[Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone
arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/apple-takes-aim-at-adobe-or-android.ars Sent from my Android mobile
There is no reasonable way for Apple to tell if an application is implemented in Objective-C or in some other language on top of Objective-C. After all, "any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common Lisp" [Phil Greenspun]. Why can't this Lisp be Pharo Smalltalk? How would they know the difference? Lukas 2010/4/10 Ramiro Diaz Trepat <ramiro@diaztrepat.name>:
arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/apple-takes-aim-at-adobe-or-android.ars
Sent from my Android mobile
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'. But this is pure speculation. In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion-of-flash-t... The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. << Regards Stefan On 10 Apr 2010, at 17:46, Lukas Renggli wrote:
There is no reasonable way for Apple to tell if an application is implemented in Objective-C or in some other language on top of Objective-C. After all, "any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common Lisp" [Phil Greenspun]. Why can't this Lisp be Pharo Smalltalk? How would they know the difference?
Lukas
2010/4/10 Ramiro Diaz Trepat <ramiro@diaztrepat.name>:
arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/apple-takes-aim-at-adobe-or-android.ars
Sent from my Android mobile
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Stefan Marr Software Languages Lab Vrije Universiteit Brussel Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium http://soft.vub.ac.be/~smarr Phone: +32 2 629 2974 Fax: +32 2 629 3525
On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'.
But this is pure speculation.
In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion-of-flash-t... The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. <<
Nonsense. An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed. -- =========================================================================== John M. McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com> Twitter: squeaker68882 Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com ===========================================================================
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed. Ehm is it that easy? I don't know the internals of their new stuff. But when I read the announcement, it sounded more like they want you to provide 'kind of services', so that only part of your app needs to stay alive in the background, for instance to play music, or track location data. But you cannot just swap out/deschedule the whole process, at least not in a model which uses threads instead of processes.
But I am just guessing...
-- =========================================================================== John M. McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com> Twitter: squeaker68882 Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com ===========================================================================
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Stefan Marr Software Languages Lab Vrije Universiteit Brussel Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium http://soft.vub.ac.be/~smarr Phone: +32 2 629 2974 Fax: +32 2 629 3525
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_(command) for discussion of kill suspend/resume. The simple case is likely the unix process scheduler sends you a suspend, later a resume if it chooses to wake you up, otherwise a resume and quit. The more complex cases are when you want to do audio, voip, or location. In this case you are setting up an agreement between the app and the scheduler to wake you when audio needs servicing, a socket requires keep-alive & traffic in processing, or a change to location is made. Part of that agreement is restrictions on what you can do in the background, like no UI or openGL work, no listening sockets, etc.. Again the unix process manager here may re-nice you to a lower priority if you do too much, or decide you are a nuance and kill you. Obviously Apple may when testing decide that your app uses too much CPU as a background process and not approve. You can ask for a limited amount of time to run as a background task when you are shoved to the background, but that is finite. In general the idea is that you are waken to processes audio, location, and socket interrupts, from an event driven expectation and you go back to sleep once the chore is done. On 2010-04-10, at 10:27 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed. Ehm is it that easy? I don't know the internals of their new stuff. But when I read the announcement, it sounded more like they want you to provide 'kind of services', so that only part of your app needs to stay alive in the background, for instance to play music, or track location data. But you cannot just swap out/deschedule the whole process, at least not in a model which uses threads instead of processes.
But I am just guessing...
-- =========================================================================== John M. McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com> Twitter: squeaker68882 Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com ===========================================================================
2010/4/10 John M McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com>:
On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'.
But this is pure speculation.
In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion-of-flash-t... The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. <<
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed.
+1.. this is a bullshit. Instead of solving the problem, they locking-down their platform. Its like saying "we're going to build an aircrafts with 4 wings, and from this moment, all two-winged planes should stop being used worldwide".
-- =========================================================================== John M. McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com> Â Twitter: Â squeaker68882 Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. Â http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com ===========================================================================
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
I think that this is a bad sign for a lot of languages. The analysis on the move against flash and adobe are interesting. This is also a problem for company selling game dev platform. Bad. Stef
On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'.
But this is pure speculation.
In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion-of-flash-t... The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. <<
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed.
+1.. this is a bullshit. Instead of solving the problem, they locking-down their platform.
Its like saying "we're going to build an aircrafts with 4 wings, and from this moment, all two-winged planes should stop being used worldwide".
-- =========================================================================== John M. McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com> Twitter: squeaker68882 Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com ===========================================================================
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/4/10 John M McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com>:
On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'.
But this is pure speculation.
In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion-of-flash-t...
The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. <<
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed.
+1.. this is a bullshit. Instead of solving the problem, they locking-down their platform.
Its like saying "we're going to build an aircrafts with 4 wings, and from this moment, all two-winged planes should stop being used worldwide".
