Comments on: Advancing Software Reuse of Linux, Windows Code on the Mac http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/ Daniel Eran Dilger in San Francisco Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:13:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Myths of Snow Leopard 5: No Carbon! — RoughlyDrafted Magazine http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-9917 Myths of Snow Leopard 5: No Carbon! — RoughlyDrafted Magazine Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:18:50 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-9917 [...] Advancing Software Reuse of Linux, Windows Code on the Mac 64-bit Face Off: Carbon vs Cocoa. That also makes it more clear why Apple changed its tune on providing new 64-bit interface APIs in both Carbon and Cocoa. The original story was that Apple would advance both. Last year, however, Apple announced it would not be implementing a 64-bit Carbon interface. [...] [...] Advancing Software Reuse of Linux, Windows Code on the Mac 64-bit Face Off: Carbon vs Cocoa. That also makes it more clear why Apple changed its tune on providing new 64-bit interface APIs in both Carbon and Cocoa. The original story was that Apple would advance both. Last year, however, Apple announced it would not be implementing a 64-bit Carbon interface. [...]

]]> By: WWDC 2008: Is Mac OS X 10.6 the Death of Carbon? — RoughlyDrafted Magazine http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-9076 WWDC 2008: Is Mac OS X 10.6 the Death of Carbon? — RoughlyDrafted Magazine Sun, 08 Jun 2008 00:59:32 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-9076 [...] on Windows the next iTunes? Safari’s Controversial Potential as a New Yellow Box for Windows Advancing Software Reuse of Linux, Windows Code on the Mac Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard, Carbon, and the Future. While Apple clearly wants developers to use [...] [...] on Windows the next iTunes? Safari’s Controversial Potential as a New Yellow Box for Windows Advancing Software Reuse of Linux, Windows Code on the Mac Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard, Carbon, and the Future. While Apple clearly wants developers to use [...]

]]> By: wordwarrior http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2694 wordwarrior Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:48:50 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2694 Dan, There are several significant API changes in Java 6: http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/features.html To make a long story short, there are API extensions to collections, JDBC , I/O, and Swing, among others. This means that anybody writing code that makes use of the new Java 6 APIs will not be able to run that code on OS X. Granted, the changes in Java 6 are much less reaching than those in Java 5. Also, unlike Java 5, there are no actual Java language changes in Java 6. So you're right that the changes aren't far reaching, but they are significant. You can say Apple has implemented 95% of Java 6 APIs and 100% of Java 5 APIs. However, it would be extremely charitable to call it "100% Java". Also, some Swing and Applet functionality was broken by Apple's Leopard Java 5 update, as described in the Java-Dev mailing list. I haven't followed closely, but to my knowledge, there has not yet been an update to Leopard (as opposed to Tiger) Java 5 since the release of Leopard. Also, don't forget that Apple is well behind Sun on Java security fixes. IMO, security fixes are not discretionary, and should be pushed out ASAP. [Yes, I'm not making excuses for why Apple hasn't shipped Java 6 support, I'm only clarifying that "100% Java" is not a measure of how much of the latest Java spec is currently implemented, but rather relates to Java apps that are not platform specific. - Dan] Dan,

There are several significant API changes in Java 6:

http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/features.html

To make a long story short, there are API extensions to collections, JDBC , I/O, and Swing, among others.

This means that anybody writing code that makes use of the new Java 6 APIs will not be able to run that code on OS X.

Granted, the changes in Java 6 are much less reaching than those in Java 5. Also, unlike Java 5, there are no actual Java language changes in Java 6.

So you’re right that the changes aren’t far reaching, but they are significant. You can say Apple has implemented 95% of Java 6 APIs and 100% of Java 5 APIs. However, it would be extremely charitable to call it “100% Java”.

Also, some Swing and Applet functionality was broken by Apple’s Leopard Java 5 update, as described in the Java-Dev mailing list. I haven’t followed closely, but to my knowledge, there has not yet been an update to Leopard (as opposed to Tiger) Java 5 since the release of Leopard.

Also, don’t forget that Apple is well behind Sun on Java security fixes. IMO, security fixes are not discretionary, and should be pushed out ASAP.

