Nice to see once more another myriad of articles that espouse all sorts of wonderful capabilities while either due to ignorance or purposeful deception leaves Apple's Objective-C compiler out of the comparison list.
No matter. All in due course.
Qt vs Java? on Server-Side? Try Cocoa WebObjects
on
A Taste of Qt 4
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
For most people who were in the pre-DotCom Boom you will recall that WebObjects via Objective-C really paved the way for Web Server-Side Development.
The decision to switch it to J2EE was political and at the time, necessary, in order to compete with all the hype.
Remember however, that this "CODE" wasn't washed down the drain. WebObjects leveraged Foundation and AppKit directly. The beauty of Cocoa is that augmenting WebObjects back to Cocoa/Objective-C is extremely trival for Apple.
I would be highly surprised if Steve doesn't decide to throw out the trump with Portable Distributed Objects (PDO) for say OS X version 11 and have it seemlessly work with.NET and J2EE.
What a lot of people who also worked once at NeXT know is that lots of the technologies that were never released are slowly being reincarnated into various pieces of the pie.
Before entering into the IT World I did my undergraduate degree in Mechanical Engineering. Back in 1989 I remember one of the American Society for Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Magazine articles on Polymer Ceramic Engines getting roughly 150 mpg using conventional gasoline. How? We'll any M.E. will tell you the heat loss is rougly 75% of the efficiency down the drain, so to speak. I'm sure the efficiencies have oscillated by +/- 5% but that is about it with traditional engine blocks, including aluminum blocks.
Where am I going with this you may be asking? The Big 3 purchased the Patents and shelved the Technologies.
With Japan finally knocking on the door, it would look rather politically dangerous for suddenly the Big 3 pulls out this 'new' Engine designs with Polymer plastic blocks, pistons, rings, etc and getting these massive fuel improvements, now wouldn't it? There are down sides to such engines, but that has more to do with weight differentials of the car, etc., than it does with fuel performance.
As the old saying goes, "What once was old is now new again."
The biggest road block to advances in technologies are also the biggest investors in advancing technologies. Business needs versus technology is one battle Business will always win.
You should take your own advice and read the Quarterly Stock Papers that describes the amount of money directed under R&D.
The fact that Apple is continuously reinvesting into new software and hardware offerings while slowly increasing the Gross Sales shines brightly with Wall Street. That also explains the recent upswing in the Stock Price. The iPod along with the various other products are showing Wall Street that Apple will lead the Industry, something it hasn't done in 15 years.
One of my most fond memories while being an employee at NeXT before stepping into Apple was Steve's final CEO to Staff Rally Speech.
Besides the obvious, "We are already speaking to several key individuals, including John Rubenstein(sp?), etc" was the comment Steve made about when the OS hits the Shelf.
To the best of my recollection:
We will be the largest UNIX vendor and Apple will be produce the best application software the Mac platform has ever seen. Apple will be more than just a hardware company. It will be a software company.
Point the blame squarely on Adobe for not getting off its ass and investing in some in-house Cocoa Developers. Now that Apple DOESN'T NEED ADOBE and Adobe never forsaw that happening. So now they are bowing out because they realize it would take 18 months of in-house revamping (time well spent) to offer Cocoa-ized/Objective-C versions of their Apps.
Adobe has had SEVEN YEARS to build an in-house Cocoa Team, along-side their Carbon Team(s).
Tough Titty to all companies in the OS X space who don't get off their asses and learn Cocoa/Objective-C.
Hell it has been pointed out several times already that Cocoa doesn't have to be written just in Objective-C. You can mix your C/ObjC++/Python, etc... There are no technical hurdles to be had. It is all B.S.
Any company that doesn't reinvest in technical skillsets for their staff deserve to go Bankrupt.
I remember contracting at Wireless and watching all the drones. Just recently relocating from Cupertino (in hindsight a big mistake) had me soon discovering that most people got payed way too much money to develop beastly systems and countless levels of B.S. along the way.
Hell if it weren't for The Omnigroup, Platinum Systems/PLATINUM Technologies Inc., architecting the original system I doubt McCaw would have ever been able to make the billions he did selling it to AT&T back in the mid 1990s.
I'm quite pleased to see it fail. NeXT were leaders in designing highy distributed systems. Hopefully the Apple Enterprise push will reignite an Enterprise Consulting Division, once more. I know I'd reapply if they did.
Being a Mechanical Engineering by training I used this technology back in early 1990s while doing my undergraduate degree at Washington State University.
It is expensive as hell (at the time it was expensive).
It is by no means a new break through, unless they are considering the barrier of entry being no longer cost prohibitive as a break through.
Who else here was bored with Stallman's article after the third or fourth paragraph?
If a developer does not take the time to read the licensing agreements that SUN provides, than whines later on they have zero pity from me.
If GNU wants to sell the notion of Freedom-their notion of Freedom since discussing Love, Liberty, Life and Light is outside the scope of GNU-they'd better have a complete solution equal to SUN's Java before they discuss the limitations and traps of SUN's Java. Otherwise, it will fall on deaf ears.
