10 Years of OpenStep

Next by 2.7182 · 2004-10-19 01:44 · Score: 4, Insightful

I was a really big Next user, and for me OS X seems to be the natural extension of it. But it was amazing to be using Next machines in the early 90's. They were remarkably ahead of their time.

Re:Next by Daengbo · 2004-10-19 03:01 · Score: 4, Interesting

OK, suppose I want an OpenStep desktop on a GNU/Linux system... What desktop should I use? GnuStep gives me no good answer!

GNUstep is development environment, not a window manager Many people have confused GNUstep with WindowMaker. GNUstep, however, is not a window manager. WindowMaker is the most often-used NeXT-looking application on a non-NeXT system. WindowMaker also uses a derivation of the GNUstep logo. WindowMaker is the preferred GNUstep window manager, but GNUstep applications also work with any window manager, although you're most likely, currently, to have a more cohesive desktop experience if you use the two in conjunction.

Relation to WindowMaker WindowMaker is a window manager, not a workspace manager nor a file browser. It is nothing more. WindowMaker and GNUstep share almost no libraries or functionality. WindowMaker is written in C, and GNUstep is written in Objective-C. WindowMaker does make certain things easier for GNUstep, but it is not GNUstep itself, although it is a part of the project.
Well, then... GnuStep seems to recommend WM as the choice for Gnustep applications, but isn't itself Gnustep in any way.

Is there anything that is? I would like to install and play for at least five minutes...

--
Put identity in the browser.
Re:Next by roard · 2004-10-19 03:48 · Score: 3, Informative

You could want to install/use Backbone or Garma, which are GNUstep-based Desktops...
Re:Next by Daengbo · 2004-10-19 04:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

I appreciate the long explanation, but I understood that part and was looking for a wm (not WM, haha) that was based on GnuStep, but there doesn't appear to be anything like that, though several attempts have been made and a distro (Linux-Step?) aborted.

Although this is going to sound a lto like flamebait, it is a real question... Is GnuStep a viable platform? Ten years without a wm based on it? It sounds like a perfect match for the Hurd, a technically superior solution that never goes anywhere and never dies. (OK, maybe the last sentence WAS flamebait)

--
Put identity in the browser.
Re:Next by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-19 06:51 · Score: 3, Informative

NeXT wasn't modeled on Smalltalk. I was there for years and no one talked about Smalltalk. Maybe you mean that Objective-C was modeled on Smalltalk, which was true, but no one was thinking, "Let's make a better version of Smalltalk"; it wasn't even on the radar.

The beauty of Objective-C was that it was just enough OO. In practice, you could make your code as efficient as C and you could have full control over your (small) memory footprint, and we made great use of inheritance, reuse, polymorphism, and late binding and linking, but it was lightweight enough that a full system ran well in 32 megs of RAM, and for everything I did, you wouldn't even be swapping if you had 48 megs for the entire system. We even had Objective-C in the kernel so you could subclass drivers. I like the syntax of Java, but it's a bloated pig by comparison and I would never use it on a server that I expected to scale, while I wouldn't hesitate to use Obj-C in this manner.

Smalltalk may have been a more pure OO environment or better for rapid turnaround development, but no one has used it for the kinds of applications or system that NeXTstep excelled at 15 years ago (or OSX does of late).
Re:Next by roard · 2004-10-19 08:36 · Score: 3, Informative

