Slashdot Mirror

I'm just thinking here, but won't it be easier to come out with an OS that is compatiable with the new OSX, since it is build on *BSD??

Not only that, but the GNUStep project is based on the OpenStep spec, just as OS X is. I believe one of the current design goals of GNUStep is to achieve source compatibility with OS X.

The reason why it's making so many headlines is because a "mainstream" Unix-based OS is finally emerging, vindicating all of us Linux/BSD geeks who loved Unix for all this time. MacOS X makes an okay Unix, but has a great GUI. Something the free desktop projects should think about emulating... oh, wait, they already are.

Cocoa = ObjectiveC + frameworks.

• ObjectiveC = Apple's own (free beer) DevTools
• ObjectiveC = NeXTStep dev kit.
• ObjectiveC = GNUStep

IMHO, Cocoa is streets ahead of PowerPlant, and I've used both.

And he tried to buy a bonus rating on Tucows. *ack!* I didn't know you could do that. Why not let the software stand on its own merit, instead of artificially pumping it up??

It [redirection of pipes to a window] works in Mac OS X now (well, 10.1.x) but works much better and nicer on a real Unix using SVR3 style RPC calls.

A real UNIX?? Them's fightin' words. Just 'coz he prefers SysV syscalls over BSD! Geez

I had hoped to find new sources of income [porting to Windows].

Congratulations. Welcome to the world of yet-another-text-editor-for-Windows ....

Eventually Apple should either port Aqua to Linux/X11 or to give up Mac OS at all.

AFAIK all the Macintosh emulators out there only emulate a 68040 Mac - the last of which being discontinued in the early 1990s.

You can try porting to GNUstep under Linux. From there a port to Mac OS X would be easy, since the API for GNUstep and Mac OS X are essentially the same. However Mac OS X has a few objects that GNUstep doesn't, and Mac OS X uses a different build procedure, some different file formats (Mac OS X uses XML for everything, whether or not it's necessary), etc...

(minus cross-platform, of course)

If they are thinking of taking this someplace serious, it could be interesting. People probably remember that OS X uses PDF to display items, and its inspiration (NeXTSTEP) used Postscript. This gives resolution-independent display, and highly accurate WYSIWYG possibilities (since you render to the printer just like you render to the screen).

GNUStep is a clone of NeXTSTEP, and uses some sort of similar rendering. I'm not clear on their status -- for a long time they were waiting for a Display Ghostscript (DGS) extension, so they could copy NeXTSTEP faithfully. Proprietary Postscript extensions for X have been around for a long time. Ultimately, it seemed like someone didn't want to wait around, and wrote a straight Xlib backend for GNUStep, with none of the vector-graphics properties. I think that backend has stuck, since it works, and DGS isn't the primary platform at this point. But I'm not sure.

This could be an alternative to DGS, or something to build ontop of, or maybe it's just people fooling around with another alternative that wouldn't be useful. Obviously, fonts and anti-aliasing and all that jazz is really essential for a complete rendering platform -- just doing splines is a long ways from that.

(If you can't get to gnustep.org, try gnustep.net -- it's good stuff, even if development has been slow over the years. Too bad FSF/GNU didn't back GNUStep instead of creating GNOME -- I don't know what was up with that)

Certainly writing a Cocoa app is tying yourself into nonfree software.

Not if you port it to GNUStep

What people seem to be forgeting is that there was, and to a point, is, a version of OSX on x86. Its called OpenStep and NextStep. Most of the cool stuff in OSX is there. When it was released for X86 in the early 90's it developed a niche following, but not more that that.

This is, IMO, a good idea. It'd be an even greater thing if GNUstep could have Java hooks too, then this fairly respected GUI API could have much wider use.

The GUI (i.e. Cocoa not Carbon) is not exactly closed either. Have a look and GNUStep...

If the open source community wants to know how break into the desktop market, look no further than Mac OS X. Whether you like the system or not, in OS X is a *nix system that has a highly user friendly interface, excellent graphic-based package management, and all the other bells and whistles that the mass desktop market craves.

I fully agree... To go beyond command line Unix, NeXT and its stepchild OS X set a alternative standard to the (unnamed) platform which (unnamed) others have been busy cloning (with great success, too). Here is hoping that observations like yours will finally create enough of a synergy...

You are talking about GNUstep. For many years, the OpenStep API and development tools have been far superior to *anything* else in the Windows or UNIX world. The GNUstep project has already got usable alpha clones of the NeXT development tools that are a joy to work with. Take a look at this mail client developed quickly with GNUstep tools. It runs on GNUstep platforms and Mac OS X.

