On Friday 31 December 2010 22:18, Matthew Combs (MattCombs@triad.rr.com) opined: > On Dec 31 2010, 6:07 pm, Bob Melson <amia9...@mypacks.net> wrote: >> >> I have a major hang up about software that is written exclusively for a >> specific operating environment, particularly in the "civilian" world of >> desktop computing.  I will grant that M$ "owns" more than 90% of the >> desktop - and won't give my opinion about _that_ - but I refuse to >> contaminate my computer with Windows just to be able to run this >> application or any other that is M$-centric.  I contend that there are >> enough architecture-neutral tools (scripting languages, language >> compilers, network protocols, etc) out in the wild that good, >> multi-platform software can be written almost painlessly. >> >> This is not to dump on you.  Matter of fact, I applaud you making the >> effort to contribute something of value to the geni community.  I just >> get ticked off at software that only runs on Windows (or MacOS or the >> linux flavor of the day). >> >> Happy New Year. >> >> Surly Ol' Bob > > Bob, > > Every time I put months of work into something, you ALWAYS spout out. > > Everybody already knows Bob won't download it or run it, blah blah > blah. > > I can't afford to purchase the equipment to develop for the Macintosh > or > other computer systems. I develop software for the systems that I > have. > Sorry about that. I put MONTHS of effort into it, my own money, and > my > own time. Why - because I want to help out the genealogy community. > So many have been nice to me, and this is my way of giving back. > Sorry > that it isn't good enough for you Bob. Hopefully others will > appreciate it. > > Matt Matt: Sorry, I missed seeing this earlier. Please don't misunderstand me. I think the fact you've put in the time and effort to create your program is great - and I said that in my earlier posting, in case you missed it. I also understand that some software, maybe even a lot, gets written as you say you wrote yours: on the systems you have and to meet a personal need. That's great, too. I'm sorry you're offended or think I'm singling you out - that wasn't my intent. ("Every time I put months of work into something, you ALWAYS spout out." What else have you written, BTW? I honestly don't remember.) But there ARE tools, many of them free, that make it possible to write software that isn't restricted to a single operating system or, even, a single version of that operating system. Those tools generally provide a well documented interface to the underlying system and remove the need to specify something like .net or a reliance on a single operating system; java, perl and php all come to mind. Look at TNG or phpGedView, gdbi or genealogyJ as examples of programs that'll run everywhere, given the appropriate runtime interpreter (also free) on the user's machine. Using an architecturally neutral set of tools relieves you of the need to worry about whether this version of M$'s "foo" or that of Apple's "bar" will do the job - you write to the API and let the Java (or perl or php) interpreter worry about making that net connect or drawing that graphic. You can concentrate on the what and not the how, so to speak, which might result in a better product but will certainly result in one that everybody can use. And that was my point. Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes -- Thomas Paine