Hm..I thinkg you misunderstand how things are related in fact.. under X-Window, you need a special program, in charge of the window management (ie, to move them, etc.). It's called.. a window manager. WindowMaker is a X11 window manager.
Then you have X11 programs, that are in charge of their window's content. As programming directly using XLib is not fun, there is a lot of X11 "toolkits". Qt and Gtk are examples of toolkits.
GNUstep is an implementation of the OpenStep API. Basically, it's a programming library, a toolkit like Qt and Gtk if you want -- not only for graphic apps, but also for non-graphic apps. In fact, the OpenStep API is divided in two frameworks: Foundation (which deals with non-graphical things such as threads, files, unicode strings, etc.) and AppKit (which provides all the nifty widgets and how you use them). But, additionally to that, GNUstep *also* provides development applications: Gorm, a graphical interface builder, and ProjectBuilder, an IDE.
Actually, GNUstep runs mainly on X11, but the way it is architectured, it's not that complex to use other drawing display. For example, there is 3 backends for X11 -- one using xlib, the other using libart, and the third using Cairo. And there is a backend for Windows GDI. So in fact, it's not tied at all to a X11, and the notion of an independant window manager is specific to X11 (actually, GNUstep apps don't really need a window manager even under X11 -- they can manage themselves..).
But, if you're under X11, chances are that you want to run other programs alongside GNUstep programs -- KDE/GNOME programs for example. You then *need* a window manager. WindowMaker is the "default" window manager recommanded by the GNUstep project, mainly because its look and feel match the GNUstep look and feel. But you can use others window manager.
And WindowMaker itself doesn't use GNUstep.
Not sure if I understood well your questions, I tried to explain how things are related, hopefully more clearly.

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by CoolMoDee · 2004-10-19 01:46 · Score: 4, Informative

The first web browser was developed with NeXT and Openstep...

--
Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.

Another French pioneer... by mirko · 2004-10-19 01:47 · Score: 4, Informative

Kudos to Jean-Marie Hullot, who contributed to this by designing "Interface Builder" !

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by Nexum · 2004-10-19 01:47 · Score: 5, Informative

What about the first web browser for a start?

The first wholescale industrial use of OOP practices?

etc. Do some googling.

--

This sig has been deprecated.

What's NeXT? by mrchapp · 2004-10-19 01:48 · Score: 4, Interesting

Looking back at my old NeXT (we never lose a chance to brag about having one) makes me wonder what's coming in the next 10 years, and how much of that will arrive from Steve Jobs' hand.

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by AKAImBatman · 2004-10-19 01:49 · Score: 5, Informative

The NeXTStep (a.k.a. OpenStep) API was developed as part of the NeXTOS that ran on NeXT workstations during the 90's. Several deals were made with other Unix vendors (including Sun) for them to support the "OpenStep" standard.

NeXT was bought off by Apple, and was developed into Mac OS X. The OS X Cocoa API is really nothing more than the NeXTStep API set, and is almost 100% source compatible with programs from the old NeXT machines.

More Information

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade

to understand this in context by minus_273 · 2004-10-19 01:49 · Score: 5, Interesting

consider that tin burns lee when developing the www and the original browser gave up on his old projects and got a next box becasue the development of the UI and software was so easy on it. I wonder what would have have happened hsd he not gotten it :).
On a side note, it is really quite sad the linux developers are not using/updating openstep. The fact that it is nearly completely compatible with OSX's Cocoa is a huge plus. I discovered this while developing software in Cocoa and have often thought about how cool it would be to have a GL based desktop with a slick Openstep ui ( the current one looks like it is stuck in 1993) on linux.. Then I got a Mac

--
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by mirko · 2004-10-19 01:49 · Score: 5, Informative

The game Doom was also developed on NeXT.

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.

There was never anything so consistent, stable.... by WillAdams · 2004-10-19 01:51 · Score: 4, Interesting

and productive out of the box as NeXTstep (says the guy who still uses a NeXT Cube as his main production machine at home).

- Command= in any app to get a definition in Webster.app rocks
- having all of your man pages, the sysadmin refs, and the works of Will Shakespeare and anything else you wish to add in Digital Librarian ensures one can look up what one needs at will.
- Being able to improve the functionality of _any_ app by installing a Service or an app which provides a Service provides a synergy one doesn't get in Mac OS X where it's hit-or-miss whether or no an app supports Services (Cocoa apps do, Carbon and Java apps have to be specially coded)
- having total control over the screen (you can drag off-screen and hide all but one pixel of the vertical menu, one tile of the Dock)
- The vertical menu makes tear-off sub-menus make sense, which allows effortless customization of one's working environment for a given task w/o inscrutable toolbars
- the pop-up menu means that the menu for the current app is always instantly available --- some commands can even become gestural in one's access to them, e.g., ``Punch'' in Altsys Virtuso, right-button-menu click, down a bit and straight over and release

I could go on, and I have, check my rants on groups.google.com in comp.sys.next/mac.advocacy

I've got a little bit more on my site, http://members.aol.com/willadams look for my nascent gnustep pages, or the NeXT brochure in my portfolio

Or of course, visit http://www.gnustep.org or http://www.stepwise.com for some good programming info

William

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.

