Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What's new in Xcode 7

developer.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 179 posts

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#111

Post by MCRed »

Fargren wrote: post #105
m4x wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple isn't forcing you to pay if you want to run your apps, they're warning users and forcing them to take an extra step to run unsigned code. That doesn't completely prevent malicious code execution but it definitely helps which is a net win for users. Complaining that they ask for $100/year to use their official distribution channel (which incurs ongoing costs for them) seems unreasonable considering the quality a…

I have to ask, because I feel XCode is the worst IDE I've ever used. What about it is pretty awesome? Instruments is pretty cool, though.

Everything. The way debugging is integrated. Interface Builder-- nobody has anything like that to compete with it. It's totally integrated so you can really develop efficiently, and the simulator makes testing quick and easy.

I've never seen an IDE that was anywhere close. I suspect that people who hate Xcode are simply familiar with something else and find it frustrating to use it (though they've spent a few hours with it and hundreds of hours with something else they're expect it to beat their old IDE with no effort yet spent learning it.)

Seriously, Microsoft and Google can't even do a competent UI on applications built for consumers. Their developer tools are terrible by comparison.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#112

Post by MCRed »

sangnoir wrote: post #97
kybernetyk wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet those developers somehow can buy a computer for $1000+ and spend an additional $500-$800 on the tablet/phone? :)

> Yet those developers somehow can buy a computer for $1000+ and spend an additional $500-$800 on the tablet/phone? :)[1] In a word - Yes. I am a developer from a 3rd world country, and I bought a Mac Mini for $500 (not '$1000+') for the purposes of entering the Apple ecosystem. I'm not going to spend another $500 on an iPhone[2], especially since I'm not sure if it will work out financially. The emulator will have t…

If you're serious about making an App, then yes, you should spend the $100. You will get it back in the first couple of days if you make a good app.

The $100 is to keep out the shovel ware and crap-- look at all the junk in the store as it is now. Imagine what it would be like if there wasn't that $100 barrier to entry?

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#113

Post by grrowl »

Someone wrote: post #49
0x0 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that's quite a change! Is this some kind of intermediate LLVM language? Sounds very Java/.NET-like. I can see how it's nice for future proofing (i bet you can even change from ARM to x86 then!), but you're handing a lot of control and probably something much closer to the original source code over to Apple. Is there a fundamental change of architecture planned for future iOS devices?

http://llvm.org/docs/BitCodeFormat.html . Way closer to assembly than Java/.NET byte codes. Also potentially processor specific. My guess is that it is future-proofing towards running iOS apps on Mac OS and/or running (parts of) iOS apps on the Apple Watch. It also might mean that Apple plans to make their own ARM extensions (for example, I suspect having the CPU know about tagged pointers, so that an 'add' instructi…

> also allows your app to download some resources on demand.

Oh boy; if this is the start of apps lazy-loading resources and code, I'm really excited. It's the largest barrier to signing in your account from any device.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#114

Post by MrGando »

MCRed wrote: post #111
Fargren wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to ask, because I feel XCode is the worst IDE I've ever used. What about it is pretty awesome? Instruments is pretty cool, though.

Everything. The way debugging is integrated. Interface Builder-- nobody has anything like that to compete with it. It's totally integrated so you can really develop efficiently, and the simulator makes testing quick and easy. I've never seen an IDE that was anywhere close. I suspect that people who hate Xcode are simply familiar with something else and find it frustrating to use it (though they've spent a few hours w…

Are you kidding me? Look, I've been developing Mac/iOS for a while now (7 years). Xcode is mostly a piece of garbage if you compare it with the robustness of Visual Studio. I actually envy the MSFT developer tools, specially VS.

Google is another story though.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#115

Post by beagle3 »

gruez wrote: post #88
comex wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not just rent; it is a security feature. Whether this feature is being used wisely is another question... A few months ago I sent Apple security an email about a fake Flash installer with a valid Developer ID certificate. It turned out that someone else had written an article about the same malware five days ago, and reported it to Apple, yet the certificate was not revoked yet - so it doesn't seem that Apple h…

>thanks to Developer ID, they at least had some kind of payment trail as well as a name, likely making it harder for the same person to get additional certificates What's preventing me from paying some person in a third world country to get a certificate in his name?

Nothing does. But that person will likely have no loyalty to you, and would give every info he has about you to Apple for an additional $100.

You don't need to be NSA level to hide your tracks there, but it's not trivial either. And Apple is likely to work with the FBI/Interpol about that if whatever evil deeds your software does is sufficiently high profile. Theses guys might also not be good enough to catch you - but they have access to the NSA data for parallel construction, allegedly. And the NSA has incriminating evidence against you.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#116

Post by mikeash »

santaclaus wrote: post #108
nothis wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, you can't auto-rename stuff? I noticed in an older version of XCode (when I still bothered), that there were really basic refactoring tools missing for C++, but I assumed that was just because Apple hates C++. Apple obviously doesn't hate Swift. I guess Apple just hates refactoring. Why though?

