Originally posted by: spyordie007
And unfortunetly a lot of Mac software requires Aqua...But Aqua programs will be difficult, since there aren't any open/free implimentations of it out there.
Originally posted by: Link19
Originally posted by: spyordie007
And unfortunetly a lot of Mac software requires Aqua...But Aqua programs will be difficult, since there aren't any open/free implimentations of it out there.
What about games for MAC OS X? DO they require Aqua?
Originally posted by: spyordie007
That is opinion, not fact. Many people see the fact that the software they have will run under Windows but not on a Mac as Windows being superior, but this is also opinion.OS X is in every way superior to Windows
Because not too long ago there were a lot of good arguments for using apple's old platform (Motorola) over the competing x86 products. Of course nowadays if the platforms go the same way it will simply be a question of what software they want to run (because the OS really wont make much of a difference to an application like Photoshop when it's running on near-identical hardware).Why do pofessional video editors, photographers, studio professionals, and movie makers choose the platform?
Also media prosumers may be good at graphic design; but this doesn?t necessarily make them hardware experts
There are some people who play around with running other OSes on Macs (most notably Linux) however it's not very common because the hardware is so overpriced. Especially with Mac going to x86, why would you want to pay so much extra money for apple's shiny case?Also have you ever wondered y poeple dont whatnt to install win xp on the macs?
Originally posted by: EssentialParadox
Originally posted by: spyordie007
That is opinion, not fact. Many people see the fact that the software they have will run under Windows but not on a Mac as Windows being superior, but this is also opinion.OS X is in every way superior to Windows
Because not too long ago there were a lot of good arguments for using apple's old platform (Motorola) over the competing x86 products. Of course nowadays if the platforms go the same way it will simply be a question of what software they want to run (because the OS really wont make much of a difference to an application like Photoshop when it's running on near-identical hardware).Why do pofessional video editors, photographers, studio professionals, and movie makers choose the platform?
Also media prosumers may be good at graphic design; but this doesn?t necessarily make them hardware experts
There are some people who play around with running other OSes on Macs (most notably Linux) however it's not very common because the hardware is so overpriced. Especially with Mac going to x86, why would you want to pay so much extra money for apple's shiny case?Also have you ever wondered y poeple dont whatnt to install win xp on the macs?
The OS makes a much larger difference to a computer than it appears you seem to realize. The fact that Apple have moved to x86 processors makes no difference to Macintosh computers, and there is still going to be a significant difference between Photoshop on Windows and Photoshop on Mac. The differences between OS X and Windows XP are more than just the interface. Thinking OS X is similar to XP is like saying Linux is similar to XP, or Vista is similar to the GameCube OS, or Photoshop on OS X is the same as Photoshop on a Windows computer just because they have the same CPU now.
Those who have any shred of knowledge regarding the workings of an Operating System wouldn't make that mistake. So you should either do a little research before coming out with those kinds of comments, or just not even bother altogether.
And guys... 'Aqua' is the name given to the theme used in Mac OS X. It has nothing to do with the coding language. But you are correct that OS X uses a different API to Windows -so you can't directly run games on it. But the fact of Apple moving to Intel CPU's does mean the actual code foundation will be extremely similar, making it 70-80% easier to port programs and games to OS X. So I bet you'll be seeing a lot more ported over from this point on.
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
from my understanding is the dificulty to port games won't change much since the entire operating system uses different APIs than windows (except if your talking about opengl) now porting old mac stuff to the new intel macs it shouldn't be a huge deal, just rewrite the parts that they optomized for the ppc and recompile
Originally posted by: EssentialParadox
And guys... 'Aqua' is the name given to the theme used in Mac OS X. It has nothing to do with the coding language.
Where did you read that made you think Aqua was more than just a theme?Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: EssentialParadox
And guys... 'Aqua' is the name given to the theme used in Mac OS X. It has nothing to do with the coding language.
Apple's definition of Aqua makes me think it is more than just a theme. If I'm wrong, what is the name of the entire display framework that includes the Aqua theme?
Originally posted by: EssentialParadox
Where did you read that made you think Aqua was more than just a theme?Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: EssentialParadox
And guys... 'Aqua' is the name given to the theme used in Mac OS X. It has nothing to do with the coding language.
Apple's definition of Aqua makes me think it is more than just a theme. If I'm wrong, what is the name of the entire display framework that includes the Aqua theme?
I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'framework', but Aqua is powered by Quartz, which is the graphics management layer in OS X. If you mean the API, the most is commonly used OS X API is Cocoa, the other is Carbon.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
I reread it and I guess it could mean a theme. It's on apple's site. Apple.com.
