Comments on: “Cross-platform” http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/ Former Open Source programmer with experience at companies like IBM and Apple. Now a UI Designer with an education in Cognitive Science and Human-Computer Interaction. Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:09:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: jiMMy http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-332 jiMMy Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:19:57 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-332 Mozilla is hideously ugly & slow interface. It is popular because there arent any other choice on windows (apart from buggy ie)... Like Qt & Swing, Mozilla uses non-native cross-platform widgets. As a user, I notice Opera' gui is very polish & very fast to launch. But, they delibrately make the menus fades slowly, otherwize it is very fast. Swing's menu felt faster than Mozilla's menu (but mozilla wins in scrolling with a scrollbar slightly, java 1.4 make incredible improvements to swing). Unfair to judge its slow loading time which is not a by-product of its library design but the nature of its VM (loading, verifying, jitting, checking). Most of these can be removed using GCJ. Swing is elegant in designs in that it uses no external mechanism like signal/slots or xul but just pure java syntax (inheritance/interface). No more, no less. How many libraries does that???. Mozilla is hideously ugly & slow interface. It is popular because there arent any other choice on windows (apart from buggy ie)…

Like Qt & Swing, Mozilla uses non-native cross-platform widgets. As a user, I notice Opera’ gui is very polish & very fast to launch. But, they delibrately make the menus fades slowly, otherwize it is very fast. Swing’s menu felt faster than Mozilla’s menu (but mozilla wins in scrolling with a scrollbar slightly, java 1.4 make incredible improvements to swing). Unfair to judge its slow loading time which is not a by-product of its library design but the nature of its VM (loading, verifying, jitting, checking). Most of these can be removed using GCJ.

Swing is elegant in designs in that it uses no external mechanism like signal/slots or xul but just pure java syntax (inheritance/interface). No more, no less. How many libraries does that???.

]]> By: julian http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-288 julian Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:04:49 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-288 Chris, sure, you can have a bunch of interfaces... but that's not what people are usually talking about when they talk about a cross-platform application. At that point you might as well write your backend as a library and write various frontends to the library--which seems to be the best thing that people do right now. Also, wxwidgets gtk2 looks like crap, crashes a lot, and doesn't support everything. Chris, sure, you can have a bunch of interfaces… but that’s not what people are usually talking about when they talk about a cross-platform application. At that point you might as well write your backend as a library and write various frontends to the library–which seems to be the best thing that people do right now.

Also, wxwidgets gtk2 looks like crap, crashes a lot, and doesn’t support everything.

]]> By: Chris Niekel http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-285 Chris Niekel Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:46:44 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-285 It should be possible (in python at least) to have one application with multiple user-interfaces in it. That way, the looks could be platform-specific (cocoa for macos, wxpython/qt/gtk for others), and the core of the application could be the same for all. It would require a very good separation between UI and the rest of the app. It should be possible (in python at least) to have one application with multiple user-interfaces in it. That way, the looks could be platform-specific (cocoa for macos, wxpython/qt/gtk for others), and the core of the application could be the same for all.

It would require a very good separation between UI and the rest of the app.

]]> By: Sparks http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-261 Sparks Thu, 12 Aug 2004 23:17:32 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-261 Speaking as someone who has and uses a Mac (albeit not for work), the reason I use Adium as opposed to Gaim under MacOS X is simply integration. Adium acts the way I'd expect for an OS X client. Cut-and-paste, drag-and-drop, built-in spellchecking using my system library, and all of that. I thought about using Thunderbird under OS X, since it is my mail client under Windows on my PC... but while it looks very nice and even integrates well appearance-wise under OS X, it had one major mark against it; it won't integrate with my system address book. And it's not just OS X where cross-platform systems don't do quite what you might want. Thunderbird for Windows still irritates me slightly because I can't minimize it to the system tray without running memory-resident hacks. That's what needs to be tackled for cross-platform software, I think; supporting not the lowest common denominator of features, but supporting a standard set of features /and then also/ supporting OS-specific things that users of that OS are used to. Apple's 'Mail.app' wins for me over Thunderbird because, though it doesn't have all the features Thunderbird can support (News, RSS feeds, etc.), it does support my system spellchecking dictionaries, it does support my system address book, and so on. Adium wins for me over just plain Gaim because Adium supports OS X things like Dock badging and whatnot. As long as cross-platform software doesn't support 'expected' platform behaviors, a lot of people -- me included -- will likely go for platform-specific alternatives. Speaking as someone who has and uses a Mac (albeit not for work), the reason I use Adium as opposed to Gaim under MacOS X is simply integration. Adium acts the way I’d expect for an OS X client. Cut-and-paste, drag-and-drop, built-in spellchecking using my system library, and all of that.

I thought about using Thunderbird under OS X, since it is my mail client under Windows on my PC… but while it looks very nice and even integrates well appearance-wise under OS X, it had one major mark against it; it won’t integrate with my system address book.

And it’s not just OS X where cross-platform systems don’t do quite what you might want. Thunderbird for Windows still irritates me slightly because I can’t minimize it to the system tray without running memory-resident hacks.

That’s what needs to be tackled for cross-platform software, I think; supporting not the lowest common denominator of features, but supporting a standard set of features /and then also/ supporting OS-specific things that users of that OS are used to. Apple’s ‘Mail.app’ wins for me over Thunderbird because, though it doesn’t have all the features Thunderbird can support (News, RSS feeds, etc.), it does support my system spellchecking dictionaries, it does support my system address book, and so on. Adium wins for me over just plain Gaim because Adium supports OS X things like Dock badging and whatnot.

As long as cross-platform software doesn’t support ‘expected’ platform behaviors, a lot of people — me included — will likely go for platform-specific alternatives.

]]> By: julian http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-260 julian Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:11:01 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-260 Regardless of what I think of ICQ-like interfaces (I concur with stpeter on that one), not very many open source developers can shell out the $$$ to make Qt actually "cross-platform". Nor do I think they should. Regardless of what I think of ICQ-like interfaces (I concur with stpeter on that one), not very many open source developers can shell out the $$$ to make Qt actually “cross-platform”. Nor do I think they should.

]]> By: Hal Rottenberg http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-259 Hal Rottenberg Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:10:09 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-259 Despite its ICQ-like interface that stpeter isn't fond of, I think Psi is a very successful multiplatform client. I'm a bit biased though. Despite its ICQ-like interface that stpeter isn’t fond of, I think Psi is a very successful multiplatform client. I’m a bit biased though.

]]> By: temas http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-257 temas Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:10:28 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-257 Definitely agree. I still haven't decided if the "client problem" is because of multi protocol clients or an actual lack of a good client on pretty much every platform. Definitely agree. I still haven’t decided if the “client problem” is because of multi protocol clients or an actual lack of a good client on pretty much every platform.

]]> By: fh http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-256 fh Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:25:22 +0000 http://missig.org/julian/blog/2004/08/10/cross-platform/#comment-256 Full-ACK Full-ACK

]]>