Page 1 of 2

neobook on CrossOver Mac 6.0 ?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 11:46 am
by HPW
Has someone access to a MAC OSX (Intel) to check if neobook apps runs on CrossOver Mac?

http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac/

Would be nice to know if neobook apps could run there!
I would be specially interested in the fact, if plugins are supported there!

Or someone on Linux?

http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxoffice/

PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:43 am
by edunaway
HPW, at the end of 2006 I transitioned all of my home and office computers to the Mac Intel platform but I have not considered crossover to run NB. For the time being I still use NB in Parallels (virtual machine) and it's the only Windows application I still use. I won't promise anything, but I will read up on it a little more.

Now this opens the door to something that's been on my mind for the past six months with regards to Neobook. I've used NB since the mid 90's and I am very fond of the product, however, the trend towards web based software as well as the need for cross platform (Linux/OSX/Win) software has allowed my eyes to wonder, but I won't name any of the other products in this post.

Instead of band-aiding something like cross over or a Linux/OSX player I'd really like to see Dave push the envelope again with NB. He did a fantastic job adding internet capabilities and it's time to allow us to build web based applications with NB that are web based, without a proprietary active x plugin, so they are cross platform too.

What I would really like to see is NB support compiling to flash, php, ruby, xml, something. Since NB is very visual and would lose much of it appeal I think compiling to flash is the best solution for cross platform. But there are certain "core features" that would need to remain available while in flash mode for it to be useful such as database connectivity, upload/download files, send email, etc. I'm sure everyone has a list.

My rant is over. I'll duck for the volley of replies. :)

-eric

PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:07 am
by HPW
....I still use NB in Parallels (virtual machine) and it's the only Windows application I still use


Surly is that the safest way to run it on the MAC.
But the crossover conzept has it advantages. It is simply cheaper because no windows license is needed. So when there would be an cheap and easy way to get neobook apps running there, it would open neobook developer more potential market.

I am not talking about using the MAC as a developer workstation, but it would be nice to know, that my neobook-apps can run there.

The idea of making neobook the swiss army knife compiler to every target platform sounds nice, but I am very skeptical how and how fast such thing could happen or if they are even possible.

A more important question will be, how neobook will fit into Vista and .NET 3.0 ! As long WIN32 is nativly supported we have no problem. But who knows this. Only god father and MS.

;-)

PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:58 am
by edunaway
he idea of making neobook the swiss army knife compiler to every target platform sounds nice, but I am very skeptical how and how fast such thing could happen or if they are even possible.


I'm thinking more along the lines of removing the NB Active X and replacing it with something more versatile.

There have been problems with NB's Active X from the beginning due to it being unsigned and with the new IE7 security features combined with Vista's overbearing security I think the NB Active X control needs to be retired and replaced with something else.

-eric

PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:39 pm
by dpayer
edunaway wrote:
he idea of making neobook the swiss army knife compiler to every target platform sounds nice, but I am very skeptical how and how fast such thing could happen or if they are even possible.


I'm thinking more along the lines of removing the NB Active X and replacing it with something more versatile.

There have been problems with NB's Active X from the beginning due to it being unsigned and with the new IE7 security features combined with Vista's overbearing security I think the NB Active X control needs to be retired and replaced with something else.

-eric


Couple points:

1) Flash is an ActiveX
2) PDF is an ActiveX

It sounds like Flash itself my have options for you. I see many people doing fairly extensive applications in Flash. I just don't see NB being able to translate to Flash or if it should even be a goal as the ROI (return on investment) may not be there.

D

PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:22 pm
by edunaway
dplayer, for the record, the Flash player is Active X only on Windows when displayed inside Internet Explorer.

SWF files themselves are not Active X files. The Flash player is not Active X in Firefox on Windows nor is it Active X on the Mac or in Linux. The same can be said about Adobe Reader (PDF) Surely you would at least recognize Firefox as a player on the internet and Neobook can't create plugins for Firefox.

There may be technical reasons Flash may not be the best choice. Instead of focusing on Flash, I hoped this would become a discussion about Neobook adapting to the obvious changes on the web. With the changes to IE7 and Vista the odds are even lower that an unsigned NB Active X will get installed or even viewed. The main reason I have suggested Flash is because it is installed in 90%+ computers so the install step has already taken place because the trust is already there by the user so running the SWF file is automatic. Maybe Flash isn't the best solution. My point is I would like to see NB grow again to keep up with the times, just like when it migrated from DOS to Windows. There was great resistance back then too.

