Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

is there ever going to be a fe

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • is there ever going to be a fe

    I actuallly wanted to let off some steam as too sayimg . will there ever be a decent front end for mac that works . amp 2 is not touch friendly and ice keeps crashimg all the while i cant download q car for my mac

  • #2
    ummm, I asked months ago if people would like to see amp continue on ... nobody replied

    I guess they were hoping that bluehawk would provide their solution for the ipad/mac ...

    I keep playing with the idea of updating amp or creating my own but I don't own a mini to try out the in car experience. I guess I could use my macbook pro but that is not what I was intending.

    I just downloaded the latest xcode and I have been looking in things since I am very active on the web FE thread.

    I also keep asking myself if the ipad is a better solution to a mini ....

    Are you on intel or G4?

    Comment


    • #3
      RevFE worked for Mac, but died for a lack of interest. There aren't enough Mac users for a Mac only frontend to thrive, and there isn't enough room in the market for new frontends to take hold very easily.
      "stop with the REINSTALLS, what do you think we got some lame-o installer!!!" - mitchjs
      RevFE
      My Shop

      Comment


      • #4
        I do agree with the not enough mac users.
        However, for a "pure" mac FE, I don't know of one that is active although
        AMP does work.

        On the windows side it's starting to look like OM, CF and RR. I guess that is because new users are looking at the activeness of the community.

        @ revFe
        To be honest I never tried your code, I must have missed it when I joined. Sorry dude!

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm thinking OM is going to be the one for mac.. granted like linux, it's not exactly too useable at present. But it's definitely getting there and those guys are definitely high in the dedicated space.
          ---------
          I'll do the bumbling, and i'll be the idiot.
          if you've got a "stupid" question, search for some of mine!

          Comment


          • #6
            I have thought the same about OM but to be honest I'm not too sure about mono and it's ability to provide the "experience" that most people will be looking for.

            I have always been a fringe user of wintel because of that "experience" reason.

            I can relate to macs better but I did choose a wintel box for my carpc because I knew I'd enjoy the toys that the wintel world offers. However, no matter how much I like CF, there are always minor things that I miss.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SapporoGuy View Post
              I have thought the same about OM but to be honest I'm not too sure about mono and it's ability to provide the "experience" that most people will be looking for.

              I have always been a fringe user of wintel because of that "experience" reason.

              I can relate to macs better but I did choose a wintel box for my carpc because I knew I'd enjoy the toys that the wintel world offers. However, no matter how much I like CF, there are always minor things that I miss.
              Well mono is just a wrapper.....we use the same system level APIs that native code would use on OSX...so I don't think mono is the limiting factor. It's just difficult to design a fe thats standard across all platforms but also fits a "different" user experience on one of them. At the moment, osx support for om is on hold due to a lack of interest both from users and developers.
              openMobile - An open source C# Front End (why choose openMobile?)
              - Always Recruiting Developers -
              Like what you see? Donations are always welcome

              Comment


              • #8
                @ Lack of interest and developers
                This is definitely a problem. However, this could be due to several things such as the mac vs wintel user share, lack of publicity (as in: mac is a viable carpc platform), mac developers are busy working on iphone/ipad development.

                @api
                I'm not real coder so I can not personally comment on whether mono provides the same level of access as say xcode. I still need to look at mono to see how it integrates with OSX. I'm just not how sure your statement of that it uses the same API. Accessing it yes I can agree. More than likely the performance should be nearly the same as a xcode product.

                @ experience
                The GUI is not really experience that I'm referring to. That is just a theme.

                It's more of a UI thing.
                Office's mac theme is close but it still is a Windows experience. CF is pretty good but it still feels like a wintel product, buttons don't follow the pattern throughout the software. The point here would be how the underlaying layer (the non-graphical) interacts with the user. I thought that meego looked cool until I tried it's menu system. Too many clicks and still difficult to navigate,

                AMP although a mac based software is different in its own way.

