Development for Mac OS X without the OS itself

Question

macOS

The task is to write a simple application for Mac OS X. It is the application, the web interface is not suitable. Don't ask why :D

Problems:
1. I've never written under Mac OS X.
2. I don't have a Mac OS X computer.
3. I have an AMD processor.

Questions:
1. What to choose for development under Mac OS X? I just started learning Java, can I write in it?
2. My friends don't have Macs either, where can I test the app?
3. If in Java, then you can test under Windows, but will it most likely work for the customer?

I have experience in developing programs in C++ and C#.

Answer 1

1. You can write in C++ using Qt, QtCreator will help you.
2. You can test on a virtual machine - download the ready-made Mac OS X image for VmWare / VirtualBox from the root tracker (there are also builds for AMD processors). The main thing is that your processor supports hardware virtualization.

Answer 2

It seems to me that at first it is more important to decide why this or that program is written. If the program is being developed for sale, then my personal opinion is to buy a poppy and write in native obj-c/cocoa. If for something else, the tips above are quite suitable.
Let me explain a little, I have a poppy for more than 5 years, I have experience developing both on the desktop and on the Apple mobile platform, and native applications have always looked and worked better. Users are simply spoiled by the high quality of programs, even if they find a free program that, in principle, performs the necessary actions, but it will look random and (even worse) with an illogical arrangement of controls for a Mac user, in most cases, the search for a program will continue until an alternative will be found. Let it be not so functional or you will need 2 to replace your program, but if they look harmonious, the user will choose them. I have faced this many times. Trust me, that's exactly what will happen.
Therefore, if something is serious or with a long-term perspective, it is better to buy a poppy, since good used models are not so expensive.

Answer 3

Yes, you can write in Java and it will work on a poppy, that's why it is Java. There are small nuances, for example, it is better to use File.separator instead of the character / in the paths, but in general there is no difference.

Answer 4

I wrote an application on a bunch of C ++ \ Qt for poppy. It outwardly looks like a poppy application and had to sweat over it. What can I say about this.
1) I also have AMD and no virtual machine really worked. One eventually started with a rattle, but it worked so slowly that it took more than an hour to build a small project, when it takes 7-8 minutes maximum if building on Windows on my own machine.
2) I don’t know about Java, I can only say about what I wrote myself. Everything is very good, but making it look and work natively is not easy. It is better, of course, to write under the poppy on objective-c. You simply cannot get through to many things from Java or C ++.
3) I generally wrote first under Windows, and tested on mac mini, which I went to via VNC. And more than once I met with some subtleties that are peculiar only to OS X. Therefore, in order to test and implement full-fledged functionality, you need to have OS X at hand.

Answer 5

Buy an Intel computer, install a hackintosh or mac os x in vmware.
It’s better to choose xcode, but objective c is a somewhat exotic language. Java is not a very good choice for a GUI.

Answer 6

I was in a similar situation about 7 months ago. I did everything through a virtual machine in VMWare. I downloaded the virtual machine from the rutracker, I won’t give the link because I don’t remember anymore :(. I worked like this for about 3 months. Yes, it slowed down, but it pissed me off. But I made and passed the program. I wrote everything under Windows and only compiled under the poppy. But if in the future you plan to write under the poppy - buy it for yourself, the nerves are more expensive :)

Answer 7

I work on Mac. Somehow I collected one of my qt' programs for him. Once again I was convinced that Qt is really “Write once, compile anywhere”. In general, I knew this before :) my colleagues and I wrote cross-platform under Windows/Linux + used cross-compilation for all sorts of domestic mips/sparc... On a Mac, Qt GUI looks bastard, native is so much nicer that I now run that utility only in Linux under VirtualBox. Gui Java-prog is also not to my liking.
If you just need to indulge, then yes, download virtual machines. For permanent work, it is better to take a mini or something used. And learn native languages.