It's not about porting Microsoft's runtime (of any flavour) to the iPhone or Mac, it's just about enabling another development environment to develop native Mac/iPhone apps.
Quite possibly... but I think it would be so much fun if Apple decided to support SilverLight, and probably a good business decision, too.
7 minutes of Ballmer on June 7 talking about Windows 7 - 777 the new number of the beast
Ballmer is gonna set all of our files to -rwxrwxrwx
The first thing that popped into my mind when I read this was SB on stage dancing like Chris Elliott in Cabin Boy... while the crowd chucks Zunes and Kins at him..
iPhone apps aren't always "crappy apps." You should think before you speak.
He wasn't saying that iPhone apps are always crappy apps. He was merely repeating what Steve had said in his letter about Flash regarding apps created in Flash and ported into iPhone code. If those are lowest common denominator and suck, why would people coding in .net and being converted into obj c be any better?
Shifting alliances are the way of the world. I don't like "Bullet-head" Ballmer any more than the next guy, but Microsoft and Apple have a long history together. There is a tacit acknowledgement that when they can help themselves by helping each other, they will. In retrospect, Gates was never the devil that many of us liked to cast him as. He and Jobs were the original Pirates of Silicon Valley after all. The two young dudes who revolutionized personal computer technology worldwide. There is an underlying camaraderie on the human level--born out of a common experience. Like old soldiers, even on opposite sides. Despite the competition, I think the two had genuine respect for one another. On the other hand, Ballmer is just a tool.
If we're looking for a new enemy, look no further than Google. I thought Schmidt's cloning of the iPhone after sitting on Apple's board was corporate treachery of the highest order. I still scratch my head that Apple hasn't made stronger legal moves on that front. The lost iPhone episode pales by comparison. Wish they had kicked in HIS door and seized his personal communications!
Adobe makes a lot of noise, but they know what side their bread is buttered on. They are not even close to the threat Google is.
You know, we used to make fun of Gates, but Ballmer? I just can't stand him in all seriousness. Not only that, I think that man as absolutely no vision. He's presided over some huge disasters at M$, from Longhorn's delay and complete do-over, to Vista's release. He's constantly derided Apple and the iPhone as well. And, he's a sweaty, screaming ape.
Quote:
Steve Ballmer comes out on stage.
Looks at Steve Jobs.
Ballmer gets on his hands and knees.
Ballmer says, "You win God." while looking directly at Jobs.
Now that I like. Actually, I would give it about 10 years.....
(May, 2020)
Microsoft, having been broken up by the Obama Justice Dept 2013, lies in ruin. Windows has gone from 95% market share to 30%. Apple commands 65% of the operating system market, 50% of the mobile phone market, and 90% of the digital media market. Microsoft is still working on Windows 8.....
(WWDC--June, 2020)
Jobs is standing center stage. He details the battles between M$ and Apple over the past 40 years, finally wrapping up with the famous phrase..."and one more thing..."
Suddenly, Gates walks across the stage. Jobs stands there, then motions for him to come over. He folds his arms. "Now...kneel. Kneel before jobs." Gates signs, and reluctantly bows. "Finally" jobs says. "Take my hand and pledge eternal loyalty." As he does, Jobs grabs a cattle brand with the original Mac smiley logo. He thrusts it into Gates chest. Gates howls in terror, and disintegrates into nothingness. The crowd goes wild.
It seems like silverlight might have some potential, but the lack of audio support is a little concerning. It seems like programming in silverlight is better though. It says silverlight supports only VC-1 codec along with some wmv codecs.
All in all, it might just be another thing Apple dismisses as a resource hog.
He wasn't saying that iPhone apps are always crappy apps. He was merely repeating what Steve had said in his letter about Flash regarding apps created in Flash and ported into iPhone code. If those are lowest common denominator and suck, why would people coding in .net and being converted into obj c be any better?
Oh woops lol.
So is that how VS 2010 will do it? Convert from .net to objective C? I was under the impression they would just support the framework altogether. I think it was 2006 that last had support for J++. It's not beyond MS to include support for languages other than vb.net and C#...
It seems like silverlight might have some potential, but the lack of audio support is a little concerning. It seems like programming in silverlight is better though. It says silverlight supports only VC-1 codec along with some wmv codecs.
All in all, it might just be another thing Apple dismisses as a resource hog.
This would be a horrible move. Silverlight is a terrible, proprietary, patent encumbered, Microsoft technology designed to move Microsoft's illegally obtained desktop monopoly onto the web and non-Microsoft platforms. It is designed to lock developers and consumers into yet another layer of super expensive, proprietary Microsoft technology. No thanks, i will pass.
