How will this benefit Apple users in the long run? Isn't this usually a sign that Apple is not going expand upon the language anymore and let third parties take the lead?
Swift is a very popular language; by becoming open source it can become a standard language, which is key for things like government and business contracts: nobody wants mission critical code to be based on a proprietary, single-source platform.
The IBM-Apple partnership relies on acceptance in the business community.
Swift becoming a standard could quickly do away with Java, C, C++ and bunch of other languages.
Note: the language is not the same as the API, people will still have to clone the APIs, unless Apple throws in at least the FoundationKit into the open source bag.
M$ is already cloning some of the libraries for the ObjC port, so adding Swift bindings will be relatively easy for them.
The rest might have to build on GNUstep or similar projects, or start from scratch.
Yes!
The other biggie is:
by becoming an open source and standard language -- it can assume another roll ...
The roll of a client-side and server-side scripting language to replace JavaScript.
Not only that, these same scripts can be compiled -- providing better performance, secure code -- all while using less bandwidth.
It won't be long before we see browsers supporting (first, interpreted then) compiled Swift scripts.
This changes everything!
I seem to have heard or read that one of the one of the platforms available for developing with Swift will be iOS!
How will this benefit Apple users in the long run? Isn't this usually a sign that Apple is not going expand upon the language anymore and let third parties take the lead?
I wonder about the same thing. Apple has a plan I'm sure. It is about weighing the pluses verses the minuses in the big picture. They must have their reasons. We just don't know the exact strategy yet.
I'm glad to see Apple is including Markdown in Swift. It's be great if they'd build support for Markdown into the text features of iOS and OS X too.
Never really got into Markdown, however the idea is interesting as it would make automated processing of comments snazzy.
That and:
1. Allowing all text apps to benefit from many of the features of Pages, including styles. That'd make it easy to move documents around.
It looks like Apple is getting a bit smarter about editing in the various apps on IOS. I do hope so as it is very frustrating to have to open up the Mac just to properly format a Note. That being said I'm not sure the iOS will build in the one feature that would make lots of sense in notes and that is being able to create lists. Lists seems like a no brainer in a "notes" app yet you can't make them on the iOS version of Notes.
2. Drastic improvements to OS X's spell checker.
3. Make export to epub as easy as export to PDF has always been within OS X. That's important for mobile devices with varying screen sizes.
Interestingly nothing was said about the above two items other than Preview speed improvements. I'm hoping Apple takes note of your suggestions here. I'm downloading the betas right now so maybe we will see real improvements here.
How will this benefit Apple users in the long run? Isn't this usually a sign that Apple is not going expand upon the language anymore and let third parties take the lead?
I wonder about the same thing. Apple has a plan I'm sure. It is about weighing the pluses verses the minuses in the big picture. They must have their reasons. We just don't know the exact strategy yet.
By the end of this year, developers will be coding their apps and testing their apps on an iPad Pro.
This includes apps targeted at the desktop, client-server, mobile, phone and wearables.
Never really got into Markdown, however the idea is interesting as it would make automated processing of comments snazzy.
It looks like Apple is getting a bit smarter about editing in the various apps on IOS. I do hope so as it is very frustrating to have to open up the Mac just to properly format a Note. That being said I'm not sure the iOS will build in the one feature that would make lots of sense in notes and that is being able to create lists. Lists seems like a no brainer in a "notes" app yet you can't make them on the iOS version of Notes.
Interestingly nothing was said about the above two items other than Preview speed improvements. I'm hoping Apple takes note of your suggestions here. I'm downloading the betas right now so maybe we will see real improvements here.
I guess you missed the keynote because Craig demoed creating a list with checkboxs in Notes.
I'm not sure if a lot of people realise that Markdown was developed by John Gruber of DaringFireball fame. His name does come up often enough in these forums that I think that fact should be noted.
Oh my gosh, this is such great news, I was starting to get worried that this conference wouldn’t announce anything worth while for me. I can’t wait to start writing programs for my Nvidia Jetson K1 development board and my Linux laptop using Swift. This is going to be fun, yyyaaayyy.
by becoming an open source and standard language -- it can assume another roll ...