MacOSX isn't OSS, it's proprietary Apple stuff that they hacked on top of an OSS OS, so come up with another excuse TT....
Hacked? Are you an ass? Yes. Yes I believe you are truly an ass!
Hate to pea in your wheaties but Quartz, Cocoa, Java, QuickTime and more are not "hacks." I'd love to see what you consider non-hacks. Let's not even get into the contributions NeXT and now Apple is making with BSD, Mach and GCC. Shit if it wasn't for those contributions GCC would be far behind the curve. It's amazing to me how one shoots off commentary without ever being on the inside to know what the hell goes on.
What I learned working at NeXT and Apple is we seemed to have this reputation of being untouchable and overly arrogant with our developed products. Not surprising considering seeing both sides of the screen I've yet to find any other company who has even close the caliber of talent writing software that NeXT did and did infuse into Apple.
Any one who would turn down a job to learn under that Engineering team is either a complete schizophrenic or never was considered for any of those positions, in the first place.
It is clear to me how come Trolltech isn't offering a free Windows port. They want to stay in business and the Windows world has a crapload of money to purchase licenses from them. If Bill Gates suddenly went Open Source I'm sure Trolltech would follow.
The entire ATT Wireless Call Suite (Axys Project and its various incarnations past version 4) was developed with NeXTSTEP/Openstep. Until Siemens came in and wanted to rip it apart that Nationwide Suite of MCCA when it became complex was not due to Objective-C's flaws but the Architectural flaws in design by Humans.
United States Postal Project was all Objective-C, Merrill Lynch has tons of Apps for its Enterprise that use Objective-C.
When Apple finally makes its Software Consulting push, firstly in the Federal Markets and later the general Fortune 1000 you will feel real smart about the comment, "Nobody uses Objective-C."
I could build a list of customers but that isn't my place.
The Mach Microkernel is a Kernel and the Berkeley Software Distribution of UNIX was 4.3 and how that means that the Mach Microkernel is derived from BSD is a bit odd. NeXT took the BSD 4.3 distribution and modified it by adding their own kernel to it.
Oversimplifying what NEXTSTEP/NeXTStep/Openstep was and what OS X is regarding the underpinnings is a bit odd.
You could have added that Openstep had a modified UFS filesystem partition and now OS X, by default has its own HFS+ native file system as well as UFS, and so on and so forth.
Openstep APIs weren't just a "port" of NeXTSTEP APIs. It wasn't a simple NXHost to NSHost port. Most folks had quite a few headaches going from NS 3.3 to Openstep 4.0 and it wasn't until Openstep 4.2 before it was complete, as far as the meaning of "complete" is concerned.
Personally, I'm looking forward to Classic being dumped and Carbon taking its rightful place and ultimately being phased out by Cocoa.
With all the Language choices now accessible to Cocoa it just makes sense.
Is when OpenOffice.org has a Cocoa version of OO.org. Any other port won't do. For Apple to build an Office Killer they know it will be written in Objective-C with AppKit/Foundation and additional APIs native specific for their Office Killer, if and when it becomes Reality.
Thank you for being such a perfectionist as well as being one of the most cordial, real, honest and pleasant individuals to talk with throughout my time working at Apple and NeXT.
Not to take the wind out of your sails because I agree with your insights but the Cocoa UI you are referring to hasn't to do with Cocoa but with QUARTZ which is proprietary, and rightfully so. I'd hate to think of the comments from Andrew Barnes, Peter Graffanino and the rest of the brilliant engineers who made Quartz happen, if Steve walked in one day and said, "I've have an epiphany! Let's give the world Quartz via Open Source." I'm sure Freedesktop.org is counting on that never happening.
The Cocoa APIs are freely available and accessible, on-line. GNUstep implements the Openstep Standard that NeXT and SUN co-drafted and released in 1994.
Open Source is growing in the Enterprise and rightly due to the aforementioned vendors adding OSS components, if not systems, to their vendor price list.
Mindshare takes time and advertisement from sources people traditionally find credible.
What needs to be improved is the Documentation processes that will only make adoption of such Systems, along-side paid consulting services, Reality.
Open Source challenges not only the creative aspirations of developers but also the disciplinary aspects of making such visions understandable and easily consumable by the constituents it is meant to aide
Slashdot Mirror
Try digital film restoration. All that grainyness will become smooth.
Nice to see once more another myriad of articles that espouse all sorts of wonderful capabilities while either due to ignorance or purposeful deception leaves Apple's Objective-C compiler out of the comparison list.
No matter. All in due course.
For most people who were in the pre-DotCom Boom you will recall that WebObjects via Objective-C really paved the way for Web Server-Side Development.
The decision to switch it to J2EE was political and at the time, necessary, in order to compete with all the hype.
Remember however, that this "CODE" wasn't washed down the drain. WebObjects leveraged Foundation and AppKit directly. The beauty of Cocoa is that augmenting WebObjects back to Cocoa/Objective-C is extremely trival for Apple.
I would be highly surprised if Steve doesn't decide to throw out the trump with Portable Distributed Objects (PDO) for say OS X version 11 and have it seemlessly work with .NET and J2EE.
