Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

tz3gm · Mar 31, 2001, 12:09 AM

hi guys

i want opinions on how u like or dislike OSX project builder and interface builder...vs. the other options...(ie. visual basic, codewarrior...etc) and if you like it what are the reasons and if you dislike it what are the reasons....

thanks, tz3gm

Scott_H · Mar 31, 2001, 02:12 AM

I haven't used the others but so far with my limited "playing" with PB and IB they are great.

tz3gm · Mar 31, 2001, 02:52 AM

have u had experience w/codewarrior?

DV · Mar 31, 2001, 02:55 AM

I am a new at programming, but the PB and IB was one of the main reasons I bought OS X early. From my limited (a few days) experience with them, I am happy with everything-- the programs, the interface, the documentation, etc.. I have never tried any other IDEs besides RealBasic (which left me wanting more), mostly because I didn't want to shell out the cash for a program that I felt I may have not been ready for. OS X gave me the excuses to start now-- it shipped with a powerful IDE for free! , and Aqua motivates me to learn how to write a program for such a kick-ass OS (well, time will tell).

The documentation is easy to read and thorough (I wish the regular Mac-Help was this good), and even with my limited knowledge of C and C++, I feel I have a good grasp on the concepts and what's going on in a typical program, and how to write my own using the dev tools.

I am a happy newbie.

DV

------------------
Click www.dallasvaughan.com for a good time </cheap_hits_generator>

[This message has been edited by DV (edited 03-31-2001).]

Angus_D · Mar 31, 2001, 05:42 AM

Apple's development tools really do rock

Cocoa is really easy to get into, and very powerful. They've done a great job with Carbon, too.

Project Builder is probably (one of) the best IDEs on any platform, and it's FREE! CodeWarrior costs something like $500 for the full license. REALbasic, which is nowhere near as powerful as PB/IB and Cocoa/Carbon, costs around $100 for a basic license. Cocoa isn't that difficult to get into. I used REALbasic because the Mac OS toolbox looked really daunting, but I think that if Cocoa had been an option I probably would have gone with it.

barracuda · Apr 4, 2001, 05:05 PM

Agreed, they really are excellent tools and I'm hoping it attracts more people to coding for Macs in general. You don't get MS Dev bundled with any Win32 operating system.

My only reservation is that IB doesn't allow you to see the code that it generates, in particular any Java code. Correct me if I've missed something, but I think this would be a very useful feature.

B.

Rick1138 · Apr 4, 2001, 06:05 PM

What do you mean by code it generates?If you choose Create Files in IB you can open up the files in Project Builder and read them,but it only really generates stub files.If you mean keeping track of outlets and connections,all that information is fed live from the nib file into the run time system.

parallax · Apr 5, 2001, 08:42 AM

Even if PB and IB costed money, I would still love them. Assume PB and IB costed as much as CodeWarrior. I don't think I'd think twice about choosing Apple's Dev Tools. It's one of the main reasons why I looooove this OS so much :-)

ryochiji · Apr 5, 2001, 10:30 AM

I use Project Builder and so far, I like it. Not as good as CodeWarrior, but it works in MacOS X (a lot of people have reported problems getting full functionality from CW 6.1 in OS X).

Some things I like about PB:
-Debugging works in OS X
-Compiles Mach-O by default
-Recent sample code from Apple compiles straight away
-Comes FREE with OS X

Ryan Bates · Apr 5, 2001, 11:14 AM

Interface Builder is the most awesome interface builder I have ever seen, much better then REALBasic in my opinion. I really like Project Builder too, but some features I wish were in PB that are in Code Warrior. I think Apple is very smart for including the developer tools for free. It will encourage many new developers to try out Cocoa - they will fall in love with it.

Ryan

bsturgen · Apr 5, 2001, 03:18 PM

I'm relatively new to PB/IB. My overall experience has been positive. Well, very positive. I like the tools and am enjoying the experience. Now all I need is a client that needs some Mac OSX stuff done

PB
+ I like the IDE
+ I dislike the editor (when are tool makers going to get it through their skull to provide out of the box external editor support that doesn't suck? yes, the tool is free, so what?)
+ I really despise the low quality compiler error messages. Very non-descript. CLI javac builds at least give me a remote clue.
+ I really like the target info editting tools. Although a Mac user for 5 years, and a programmer for 12, I'm relatively new to Mac programming. PB's capability to edit the target, resource, etc. information in a painless manner is very welcome.
+ Not a big fan of the preview screen. I like separate windows for editting files.
+ Java specific: wish that there was a quick way (out of the box) to create interfaces.
+ Java specific: wish there was a quick way out of the box to package class files (what is it with default packages...do tool developers not understand that the physical model of a project is important? Forte does this, too).
+ This could be due to my lack of understanding, but I have never been a big fan of using an IDE to create final builds. I much prefer external CLI tools that can be scheduled, unit tests that can be run outside of an IDE, etc.

IB
+ Absolutely love it. The only UI builder I have ever used that didn't make me want to puke.
+ I like the fact that all of the connections do not generate source code (unlike, say, VisualRage, errrr, VisualAge, which generates some of the worst code I've ever seen), but instead does some sort of mystical XML thing, that I believe is placed somewhere in the .app folder hierarchy.
+ I wish that updating a controller/document/generated class with new targets and outlets was easier. You know, kinda like this whole iterative development thing.
+ I wish, but not too terribly important to me, that IB could also be usable for 100% Java apps.

Cocoa
+ Still learning it. Like it already. Very sane, usable framework. I tried powerplant, but that was too MFC-like. Done the MFC thing, hated it. Swing is NOT an application framework (note: an application framework has concepts for Application, Document, etc.).
+ I am really digging the FileOwner and delgate stuff. Very cool. Very instance based.