Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Jul 2012 23:39 UTC
Windows Ars Technica is running an interesting article about the Mail application on Windows 8. It's one of the first party Metro applications, and Ars' conclusion is that it's really, really not up to snuff - it can't even compare favourably to the mail application on Windows Phone. The sad thing is, however - this applies to virtually all Metro applications.
Thread beginning with comment 526889
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Too many platforms
by moondevil on Sun 15th Jul 2012 11:00 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Too many platforms"
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

"Try to do this with a binary compiled dynamically in 1994.


Works without problems. You just have to provide the dynamic libraries it was specifically compiled against. Same on Windows with the DLLs.
"

No, because those .so won't be able to link with the kernel ABI of today's Linuxes.

"[q]You can see how powerful APIs like POSIX, SDL and Qt are by looking at how applications are released on POSIX systems. Virtually EVERY application you have on Linux compiles flawlessly on *BSD or MacOSX (with Macports, for example).


SDL and Qt are not operating system APIs.
"

True. But they are competing with APIs from Microsoft like DirectX, MFC and Win32 and they are gaining more and more market share due to their cross-platform compatibility. [/q] [/q]

We were talking about operating system APIs. DirectX and MFC are also not operating system APIs.

Valve just hired the lead developer of SDL.


So what? Sam is well known in the game developers community, surely Valve hired him for more than just Linux.

Before
None. MacOS X still has the same native API it got when it was introduced, namely Cocoa which is based on NeXTStep which has been around since the 80ies.


after

Deprecating parts of the API while providing good documentation on these changes is a very good thing.


Better make your mind what Apple does.

Before
You can even compile and run Cocoa applications on Linux: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2humz9hIVM


after

I didn't claim that. However, GNUStep does allow to run many MacOS applications on Linux.


Well I read your comment as Cocoa was fully supported in Linux. Changed your mind?

There aren't really any other commercial platforms left. Alpha, Solaris, HP-UX and so on don't really exist anymore.


Better don't tell that to the guys paying for consulting support on those systems.



Where is the source code for Cocoa and iOS?

"I have developed commercial software for Aix, HP-UX, Solaris, Linux, BSD, OS/400, Symbian, NeXTStep, Mac OS X, Windows, Android.

What are your developer credentials to talk about stability of operating system APIs?


Are we going to compare penis lengths now? This is not how you're going to win an argument. It's like saying "My parents are richer than yours, so I must be right!"
"

No, it is saying that I have real life experience to know what I speak of, and am not making stuff up.

I feel really sorry for people who are so attached to Microsoft that they're even willing to waive for features and usability when switching from Windows 7 to the awkward Windows 8.


No need to feel sorry.

I don't care about programming languages or operating systems. I care for what customers want, and how much they pay.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Too many platforms
by cyrilleberger on Mon 16th Jul 2012 07:58 in reply to "RE[5]: Too many platforms"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

No, because those .so won't be able to link with the kernel ABI of today's Linuxes.


I guess, you meant "syscall" ? Since syscalls are considered a private API, a "professional software developer" would not use them, and instead would use the POSIX API that are exposed in the glibc, which keeps backward binary compatibility.

Any professional software developer that use syscalls directly instead of POSIX should be demoted from its "professional" rank (with a few exceptions being Kernel and libc hackers).

Edited 2012-07-16 07:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Too many platforms
by moondevil on Mon 16th Jul 2012 08:42 in reply to "RE[6]: Too many platforms"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

"No, because those .so won't be able to link with the kernel ABI of today's Linuxes.


I guess, you meant "syscall" ? Since syscalls are considered a private API, a "professional software developer" would not use them, and instead would use the POSIX API that are exposed in the glibc, which keeps backward binary compatibility.
"

ABI is much more than just syscalls.

An ABI implies syscalls, calling conventions, memory layout for data structures, executable file formats, ...

Regarding your glibc example, it depends on how your application links with it, assuming it was even compiled with gcc.

Edited 2012-07-16 08:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3