                I used the word "experience" because it's really hard to explain. IF it was easy to explain or understand Apple would have been gone away years ago. So, Yes, I agree. Designing a GUI that the public will accept is very difficult and takes time or at least a vision that many people can accept.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by SapporoGuy View Post
                  @ Lack of interest and developers
                  This is definitely a problem. However, this could be due to several things such as the mac vs wintel user share, lack of publicity (as in: mac is a viable carpc platform), mac developers are busy working on iphone/ipad development.
                  Very few users want to spend more money to be limited to a certain set of hardware. While the number of ipad users is pretty high, I could probably count the number of osx users on one hand and that certainly is not worth significant development time. I doubt that bluehawk (whos claim to fame is the iHorn app) are really going to change the carcomputing userbase-so its really just up to if theres a talented osx dev that really wants to put the work in.

                  Originally posted by SapporoGuy View Post
                  @api
                  I'm not real coder so I can not personally comment on whether mono provides the same level of access as say xcode. I still need to look at mono to see how it integrates with OSX. I'm just not how sure your statement of that it uses the same API. Accessing it yes I can agree. More than likely the performance should be nearly the same as a xcode product.
                  asking if mono has access to osx is like asking if c++ has access to windows. Its just a development tool, how integrated you are into the host OS is really only limited by how much time you want to spend coding.

                  Originally posted by SapporoGuy View Post
                  @ experience
                  The GUI is not really experience that I'm referring to. That is just a theme.

                  It's more of a UI thing.
                  Office's mac theme is close but it still is a Windows experience. CF is pretty good but it still feels like a wintel product, buttons don't follow the pattern throughout the software. The point here would be how the underlaying layer (the non-graphical) interacts with the user. I thought that meego looked cool until I tried it's menu system. Too many clicks and still difficult to navigate,

                  AMP although a mac based software is different in its own way.

                  I used the word "experience" because it's really hard to explain. IF it was easy to explain or understand Apple would have been gone away years ago. So, Yes, I agree. Designing a GUI that the public will accept is very difficult and takes time or at least a vision that many people can accept.
                  I thought I was following you until about halfway through. Everything the user interacts with is the graphical layer...so im confused as to how the underlaying non-graphical layer interacts with the user.
                  If its just a matter of GUI design, then its not really an issue of coding for OSX but just designing a skin that feels more natural to OSX users.
                  openMobile - An open source C# Front End (why choose openMobile?)
                  - Always Recruiting Developers -
                  Like what you see? Donations are always welcome

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Smaller user base, no Mac devs interested enough to hang around and do it. Also, NO NAV. Most people who run Macs end up running nav via Fusion or Parallels at which point you might as well go ahead and run a Windows FE.

                    I have and do run a Mac Mini in my car. At first for the novelty, and later because it's a really good hardware package and runs nearly any operating system. That's a niche set of a niche set of users.

                    If you have a good FE, there's no need for the Mac experience aside from the ease of use when configuring the underpinnings. I can count on one hand the number of times I've had major issues with setting up the Mac, and OTOH there are days of my life I'd like back from other OS's. Regardless, a well configured Windows system is reliable and stable in the car and the community is much bigger. It's just a fact.
                    Originally posted by ghettocruzer
                    I was gung ho on building a PC [until] just recently. However, between my new phone having internet and GPS and all...and this kit...Im starting to have trouble justfiying it haha.
                    Want to:
                    -Find out about the new iBug iPad install?
                    -Find out about carPC's in just 5 minutes? View the Car PC 101 video

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Steve thinks mac OS is a wonderful experience. Steve wants to run it on mobile devices. Steve realizes that mac OS would totally blow on a mobile device. Steve has developers take the good parts (the kernel, some middleware, etc) and build a completely new OS. Steve calls it iOS. It's all his, you can't have it. It's pretty, and a really great user experience, but you still can't have it. It's not free. It's Steve's.

                      I really don't get how OSX is a viable option in the car. It's a desktop operating system just like windows except worse because there is probably even less support for car stuff than linux. As much as I hate to admit this, Steve was right, the only real solution is to take the good parts of OSX and start over from the bottom up. Only, you can't do that, because OSX is a locked down closed system. It's more closed than windows.

                      To be fair, I really don't think there is a really viable solution in the car software world in stable form. Emerging free and open mobile operating systems will soon replace the frontend. It's only a matter of time.
                      Former author of LinuxICE, nghost, nobdy.
                      Current author of Automotive Message Broker (AMB).
                      Works on Tizen IVI. Does not represent anyone or anything but himself.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Stevey started with getting booted and then came up with some cool stuff. NextOS. Realized that it's GUI/UI was not user friendly so put some cool-aid on it and then watched all these nay sayers and eye candy booers later boot it up because their previous version was worse than mac os 9.