The roll of a client-side and server-side scripting language to replace JavaScript.
Not only that, these same scripts can be compiled -- providing better performance, secure code -- all while using less bandwidth.
It won't be long before we see browsers supporting (first, interpreted then) compiled Swift scripts.
This changes everything!
I still think you are completely wrong about this.
For one thing, complied browser scripts would be extremely insecure just like client side Java and Flash are.
Conserving bandwidth is continuing to be less and less relevant as the complexity of web pages and faster broadband networks makes it a non-issue while developers continue to ignore any effort to conserve it, just as we have witnessed with the worldwide streaming of Apple's keynote address today.
Server side Javascript is somewhat esoteric and almost all of the solutions in that realm require Java servlet capability and run on Domino, Tomcat or some proprietary standalone.
A dedicated Swift server is a possibility but will likely not be written by Apple. Perhaps instead of a runtime tag replacement model like php it might be more like .Net which uses C# as a scripting language, but requires the server to be Windows Server. A Swift web server would have to offer amazing performance benefits to push enterprise to switch from Apache, Windows, Domino and other IEEE certified Java servers. Not impossible, but not likely either, in my opinion.
I'd bet on it! When Apple announced Swift, they presented it as a System Programming Language and everything below!
My take away at that time was they would use it to write and compile future OS X, but that OS X would still use UNIX core libraries and kernel. The fact that they are extending Swift to Linux means to me that UNIX will be around a while longer at Apple.
by becoming an open source and standard language -- it can assume another roll ...
The roll of a client-side and server-side scripting language to replace JavaScript.
Not only that, these same scripts can be compiled -- providing better performance, secure code -- all while using less bandwidth.
It won't be long before we see browsers supporting (first, interpreted then) compiled Swift scripts.
This changes everything!
I still think you are completely wrong about this.
For one thing, complied browser scripts would be extremely insecure just like client side Java and Flash are.
You are assuming that just because scripts written in Java or Flash are insecure that scripts written in Swift will be insecure -- that need not be true! And the fact that they are compiled makes reverse engineering them more difficult.
Why would a compiled Swift script passed to a browser to be executed by the underling OS be any less secure than the Browser (or any app) written in Swift and executed by the underlying OS.?
Conserving bandwidth is continuing to be less and less relevant as the complexity of web pages and faster broadband networks makes it a non-issue while developers continue to ignore any effort to conserve it, just as we have witnessed with the worldwide streaming of Apple's keynote address today.
Again we disagree! web sites that use less bandwidth will scale better and provide a better user experience than a comparable site that wastes bandwidth. Like water, bandwidth isn't free or infinite!
The Apple event is ~2 hours, once per year ... and likely, streamed concurrently to thousands of viewers -- likely, less wasteful than a typical NetFlix movie.
But, again, this supports my argument -- conserve bandwidth when and where you can -- so it can be put to better (more in demand) use.
Server side Javascript is somewhat esoteric and almost all of the solutions in that realm require Java servlet capability and run on Domino, Tomcat or some proprietary standalone.
A dedicated Swift server is a possibility but will likely not be written by Apple. Perhaps instead of a runtime tag replacement model like php it might be more like .Net which uses C# as a scripting language, but requires the server to be Windows Server. A Swift web server would have to offer amazing performance benefits to push enterprise to switch from Apache, Windows, Domino and other IEEE certified Java servers. Not impossible, but not likely either, in my opinion.
I hadn't really considered using Swift to develop a replacement for a web server like Apache -- but it would be worth considering if the result was better performing and more maintainable than the current offering.
What's the status on Oracle suit? I thought it was dismissed.
BTW, if Apple make FaceTime and iMessage open source, fandroids will have orgasm.
