OS X Isn't for Developers

#1

Post by holman » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:34 PM UTC

OS X Isn't for Developers
zachholman.com

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#2

Post by darkhelmetlive » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:44 PM UTC

The few of points I've made about this are:

1. The Xcode 4 download compared to Xcode 3 is basically just a different IDE. The gcc version is, for all intents and purposes, identical. There's nothing stopping anybody from just installing that if all they need is the toolchain.

2. The other big 2 OS's (Windows and Ubuntu) don't have any build tools installed by default either. Granted they are just an apt-get away on Ubuntu, but it's still something you have to explicitly install.

3. If I wasn't a dev, I'd be pissed to find some compiler toolchain IDE gongshow eating up 5-15GB of my disk space, so not having it by default is probably a good thing. Most people aren't devs.

I paid the $5, but I'd still like to see just the toolchain available as a free download, though I still don't think it would be a good thing to have it installed by default.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#3

Post by wmoxam » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:46 PM UTC

Argument kinda falls flat. For starters, Xcode 3 is still free, at least for now. No need for Xcode 4.

Also, I'm certain that someone will package gcc for mac sooner or later now that there's an incentive to do so. There has not been much incentive to do so before now since it was included with Xcode.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#4

Post by upinsmoke » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:46 PM UTC

gcc version is the same as Xcode 3. Xcode 3 is free at developer.apple.com

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#5

Post by holman » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:48 PM UTC

wmoxam wrote: post #3

Argument kinda falls flat. For starters, Xcode 3 is still free, at least for now. No need for Xcode 4. Also, I'm certain that someone will package gcc for mac sooner or later now that there's an incentive to do so. There has not been much incentive to do so before now since it was included with Xcode.

I wasn't arguing that Xcode is expensive. I'm arguing that the barriers to entry are pretty offensive if you need the capabilities of only gcc. An hour-long process involving credit cards isn't very nifty.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#6

Post by petercooper » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:48 PM UTC

darkhelmetlive wrote: post #2

The few of points I've made about this are: 1. The Xcode 4 download compared to Xcode 3 is basically just a different IDE. The gcc version is, for all intents and purposes, identical. There's nothing stopping anybody from just installing that if all they need is the toolchain. 2. The other big 2 OS's (Windows and Ubuntu) don't have any build tools installed by default either. Granted they are just an apt-get away on…

If I wasn't a dev, I'd be pissed to find out some compiler toolchain IDE gongshow eating up 5-15GB of my disk space

Yeah, but the essentials that most command line builds require wouldn't even take up 10% of that. Apple already wastes gigabytes on printer drivers and extra languages you don't need.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#7

Post by joeld42 » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:49 PM UTC

I don't understand? Can't you release the ruby gems or whatever it is as binaries? You only need to spend the $5 if you want to change something, right?

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#8

Post by tvon » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:50 PM UTC

holman wrote: post #5

wmoxam wrote: post #3

Argument kinda falls flat. For starters, Xcode 3 is still free, at least for now. No need for Xcode 4. Also, I'm certain that someone will package gcc for mac sooner or later now that there's an incentive to do so. There has not been much incentive to do so before now since it was included with Xcode.

I wasn't arguing that Xcode is expensive. I'm arguing that the barriers to entry are pretty offensive if you need the capabilities of only gcc. An hour-long process involving credit cards isn't very nifty.

It doesn't involve credit cards as xcode 3 is still freely available. If Apple does not include the developer tools on the Lion DVD, and if they remove all free versions of xcode for download, then I don't doubt someone will package up the "build essentials" for OSX and make them available. To date there has been no reason to do this, but if there is a reason, there is nothing preventing it that I am aware of.

edit: though I agree a smaller "build essentials" tool chain would be nice, but that was the case before you had to pay for xcode and nobody has bothered to create one. I can't think of a reason why it wouldn't be possible, only that it's probably not worth the hassle of setting it up and maintaining it (though Apple doing it would be excellent).

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#9

Post by holman » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:50 PM UTC

darkhelmetlive wrote: post #2

The few of points I've made about this are: 1. The Xcode 4 download compared to Xcode 3 is basically just a different IDE. The gcc version is, for all intents and purposes, identical. There's nothing stopping anybody from just installing that if all they need is the toolchain. 2. The other big 2 OS's (Windows and Ubuntu) don't have any build tools installed by default either. Granted they are just an apt-get away on…

I'm so down with an apt-get (or in this case, brew install) for build tools. That's really what I'm getting at. It'd be great if it were installed by default, but if it were just accessibile by any means it'd be a massive step up. Most people don't need all of Xcode.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#10

Post by jarin » Thu, Mar 10, 2011, 11:51 PM UTC

joeld42 wrote: post #7

I don't understand? Can't you release the ruby gems or whatever it is as binaries? You only need to spend the $5 if you want to change something, right?

Gems that use C extensions generally build them using native libraries.