microsoft-watch.com— Apple wants this year's Wordwide Developer Conference to woo more Windows developers to the Mac. Will it be the year's longest running "Get a Mac" ad?
Mar 20, 2007View in Crawl 4
@burty89:Word games. I didn't say that it *only* ran Unix.The point is, for the fellow suggesting Linux instead, Apple is way ahead of him. They were running Unix way back in in the days of the Lisa - the Microsoft version that Linux is modelled after.(I know, I know, that seems so *wrong*, but look it up.)
... Or at least sell me a version so I can legally run it in a VMWare session like every other OS. In the real world, you can't just throw away your desktop because you are forced to use some other hardware vendor. If you want to get serious about having people develop for you, you have to make it easy for developers, and starting with 'Once you buy one of our new laptops' is probably not the best way to encourage folk to wet their toes.
actually, I haven't paraded around a degree, I haven't mentioned what I have and what I don't have. What I *have* paraded around is *experience*. And *that* *is* relevant to the discussion. Until you've moved out of the short-sighted seat of a pizza-munching troll dev in a someone's basement somewhere, you don't realize what a **royal** pain in the *ss it is to do real configuration management. After a dev has had to do CM or QA they seem to stop bitching about how few hardware platforms they are restricted to by the PM/CM/QA people.My point, that you have missed once again, is that Apple is doing a pretty decent job of controlling the hardware platform so that the software platform can run reliably. You seem rather bitter just because the Hackintosh community found holes in beta implementations of OS X (I include myself in that category) and you're sore that you can't run the OS on your hardware anymore. And you know why you're mad? Because Apple has decided that the cost of including your system and trying to support the myriad configurations that are possible in the intel PC world just isn't worth it. Yep. That's it. You're mad because Apple has made you insecure--you and your modded PC just don't fit into their business model. You're. Not. Worthwhile. It's an emotional response instead of a logical response. Anyways, now that we've figured out your core issue (be sure to let your therapist know...if you can afford one), lets move on in the real world of profits, and why your hackintosh just isn't worth the cost required to support it.And if you're devolving to name calling (nyah, nyah?) you show your absolute and complete ignorance by trying to compare a video game *system* to an Operating System. I haven't proven any point of yours, beyond that at the assembly level things can be hacked into other forms. You still miss the point of configuration management. I don't *want* OS X to have to support 1,000 video cards if it means that I have to sacrifice one iota of reliability or predictability. And that's part of the difference between a talented amateur and a computing professional. A professional looks at Total Cost--from development to implementation, to maintenance. Just because you *can* hack something together doesn't make it worth the cost of supporting. So throw some chains around the config so that people can't whine about how they aren't being supported after hacking your OS onto their PC. Because Apple is trying to create an integrated *SYSTEM* and not a bunch of parts cobbled together that "should" work, for the most part.The Video game reference, while completely misunderstood by you, still stands as valid. Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, etc all lock down hardware configurations in order to make a (mostly) reliable system that performs well (and hopefully makes them oodles of money). And that's why VGS ecospheres pertain to the discussion. While you may not want to develop for the 10% market that is OS X, (beyond noticing that a year ago you would have said 5% or less), there are people that realize that that "miniscule" market tends to be just as profitable even with the enigma of having a smaller slice of the overall pie. The *community* around the Macintosh platform (another parallel to the VGS market) tends to appreciate the developers that take the time out for their "little" platform. And the developers that take the time, money and energy to develop for that little platform have the opportunity to create apps that are more, well, creative and tend to be more reliable since they don't have to code for the slight differences of thousands of video cards, sound cards, etc. (mostly. That argument is growing less germane since people are upgrading and expanding systems via high powered serial busses and developers targeting OSX still have to deal with carbon vs cocoa, UB quirks, etc. But it's still nowhere near as bad as the PC ecosystem)So there are multiple parallels with the VGS market: 1. Configuration Management (with hardware "jumps" and planned obsolescence) 2. Reliability and Predictability of a "Platform" traded for ultimate flexibility 3. Communities that gather around the ecosystem that is created by an integrated "System". Not an OS, Not some hardware that meets half-a**ed specs that hopefully will work together, but an integrated, tested, configuration managed system.And the experience comment is also germane--in my experience (from baby developer to systems engineering to program/project management), the only people that *really* bitch about being shackled and limited to a particular platform or configuration are people that have never developed for a "large" (more than 5 developers + systems engineering & QA + mgmt) project either because they're new or they're "lone wolf" developers. Sorry to so obviously point you out as inexperienced in "real" development; you're just providing another example of an ill-tempered, mal-adjusted person occasionally slinging out some code that *at best* signifies an amateur trying to be a professional. Your whole argument of developing for a Macintosh *System* is invalid anyways. If you really cared about development audience, you'd be developing in something x-plat that sacrifices power for portability. There's plenty of ruby, python, and java apps out there for any developer that's really concerned about developing for the "10% market". So, through this little exposition in prose, we've recognized your whine for being the mewlings of an inexperienced dev, exposed your core emotional instabilities, knocked down your strawman about x-plat development, and hopefully enlightened the bemused audience about the fact that support and maintenance change the balance of the cost benefit analysis.Huh, another thought just hit me--Microsoft's only forays into producing integrated hardware and software *systems* are *much* more locked down than anything on an Apple system. But when either company produces an integrated *system* they both take the same approach to reduce part counts, support and maintenance costs, and user "sku confusion". And even with being completely different markets and systems, they take the same approach. Huh, imagine that. Yes, at heart I'm a **Systems Engineer**. Kicking dev butts into thinking beyond the edge of their keyboards and monitors for many years.
