Apple WWDC to focus on Leopard, web media, Windows converts

[syklee26]

i wonder if that means some improvement on .Mac......this has been by far the worst product Apple has available right now.

[FormerLurker]

First Post - Again!!





Deja Vu ???

[AppleInsider]

Mac OS X Leopard is just one of three primary focuses for the 2007 edition of Apple's developer conference, company officials say. This year's gathering will reportedly stress Internet content more than ever while also catering to a rising niche: Windows switchers.

Most expect the next version of Apple's operating system to take center stage at the San Francisco event, a fact already reflected in the company's promo banners around the Moscone Center. But the Mac maker this year will be reaching out to some new audiences, including those who have never written code for the Mac.

Apple's attention in recent years has largely stuck to its base of loyal developers, and typically only sees outsiders who are new to development or are used to writing for Linux and other open development platforms. During WWDC 2006, however, the company noticed that roughly a third of its entire conference audience consisted of first-time developers coming from closed-source backgrounds -- a pleasant surprise, according to Apple's Worldwide Developer Relations head Ron Okamoto.

"Traditionally, we've seen lots of young people, coming out of college, or perhaps with open source backgrounds, getting introduced to the Mac," he told Paul Thurrott over at the SuperSite for Windows. "But now we're seeing people who have Windows and UNIX coding experience getting on the Mac in ever-bigger numbers."

The unprecedented shift has driven Apple to create session tracks it would never have considered possible until now. While Monday for most Mac developers will have a light schedule -- highlighted primarily by a keynote from Apple CEO Steve Jobs in the morning -- newcomers to Mac development will be consumed with Immersion Monday, a whole-day program built explicitly to help coders that may not grasp even the basics of writing Mac software.

Other sessions during the week will help tackle more specific aspects, with the ultimate aim of laying the groundwork for those who might have been lost in transitioning from .NET or other outside platforms in earlier years. "When [newcomers are] done Friday, they'll have gotten a nice jump start to getting around the Mac," Okamoto claims.

Just as new is an emphasis on the proliferation of online audio and video, according to the SuperSite's report. A new track, named Content and Media, is tailored just to those developers who need to focus on getting their media to the Internet. Though offline production will be covered, most tracks will focus on blending Apple's latest software with the web -- ranging from web-only AJAX and WebObjects code to the mixed-media Dashboard in Mac OS X or even crafting websites made just for the iPhone.

Leopard is set to give these content producers an edge regardless of how much they use the Internet, but the key will be unifying normally separate worlds. This is a specialty for Apple, Okamoto says. "The iTunes Store, and some things we do on our developer Web site, can point the way," he told the SuperSite.

No matter the background of the developer, the goal for this year's WWDC will be to live up to the conference's "worldwide" title by making the Mac's presence felt outside of familiar territory, both figuratively and literally: in addition to coders from rival platforms, Apple hopes to draw in guests from over 44 countries and foster growth beyond the company's American home.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[ascii]

Sounds like they're overreaching to me. Just focus on the basics and the rest will take care of itself.

[DaveGee]

Originally Posted by ascii

Sounds like they're overreaching to me. Just focus on the basics and the rest will take care of itself.

Great... but where were YOU when we held the WWDC planning sessions?!?!

[macslut]

PodTech, who will be podcasting the Steve Jobs podcast is suggesting that Apple will finally be getting into gaming and encouraging developers along these lines:
http://www.podtech.net/home/3282/app...one-more-thing

[Neil Anderson]

Developers, developers, developers!

[Bageljoey]

Originally Posted by Neil Anderson

Developers, developers, developers!

Dont do that! It sends cold shivers down my spine every time...

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by ascii

Sounds like they're overreaching to me. Just focus on the basics and the rest will take care of itself.

They've been trying that for 30 years and the basics have traditionally barely paid the bills.

[physguy]

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

They've been trying that for 30 years and the basics have traditionally barely paid the bills.

Hence their $100+ billion valuation and $12.5+ billion in cash.

[Bageljoey]

Originally Posted by physguy

Hence their $100+ billion valuation and $12.5+ billion in cash.

Yeah, try living on that!

But I am assuming that BenRoethig was indicating that it was the not basics (little things like the iPod)--things that were not part of the core OS and computer market that helped Apple to take off.

Imagine if someone warned Apple to focus on the basics 6 years ago and they listened...