The GNUstep project is actively tracking the additions made to Cocoa (what Apple decided to call OpenStep after buying NeXT).

GNUstep frameworks and applications will build on most UNIXes, on Mac OS X (obviously), and win32 platforms. Support for the GUI backend is Alpha on win32 but is progressing.

GNUstep has a database framework much like NeXT's Enterprise Object Framework and a web development system much like WebObjects. Also available is a 3D framework, music and sound frameworks, a networking framework, an email framework, and others.

Like Apple, you can write your applications in Objective C or Java. Unlike Apple, the GNUstep project provides several other language options: Ruby, Guile, and other scripting languages by way of StepTalk.

You are talking about GNUstep. For many years, the OpenStep API and development tools have been far superior to *anything* else in the Windows or UNIX world. The GNUstep project has already got usable alpha clones of the NeXT development tools that are a joy to work with. Take a look at this mail client developed quickly with GNUstep tools. It runs on GNUstep platforms and Mac OS X.

The GNUstep project is actively tracking the additions made to Cocoa (what Apple decided to call OpenStep after buying NeXT).

GNUstep frameworks and applications will build on most UNIXes, on Mac OS X (obviously), and win32 platforms. Support for the GUI backend is Alpha on win32 but is progressing.

GNUstep has a database framework much like NeXT's Enterprise Object Framework and a web development system much like WebObjects. Also available is a 3D framework, music and sound frameworks, a networking framework, an email framework, and others.

Like Apple, you can write your applications in Objective C or Java. Unlike Apple, the GNUstep project provides several other language options: Ruby, Guile, and other scripting languages by way of StepTalk.

You are talking about GNUstep. For many years, the OpenStep API and development tools have been far superior to *anything* else in the Windows or UNIX world. The GNUstep project has already got usable alpha clones of the NeXT development tools that are a joy to work with. Take a look at this mail client developed quickly with GNUstep tools. It runs on GNUstep platforms and Mac OS X.

The GNUstep project is actively tracking the additions made to Cocoa (what Apple decided to call OpenStep after buying NeXT).

GNUstep frameworks and applications will build on most UNIXes, on Mac OS X (obviously), and win32 platforms. Support for the GUI backend is Alpha on win32 but is progressing.

GNUstep has a database framework much like NeXT's Enterprise Object Framework and a web development system much like WebObjects. Also available is a 3D framework, music and sound frameworks, a networking framework, an email framework, and others.

Like Apple, you can write your applications in Objective C or Java. Unlike Apple, the GNUstep project provides several other language options: Ruby, Guile, and other scripting languages by way of StepTalk.

er... Apple has a beta version of gcc 3.1 with full objective C support AND altivec supprot.

GCC 3.0.4 also has full Objective-C support. You probably mean Objective-C++. Objective-C++ isn't really its name, but it gets the point across I guess (you can mix C++ and Objective-C code in the same file to gain the strengths of both...e.g. Objective-C's better class system + C++'s overloading support). I think that Apple recently (a few months ago) donated the C++ support to the Objective-C compiler to GNUStep.

How in the hell are .NET and OS X similar? One is a new Unix-based operating system leveraging Apple technologies, and one is a completely new "applications as internet services" paradigm.

This is a good point, but on the otherhand, why should Dell care if its software ran on a Gateway or not.

The whole point of this business model is to sell hardware

Don't write off GNUStep just because they haven't reached the popularity of KDE or GNOME. I think that with Apple's dominance in the UNIX market place, that we may see GNUStep become increasingly important.

-Peter

If you want to learn how to code with Mac OS X, I suggest using GNUstep until you can afford a PPC machine.

Gee, MS can either keep people locked into their proprietary document formats, or they can let a moderately sizable portion of the market escape and start promoting other formats. No-brainer there. Of course they're going to keep making Office/IE for Mac.

The only reason that I can see why they haven't already made Office/IE for Linux is that MS has a bug up their butt about the GPL. Don't be surprised if they release their lock-in magic for FreeBSD before long.

Supporting (or should that be "supporting") Apple is a big win for them in another way too, though, because a certain percentage of Apple users are going to realize that they're mostly using MS products, and are going to find the idea of a switch to an MS platform that much more palatable. Especially given the price advantage of the (admitedly flakey) commodity hardware platform.

