Re: Re[3]: Gnustep + mac + windows?)

[Saibot]

From: "Manuel Guesdon" <ml@orange-concept.com>
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:14:22 +0200 Andreas Heppel <aheppel@web.de> wrote:
>
>  >| On 2002-09-24 13:44:56 +0200 Philippe C.D. Robert <probert@sgi.com>
wrote:
>  >|
>  >| > On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
>  >| >> Anyway,  I can  think of  dozens of  programs to  write  before
adding
>  >| >> themes...  For example, a  MS-Windows backend would probably have
more
>  >| >> impact on potential users of GNUstep.
>  >| >
>  >| > Why this?
>  >| Because there lots of Windows users and developers who might be
interested in a framework that is easy to use _and_
>  >| portable.
>  >| Coming from the Windows world, I know the existing frameworks there
and know now how much easier it is to do a
>  >| graphical application using the GNUstep framework than using C++ and
the MFC (Microsoft Foundation Classes) or
>  >| Borland's frameworks. Not to mention the fact that they cost lots of
money.
>  >| Tell those Windows developers how easy it is to learn Objective-C and
how easy GNUstep development is, and even if
>  >| only a very small fraction starts to develop using GNUstep this will
be a lot, because there are millions and
>  >| millions Windows developers out there.
>
> May be I'm a marginal case here and sometimes I fell a bit suprised by all
these discussions but I think there's a lot of
> people who doesn't care about GUI, backends,... [snip]

Lots of people don't care about GUI, backends, ... Sure.
Now, another lot of people do. What is your point?

> Todays, thre's a lot of people who's work is mainly oriented on servers,
web applications and back office. I think they
> don't care GUI, all they want is web application framework, database
framework, network related objects and business
> objects.

Sure, and another lot of people do only GUI stuff. Again, I fail to see your
point.

>
> Another thought is that GNUstep like lots of 'free' projects is based on
people interests. If someone want a feature,
> it code it. If he's the only one who want it and don't want to make it,
the feature never come. I think GNustep is like
> this: people have different interests and desire and make things to follow
that. Windows people and Mac OS X
> ones may choose to be interested and participate to GNUstep development
but why one should do it for them ?

Because not everyone who desires a feature has the ability or time to do it.
I've seen quite a lot of people on this list ask about windows or mac os x
compatibility. GNustep, like most open source software, is made to be used.
Users of something don't have to be developers of that thing too. If you
were developing a multimedia application and a user asks about a loop
fonctionality, would you complain "why should I do it for him"? You'd either
code it or not or someone else would, or not. If you got 100s of requests
for that feature, you might consider implementing it although you wouldn't
use it yourself...

People subscribe to this list to stay in touch with what happens on GNustep,
GNustep developers and GNustep users. I don't think replying to a feature
request with "do it yourself" and "a group of people is not interested in
that feature" is very constructive... Now, tell me why you think a windows
GUI would be a bad thing (or a bad thing to do now). That would be
interesting...

> I've followed many Mac OS people discussion and near the only thing I've
seen is, to summary: "Is GNustep ready
> so we can use it without participation to it's coding ? No, it don't have
this or that. Okay, I'll check next year if it
> willMany of t be ready.". They seems to don't care about all Apple trashed
'standards' and other forgotten projects. New
> marketing orientation is always better :-(

I don't care if Apple trashed "standards" either, why would I? I'm a
developer of applications, not a developer of "standards". If their trash
suits me and makes my life easier, I don't have no problem with that. I
don't have time to participate in GNustep currently, so I'm doing like other
people are doing, following what's going on and use the thing when it's
ready for me (which is, when there is a windows GUI).

> Windows people keeps working with MS tools even if they are buggy and
expensive (MSDN cost is really expensive for
> independent or small sized companies), even if MS don't care about
ascending compatibility and so on.  Why should we
> try to make them switch to *nix, GNUstep,... ?

I've done development on windows, *nix and OS X. What I can say from this
perspective is that MS Visual C++ is  the best IDEs I've seen. Their
compiler kicks ass, is extremly fast and way less buggy than gcc. I don't
like developing on windows for other reasons (ethical, bad APIs, ...) but
their developer tools are often less buggy than what I've seen elsewhere.
But people don't stick to someplace because of the tools (most don't
anyway), windows developers keep working on windows because that's where the
money is. You just can't deny that 90% of people use windows, so developers
develop stuff for windows...

You don't have to try and make people switch to unix or GNustep. Andreas
said "Windows developers could be interested in GNustep, if they joined it
would help". Nobody's saying you have to try and convert them. Just that if
GNustep had a windows GUI, more people would join, which would be good for
GNustep.

> Just few evening thoughts...

Just a few morning thoughts ;-)

Stephan

> BTW, GNUstep will now be used to make postscripts files to print SNCF
(French national railway company) official
> trains/hours indicators for Paris and it's region. No GUI, just base
classes and GNustepWeb :-)
Cool, I hope it works better than the SNCF, wouldn't be very fun if that
application decided to go on strike every other week ;-)