Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Eug · Sep 19, 2007, 09:35 PM

Price matters.

$299 was somewhat expensive for the PS2, but at least it came with a DVD player, in the era of VHS which even in 2000 was dated technology.

At $499-599, the PS3 was far too expensive, even with a Blu-ray player in 2006... in the era of when DVD satisfied most people.

goMac · Sep 19, 2007, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by starman

I was talking about programming. Good engineers should be able to figure out anything.

There's a difference between engineers should be able to figure out anything and engineers should program for everything. For example, I could program in Win32. I don't. Why? Because Win32 is a pain in the ass and I don't have any Windows clients I program for right now. If I got a big job that required Win32, yes, I would use Win32. But how many PS3 users are out there clamoring for PS3 software? Not many.

Think about it this way. The Playstation 3 is just like Windows, except with a small marketshare. If Windows had a small marketshare, why would anyone code for it? On the other hand, if the PS3 was easier to code for, more people would code for it even if it had a small marketshare ("hey guys, we're running a few weeks early, let's see if we can get this running on the PS3!")

As another analogy, I think Cocoa really kept the Mac platform alive during the OS X transition. The Mac had a small marketshare, but when it was so easy to code for Mac, why not release a Mac version?

icruise · Sep 19, 2007, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

Price matters.

$299 was somewhat expensive for the PS2, but at least it came with a DVD player, in the era of VHS which even in 2000 was dated technology.

At $499-599, the PS3 was far too expensive, even with a Blu-ray player in 2006... in the era of when DVD satisfied most people.

I agree that the PS3 is too expensive (although if you actually want to use all of its functions, it's a reasonable deal). But the point is that you can't categorize $299 as "cheap" when it was mid-to-top range for consoles up until that point.

Eug · Sep 19, 2007, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by icruise

I agree that the PS3 is too expensive (although if you actually want to use all of its functions, it's a reasonable deal). But the point is that you can't categorize $299 as "cheap" when it was mid-to-top range for consoles up until that point.

I never said it was truly cheap. I just don't think it was too expensive.

I thought the PS3 was too expensive at launch for a console, at $499-599.

Originally Posted by goMac

Think about it this way. The Playstation 3 is just like Windows, except with a small marketshare. If Windows had a small marketshare, why would anyone code for it? On the other hand, if the PS3 was easier to code for, more people would code for it even if it had a small marketshare ("hey guys, we're running a few weeks early, let's see if we can get this running on the PS3!")

That doesn't really make sense.

icruise · Sep 19, 2007, 10:00 PM

This whole exchange is based on goMac's claim that the PS2's success came from the fact that it was so cheap.

starman · Sep 19, 2007, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

As another analogy, I think Cocoa really kept the Mac platform alive during the OS X transition. The Mac had a small marketshare, but when it was so easy to code for Mac, why not release a Mac version?

I don't agree. Yes, Cocoa is easy, but how many people are going to learn Objective C just to put something out on the Mac? Many people don't want to learn a new SYNTAX.

goMac · Sep 19, 2007, 10:15 PM

Originally Posted by starman

I don't agree. Yes, Cocoa is easy, but how many people are going to learn Objective C just to put something out on the Mac? Many people don't want to learn a new SYNTAX.

Syntax? Cocoa's syntax isn't that hard to learn... If you know a object oriented language it's pretty simple. Besides, with bindings and IB, the amount of code you need to write is substantially reduced.

goMac · Sep 19, 2007, 10:16 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

That doesn't really make sense.

My point is that the PS3 has the programming ease of Windows with the marketshare of the Mac. That isn't a good combination for developers.

starman · Sep 19, 2007, 10:55 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

Syntax? Cocoa's syntax isn't that hard to learn... If you know a object oriented language it's pretty simple. Besides, with bindings and IB, the amount of code you need to write is substantially reduced.

