nko
10-19-2004, 12:02 PM
Why aren't more developers on with GNUStep? Is there any particular reason? From what I've heard about it, it's great, but no one seems to use it. Is it just not as good as advertised?
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : Why Isn't GNUStep / NeXTSTEP Bigger?
janet loves bill
10-19-2004, 05:23 PM
LOL..................<rant/>
I guess people don't want Richard Stallman taking Credit for their work, just like he is trying to do with Linux!
The GNU people need to get off their duffs and get GNU/Hurd into the Mainstream........it would really give people more of a choice.......
but Stallman and his ilk are too busy trying to hog all the Glory from Linus T.
<end rant/> :)
I guess people don't want Richard Stallman taking Credit for their work, just like he is trying to do with Linux!
The GNU people need to get off their duffs and get GNU/Hurd into the Mainstream........it would really give people more of a choice.......
but Stallman and his ilk are too busy trying to hog all the Glory from Linus T.
<end rant/> :)
nko
10-19-2004, 06:10 PM
Well, I don't want to get sidetracked, especially not in to a flamewar, but Stallman only wants it to be called "GNU/Linux" because while the kernel is the most talked-about part of the system, you couldn't actually use it without the GNU part. I agree that it makes a mouthful, but it's not like he's a credit grubber.
And beyond the Stallman rants and all that, there's still the question as to why *Step isn't bigger outside of the Mac OS X realm.
And beyond the Stallman rants and all that, there's still the question as to why *Step isn't bigger outside of the Mac OS X realm.
bwkaz
10-19-2004, 08:55 PM
Because NeXTStep never was very big?
The history of OSes (and software in general) is littered with ideas that never became widespread, even though they were technically superior than their competitors. Sun's NFS versus some competing network filesystems is one example -- NFS only exists now because it was open source, and the others weren't. Many of the others were technically superior.
Sun's NeWS versus MIT's X11 (in the arena of graphical interfaces) is another example, though Sun was on the other side of this one. X11 was open source, and NeWS was not (even though it was supposedly quite a bit better). X11 is the Unix standard GUI now.
The dead or dying proprietary Unixes (especially in the late 80s and most of the 90s, when they were all losing to Windows) are yet another example. Unix did stuff right in 1970 that Windows still hasn't done right (for example, being able to delete in-use files). But Unix fragmented when the proprietary vendors fought among themselves, which allowed Windows to dominate.
If it was purely a question of technical superiority, a lot more people might be using NeXTStep (or, for that matter, Plan 9, maybe). But it's not. ;)
The history of OSes (and software in general) is littered with ideas that never became widespread, even though they were technically superior than their competitors. Sun's NFS versus some competing network filesystems is one example -- NFS only exists now because it was open source, and the others weren't. Many of the others were technically superior.
Sun's NeWS versus MIT's X11 (in the arena of graphical interfaces) is another example, though Sun was on the other side of this one. X11 was open source, and NeWS was not (even though it was supposedly quite a bit better). X11 is the Unix standard GUI now.
The dead or dying proprietary Unixes (especially in the late 80s and most of the 90s, when they were all losing to Windows) are yet another example. Unix did stuff right in 1970 that Windows still hasn't done right (for example, being able to delete in-use files). But Unix fragmented when the proprietary vendors fought among themselves, which allowed Windows to dominate.
If it was purely a question of technical superiority, a lot more people might be using NeXTStep (or, for that matter, Plan 9, maybe). But it's not. ;)
nko
10-20-2004, 11:06 AM
I think NFS would be bigger if not for the popularity of Windows. If we were all using a Linux / BSD, NFS, I think, would grow rampantly in popularity. Instead, we're in the minority, so we have to integrate well with Windows. The result is that SMB is very popular, and NFS is not. And hey, SMB is "good enough."
GNUStep, I guess, is my main question. Why didn't it grow instead of GNOME / KDE, or at least, why didn't it grow along side them? GNUStep seems to be relatively complete and usable... is this just a very recent development?
I guess another question comes up... does Objective-C make memory management any easier than C?
GNUStep, I guess, is my main question. Why didn't it grow instead of GNOME / KDE, or at least, why didn't it grow along side them? GNUStep seems to be relatively complete and usable... is this just a very recent development?
I guess another question comes up... does Objective-C make memory management any easier than C?
bwkaz
10-20-2004, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by nko
I think NFS would be bigger if not for the popularity of Windows. I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
I was talking about in the Unix world only. NFS is popular, even though there were a lot of other network filesystems that were technically superior to it. (For example, they did file locking intelligently, instead of not at all -- and yeah, I know, recent NFS versions do support locking; my point is that, IIRC, the original version didn't.)
The NeWS / X11 comparison is also only valid in the Unix world.
But whatever. I've never used NeXTStep myself, and haven't looked at GNUStep either, so maybe comparing them to X11/NeWS and NFS/others isn't right. ;)
As far as Objective C, I haven't used it either. But not many OSes have an Objective C runtime library as part of their core (although before Unix, most didn't have a C library as part of the core either, so...), which is probably part of the reason not many people distribute Objective C programs. Which feeds the vicious cycle again, because few programs distributed means fewer systems having the libraries, on and on... ;)
I think NFS would be bigger if not for the popularity of Windows. I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
I was talking about in the Unix world only. NFS is popular, even though there were a lot of other network filesystems that were technically superior to it. (For example, they did file locking intelligently, instead of not at all -- and yeah, I know, recent NFS versions do support locking; my point is that, IIRC, the original version didn't.)
The NeWS / X11 comparison is also only valid in the Unix world.
But whatever. I've never used NeXTStep myself, and haven't looked at GNUStep either, so maybe comparing them to X11/NeWS and NFS/others isn't right. ;)
As far as Objective C, I haven't used it either. But not many OSes have an Objective C runtime library as part of their core (although before Unix, most didn't have a C library as part of the core either, so...), which is probably part of the reason not many people distribute Objective C programs. Which feeds the vicious cycle again, because few programs distributed means fewer systems having the libraries, on and on... ;)
nko
10-20-2004, 07:22 PM
Ah, I did misunderstand at first what you were saying about NFS :) . I guess it does make sense that not having a standard ObjC library can be a block on adoption.
JohnT
10-20-2004, 07:56 PM
To get an overview and clear up any mis-interpretations of GNUSTEP a visit might help to.....http://www.gnustep.org/information/aboutGNUstep.html
justlinux.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.