Apple applications soon coming to Windows

[bdash]

I know quite well what Chris is doing. And I know that it took a decent amount of work on his part to even get WebKit to compile on Windows. But the fact you're missing is that WebKit (read: not Safari) is an open-source project. The work they're doing to make it compile properly on Windows is being provided by 3rd-party contributors. I'm sure that Apple (as an organization) could honestly care less if WebKit compiled and ran on Windows.

 

Just to clear things up a little... The initial port of WebKit to Windows was done by developers that were already active in the WebKit community. This involved refactoring the WebCore library to be less tied to Mac OS X, and implementing Windows-specific portions of the code when required. A small browser-like application named Spinneret was developed for use in testing WebCore on Windows, the first version of which made its way into the WebKit source code repository in January this year.

 

For the majority of the time since Janurary, WebCore has continued to function on Windows. Various improvements have been contributed, both from people within Apple and members of the open source community. The most common changes in recent times have been minor fixes to ensure that the code compiles on Windows (most of the developers on WebKit work on Mac OS X and some of their changes cause the Windows port to fail to compile).

 

The most obvious reason for porting WebKit to Windows (and other platforms: both GDK and QT ports exist in the WebKit source code repository) is to improve the portability of the code. Improving portability usually involves improving the architecture of the code, removing legacy cruft, and improving abstractions. This has improved the quality of the code in WebKit quite remarkably, with a large amount of functionality being shifted from the Mac OS X-specific WebKit layer down into the portable WebCore layer.

 

I don't see Apple porting Safari itself to Windows, as it heavily relies on many Mac OS X specific technologies. I personally would love to see a WebKit-based browser on Windows, both as a tool for web developers on Windows to get an idea of their compatibility with Safari and as a way to further improve the portability of the WebKit codebase.

 

As always, the WebKit project is keen to hear from anyone that wants to help improve WebKit, whether it be the Mac, Windows, or Linux variants. More information can be found on the website at http://webkit.org/, or by joining us on IRC at irc://irc.freenode.net/#webkit .

 

-- Mark Rowe, WebKit contributor

[Colonel]

I know quite well what Chris is doing. And I know that it took a decent amount of work on his part to even get WebKit to compile on Windows. But the fact you're missing is that WebKit (read: not Safari) is an open-source project. The work they're doing to make it compile properly on Windows is being provided by 3rd-party contributors. I'm sure that Apple (as an organization) could honestly care less if WebKit compiled and ran on Windows.

 

I also know Chris well. He has halted development on Swift for a while. I'm not sure how long. This is from his site,

Read!

 

I'm taking a break from Swift. Right now I haven't got the time 

nor cash to finish this project. I want to open it up again, and release my 

0.2 version and keep developing, but right now (as i'm in the middle of setting 

up the new server) don't have the time needed. I get paid jack for this. 

I have spent $350 out of my own pocket on this. I have recieved $130 in ad 

revenue. Big difference. Please keep checking in, I will have a release 

within a week or 2. 

 

Peace. 

c

[sandmanfvrga]

Wow gwprod12 you are so smart!

 

</sarcasm>

 

I may not be the spokesman but my opinion is just as important as yours. When you get some maturity then you will realize that. We can throw names around all day, doesn't change the fact that we are just expressing our opinions.

[gwprod12]

At the risk of sounding immature... you started the namecalling. And really, who exactly are you to be making factual predictions about Apple's future business decisions?

[AriX]

I didn't read this whole thread yet, but I want to say two things: first, QuickTime for Windows, iTunes for Windows, and AppleWorks for Windows are all almost EXACTLY the same as the Mac versions. I think that the Windows versions of Mac Apps are all made using Yellow Box for Windows, aka Cocoa for Windows, which was included in Rhapsody (Mac OS X Preview). It was also included in WebObjects 4. Apps that were included were early versions of XCode software (Inferface Builder, Project Builder) and I think TextEdit and a few more. I suspect that Cocoa for Windows is being brought back for a few new Windows Apps or something.

