| Re: Other IDL / Mac advantages [message #27510 is a reply to message #27508] |
Wed, 24 October 2001 09:02   |
Logan Lindquist
Messages: 50
Registered: October 2001
|
Member |
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>"Wolf Schweitzer" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:wuff@swisswuff.ch"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>wuff@swisswuff.ch</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>> wrote in message
</FONT><A href="news:3BD678DC.9050505@swisswuff.ch"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>news:3BD678DC.9050505@swisswuff.ch</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> To me, there is a misconception that some
people assume we are using <BR>> Macs because of their "cutsy" interface and
that can be "over" now.<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The graphic user interface between different
operating systems is only a tool used to created by different companies to allow
you to perform work and create things using the hardware that is available to
that particular system. The major debate over the GUI's does not really matter
when the hardware aspect is not considered. THE CAUSE OF THE MAC OS VS
PC OS DEBATE IS BASED SOLELY ON WHAT GUI YOU ARE MOST FAMILAR WITH. That is all
that should be considered. How quickly can you get the work you need to get done
on a particluar operating system is based on previous amount of time spent using
that operating system IN ADDITION TO WHAT HARDWARE YOU MACHINE HAS.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> An important advantage for IDL on Macintosh is
its ability to do <BR>> parameter-passing with Applescript. In order to
understand the <BR>> usefulness of that you need to know what other
applications also do <BR>> Applescript on a Mac OS.<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This is a true statement, as you can see...
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>*****</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><U><STRONG>IDL 5.5 Functional
Summary</STRONG></U></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>Development & Programming
Tools</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Macintosh AppleScript support</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>*****</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This is also supported under a windows enviroment.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>******</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><U><STRONG>IDL 5.5 Functional
Summary</STRONG></U></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>Development & Programming
Tools</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT face=Arial size=2>Callable Windows
DLL</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT face=Arial><FONT face=Arial size=2>ActiveX control
(dual interface)</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=1><FONT face=Arial
size=1><FONT size=2>******</FONT></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=1><FONT face=Arial
size=1><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> As Applescript would not sell without Mac OS
and we are all happy it's <BR>> also part of Mac OS X, I think that IDL would
need to be shipped with <BR>> Mac OS X - it is just an essential ingredient
for the scientific <BR>> Macintosh community.<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I do not know the details of porting stuff that has
been written for Linux over to OS X but I wouldn't image that they would be much
different, since OS X is based on a Linux kernel. IDL already supports Linux on
Alpha's and x86. So the real question is if they already have a compilation
that is somewhat similar, and there is enough support to figure out the details
of porting the x86 Linux or the Alpha Linux over to OS X, why not start an open
sourced development of such?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2>I just went and reviewed what the VP of RSI
said about this issue. </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2>"<FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>>
> Now for the good news. In subsequent discussions with Apple they have
made<BR>> > us aware of a commercial X-Windows library for OS X. We
are in the<BR>> process<BR>> > of evaluating it for use in a native
Unix/X-Windows implementation of IDL<BR>> > and ENVI for the Mac OS X
platform. This would solve many technical<BR>> issues<BR>> > for
us and allow us to continue to support the Macintosh platform both<BR>> >
natively and profitably, as it would leverage off our other Unix/X<BR>> >
platforms. The only thing this does not accomplish is providing IDL with
a<BR>> > new Aqua UI and widget set."</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2>So it looks like the big gripe that many of
you have is unfounded, because RSI can't afford to pay a graphic artist/computer
scientist to redesign the GUI of IDL OR they don't want to change the look
because of IDL is a professional product. Thus the redesign would make
the interface less professional looking. At least they are considering porting
to OS X. It all then comes down to a usability issue. OS X users would have to
get used to a slightly different interface. I suggest stop complaining and
wait to see they decide to support it. <FONT></DIV></FONT></FONT></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Their business people are looking at the financial
information related to how many Mac users buy or renew licenses each year. The
decision so far seems to be a preliminary one. Business people will change their
mind if it is deemed profitable for the company. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>About the pricing. If everyone would remember back
to economics, the quantity/demand curves and the price/cost curves will give us
some useful tool to analyze their decisions. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Since it's software the quantity/demand curve
operate a bit differently. Easy to produce once the code exists. The amount of
demand gives us some idea of why it costs so much. I agree that they should
reconsider their pricing structure for educational software[increase demand -
lower prices], but I also think they are doing a good job of targeting the
specific group of students that is mostly likely to use the language in the
business environment. When compared to mathematical programs such as MatLab or
Mathmatica, I think that those are better targeted towards Math majors. I
haven't used either extensively. The trick is to get future users to become
familiar with the language. You do not do this by limiting the number of copies
that an institution can buy. These future users will hopefully equal future
dollars spent once they graduate and get a job. I am an example! It would be
helpful if someone who actually bought an educational version to contribute to
the price range we are talking about. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>That's all I have to say for now. It's lunch
time and I'm hungry,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Logan Lindquist</DIV></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