Some links about OpenStep/GNUstep/Cocoa .. by roard · 2004-10-19 01:53 · Score: 3, Informative

Some GNUstep links:

Other links, Objective-C and Apple Cocoa

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by WillAdams · 2004-10-19 01:56 · Score: 5, Informative

WorldWideWeb.app and Doom have already been mentioned --- lengthy discussion of the former in the book _Weaving the Web_ by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, check the source for Doom.app and John Carmack's blog to learn how he feels about NeXTstep.

Other things:

- Altsys Virtuoso (this became Macromedia FreeHand)
- Lotus Improv (which lives on as Quantrix or Flexisheet)
- MusicKit
- MiscKit
- Pages by Pages
- TouchType.app

Other more recent developments:

- Cenon - http://www.cenon.info
- GNUmail
- ProjectCenter
- GORM

William

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by AKAImBatman · 2004-10-19 02:05 · Score: 3, Insightful

and the cases burned really well due to the fact that they were cast magnesium

Poppycock. The cases were a magnesium alloy. The only way the guy got it to burn was to heat it to several thousand degrees so that the alloy broke down. Not to mention that he had to try it with two different cases, AND use tons of lighter fluid to get one to ignite. :-)

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade

Objective C by RAMMS+EIN · 2004-10-19 02:08 · Score: 3, Interesting

The *step development environment is greatly loved by those that use it, and largely ignored by the rest of the world, because they refuse to learn Objective C. Instead, they use Java, which is very much the same idea in a different shape. This is a great pity, because with OpenStep the world could have had it all so much earlier.

Oh, and I wanted to mention that GNUStep is pretty universally percieved to be ugly, but support for theming is being worked on (it already works, but appears very limited).

--
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.

OpenStep vs. KDE and Gnome by Florian · 2004-10-19 02:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's a pity that, at the peak of the Linux desktop hype in the late 1990s, when evangelists predicted the near death of Microsoft, KDE and Gnome were rushed out of the door, and GNUstep development remained obscure. It was the first time that distributed free software development defected from its proven practice of implementing standardized, proven APIs and technology (like POSIX) and created major APIs of its own. The result is that KDE and Gnome have created APIs that nobody uses for serious large-scale software development projects [except those companies who have large investments into KDE/Gnome themselves, like Ximian with Evolution]. Now KDE and Gnome have a long way to go to clean up and standardize their APIs (via freedesktop.org), usability (via UI guidelines) and code, solving issues that adherence to an existing open GUI specification like OpenStep would have prevented in the first place.

Imagine the massive development efforts on KDE and Gnome, including the massive rewrites of their codebases, would instead had gone into GNUstep, so that the GNU/Linux and *BSD desktop would be OS X/Cocao source compatibile today [and companies developing for OS X port their software to Linux basically with one more compiler run]...

--
gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70

Re:OpenStep vs. KDE and Gnome by muecksteiner · 2004-10-19 02:38 · Score: 5, Insightful

The main trouble - then and now - is that the majority of folks simply "don't get it" why OpenStep is superior to crippleware APIs like Qt/KDE.

KDE is "trying to do an improved Windows on Linux" (and taking a lot of its bad design choices with them in the process), while OpenStep is something entirely different. And for an average, M$-infected programmer using something like that would require some re-thinking of some of one's own assumptions how apps should be coded, so most simply don't bother. Sheep, that's what I call them... ;-)

I guess the apathy towards OpenStep also stems from the fact that most people have never seen NeXTStep development in action - it left most witnesses drooling for more - and/or because they're too conventionally-minded to try anything outside their mainstream C++/Java box. To paraphrase a famous quote, "nobody was ever fired for choosing C++", right? And who's ever heard of Objective C - apart from geeks, that is?.

