Re: question about low availability of Mac OS X applications that has GnuStep edition

[Doc O'Leary]

In article <mailman.10.1295920702.26185.discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>,
 "Zhang Weiwu, Beijing" <zhangweiwu@realss.com> wrote:

> On 01/25/2011 06:25 AM, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> >
> > Linux, *BSD, Solaris... a big mess, don't you think? A maze...
> > GNUstep has its shortcomings, but I think that generally Linux is not
> > such a well-defined and interesting target for many applications.
> > Sadly perhaps, but it is reality. 
> 
> Consider application authors delver binary due to the fact the source
> code is thus not available

This directly contradicts your idea that support would be a simple 
recompile.  No developer is avoiding building yet-another-binary simply 
because typing "make" is too hard.

>, is a byte-code approach possible solution to
> this BUSINESS PROBLEM?

No.  The real need boils down to having a supported API that covers all 
the target platforms; whether or not that involves a virtual machine is 
immaterial.  The "problem" with GNUstep is that the major platform
(Mac OS X) doesn't write to the standard (OpenStep).

In some ways, it reflects the problem web browsers had when Microsoft 
was dominant with IE.  The only difference is that Apple keeps 
innovating, make it harder for GNUstep to "Firefox" them.  That's certainly
why I had high hopes when there was news/rumors that Sony was going to
put their support behind GNUstep for their mobile offering.

-- 
iPhone apps that matter:    http://appstore.subsume.com/
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, astraweb.com,
    and probably your server, too.