Miscellaneous comments on Tkinter and related matters
I can rarely afford to dip into Python-Dev. My head is exploding too much of the time as it is. Maybe I can help with the recent Tkinter discussions, though. 1. Tcl's going to be around for a long time. Here's the insider scoop on what the Ajuba Solutions announcement means: insiders don't know. That is, *nobody* is sure how Tcl will develop. It'll survive, though, for quite a while. Do NOT worry that it'll suddenly dry up and blow away. I'm working on a more detailed explanation of Tcl processes. It'll probably take a few weeks, though. In the meantime, just ignore the mess, and understand that the Tcl Core Team includes bright people who'll land on their feet somehow. 2. I agree that MacOS is the thorny problem for the standard Pysolution. I'd be happy to discuss the possibilities (Tkinter? wxWindows? Qt?!? GTK+?!!?!? ...) with a smaller group, and, of course, Fredrik, Robin, Guido, ... all are quite knowledgeable about these matters. There are a few things you should know about the Tcl side. The bad is that Tk is barely maintained for MacOS. It's really rather miserable. On the other hand, Jim Ingham is now an Apple employee, and things could change in a hurry, at any time. The good is that Tk starts far ahead of any competitor. It has already solved most of the hard problems. All it needs is a little maintenance. 3. Is there a way to have Tk without contamination by Tcl? More than ever. This is what makes me most cheerful about Tkinter's prospects. The Tcl Core Team has largely given up its hangups about co-operating with foreigners (or its hangups that barbarians have hangups about co- operating with Tcl). This is a *very* good time for someone like Fredrik to establish a working relationship, and get CVS access. I really think Tk can be maintained by a different group than Tcl. Perl, Ruby, ... folks are also receptive to the idea (I've talked with them). For pointers to some of what's happening in this area, see <URL:http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/comp.lang.misc/core_enhancement.html> Also, you should know that my favorite enhancement to Tk is a remodularization called TkGS. This should improve performance under Win*, make it more portable to BeOS, improve access by Python, and so on. 4. Greg's right that some publishers are dumping Tcl. Not all, though. If it matters, we can go into details. 5. Pango is indeed cool, but it's different from [text]. The world is probably moving to Pango and similar implementations. The world will be missing much of what [text] offers. 6. ANYONE with an urge to get out a Python-related idea should pursue it. *DDJ*'s a great outlet. It's far from the only one. If people have ideas about articles, but are held back by lack of time/ fluency/contacts/..., *please* get in touch with me. I'll find a way at least to give articles a fair chance at being published. Cameron Laird <claird@NeoSoft.com> +1 281 996 8546 FAX http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/misc.writing/publications.html
Cameron Laird writes:
2. I agree that MacOS is the thorny problem for the standard Pysolution.
What is the impact of the fact that MacOS X will run X? Doesn't this open the door to a lot of new possibilities, at least if we don't need to support Mac OS[6-9]. Or is the installed base of MacOS[6-9] just way too big to even think about dropping (or deprecating) support for it?
Hi, Charles G Waldman:
It will take years, before MacOS X will find its way onto the desk of the average Apple Mac user. The Mac s mostly used in the graphics and printing industry (our cutsomers) where people normally don't even think about a OS upgrade, if they don't have to. They usually run a mix of Photoshop, Quark XPRess, Artwork, illustrator or other so called creative software on the version of the OS they had on the machine when they bought it. THese machines are usually used through a period of at least four years. So MacOS X might simplify things for software vendors from 2004 on and later. Regards, Peter
Peter Funk [pf@artcom-gmbh.de] wrote:
I think this is a bit incorrect. Almost every Mac user that I interact with (including all the users hre at Digital Creations) have OS X running and using it at various levels. Mostly it's waiting for people like Adobe to release Carbon applications. Graphics designers will be the first to move to OS X, not thel ast, as they will ge the most fromt he increased stability and performance. It all depends on your market. The best goal for Mac OS would be to aim at full Carbon compliance, and not write to Cocoa, or to the original MacOS toolkit. This would let you run on all releases after 8.0 I believe (maybe even 7.6). Chris -- | Christopher Petrilli | petrilli@amber.org
Charles G Waldman wrote:
Would Mac users go for: "first install X. Then you can run Python." -- Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html
Paul Prescod writes:
Would Mac users go for: "first install X. Then you can run Python."
I should probably just shut up, because I really don't know enough about Mac OS X, but what I was wondering is whether OS X will actually *use* the X Window System. Of course we don't want to tell users that they have to go install X on their own.
Charles G Waldman wrote:
And become just another Unix? Then how would they get people to pay the Macintosh usability premium? Seriously, maybe someday as a "Linux compatibility mode" but I don't think it is officially proposed. -- Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html
Cameron Laird writes:
2. I agree that MacOS is the thorny problem for the standard Pysolution.
What is the impact of the fact that MacOS X will run X? Doesn't this open the door to a lot of new possibilities, at least if we don't need to support Mac OS[6-9]. Or is the installed base of MacOS[6-9] just way too big to even think about dropping (or deprecating) support for it?
Hi, Charles G Waldman:
It will take years, before MacOS X will find its way onto the desk of the average Apple Mac user. The Mac s mostly used in the graphics and printing industry (our cutsomers) where people normally don't even think about a OS upgrade, if they don't have to. They usually run a mix of Photoshop, Quark XPRess, Artwork, illustrator or other so called creative software on the version of the OS they had on the machine when they bought it. THese machines are usually used through a period of at least four years. So MacOS X might simplify things for software vendors from 2004 on and later. Regards, Peter
Peter Funk [pf@artcom-gmbh.de] wrote:
I think this is a bit incorrect. Almost every Mac user that I interact with (including all the users hre at Digital Creations) have OS X running and using it at various levels. Mostly it's waiting for people like Adobe to release Carbon applications. Graphics designers will be the first to move to OS X, not thel ast, as they will ge the most fromt he increased stability and performance. It all depends on your market. The best goal for Mac OS would be to aim at full Carbon compliance, and not write to Cocoa, or to the original MacOS toolkit. This would let you run on all releases after 8.0 I believe (maybe even 7.6). Chris -- | Christopher Petrilli | petrilli@amber.org
Charles G Waldman wrote:
Would Mac users go for: "first install X. Then you can run Python." -- Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html
Paul Prescod writes:
Would Mac users go for: "first install X. Then you can run Python."
I should probably just shut up, because I really don't know enough about Mac OS X, but what I was wondering is whether OS X will actually *use* the X Window System. Of course we don't want to tell users that they have to go install X on their own.
Charles G Waldman wrote:
And become just another Unix? Then how would they get people to pay the Macintosh usability premium? Seriously, maybe someday as a "Linux compatibility mode" but I don't think it is officially proposed. -- Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html
participants (5)
-
Cameron Laird -
Charles G Waldman -
Christopher Petrilli -
Paul Prescod -
pf＠artcom-gmbh.de