Tell that to some Visual Studio nut. YOU know it, I know it, but do you really think that someone's gonna really give a rat's ass about Mac programming?

starman · Sep 19, 2007, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

My point is that the PS3 has the programming ease of Windows with the marketshare of the Mac. That isn't a good combination for developers.

And yet, look at all the Windows apps.

goMac · Sep 19, 2007, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by starman

And yet, look at all the Windows apps.

Does Windows have the marketshare of the Mac? I'm not sure what's wrong with your reading comprehension here, so I'll lay it out for you:

My point is that the PS3 has the programming ease of Windows with the marketshare of the Mac. That isn't a good combination for developers.

Notice the "with the"? You may also know that as an and. It means both conditions have to be true. The doesn't mean I'm comparing the ease of programming on the PS3 to Win32. That doesn't mean I'm comparing the marketshare to the marketshare of the Mac. That means I'm comparing the PS3 against both. At the same time.

If Windows had the marketshare of the Mac, there would be no apps for it. It would be a pain in the ass to code in Win32 for a platform that doesn't have very many users.

goMac · Sep 19, 2007, 11:16 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Tell that to some Visual Studio nut. YOU know it, I know it, but do you really think that someone's gonna really give a rat's ass about Mac programming?

Sure. Cocoa revitalized the Mac software market. Mac OS 9 was starving for software, and suddenly OS X comes along and the amount of software on the platform just explodes.

What else do you think would explain that besides a change in API?

Eug · Sep 19, 2007, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

My point is that the PS3 has the programming ease of Windows with the marketshare of the Mac. That isn't a good combination for developers.

I am not a programmer, but my programmer friends seem to like Micosoft's development tools very much.

Originally Posted by goMac

Sure. Cocoa revitalized the Mac software market. Mac OS 9 was starving for software, and suddenly OS X comes along and the amount of software on the platform just explodes.

What else do you think would explain that besides a change in API?

Probably one BIG part of that is the fact that OS X doesn't royally suck... like OS 9 does... End users are actually able to use OS X without rebooting 8X a day.

Originally Posted by icruise

This whole exchange is based on goMac's claim that the PS2's success came from the fact that it was so cheap.

Perhaps a better way to look at the situation is that the PS3's failure (so far at least) comes from the fact that it is so expensive.

goMac · Sep 19, 2007, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

I am not a programmer, but my programmer friends seem to like Micosoft's development tools very much.

There's a separation that needs to be made here. There is no doubt that Visual Studio is very nice, far nicer than XCode. But Visual Studio is not the same thing as Win32, and I doubt starman would be so bold to make the claim that Win32 is a nice, clean API.

starman · Sep 19, 2007, 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

Does Windows have the marketshare of the Mac? I'm not sure what's wrong with your reading comprehension here, so I'll lay it out for you:

My point is that the PS3 has the programming ease of Windows with the marketshare of the Mac. That isn't a good combination for developers.

Notice the "with the"? You may also know that as an and. It means both conditions have to be true. The doesn't mean I'm comparing the ease of programming on the PS3 to Win32. That doesn't mean I'm comparing the marketshare to the marketshare of the Mac. That means I'm comparing the PS3 against both. At the same time.

If Windows had the marketshare of the Mac, there would be no apps for it. It would be a pain in the ass to code in Win32 for a platform that doesn't have very many users.

I've programmed both platforms for 20 years so I fail to see why programming for Windows is so difficult for you.

starman · 12:31 AM

Originally Posted by goMac

There's a separation that needs to be made here. There is no doubt that Visual Studio is very nice, far nicer than XCode. But Visual Studio is not the same thing as Win32, and I doubt starman would be so bold to make the claim that Win32 is a nice, clean API.

Huh? How is it a "bad API"? It's C/C++. What exactly makes the API bad? I fail to see your problem with it.

Want to see how closely it resembles the Mac's Carbon API? Look at wxWindows someday.

Cocoa was not OS X's savior.

I'm just not sure what you mean by a "clean API". The Windows API is logical and consistent.