Originally posted by: EssentialParadox
Yeah. They call it the GUI - Graphical User Interface.
But you guys do know, apart from the AFI boot system incorporated into the new Systems, it's likely you'll be able to boot from a Windows install. It won't be switchable dual-boot, but you'll be able to install OS X, Windows and even Linux on the new iMac if you wanted, and then select the OS on boot-up. Of course, I'm hanging around anandtech to see who does this first and how easy or difficult it is.
I have a spare dev unit, but it's quite different from the actual iMacs being sold. So I can't really send you that.Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Send me one, I'll do it.
There really isn?t going to be that big of a difference for Adobe programs, it's the hardware that is doing the work. The only way there would be significant difference for a program like Photoshop is if they were using OS specific APIs to carry out their tasks (which Adobe does very little of). I'm pretty familiar with how Adobe applications work on the various OSes they support and the major difference between the two platforms is the hardware; the application functionality is near identical (I used to work there BTW). It's the hardware that does the majority of the work; the OS's role for these applications is relatively minor.and there is still going to be a significant difference between Photoshop on Windows and Photoshop on Mac. The differences between OS X and Windows XP are more than just the interface
According to Apple?s site Aqua sure looks like more than just a theme:Where did you read that made you think Aqua was more than just a theme?
Ohh, OK. So you used to work at Adobe, can I ask doing what? You could've been a floor cleaner for all I know.Originally posted by: spyordie007
There really isn?t going to be that big of a difference for Adobe programs, it's the hardware that is doing the work. The only way there would be significant difference for a program like Photoshop is if they were using OS specific APIs to carry out their tasks (which Adobe does very little of). I'm pretty familiar with how Adobe applications work on the various OSes they support and the major difference between the two platforms is the hardware; the application functionality is near identical (I used to work there BTW). It's the hardware that does the majority of the work; the OS's role for these applications is relatively minor.and there is still going to be a significant difference between Photoshop on Windows and Photoshop on Mac. The differences between OS X and Windows XP are more than just the interface
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=graphical%20user%20interfaceOriginally posted by: spyordie007
According to Apple?s site Aqua sure looks like more than just a theme:Where did you read that made you think Aqua was more than just a theme?
http://www.apple.com/macosx/overview/aquauserinterface.html
They refer to it as the whole GUI including the applications that support it. Other elements such as Finder, Expose, Spotlight, etc. are all considered part of Aqua. So saying that anything that relies on Aqua wouldn?t work on another platform is a fair assessment.
Of course the definition of a ?theme? and its application to the user interface varies
I'd be interested in hearing why. For a database, I'd believe it (they spend something like 30% of execution time in system code), but I'm very skeptical of claims that a number-crunching program like Photoshop would have any real dependence on the OS.and there is still going to be a significant difference between Photoshop on Windows and Photoshop on Mac. The differences between OS X and Windows XP are more than just the interface
Got a source for that number?But the fact of Apple moving to Intel CPU's does mean the actual code foundation will be extremely similar, making it 70-80% easier to port programs and games to OS X. So I bet you'll be seeing a lot more ported over from this point on.
Your posts imply to me you don't really know what you're talking about, or are nitpicking semantics and missing the point(s) people are trying to make. Which of my statements do you disagree with specifically? FWIW, I'm sure everyone in this thread already knows what a GUI is.CTho9305 - you need to see my follow-up posts.
I worked out of the Seattle office on the support side of the house doing things like tracking/repro?ing bugs and submitting to engineering, writing training documentation and the like in 2001 and 2002. I dealt with both platforms.Ohh, OK. So you used to work at Adobe, can I ask doing what? You could've been a floor cleaner for all I know.
Graphics are not *solely* done on Macs in the media and print industry. In the print shops and graphic design professional areas you?re right in that Macs are more common than Windows; but overall they are not even the majority (when I worked there 52% of Photoshop sales were for Windows).If you actually know what you're talking about, tell me why - the definitive reason, above everything else - graphics are solely done on Macs in the media and print industry.
You should know this.. you used to work there BTW.
No actually I?m discussing APIs on the forum like everyone else should know what I?m talking about. I guess I should have assumed that you didn?t know what you were talking about from the beginning.However, when you're discussing API's on a forum like you know what you're talking about, you should know the difference between a GUI and an API. They're not one and the same, they're not linked at all. If I wrote an application on Mac OS X Panther it would look different running on OS X Tiger because the Aqua theme has changed slightly. It doesn't mean the code is different, just the representation.
