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

OS X Isn't for Developers

zachholman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 252 posts

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#231

Post by scott_s »

Wientje wrote: post #217
scott_s wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been long enough that I can't edit what I wrote, but I forgot my history. The first C compiler was grown by modifying a B compiler that was implemented in B. That B compiler, however, was originally implemented in assembly: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/chist.html

It kinda makes you think. If we delete all compilers in the world, there would be no easy way to make new compilers. It also means that your compiler on your PC can trace its heritage back to the first machine coed compiler ever written, like life itself evolving from one generation to the next.

I was thinking of a similar orign-of-life analogy, but unlike life, compilers have sprung up independently of each other many times over. That is, in the early days, it was common to implement everything over again in assembly on a new machine.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#232

Post by HomeSen »

Actually, you don't need to buy Xcode4 just to get gcc ;) Just have a look at the opensource page of apple: http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/gcc/. You can get all the sources you need and thus could also create your own "brew package", or am I missing something here?

Also you can still ask your users to find their OSX-DVDs and install (though an older version of) Xcode from there.

If someone already mentioned the above, I apologize, but I'm too lazy to read 220+ comments :P

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#233

Post by yardie »

fpgeek wrote: post #118

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…

What happened was that Oracle was to assume continued development of Java on OSX. What was reported was Apple was completely dropping it. In fact, I just received a notification that a new version was ready.

And up to that point Apple was slowly killing Java development on the Mac. Updates were less frequent and ages behind other platforms. And you only had one choice to get the JDK, Apple. At least with Oracle, it's assumed, updates should be arriving regularly and in line with other platforms.

Which is what Apple was saying all along when the controversy started.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#234

Post by bluesnowmonkey »

k33l0r wrote: post #84
sid0 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because then you'd need to ship binaries for every conceivable platform that your gem could be used on You don't. You ship binaries for the top 2-3 platforms and provide source for the rest. That's how open source projects have been doing things for ages . and you'd need to make some pretty fundamental changes to the whole Ruby gem distribution system Meh, it isn't insurmountable.

You ship binaries for the top 2-3 platforms and provide source for the rest. I wish it were that simple, but then you also have to worry about library versions (unless you really want to bundle all your dependencies too, bloating your little library from 10KiB to tens of megabytes, or more). Also see this reply: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2311455 Meh, it isn't insurmountable. Yeah, because forcing a huge inf…

> tens of megabytes

Is that supposed to be a lot?

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#235

Post by pyre »

rbarooah wrote: post #192
tvon wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I hear the "it's about SOX" comment a lot, and I hear the "it's about greed" comment a lot, neither of which make any sense to me... I'd love to get a real explanation.

The sox comment has been explained in numerous places. Basically because Xcode comes with a purchase of a new Mac or OSX it's considered to be part of the value delivered with that purchase. If they update it later, it is regarded as delivering additional value to the original purchase . I.e. Some of the money you paid originally is accounted as having paid for the upgrade. This means that the original transaction wa…

I don't buy the idea that SOX prevents 'loss leaders.'

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#236

Post by aeontech »

teilo wrote: post #44
aeontech wrote: post #12

What a lot of people seem to miss is that Xcode 4 is still a free download on http://developer.apple.com/xcode/ for members of the developer program (which is a free membership).

No, this is wrong. A developer login is free. The developer program costs $99 a year. You cannot get XCode for free unless you have ponied up your $99.

I stand corrected.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#237

Post by jameskatt »

This is an idiotic article.

XCode is available for $4.99 on the Mac App Store (so you can get updates automatically) or for FREE if you care to download it and install it yourself. And it is INCLUDED FOR FREE on Mac OS X installation disks and EVERY Mac sold. DUH.

Apple has made it INCREDIBLY EASY for Developers to create apps for OS X. All you have to do is witness the more than 442377 apps that have been approved for iOS (which has OS X as its base OS) and the thousands upon thousands of developers who have signed up for OS X. The Mac App Store makes it also incredibly easy to sell your apps to PAYING CUSTOMERS for OS X on Mac.

Complaining about how much disk space XCode takes up is also a moot point given how cheap 2 GB hard drives are these days (e.g. $79 for a Hitachi 2 GB hard drive on Amazon).

OS X IS FOR DEVELOPERS that actually want to ship and sell product. Period.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#238

Post by jameskatt »

This is an idiotic article.

XCode is available for $4.99 on the Mac App Store (so you can get updates automatically) or for FREE if you care to download it and install it yourself. And it is INCLUDED FOR FREE on Mac OS X installation disks and EVERY Mac sold. DUH.

Apple has made it INCREDIBLY EASY for Developers to create apps for OS X. All you have to do is witness the more than 442377 apps that have been approved for iOS (which has OS X as its base OS) and the thousands upon thousands of developers who have signed up for OS X. The Mac App Store makes it also incredibly easy to sell your apps to PAYING CUSTOMERS for OS X on Mac.

Complaining about how much disk space XCode takes up is also a moot point given how cheap 2 GB hard drives are these days (e.g. $79 for a Hitachi 2 GB hard drive on Amazon).

OS X IS FOR DEVELOPERS that actually want to ship and sell product. Period.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#239

Post by b3b0p »

CountSessine wrote: post #127
NumberFiveAlive wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per your point #3: I spend a lot of time in both Windows 7/VS2010 AND OSX/XCode (along with a smidgen of time in Ubuntu as well) and crashes are just about a thing of the past in all three environments. That said, Xcode/OSX gives me the spinning beach ball of death at least as much as I get a crash to desktop in W7 and far, far more often than I get a BSOD in W7. The idea that windows crashes a lot is a myth hanging…

As for the polish comment, it's really a matter of what you're used to and strictly a matter of opinion, but I find Xcode a nightmare to navigate compared to VS2010. Sure, Xcode is shinier and looks better, but the UX is far superior in VS2010 (again, just my opinion). I'm very much looking forward to a single window interface in Xcode 4.3. Oh dear - you haven't been using the multiple-window layout in Xcode 3, have…

I didn't downvote you, I can't downvote, but I like the multiwindow layout because then it's very easy to use an external editor in place of the Xcode editor. I liked using MacVim or TextMate when I first got into iOS development.

Re: OS X Isn't for Developers

#240

Post by yMcDonald »

Eclipse.

That's enough to turn any iMac (well, any computers) into a programmer's powerhouse.

Last year, I led a small team of 3 devs to build a homebrew app for the NDS portable game console. We all used different OSes/IDE for development out of necessity (WinXp, Linux/Eclipse, MacOS X/xCode). Although I had no problem installing arm-gcc on the Mac and configure xCode to use the NDS-specific toolchain, I still prefer Eclipse.

Maybe xCode 4 will change that perception... Looking forward to give it a spin...

Yves McDonald

Post reply on HN