If you're particularly uncharitable you could argue that the selection process which gave us Linux itself followed a similar pattern. There were technologically more advanced and initially cleaner OS projects out there at the time, but somehow the crowd choose a less-than-cutting-edge project they could at least *understand*.

I used NeXTStep for years, and I'm still doing my software development in ObjC - luckily I work in a niche where this is possible. If all others want to make their life difficult - well, that's their choice... ;-)

Just my two euro cents

A.W.
Re:OpenStep vs. KDE and Gnome by Brandybuck · 2004-10-19 06:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

You are making gross mischaracterizations about KDE. KDE was started to create a destkop, not an API. The API was merely a pleasant side effect. We're not all a bunch of ex-MFC programmers. Some of us have NEVER written native Windows software.

The apathy towards OpenStep stems from two facts. First, until recently there was no Free OpenStep desktop. There was a Free OpenStep API, but not a desktop. And that API wasn't complete at the time Qt/KDE and GTK+/GNOME became popular. The second reason is Objective C. Despite the good things about the language, you must admit if you have any honesty that it is not a common language. Until the release of OSX is was almost a dead language. People starting with a new API prefer to use a language they know. The most common systems languages are still C and C++.

Qt/KDE is not "crippleware". That's below-the-belt FUD that cheapens your whole argument. Even if you have a small enough mind to truly believe that, stating will only hurt your "cause".

--
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Re:OpenStep vs. KDE and Gnome by muecksteiner · 2004-10-19 12:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

KDE was started to create a destkop, not an API. The API was merely a pleasant side effect.

Given that my original claim was that the basic structure of KDE is not nearly as well thought out as it should be I can only say - "and your point is?"

With a well thought out comprehensive application development toolkit like OS on the one side, and something which started out as one of these retarded "X desktop projects" ("one more kewl way of drawing Xterms" - granted, it's evolved beyond recognition into something genuinely useable now, but still >;-) and added most of the useful stuff as an afterthought, where do you think my sympathies lie?

I am actually amazed how much the KDE team has achieved, given that the entire software structure is suboptimal compared to e.g. (but probably not only) OpenStep.

The galling thought which the parent poster wanted to bring across was that if all that precious effort put into KDE had been invested into something with a more solid foundation - like for instance OpenStep - we could be much, much further on now than we currently are. People would in all probability be flocking to Linux due to its RAD prototyping capabilites, like they did with NeXTStep - and as a consequence there would not be such a lack of sophisticated GUI applications for the platform.

The apathy towards OpenStep stems from two facts. First, until recently there was no Free OpenStep desktop.

Yes, I agree, that was the thing which broke the back of any widespread OStep adoption. You could download an - arguably buggy and unfinished, but basically USEABLE - version of KDE when the GNUStep guys were still tinkering with the nth unuseable prerelease of their perfect uberdesktop. They did their work well (in the sense of being thorough), and the last sentence was not meant to deride them and their effort. Given the complexity of the project they have fared very well, but they are a bit late to the party now...

Qt/KDE is not "crippleware". That's below-the-belt FUD that cheapens your whole argument.

You are right - that was a rather over-the-top comment; apologies to the KDEers out there.

And I have to add that even if one were in a mood to flame KDE the nomenclature I used would not be entirely correct anyway; KDE is certainly not crippleware as such (this would imply broken functionality, which is generally not the case nowadays), but rather something I would call "conceptual crippleware" - a fundamentally limited design which is being meticulously implemented by a very dedicated team... >;-)

0.2E-32 EUR

A.W.

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by NoMoreNicksLeft · 2004-10-19 02:12 · Score: 3, Insightful

Both good examples, but you missed one. Mac OSX.

Informative background by Pan+T.+Hose · 2004-10-19 02:25 · Score: 4, Informative

I've been around computers a long time and i've never heard of it. What major application can anyone mention that has been developed on it? A 10th anniversary of something that barely anyone has ever used (in the big scheme of things) is really not any great thing to celebrate... I like the idea of it, but i'm not sure it's as wonderful of a hit as this news article is trying to make it seem.... Or am i off the mark here?

Apparently.

