Re: [seul-edu] What does OS-X mean to a Linux user?

["S. Barret Dolph" <white129@ms7.hinet.net>]

Yes, Douglas is exactly right. I must send Quark formats
to the publishers here. It was quite a disappointment when
Adobe gave up on Framemaker. I am not a very knowledgeable
user of Linux but love the simplicity of it very much.  So,
I may have to take install windows on one of my computers
and install Quark Express. That would still be cheaper than
buying a Mac which are quite expensive here. (Although money
is not a key factor. I get all Microsoft products and support
for free in Taiwan but still prefer Linux.)

Thanks for your time,
Cordially

S. Barret Dolph

Doug Loss wrote:

> Chris Hornbaker wrote:
> 
>> S. Berret Dolph wrote:
>> 
>>> Will this mean that software for OS-X will be useable for
>>> a Linux user? Specifically, I will need to start using
>>> Quark desktop publishing in order to format my books in
>>> order to publish them here in Taiwan.
>> 
>> Maybe. I don't see that happening though. OS-X is based on FreeBSD which is a
>> little different than Linux. I expect to see stuff for FreeBSD first if they
>> do anything. Personally I'd like to see a native QuickTime for Linux. Though,
>> CrossOver works pretty well.
>> 
> 
> In the near term, I doubt that you'll see Quark for Linux.  However,
> porting from OS-X to Linux isn't necessarily as difficult as you might
> think.  The C/C++ code should generally be gcc-compliant, since gcc is
> the standard compiler for OS-X.  The GUI part may be a problem, but if
> it's written to Apple's Cocoa API (which is just another cutesy Apple
> name for the OpenStep API) it should be readily translatable to
> GNUStep.  If you've used WindowMaker as a window manager, you have some
> idea of what GNUStep looks like.  Whether the owner of Quark is
> interested in doing so is a completely different question, of course.
> 
> 
>>> It seems that I will
>>> have to go back to Windows, Mac's are quite expensive here, in
>>> order to do this. Am I simply doomed to this fate?
>> 
>> No, not doomed. Mac's are pretty expensive. I see them only useful for video
>> editing. To write books try Pathetic Writer from http://siag.nu It outputs to
>> LOTS of formats (including PDF and PS).
>> 
> 
> I know a little about the publishing industry, and I suspect that what
> Barret's saying is that the publishers require him to submit his
> documents in a proprietary Quark format.  I know there are publishers
> here in the states that require PageMaker files and refuse to deal with
> any other type of typesetter-ready copy.  How close am I, Barret?