4 ms·

What do you mean by "abandoned"? Isn't pretty much everything Microsoft releases supported on its original platform for at least 10 years? With OSS software a

by kvb 14y ago

What do you mean by "abandoned"? Isn't pretty much everything Microsoft releases supported on its original platform for at least 10 years? With OSS software and OSes, do you get better support guarantees?

Argorak 14y ago
Thats a bonus for existing applications, but not when choosing a technology for a new one. If your technology gets shelved, you won't be able to grow with underlying framework. Now new interesting stuff for you, except if you rebuild. Apple for example takes a different route: they have shorter support spans, but rarely invalidate whole technology stacks. Cocoa is still alive and kicking after all those years.
- WayneDB 14y ago
  What "whole technology stack" has Microsoft invalidated? How is Cocoa still alive and kicking? How is that different from something like VB6?
  - Argorak 14y ago
    Silverlight? You would never start a new project in it nowadays, would you? Cocoa on the other hand is still the foundation of almost all OS X and iOS programs.
    - cooldeal 14y ago
      The iPad killed Silverlight, not Microsoft.
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
    - WayneDB 14y ago
      I have no problem targeting Silverlight because Silverlight is not the "stack" in that case. XAML and .NET are, both of which are viable for the foreseeable future. Any other examples?
  - wtallis 14y ago
    Since being renamed from OpenStep, Cocoa has gotten hardware-accelerated graphics, two new (one since-deprecated) semi-automatic memory management schemes, 64-bit support, a hardware-accelerated animation system, a new fine-grained security model, closure-based concurrency, and cloud storage support. And yet it's still largely compatible with and recognizable as the framework with which the first web browser was built. And it's still a first-class citizen that Apple uses to write their own apps - it's not just being kept around in maintenance mode.
  - ja27 14y ago
    Silverlight, MFC, ATL, Active Server Pages (pre-ASP.NET), MSN Messenger, Windows 7 desktop gadgets, Windows Phone 7, Windows 8 RT (wait, I got ahead of myself - give it a few more months).
    - pjmlp 14y ago
      WebObjects, Java Bindings, Garbage Collector, Quicktime 2/3D, Java Quicktime API, AudioDeviceIO, Carbon....
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- chc 14y ago
  > Apple for example takes a different route: they have shorter support spans, but rarely invalidate whole technology stacks. Carbon programmers beg to differ. (Full disclosure: I was always a Cocoa guy, so this isn't sour grapes. But if you were paying attention to the OS X development scene as a whole, it was really shocking how fast Carbon went from being more actively developed and having support for more things than Cocoa to being thrown straight into the dumpster.)

by kvb 14y ago

Argorak 14y ago

Thats a bonus for existing applications, but not when choosing a technology for a new one. If your technology gets shelved, you won't be able to grow with underlying framework. Now new interesting stuff for you, except if you rebuild. Apple for example takes a different route: they have shorter support spans, but rarely invalidate whole technology stacks. Cocoa is still alive and kicking after all those years.

WayneDB 14y ago
What "whole technology stack" has Microsoft invalidated? How is Cocoa still alive and kicking? How is that different from something like VB6?
- Argorak 14y ago
  Silverlight? You would never start a new project in it nowadays, would you? Cocoa on the other hand is still the foundation of almost all OS X and iOS programs.
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    The iPad killed Silverlight, not Microsoft.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
  - WayneDB 14y ago
    I have no problem targeting Silverlight because Silverlight is not the "stack" in that case. XAML and .NET are, both of which are viable for the foreseeable future. Any other examples?
- wtallis 14y ago
  Since being renamed from OpenStep, Cocoa has gotten hardware-accelerated graphics, two new (one since-deprecated) semi-automatic memory management schemes, 64-bit support, a hardware-accelerated animation system, a new fine-grained security model, closure-based concurrency, and cloud storage support. And yet it's still largely compatible with and recognizable as the framework with which the first web browser was built. And it's still a first-class citizen that Apple uses to write their own apps - it's not just being kept around in maintenance mode.
- ja27 14y ago
  Silverlight, MFC, ATL, Active Server Pages (pre-ASP.NET), MSN Messenger, Windows 7 desktop gadgets, Windows Phone 7, Windows 8 RT (wait, I got ahead of myself - give it a few more months).
  - pjmlp 14y ago
    WebObjects, Java Bindings, Garbage Collector, Quicktime 2/3D, Java Quicktime API, AudioDeviceIO, Carbon....
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
chc 14y ago
> Apple for example takes a different route: they have shorter support spans, but rarely invalidate whole technology stacks. Carbon programmers beg to differ. (Full disclosure: I was always a Cocoa guy, so this isn't sour grapes. But if you were paying attention to the OS X development scene as a whole, it was really shocking how fast Carbon went from being more actively developed and having support for more things than Cocoa to being thrown straight into the dumpster.)