'Course, I would say that Apple has been rather good, lately, at focusing on more than one thing.
If they continue their rise through the computer, the consumer electronic, and the software markets it will be a testement to their ability to not only focus on several different areas but also to integrate them in ways that have never been seen--or even considered--before.

[Johnny Mozzarella]

The best way Apple could fix .Mac is to hire 37 signals to re-do it.
Those guys understand web services.
Simple, practical, effective tools that are worth $99/year.

[mgv]

I think its fantastic.

I have limited skills in coding, but would love to write some front end apps for my web server. I'd love to see what apple has to match visual studio.

I know this is really dumb compared to alot of developers, but these sessions are very valuable to me. I'm in the silly position of using my mac for most things but running windows to develop software, and I'd like to change that.

Anyway, just the thought of getting to the WWDC is exciting me now. I guess every aspirant programmer has to travel to mecca at least once in their lives....

Michael

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by mgv

I think its fantastic.

I have limited skills in coding, but would love to write some front end apps for my web server. I'd love to see what apple has to match visual studio.

Xcode.

It's free. And it came with your computer. If you want to find out more, head over to http://developer.apple.com/products/online.html and sign up for a free developer membership - this gets you access to all the online docs, sample code, etc. What you have on your installer DVDs is what was current when your machine shipped, but the online site is where you get upgrades and more current information.

Xcode 3.0 will ship with 10.5, and it promises to be a huge jump.

I know this is really dumb compared to alot of developers, but these sessions are very valuable to me. I'm in the silly position of using my mac for most things but running windows to develop software, and I'd like to change that.

Anyway, just the thought of getting to the WWDC is exciting me now. I guess every aspirant programmer has to travel to mecca at least once in their lives....

Oh yas.

[mdriftmeyer]

It's rather amazing that WebObjects gets mentioned by AppleInsider from that track of Content Media when the track itself has no mention of the Enterprise Product.

[jasenj1]

As a professional coder, I hope they revamp XCode and make it more beginner (to the Mac) friendly. I primarily do Java stuff for a living and can get around in Eclipse pretty well, and have even done a bit of Visual Studio work and old school C in the distant past.

This past year I joined an open source project on the Mac and had to learn XCode. Wow. What a mess. Some things are great (Interface Builder, Quartz Composer), but I found the core XCode environment to be be indecipherable. There are a zillion dialog boxes and preference panes with pages and pages of free text boxes. Changes made in the GUI don't get reflected in the text based preferences and vice versa. There appears to be a bazillion configuration and compile options (again with many entries just being blank text boxes). I never could get the debugging, tracing, and watches working.

I think the tool definitely shows a STRONG Unix background and leaning, but the experience is not pulled together with the polish and flow of Apple's consumer (and pro) applications. They definitely need to apply some of their human interaction expertise to XCode.

- Jasen.

[BWhaler]

Originally Posted by Neil Anderson

Developers, developers, developers!

This never gets old. Truly as funny as the day the sweaty monkey boy video hit the internet.

Poor Balmer. He's become an internet joke.

[tsvisser]

I am a programmer primarily for embedded control systems, but have been looking with interest in getting into the 21st century for more traditional IDE's. I have looked at XCode and written a few simple applications with some success, but am sort of looking hard at becoming more proficient at FLASH and AS3.0. Since I work mostly with UI design and have a smattering of target platforms to compile to, this seems to make the most sense to me. Most of what I do is fairly high level, from a "system level" perspective, so I am happy to leave the "power" of doing things like handling my own garbage collection and low level operations to the FLASH virtual runtime, even though there is probably a performance hit in doing so.

I am very excited to hear the status of iPhone with respect to FLASH support. The iPhone or perhaps a non-cell phone version in the form of a similiar video iPod will likely become my primary target platform.

[ascii]

Originally Posted by jasenj1

Some things are great (Interface Builder, Quartz Composer), but I found the core XCode environment to be be indecipherable. There are a zillion dialog boxes and preference panes with pages and pages of free text boxes.

That's how I feel. It's Apple's style to have lots of these little "Inspectors" everywhere instead of putting the settings in one place. It might be a great pure OO paradigm to have the properties with their individual objects, but from a usability POV it's sh*t.

[Seeker1]

In the interview with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, didn't Steve mention that they were going to make .Mac improvements very soon? Perhaps he will be announcing something at the WWDC.

