What? Someone we know could afford the WWDC entry ticket price? I'm impressed. My next question after PPC support was whether Rosetta made the cut? Confirmed. Back to my nap... John G Rich Love wrote: > From anonymous... > > I am at WWDC and I have 10.6 developer release DVD. > > FBtoC runs fine in 10.6. Several example apps ran fine (I checked to > make sure they said "Application (Intel)" in the Get Info) > > Regular FB3 ran fine and the programs that it made ran fine too. > > > > > > On Jun 11, 2008, at 9:18 PM, Rich Love wrote: > >> It appears to be confirmed. 10.6 is Intel Only >> http://gizmodo.com/5015495/snow-leopard-will-be-intel-exclusive-after-all >> >> >> If anyone gets their hands on the 10.6 developer release, it would be >> nice to test some FBtoC apps with it. >> >> Rich >> >> >> On Jun 4, 2008, at 2:21 PM, Brian Stevens wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 4, 2008, at 10:19 AM, Christopher Wyatt wrote: >>> >>>> On Jun 4, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Brian Stevens wrote: >>>> >>>>> <http://www.tuaw.com/2008/06/03/rumor-mac-os-x-10-6-to-debut-at-wwdc-08/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regardless of how accurate this is ( and I do not know if it is >>>>> accurate----it is strictly rumor ), remember: The question is >>>>> WHEN Rosetta will be discontinued not IF. >>>> >>>> The rumors go a bit deeper than this >>> Yes, I was keeping the message brief. >>> >>>> 1) Carbon 64 will never happen... unless someone writes an open >>>> source port. More importantly, Apple is now hinting Carbon itself >>>> might vanish entirely, while Cocoa / Obj-C tools have already been >>>> demonstrably cross-platform (dig into iTunes or Safari on the PC >>>> side and you'll find Cocoa.) >>> Apple announced no more Carbon at WWDC 07. There were no hints, ifs >>> or maybes. It is history. The only question is when. >>> >>> >>>> Adobe was caught off-guard somehow, which is why there will be a >>>> 64-bit Win version of CS4, but not a 64-bit OS X version. Adobe is >>>> trying to port to Cocoa quickly for CS5. >>> Adobe had the same notification ( if not more because they are such >>> a prominent developer ) as every other developer. They knew Carbon >>> was going away and persisted with Carbon development anyway. It was >>> a cost choice for them. They were not caught off guard. This is just >>> the bs they tell the public. >>> >>>> 2) PowerPC support of OS 10.6 is in doubt. >>> This was the essence of my post. >>> >>>> >>>> In the end, the question is how to keep other tools (REALbasic, >>>> FutureBASIC, FreePascal, etc) working on newer systems over the >>>> next three or four years. >>>> >>>> Thankfully, from what I have read, if you have a Carbon app, it >>>> won't stop working. It's simply that Xcode will lose Carbon tools, >>>> such as Interface Builder being Cocoa-only. >>> >>> >>> Considering FB for the moment, the only current issue is the FB >>> Editor. It is a PowerPC binary that requires Rosetta to run. The >>> current rumors about no PowerPC support in 10.6 ( might hear >>> announcements at WWDC next week ) are our most immediate concern. >>> >>> Executables already created as universal binaries ( like FBtoC ) >>> will launch and execute just fine when Apple dumps carbon. As Chris >>> points out, it is the developer that is faced with losing carbon. >>> Developers will need to keep tools for Xcode 2.5 or 3.0 on their >>> machines with the appropriate SDKs installed. What this means is >>> developers won't be able to utilize functionality that is new in the >>> OS revision where carbon is dropped. They will, however, be able to >>> create universal binaries that have functionality based on features >>> in the OS to that point ( which today is through and including >>> Leopard 10.5 ) >>> >>> Brian S. >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >>> futurebasic-unsubscribe@... >>> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >> futurebasic-unsubscribe@... >> > > -- > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: > futurebasic-unsubscribe@... >