If the Mac truly becomes completely irrelevant from a consumer point of view it will still be valuable to Apple as the dev platform.
One doesn't write Droid software on Droid: one simply tests it there.
Exactly, that's why the above "Xcode on iPad pro" idea is ridiculous. Development will always be the domain of devices/computers with the highest possible computing power.
If Apple does not manufacture these devices themselves then they will almost certainly make Xcode vailable on them. In that sense Xcode on windows might come true, but I would bet that Xcode on "OS X DEV" which you can install on specific intel machines is much more likeley under those circumstances.
I don't think it's quite so ridiculous. ARM CPUs are increasing in power with each generation -- they're even trying to get them into the server market now. Once ARM CPUs get up to a certain level of horsepower, there is no reason why Apple can't use an iPad-style device as the iOS development platform. Remember, back in the late end of the PowerPC days, when the chip was woefully underpowered compared to Intel's best except for a few certain benchmarks that they were optimized for, Apple still only had its development tools on PPC, despite it not being the platform with the highest possible computing power (although I agree that this may not be a fair comparison). The iPad as it exists now is arguably more powerful than many of the PPC machines people were developing on for a long time -- it's certainly more powerful than my old PPC Mac.
One other thing to keep in mind is that iOS is basically just OS X written for touch-based devices. The kernel, APIs, etc., are all pretty much the same on both for anything not involving touch screens. While porting Xcode to iOS wouldn't be trivial, it certainly would be a lot easier than porting it to Windows or Linux or whatever other non-OS X options exist.
Agreed... which is why as an owner of Apple stock (yes, I'm not joking, I do own about 10 shares of Apple which I bought quite a while back), I love what they're doing. However, as a user of Apple's computer products (as opposed to their mobile products), I'm not a fan. It's great for consumers, such as my mom, but not so great for professional/power users such as most of us here.
Yah whatever, I'm just at odds w/ the "apple is evil" thing, cause what's actually pretty messed up is when companies knowingly release crappy products riddled with bugs and defects, that's straight up deception. Apple's QA is freaking miles beyond every other tech company, no matter how much tech bloggers want to try to find slip ups here and there.
It's weird to me that you don't hear more tech ppl getting mad at Google for basically co-opting open source morality to use as a pr tool. It lets them get away with creating a fragmented and consumer-frustrating platform that gets slapped on the massive pile of bottom-of-the-barrel devices; a crucial technique for boosting all the AdSense and big data money they're pulling in. I just think it's silly to say a company is "good/evil" or "right/wrong" based on how open their platform is. They can only be judged by their dedication to providing quality products.
Either way, Apple won't leave the professional, serious work world in the dust; but they will change what that world is, and it will be more inclusive and accessible.
Agreed... which is why as an owner of Apple stock (yes, I'm not joking, I do own about 10 shares of Apple which I bought quite a while back), I love what they're doing. However, as a user of Apple's computer products (as opposed to their mobile products), I'm not a fan. It's great for consumers, such as my mom, but not so great for professional/power users such as most of us here.
Yah whatever, I'm just at odds w/ the "apple is evil" thing, cause what's actually pretty messed up is when companies knowingly release crappy products riddled with bugs and defects, that's straight up deception. Apple's QA is freaking miles beyond every other tech company, no matter how much tech bloggers want to try to find slip ups here and there.
I'm not saying "Apple is evil." I don't think what they're doing with restrictions is necessarily "evil" (it certainly isn't for the average, non-tech savvy user). It's just not appropriate for my use cases.
Their QA is excellent, though I'm not sure if it's miles beyond every other tech company. For one thing, they only have to test on a handful of different hardware combinations, which makes things somewhat easier. For another, they've had their own issues with stupid bugs getting through the QA process.
It's weird to me that you don't hear more tech ppl getting mad at Google for basically co-opting open source morality to use as a pr tool. It lets them get away with creating a fragmented and consumer-frustrating platform that gets slapped on the massive pile of bottom-of-the-barrel devices; a crucial technique for boosting all the AdSense and big data money they're pulling in. I just think it's silly to say a company is "good/evil" or "right/wrong" based on how open their platform is. They can only be judged by their dedication to providing quality products.
That's why I use an iPhone and not an Android. Well, not the only reason, but I haven't bought into the Android open source Kool-Aid either.
Either way, Apple won't leave the professional, serious work world in the dust; but they will change what that world is, and it will be more inclusive and accessible.
Yeah... right... So when's that next Mac Pro update due out? Or how about the high quality of Final Cut Pro X?
Remember, Apple made more money this past year (or was it quarter? I forget) on the iPhone than they did in 30 years of selling Macs. It's just good business sense to concentrate on what makes them the most money.