Appeals court ruled in favor of Oracle (and against Aslup, who most feel was way off on copyright and his original ruling in favor of Google). Aslup learned Java and programming for this case, and proved the old saying true: "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." However, many uneducated people assumed that because he learned Java that it meant anything he said was infallible. Clearly that was not the case.
Google also lost another recent ruling just 2 weeks ago (they applied to the Supreme Court for a review). The comments from those involved don't paint Google in a good light AT ALL.
Bottom line is nobody (except for a few Google friends) is on the side of Google. Everyone who's something in software is siding with Oracle (even hardcore enemies/competitors of Oracle). It's hilarious to watch posters talk about how a victory for Oracle will be a death blow to software when it's actually the other way around.
Oh my gosh, this is such great news, I was starting to get worried that this conference wouldn’t announce anything worth while for me. I can’t wait to start writing programs for my Nvidia Jetson K1 development board and my Linux laptop using Swift. This is going to be fun, yyyaaayyy.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." However, many uneducated people assumed that because he learned Java that it meant anything he said was infallible. Clearly that was not the case.ore enemies/competitors of Oracle). It's hilarious to watch posters talk about how a victory for Oracle will be a death blow to software when it's actually the other way around.
Some highly educated people including university law professors considered experts in copyright and IP sided with Alsup and/or Google. I don't think the level of education is the determining factor in which side you support.
Google also lost another recent ruling just 2 weeks ago (they applied to the Supreme Court for a review). The comments from those involved don't paint Google in a good light AT ALL.
There hasn't been a SCOTUS ruling yet on whether they'll accept Google's case. You may have confused things with the governments statement that they would not recommend they accept it. IMO it's unlikely the Supreme Court will hear it but they could.
Everyone who's something in software is siding with Oracle (even hardcore enemies/competitors of Oracle). It's hilarious to watch posters talk about how a victory for Oracle will be a death blow to software when it's actually the other way around.
Not exactly accurate either. Yahoo! Inc., Red Hat Inc. and Hewlett-Packard Co. are each urging SCOTUS to hear Google's arguments.
Comments
Sure. Like Google decided to write their own language for Android when they were deciding between C# or Java.
Oh wait, they didn't create their own, and that's why they're in trouble with Oracle.
What's the status on Oracle suit? I thought it was dismissed.
BTW, if Apple make FaceTime and iMessage open source, fandroids will have orgasm.
I thought that was Objective C? Right now, without a standards document, it will be hard for MS to do a 100% compatible Swift.
Yes!
The other biggie is:
by becoming an open source and standard language -- it can assume another roll ...
The roll of a client-side and server-side scripting language to replace JavaScript.
Not only that, these same scripts can be compiled -- providing better performance, secure code -- all while using less bandwidth.
It won't be long before we see browsers supporting (first, interpreted then) compiled Swift scripts.
This changes everything!
I seem to have heard or read that one of the one of the platforms available for developing with Swift will be iOS!
How will this benefit Apple users in the long run? Isn't this usually a sign that Apple is not going expand upon the language anymore and let third parties take the lead?
I wonder about the same thing. Apple has a plan I'm sure. It is about weighing the pluses verses the minuses in the big picture. They must have their reasons. We just don't know the exact strategy yet.
Interestingly nothing was said about the above two items other than Preview speed improvements. I'm hoping Apple takes note of your suggestions here. I'm downloading the betas right now so maybe we will see real improvements here.
But MS will ... And Apple has at least a year lead time!
This move, and the timing, is absolutely brilliant!
By the end of this year, developers will be coding their apps and testing their apps on an iPad Pro.
This includes apps targeted at the desktop, client-server, mobile, phone and wearables.
I guess you missed the keynote because Craig demoed creating a list with checkboxs in Notes.
I'm not sure if a lot of people realise that Markdown was developed by John Gruber of DaringFireball fame. His name does come up often enough in these forums that I think that fact should be noted.
By the end of this year, developers will be coding their apps and testing their apps on an iPad Pro.
This includes apps targeted at the desktop, client-server, mobile, phone and wearables.
