Board index » delphi » Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way


2006-04-07 08:24:07 AM
delphi26
Dag Fjeld Edvardsen writes:
Quote

Yes, it is not the whole story. But it is a significant part of the
explaination.
How? OS/2 did indeed run Windows apps just fine and MS did not stop that,
thus it had zero effect on which platform developers wrote applications for.
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are
injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say
there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks
my leg." ?Thomas Jefferson
 
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

David Smith writes:
Quote

>If the Mac can reliably run most or all Windows apps, then why would
>I ever bother to write a Mac-native app??

Macs don't and will never come with Windows installed. You would have
to buy a copy and install it. Most users won't do it.
But somehow the ability to run Windows is going to result in increased sales
even though no one will do it? Strange logic.
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's
unfamiliar territory." - Paul Fix
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Wayne Niddery [TeamB] kirjoitti:
Quote
David Smith writes:
>>If the Mac can reliably run most or all Windows apps, then why would
>>I ever bother to write a Mac-native app??
>Macs don't and will never come with Windows installed. You would have
>to buy a copy and install it. Most users won't do it.

But somehow the ability to run Windows is going to result in increased sales
even though no one will do it? Strange logic.
There are a lot of Windows users who are interested in Macs, but don't
have the guts to make the switch. Now they can and keep using the few
win-only apps that had hold them back earlier. There's nothing strange
in that. Current Mac users won't need Windows anyway.
David S.
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

"Dag Fjeld Edvardsen" <dfe who is located on byggforsk dot no>wrote in
message news:XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
Quote
I think this will strongly increase the demands for Macs. And OsX will be
in the hands of more people. My next PC will probably be a Mac!

DevCo should start developing a version of Delphi for OsX ;) Remember, no
competition from Visual Studio on OsX...

But there is competition from Apple's XCode IDE, which ships for *free* on
Mac OS X, and is the *required* dev tool if one wants to create Universal
Binaries that can run on both PPC and Intel Macs (this is desired since PPC
Mac users will outnumber Intel Mac users for at least a few years). The Mac
dev tools market is much less competitive than the dev tools market on other
platforms; in fact, Apple has a monopoly on Mac dev tools. Metrowerks
Codewarrior was the preferred Mac dev tool by the big software houses (e.g.
Adobe, Microsoft) even though it wasn't free like XCode, because it was
simply better than XCode. But Apple has refused to share how to package
Universal Binaries so Codewarrior is on its death bed (Adobe, Microsoft, and
other CodeWarrior users are abandoning CodeWarrior in favor of XCode since
that's the only way one can create Universal Binaries).
As we know, Delphi is quite expensive. How is it going to compete against
*free* XCode that is bundled with OSX and is the only way one can target
both PPC and Intel Macs? (PPC Mac users will outnumber Intel Mac users for
a few years at least).
Competing with Visual Studio in the Windows dev tools market is nothing
compared to competing with XCode in the Mac dev tools market.
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

"Bob Dawson" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Dag Fjeld Edvardsen" wrote
>
>Yes, it is not the whole story. But it is a significant part of the
>explaination.

I don't even buy that. The abuse of monopoly power case is much stronger
in
the realm of office suites than it is in the OS market itself.

Huh? Please cite examples of abuse of monopoly power in office suites by
Microsoft. Hell, they don't even have a monopoly in office suites. For
example, Dell bundles WordPerfect Office as the default office suite. You
have to pay extra if you want Microsoft Office rather than the default
WordPerfect install. And HP offers WordPerfect Office on equal footing with
Microsoft Office (not on price (MS costs more), but neither is the
"default"). How could Dell and HP do these things if Microsoft had a
monopoly in office suites? Get real. Sure, Microsoft has greater market
power in office suites than competitors, but they don't have a monopoly.
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

"Wayne Niddery [TeamB]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Dag Fjeld Edvardsen writes:
>
>Two things will happen:
>(a) More people will by Macs, leading to higher demand for native OsX
>software
>(b) Some Mac owners will buy a large share of their software for
>Windows.
>I feel very sure that (a) is will be much stronger than (b).

Then you will have to explain why this didn't work for OS/2. OS/2 could run
Windows applications (some even said better than Windows), but that simply
guaranteed that very few people thereafter bothered to write OS/2 native
applications - there was no reason to since, by writing a Windows app,
they could sell to users of both platforms and not care which one became
the market favourite, they would win either way.

If the Mac can reliably run most or all Windows apps, then why would I
ever bother to write a Mac-native app?? (a) above will never happen
(people may indeed buy more Macs, but it will *not* translate into demand
for more Mac-native apps precisely because those increased sales are a
result of being able to run Windows apps - increasing demand for more
*Windows*-native apps).