 

P.S. All the Apple Apps for Windows:

iTunes

QuickTime

iPod Updater

AppleWorks

Yellow Box for Windows

WebObjects 4 for Windows

Apple Driver CD for Windows (Boot Camp)

Bonjour for Windows

I can't think of any more at the moment, but I am sure that there are more.

[sandmanfvrga]

Granted I started the name calling, which I shouldn't have, but you first post is sarcasm and an insult. Not very construcive. Who am I? A person like yourself that has the right and the freedom to wonder/guess/speculate about a company I am intersting in. You can do it as well and there is no law saying I can't. You just didn't like it which is your right but will not stop me from doing it.

 

(on topic)

Apple may put OLD version of iLife out for Windows, but if they put new versions, then their advertisements of what they can do and the PC guy with the borring pie graph and such will be worthless.

[AriX]

I thought of another one: Bonjour for Windows

[gwprod12]

There's a substantial difference between "Apple will NEVER put out iLife for windows" and "I cant imagine Apple would ever put out iLife for windows". One is declaration, with supposed authority, the other is opinion. Imagine my chagrin at witnessing someone expressing their opinion as fact.

[sandmanfvrga]

It is my opinion that Apple will NEVER put iLife on Windows. That is an opinion.

[bwhsh8r]

Yellow box for windows anyone??? Thats like the samething (albet alot less efficient, but it does serve the same purpose)...

 

 

 

max

[Takuro]

I think it's been mentioned before, but here it goes:

 

iTV will support both Windows and Mac PCs. iTV will most likely have another application involved in its operation, other than iTunes. There's your new Apple program for Windows.

 

Apple will have iTunes, Quicktime, Bonjour, and now an iTV-management program available for Windows. I think that's enough to mandate an software updater at this point.

 

Sorry to rain on some peoples' parades, but you won't see iChat, Safari, or other Apple programs running over a Start Menu any time soon.

[A Nonny Moose]

Oh, god here we go again:

 

1. Apple switching off to Intel wouldn't have been a move that could kill the company. The problem with those predictions was that they came from five years ago when the PowerPC Chips were seriously stomping Intel. So what happened? Intel caught up while the PPC chips stagnated, thus prompting Apple to make the switch. It's still a Mac underneath, but there wasn't any reason for gloom-and-doom.

 

2. With that being said, throwing all of Apple's applications to Windows is a move that could kill Apple. Remember, APPLE IS A HARDWARE COMPANY. So why make kick ass software? So you'll buy the Apple hardware (duh). Making all of their applications go to Windows will send Apple off to hell in a handbasket, as Apple is forced to sell a ton more copies of the software in order to make a profit (as opposed to selling relatively fewer pieces of hardware). So Apple would need to sell tons more stuff (which won't happen) or raise prices (which lowers demand but increases supply, making a surplus of goods that can be bought for $5 when Apple goes bankrupt).

[sandmanfvrga]

I don't agree with you much Moose, but you are right. I mean ALL the advertisements, online ads and such about "why to switch to Mac/OSX" and iLife is a HUGE part of that. To change that would kill Apple and make them look like a fool.

[rogabean]

I think it's been mentioned before, but here it goes:

 

iTV will support both Windows and Mac PCs. iTV will most likely have another application involved in its operation, other than iTunes. There's your new Apple program for Windows.

 

Apple will have iTunes, Quicktime, Bonjour, and now an iTV-management program available for Windows. I think that's enough to mandate an software updater at this point.

 

Sorry to rain on some peoples' parades, but you won't see iChat, Safari, or other Apple programs running over a Start Menu any time soon.

 

 

Actually I say iTunes will be the app for iTV on both platforms... But I could see a remote management App for the iTV on both platforms if they don't just be smart about it and do a HTTP interface to it...