What the Linux community needs to do in response (IMO) is also support OS/X as well as we can, so that we make Linux (and, by extension, the BSDs) another viable out for Mac users. And gain the sympathy of the more loyal Mac users, who will surely appreciate having more software (esp. free software) available for their platform.

I know that I'm brushing up my ObjC and starting to browse the GNUstep sites.

Damn, forgot to hit the preview button, that should read:
"for those that don't know what it is, read all about it here."

And I would also like to point out that I love WindowMaker too, I only wish it would intergrate better with GNUstep, sure the WINGs library is light and fast, wich makes sense if you want to use WindowMaker as a standalone window manager, but I wouldn't mind a ObjC GNUstep fork. If only I had the programming skills required, I would happily do it myself.

I don't know if you are confusing GNUstep with WindowMaker, or if you just forgot to mention what GNUstep is, for those that don't, read all about it here.

I prefer GNUstep + Debian, Mac's are too expensive for my taste.
If more developers get involved, GNUstep
would evolve much faster (obviously), and once it fully conforms to the OpenStep specification, then everyone could focus on all the stuff that Apple added.
Some GNUstep applications have been successfully ported to OSX, like GNUMail with little changes, but full source compability isn't quite there yet, and ObjectiveC++ is still missing in gcc.

However, if I had the money, I would run to the nearest reseller and get myself an iMac right away.

That NextStep app framework is for me the most enticing thing about OSX. I wish GNUStep was "there"; more, would that it were "there" for portable development across Linux, *BSD, Solaris, NT/XP/2000, etc.

just think of it this way: java was (is) a first-generation technology. of course it's been a disappointment.

if it appears microsoft's attempt to duplicate java is better, it's just because microsoft has been able to look at java and learn from what mistakes sun made.

sun was not able to learn from their mistakes when they were developing java because no one had ever made those mistakes before. sun cannot learn from their mistakes, go thorugh and fix their problems now becuase they do not have the resources. microsoft at this point has nearly all the resources-- people, cash, mindshare-- in the entire industry.

if sun had the kind of level of ability to develop things quickly and ability to psuh people into upgrading their products on a frequent basis that microsoft does -- things that are products of microsoft's monopoly power, not products of the worthiness of the intellectual holdings or products of either microsoft or sun -- i think it'ws safe to say that java would be something you could really call a success, as opposed to "oh, well it's a neat little platform for servlets, has some minor but omnipresent and hellishly obnoxious issues when you try to use it for anything else though".

i agree totally on the bit that this would be better if java had been an open-from-the-start technology; hell , i think all they need is the willingness and ability to *change* java *NOW* in serious ways. i'm hoping Parrot produces something interesting. it would be neat to have a public vm that actually lets your code cross languages elegantly, as opposed to java's "well, you have the specs to the vm, write a compiler for whatever language you like, you'll have to figure out how to bridge object systems yourself though" or .NETs "it bridges between any language automatically! but you can only use languages that have been modified until they are just c# with syntactic sugar!". (is 'isomorphic' an insult?)

i suspect no real progress will take place in the way of the public usage of portable bytecode systems and standard object frameworks until both java and .NET lie in ruins. or until java is willing to face the issues with java at a deep-rooted level and do some serious rethinking and serious rewriting. or until the java standards board takes java away from sun and runs with it.

i look at it this way, though: sun has done a hell of a lot with java with not a lot of resources. everyone who's used java in any capacity has probably been annoyed a decent amount for its shortcomings, but its shortcomings usually come down to "it isn't everything". maybe it was foolish for java to *try* to be everything, but i'll say this: they got a lot closer to being everything a lot faster than any other computing platform i'm aware of. i for one am impressed. i just wish it was better.

i dunno. all i want is a cross-platform object system that looks like nextstep that actually *works* crossplatformly, and a garbage collector.

I wouldn't be surprised to see GNUstep as a good (roughly source compatible to Mac OS X) desktop.

It's a real shame that with all this talk of GNOME and KDE, people have forgotten GNUstep.

Very true, though I did use the word "port" instead of "recompile".

The port would probably be non-trivial, unless the X applications were written with, say, GNUstep.

I'm not an X hacker, but I would imagine that the APIs for XWindows and Aqua would have similar philosophies. I would assume both would have elements such as "Create_new_window", and "Build_new_menu", and "Get_mouse_click", etc.

I wouldn't necessarily assume that they're similar enough that a port wouldn't require a significant amount of effort.

