| RSI Remains Committed to Mac OS X [message #29832] |
Thu, 21 March 2002 12:15 |
info
Messages: 14
Registered: April 1993
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Research Systems Remains Committed to IDL and ENVI on Mac OS X
Last fall, Research Systems, Inc. (RSI) announced its intention
to release a native version of IDL for the Mac OS X platform using
X11/Motif graphics and user interface. When this announcement was made,
we had completed a largely functional proof of concept port, giving
us the confidence to go public with our plans. We expected to resolve
some stability issues, hold an alpha/beta test period to get user
feedback, and then release the result as a fully supported IDL platform.
We fully expected to be nearing completion by spring.
The IDL community has been patiently waiting for us to complete
this work. There has been speculation as to when RSI will release
the final product. Our silence on the subject is due to a desire
to complete the work before speaking publicly about it.
In fact, we have had a largely complete port of IDL for this
platform since late last year. It is fully integrated into the
IDL source code, and has been building and passing regression tests
successfully as part of our nightly builds for months. However,
our progress towards a releasable product has been stalled by
frustratingly slow progress in resolving some stability issues
involving the underlying X11/Motif user interface components. We
want you to know that we continue to work on these issues, and
expect to resolve them. Only then will we release IDL for the Mac OS X
platform.
RSI will evaluate how to handle maintenance for Macintosh users
and make extensions or credits as appropriate.
We appreciate your patience and support. Below are more detailed
answers to some common questions that people are asking about
IDL for Mac OS X.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------
Q: Why Is IDL For Mac X based on The X Window System and not Aqua/Quartz?
The cost of supporting a platform is largely based on
the amount of unique code, documentation, packaging,
and support required for it. By using the X Window
System user interface and graphics APIs, the cost of
supporting IDL on this platform is greatly reduced. The
costs become similar to those of any other Unix platform.
We believe that the IDL Macintosh user base is large enough
to sustain this version of IDL, and that it will be of high
quality.
Q: Is It A Native Port?
It is a native port in the sense that it is compiled on
the system, and runs natively without any emulation.
There is no use of the Mac Classic environment, or of
the Carbon APIs. The look and feel are not fully "native",
but will be familiar to any Unix user.
Q: What Does It Look Like?
It looks like IDL on any other Unix platform. The user
interface has a Motif look and feel. The X Windows created by
IDL appear on the OS X desktop, along with all other windows,
and there is no special effort required to move between them.
If you've ever used a Windows PC with X server software to
display Unix IDL output on your Windows desktop, the effect
is similar.
Q: You Announced That You Will Be Using The Tenon Xtools X11 Package.
Why Not Use The Free XDarwin, And Do You Have Plans To Support XDarwin?
As you probably know, both of these packages are based
on the same underlying XFree86 X11 software. There are
advantages and disadvantages to each relative to the other.
We have not made a final decision on this matter. Rather, we
are currently working with both, and will end up using the one
that works best with IDL. There are advantages and disadvantages
to each, and we have encountered issues with both.
The Tenon version offers some compelling benefits for IDL users
and for RSI:
- Single point of contact for support for customers.
Most of our customers do not wish to become involved
in X11 code development. Tenon delivers a single point
of contact for installation and support. This is similar
to the role that Red Hat plays in the Linux community.
There is always room for those with specialized skills
to play with these things, but we believe most of
our users simply want a simple stable solution that works.
- Motif: IDL needs this, and the Tenon package has it integrated.
- Hardware OpenGL support: Tenon has support for using
the native hardware GL support, and it is very fast. XDarwin's
current support is build on top of Mesa (pure software).
- Single point of contact for RSI. We are not in the
X11 server maintenance business. We need a stable
platform to base our software on.
Given the common underlying source for both Xtools and
XDarwin, we believe that with some effort, IDL built for
one of them should be able to work with the other. However,
this is not something that we will be pursuing initially,
largely in order to concentrate our limited resources on
getting IDL for OS X working. Over time, it is a possibility
that we are not ruling out.
Q: So, What's The Holdup?