In the future, when you so desperately want to learn about something, you can use Wikipædia, a free on-line encyclopædia:

OpenStep is an open object-oriented API specification for an object-oriented operating system that uses any modern operating system as its core, principly developed by NeXT. It is important to recognize that while OpenStep is an API specification, OPENSTEP (all capitalized) is a specific implementation of this OpenStep developed by NeXT. While originally built on a Mach-based Unix (such as the core of NeXTSTEP), versions of OPENSTEP were available for Solaris and Windows NT as well. Furthermore the OPENSTEP libraries (the libraries that shipped with the OPENSTEP operating system) are in fact a superset of the original OpenStep specification. The OpenStep API was created as the result of a 1993 collaboration between NeXT Computer and Sun Microsystems, allowing this cut-down version of NeXT's NeXTSTEP operating system object layers to be run on Sun's Solaris operating system (more specifically, Solaris on SPARC-based hardware). Most of the OpenStep effort was to strip away those portions of NeXTSTEP that depended on Mach or NeXT-specific hardware being present. This resulted in a smaller system that consisted primarily of Display PostScript, the Objective-C runtime and compilers, and the majority of the NeXTSTEP Objective-C libraries. Not included was the basic operating system, or the display system. The first draft of the API was published by NeXT in summer 1994. Later that year they released an OpenStep compliant version of their flagship operating system NeXTSTEP running on several of their supported platforms and rebranded it OPENSTEP. OPENSTEP remained NeXT's primary operating system product until they were purchased by Apple Computer in 1997. OPENSTEP was then combined with technologies from the existing Mac OS to produce Mac OS X. Sun never seemed terribly interested in the product, likely a result of the NIH syndrome. In fact it's somewhat unclear why they were ever interested, although it appears it was an attempt to "get in" on the object-oriented operating system market before Microsoft released its plans for the object-oriented Cairo OS (which never happened). Nevertheless they started their port to Solaris some time in 1994, and released it in 1996. When Sun started work on Java just after this point, Solaris OpenStep was never seen again.

NeXTSTEP is the original object-oriented, multitasking operating system that NeXT Computer, Inc. developed to run on its proprietary NeXT computers (informally known as "black boxes"). NeXTSTEP 1.0 was released on 18 September 1989 after several previews starting in 1986, and the last release 3.3 in early 1995, by which time it ran not only on Motorola 68000 series processors (specifically the original black boxes), but also generic IBM compatible x86/Intel, Sun SPARC, and HP PA-RISC). About the time of the 3.2 release NeXT teamed up with Sun Microsystems to develop OpenStep, a cross-platform standard and implementation (for Sun Solaris, Microsoft Windows, and NeXT's version of the Mach kernel) based on NEXTSTEP 3.2. The format of the name had many camel case variants, initially being NextStep, then NeXTstep, then NeXTSTEP, and became NEXTSTEP (all

--
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by DrXym · 2004-10-19 02:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

Don't be facetious. Any programmer unfamiliar with the interface builder would sit there boggling at the screen for minutes in total incomprehension. I've used all kinds of UI development tools over the years running the gamut from horrible to sublime. XCode definitely falls near the bottom. Certainly not as bad as trying to visually design a Swing app but close.

Interface builder is not intuitive, it's not even discoverable. Joining objects residing in two separate windows with lines doesn't even make sense from a usability perspective. Even when you eventually figure out how to create classes and join them up to buttons, it is non-obvious how that maps onto actual code. On top of these problems you have to learn a new language just to be able to get your UI to do anything. If the documentation & help system were up to snuff it might shorten the learning curve but they're not - it takes seconds to do a search on MSDN, so why does it takes minutes on OS X?

Thus, the new programmer is faced with an unfamiliar language, an unfamiliar metaphor for UI building, and an unfamiliar framework with bad documentation. I haven't seen such an uncompromising and steep learning curve for a long time. And all that to programme a supposedly user friendly OS.

So yes I do think it is non obvious. In my case it was the first time I actually had to buy a book ("Cocoa Programming for Mac OS X") before I could even figure out what was happening. I haven't seen XCode 2.0 it has to be said, but I sure hope they intend to make it easier to use. Even a few wizards with common design patterns might help somewhat.

annoyed by phoxix · 2004-10-19 02:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

why does GNUstep need to have a top devel dir in my home directory ? Why couldn't it be a freaking dot-dir like every other program ?

it seems a bit arrogant to me that something needs its own directory in the root of my home directory.