[Yes, I'm not making excuses for why Apple hasn't shipped Java 6 support, I'm only clarifying that "100% Java" is not a measure of how much of the latest Java spec is currently implemented, but rather relates to Java apps that are not platform specific. - Dan]

]]> By: johnnyapple http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2673 johnnyapple Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:53:42 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2673 Duh, ya, I've clearly got my colors mixed up. It was ten years ago ;-) I'll have to search the archives for Yellow Box stuff and refresh tired brain. Duh, ya, I’ve clearly got my colors mixed up. It was ten years ago ;-) I’ll have to search the archives for Yellow Box stuff and refresh tired brain.

]]> By: danieleran http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2672 danieleran Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:31:00 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2672 @ johnnyapple: Red Box has always been related to Windows, although I'm not sure that Apple ever directly used the phrase, and I'm sure it never used it related to anything running on the Mac Yellow Box was the NeXT+Cocoa environment (a superset of what is now considered Cocoa), intended to be portable. It was the same as the OpenStep specification. It contrasted with Blue Box, which was the Classic Mac OS, or Carbon. Those definitions have blurred over the last ten years. Red Box was only ever suggested as a possible way for PCs to run Windows programs alongside Yellow Box on Rhapsody. A Red Box was never released, and anyone who used OpenStep/Yellow Box in the late 90s typically was running the OS/YB layer on top of Windows NT, and getting their Windows compatibility "for free." @ wordwarrior: "100% Java" describes cross platform Java code that runs anywhere, as opposed to using the Java language to write Cocoa or Windows apps, for example, or using any libraries that are tied to a specific platform. Despite all the noise about Java 6, it has almost no impact on the ability to run 100% Java code on the Mac. It is important for Java developers to have the latest tools from Sun (6 = version 1.6, rather than 1.5) in order to do certain kinds of work, but the vast majority of Java programs don't require anything specific to the last two version of Java. @vanfruniken: I believe the MacOS folder related to extending the existing Universal binary support inherited from NeXT in a way that made it straightforward to add to the classic Mac OS a way to launch Carbon apps in the form of bundles. It would be unnecessary and impractical for Apple to create a bundle architecture for Windows (instead of delivering an exe like Quicktime, iTunes, Safari do), and the ability to run Windows DLLs on Mac OS X wouldn't require any more than including them as library recourses, just as developers now do with FOSS based Mac apps. @ johnnyapple: Red Box has always been related to Windows, although I’m not sure that Apple ever directly used the phrase, and I’m sure it never used it related to anything running on the Mac

Yellow Box was the NeXT+Cocoa environment (a superset of what is now considered Cocoa), intended to be portable. It was the same as the OpenStep specification.

It contrasted with Blue Box, which was the Classic Mac OS, or Carbon. Those definitions have blurred over the last ten years.

Red Box was only ever suggested as a possible way for PCs to run Windows programs alongside Yellow Box on Rhapsody. A Red Box was never released, and anyone who used OpenStep/Yellow Box in the late 90s typically was running the OS/YB layer on top of Windows NT, and getting their Windows compatibility “for free.”

@ wordwarrior: “100% Java” describes cross platform Java code that runs anywhere, as opposed to using the Java language to write Cocoa or Windows apps, for example, or using any libraries that are tied to a specific platform.

Despite all the noise about Java 6, it has almost no impact on the ability to run 100% Java code on the Mac. It is important for Java developers to have the latest tools from Sun (6 = version 1.6, rather than 1.5) in order to do certain kinds of work, but the vast majority of Java programs don’t require anything specific to the last two version of Java.

@vanfruniken: I believe the MacOS folder related to extending the existing Universal binary support inherited from NeXT in a way that made it straightforward to add to the classic Mac OS a way to launch Carbon apps in the form of bundles.

It would be unnecessary and impractical for Apple to create a bundle architecture for Windows (instead of delivering an exe like Quicktime, iTunes, Safari do), and the ability to run Windows DLLs on Mac OS X wouldn’t require any more than including them as library recourses, just as developers now do with FOSS based Mac apps.