Any word on a live stream of this? I wish they would continue the live streams of keynotes, because it is always fun to stay up in the middle of the night and watch it over here in Japan. Sure, I feel sleepy the next day, and maybe the announcements weren't worth it, but every now any then, there's something really cool. "Just one more thing..."

[melgross]

Originally Posted by ascii

That's how I feel. It's Apple's style to have lots of these little "Inspectors" everywhere instead of putting the settings in one place. It might be a great pure OO paradigm to have the properties with their individual objects, but from a usability POV it's sh*t.

You guys aren't the only ones. Adobe's engineers said the same thing.

XCode has been criticized as being difficult, and incomplete.

I know that there are defenders of it that will rise up and flame me for saying it, but it's true. Apple's OS X tools are simply not as developed as those for Windows.

[Kickaha]

IIRC, 3.0 is the first ground-up rewrite since it was at NeXT.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by Neil Anderson

Developers, developers, developers!

Advertisers! Advertisers! Advertisers! Advertisers!

[melgross]

Originally Posted by Kickaha

IIRC, 3.0 is the first ground-up rewrite since it was at NeXT.

Let's hope it's a major improvement then.

[ThunkDifferent.com]

i hope they do update .mac, the title of the article refers to internet content as a focus, could mean google.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by auxio

It's quite an interesting position: you prefer the use of Intel's compiler over a 3rd party one, yet you don't prefer the use of the OS maker's IDE over a 3rd party one. My guess is that your position is pro-business motivated since both gcc and Xcode are free tools which have cut into the markets of commercial tools. Whereas I prefer tools based on a balance between quality and longevity (regardless of being free or commercial).

I'd personally avoid Intel's compiler unless I needed some particular feature only it had. Just in case Apple chooses to switch to a different CPU at some point. gcc supports so many CPUs that I see it being the compiler with the most longevity at this point.

No, I don't care where it comes from.

But GCC has had plenty of complaints too. Intels compilers are simply better suited to their chips' performance than GCC is.

I like XCode, I just think it lacks too much. I'm not going to get into details, because, as I've said, I don't program much these days, so I don't have as much hands on with it as I could have.

But from reading what others have said over time, and my own little experience with it, the only conclusion i can come to, is that it needs a lot of work.

If you like it, that's great.

[mgv]

Originally Posted by Kickaha

Xcode.

It's free. And it came with your computer. If you want to find out more, head over to http://developer.apple.com/products/online.html and sign up for a free developer membership - this gets you access to all the online docs, sample code, etc. What you have on your installer DVDs is what was current when your machine shipped, but the online site is where you get upgrades and more current information.

Xcode 3.0 will ship with 10.5, and it promises to be a huge jump.



Oh yas.

Actually, I'm a registered developer now - got it at the same time as I registered for macworld.

But so far X-Code seems powerful but not entirely user friendly...

Michael

[Kickaha]

No arguments there. I can't wait to see what 3.0 has.

[SpinDrift]

Originally Posted by BWhaler

This never gets old. Truly as funny as the day the sweaty monkey boy video hit the internet.

Poor Balmer. He's become an internet joke.

He's always been a joke. Poor fella was bald before Bill Gates grew hair on his down belows.

[SpinDrift]

Originally Posted by ThunkDifferent.com

i hope they do update .mac, the title of the article refers to internet content as a focus, could mean google.

Steve did say in his D5 interview that Apple are working on bringing .mac up to scratch. But as far as internet content goes, I think WWDC will be encouraging developers to build more advanced online applications, or applications that make use of the web more effectivly. Don't forget WWDC is a week long, a lot of people confuse WWDC with just the opening keynote.

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by physguy

Hence their $100+ billion valuation and $12.5+ billion in cash.

Actually, when they focused on the basics they were pretty much broke. That money came from the more marketable iBook/Macbook and the iPod.

[IQatEdo]

Originally Posted by Neil Anderson

Developers, developers, developers!

Hey Steve - you do keep tabs on the Mac!

[physguy]

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

Actually, when they focused on the basics they were pretty much broke. That money came from the more marketable iBook/Macbook and the iPod.

Cash has never really been Apple's problem

Cash on Hand
Year Millions
2006 $10,110
2005 $8,261
2004 $5,464
2003 $4,566
2002 $4,337
2001 $4,336
2000 $4,027
1999 $3,226
1998 $2,300
1997 $1,459
1996 $1,745
1995 $952
1994 $1,258
1993 $892
1992 $1,435
1991 $893
1990 $997

[auxio]

Originally Posted by melgross

You guys aren't the only ones. Adobe's engineers said the same thing.

