[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt
From: |
Alex Perez |
Subject: |
Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt |
Date: |
Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:48:55 -0800 (PST) |
Florent, your mailbox is disabled, probably because it's full.
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, Florent Pillet wrote:
> I'd go farther than that. A Windows port itself is not enough. What is
> needed is a way to somehow shrink-wrap an application with the GNUStep
> frameworks so that, in the end, the user just has to run an installer
> and doesn't need to know that GS is the running support for the app.
>
> I don't know how this can be done (or has been planned for) from an
> architectural point of view.
Yes, it is possible and is done right now, without even needing an
installer (app can go on CD), and if you'd actually read my previous
e-mails thoroughly, you'd have seen me saying so.
>
> OTOH, if Apple would somehow revive the Yellow box I'd be happy too.
> I'd even be happy to pay for it, as long as it allows me to seamlessly
> port my apps...
You can wish for this, but it will not change the fact that Apple will
*NEVER* revive YellowBox because they have far too much of an interest in
seeing their expensive hardware sold. Once again, corporate self-interest
(which is understandable) affecting business decisions is something that
GNUstep is immune from.
>
> Florent
>
> On 4 févr. 04, at 10:49, Philip Mötteli wrote:
>
> > Well, I feel a huge interest here in using GNUstep as a porting means.
> > The problem is, as I already mentionned right in my first posting of
> > the thread you mentionned, that GS needs to complete the Windows port
> > as much as possible. That's actually the only frequent complaint I
> > see. And I do agree with that. I just don't agree with people
> > complaining and not wanting to help with one line of code. And I don't
> > think, that rewriting, debugging and maintaining a whole interface
> > layer themselves, will cost their clients less, than completing
> > gnustep-gui.
> >
>
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philip Mötteli, 2004/02/03
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philippe C . D . Robert, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philip Mötteli, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Florent Pillet, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philip Mötteli, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Florent Pillet, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Gregory John Casamento, 2004/02/07
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philippe C.D. Robert, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philip Mötteli, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Allan Odgaard, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt,
Alex Perez <=
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philippe C.D. Robert, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Florent Pillet, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philip Mötteli, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Philip Mötteli, 2004/02/04
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Chris Hanson, 2004/02/04
- Marketing GNUstep (was: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt), Sascha Erni, -.rb, 2004/02/04
- Re: Marketing GNUstep (was: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt), Andreas Höschler, 2004/02/04
- Message not available
- Re: Marketing GNUstep (was: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt), MJ Ray, 2004/02/04
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, Uli Kusterer, 2004/02/03
- Message not available
- Marketing, was: Cocoa/Windows parallel dvlpmt, MJ Ray, 2004/02/08