Its just a way of making sure that all iPhone/iPad/Mac development is still done on Macs, IMHO. 10+ years ago, Apple promised developers a way to program Mac OS X apps for Windows. With the advent of QuickTime X, based on Cocoa libs, I've been speculating that Apple was planning on leveraging those libraries as a distribution of Mac OS X frameworks to Windows that 3rd party developers could use. It doesn't seem a total stretch that if Apple does this, they want to make sure that iPhone/iPad apps can only be developed on Mac and by extension, Mac OS X applications, even for Windows, will only be developed on the Mac as well. One IDE to rule them all: Mac OS X, iphone/ipad/iTouch, and now (MAYBE) Windows... Lawson
Interesting theory. The question is are they trying to force developers to buy Macs, or are they simply trying to avoid the hassles of targeting Windows? 10+ years to present day is an interesting time frame. OLE was pretty much out of the way (supported but not pressed and certainly not dominating the work flow of the masses), COM was still the answer to everything, at least until the OCX/ActiveX silliness got into full swing, and then they started threatening to do away with native code (.Net, presentation framework, end of the portable executable format, etc.). If I could avoid all of that *and* sell some of my high-priced hardware at the same time, I might do the same thing that Apple is doing. Bill -----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Lawson English Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 5:36 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/4/10 John M McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com>:
On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'.
But this is pure speculation.
In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion- of-flash-to-iphone-export-continues/
The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. <<
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed.
+1.. this is a bullshit. Instead of solving the problem, they locking-down their platform.
Its like saying "we're going to build an aircrafts with 4 wings, and from this moment, all two-winged planes should stop being used worldwide".
Its just a way of making sure that all iPhone/iPad/Mac development is still done on Macs, IMHO. 10+ years ago, Apple promised developers a way to program Mac OS X apps for Windows. With the advent of QuickTime X, based on Cocoa libs, I've been speculating that Apple was planning on leveraging those libraries as a distribution of Mac OS X frameworks to Windows that 3rd party developers could use. It doesn't seem a total stretch that if Apple does this, they want to make sure that iPhone/iPad apps can only be developed on Mac and by extension, Mac OS X applications, even for Windows, will only be developed on the Mac as well. One IDE to rule them all: Mac OS X, iphone/ipad/iTouch, and now (MAYBE) Windows... Lawson _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On 11 April 2010 17:29, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab@anest.ufl.edu> wrote:
Interesting theory. Â The question is are they trying to force developers to buy Macs, or are they simply trying to avoid the hassles of targeting Windows? Â 10+ years to present day is an interesting time frame. Â OLE was pretty much out of the way (supported but not pressed and certainly not dominating the work flow of the masses), COM was still the answer to everything, at least until the OCX/ActiveX silliness got into full swing, and then they started threatening to do away with native code (.Net, presentation framework, end of the portable executable format, etc.).
If I could avoid all of that *and* sell some of my high-priced hardware at the same time, I might do the same thing that Apple is doing.
But what makes you think, that your approach to software development is any better than any other one? Or, that having C, C++, Object-C and JavaScript is all what today's developper needs?
Bill
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Lawson English Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 5:36 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone
Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/4/10 John M McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com>:
On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'.
But this is pure speculation.
In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion- of-flash-to-iphone-export-continues/
The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. <<
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed.
+1.. this is a bullshit. Instead of solving the problem, they locking-down their platform.
Its like saying "we're going to build an aircrafts with 4 wings, and from this moment, all two-winged planes should stop being used worldwide".
Its just a way of making sure that all iPhone/iPad/Mac development is still done on Macs, IMHO.
10+ years ago, Apple promised developers a way to program Mac OS X apps for Windows.
With the advent of QuickTime X, based on Cocoa libs, I've been speculating that Apple was planning on leveraging those libraries as a distribution of Mac OS X frameworks to Windows that 3rd party developers could use.
It doesn't seem a total stretch that if Apple does this, they want to make sure that iPhone/iPad apps can only be developed on Mac and by extension, Mac OS X applications, even for Windows, will only be developed on the Mac as well. One IDE to rule them all: Mac OS X, iphone/ipad/iTouch, and now (MAYBE) Windows...
Lawson
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
On 11 April 2010 17:42, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11 April 2010 17:29, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab@anest.ufl.edu> wrote:
Interesting theory. Â The question is are they trying to force developers to buy Macs, or are they simply trying to avoid the hassles of targeting Windows? Â 10+ years to present day is an interesting time frame. Â OLE was pretty much out of the way (supported but not pressed and certainly not dominating the work flow of the masses), COM was still the answer to everything, at least until the OCX/ActiveX silliness got into full swing, and then they started threatening to do away with native code (.Net, presentation framework, end of the portable executable format, etc.).
If I could avoid all of that *and* sell some of my high-priced hardware at the same time, I might do the same thing that Apple is doing.
But what makes you think, that your approach to software development is any better than any other one? Or, that having C, C++, Object-C and JavaScript is all what today's developper needs?
You could have a brilliant hardware with tons of cool functionality. But without good software this is just a piece of useless metal and plastic. And we know, that all good things is brought to life in open and free, creative environments, not in sealed and secured , paranoic places. People won't buy an 'approved' C++ crap, if they will have a choice to use something which is way better. And they are really don't care, what language is used to implement software. P.S. i miss the S letter in 'Apple's name, so , i will put a $ instead :)
Bill
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
People won't buy an 'approved' C++ crap, if they will have a choice to use something which is way better. And they are really don't care, what language is used to implement software.