 

iTunes and Quicktime was enough to warrant a Software Updater for Windows... I'm suprised they didn't have one before. Better to automate updates to your software then leave it up to users to manually update... I would say all this speculation is for naught.

[teppei]

iTunes and Quicktime was enough to warrant a Software Updater for Windows... I'm suprised they didn't have one before. Better to automate updates to your software then leave it up to users to manually update... I would say all this speculation is for naught.

 

well said my friend,

 

with a "slow like snail internet connection: in my country.. upgrading iTunes is really2 annoys me (which i have to download the complete package), so i keep hitting "no" and "never ask" whenever they ask. it reminded me, that i still have iTunes 5.5 - 6.5 in my HDD, that im afraid to delete at first time, because afraid of the bugs may occured on the latest release.

 

so yes this is just for QT and iTunes, although deep inside i wish they release some "teaser" to switch rather than iTunes an QT (actually couple of my non-geeky friends loves the iTunes GUI and search engine, and they start to look for other Apple's Product)

 

regards,

[Sam0r]

I'm thinking that they'll port iChat to windows, mainly because of the 'iPhone'. Also, I think the iPhone will be a VOIP type phone, with wifi capability which will let you call normal landlines, and video to iChat users.

 

Quite a vew companies are getting into the VOIP services, why not apple?

 

I'm not saying this is going to happen, but it would make sense, they only ported iTunes to windows to sell the iPod to windows users.

 

Anyone with me?

[A Nonny Moose]

In a way, Sam0r, I can see iChat going to Windows, but only as a way to satisfy video chats via iChat.

[GBK.Xscape]

off topic but dont call ur hackintosh 100% compatible beucase its not like u could just pop in any old Mac OSX intel install disc and it would work and the updates from apple wouldnt work if it werent for people like jas or semthex. and with ur processor that supports only sse2 itunes most likely doesnt work. window computers will never be 100% compatible with apple OS

forgot to say but this post was directed at Sam0r

[toddicus]

Which MacOS applications do you want to see come to the Windows operating system?

 

Personally? None, but I'm one of those windows haters, so that's me

 

What do think is in the realm of posibility? Safari, iChat things like that... maybe. But iLife no, not so much, for too many reasons. More than just being a bad business decision and killing some of the draw to apple hardware, they rely heavily on the core services of OS X. To port it would be a massive undertaking, they would have to be re-written in a way that they survived on their own without the help of core services in OS X. Or they could be built on the technologies Vista is going to have, or was supposed to have, (not really following it) but with all the bashing Apple has done of Vista, I don't see them putting out something that only works on Vista.

 

I think there aren't reasons to put iLife on windows, and there are many reasons not to. Maybe we'll see apps to go with devices as we do with iPod. I can see iTV being supported on windows eventually, and if there is an iPhone, that too. But unless Apple starts making digital cameras and video cameras, I don't see iPhoto and iMovie.

[Sam0r]

off topic but dont call ur hackintosh 100% compatible beucase its not like u could just pop in any old Mac OSX intel install disc and it would work and the updates from apple wouldnt work if it werent for people like jas or semthex. and with ur processor that supports only sse2 itunes most likely doesnt work. window computers will never be 100% compatible with apple OS

forgot to say but this post was directed at Sam0r

Well, Its about as compatible as it'll ever be. And anyway, FYI I don't own that rig anymore.

 

If you have a problem with it, PM me, don't spam **** in the forums.

 

And another thing, that processor has SSE3.

[aberracus]

Im 1000% with Todicuss, as usual he is well informed, iLife is a very low priced update for OSX and comes free with your mac, why? because its one of the major diferences with windows, windows have Calc, Clock, minesweeper! Mac got iLife....

 

Remember the ADs?

 

BTW GBK.Xscape m y iHACK is 100% compatible, compatibility doesnt mean the platform means the software adn hardware that you can put in it.

[vandetta]

I don't think there will be much more Apple Apps going to Windows, this can ruin Apple's business dude..