I know you didn't say it's evil, it was Scott who did. But also like a million nerds all over the internet.
I think the fact that they have complete platform control plays into my statement that they have the best QA; other companies are often able to pass the buck when it comes different defects. Software developer can blame the hardware manufacturer etc etc.
That's a good point about the pro-level stuff and their focused strategy (don't make too many products), but you can edit full HD video on pretty much anything these days, and if you're talking super big ticket Hollywood editing, then you're talking supercomputers. I was confused about the FCX thing too, but I'd imagine it was actually an attempt to widen their editing market (sort of bridging the iMovie and FC crowds); tho they may have overestimated how much stuff pro users could deal with having removed. But even with that said, I could see them changing gears and thinking of their Mac line as a "hobby," like what they currently call the apple TV. I just don't think beefed up hardware and ultra-flexible software is the computing of the future (literally because of resource scarcity and population growth), and I think Apple gets it.
Apple does have excellent QA as far as they are concerned. But us programmers have a term we like to use, it's "defective by design." Apple products work exactly as Apple intends them do, they just don't work any other way.
Apple does have excellent QA as far as they are concerned. But us programmers have a term we like to use, it's "defective by design." Apple products work exactly as Apple intends them do, they just don't work any other way.
That still doesn't mean Apple won't let you make products that work on OS X the way you want them to, sometimes they even help you.
Apple does have excellent QA as far as they are concerned. But us programmers have a term we like to use, it's "defective by design." Apple products work exactly as Apple intends them do, they just don't work any other way.
That still doesn't mean Apple won't let you make products that work on OS X the way you want them to, sometimes they even help you.
Apple does have excellent QA as far as they are concerned. But us programmers have a term we like to use, it's "defective by design." Apple products work exactly as Apple intends them do, they just don't work any other way.
That still doesn't mean Apple won't let you make products that work on OS X the way you want them to, sometimes they even help you.
Yeah, I was pretty shocked by that.
I'm not. Probably works to their benefit as much as the community's. I know some folks who are developers at Apple whose idea of an IDE is a bunch of terminal windows and vi (no, not vim, but old fashioned, un-adorned, vi). They wouldn't need all of Xcode's overhead if all they're doing is compiling some new kernel module that they wrote in vi.
[Regarding the App Store], Apple’s priorities are as follows: Apple’s best interests first, users’ second, developers’ third.
Apple is trying to convince developers to embrace the App Store and its associated technologies like Gatekeeper. There's both a carrot (Apple handles payments, for a cut) and a stick (access to some APIs). Gatekeeper fills a need that protects both developers and consumers.
I don't anticipate Apple restricting development on Macs or getting rid of Macs anytime soon.
Didn't know that, but I would argue that they've diverged enough so that they're two entirely different phrases with different meanings, and both are correct, though "carrot or a stick" came first.
I don't anticipate Apple restricting development on Macs or getting rid of Macs anytime soon.
Well, this is the company that said that Macs are "trucks" and that the average user doesn't need a "truck." They may not kill them off completely, but they're going to marginalize them further and further -- again, until iOS can fully fulfill the realization of their "Knowledge Navigator" from that 1987 video.
I thought I'd bump this thread, and the bet in progress, to point out some iOS 8 things.
Instead of Apple devices and computers becoming more restrictive, it seems they are becoming more and more open and capable. Of course the apps still need developer accounts and approval, but the functionality of the apps can now be widely expanded by the expansions. Things like third party keyboards and app interactivity, things until now only on Android flavors, are here and it's awesome. And, I'd like to hope, probably more secure than Android, though that's an uneducated guess.
On the Mac side, not only are Macs not going away, there was a new Mac Pro this year, and likely more iMacs and Pros to come before Christmas. The Macbooks are only stalled because Intel isn't getting the new CPUs out in time. The app store is still there, but there's still a great market outside of it. I've bought two different software bundles this year from separate websites, and none of the apps required the app store or any approval from Apple. There is no diminishing of capabilities or openness.
And we know what's coming with OSX Yosemite. I think Rym and Scott are going to lose money and gain red cheeks from slaps in February.
Is this today or tomorrow? Either way, George and Ro and others are going to be happy. I haven't read back through to see if I'm owed any money.
I think it's clear that Rym and Scott totally missed on this one. I still install apps all the time, and actually less frequently from the app store than not.
And OSX is probably more "open" now than it was three years ago. For example, instead of Dropbox having to do kernel hack stuff to change the icons of synched folders, that's now an API call they and others can use. And Apple let them use this feature in the same release that they launched Cloud Kit, which could be seen as a competitor.