XCode has been criticized as being difficult, and incomplete.

I know that there are defenders of it that will rise up and flame me for saying it, but it's true. Apple's OS X tools are simply not as developed as those for Windows.

I'm one of the few developers who uses/develops with an almost identical codebase on Mac, Windows, and Linux, (very large -- at least a few thousand files) and I can honestly say that Visual Studio .NET 2003 (haven't upgraded to 2005 yet) is just as incomprehensible (and even moreso in a number of ways).

I mean, people talk about the confusing/hidden settings in XCode, try changing the settings in Visual Studio. First you have the multitude of global settings in Tools->Options... menu (comparible to the Xcode->Preferences... menu, but not half as nice looking or organized). Then you have another multitude of settings when you right-click your solution and select Properties (about the same as XCode when you right-click on a project and select Get Info).

Also, for those who don't know about it: in XCode, switch to the All-in-one view in the preferences. It makes a world of difference.

In Visual Studio, it seems to be a crapshoot whether the drop-down box with the list of functions in your class will actually work or not. Ditto for code-completion. Both of these functions work perfectly for me in XCode all the time (the class function dropdown box is especially nice since you can put #pragma mark in your code and have the comments show up as a way to organize the functions).

One other thing I like better in XCode is when you have a lot of files open. Using the drop-down box with the list of files is a much better way to navigate than using the tabs at the top in Visual Studio (where your tab may be off the screen and so you have to scroll over to it).

And I much prefer Interface Builder to Visual Studio's Resource Editor/GUI builder (putting guidelines in by hand -- yuck).

About the only thing in Visual Studio I prefer is the debugger. XCode sometimes doesn't even give you a stack trace (I often have to re-run the program to get the stack trace). And sometimes the line of code it's stopped on doesn't match up with anything (I've had it stop at a blank line before -- wtf is that?). Visual Studio's debugger always works well (even going down into the assembly code when there's no source for a particular function).

Project settings will always be complicated due to the vast number of things you need control over, there's no way around that. Every IDE I've ever used is complicated when it comes to them (takes time to learn). Really, XCode isn't a bad IDE overall. I mainly find that it's whatever IDE developers spend the most time in which they tend to prefer (myself included).

[melgross]

Originally Posted by auxio

I'm one of the few developers who uses/develops with an almost identical codebase on Mac, Windows, and Linux, (very large -- at least a few thousand files) and I can honestly say that Visual Studio .NET 2003 (haven't upgraded to 2005 yet) is just as incomprehensible (and even moreso in a number of ways).

I mean, people talk about the confusing/hidden settings in XCode, try changing the settings in Visual Studio. First you have the multitude of global settings in Tools->Options... menu (comparible to the Xcode->Preferences... menu, but not half as nice looking or organized). Then you have another multitude of settings when you right-click your solution and select Properties (about the same as XCode when you right-click on a project and select Get Info).

Also, for those who don't know about it: in XCode, switch to the All-in-one view in the preferences. It makes a world of difference.

In Visual Studio, it seems to be a crapshoot whether the drop-down box with the list of functions in your class will actually work or not. Ditto for code-completion. Both of these functions work perfectly for me in XCode all the time (the class function dropdown box is especially nice since you can put #pragma mark in your code and have the comments show up as a way to organize the functions).

One other thing I like better in XCode is when you have a lot of files open. Using the drop-down box with the list of files is a much better way to navigate than using the tabs at the top in Visual Studio (where your tab may be off the screen and so you have to scroll over to it).

And I much prefer Interface Builder to Visual Studio's Resource Editor/GUI builder (putting guidelines in by hand -- yuck).

About the only thing in Visual Studio I prefer is the debugger. XCode sometimes doesn't even give you a stack trace (I often have to re-run the program to get the stack trace). And sometimes the line of code it's stopped on doesn't match up with anything (I've had it stop at a blank line before -- wtf is that?). Visual Studio's debugger always works well (even going down into the assembly code when there's no source for a particular function).

Project settings will always be complicated due to the vast number of things you need control over, there's no way around that. Every IDE I've ever used is complicated when it comes to them (takes time to learn). Really, XCode isn't a bad IDE overall. I mainly find that it's whatever IDE developers spend the most time in which they tend to prefer (myself included).

