[theolein]

Sorry if this thread seems useless, but browsing the posts around here has made me take note of something that Apple has been incredibly wise to do since the inroduction of OSX: include free developer tools.

I noticed how many of the members here have a link plugging their privately developed small application for OSX. This is something that you definitely don't find in Windows, as MS makes a large amount of it's cash from charging horrendous amounts for it's development tools. While this didn't have much of a noticable effect in the earlier versions of OSX, while beginning developers got up to speed, it seems as if one in every 7 or 8 members here has been learning how to develop under OSX, and thus Apple's long term Ace up it's sleeve:

All those developers form a base of developer talent that current or future OSX application developers can draw from, this meaning that with time one will expect more and more sorely needed enterprise applications being ported to OSX such as CRM applications, CAD etc.

I think the only remaining paradox is that Apple's OSX only running on Apple PPC machines is perhaps a hinderance to adaption of OSX by enterprises (and cost conscious organisations like schools) who usually like to be able to shop around and have choices in terms of hardware. I wonder what an alternative for Apple would be in this area? Perhaps allowing select partners to manufacture and sell OSX capable machines, such as IBM. I personally can't imagine SJ even thinking of such a return to the clone days, but I know as someone who has had to do PC aquisition for a small company that this is defineitely a problem.

What are your thoughts?

[biscuit]

I think you have a good point there, but rather than being an ace up the sleeve I see this as being something Apple had to do.

It would've been harder to convince as many developers to switch to OSX (and do a good job of it, not just a quick Carbon port) if the dev tools were not free. I see what you're describing as a very welcome side-effect.

As for other people making OSX compatible machines; I don't see it happening. One of Apple's selling points is that they "make the whole box", hardware and software are tightly integrated. While this means you can't shop around, it should (and I think it does) mean that you're buying a more reliable, higher quality product.

biscuit

[tikki]

I certainly wouldn't have picked up Cocoa if the developer tools weren't free. Purdue gives us Visual Studio.Net for $10, but Project Builder/Interface Builder is a much nicer system imo.

[JLFanboy]

Funny title. Thought you meant something about the Ace of Spades being the "death card."

[waffffffle]

While this has been discussed before, I completely agree with you on the free dev tools. However if I am not mistaken, I believe Apple has always done this. I think that Apple's original developer tools for the classic Mac OS were free, however very few developers used them and instead they used CodeWarrior. It seem that Apple is now trying to take CodeWarrior head on with Xcode.

At my school Microsoft gives away free Visual Studio to all Computer Science majors (also Windows XP). i think they do it at a few schools. However I still don't like that idea because eventually, once a student graduates, those tools are no longer free, and unless the student is working for a company that will provide those tools for free, the student will have to pay.

However I really don't like the idea of learning to develop for only one platform. However it doesn't really seem like there's any other option since every platform has its own developer tools and APIs that tie you in.

[eyadams]

I think that Apple's original developer tools for the classic Mac OS were free, however very few developers used them and instead they used CodeWarrior.

Originally Apple charged for their developer tools, and did for all their platforms. The Macintosh Programmers Workshop, or "MPW", was several hundred dollars in the beginning; it wasn't until the 1990's that they started giving it away. MPW was a curious beast - it basically was a command line interface slapped on top of the standard OS. You created build scripts not unlike Unix "make" files, or could compile and link by hand if you were so inclined. Apple did the same thing with the Newton - at first the developer tools cost a fortune; it wasn't until much later that they started giving them away for free.

The reason most people developed with CodeWarrior was twofold - first, you got dramatically better development tools. Properly windowed with a great text editor, and no annoying build scripts. But just as importantly, you got PowerPlant, a library for handling user interfaces and other standard Macintosh stuff that many people found easier to use than Apple's MacApp.

ProjectBuilder and InterfaceBuilder are nice tools. I still like CodeWarrior, but I think it's starting to fall behind - it's no longer as dramatically better than Apple's own offerings. Also, under Motorola they've been emphasizing the embedded market (which makes sense, given that's Motorola's bread and butter).

[theolein]

Doesn't anyone have some idea about how Apple could better compete in the area of hardware. I know this sounds silly but allowing one or maximum two other hardware manufacturers to make OSX compatible machines would be a boost (I think) for Apple in the areas I mentioned above. IBM could be allowed to use MacOSX on it's R/S6000 machines or something like that. IBM has never been cheap and I doubt they would undercut Apple's margins but it might add some sway in corporate decisions.

[Since EBCDIC]

Long before MPW there were a variety of ways to program for the Macintosh; all frustratingly difficult.

I was hot and heavy into coding when the Mac arrived on the scene in 1984, but it was *years* before the developer situation settled down and became inexpensive. Early on it was assumed that your company would be doing the paying for pricey tools, and that you would have an endless amount of time to deal with a very strange programming environment.