The difference is that OS/2 ran Windows apps out-of-the-box and without
having to dual-boot. With Apple's BootCamp, you still have to buy a copy of
Windows separately and you have to dual-boot. While 100% of OS/2 machines
could run Win16 apps, I'd guess that fewer than 10% of Macs will be able
to run Windows apps, since the vast majority of Mac users won't purchase a
Windows OS for their Macs. So developers will still have plenty of
incentive to make Mac apps.
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Quote
Huh? Please cite examples of abuse of monopoly power in office suites by
Microsoft. Hell, they don't even have a monopoly in office suites. For
example, Dell bundles WordPerfect Office as the default office suite. You
have to pay extra if you want Microsoft Office rather than the default
WordPerfect install. And HP offers WordPerfect Office on equal footing
with Microsoft Office (not on price (MS costs more), but neither is the
"default"). How could Dell and HP do these things if Microsoft had a
monopoly in office suites? Get real. Sure, Microsoft has greater market
power in office suites than competitors, but they don't have a monopoly.
To split hairs with part of what you say, I think they are a monopoly,
because they have over 90% of the market by value, which means they have a
large degree of monopoly power. I bet most who get WordPerfect Office
promptly upgrades.
But I don't think they've abused their monopoly power in this area
personally. At least I haven't seen much evidence, and the HP deal shows
this.
Oliver Townshend
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Quote
>Because:
>www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/2005-07-01-msft-ibm_x.htm

There's nothing in that article that has *anything* to do with my
statement above.
Your argument has a quantitative and qualitative part.
The article shows that MS pressured hardware manufactorers to not preinstall
OS/2
on their PCs (even when OS/2 had a much lower price and could run Windows
software).
This led to a *much* lower installed base of OS/2. Remember, most people use
the
OS that is preinstalled on the computer. A low number of PCs with OS/2
led to lower demand for native OS/2 software.
There are two things at work here: (1) How strong are the incentives for
*each*
user of OS/2 to buy native OS/2 software, and (2) how many users of OS/2
are there in total. The link above indicates that MS pressure led to a much
lower
number of OS/2 users. At least that is what the court has found.
Anyway: Boot camp is about dual booting, not running Windows programs
inside OsX. That is an important difference (so the OS/2 discussion is not
really
relevant for Boot Camp, but will be for virtualization).
If a Mac user wants to run IrfanView (a great Windows program) he has to
log out of OsX and boot into WinXP. If I created a native OsX
application.doing
the same thing as IrfanView my app would have an important advantage. The
Mac user
didn't have to shut down OsX and boot into Windows. So all things beeing
qual, the native OsX application have an advantage. Again: It would be
quite different if we were talking about virtualization.
-Dag
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Quote
There are a lot of Windows users who are interested in Macs, but don't
have the guts to make the switch. Now they can and keep using the few
win-only apps that had hold them back earlier. There's nothing strange in
that. Current Mac users won't need Windows anyway.

David S.
I think is the whole story in a nutshell. My sister is looking for a
computer,
and will be much more likely to buy a Mac now that there is no extra "risk"
involved.
-Dag
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Yes, Xcode is free (as in price:=0).
But even so I think that there is a market for Delphi on
the Mac. Universal binaries are important now,
but (as you say) will be less so over the next couple
of years.
RAD with Xcode is not as easy as RAD with Delphi.
Borland already has a nice compiler
for Linux (part of Kylix, and it was not the compilers
fault that Kylix had technical problems on newer
distributions; As far as I know..). I am not sure
how large difference there is between executables
for Linux and BSD (used in OsX), but I'd guess
a large part of the work is already done. There is some binary
compatability between Linux and BSD.
Start with a simple version of Delphi for the Mac,
and with a very low price for the first versions. This could
give Borland a nice share of a growing market on
OsX, and would be one extra reason for Delphi developers to
stay away from Visual Studio.
-Dag
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