]]> By: FloydThreepwood http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2669 FloydThreepwood Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:46:31 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2669 What has that to do with the article? Adding something to a convention of folder and package design is not the problem. Sure it's easy to extend this, but extending OS X to run anything that could be hidden in a Windows folder is a whole other story. I would like to see Microsoft and Apple to cooperate in Software buisiness as far as installing Windows XP (no Vista is only for Pro pc people from Dell and Lenovo) by default on new Systems und abandoning OS X. Zune rules, gray is the new white, and clumsy overtakes elegant! What has that to do with the article? Adding something to a convention of folder and package design is not the problem. Sure it’s easy to extend this, but extending OS X to run anything that could be hidden in a Windows folder is a whole other story.
I would like to see Microsoft and Apple to cooperate in Software buisiness as far as installing Windows XP (no Vista is only for Pro pc people from Dell and Lenovo) by default on new Systems und abandoning OS X. Zune rules, gray is the new white, and clumsy overtakes elegant!

]]> By: cgervais http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2666 cgervais Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:13:59 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2666 vanfrunike, that may be an artifact of the NeXTStep roots of Mac OS X. There used to be folders for HP-UX, Solaris, etc. I don't know how Apple would translate their packaging format to Windows -- why wouldn't their build process just build a .EXE? Why would they ship a Windows binary within a Mac OS X package? vanfrunike, that may be an artifact of the NeXTStep roots of Mac OS X. There used to be folders for HP-UX, Solaris, etc. I don’t know how Apple would translate their packaging format to Windows — why wouldn’t their build process just build a .EXE? Why would they ship a Windows binary within a Mac OS X package?

]]> By: vanfruniken http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2662 vanfruniken Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:19:55 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2662 Don't overlook the fact that the application package format includes a subfolder called MacOS. This seems to be easily extended with a folder Windoze. Don’t overlook the fact that the application package format includes a subfolder called MacOS. This seems to be easily extended with a folder Windoze.

]]> By: wordwarrior http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2635 wordwarrior Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:11:32 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2635 "Fully open and/or interoperable software, such as POSIX code and 100% Java." 100% Java? Well, considering that Apple still hasn't delivered Java 6 for OS X, despite it being available for Windows, Linux and Solaris (and FreeBSD Ports) since November 2006, not to mention the slew of GUI bugs introduced to Java 5 on Leopard (read the archives for java-dev@lists.apple.com if you don't believe me), I would quantify Apple's implementation of Java as totalling far less than 100%. “Fully open and/or interoperable software, such as POSIX code and 100% Java.”

100% Java?

Well, considering that Apple still hasn’t delivered Java 6 for OS X, despite it being available for Windows, Linux and Solaris (and FreeBSD Ports) since November 2006, not to mention the slew of GUI bugs introduced to Java 5 on Leopard (read the archives for java-dev@lists.apple.com if you don’t believe me), I would quantify Apple’s implementation of Java as totalling far less than 100%.

]]> By: johnnyapple http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2593 johnnyapple Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:02:27 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/17/advancing-software-reuse-of-linux-windows-code-on-the-mac/#comment-2593 I thought "Red Box" was similar to OpenStep in that it would theoretically install Cocoa libraries on Windows systems, not a compatibility environment to run native Windows code on OS X. Wasn't that what the Red Box under Rhapsody was originally planned to do? If Apple is working on ways for Windows developers to re-use much of their code to port applications to the Mac I assume they wouldn't do so at the cost of system stability. If that's the case, then sure, OK. I'm looking forward to more in this series so I can better understand what this is all about. Interesting, I'll have to be patient. I thought “Red Box” was similar to OpenStep in that it would theoretically install Cocoa libraries on Windows systems, not a compatibility environment to run native Windows code on OS X. Wasn’t that what the Red Box under Rhapsody was originally planned to do?

If Apple is working on ways for Windows developers to re-use much of their code to port applications to the Mac I assume they wouldn’t do so at the cost of system stability. If that’s the case, then sure, OK.

I’m looking forward to more in this series so I can better understand what this is all about. Interesting, I’ll have to be patient.

]]>