The difference is that you don't HAVE to develop in Visual Studio.

[auxio]

Originally Posted by melgross

The difference is that you don't HAVE to develop in Visual Studio.

No, but I'm sure that it's the similar to Mac in the sense that, whenever MS develops a new technology (eg. C# or some of the new Aero UI enhancements), support in you're 3rd party IDE is going to lag (or possibly never come depending on how specialized the audience is).

In my experience, I've found that it's always better in the long run to go with the tools provided by the company which created the OS (Linux aside of course). Though I can't speak for Mac OS prior to X. I've heard that CodeWarrior was the way to go, which seems to be where all the animosity towards XCode stems from for various reasons (not all technical).

[melgross]

Originally Posted by auxio

No, but I'm sure that it's the similar to Mac in the sense that, whenever MS develops a new technology (eg. C# or some of the new Aero UI enhancements), support in you're 3rd party IDE is going to lag (or possibly never come depending on how specialized the audience is).

In my experience, I've found that it's always better in the long run to go with the tools provided by the company which created the OS (Linux aside of course). Though I can't speak for Mac OS prior to X. I've heard that CodeWarrior was the way to go, which seems to be where all the animosity towards XCode stems from for various reasons (not all technical).

That's personal preference.

Codewarrior was very robust. XCode is still working on it.

[auxio]

Originally Posted by melgross

That's personal preference.

That's speaking from having used 5 different IDEs and 5 different programming languages with a multitude of development frameworks/libraries (some bleeding-edge, some well-estabilished) on the same project over the past 10 years. Technology changes, company directions change, requirements change. If your tools can't keep up with your needs, it's a real pain to keep switching.

I only use 3rd party IDEs when developing in OS-independent programming languages/platforms like Java, Python, etc. Because in those cases, there's no incentive for the OS makers to provide good support (and from my experience, they don't).

Codewarrior was very robust. XCode is still working on it.

I'd have agreed with you up until about a year ago. But now I'd say that XCode is as good as any other IDE I've used. Not that there still isn't room for improvement, but that's true for any IDE.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by auxio

That's speaking from having used 5 different IDEs and 5 different programming languages with a multitude of development frameworks/libraries (some bleeding-edge, some well-estabilished) on the same project over the past 10 years. Technology changes, company directions change, requirements change. If your tools can't keep up with your needs, it's a real pain to keep switching.

I only use 3rd party IDEs when developing in OS-independent programming languages/platforms like Java, Python, etc. Because in those cases, there's no incentive for the OS makers to provide good support (and from my experience, they don't).
I'd have agreed with you up until about a year ago. But now I'd say that XCode is as good as any other IDE I've used. Not that there still isn't room for improvement, but that's true for any IDE.

As I've said elsewhere, I haven't done any serious programming in years, but from what I've seen of it, it has a way to go to get to where other programming tools were. With all of the complaints from the big developers, I would have to say that something is amiss.

[auxio]

Originally Posted by melgross

As I've said elsewhere, I haven't done any serious programming in years, but from what I've seen of it, it has a way to go to get to where other programming tools were. With all of the complaints from the big developers, I would have to say that something is amiss.

I think it's mainly the Adobe developers who are whining. And it's likely because of a couple reasons:

1) They've been developing in the same environment for about 15 years now and I can only imagine how much leverage they had with Metrowerks to get it customized in every way they needed. I'm sure Apple worked with them a lot as well, but Apple is a much bigger company and has other priorities.

While I agree that Xcode is likely much less mature than Codewarrior was/is (haven't used it, so I can't say), and it was a bit flakey until 2.1 or so, the underlying tools it uses (gcc and gdb) are much more mature and powerful if you take the time to learn them and find out about all the supporting tools developed around them over the years by UNIX developers. So it's not like there weren't ways to work around Xcode's limitations if you needed to until it came of age (which I consider it has).

2) The project managers had a hard time trying to convince management why they need to invest a big chunk of money in something which they don't understand, and which end-users won't readily fork over extra money for (since they don't understand it either). So this added to Adobe developers' stress load -- hence the need to vent frustrations on Xcode.

As I said before, it's a pain to switch development environments. I see (and hear) the developers who've worked on one platform for the majority of their career go through pain when learning a new platform all the time.