We have encountered instability with programs that make
heavy use of Motif widgets. Non-widget graphical applications
run all day without problem, but programs that employ UI crash
randomly. At this time, we are not sure exactly where in the
X Windows code the problem lies, but we continue to work with
Tenon to isolate and fix it.
In searching on the web, we see evidence that others
are having similar issues, both with Tenon and XDarwin.
IDL's use of widgets is especially heavy, so it seems to
have more problems than simple demo programs.
Q: Is There A Command Line Version of IDL on Mac OS X?
Yes. As with all Unix platforms, IDL for Mac OS X can be
run as a stand alone tty based command line program, or with
a full IDE. Furthermore, the command line version should be
fully compatible with the popular emacs idlwave mode.
Q: Are There Any Advantages To The Use Of X11 Graphics And UI?
There are some benefits to the use of X11:
- User familiarity with other Unix IDLs make it
easy to move between platforms.
- You can run IDL on a Mac and display the graphics
on any X display on the network. Similarly, X
support allows you to display graphics from another
system on your Mac.
- As a Unix platform, IDL for Mac OS X is installed and
managed like any other Unix platform, and Unix IDL
installations can support multiple architectures, including
Mac OS X. It is trivial to maintain a single network
wide installation of Unix IDL, including OS X.
Q: Disadvantages?
IDL's user interface does not have the native Aqua/Quartz
appearance. Whether this is an important disadvantage is
a decision that only you can make. However, there are no
significant functional disadvantages to IDL on Mac OS X
relative to other Unix platforms.
Q: Is This A Stable Long Term Strategy?
We believe that it is. There is a great deal of X11 based
software than can run under Mac OS X with minimal porting effort
if a solid X11 implementation is available. Much of this
valuable software will never be re-written for the
Mac Aqua/Quartz toolkit, but would be very valuable on the
OS X platform. We believe that this general need creates
an obvious vacuum that will by necessity be filled.
The Tenon and XDarwin projects are both making progress on
this goal, and once they achieve stability, we expect it to
be dependable and long lived. For us, the question is more
"when" than "if".
Q: What Is IDL Performance Like On Mac OS X?
Numerical performance is, not surprisingly, about the same
as under Classic Mac OS, and is quite respectable. General
graphical performance is good, and about like any other
application running on the same system. File I/O is much faster
then Classic Mac OS, and is comparable to other Unix platforms.
OpenGL based graphics are impressively fast --- as good or better
than any platform we have daily experience with.
Q: Does IDL for Mac OS X use OpenGL? Altivec? Multiple CPUs?
Yes to all three.
The Tenon X server supports OpenGL, and IDL uses it. Performance
is quite good. Altivec is supported, to the same extent as with
Classic Mac IDL (basic numeric operators). Multiple CPUs are
employed by the IDL thread pool to speed numeric computation.
Q: Will IDL for Mac OS X have <your favorite Unix feature>?
For all practical purposes, Mac OS X *is* Unix. Therefore,
you should expect everything to work as you would expect it
to on a Unix system.
Q: What Do RSI Engineers Think Of Mac OS X?
Our initial impressions are favorable. Our Unix-savvy
developers are impressed by the fact that there is a real
and complete Unix under the fancy user interface. IDL runs
well on the system, and we think that it will appeal to
people who appreciate having a sophisticated user interface
along with full access to the powerful Unix command line. The
availability of Microsoft Office offers the possibility that
a single machine could be used for both productivity
applications (Word, Excel, Mail) and more traditional Unix
uses (such as scientific computing). Some people who currently
have two computers on their desks might find this especially
appealing.
Other than the issues with the Motif toolkit, which we
expect to resolve, the port of IDL to OS X was straightforward,
and we believe that Unix users will have little problem
moving their own programs to this platform.
Q: What About ENVI on Mac OS X?
RSI also remains committed to releasing ENVI for Mac OS X.
Obviously, we will need to finish IDL for Mac OS X first,
and then test ENVI on the new IDL port. Once IDL is tested
on Mac OS X, we anticipate very few problems porting
ENVI to Mac OS X. We expect that the ENVI Mac OS X release
will quickly follow the IDL Mac OS X.
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
