with the Apple crew and not the other guys up North.