"Pepe Smythe" wrote
Quote

Huh? Please cite examples of abuse of monopoly power in office suites
by Microsoft. Hell, they don't even have a monopoly in office suites.
IIRC Lotus created the 'Office' market by bundling 1-2-3, the recently
acquired AmiPro, and several other programs into the Lotus SmartSuite. MS
called it a pricing gimmick and said they had no intention of following
suit. But SmartSuite began to take market share, so MS Office and the
WordPerfect Office were created in short order as responses. That was back
when Lotus and WordPerfect still mattered (still had meaningful portions of
the market).
So that is where OS market power enters the story. For a couple of years MS
made it almost as cheap to bundle Windows+Office as it was to bundle Windows
alone. In fact for 'favored' (cooperative/MS-exclusive) vendors it was
probably cheaper. In the early 90's (again IIRC) it was hard to find
anything but a barebones system in ComputerShopper that didn't have Office
included. Lotus and WP both made some pre-install deals as well in the
attempt to hang on, but couldn't really afford to give away their only
products, whereas MS, with its supporting income stream from the OS market,
could. By the end of the decade MS had control of the office suite market,
and today it is fairly unusual to find Office pre-installed by default. MS
has returned Office pricing to quite profitable levels.
Quote
monopoly in office suites? Get real. Sure, Microsoft has greater
market power in office suites than competitors, but they don't have
a monopoly.
Most estimates I have seen put them somewhere around 95-97%.
Side note: In addition to the concept of the office bundle, credit Lotus
with the ideas of standard cross-program icons and macro/scripting
languages. These were introduced in SmartSuite, and advertised as evidence
of its 'superior integration,' before VBA existed.
Obviously, market power isn't the whole story. WP for instance stumbled
badly with WordPerfect for Windows 5.1 and 5.2. And once SmartSuite had MS's
attention, MS responded quickly to the new concepts, whereas Novell
neglected WP, and IBM did virtually nothing with SmartSuite once they
acquired it (other than making a half-hearted attempt to host it on OS/2).
But it is a significant part of the story.
bobD
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

David Smith writes:
Quote
There are a lot of Windows users who are interested in Macs, but
don't have the guts to make the switch.
Guts? that is hitting pretty low.
I've owned three Macs. Everyone had as many problems than my other
"PC" machines. In particular, the Performa was awful.
Nonetheless, I would love to have a OS X based Mac. Even better, if it's
the same machine as my primary Windows machine. Then I can just boot
into OS X every once and a while and play around without having to have
a second hunk of plastic/metal sitting on my desk to do so.
--
Jon Robertson
Borland Certified Advanced Delphi 7 Developer
MedEvolve, Inc
www.medevolve.com
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Jon Robertson kirjoitti:
Quote
David Smith writes:

>There are a lot of Windows users who are interested in Macs, but
>don't have the guts to make the switch.

Guts? that is hitting pretty low.
I didn't mean that in the bad way. But I do think that most of the fear
of switching over is based on the thinking that one cannot get along
without their favorite program X and it is win only. But when somebody
finally makes the switch, they usually find that there are other
software for that same purpose in the Mac and that they can be equally
good. And maybe soon they won't even miss the original program, when
they realize that they can get along just fine without it.
They can also always ask the developer of that program to start
supporting Macs. Change can only come if there's a demand for the support.
But that everything changed over night. If there really is a program
that you cannot get along without and the Mac support seems awfully long
way (can you spell Delphi here?), then you don't have to have multiple
machines anymore. Just one beautiful, functional iMac, mini or MacBook
laptop which runs your precious Win programs natively. Wonderful!
I'm myself thinking of using the Windows XP section to run Delphi, but I
honestly cannot think of any other program that I'd miss that much.
I love the UltraEdit text editor, but I am sure that there are equally
good editors in the Mac.
David S.
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

Pepe Smythe writes:
Quote
I would guess that fewer
than 10% of Macs will be able to run Windows apps, since the vast
majority of Mac users won't purchase a Windows OS for their Macs. So
developers will still have plenty of incentive to make Mac apps.
Which is also part of my point - in this thread some seem to be saying that
Mac sales are going to take off *now* because the Mac can run Windows, but
using your own guess above, that would, at best, generate 10% more Mac
sales. Hardly enough to incent me to develop anything for that platform.
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and
stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
 

Re: Cross platform-- the hard way

"Wayne Niddery [TeamB]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
Which is also part of my point - in this thread some seem to be
saying that Mac sales are going to take off *now* because the Mac
can run Windows, but using your own guess above, that would, at
best, generate 10% more Mac sales. Hardly enough to incent me to
develop anything for that platform.
Except for people who have an inseverable tie to Microsoft, it seems
to me that those buying new computers would have a reason to choose
the Mac for simply the option of running windows or OSX on the same
computer. If they buy anything else, they lose such a choice.
It's a slow thing to break a monopoly, but this may be a way for Apple
to expand their user base, and I think it is a good idea.
Now when my mom needs a new computer, you can guess what I'll
suggest. People can try out OSX without risking buying a computer
that they'll never use if they turn out to want windows instead. And
if that doesn't work out we can run windows or even linux on it.
(She's actually doing just fine with linux, and doesn't even know what
a file is. All she does is use firefox under Gnome, and solitare.)
--
Chris (TeamB);