XCode has come a long way since iPhone developers came on board. I've been noticing a lot of little tweaks in the last year (and even the latest beta) that are really making it compete nicely with the environments you mentioned. Hence the arguable statement makes sense to me, but only over the past two years.
I'm sure you're right it is still evolving. Now if only it would evolve in to a Visual Studio clone.
No, they won't. This is just typical Apple secrecy. If you remember, there was literally NO ONE outside of Apple that had their hands on iPhone before 6 PM EST on June 29, 2007.
This is typical for Apple. I remember before the iPhone was released there was an interview with both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates and durning the interview they asked Jobs if he was using an iPhone backstage and he said yes but he refused to even take it out of his pocket durning the interview. I often wonder if even Bill Gates got a look at it backstage...lol.
However I think the iPad is a different situation and at this point with only two weeks to go and everyone having a good idea about the iPad and what it has to offer it doesn't make much sense to make it hard on developers. If anything Apple should be doing somewhat controlled leaks at this point to raise the pre release hype.
The tech industry is simply too big to make it too hard on developers they will simple go write their software for another product. This is what happened with Sony and the PS3 and why the PS3 over time had to cut its price big time. The product was priced high and Sony was making it hard for gaming companies to code so they simply just coded for the XBOX Wii and PC.
Are the physical specs still a secret? For those developers who need a physical object to determine the best placement of fingers, thumbs and such, couldn't Apple just provide them with the specs. Developers could then build their own mockups (or cut out of cardboard as one did).
Apple has turned exactly into the Big Brother in the 1984 commercial it mocked. Funny how the Karma chameleon rears his head.
Apple is not a an oppressive government that controls your every move. They are a company with specific rules and standards. You can enter and leave the Apple walled garden to your heart's content.
Apple doesn't govern your life. Your government does. I'd worry about *that* organization way before I'd worry about a tech company out to sell some products.
Apple has always been this secretive. If consumers and developers were unhappy, they'd go somewhere else. But that's not happening.
I don't see what Apple of 2010 has to do with IBM of 1984.
Absolutely nothing, which is why he posted it. Apple has a larger valuation and makes more money than IBM yet for some reason he thinks the Apple 1984 marketing itself as the innovative underdog still needs to maintain this "little guy" persona. It's illogical.
PS: Anyone know IBM's market cap for this day in 1984?
edit: IBM has 1.3B stocks out with two 2:1 splits for 325M shares back in 1984. AT $28 a share that is $9.1B.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
But surely the major devs, such as Microsoft, who would have the resources to copy the iPad, would have received one? They are giving it to their worst enemies and then demanding they don't share, which is a bit moot by that point.
Edit: or maybe that's the point. To get all the people who are capable of copying it, signing these 10 page contracts up front? Very clever if there are later legal disputes.
For the most part what they've seen in the demo and on the website is all they need to copy. They've surely gone though iPhone OS by this point so seeing the redesigned UI for a 10" tablet and iWork for a 10" tablet is more than enough to know that is how it's done. I'm sure WinPh7 has already been split off to make a tablet version of the OS.
The contracts aspect is interesting and clever but it sounds a bit too conspiracy theory to me at this point to accept as likely. The easier answer is that the companies they loaned the HW too, under lock-and-key, are big players that will help Apple make more iPad sales if they're offering apps at or near launch.
So what everyone still gets the SDK they just can't physically hold the iPad, I really don't see the huge deal, aww boo hoo we didn't get to play with one before everyone else.
:-) Well, they're going to look silly if the product turns out to not be that good.
The article said XCode is "one of the most complete and cutting-edge development environments offered by a modern day high-tech firm" - I would say this is somewhat of an overstatement. It is certainly one of the best dev environments for a mobile device, but when it comes to desktop computer development, both Microsoft's Visual Studio and the open source Eclipse are quicker to learn and easier to use.