Swift, a new language, is released and mostly working. I guess. I've not kept up with that much. It changed a lot early on based on feedback from developers.
There are now public betas for OSX too. This is how journalists can now review the new Photos app before it is released.
On the iOS side, I predicted that phone functionality would be opened up more on phones to web access, like you can let a desktop browser have access to your webcam and microphone. This hasn't happened yet, though cleverly I didn't put money on it!
Anyway, you should do a show on it, when you come back.
Comments
One other thing to keep in mind is that iOS is basically just OS X written for touch-based devices. The kernel, APIs, etc., are all pretty much the same on both for anything not involving touch screens. While porting Xcode to iOS wouldn't be trivial, it certainly would be a lot easier than porting it to Windows or Linux or whatever other non-OS X options exist.
It's weird to me that you don't hear more tech ppl getting mad at Google for basically co-opting open source morality to use as a pr tool. It lets them get away with creating a fragmented and consumer-frustrating platform that gets slapped on the massive pile of bottom-of-the-barrel devices; a crucial technique for boosting all the AdSense and big data money they're pulling in. I just think it's silly to say a company is "good/evil" or "right/wrong" based on how open their platform is. They can only be judged by their dedication to providing quality products.
Either way, Apple won't leave the professional, serious work world in the dust; but they will change what that world is, and it will be more inclusive and accessible.
Their QA is excellent, though I'm not sure if it's miles beyond every other tech company. For one thing, they only have to test on a handful of different hardware combinations, which makes things somewhat easier. For another, they've had their own issues with stupid bugs getting through the QA process. That's why I use an iPhone and not an Android.
Remember, Apple made more money this past year (or was it quarter? I forget) on the iPhone than they did in 30 years of selling Macs. It's just good business sense to concentrate on what makes them the most money.
I think the fact that they have complete platform control plays into my statement that they have the best QA; other companies are often able to pass the buck when it comes different defects. Software developer can blame the hardware manufacturer etc etc.
That's a good point about the pro-level stuff and their focused strategy (don't make too many products), but you can edit full HD video on pretty much anything these days, and if you're talking super big ticket Hollywood editing, then you're talking supercomputers. I was confused about the FCX thing too, but I'd imagine it was actually an attempt to widen their editing market (sort of bridging the iMovie and FC crowds); tho they may have overestimated how much stuff pro users could deal with having removed. But even with that said, I could see them changing gears and thinking of their Mac line as a "hobby," like what they currently call the apple TV. I just don't think beefed up hardware and ultra-flexible software is the computing of the future (literally because of resource scarcity and population growth), and I think Apple gets it.
I don't anticipate Apple restricting development on Macs or getting rid of Macs anytime soon.
Instead of Apple devices and computers becoming more restrictive, it seems they are becoming more and more open and capable. Of course the apps still need developer accounts and approval, but the functionality of the apps can now be widely expanded by the expansions. Things like third party keyboards and app interactivity, things until now only on Android flavors, are here and it's awesome. And, I'd like to hope, probably more secure than Android, though that's an uneducated guess.
On the Mac side, not only are Macs not going away, there was a new Mac Pro this year, and likely more iMacs and Pros to come before Christmas. The Macbooks are only stalled because Intel isn't getting the new CPUs out in time. The app store is still there, but there's still a great market outside of it. I've bought two different software bundles this year from separate websites, and none of the apps required the app store or any approval from Apple. There is no diminishing of capabilities or openness.
And we know what's coming with OSX Yosemite. I think Rym and Scott are going to lose money and gain red cheeks from slaps in February.
I think it's clear that Rym and Scott totally missed on this one. I still install apps all the time, and actually less frequently from the app store than not.
And OSX is probably more "open" now than it was three years ago. For example, instead of Dropbox having to do kernel hack stuff to change the icons of synched folders, that's now an API call they and others can use. And Apple let them use this feature in the same release that they launched Cloud Kit, which could be seen as a competitor.
Swift, a new language, is released and mostly working. I guess. I've not kept up with that much. It changed a lot early on based on feedback from developers.
There are now public betas for OSX too. This is how journalists can now review the new Photos app before it is released.
On the iOS side, I predicted that phone functionality would be opened up more on phones to web access, like you can let a desktop browser have access to your webcam and microphone. This hasn't happened yet, though cleverly I didn't put money on it!
Anyway, you should do a show on it, when you come back.
And come back!
We'll pay George at the next big Crew gathering.
I'm glad I didn't bet to eat my hat. Or promise to eat my own shit like that one guy on twitter a few days ago.
The timeframe was wrong, but Apple is still very much moving in the same direction. Write your apps the way they want you to, or else.
Also I still win.