If this is about Mac/iPhone development within Visual Studio (and I'm sure Microsoft have had a lot of customer queries about it) then what it means is:
1) Adding an Objective C compiler back-end to Visual Studio
2) Adding the Apple frameworks as a platform into VS.
3) Presumably adding an ARM assembler and compiler as well, although it may already be there as part of Windows Mobile development.
Apps would still use Cocoa, Core Animation, etc. It's not about porting Microsoft's runtime (of any flavour) to the iPhone or Mac, it's just about enabling another development environment to develop native Mac/iPhone apps.
Debugging could be interesting, as it would pretty much require a fully operational set of Apple frameworks running on Windows. Never mind the incompatibilities. Maybe it will have a minimal Mac OS X install within a Virtual Machine.
Well, a couple of points.
1. Xcode was ported to Windows years ago as part of NeXT's OpenStep initiative, which also included a complete OpenStep (basically, Cocoa) runtime for apps. Apple kept alive and continued to develop their Intel port of OpenStep as Mac OS X developed, so it's not entirely far fetched that they've kept Xcode up to date on Windows. Integrating Interface Builder and at least some Project Builder functionality into VS probably wouldn't be much of a technical challenge, either, but, although I don't work in VS at all, I imagine the development process requires a completely different workflow, and developers still have to learn the frameworks, which is the biggest hurdle, so it's hard to see exactly what benefits developers derive from that.
(OpenStep on Windows was actually an interesting cross-platform initiative. Essentially, you just created special .nib files, using Interface Builder, for Windows -- renaming menu items, rearranging menus and dialogs, to make them more Windows like -- and, if memory serves, you could actually compile "universal" apps where one version would run on both platforms, picking the correct .nib, or .nibs if your app was localized, depending on the platform.)
2. The amount of money Apple makes off hardware sales to developers who are only buying Macs is probably negligible. On the other hand, the number of (good) developers they would gain by not requiring a Mac is probably also negligible. The downside would be that the likelihood of these developers moving into Mac development declines if they don't have Macs, although, the pickup there is probably small to begin with. Mostly a wash, Hard to see any direct benefits for Apple here, or Microsoft, for that matter. The biggest benefit for Apple, of Windows hosted CocoaTouch development, is the image factor, as it "looks" like they are opening up development while it's still smartly restricted to proper tools.
3. A search announcement seems much more likely, and 7 minutes isn't a lot of time to devote to a developer tools announcement if it's something as different as CocoaTouch support in VS. Barely enough time for a demo, let alone any to talk about it.
4. It's possible that there is something going on in development tools, like Xcode for iPhone OS on Windows and a search related announcement, and that could probably fit into 7 minutes fairly simply. And maybe this information got jumbled along the way until it became the current rumor.
5. It's also possible that it's just crazy bullshit.
This doesn't make any sense. Microsoft tools use a completely different runtime. Apple just made the no 3rd party runtimes rule. Apple has been putting a lot of work in to their development tools the last few years. Microsoft's tools wouldn't bring anything new. The only thing that makes any sense would be .net coming to the Mac as an alternative to Java (with some of the same user experience problems as Java), but I don't think that Apple would encourage this. Maybe it uses scripting bridge? I could see that I suppose. It's not going to run on the iPad/iPhone in that case though.
There is one notable thing here though. The reference implementation (without the user interface stuff) of .net from Microsoft Research does compile on the Mac. They targeted the Mac to prove that it was cross platform capable like Java. It wasn't heavily optimized for the Mac though.
Yes. Sounds like bogus rumor. Apple shut off the 3rd pary runtimes prior to adobe CS5 launch.
The situation with CodeWarrior wasn't one where Apple was "dependent" on another company. CodeWarrior was simply a better compiler and development environment than Apple's own tools, so it was more popular with developers. Apple supplied the Mac development SDKs for use with CodeWarrior.
A bigger issue was for application developers who used CodeWarrior when the product was discontinued - they had to port their application to build with a different set of code tools and learn how to use a different IDE. (This was on top of issues around Carbon vs Cocoa.)
(Sorry, lost track of what I snipped above.)
This latter point was exactly the problem with CodeWarrior. It offered an alternate framework that interfered with adoption of native Cocoa APIs. It was a layer between developers and the OS that defined the platform rather than Apple being free to define it. (Sound familiar?) Once Apple made the move to OS X, CodeWarrior had to die so Mac OS X could prosper. Developers had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future.
