Originally posted by JS987
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Miguel de Icaza Leaves Linux For Apple OS X
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by deanjo View PostOne could argue that the App store fills that need and is their "package manager". There are also items like fink and homebrew.
Disallowed types of applications revealed by Apple include
Software that changes the native user interface elements or behaviors of Mac OS X.
Software that does not comply with the Apple Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines.
Software that is similar in look or function to current Apple products (e.g. Mac App Store, Finder, iTunes, iChat, etc.).
Software similar to other software that is already released in the Mac App Store. Examples given: Adobe Illustrator and CorelDraw, Photoshop Lightroom & Apple Aperture, Cinema 4D and 3D Max, etc.
Software that contains or displays pornographic material.
Software that is or installs shared components (kernel extensions, browser plugins, QuickTime components, etc.).
Software that provides content or services that expire.
Software that does not run on the currently shipping version of Mac OS.
Beta, demo, trial, or test versions of software.
Software that references trademarks unless the developer has explicit permission to use them
Open source software licensed only under the GPL (because the App Store Terms of Service imposes additional restrictions incompatible with the GPL)
Apps that use software libraries that are either optionally installed or deemed deprecated by Apple for Mac OS X users. Examples given:
Apple's implementation of Java SE 6 (although the OpenJDK implementation of Java SE 7 is permitted if bundled into the app)
PowerPC code requiring Rosetta
Comment
-
Originally posted by JS987 View PostApp store can't provide all applications. You can't install GPL software from official repository. fink, homebrew and MacPorts are unofficial and not integrated with App store.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_App_Store
Comment
-
Originally posted by peppercats View PostShows what?
Every person I've talked to about windows 8(actual normal people, not power-users or linux users) have called it a design disaster. When I bought my laptop, every negative review simply pointed to windows 8 being crap and unusable.
I guess it shows that microsoft vastly overpays their UI team.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LinuxID10T View PostLOLWUT? From every modern benchmark I've ever seen Java gives C# butthurt in the speed department. I guess you don't like the massive amount of Java IDEs either. They are different, not inferior. To give you some credit though, I don't code in Java (C++ and lua all the way for me) but still, I think that criticism unnecessary and incorrect.
it's quite cross platform(but not build-once run everywhere... neither is C#, Mono though
About C++: Well last time I checked you needed to fumble around with header files (I still don't understand what those are for), pointers and there was not one IDE that has C++ + GUI builder the way C# has it. Instead you needed to do manual binding and stuff you really shouldn't even think about. Also I read a few times that compilers tend to 'optimize' your code which results in unexpected behaviour. Aaand last one: There seems to be no debugger that is as easy as VisualStudio's debugger (build-in in an IDE and easy to use)
Comment
-
Originally posted by deanjo View PostAnd you cannot put closed applications on the mainline linux repositories. It isn't that different. Also you can offer GPL software as long as it is dual licensed.
I can't change license of software created by others. GPL applications shouldn't be dual licensed as GPL is best license for users.
There are 10 other limitations except disallowing of GPL only license.
Comment
-
Originally posted by zoomblab View PostIf the 2-3 major distributors would sit down and agree on a standard application bundle format there would a lot less fragmentation in Linux. Packages and centralized repositories are alright for maintaining the system. However, applications should be easily distributed from anywhere and from anyone, just like MacOS or Windows. Ideally the user should be able to get applications from the application creators themselves, e.g. Firefox from Mozilla, Chrome from Google, MySQL from Oracle, etc. If I was a developer of a successful open source application, I'd like the user to get a cross distro binary directly from my site. It would be a win for both me and the user.
Originally posted by uid313 View PostPeople hate on .NET, but its pretty much Java done right.
Originally posted by arokh View PostIf you can't learn from the best, and instead insist on your own broken ways then you will certainly not go anywhere.
Comment
-
Vala.
And as I said previvously: Their documentation sucks.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JS987 View PostGPL applications shouldn't be dual licensed as GPL is best license for users.
Comment
-
Originally posted by deanjo View PostThat is a matter of opinion and the typical "user" sees no benefit. The GPL is great for developers who wish to release their code to the public and force others to contribute back.
Comment
Comment