Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Win32 to OS X Porting Guide

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the now-there's-an-idea dept.

BoomerSooner writes "Apple has released a Win32 to Mac OS X Porting Guide for C/C++ developers. This Guide is to get you started porting an existing procedural Win32 application written in C or C++ to Mac OS X. It looks like Apple is getting a bit more aggressive toward Microsoft."

10 of 285 comments (clear)

  1. Panic in the streets of Redmond! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It looks like Apple is getting a bit more aggressive toward Microsoft.

    Yeah, I heard the Fiji Islands are getting more aggressive towards the USA, too. Somehow, I don't think that will make much of a difference. Apple has two percent of the market, people. That's less than Linux. Hell, that's probably less than OS/2! If Apple had any guts, they'd release an x86 version of OS X. But they know they'd lose, so they won't.

  2. MFC?? by shlong · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hate to say this, but this 'guide' is rather useless and looks to be little more than a reprint of marketing glossies. Don't get me wrong, I love OSX. But to imply that you can easily port MFC apps to Cocoa is humorous. Even rewriting an MFC app in Cocoa will most likely be highly frustrating due to your engineers having to change their mentality from one to the other.

    --
    Cat, the other, tastier white meat.
  3. Re:Advice to Geeks about to try out mac osx by justsomebody · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I know your intention was good.

    But, wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to buy a PC and install Linux.

    Answers on your thinking what to say next
    1. No, I don't need any commercial applications, at least mac doesn't cover that department of software
    2. No, I my case is much nicer than Apple case, I'm very selective one
    3. Yes, I tryed OSX, even Jaguar, toooo sloooow

    --
    Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
  4. And figures are bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Percent of what? Desktop? Servers? Embedded? Toasters?

    New sales? What type of sales? Do they count in x86 boxes people build themselves?

    And in the end, look at the world. Look at how many bloody computers are out there.

    Even a single-digit percentage is a shitload of people using something.

  5. 3D Graphics Information is pretty thin by tc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To summarise, it basically says: "We support OpenGL, so if your app uses OpenGL, you'll have no problem". It then goes on to list a few things about OpenGL, which a seasoned OpenGL developer would already know.

    At no point does it say what you should do if your Windows app is written using Direct3D. Not even a link to a D3D-to-GL porting guide.

    Regardless of the relative merits of the two APIs, it's an undeniable fact that many 3D Windows apps use Direct3D, and it therefore seems like a pretty huge oversight for Apple to not even mention how one might go about porting them.

  6. Don't hold your breath by Metalhead01 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If Apple ever released OSX for PC's, it would be their death knell. Why?

    1. Hardware: OSX will only run on a small percentage of hardware, insuring that its stability is much higher than that of Windows. If OSX were to move to x86, then it would have to support the huge swath of shitty hardware, bringing down its stability level a great deal.

    2. Customer Outrage: Mac users & Mac zealots pride themselves on being different from everyone else. If Apple made OSX available to the horde of beige boxes, they'd riot and go looking for Steve Jobs' blood.

    3. No MS Office: If OSX is released for x86, you can be damn sure that Microsoft won't port Office to it at all. And while you can use OpenOffice, or any other office app, most people don't realize they exist, and won't use them.

    --
    The only reason I keep my Windows partition is so I can mount it like the bitch that it is.
  7. Re:Advice to Geeks about to try out mac osx by Wesley+Willis · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you don't want what OS X has to offer (which is quite a bit), then yes goddammit, use Linux on x86. The only reason there is a long explanation for all this stuff is because this is the way to get comfortable with the Mac OS X environment if you are a Linux user.

    So, yes, your implied conclusion is correct-- it's easier to do what you have always done and not try something new, especially if you don't care about the advantages of the alternative.

    Congratulations.

    --


    ---
    Rock over London
    Rock on Chicago
    Wheaties: Breakfast of Champions
  8. Step 2 uncovered! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    2. Wait until people get fed up with all the DRM and other shit Microsoft will eventually weld into future revisions of Windows, and leave in droves for the other mainstream OS that doesn't have any of it.

    1. Re:Step 2 uncovered! by noewun · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The idea of paying lots of money for boxed software at a computer store is so outdated. And the fact that Macintosh is built around that model is going to hurt it badly.

      What color is the sun on your world?

      Seriously: you statement is so head-in-the-clouds-theoretical I have trouble seeing it as anything other than parody. There is no, REPEAT NO, other way 99% of the people in the country will buy things than go to a store/order online and recieve something in a box.

      I'd suggest you spend less time deciding how the world will work and more time away from the computer.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
  9. Re:Cool! by wheezl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't Forget X-Chat Aqua

    http://xchataqua.sourceforge.net/

    --
    -- oh.... so..... sleeeeeepy.