Talk:Cross-platform software

message: "# Linux, NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD—open-source, cross-platform operating systems"
Is not an operating system a platform? How then can these operating systems be cross-platform. I know that they build on many architectures, but that is a different ballgame. Can this line be removed or clarified?
148.61.93.79 16:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the multiplatform article should be merged with Cross-platform.  I am going to put it up on the front page.  The two words are essentially synonyms for each other, and the multiplatform article does have information that we don’t (yet) have in cross-platform, such as the bit about video game systems (which could probably go without saying, since they are in effect computer platforms, but still…). Mike Trausch (fd0man, Talk Page) 16:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncategorized Discussion 

message: I have begun work on attempting to cleaning up the page.  I have rewritten the first half of it, at least for now, and will likely revisit this tomorrow, because there is still a lot to do here.  Just wanted to let people know here that I am not entirely done with it yet. —Mike Trausch (fd0man, Talk Page) 05:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggestions would be appreciated.  I have mostly completed what I feel should have been done to this article for a rewrite.  I would like outside opinions/review done to see if we can remove the “confusing” template, as I think the only real changes that are left are to make all of the markup in the article consistent. —Mike Trausch (fd0man, Talk Page) 15:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Working on cleaning it up a bit… 

message: Recently, Mozilla was added into this section (“An open source platform for building Mac, Windows and Linux applications.”).  However, I am not sure that a web browsing suite qualifies—if that is the case, then other cross-platform browsers such as Opera would also indeed qualify.
Speaking as a web developer, it is atypical to call a web application that runs on only one family of browsers “cross-platform”, and I am tempted to remove this recently-added text.  While web browsers do have standards that they should follow (just as  systems do), they aren’t what I would consider to be a platform in and of themselves, at least not in the traditional sense.  If an application runs on every available  system, that covers a wide range of processor architectures and actual operating systems, while browsers are quite limited in this sense—of course, apps written for Mozilla might be cross-platform in theory, if Mozilla and its offspring were ported to every platform known to exist, but it is not that way in practice.  Suggestions or comments? —Mike Trausch Fd0man•Talk to me 18:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mozilla (I just fixed the link) refers in this case to the Mozilla application framework, not to the Mozilla family of browsers. This framework  is used by the browsers and many other unrelated software. And by the way it does support a wide variety of platforms, among them Linux, Mac OS X, Windows, OS/2, BeOS, Solaris, etc.  Ceroklis 00:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross-platform programming toolkits 

message: 4x4 evolution with pc/dreamcast via gamespy network is crossplatform and so is warthunder via pc/ps4.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.27.70 (talk) 15:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Additions of Games

message: The Parrot virtual machine is similar to the Java VM as a cross platform development environment. It is targeting all the platforms that Perl currently runs on and there are many languages being developed to run on top of it so it is likely to be a major player in the future.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris97 (talk • contribs) 11:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parrot 

message: Looking over the list of topics so far, and the vague criteria listed in this topic, it's apparent that only a small fraction of the qualifying topics have been marked for inclusion.  Probably a several thousand topics are now qualifying (the majority of topics dealing with computer programs), and some glaring omissions are made. Tedickey (talk) 00:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criteria

message: This edit made the article internally inconsistent, using the terms "Linux" and "GNU/Linux" interchangeably. This is confusing; we should use one or the other. It should be reverted. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:07, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent revert 

message: *"Other well-known desktop computer platforms include Linux/Unix and Mac OS X (both of which are themselves cross-platform)"
**What does it mean when one says that a platform is itself cross-platform?
*"BSD, very cross platform (see NetBSD, for example)"
**What does it mean when a software platform is considered to be very cross platform?
*What is the difference between a software considered cross-platform and a software having a high degree of software portability? Thanks, --Abdull (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This topic actually means very little, since it's largely a combination WP:OR and promotional edits Tedickey (talk) 21:59, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So would you suggest to merge the two topics? --Abdull (talk) 20:12, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

text:  The phrase "Other well-known desktop computer platforms include Linux/Unix and Mac OS X (both of which are themselves cross-platform)" is still there.  How can something be cross-platform with itself?  It doesn't have two OS's or two hardware systems in one computer.  I propose removing the parenthetical phrase. Nerfer (talk) 18:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phrasing;... Software portability 

message: Platform independent redirects to this article. Looking at the article, all I can find is the "Platform-independent software" section, which is unreferenced. I do recall SourceForge using this term to describe what it now calls "OS Independent (Written in an interpreted language)", which is used for the operating system trove category.
:
:
However, based on the results above, the former appears to be the more popular.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.
--Hm2k (talk) 13:33, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Platform independent 

message: fwiw, the term was in use before 2005, e.g., this link from 2004 TEDickey (talk) 17:16, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  platform agnostic 