You'll have to admit that open source software with a truly excellent user experience still hasn't happened yet. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch
On 11 April 2010 17:59, Lukas Renggli <renggli@gmail.com> wrote:
People won't buy an 'approved' C++ crap, if they will have a choice to use something which is way better. And they are really don't care, what language is used to implement software.
You'll have to admit that open source software with a truly excellent user experience still hasn't happened yet.
Really? What about FireFox? If that's not excellent.. then i really can't guess , what is your criteria of being excellent. Or. take macs.. what engine used in Safari? Or .. on what is based a Darwin OS?
Lukas
-- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
Lukas, I'll give you that, but I also think that Windows is going the wrong way. Something simple like browsing a directory full of graphs of data from various experimental runs has become easier (and faster) on Linux than it is on Windows. If Apple could/would run their OS on things like PC/104 hardware, I might have jumped to them years ago. As it is, Linux has been getting better, Windows (IMHO) has been getting steadily more bloated, annoying and buggy, and my long-standing policy of never increasing my dependence on MS has gradually made it feasible for me to move to Linux in a big way. Pharo is no small part of it. Bill -----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Lukas Renggli Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2010 9:59 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone
People won't buy an 'approved' C++ crap, if they will have a choice to use something which is way better. And they are really don't care, what language is used to implement software.
You'll have to admit that open source software with a truly excellent user experience still hasn't happened yet. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Sig, I *never* said anything like that. I do think that Microsoft is in decline, and it would not surprise me at all if Apple didn't want to play along with their whims, trying hit a moving target that will cause them to do extra work at the potential expense of their own market share. Bill -----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Igor Stasenko Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2010 9:43 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone On 11 April 2010 17:29, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab@anest.ufl.edu> wrote:
Interesting theory. Â The question is are they trying to force developers to buy Macs, or are they simply trying to avoid the hassles of targeting Windows? Â 10+ years to present day is an interesting time frame. Â OLE was pretty much out of the way (supported but not pressed and certainly not dominating the work flow of the masses), COM was still the answer to everything, at least until the OCX/ActiveX silliness got into full swing, and then they started threatening to do away with native code (.Net, presentation framework, end of the portable executable format, etc.).
If I could avoid all of that *and* sell some of my high-priced hardware at the same time, I might do the same thing that Apple is doing.
But what makes you think, that your approach to software development is any better than any other one? Or, that having C, C++, Object-C and JavaScript is all what today's developper needs?
Bill
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Lawson English Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 5:36 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone
Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/4/10 John M McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com>:
On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote:
There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related to multitasking. I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'.
But this is pure speculation.
In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going...
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion - of-flash-to-iphone-export-continues/
The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.
"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. <<
Nonsense.
An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how Processes are managed.
+1.. this is a bullshit. Instead of solving the problem, they locking-down their platform.
Its like saying "we're going to build an aircrafts with 4 wings, and from this moment, all two-winged planes should stop being used worldwide".
Its just a way of making sure that all iPhone/iPad/Mac development is still done on Macs, IMHO.
10+ years ago, Apple promised developers a way to program Mac OS X 10+ apps for Windows.
With the advent of QuickTime X, based on Cocoa libs, I've been speculating that Apple was planning on leveraging those libraries as a distribution of Mac OS X frameworks to Windows that 3rd party developers could use.
It doesn't seem a total stretch that if Apple does this, they want to make sure that iPhone/iPad apps can only be developed on Mac and by extension, Mac OS X applications, even for Windows, will only be developed on the Mac as well. One IDE to rule them all: Mac OS X, iphone/ipad/iTouch, and now (MAYBE) Windows...
Lawson
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On 11 April 2010 19:53, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab@anest.ufl.edu> wrote:
Sig,
I *never* said anything like that. Sure you didn't. Apple did :)
I do think that Microsoft is in decline, and it would not surprise me at all if Apple didn't want to play along with their whims, trying hit a moving target that will cause them to do extra work at the potential expense of their own market share.
They (Apple and M$) are dinosaurs. Google will kill them all. We'll see that :) This is because they don't realizing where a software evolution goes: open standards, open architecture, open software.
Bill
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
why? the vm is a c application and the image such data of the application. Tell me if this is otherwise. On Apr 10, 2010, at 5:13 PM, Ramiro Diaz Trepat wrote:
arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/apple-takes-aim-at-adobe-or-android.ars
Sent from my Android mobile
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/10/steve-jobs-responds-to-complaint-about-ne... 2010/4/10 Ramiro Diaz Trepat <ramiro@diaztrepat.name>:
arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/apple-takes-aim-at-adobe-or-android.ars
Sent from my Android mobile
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- -JT
participants (9)
-
Igor Stasenko -
John M McIntosh -
John Toohey -
Lawson English -
Lukas Renggli -
Ramiro Diaz Trepat -
Schwab,Wilhelm K -
Stefan Marr -
Stéphane Ducasse