Comments
So after Steve's keynote, please come back to this post and let me know...
Were you not disappointed? Were you pleasantly pleased? Or were you Wow'd? Just out of curiosity...
I'd rather be pleasantly pleased than sadly saddened. :-)
It's not about porting Microsoft's runtime (of any flavour) to the iPhone or Mac, it's just about enabling another development environment to develop native Mac/iPhone apps.
Quite possibly... but I think it would be so much fun if Apple decided to support SilverLight, and probably a good business decision, too.
7 minutes of Ballmer on June 7 talking about Windows 7 - 777 the new number of the beast
Ballmer is gonna set all of our files to -rwxrwxrwx
The first thing that popped into my mind when I read this was SB on stage dancing like Chris Elliott in Cabin Boy... while the crowd chucks Zunes and Kins at him..
iPhone apps aren't always "crappy apps." You should think before you speak.
He wasn't saying that iPhone apps are always crappy apps. He was merely repeating what Steve had said in his letter about Flash regarding apps created in Flash and ported into iPhone code. If those are lowest common denominator and suck, why would people coding in .net and being converted into obj c be any better?
Office for iPad on the other hand would be great (not that i use office, but many do).
While I'm not a developer and if this rumor proves true, it doesn't make me want to use Microsoft software.
If we're looking for a new enemy, look no further than Google. I thought Schmidt's cloning of the iPhone after sitting on Apple's board was corporate treachery of the highest order. I still scratch my head that Apple hasn't made stronger legal moves on that front. The lost iPhone episode pales by comparison. Wish they had kicked in HIS door and seized his personal communications!
Adobe makes a lot of noise, but they know what side their bread is buttered on. They are not even close to the threat Google is.
Steve Ballmer comes out on stage.
Looks at Steve Jobs.
Ballmer gets on his hands and knees.
Ballmer says, "You win God." while looking directly at Jobs.
Now that I like. Actually, I would give it about 10 years.....
(May, 2020)
Microsoft, having been broken up by the Obama Justice Dept 2013, lies in ruin. Windows has gone from 95% market share to 30%. Apple commands 65% of the operating system market, 50% of the mobile phone market, and 90% of the digital media market. Microsoft is still working on Windows 8.....
(WWDC--June, 2020)
Jobs is standing center stage. He details the battles between M$ and Apple over the past 40 years, finally wrapping up with the famous phrase..."and one more thing..."
Suddenly, Gates walks across the stage. Jobs stands there, then motions for him to come over. He folds his arms. "Now...kneel. Kneel before jobs." Gates signs, and reluctantly bows. "Finally" jobs says. "Take my hand and pledge eternal loyalty." As he does, Jobs grabs a cattle brand with the original Mac smiley logo. He thrusts it into Gates chest. Gates howls in terror, and disintegrates into nothingness. The crowd goes wild.
Quite possibly... but I think it would be so much fun if Apple decided to support SilverLight, and probably a good business decision, too.
Here's a good comparison of the two: http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009...ur-needs-best/
It seems like silverlight might have some potential, but the lack of audio support is a little concerning. It seems like programming in silverlight is better though. It says silverlight supports only VC-1 codec along with some wmv codecs.
All in all, it might just be another thing Apple dismisses as a resource hog.
O M G we're not going to see APPLESOFT!
What are they doing?
Maybe they're going to 'do' over Google together?
Or just maybe I had one or three many brews tonite
Umm.. Applesoft is Microsoft. Know your history.
He wasn't saying that iPhone apps are always crappy apps. He was merely repeating what Steve had said in his letter about Flash regarding apps created in Flash and ported into iPhone code. If those are lowest common denominator and suck, why would people coding in .net and being converted into obj c be any better?
Oh woops lol.
So is that how VS 2010 will do it? Convert from .net to objective C? I was under the impression they would just support the framework altogether. I think it was 2006 that last had support for J++. It's not beyond MS to include support for languages other than vb.net and C#...
Here's a good comparison of the two: http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009...ur-needs-best/
It seems like silverlight might have some potential, but the lack of audio support is a little concerning. It seems like programming in silverlight is better though. It says silverlight supports only VC-1 codec along with some wmv codecs.
All in all, it might just be another thing Apple dismisses as a resource hog.
This would be a horrible move. Silverlight is a terrible, proprietary, patent encumbered, Microsoft technology designed to move Microsoft's illegally obtained desktop monopoly onto the web and non-Microsoft platforms. It is designed to lock developers and consumers into yet another layer of super expensive, proprietary Microsoft technology. No thanks, i will pass.