Generally, and in this case too, "quicker to learn" and "easier to use" means they aren't cutting edge.
They can't go together. XCode is more cutting edge than the slow and clunky Visual Studio and Eclipse IDE's though.
I work with VS 2005/2008 all day at work and they are painfully slow, and half the time the "Properties" being displayed aren't even for the correct control.
It's always great losing a couple of hours work in VS too just because you accidentally switched to and edited in source view whilst the designer was still in template view.
[QUOTE=ascii;1593660]But surely the major devs, such as Microsoft, who would have the resources to copy the iPad, would have received one? They are giving it to their worst enemies and then demanding they don't share, which is a bit moot by that point.
Yes, the delays are days and weeks not months and years. This is obviously good marketing on Apples part. Each surprise is yet another round of world wide free front page press. Come on.. this is like marketing 001..
And when didn't those most in the "know" act first on newness? The fart app can wait a few weeks can't it?
What i find interesting is that i haven't seen anything from Pogue in the NYTimes. His reports are mainstream .. maybe i missed something he wrote? If not, he is part of the plot to start off with a bang at the Times with this appliance.
Mean while the latest from "picture to a movie" presentations from Penguin, Wired and others represents a real interest in visual tools to tell media stories as efficient and multidimensional. This also is an enormous wake up to Media as a re-set in economics where they can put enough value into their work to get people to pay for it.
The recent penguin presentation has just 250,000 hits on utube.. hardly a mass market grasp of what is coming I would say! The point is that it is too early to do much more than imagine what this appliance will do in the world. I think it is going to be massively big.. and will go through its growing pains just like other disruptive products do when they hit the streets.
This is a very well organized market disruption to media - that will become important in enough eyes to proceed nicely in 2010 before really taking off in 2011.. Of course there are the constant pundits that think it is nothing more than a touch-GRANDE.. That is what makes it interesting.. But i haven't read anything pundits are saying that has much at all to do with where the ipad is heading .. just on its own merits and nothing more. In consumer electronics, the ipad is already a hit. Pre-exit polls before delivery of a device on order are an obvious indicator.
Funny that for all their secrecy, people know how the secrecy works and information still gets out. I am sure there are some details that will never see the light of day however....
Apple is doing this exactly right. We need to be secret so that nobody knows.
So that nobody knows what? The iPad has been annoucned. It's been used by thousands - albeit in a limited fashion at a trade show. Why is Apple still acting like the device is a big secret?
The whole premise of this article as exaggerated by its title is silly.
Developers aren't being handicapped by Apple's secrecy. They're simply being made to wait, like the rest of us, for a brand new product.
The small number that Apple trusts with actual machines are trusted for good and substantial reasons best known only to Apple.
There's no such thing as "some" security when it comes to a new product not yet released, so the line has to be drawn, and it has to be a very firm and well-defined line, with dramatically different qualifications on either side of it.
It's simply a matter of time--a mere 15 days--before these "poor neglected" developers will have their own units to play with--worst case, 45 days or so before they get the 3G models.
That's certainly not worth the risk for Apple in handing out pre-release units.
As someone who is fully aware of the reality of Big Brother, or what it actually translates to in the modern world, I cannot agree that Apple is there yet.
Well, if we talk about what the book 1984 was about, Apple can never get there. 1984 was about the GOVERNMENT forcibly intruding into every aspect of our life. Apple is a private company, not the government. Since we have a choice not to deal with Apple and it has no governmental authority, it can't get to "1984".
It bundles a simulator for Macs that displays applications in windows that mimic the displays screens of iPhones, iPods and iPads, substituting a mouse cursor for the user's finger.
Guess it would be too much trouble then for Apple to port App Store apps to Mac's/Dashboard since it's 90% of the way there anyway.
Most of the App Store apps are crap, but it would be nice to have most of the good ones running on all of one's Apple devices, also there could be some auto-syncing going on there too when they get into range of each other.