                        osx core is free to download == darwin == BSD
                        GUI/UI are Steve o's property, however xcode is free to download and to make apps with. iphone with it's access to millions of people is $99 a year (well at least to signup)

                        Back to topic.

                        GUI - I would refer to as being the graphics a bling that users visual see. Basically the theme.

                        UI- are the elements that tie the GUI to the code. Thus the menus, location of buttons, usability features, the amount of user interaction and such. This is the area that programmers probably are the worse at. Not the graphics that so many will admit that they are horrible at.

                        So I would say that the "experience" that I'm referring to is actually the UI.
                        How many clicks do I have to go through to play my tunes.
                        Where are the settings located? Are they organized into 1 central area or are they per application? Or even worse a mix between the 2???

                        OSX UI is intuitive. Can I do it? yes. Can I find the location of the function easily? yes.
                        XP UI is anywhere from great to WTF? Can I do it? yes. Can I find the function? yes, after googling how and then still going through loops.

                        I truly hope that windows has fixed this with win7.

                        I mentioned this in another thread when we were talking about user interaction while driving. CF has a doable theme but from there on out when you use the UI for a while you start to get frustrated when you realize that menus jump around when you go between functions.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SapporoGuy View Post
                          ummm, I asked months ago if people would like to see amp continue on ... nobody replied

                          I guess they were hoping that bluehawk would provide their solution for the ipad/mac ...

                          I keep playing with the idea of updating amp or creating my own but I don't own a mini to try out the in car experience. I guess I could use my macbook pro but that is not what I was intending.

                          I just downloaded the latest xcode and I have been looking in things since I am very active on the web FE thread.

                          I also keep asking myself if the ipad is a better solution to a mini ....

                          Are you on intel or G4?
                          I'm the original AMP developer. I'm obviously biased, but I still think it's the best front for a car based mac. The touch screen stuff worked, the music worked, video worked, pictures worked, it has some animations, etc. It could launch applications, it had a web browser, and I think I even wrote a war driver thing for it. Honestly I have no idea if the code even compiles anymore or anything like that. Like Bug Byte said, I'm just not aware of any decent Nav software.

                          Perhaps a radical re-skinning and updating of AMP would be a nice front end?

                          Also, I have no way of testing this, but if I remember AMP uses iTunes to play songs? Or I think it used iTunes for something. It wouldn't be difficult to re-write it to use iTunes to play songs, and then you could poll iTunes to get the current playing song info. That would be great for using an iPhone to control the playback of music through the front end. I think bluehawk is doing something along these lines, but they may be using a different framework to do it, I have no idea what's out there now. Also, it would be nice to remove the coredata thing from AMP and just have it parse out the itunesXML on startup.

                          I just feel so conflicted about front ends. I just don't know what I'd use it for. I get in, my built in XM radio turns on, and I have the Opie & Anthony show come on. If I don't want to hear that, I have either hundreds of music channels, or I can plug my iPhone in.
                          -

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi aychamo!

                            Glad that you stopped by! I, too, agree that your AMP is probably the best offering for the mac (well, at least until somebody steps up to the plate and surpasses what you have built).

                            Not all of us live in the US or have an option of XM radio. I live in Japan and ... well ... a FE allows me to NOT go with a full fledge nav unit that does a lot but still is limited by the media that you can put on it being lack of FM stations, access through nav unit to the net or not wanting to plug-in multiple usb storage devices. Yes, to some extent a ipod/iphone/nav unit probably do all that I want but ... then I loose out on OBD and themes which allow me to be different. However, when accounting comes into consideration ... a FE does loose out. lolo, I should have just spent the $700 and bought the alpine and BT solution or the pioneer for a little less.

                            Both AMP versions will compile under 10.6 using xcode.

                            Would you mind answering a few questions about AMP?
                            What are the major differences between 1.0 and 2.0?
                            I saw that you were implementing a plug-in architecture, how far did you get with it?
                            What would you have done different?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              For the Nav: I successfully installed Navit on my Mac mini, is quite good!
                              iC3
                              Citroen C3

                              progress ##### 50%

                              ICE3

                              ITALY

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X