Any chance that Apple will task Swift with the software platform for the Open Compute hardware that they will be using for their server farms?
I'd bet on it! When Apple announced Swift, they presented it as a System Programming Language and everything below!
Yes!
The other biggie is:
by becoming an open source and standard language -- it can assume another roll ...
The roll of a client-side and server-side scripting language to replace JavaScript.
Not only that, these same scripts can be compiled -- providing better performance, secure code -- all while using less bandwidth.
It won't be long before we see browsers supporting (first, interpreted then) compiled Swift scripts.
This changes everything!
I still think you are completely wrong about this.
For one thing, complied browser scripts would be extremely insecure just like client side Java and Flash are.
Conserving bandwidth is continuing to be less and less relevant as the complexity of web pages and faster broadband networks makes it a non-issue while developers continue to ignore any effort to conserve it, just as we have witnessed with the worldwide streaming of Apple's keynote address today.
Server side Javascript is somewhat esoteric and almost all of the solutions in that realm require Java servlet capability and run on Domino, Tomcat or some proprietary standalone.
A dedicated Swift server is a possibility but will likely not be written by Apple. Perhaps instead of a runtime tag replacement model like php it might be more like .Net which uses C# as a scripting language, but requires the server to be Windows Server. A Swift web server would have to offer amazing performance benefits to push enterprise to switch from Apache, Windows, Domino and other IEEE certified Java servers. Not impossible, but not likely either, in my opinion.
I'd bet on it! When Apple announced Swift, they presented it as a System Programming Language and everything below!
My take away at that time was they would use it to write and compile future OS X, but that OS X would still use UNIX core libraries and kernel. The fact that they are extending Swift to Linux means to me that UNIX will be around a while longer at Apple.
You are assuming that just because scripts written in Java or Flash are insecure that scripts written in Swift will be insecure -- that need not be true! And the fact that they are compiled makes reverse engineering them more difficult.
Why would a compiled Swift script passed to a browser to be executed by the underling OS be any less secure than the Browser (or any app) written in Swift and executed by the underlying OS.?
Again we disagree! web sites that use less bandwidth will scale better and provide a better user experience than a comparable site that wastes bandwidth. Like water, bandwidth isn't free or infinite!
The Apple event is ~2 hours, once per year ... and likely, streamed concurrently to thousands of viewers -- likely, less wasteful than a typical NetFlix movie.
But, again, this supports my argument -- conserve bandwidth when and where you can -- so it can be put to better (more in demand) use.
I hadn't really considered using Swift to develop a replacement for a web server like Apache -- but it would be worth considering if the result was better performing and more maintainable than the current offering.
What's the status on Oracle suit? I thought it was dismissed.
BTW, if Apple make FaceTime and iMessage open source, fandroids will have orgasm.
Appeals court ruled in favor of Oracle (and against Aslup, who most feel was way off on copyright and his original ruling in favor of Google). Aslup learned Java and programming for this case, and proved the old saying true: "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." However, many uneducated people assumed that because he learned Java that it meant anything he said was infallible. Clearly that was not the case.
Google also lost another recent ruling just 2 weeks ago (they applied to the Supreme Court for a review). The comments from those involved don't paint Google in a good light AT ALL.
Bottom line is nobody (except for a few Google friends) is on the side of Google. Everyone who's something in software is siding with Oracle (even hardcore enemies/competitors of Oracle). It's hilarious to watch posters talk about how a victory for Oracle will be a death blow to software when it's actually the other way around.
Here's a online Swift Playground implementation:
http://www.swiftstub.com
SwiftStub
I could see Apple offering an online service that included all the Apple Swift APIs.
There hasn't been a SCOTUS ruling yet on whether they'll accept Google's case. You may have confused things with the governments statement that they would not recommend they accept it. IMO it's unlikely the Supreme Court will hear it but they could.
Not exactly accurate either. Yahoo! Inc., Red Hat Inc. and Hewlett-Packard Co. are each urging SCOTUS to hear Google's arguments.
Open Sesame is a command, not a Bagel