[MacDV] Re: The 20inch LCD Conspiracy

[SLarsonIH at aol.com]

Yeah, me too . . .

<<I should probably just stay out of this, but...

There are reasons iDVD won't run in OS9 on an 8600.

First, iDVD needs a G4. Even if you've upgraded your system to a G4, 
there's no way Apple can be expected to officially support every 
upgrade 3rd parties may make available for older hardware.>>

I would agree wholeheartedly, IF, DVD Pro didn't either. 

<<Second, OS X has many frameworks and API's that are not available in OS 
9. Does anyone really expect Apple to port Aqua/Quartz to OS 9 in order 
to make new software run in 9? The simple fact is that OS X supports 
many functions/features not found in OS 9, and some of them are not 
even possible to do in OS 9. Even features that are possible to 
implement in OS 9 would require more effort and troubleshooting (and be 
more bug prone) than the equivalent in X.>>

Agreed. I don't expect that.

<<Apple had to make a choice between a less functional, harder to 
maintain and upgrade iDVD that runs in both 9 and X, or a more 
functional version, leveraging the power and features of OS X that will 
be easier to maintain and upgrade. IMO they made the right choice.>>

Huh? All they have to do is copy the parts of the code in DVD Pro which will 
let you use an external Pioneer 103/104/105 to burn DVD's, and paste it into 
iDVD. They don't, because you will either have to pay the grand for DVD Pro 
or buy a new machine. Period.

<<It may take a bigger team to support iApps in OS 9 than OS X.>>

Notice I said 'some' iApps. Nobody would expect an OS9 iApp to look and feel 
like the OSX version. Well, at least I wouldn't. Take iCal for example. It's 
the information that is important. I'm sure they could have an OS9 iCal 
compatible for sale in a short period of time with a minimal programming 
team. iPhoto would be much easier. Strike a deal with the guy that wrote 
GraphicConverter. iMovie is already in OS9 as is iTunes.

<<Maybe. But as I said before, if they need to use OS X only frameworks 
and API just to get the software to work, OS 9 support may simply not 
be possible. The versions of iApps that currently run in OS 9 may be as 
feature complete as they can be without porting parts of OS X into OS 9 
in some way (if that's even possible). Keep in mind that any 
application written using Cocoa frameworks can't just be ported to OS 
9. You would essentially have to port Cocoa functionality as well.>>

Agreed

<<Of course OS X was running on Intel hardware before it was running on 
Apple hardware. In the early days, if you wanted to program for OS X, 
you did it on Intel hardware because that's the only place Apple's 
(NeXT's) development tools would run. IOW, the core of OS X and the 
basic frameworks have been working on Intel hardware for a long time. 
Making those services (essentially Cocoa frameworks) available to OS 9 
would be a nightmare if not impossible. Porting OS X to different 
hardware is relatively easy, porting OS X functionality to a different 
OS is essentially impossible.>>

Not asking them to.

<<Many of the other "Apple Conspiracy" stuff I've seen (including the 
flap about the 20" LCD) in the end really boil down to engineering 
tradeoffs and not being able to do the impossible. Old and new hardware 
& software doesn't always mix. Though it may be painful at times, its 
not a conspiracy.

-Mike >>

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do believe, based on the many 
different moves on Apples part, that they are trying to force everyone to 
OSX, right now. I just don't like their tactics.

STeve