141–150 of 401 posts
Visual Studio: $549.00 Flash Builder: $699.00 TextMate: $56.00 Coda: $99.00 BBedit: $99.99 Xcode 4: $4.99
Eclipse: $0 NetBeans: $0 DevShed C++: $0 Emacs: $0 The complete GNU compiler collection: $0 Xcode 3: $0
I suspect Apple is trying to build up the Mac App Store. I doubt they care about the money they get from Xcode or Facetime ($0.99). Perhaps it sets up an expectation for the consumer - a small utility should cost about $0.99 and that a larger application should be about $4.99. This gets consumers in the habit of paying for software they might expect to be free, motivating developers to use the Mac App store and build…
I agree: They are charging to set an expectation for consumers and app developers that quality mac apps should not be free.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering that you still need a mac, I don't see how much difference it makes. Note that I still think it's a terribly stupid idea.
Right, but who bought them that mac?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Teenagers might not have credit cards, but they receive iTunes gift cards as gifts, which they can now use on Xcode.
I'm trying to think of what would've happened if I had to ask my parents for their credit card every time I had to download some tool when I was a kid just messing around with programming. I probably wouldn't working in the field today, that's for sure.
So not only did that lead to me being a programmer for a living, I got some negotiation skills out of it too.
This is somewhat strange pricing - it seems ridiculously cheap if they're trying to make significant profits off of it, but pricey enough to prevent tinkerers who don't really know about coding but feel like trying it from getting a start in xcode.
Some pirated software and cracking patches rely on gdb. So a user has to have xcode installed in order for the cracks to work. At least, it's often a requirement. This might be to make that harder and to thwart software piracy up to a point.
...or actually, $1,999.99
i think i will pass.
You can make up a new title if you want, but if you put
gratuitous editorial spin on it, the editors may rewrite it.
[1] http://developer.apple.com/xcode/index.php
(The comment was edited, as others have noted that they can't download from the ADC site with a free ADC account.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm with you. When you give software away instead of charging for it, while simultaneously making your money off an associated product, you are required to do all sorts of backflips over how you account for revenue. This is why certain updates for the iPod Touch cost money while they are free for iPhones: It is entirely driven by how Apple writes up iPod Touch vs. iPhone revenue.
Except that's not true anymore: "Apple has for the first time made this full iOS upgrade free to all of its iPod touch customers, rather than charging the customary $10 fee that provoked groans in the past." ( http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/reviews/entry/apple-ios-4.0... ) This leads me to believe that the whole accounting rules canard was just a way to make more money. Why did they start charging for XCode? Becaus…
That being said, they haven't said that the XCode charge is a subscription accounting thing, so there's certainly no logical reason why you may not be correct in saying that they are charging for XCode because they can. I'm guessing otherwise, but this is armchair speculation.
UPDATE: I was wrong about subscription-based accounting affecting how Apple accounts for expenses. Here's a link I found:
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/23/standards-board-approves...
Sarbanes-Oxley? http://www.google.com/search?q=Sarbanes+Oxley+Apple
ETA: Also does anyone seriously think that the $4.99 is going to remotely even slightly come anywhere within a few orders of magnitude of paying for the development costs? I mean, really?