If this is about Mac/iPhone development within Visual Studio (and I'm sure Microsoft have had a lot of customer queries about it) then what it means is:
1) Adding an Objective C compiler back-end to Visual Studio
2) Adding the Apple frameworks as a platform into VS.
3) Presumably adding an ARM assembler and compiler as well, although it may already be there as part of Windows Mobile development.
Apps would still use Cocoa, Core Animation, etc. It's not about porting Microsoft's runtime (of any flavour) to the iPhone or Mac, it's just about enabling another development environment to develop native Mac/iPhone apps.
Debugging could be interesting, as it would pretty much require a fully operational set of Apple frameworks running on Windows. Never mind the incompatibilities. Maybe it will have a minimal Mac OS X install within a Virtual Machine.
Well, a couple of points.
1. Xcode was ported to Windows years ago as part of NeXT's OpenStep initiative, which also included a complete OpenStep (basically, Cocoa) runtime for apps. Apple kept alive and continued to develop their Intel port of OpenStep as Mac OS X developed, so it's not entirely far fetched that they've kept Xcode up to date on Windows. Integrating Interface Builder and at least some Project Builder functionality into VS probably wouldn't be much of a technical challenge, either, but, although I don't work in VS at all, I imagine the development process requires a completely different workflow, and developers still have to learn the frameworks, which is the biggest hurdle, so it's hard to see exactly what benefits developers derive from that.
(OpenStep on Windows was actually an interesting cross-platform initiative. Essentially, you just created special .nib files, using Interface Builder, for Windows -- renaming menu items, rearranging menus and dialogs, to make them more Windows like -- and, if memory serves, you could actually compile "universal" apps where one version would run on both platforms, picking the correct .nib, or .nibs if your app was localized, depending on the platform.)
2. The amount of money Apple makes off hardware sales to developers who are only buying Macs is probably negligible. On the other hand, the number of (good) developers they would gain by not requiring a Mac is probably also negligible. The downside would be that the likelihood of these developers moving into Mac development declines if they don't have Macs, although, the pickup there is probably small to begin with. Mostly a wash, Hard to see any direct benefits for Apple here, or Microsoft, for that matter. The biggest benefit for Apple, of Windows hosted CocoaTouch development, is the image factor, as it "looks" like they are opening up development while it's still smartly restricted to proper tools.
3. A search announcement seems much more likely, and 7 minutes isn't a lot of time to devote to a developer tools announcement if it's something as different as CocoaTouch support in VS. Barely enough time for a demo, let alone any to talk about it.
4. It's possible that there is something going on in development tools, like Xcode for iPhone OS on Windows and a search related announcement, and that could probably fit into 7 minutes fairly simply. And maybe this information got jumbled along the way until it became the current rumor.
5. It's also possible that it's just crazy bullshit.
This doesn't make any sense. Microsoft tools use a completely different runtime. Apple just made the no 3rd party runtimes rule. Apple has been putting a lot of work in to their development tools the last few years. Microsoft's tools wouldn't bring anything new. The only thing that makes any sense would be .net coming to the Mac as an alternative to Java (with some of the same user experience problems as Java), but I don't think that Apple would encourage this. Maybe it uses scripting bridge? I could see that I suppose. It's not going to run on the iPad/iPhone in that case though.
There is one notable thing here though. The reference implementation (without the user interface stuff) of .net from Microsoft Research does compile on the Mac. They targeted the Mac to prove that it was cross platform capable like Java. It wasn't heavily optimized for the Mac though.
Yes. Sounds like bogus rumor. Apple shut off the 3rd pary runtimes prior to adobe CS5 launch.
RTFA it's so that people with Windows can develop for iPhone.
This seems correct to me. It seems to be the most likely explanation.
The situation with CodeWarrior wasn't one where Apple was "dependent" on another company. CodeWarrior was simply a better compiler and development environment than Apple's own tools, so it was more popular with developers. Apple supplied the Mac development SDKs for use with CodeWarrior.
A bigger issue was for application developers who used CodeWarrior when the product was discontinued - they had to port their application to build with a different set of code tools and learn how to use a different IDE. (This was on top of issues around Carbon vs Cocoa.)
(Sorry, lost track of what I snipped above.)
This latter point was exactly the problem with CodeWarrior. It offered an alternate framework that interfered with adoption of native Cocoa APIs. It was a layer between developers and the OS that defined the platform rather than Apple being free to define it. (Sound familiar?) Once Apple made the move to OS X, CodeWarrior had to die so Mac OS X could prosper. Developers had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future.