Ohh kay. You wanna get down and dirty with me, fine.Originally posted by: CTho9305
Your posts imply to me you don't really know what you're talking aboutCTho9305 - you need to see my follow-up posts.
This is an issue, but moder compilers can take care of the majority of the issues without *too much* finagling.You have two types of byte ordering (also known as endian formats.) It is how byte data is stored in memory. PPC processors use big-endian byte ordering and x86 processors use little-endian byte ordering. When porting a game from x86 to PPC you have to switch all the x86 byte formatting to PPC byte formatting. You can have hundreds of these little bastards, so that isn't easy. And if you miss one you've added a bug in the game. Worse, it might not even run. Now that Macs are using the same endian format, there won't be any need to convert them to the big-endian ordering. This will speed up the porting. Not massively, but enough to make it easier on the lives of OS X porters.
I didnt say "no differance" just not a big differance; Photoshop is largely CPU limited and will tyipcally eat up large amounts of cache. There was a time that the shorter pipeline combined with the larger amounts of cache on Macs provided enough of an advantage that a large number of graphic shops/users moved to it (most notably in the G3 and G4 days). However if the hardware is the same this will no longer be the case.Yet he says that now, all of a sudden, there is no difference between photoshop on PC and photoshop on Mac because they're using the same processor. But the fact is, it's made exactly the amount of changes as there were between G5's and Windows x86 processors - none.
OK, fine. So you worked tracking bugs and then submitting them to the engineers to fix.Originally posted by: spyordie007
Since you seem to be waiting on me for some reason I?ll do a quick post so can indulge us with your ?true? knowledge?
I worked out of the Seattle office on the support side of the house doing things like tracking/repro?ing bugs and submitting to engineering, writing training documentation and the like in 2001 and 2002. I dealt with both platforms.Ohh, OK. So you used to work at Adobe, can I ask doing what? You could've been a floor cleaner for all I know.
Graphics are not *solely* done on Macs in the media and print industry. In the print shops and graphic design professional areas you?re right in that Macs are more common than Windows; but overall they are not even the majority (when I worked there 52% of Photoshop sales were for Windows).If you actually know what you're talking about, tell me why - the definitive reason, above everything else - graphics are solely done on Macs in the media and print industry.
You should know this.. you used to work there BTW.
No actually I?m discussing APIs on the forum like everyone else should know what I?m talking about. I guess I should have assumed that you didn?t know what you were talking about from the beginning.However, when you're discussing API's on a forum like you know what you're talking about, you should know the difference between a GUI and an API. They're not one and the same, they're not linked at all. If I wrote an application on Mac OS X Panther it would look different running on OS X Tiger because the Aqua theme has changed slightly. It doesn't mean the code is different, just the representation.
GUIs typically have lots of APIs, those APIs are exposed so that programs can manipulate the UI (in fact even themes can have APIs ? this is why in Windows UxTheme.dll gets replaced to use custom themes, because they need additional APIs to expose additional functionality).
Where this comes into play with application compatibility is when I write a program under one platform (i.e. Windows) that uses Windows-specific APIs to provide my application?s functionality; this application could not easily be ported to Mac OS X because the APIs wouldn?t exist. If my program has most of the functionality built-in (such as Photoshop) I only need change access to a few APIs that are OS specific (again using Photoshop as an example with file manipulation, opening, browsing, saving, etc.).
So going back to the previous posts if an OS X application uses Aqua APIs to accomplish much of its functionality it could not be easily ported to another application. Regardless of whether you want to call Aqua a ?theme? or a ?UI? this holds true.
It's still enough of a considerable issue that it will decrease port times.Originally posted by: spyordie007
This is an issue, but moder compilers can take care of the majority of the issues without *too much* finagling.You have two types of byte ordering (also known as endian formats.) It is how byte data is stored in memory. PPC processors use big-endian byte ordering and x86 processors use little-endian byte ordering. When porting a game from x86 to PPC you have to switch all the x86 byte formatting to PPC byte formatting. You can have hundreds of these little bastards, so that isn't easy. And if you miss one you've added a bug in the game. Worse, it might not even run. Now that Macs are using the same endian format, there won't be any need to convert them to the big-endian ordering. This will speed up the porting. Not massively, but enough to make it easier on the lives of OS X porters.
It?s true that that gamma is still a concern taking graphics between the 2 platforms, especially in the past. Fortunately nowadays most decent PCs come with a GPU that can handle gamma correction (i.e. NVidia) and this largely mitigates this problem. If you cant afford decent PC hardware that has this capability than you probable cant afford a Mac.Because you wanna know why Macs are used for print? I'll give you a clue - gamma. It's the color range you see on the screen. Macs have a gamma of 1.8 and Windows has a gamma of 2.2. Macs are used because the screen displays a much richer and more accurate representation of the images and how they will look when printed. In my company I've dealt with dozens of different print firms and not one of them have used a PC for dealing with my designs.