I don't even use GNUstep, but its always there. It keeps coming back too, after I remove it.

Sunny Dubey

Re:Qt acheived this already by OmniVector · 2004-10-19 02:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

any program worth his shit should have no trouble picking up objective-c (a far simpler and more powerful language than c++). the language barrier really isn't an issue. it's more an issue of mindshare. there are a lot of things that are better in the computing world by design but get largely ignored due to lack of marketing.

--
- tristan

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by bnenning · 2004-10-19 02:51 · Score: 3, Interesting

Most OS X apps use Cocoa & Objective-C for their front-end.

Or Carbon and C/C++.

That's not to say I don't think Objective-C is elegant but I'd still prefer C++

No, you really wouldn't. C++ just doesn't have the dynamic capabilities that Cocoa apps exploit to substantially reduce code. Simple example: given an arbitrary object, determine if it implements a named method. One line of code in ObjC, and this allows Cocoa apps to automatically enable and disable menu items depending on what actions are valid for the current selection.

--
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.

80% of all software is custom built by KamuSan · 2004-10-19 02:52 · Score: 3, Insightful

OpenStep was really popular with several large banks for their internal applications.

Good question, but the fact that you don't see a lot of programs made with a particular framework doesn't mean it's not widely used. 80% of all software (just a guess, maybe it's even more) that is written is custom built software for a specific customer or purpose.

No gnuSTEP link in the writeup? by RdsArts · 2004-10-19 03:22 · Score: 3, Funny

Why isn't there a link to the GNUstep website in the writeup? You'd think they could link to the GNUstep website in a story that talks about GNUstep. What's with that?

Seriously, next time there's a story that has GNUstep in the writeup, they should probably link the text "GNUstep" to the GNUstep website, which is (of course) www.GNUstep.org.

Re:Call me stupid, but.... by Lars+T. · 2004-10-19 03:50 · Score: 3, Funny

Nothing like posting a web page as proof - that debunks your little story.

With these test shots out of the way, we started to think about burning the cube itself. When I had called NeXT to find out what kind of paint they had used to paint the cube, one of the people I had spoken with told me that the cube was made out of "magnesium alloy which is specially designed to be difficult to ignite." These words came back to me as I stood in front of the burn chamber at Livermore. What if we couldn't get the cube to ignite? The idea stood out in my mind like a sore thumb.
[...]
We put the rear panel into the burn chamber. The panel is a square piece of metal, 14'' on each side, and roughly half an inch thick. We stood it on end with a pair of bricks. Then we hit it with the MAP gas tource.
Nothing happened.
We kept the torch focused on the rear panel. Slowly it heated up in the spot where the flame lapped. Soon the metal started to melt. Then it puffed up with a white, caky ash.
"What's going on?" somebody asked.
We kept the flame on the spot. After another minute, we saw that same telltale white spark. "It's caught!" somebody said. The person holding the torch backed away.
The flame sputtered for a few seconds, then it went out. Something was clearly wrong.
We tried again with the MAP gas torch, with similar results. "We have problems like this all of the time," Kirk said, trying to reassure me. "Sometimes its really hard to get things burning." He then walked over to a storage shed and wheeled back an oxygen-acetylene torch. "This should set it on fire," he said with a gleam in his eyes.
The acetylene torch bruned a lot brighter than the MAP gas, but the results were similar. The back panel glowed red, burned white, sputtered a little, then went, leaving a caky white residue --- and a hole.
"This is so NeXT," I told Sally. "Everything works great in the tests, then when you try to make it work for real, in the field, nothing works. They build a computer out of magnesium, and it doesn't even burn!"

--

Lars T.

To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

A couple more links by tarzeau · 2004-10-19 04:50 · Score: 3, Informative

Read the OpenStep specification. Try a GNUstep Live CD.

--
Windoze not found: (C)heer, (P)arty or (D)ance

32 of 338 comments (clear)