message: The word Platform has more than one meaning, and therefore so does Cross-Platform. In the article now there are references to hardware platforms (ie chipset architectures) and software platforms (eg operating systems, development environments, etc). So an operating system can be cross-platform on multiple chipsets, an application can run cross-platform on different chipsets using the same OS, or an application can run cross-platform on different operating systems. And that's before we add mobile platforms. 
Seems to me one of two things should happen. Either platform should only mean one thing in the article, or there should be different sections for different meanings. 
Single-meaning approach. We might start with the definition of computing platform: A computing platform is some sort of hardware architecture and software framework (including application frameworks) that allows software to run. That's clean terminology. If we adopted that definition for this article then a chipset is not a platform  but an architecture, and an OS is not a platform but a framework. 
Our new definition of cross-platform might be: Cross-platform describes software that creates or enables other software to run on multiple platforms. Let's see how this works out.
*Java runs on different platforms to enable writing cross-platform applications
*Browsers run on different platforms to enable writing cross-platform Web experiences
*Cross-platform development environments generate different execuables for different platforms
Disambiguation approach. Alternatively we can identify the main ways the term is used differently in different situations. Cross-platform compilers generate executables for different hardware platforms (architectures). Cross-platform application development frameworks generate different runtimes for different software platforms (operating systems). Cross-platform runtimes (Java, browsers) interpret the same code for any platform (usually OS) they run on. 
Either of these approaches appeal?
GFMobile (talk) 21:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't make sense in this context. Cross-platform implies "platform" software runs on/with, whereas a software-platform implies "platform" that must be installed as a runtime or was incorporated in the development of an application. A software-platform isn't a restriction unless the software platform's supported hardware platforms are restricted. 104.176.16.56 (talk) 02:24, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple meanings of Platform 

message: Hi.
Half of the design strategies listed there seem to be one and the same: Graceful degradation, separation of functionality and single codebase all have the similar description and seem to entail having one codebase that determines the platform and acts accordingly.
What am I missing?
Best regards,Codename Lisa (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Design strategies 

message: It's being claimed that "cross-platform" must not be used in computing articles (to the point of using it being described as "vandalism" and reverted beyond 3RR) because it's prohibited by MOS:COMPUTING (which doesn't actually mention it).  Thoughts?
See: Apache Ant,  Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Computing#Prohibition of "cross-platform"?, User_talk:Andy_Dingley#About_that_very_thin_line and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Codename_Lisa_reported_by_User:Andy_Dingley_.28Result:_.29  Andy Dingley (talk) 12:38, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If a program is "cross-platform" that should generally be assumed if more than one platform is listed, however, if a program is "platform-specific" or "platform-agnostic", neither of those may be obvious even if only one platform is listed or the program is open-source (speaking respectively of order). I think the MOS should be updated to simply say cross-platform should be assumed unless one of the others is the case. 104.176.16.56 (talk) 01:54, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prohibition of "cross-platform" from computing articles, per [[MOS:COMPUTING]]? 

message: This article could be more explicit about cross-platform development in the sense of coding once for later deployment on the web AND desktop. E.g. Silverlight is mentioned, and there is a section on web development, but not a good explanation for novices. I am not coding & reading frequently enough on this subject to "dare" editing this article. 
------------------------------------------------------------
This is different from a proprietary software or open-source software with a proprietary dependency, which can be cross-platform because of being arbitrarily limited to whatever hardware architecture "platform" those with access to the proprietary source code decide to release binaries for, neglecting any for a variety of reasons ranging from an ignorance of the platforms existence and possibility as a target for compilation to unwillingness to test on that hardware or release an untested binary all the way to an act so vain as to disable others from supporting specific hardware. 
This contributes to an overwhelming network effect where a new hardware architecture must raise awareness of its existence to proprietary software owners and first win their support before well-known programs can run on their "platforms". 
In short, platform-agnostic suggests explicitly any platform whereas cross-platform suggests only the chosen platforms.
:104.176.16.56 (talk) 01:35, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi 103.253.47.142 (talk) 15:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  web vs. desktop 

message: Miner 2049er doesn't have any multiplayer, and definitely doesn't have cross-platform multiplayer. 
Before the X1/PS4/SW generation, the following games have cross-platform play (not complete list): 
-Minecraft
-Dreamcast-PC: Maximum Pool, 4x4 EVO, Quake III Arena
-PS2-PC: Final Fantasy XI
-Amiga-Atari ST: Lotus 2, Populous, Populous 2, Powermonger, Stunt Car Racer, RVF Honda, Hard Drivin’, Vroom
-Amiga, Atari ST, DOS, Apple II, Apple IIgs, Macintosh: Battle Chess
(I never edited a page, so I didn't try to butt in to a live wiki, perhaps someone can edit some of it.)
== C£ computing language yes or no? == tp - c
what program language am I running?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.229.5 (talk) 07:38, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The list of games