[type_r503]

Does anyone know of a port of the cocoa objects to window's? I want to be able to port some code to windows. In a perfect world I could simply recompile.

type

[Mactoid]

GNUStep is probably the closest that your going to get, however it doesn't have very good support for Windows at the moment.

[Borborygmi]

Man, I wish the whole YellowBox part of the Rhapsody project was still going. Imagine coding an app in Cocoa, and then being able to run it on a PC. If Apple it a free download to put the Cocoa API's on x86, I bet we would see a lot of people using the (IMHO) better designed Mac software. Of course, Apple makes money from hardware sales, so they probably can't see the angle. As is the case in most things, I'm probable oversimplifying, overgeneralizing, and just plain making stuff up.

[kamprath]

Originally posted by Borborygmi:
<STRONG>Man, I wish the whole YellowBox part of the Rhapsody project was still going. Imagine coding an app in Cocoa, and then being able to run it on a PC. If Apple it a free download to put the Cocoa API's on x86, I bet we would see a lot of people using the (IMHO) better designed Mac software. Of course, Apple makes money from hardware sales, so they probably can't see the angle. As is the case in most things, I'm probable oversimplifying, overgeneralizing, and just plain making stuff up.</STRONG>

Yes, I can imagine it . . . its a scary prospect. I do think the larger fallout of such a move is more people making poorly designed software (rather than more people using better designed software).

[Detrius]

However, the current Cocoa implementation does still leave room for this type of thing. The whole "Application as a directory" idea means that if Apple actually DID port OS X over to the x86 architecture, a simple second compile on the developers' part means that the same "file as a directory" could could be double clicked on either platform and it would just run.

This does, of course, leave room for Apple to ship their own machines with non PowerPC processors, as applications could very easily be installed on systems with different types of processors.

I do believe that Apple will change processor architecture--maybe within the next five to 10 years (just speculation from an uninformed source). They did jump ship on the 68k architecture. They believed that the PPC was so much faster that it could emulate the 68k faster than the 68k could run. Who's to say that AMD's next big thing won't fit that description? The Mac OS X architecture leaves room for easy porting. After all, Darwin already runs on the x86 platform... and they did actually release yellowbox to developers several years back... They probably already have an entire implementation of OS X running on x86 in house.


but as of right now, there is no way (for the general public) to simply compile a Cocoa application for x86/Windows. Oh well... I'm looking forward to the DOJ's requirement that Microsoft says will mean they won't be able to ship Windows anymore. At that point, Apple better be ready to take over... with an OS X release that runs on x86.

[Angus_D]

Originally posted by Detrius:
<STRONG>but as of right now, there is no way (for the general public) to simply compile a Cocoa application for x86/Windows. Oh well... I'm looking forward to the DOJ's requirement that Microsoft says will mean they won't be able to ship Windows anymore. At that point, Apple better be ready to take over... with an OS X release that runs on x86.</STRONG>

Apple distributes YB for Windows as a runtime for the WebObjects development environment on Windows (it's the old projectbuilder and so on), and I think you can use it. Problem is, you can't distribute it (need a WO Dev license for each comp you want to run it on).

[Detrius]

Originally posted by Angus_D:
<STRONG>

Apple distributes YB for Windows as a runtime for the WebObjects development environment on Windows (it's the old projectbuilder and so on), and I think you can use it. Problem is, you can't distribute it (need a WO Dev license for each comp you want to run it on).</STRONG>

That's cool and really silly at the same time.

[Angus_D]

Originally posted by Detrius:
<STRONG>That's cool and really silly at the same time.</STRONG>

A typically Apple thing to do, in fact