Of course if what I propose requires future Mac's to be closed ecosystem devices like the iPad, then they can go to hell.
Comments
haha, it's like a spy ring. I wonder if they have assassins too.
And his name is Moshe. When Moshe has been dispatched by SJ you are as good as dead.
XCode has come a long way since iPhone developers came on board. I've been noticing a lot of little tweaks in the last year (and even the latest beta) that are really making it compete nicely with the environments you mentioned. Hence the arguable statement makes sense to me, but only over the past two years.
I'm sure you're right it is still evolving. Now if only it would evolve in to a Visual Studio clone.
No, they won't. This is just typical Apple secrecy. If you remember, there was literally NO ONE outside of Apple that had their hands on iPhone before 6 PM EST on June 29, 2007.
This is typical for Apple. I remember before the iPhone was released there was an interview with both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates and durning the interview they asked Jobs if he was using an iPhone backstage and he said yes but he refused to even take it out of his pocket durning the interview. I often wonder if even Bill Gates got a look at it backstage...lol.
However I think the iPad is a different situation and at this point with only two weeks to go and everyone having a good idea about the iPad and what it has to offer it doesn't make much sense to make it hard on developers. If anything Apple should be doing somewhat controlled leaks at this point to raise the pre release hype.
The tech industry is simply too big to make it too hard on developers they will simple go write their software for another product. This is what happened with Sony and the PS3 and why the PS3 over time had to cut its price big time. The product was priced high and Sony was making it hard for gaming companies to code so they simply just coded for the XBOX Wii and PC.
Apple has turned exactly into the Big Brother in the 1984 commercial it mocked. Funny how the Karma chameleon rears his head.
Apple is not a an oppressive government that controls your every move. They are a company with specific rules and standards. You can enter and leave the Apple walled garden to your heart's content.
Apple doesn't govern your life. Your government does. I'd worry about *that* organization way before I'd worry about a tech company out to sell some products.
Apple has always been this secretive. If consumers and developers were unhappy, they'd go somewhere else. But that's not happening.
I don't see what Apple of 2010 has to do with IBM of 1984.
Absolutely nothing, which is why he posted it. Apple has a larger valuation and makes more money than IBM yet for some reason he thinks the Apple 1984 marketing itself as the innovative underdog still needs to maintain this "little guy" persona. It's illogical.
PS: Anyone know IBM's market cap for this day in 1984?
edit: IBM has 1.3B stocks out with two 2:1 splits for 325M shares back in 1984. AT $28 a share that is $9.1B.
But surely the major devs, such as Microsoft, who would have the resources to copy the iPad, would have received one? They are giving it to their worst enemies and then demanding they don't share, which is a bit moot by that point.
Edit: or maybe that's the point. To get all the people who are capable of copying it, signing these 10 page contracts up front? Very clever if there are later legal disputes.
For the most part what they've seen in the demo and on the website is all they need to copy. They've surely gone though iPhone OS by this point so seeing the redesigned UI for a 10" tablet and iWork for a 10" tablet is more than enough to know that is how it's done. I'm sure WinPh7 has already been split off to make a tablet version of the OS.
The contracts aspect is interesting and clever but it sounds a bit too conspiracy theory to me at this point to accept as likely. The easier answer is that the companies they loaned the HW too, under lock-and-key, are big players that will help Apple make more iPad sales if they're offering apps at or near launch.
:-) Well, they're going to look silly if the product turns out to not be that good.
The article said XCode is "one of the most complete and cutting-edge development environments offered by a modern day high-tech firm" - I would say this is somewhat of an overstatement. It is certainly one of the best dev environments for a mobile device, but when it comes to desktop computer development, both Microsoft's Visual Studio and the open source Eclipse are quicker to learn and easier to use.
Generally, and in this case too, "quicker to learn" and "easier to use" means they aren't cutting edge.
They can't go together. XCode is more cutting edge than the slow and clunky Visual Studio and Eclipse IDE's though.
