OS X Isn't for Developers • Hacker News Board

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#111

Post by bonch » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 12:57 AM UTC

petercooper wrote: post #6

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.

> Apple already wastes gigabytes on printer drivers and extra languages you don't need.

No, they didn't. For example, Snow Leopard downloads printer drivers from Apple as you need them.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#112

Post by mnutt » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 12:58 AM UTC

MJR wrote: post #56

It’s possible that this will change before OS X Lion ships, but it’s still a troubling prospect today. Why is this a troubling prospect today? The Developer tools you need are on your install disk. You did buy the operating system right? Just install them. If you don't have the disc handy at least you have the option of downloading it for free. You're arguing that spending AN HOUR of your time is offensive. Think of…

No, he's arguing that asking somebody else to spend an hour of their time to install a gem is placing extra barriers to people experimenting with the software that came with their computer.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#113

Post by bonch » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 12:58 AM UTC

dasil003 wrote: post #69

It's a legitimate point, but the linkbait title just irritates me. This is something that developers only have to deal with once every year or two. $5 is not a lot of money for a 4.5GB development package, regardless of whether you think it should be free. It certainly shouldn't be any kind of tipping point in platform choice for developers.

> It certainly shouldn't be any kind of tipping point in platform choice for developers.

It won't be. After the usual anti-Apple trolls have had their say, everyone will have forgotten about this phony "controversy" by next week.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#114

Post by nl » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 12:59 AM UTC

dgallagher wrote: post #105

statictype wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about iTunes? Why don't they have to charge for iTunes?

You make a great point; there appear to be some contradictions in their accounting policies. The "App Store" didn't come with OS X, but was free. iTunes and Safari get major updates all the time, yet remain free upgrades. On iOS, you have iBooks, Remote, Find My iPhone, Apple Store, MobileMe Disk, and MobileMe Gallery, all free. We're not sure what the litmus test is for their accounting practices. We're not even sur…

Business Decisions != Accounting practices

Can you seriously imagine Steve Jobs being told they he has to charge for something he doesn't want to because of accounting practices?!

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#115

Post by scott_s » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 1:00 AM UTC

I'm not sure why having to separately install XCode to get gcc is a "blight." OSX is a consumer OS. If you are a developer, you're savvy enough to know that you stick in the OSX DVD after booting your Mac up for the first time and install developer tools. Then you never have to think about it again. Where's the blight?

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#116

Post by cytzol » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 1:00 AM UTC

dekz wrote: post #101

holman wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was more reacting to the common argument that "$5 is not expensive". My apologies if that's not what they were addressing in this comment. That said, Xcode 3 doesn't satisfy the requirement of being easy or quick to install for a casual user.

What isn't easy about installing from the disc given when you bought the mac? Don't have a your mac discs anymore? Download it or borrow someone elses. If you don't want the extra crud of iOS firmwares, disable it. To be honest it's quite "easy" to install for any user. Quick on the other hand, how many 4.5gb installations are quick?

FWIW, it doesn't come with the new Air models.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#117

Post by dventimi » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 1:01 AM UTC

I don't own or use a Mac anymore, but when I did in grad school a few years ago (using Tiger) I always got gcc binaries from here: http://hpc.sourceforge.net/

I never installed XCode.

I very very far from being an expert on this, so forgive me if I'm mistaken, but is there a reason these do not suffice?

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#118

Post by fpgeek » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 1:04 AM UTC

This reminds me of the controversy when Apple decided to stop developing (and pre-installing) Java. Strictly speaking, nothing any Java developer had been doing became impossible, but a lot of things became more inconvenient, more complicated and / or more frustrating. It felt like Apple didn't care and they thought (rightly or wrongly) Apple should.

This Xcode 4 situation feels like the same thing. Maybe the status quo will return after Lion is released, maybe not. Right now, however, things are a bit more inconvenient / complicated / frustrating and it feels like Apple doesn't care all over again.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#119

Post by sclarson » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 1:05 AM UTC

You really shouldn't neglect to mention Mono among those developers. There are a lot of them of C#/Mono developers out there making applications for every platform that love using OS X and monodevelop.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#120

Post by rayiner » Fri, Mar 11, 2011, 1:11 AM UTC

nl wrote: post #107

geuis wrote: post #62

I disagree with all of the OP's points, except for one. Yes, Macs are incredibly popular with developers. 1) The reason I have always liked Macs since I was a kid is they basically come with what they need, and its easy to install extra stuff if you need it. Just because many developers like Macs doesn't mean that most Mac owners are developers. Most are just normal people who would wonder what is eating up extra spa…

Its been demonstrated many times that Apple charges these $5 fees for previously free tools and applications because of SOX compliance laws... Its rather obvious its about SOX. No, it's not at all. The only "evidence" for that is a bunch of uninformed developers speculating about things they know nothing about. OTOH, there is quite a bit of evidence that this isn't the case: 1) Why didn't they charge before? They've…

Just a law student, but I can buy the SOX thing. Companies have very different approaches to compliance, get advice from different counsel, account for things in different ways, etc.

I feel like there is a Occam's Razor argument in here. What purpose besides SOX could Apple have in not giving away XCode 4? Could be pure greed as others are saying, but when Apple wants to make money they're incredibly good at it. How many people are going to download XCode? Tens of thousands? Apple might stand to make, what $100k off the venture? If they were really trying to monetize XCode why would they price it so they don't make any money off it?