Yeah uh, you're not feeling like you wasted your money adinb, considering that XCode, just like VS2k5, allows you to change every single key binding?<a class="user" href="http://nevyn.nu/img/xcode-keybindings.png">http://nevyn.nu/img/xcode-keybindings.png</a>And AppleOSuX, I really don't envy someone so engrossed with bashing a platform they don't even know that they keep that 'adventure' as a nick name.
Mono supports more than half of the changes from 1.1 to 20. The 1.2 version is misleading since it is not meant to say anything other than it is somewhere between the two. Most medium sized apps will work though, the real problems come with things that use native Windows stuff (for example there was one app that used an IE widget that wasn't part of .Net).What Miguel De Icazas team has found is that people are only really using about 10% of the .Net API so while it has a huge API space it is more than possible to quickly get most things working. The real issue is patents though, while they are going to take some risks they won't be stupid about it. I can't see them including something like the Ribbon any time soon thought we are starting to see stuff like win forms.
rogerstrongMar 20, 2007
@burty89:Word games. I didn't say that it *only* ran Unix.The point is, for the fellow suggesting Linux instead, Apple is way ahead of him. They were running Unix way back in in the days of the Lisa - the Microsoft version that Linux is modelled after.(I know, I know, that seems so *wrong*, but look it up.)
grumpyrainMar 21, 2007
... Or at least sell me a version so I can legally run it in a VMWare session like every other OS. In the real world, you can't just throw away your desktop because you are forced to use some other hardware vendor. If you want to get serious about having people develop for you, you have to make it easy for developers, and starting with 'Once you buy one of our new laptops' is probably not the best way to encourage folk to wet their toes.
adinbMar 21, 2007
actually, I haven't paraded around a degree, I haven't mentioned what I have and what I don't have. What I *have* paraded around is *experience*. And *that* *is* relevant to the discussion. Until you've moved out of the short-sighted seat of a pizza-munching troll dev in a someone's basement somewhere, you don't realize what a **royal** pain in the *ss it is to do real configuration management. After a dev has had to do CM or QA they seem to stop bitching about how few hardware platforms they are restricted to by the PM/CM/QA people.My point, that you have missed once again, is that Apple is doing a pretty decent job of controlling the hardware platform so that the software platform can run reliably. You seem rather bitter just because the Hackintosh community found holes in beta implementations of OS X (I include myself in that category) and you're sore that you can't run the OS on your hardware anymore. And you know why you're mad? Because Apple has decided that the cost of including your system and trying to support the myriad configurations that are possible in the intel PC world just isn't worth it. Yep. That's it. You're mad because Apple has made you insecure--you and your modded PC just don't fit into their business model. You're. Not. Worthwhile. It's an emotional response instead of a logical response. Anyways, now that we've figured out your core issue (be sure to let your therapist know...if you can afford one), lets move on in the real world of profits, and why your hackintosh just isn't worth the cost required to support it.And if you're devolving to name calling (nyah, nyah?) you show your absolute and complete ignorance by trying to compare a video game *system* to an Operating System. I haven't proven any point of yours, beyond that at the assembly level things can be hacked into other forms. You still miss the point of configuration management. I don't *want* OS X to have to support 1,000 video cards if it means that I have to sacrifice one iota of reliability or predictability. And that's part of the difference between a talented amateur and a computing professional. A professional looks at Total Cost--from development to implementation, to maintenance. Just because you *can* hack something together doesn't make it worth the cost of supporting. So throw some chains around the config so that people can't whine about how they aren't being supported after hacking your OS onto their PC. Because Apple is trying to create an integrated *SYSTEM* and not a bunch of parts cobbled together that "should" work, for the most part.The Video game reference, while completely misunderstood by you, still stands as valid. Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, etc all lock down hardware configurations in order to make a (mostly) reliable system that performs well (and hopefully makes them oodles of money). And that's why VGS ecospheres pertain to the discussion. While you may not want to develop for the 10% market that is OS X, (beyond noticing that a year ago you would have said 5% or less), there are people that realize that that "miniscule" market tends to be just as profitable even with the enigma of having a smaller slice of the overall pie. The *community* around the Macintosh platform (another parallel to the VGS market) tends to appreciate the developers that take the time out for their "little" platform. And the developers that take the time, money and energy to develop for that little platform have the opportunity to create apps that are more, well, creative and tend to be more reliable since they don't have to code for the slight differences of thousands of video cards, sound cards, etc. (mostly. That argument is growing less germane since people are upgrading and expanding systems via high powered serial busses and developers targeting OSX still have to deal with carbon vs cocoa, UB quirks, etc. But it's still nowhere near as bad as the PC ecosystem)So there are multiple parallels with the VGS market: 1. Configuration Management (with hardware "jumps" and planned obsolescence) 2. Reliability and Predictability of a "Platform" traded for ultimate flexibility 3. Communities that gather around the ecosystem that is created by an integrated "System". Not an OS, Not some hardware that meets half-a**ed specs that hopefully will work together, but an integrated, tested, configuration managed system.And the experience comment is also germane--in my experience (from baby developer to systems engineering to program/project management), the only people that *really* bitch about being shackled and limited to a particular platform or configuration are people that have never developed for a "large" (more than 5 developers + systems engineering & QA + mgmt) project either because they're new or they're "lone wolf" developers. Sorry to so obviously point you out as inexperienced in "real" development; you're just providing another example of an ill-tempered, mal-adjusted person occasionally slinging out some code that *at best* signifies an amateur trying to be a professional. Your whole argument of developing for a Macintosh *System* is invalid anyways. If you really cared about development audience, you'd be developing in something x-plat that sacrifices power for portability. There's plenty of ruby, python, and java apps out there for any developer that's really concerned about developing for the "10% market". So, through this little exposition in prose, we've recognized your whine for being the mewlings of an inexperienced dev, exposed your core emotional instabilities, knocked down your strawman about x-plat development, and hopefully enlightened the bemused audience about the fact that support and maintenance change the balance of the cost benefit analysis.Huh, another thought just hit me--Microsoft's only forays into producing integrated hardware and software *systems* are *much* more locked down than anything on an Apple system. But when either company produces an integrated *system* they both take the same approach to reduce part counts, support and maintenance costs, and user "sku confusion". And even with being completely different markets and systems, they take the same approach. Huh, imagine that. Yes, at heart I'm a **Systems Engineer**. Kicking dev butts into thinking beyond the edge of their keyboards and monitors for many years.
lateralusMar 21, 2007
no xCode for intel macs?lame
nevynMar 21, 2007
Yeah uh, you're not feeling like you wasted your money adinb, considering that XCode, just like VS2k5, allows you to change every single key binding?<a class="user" href="http://nevyn.nu/img/xcode-keybindings.png">http://nevyn.nu/img/xcode-keybindings.png</a>And AppleOSuX, I really don't envy someone so engrossed with bashing a platform they don't even know that they keep that 'adventure' as a nick name.
gmorganMar 21, 2007
Mono supports more than half of the changes from 1.1 to 20. The 1.2 version is misleading since it is not meant to say anything other than it is somewhere between the two. Most medium sized apps will work though, the real problems come with things that use native Windows stuff (for example there was one app that used an IE widget that wasn't part of .Net).What Miguel De Icazas team has found is that people are only really using about 10% of the .Net API so while it has a huge API space it is more than possible to quickly get most things working. The real issue is patents though, while they are going to take some risks they won't be stupid about it. I can't see them including something like the Ribbon any time soon thought we are starting to see stuff like win forms.
trilithMay 16, 2007
Doubtful info... Hard to beleive.