I work with VS 2005/2008 all day at work and they are painfully slow, and half the time the "Properties" being displayed aren't even for the correct control.
It's always great losing a couple of hours work in VS too just because you accidentally switched to and edited in source view whilst the designer was still in template view.
Yes, the delays are days and weeks not months and years. This is obviously good marketing on Apples part. Each surprise is yet another round of world wide free front page press. Come on.. this is like marketing 001..
And when didn't those most in the "know" act first on newness? The fart app can wait a few weeks can't it?
What i find interesting is that i haven't seen anything from Pogue in the NYTimes. His reports are mainstream .. maybe i missed something he wrote? If not, he is part of the plot to start off with a bang at the Times with this appliance.
Mean while the latest from "picture to a movie" presentations from Penguin, Wired and others represents a real interest in visual tools to tell media stories as efficient and multidimensional. This also is an enormous wake up to Media as a re-set in economics where they can put enough value into their work to get people to pay for it.
The recent penguin presentation has just 250,000 hits on utube.. hardly a mass market grasp of what is coming I would say! The point is that it is too early to do much more than imagine what this appliance will do in the world. I think it is going to be massively big.. and will go through its growing pains just like other disruptive products do when they hit the streets.
This is a very well organized market disruption to media - that will become important in enough eyes to proceed nicely in 2010 before really taking off in 2011.. Of course there are the constant pundits that think it is nothing more than a touch-GRANDE.. That is what makes it interesting.. But i haven't read anything pundits are saying that has much at all to do with where the ipad is heading .. just on its own merits and nothing more. In consumer electronics, the ipad is already a hit. Pre-exit polls before delivery of a device on order are an obvious indicator.
PS: Anyone know IBM's market cap for this day in 1984?
I would guess it was alot better then Apple market cap back in 1984.
Apple is doing this exactly right. We need to be secret so that nobody knows.
So that nobody knows what? The iPad has been annoucned. It's been used by thousands - albeit in a limited fashion at a trade show. Why is Apple still acting like the device is a big secret?
Maybe they are using the 4.0 OS.
Maybe...
Developers aren't being handicapped by Apple's secrecy. They're simply being made to wait, like the rest of us, for a brand new product.
The small number that Apple trusts with actual machines are trusted for good and substantial reasons best known only to Apple.
There's no such thing as "some" security when it comes to a new product not yet released, so the line has to be drawn, and it has to be a very firm and well-defined line, with dramatically different qualifications on either side of it.
It's simply a matter of time--a mere 15 days--before these "poor neglected" developers will have their own units to play with--worst case, 45 days or so before they get the 3G models.
That's certainly not worth the risk for Apple in handing out pre-release units.
As someone who is fully aware of the reality of Big Brother, or what it actually translates to in the modern world, I cannot agree that Apple is there yet.
Well, if we talk about what the book 1984 was about, Apple can never get there. 1984 was about the GOVERNMENT forcibly intruding into every aspect of our life. Apple is a private company, not the government. Since we have a choice not to deal with Apple and it has no governmental authority, it can't get to "1984".
Apple has turned exactly into the Big Brother in the 1984 commercial it mocked. Funny how the Karma chameleon rears his head.
Dude, think before you post.
The big Brother reference is a real reach, and Karma Chameleon is a reference to a closeted gay man. You're not making much sense as usual.
It bundles a simulator for Macs that displays applications in windows that mimic the displays screens of iPhones, iPods and iPads, substituting a mouse cursor for the user's finger.
Guess it would be too much trouble then for Apple to port App Store apps to Mac's/Dashboard since it's 90% of the way there anyway.
Most of the App Store apps are crap, but it would be nice to have most of the good ones running on all of one's Apple devices, also there could be some auto-syncing going on there too when they get into range of each other.
Of course if what I propose requires future Mac's to be closed ecosystem devices like the iPad, then they can go to hell.