Couldn't they port it using GNUstep?

try gnustep

-Peter

If it's such a problem, just ditch GNOME and move over to GNUstep which is all GPL/LGPL and can't be taken away. Oh, and you get a bit of MacOS X compatibility thrown in too.

Offtopic, I think it's really significant that GPL'd software invades the Objective C/Cocoa world. We REALLY need more software for this great API and it's a niche that GNU can fill.

Speaking as a long-time Macintosh software developer, I literally drool at the possibility of selling my apps to an intel-sized audience with a simple recompile.

Take a step. Take another. Now take a GNUstep. Like Mac OS X's Cocoa, GNUstep is an implementation of the OPENSTEP API, except on top of a GNU system running X11 instead of a DarwinBSD system running Quartz. And if you need wincompatibility: 1. it's free software so you can fund a porting effort if you want, and 2. XFree86 runs on Cygwin.

• A DPS extension for XFree86
  
  
• GNUstep Resources (See miscellaneous packages)
  
  

For those that think GNOME and KDE are too big and bloated, this is moving towards being usable for some applications.

Keeping relevance, if L. Peter Deutsch didn't win, the somewhat-inadequacy of DGS work that the FSF contracted for might very well be part of the reason...

DGS

GNUmail? It requires GNUstep. But hey, you only forbade GNOME and KDE. :-)

Right now the only thing holding me back from using it all the time is the fact that whatever I code using the Cocoa APIs are going to be MacOS X only.

Right now the only thing holding me back from using it all the time is the fact that whatever I code using the Cocoa APIs are going to be MacOS X only.

Ever heard of GNUStep?

Mac OS X only my ass: GNUstep.

GNUstep.

I recommend GNUstep. No, it isn't polished yet, but we already have a nice mail client, an IDE, and a GUI design application. And we hope to have a calendar/planner application coming soon. Oh, and you can easily compile Cocoa (Mac OS X) apps under GNUstep too (and vice versa).

Everybody who can help us should give it a shot. We just need more people involved in the project.

I've used Windows in many of it's incarnations. I've used Gnome and KDE on Linux systems. I have a passing familiarity with Mac OS9. They are all, in their own way, a total pain in the arse. The only desktop that's made me smile in a long time is OSX's Aqua. There is a neatness and consistency to the interface which makes it easy to learn and a pleasure to use.
GNUStep are working to implement the OpenStep specification, upon which OSX's interface is based, as an open source project for *nix. I haven't seen it running yet but if it's as good as I'm hoping, and if it receives support from developers, it could do a lot to enhance the reputation of Linux as a serious OS for the desktop.
Currently I prefer the command line and my Linux systems tend to be used as file and network servers

For those of you who don't know, GNUstep is a clone of the Cocoa API.

Check it out!

Now if you had pointed out that making use of High level Cocoa classes would restrict you pretty much to Apple until GNUStep caught up then you might have had a point. But Objective-C ? gcc and GNUStep-Foundation look pretty damn portable (and Free) to me, mate.

" This won't let me run MacOS X graphical applications."
Neither will your x86 processor, but you already know that.

"wouldn't it be interesting for people like Trolltech and the like to emulate Quartz/Cocoa/Carbon?"
GNUstep, It's not by Trolltech, but it's what you're looking for, and what the parent post already pointed out.

It also means the possibility for a form of binary compatibility with e.g. Unix systems that didn't exist before. An Open Source Unix implementation would be pretty nice to have -- which happens to be what Mono is doing.

It looks to me like enough of the core libraries are part of the ECMA standard that, once implemented, they'd provide almost the same level of compatibility (except binary, not just source) between the Mono CLR on Linux/Unix and the Microsoft CLR on Windows as there is between GNUStep and MacOS X.

That's icing, though. Microsoft could always play their usual compatibility games, limiting the usefulness of CLR for that purpose. Whether or not it's 100% compatible with Microsoft's version, if you have your own implementation that Microsoft doesn't control it's a really useful technology just for the sake of e.g. cross-platform Linux development.

There are some annoying things in CLR, but overall it's an improvement over the JVM (as practiced).

Note I'm not addressing C# versus Java as languages. You can host many different languages on both the JVM and CLR, although Microsoft seems to be actively touting that fact more than Sun is right now.

Go here if you want screen shots. The link on the story post was just for the download.

If you follow the link to OS News there's a link to the left for screenshots and a bunch of other stuff

There was a project which tried to clone MacOS X for x86.
It was based on GNUstep. It's dead now.