-eric

PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:20 am
by Neosoft Support
I definitely think that offering some alternate output formats is something worth exploring. The current ActiveX control was developed in response to user input, but it's never been an ideal solution.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is any one alternative format that supports everything that NeoBook can do. Flash is probably the most compatible with NeoBook, but there are a few features (plug-ins, file i/o, etc.) that simply could not be converted. Any alternative formats are likely to come with some restrictions.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:25 pm
by dpayer
Neosoft Support wrote:I definitely think that offering some alternate output formats is something worth exploring. The current ActiveX control was developed in response to user input, but it's never been an ideal solution.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is any one alternative format that supports everything that NeoBook can do. Flash is probably the most compatible with NeoBook, but there are a few features (plug-ins, file i/o, etc.) that simply could not be converted. Any alternative formats are likely to come with some restrictions.


Dave,

I could envision NB being a Flash Creation program (would be a nice selling point).

As one of the program types (exe, scr, system tray, web plugin, etc) you could have a flash type and then in that program IDE, you could exclude from view all plugins and parts of NB that write to (or read from) the file system directly (via http only); anything that executes a file, or anything that doesn't play well in the "sandbox" framework they have made for browser plugins.

Truthfully, that really limits what NB can do but at the same time, it would give people a chance to create things in flash for distribution.

David P.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:47 pm
by atsui
Speaking for myself, if NB could output flash, even if there are certain output limitations, I think there would really be a big market for that. Applications created by NB would have a new target platform to sell to.

I for one, would definitely pay for that.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:33 pm
by HPW
This topic is far off-topic now!

So no answer for the question if neobook is running on crossover yet.

Anyway, when neobook want to support another target like flash, it has to compete with some powerfull competitors on the flash authoring market!

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:42 am
by Neosoft Support
As one of the program types (exe, scr, system tray, web plugin, etc) you could have a flash type and then in that program IDE, you could exclude from view all plugins and parts of NB that write to (or read from) the file system directly (via http only); anything that executes a file, or anything that doesn't play well in the "sandbox" framework they have made for browser plugins.


Yes, that's probably the best method.

Anyway, when neobook want to support another target like flash, it has to compete with some powerfull competitors on the flash authoring market!


That's something to consider too.

So no answer for the question if neobook is running on crossover yet.


I guess not.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:05 pm
by edunaway
As one of the program types (exe, scr, system tray, web plugin, etc) you could have a flash type and then in that program IDE, you could exclude from view all plugins


While this would be the ideal way to compartmentalize functions that are only available to that specific program type, I think this would remove much of Neobook's versatility and ease of use. That's one of its biggest strengths: one IDE to build an EXE, SCR, Web Plugin, etc. You just load it and start a new project.

Maybe a better way to do this would be to flag functions that are "flash safe," for example, and have an "audit" mode as part of the debugger to check for incompatible functions that are being used.

-eric

PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:28 pm
by Trainman
Has the crossover question been answered elsewhere?

I can give a try on my MacBook if not.

John

PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:38 pm
by Trainman
I installed the trial version of NeoBook with the trial version of Crossover on my MacBook. . . AND IT WORKED FLAWLESSLY!

I didn't do anything complex to *really* test it, but I was able to make a one-page publication with a button and a "hello world" messagebox, compile it, then run that publication.

When I have more time, I'll be playing around with plugins and more advanced pub-making. . .since this is very promising for me as a mac user! :-)

Now, to be clear, as I understand it, you can't just go and distribute your runtime exe's for mac. . .the mac end-user would have to first install Crossover before using your exe. (someone correct me if I'm wrong on that).

John

PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:23 pm
by TMcD
John Ballard wrote:
Now, to be clear, as I understand it, you can't just go and distribute your runtime exe's for mac. . .the mac end-user would have to first install Crossover before using your exe. (someone correct me if I'm wrong on that).

John


John,

Yeah, .exe files won't work on a MAC, they would need to have Crossover installed. Just think of .exe as Windows format and so whatever xyz computer would need Windows.

Troy