comp.sys.mac.advocacy

In article
<35a2ad51-b6f5-4eb8-8d00-20ac38b46649@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
ed wrote:

> On Apr 3, 5:06 am, Sandman wrote:
> > Having cancelled 64bit for Carbon, Apple has set Adobe back on their
> > plans to release Photoshop 64bit for OSX and they have to update the
> > entire PS codebase to Cocoa instead.
> >
> >
> >
> > Adobe was under the impression - like the rest of us - that Leopard
> > was going to introduce 64bit Carbon apps, but when Apple cancelled
> > that Adobe had to scrap the idea to be able to provide 64bit version
> > of PS for Windows and Mac at the same time, and now has to go back and
> > rebuild PS in Cocoa.
> >
> > I think both are to blame, Apple for cancelling a promised technology
> > and Adobe for not getting their ass out and porting it to Cocoa
> > several years ago.
>
> from your link:
> "As soon as we got the news in June, we began adjusting our product
> development plans. No one has ever ported an application the size of
> Photoshop from Carbon to Cocoa (as I mentioned earlier, after 9 years
> as an Apple product Final Cut Pro remains Carbon-based), so we're
> dealing with unknown territory...
>
> 2) Adobe gets castigated for "dragging its feet" on Cocoa/x64. This
> charge will be inevitable, I suppose, but I want you to know that we
> started work on the problem immediately after WWDC '07. We started
> peeling senior engineers off the CS4 effort, and we'll keep pouring on
> the muscle in the next cycle. This work comes at the expense of other
> priorities, but so be it.
>
> 3) We start hearing all about "Cocoa Über Alles"--about how Adobe
> should have known that Cocoa is the One True Way(tm) and should have
> started the move years ago. Most Mac users don't know Cocoa from
> Ovaltine, and nor should they: it's just an implementation detail, not
> a measure of quality. I think Brent Simmons, creator of wonderful
> Cocoa apps like NetNewsWire, put it most elegantly: "Finder + Cocoa =
> Finder." That is, rewriting one's app in Cocoa doesn't somehow
> automatically improve its speed, usability, or feature set.
>
> I'll also note that Apple's Carbon Web site says, "Carbon is a set of
> APIs for developing full-featured, high-performance, and reliable
> applications for Mac OS X... The Carbon APIs are also well-suited to
> cross-platform development." I don't mention it to detract from
> Cocoa; I mention it to point out that each approach has its pros and
> cons, and in hopes that we don't hear all about how Cocoa is clearly
> the only way to write "real" Mac software."

Uhm, what was your point, ed? You just pasted some text there, all of
which I had already read. Hmm?


--
Sandman[.net]