Carbon will not be 64bit in Leopard. "At last year's keynote, Apple had claimed that both Carbon and Cocoa would be 64-bit, adding to the 64-bit fundamentals that Tiger had laid. However, according to the latest on Apple's website, Leopard's 64-bit frameworks will include the POSIX and math libraries found in Tiger, Cocoa, Quartz, OpenGL, and X11 GUI framework. In addition, Apple confirms that Carbon will not be 64-bit on the Carbon Developer mailing list." In addition, the readme file included with Leopard's developer preview says G3 support will be dropped from Leopard.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2006-01-16
"It's an API that Apple promised would have 64 bit support a year ago, and now they are saying that it won't. What's not to understand about that?"
If you would've said that, I wouldn't had complained. But you made an abstruse comparison, which I had to correct.
You didn't talk about undelivered promises and how Microsoft performs better on that topic, did you?
Member since:2005-08-22
If you really want to compare with Microsoft, the only arguable comparision would be MS not porting the API for 16bit Windows 3.x applications in Windows 95 to 32bit. Wait.. they didn't, and nobody cared at all!
You can still run Win3.x apps on modern 32 bit Windows. I'm assuming you mean MS didn't port the Win16 API to 64 bit. There's a reason for that - when you enable 64 bit mode on an x86 chip, it completely disables the ability to run 16 bit code. Win64 can't possibly run Win16 apps as the CPU doesn't support it. The best you can do at that point is run something like DOSBox that emulates the CPU.
Member since:2006-01-16
"You can still run Win3.x apps on modern 32 bit Windows."
As you can run 32bit Carbon apps on OS X in 64bit mode.
But you cannot compile Win3.x apps as 32bit apps. That's what this discussion is about (not being able to compile 64bit Carbon apps).
"I'm assuming you mean MS didn't port the Win16 API to 64 bit."
Nope 
Member since:
2006-01-16
You definitely don't know what you're talking about.
If you really want to compare with Microsoft, the only arguable comparision would be MS not porting the API for 16bit Windows 3.x applications in Windows 95 to 32bit. Wait.. they didn't, and nobody cared at all!
Edited 2007-06-14 18:31