Perhaps you are confusing Windows 9x with Windows NT, they are quite different.There's also the points that Macs are better suited for professionals in any area because Windows natively runs a program and dedicates all its resources to that program, whereas on a Mac each program only takes up what it requires, so it is much more efficient when switching around between programs at speed; and then the points that the Mac OS is much more productive for the professional with Exposé features and such.
Okay, not sure what your point is here.Aqua is not the OS X API
Originally posted by: EssentialParadox
Ohh kay. You wanna get down and dirty with me, fine.Originally posted by: CTho9305
Your posts imply to me you don't really know what you're talking aboutCTho9305 - you need to see my follow-up posts.
Do you know what byte swapping is? I think you do considering you pointed it out already, so that's good. But if anyone else is interested I'll just explain it:
You have two types of byte ordering (also known as endian formats.) It is how byte data is stored in memory. PPC processors use big-endian byte ordering and x86 processors use little-endian byte ordering. When porting a game from x86 to PPC you have to switch all the x86 byte formatting to PPC byte formatting. You can have hundreds of these little bastards, so that isn't easy. And if you miss one you've added a bug in the game. Worse, it might not even run. Now that Macs are using the same endian format, there won't be any need to convert them to the big-endian ordering. This will speed up the porting. Not massively, but enough to make it easier on the lives of OS X porters.
In regards to spyordie007, I never meant to give the impression I didn't believe he worked at Adobe (assuming that's what you're talking about in respect to "BSing") I just don't think it could have been of a relevant enough position at the company for him to use it to back-up his points considering what he's been talking about in this thread.
The fact that Macs are using x86 processors now makes absolutely no change at all in regards to how software runs. Yet he says that now, all of a sudden, there is no difference between photoshop on PC and photoshop on Mac because they're using the same processor. But the fact is, it's made exactly the amount of changes as there were between G5's and Windows x86 processors - none.
I read that as you contradicting yourself. What am I misunderstanding? Also, you didn't address the 70-80% easier statement - do you have some examples to validate the claim?Thinking OS X is similar to XP is like saying Linux is similar to XP, or Vista is similar to the GameCube OS, or Photoshop on OS X is the same as Photoshop on a Windows computer just because they have the same CPU now.
I'd expect momentum would be a big factor - once the whole industry had Macs with their shiny new PPC chips (instead of the M68k's), switching to PCs would have probably been a pain.He even answered to the question, "why do professional video editors, photographers, studio professionals all use the Mac platform?" that it was because of the processor. It hasn't been about the processor since the 90s. G5s weren't any faster than Windows PCs and there was no special hardware acceleration,
I'd be interested in hearing that reason....it was all about the actual OS and the software as to why they choose Macs. In fact, a very specific reason in regards to print, which he's still failed to answer.
No, if I do |int foo = 2882400018; char *bar = &foo; printf("%x", bar);|, the compiler can't really do anything. On one type of chip, you'd get AB, on another you'd get 12. In general I don't think the compiler will help you out at all.This is an issue, but moder compilers can take care of the majority of the issues without *too much* finagling.byte ordering discussion (snipped)
Interesting. Photoshop installs some "Adobe Gamma" thing on windows. My video card drivers (since like 1999) have let me set the gamma in the video card settings. That's a pretty poor reason if it's true. Spyordie007 replied to this point too.Because you wanna know why Macs are used for print? I'll give you a clue - gamma. It's the color range you see on the screen. Macs have a gamma of 1.8 and Windows has a gamma of 2.2. Macs are used because the screen displays a much richer and more accurate representation of the images and how they will look when printed. In my company I've dealt with dozens of different print firms and not one of them have used a PC for dealing with my designs.
That's flat out wrong. It's not even true for Windows 9x.There's also the points that Macs are better suited for professionals in any area because Windows natively runs a program and dedicates all its resources to that program, whereas on a Mac each program only takes up what it requires, so it is much more efficient when switching around between programs at speed; and then the points that the Mac OS is much more productive for the professional with Exposé features and such.
I'm not a Mac person - I don't know what the various names are. I think both spyordie007 and I both only meant to be talking about APIs.And please stop referring to it as "Aqua API," because I've already corrected you that the API's are Cocoa and Carbon and the graphical representation of these API's is named "Aqua." Aqua has no API's and they're not interchangeable terms.