Interesting, because the SmallTalk windowing environment on the Three Rivers PERQ computer around that time, and the Lisp Machines and Symbolics at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Labs were much, much easier to program.

I think the logjam really broke for the rest of us when MacPascal was released. There were professional ways of releasing Mac software before then, but you wouldn't wish that on someone you really, really don't like.

CodeWarrior was great, but also rather costly for an end-user (rather than for a company).

I love how things are now. All the UNIX things I love and use, amazing tools from Apple, and an OS which is getting better with each iteration.

Must towel off :-)

[booboo]

Originally posted by eyadams:
...Also, under Motorola they've been emphasizing the embedded market (which makes sense, given that's Motorola's bread and butter).

Is this key?

Are Apple improving their developer tools because they are doubtful over Codewarriors future?

[OpenStep]

We're lucky they are free now, back in the NeXT day there was regular NS/OS and NS/OS Developer that were 2 separate products.

[eyadams]

Are Apple improving their developer tools because they are doubtful over Codewarriors future?

While CodeWarrior's status may be a factor, I think the main reason they're improving the tools so much because it's one of the crown jewels that came with NeXT. I don't think anyone ever really love MPW, but there are lots of people who speak very highly of PB and IB in their earlier life as the NeXT development tools.

Also, it just makes good sense from a competitive standpoint: Microsoft's developer tools are very, very good. While having emacs, gcc and make will lure Unix developers, developers coming from Windows world would look at these tools and laugh. To compete, Apple needs top level tools. MPW would never have been great; ProjectBuilder and InterfaceBuilder started out great and are only getting better.

[moki]

Originally posted by Since EBCDIC:
I love how things are now. All the UNIX things I love and use, amazing tools from Apple, and an OS which is getting better with each iteration.

hrm well, as someone who has used developmental tools on the Mac since TML Pascal back in 1986, I can say that it is nice Apple's developer tools are free, but I find them far from amazing.

Project Builder is slow, and has one of the worst UI's I've ever seen (it looks like something Q of James Bond fame would design, with all sorts of hidden buttons and drawers). The debugging tools are passable at best, and the integration between Project Builder and Interface Builder was state of the art in 1992, but not now.

gcc is better with 3.1, but it still isn't as fast, nor does it generate code as well as CodeWarrior does.

Yeah, it all works, but just barely.

Here's to hoping Xcode brings better things...

[theolein]

Originally posted by moki:
hrm well, as someone who has used developmental tools on the Mac since TML Pascal back in 1986, I can say that it is nice Apple's developer tools are free, but I find them far from amazing.

Project Builder is slow, and has one of the worst UI's I've ever seen (it looks like something Q of James Bond fame would design, with all sorts of hidden buttons and drawers). The debugging tools are passable at best, and the integration between Project Builder and Interface Builder was state of the art in 1992, but not now.

gcc is better with 3.1, but it still isn't as fast, nor does it generate code as well as CodeWarrior does.

Yeah, it all works, but just barely.

Here's to hoping Xcode brings better things...

Xcode and Panther use GCC3.3 don't they? Supposed to be much, much better. As for PB and IB, well I agree to an extent. I ended up using vim of all things for a lot of coding. I heard Xcode will finally provide code completion, which is something that has been sorely lacking in PB.

[moki]

Originally posted by theolein:
Xcode and Panther use GCC3.3 don't they? Supposed to be much, much better. As for PB and IB, well I agree to an extent. I ended up using vim of all things for a lot of coding. I heard Xcode will finally provide code completion, which is something that has been sorely lacking in PB.

BTW I do agree that your basic premise is correct, that including the developer tools for free was a very smart idea. Hobbyists are probably more likely to give it a go, though I'm sure it has cut into MetroWerks' sales as well.

[Waterman]

I think the point about Apple making both the hardware and the software (and wanting to stay that way) is the key to their ability to innovate. It's also the key to their profitability, which is why it probably won't happen except as a VERY last resort.

But...

Could Apple partner with Sony to unleash some sort of OS X based general purpose OS for the PS3? I'm thinking TiVo Desktop-like functionality, like displaying pictures from iPhoto on your TV or surfing the net with Safari on your TV. Of course, I don't even have a TV, so this wouldn't be useful to me...

If the Sony hype engine is to be believed, the PS3's 'cell' processor will be amazing, with the possibility of massively distributed computing over broadband and incredible performance. Apple could bring its experience with Zero-Conf networking to the table, and Sony has incredible market penetration in the console market. Both Apple and Sony share a common enemy in Microsoft. Apple for obvious reasons, and Sony for the Xbox and MS's new found interest in the cell phone market, among others, probably.

Has this possibility been discussed in detail already here? If not, let's chat it up, baby!