> but I assumed that was just because Apple hates C++ Chris Lattner is a bit of a C++ head, no? LLVM is a C++ project... With that said, yea, refactoring support in Xcode is a drag.

Lattner hasn't had any say in how Xcode's user-facing features work until pretty recently, though.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#117

Post by beagle3 »

nekitamo wrote: post #54
Entalpi wrote: post #34

"Xcode 7 has a ENABLE_BITCODE option to embed bitcode in apps, app extensions, and frameworks. The option is turned on by default for iOS and is mandatory for watchOS projects submitted to the store. When bitcode is enabled for a target, all the objects, static libraries and user frameworks used when linking that target must contain bitcode. Otherwise, an error or a warning will be issued by the linker. (Note: missin…

Agreed, this is an insane requirement. Our app uses commercial libraries from closed source vendors, some of which are no longer distributing newer versions of their libraries. If this becomes a requirement, we will not be able to ship our app because we can't deliver the entire thing in bitcode.

> Our app uses commercial libraries from closed source vendors, some of which are no longer distributing newer versions of their libraries

This is the insane part - you're relying on things you have zero control over and zero support for. Apple's requirement is no different than some fatal bug discovered or backdoor discovered in those libraries - except Apple is giving you some notice without immediately putting the liability on you.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#118

Post by sangnoir »

MCRed wrote: post #112
sangnoir wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet those developers somehow can buy a computer for $1000+ and spend an additional $500-$800 on the tablet/phone? :)[1] In a word - Yes. I am a developer from a 3rd world country, and I bought a Mac Mini for $500 (not '$1000+') for the purposes of entering the Apple ecosystem. I'm not going to spend another $500 on an iPhone[2], especially since I'm not sure if it will work out financially. The emulator will have t…

If you're serious about making an App, then yes, you should spend the $100. You will get it back in the first couple of days if you make a good app. The $100 is to keep out the shovel ware and crap-- look at all the junk in the store as it is now. Imagine what it would be like if there wasn't that $100 barrier to entry?

> You will get it back in the first couple of days if you make a good app.

Well, there's the rub. Unfortunately, the vast majority of developers just don't make money on the app stores. I'm not going to beat myself up if it doesn't work out - I'm taking this as a long-term learning opportunity.

If one of my apps takes off on Android (as proof that other people find it good - or I'm confident it is good enough), then I'll pay the $100.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#119

Post by snowwrestler »

chc wrote: post #40
mynameisvlad wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, really, you're comparing paying rent with a $100/yr fee (which now allows you to sign apps across their platforms)? Really? I highly doubt most indie developers even have to make that choice. Finding the $100 a year is not the most impossible task in the world, even for a tiny indie developer. Plus, more than a few apps have added instructions on their download pages to show users how to get around Gatekeeper…

I could afford $100 a month. Affordability is not the point. The point is that Apple will block your app from opening by default unless you pay them a recurring fee, and if not, you must incur additional support burden to teach users how to get around the problem. Yes, lots of apps do post instructions on how to get around it, but lots of apps do all sorts of user-unfriendly things. We Apple users used to make fun of…

Philosophically, it is a bummer. Instead of a developer and customer having a direct relationship, there's now an Apple tax that needs to be paid every year or the relationship gets cut.

However, I can't think of any other way to gain the security benefits of app signing.

Ultimately, all security is a web of trust. If you're going to put an automated, self-service system at the root of that web (the Apple dev program), then you need reliable ways to establish identity and discourage high-volume fraud. A $100/year credit card charge does both pretty well.

Re: What's new in Xcode 7

#120

Post by jamestnz »

biturd wrote: post #104
chc wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly, if you're charging users, then there's absolutely no question about it, you get the membership. Your entire "expecting the user to do so" point completely goes out the window the second you said it's a paid app. If you have the revenue, then it's simply a cost of doing business in the Apple world. Yes, because Apple demands rent. They create a problem and then charge you to fix it. This is called rent-see…

I feel being a staunch Mac user from the beginning has been detrimental to me. My first computer was a commodore 64, which I typed the programs out of the book into the terminal and it made balls move around on the screen and such. But I was really young, and no one was there to catch me, so I never thought to fiddle with it, I thought it was like a set of instructions and you had to follow them. I did not yet unders…

Wow, your history matches mine quite closely (manually typing BASIC programs into the C64 whilst not really "getting it", then going on to the Classic Mac OS and onto BBSes). I first got into the Mac around System 6 with a Mac 512Ke, then onto a Plus and other machines from there... remember hacking at apps with ResEdit?

Also keep in mind that the standard language for the classic Mac was originally Pascal[1], not C.

In addition to Metrowerks CodeWarrior (which I also recall being pricey), there was also the Borland TurboC++ family. And starting from around System 7 there was MPW from Apple[2], which targeted a number of languages and was eventually free.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacApp

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_Programmer's_Workshop

Post reply on HN