What a lot of people who also worked once at NeXT know is that lots of the technologies that were never released are slowly being reincarnated into various pieces of the pie.
Before entering into the IT World I did my undergraduate degree in Mechanical Engineering. Back in 1989 I remember one of the American Society for Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Magazine articles on Polymer Ceramic Engines getting roughly 150 mpg using conventional gasoline. How? We'll any M.E. will tell you the heat loss is rougly 75% of the efficiency down the drain, so to speak. I'm sure the efficiencies have oscillated by +/- 5% but that is about it with traditional engine blocks, including aluminum blocks.
Where am I going with this you may be asking? The Big 3 purchased the Patents and shelved the Technologies.
With Japan finally knocking on the door, it would look rather politically dangerous for suddenly the Big 3 pulls out this 'new' Engine designs with Polymer plastic blocks, pistons, rings, etc and getting these massive fuel improvements, now wouldn't it? There are down sides to such engines, but that has more to do with weight differentials of the car, etc., than it does with fuel performance.
As the old saying goes, "What once was old is now new again."
The biggest road block to advances in technologies are also the biggest investors in advancing technologies. Business needs versus technology is one battle Business will always win.
You should take your own advice and read the Quarterly Stock Papers that describes the amount of money directed under R&D.
The fact that Apple is continuously reinvesting into new software and hardware offerings while slowly increasing the Gross Sales shines brightly with Wall Street. That also explains the recent upswing in the Stock Price. The iPod along with the various other products are showing Wall Street that Apple will lead the Industry, something it hasn't done in 15 years.
One of my most fond memories while being an employee at NeXT before stepping into Apple was Steve's final CEO to Staff Rally Speech.
Besides the obvious, "We are already speaking to several key individuals, including John Rubenstein(sp?), etc" was the comment Steve made about when the OS hits the Shelf.
To the best of my recollection:
Now obviously Steve held to his Vision.
Point the blame squarely on Adobe for not getting off its ass and investing in some in-house Cocoa Developers. Now that Apple DOESN'T NEED ADOBE and Adobe never forsaw that happening. So now they are bowing out because they realize it would take 18 months of in-house revamping (time well spent) to offer Cocoa-ized/Objective-C versions of their Apps.
Adobe has had SEVEN YEARS to build an in-house Cocoa Team, along-side their Carbon Team(s).
Tough Titty to all companies in the OS X space who don't get off their asses and learn Cocoa/Objective-C.
Hell it has been pointed out several times already that Cocoa doesn't have to be written just in Objective-C. You can mix your C/ObjC++/Python, etc... There are no technical hurdles to be had. It is all B.S.
Any company that doesn't reinvest in technical skillsets for their staff deserve to go Bankrupt.
I remember contracting at Wireless and watching all the drones. Just recently relocating from Cupertino (in hindsight a big mistake) had me soon discovering that most people got payed way too much money to develop beastly systems and countless levels of B.S. along the way.
Hell if it weren't for The Omnigroup, Platinum Systems/PLATINUM Technologies Inc., architecting the original system I doubt McCaw would have ever been able to make the billions he did selling it to AT&T back in the mid 1990s.
I'm quite pleased to see it fail. NeXT were leaders in designing highy distributed systems. Hopefully the Apple Enterprise push will reignite an Enterprise Consulting Division, once more. I know I'd reapply if they did.
Being a Mechanical Engineering by training I used this technology back in early 1990s while doing my undergraduate degree at Washington State University.
It is expensive as hell (at the time it was expensive).
It is by no means a new break through, unless they are considering the barrier of entry being no longer cost prohibitive as a break through.
Who else here was bored with Stallman's article after the third or fourth paragraph?
If a developer does not take the time to read the licensing agreements that SUN provides, than whines later on they have zero pity from me.
If GNU wants to sell the notion of Freedom-their notion of Freedom since discussing Love, Liberty, Life and Light is outside the scope of GNU-they'd better have a complete solution equal to SUN's Java before they discuss the limitations and traps of SUN's Java. Otherwise, it will fall on deaf ears.
Hacked? Are you an ass? Yes. Yes I believe you are truly an ass!
Hate to pea in your wheaties but Quartz, Cocoa, Java, QuickTime and more are not "hacks." I'd love to see what you consider non-hacks. Let's not even get into the contributions NeXT and now Apple is making with BSD, Mach and GCC. Shit if it wasn't for those contributions GCC would be far behind the curve. It's amazing to me how one shoots off commentary without ever being on the inside to know what the hell goes on.
What I learned working at NeXT and Apple is we seemed to have this reputation of being untouchable and overly arrogant with our developed products. Not surprising considering seeing both sides of the screen I've yet to find any other company who has even close the caliber of talent writing software that NeXT did and did infuse into Apple.
Any one who would turn down a job to learn under that Engineering team is either a complete schizophrenic or never was considered for any of those positions, in the first place.
It is clear to me how come Trolltech isn't offering a free Windows port. They want to stay in business and the Windows world has a crapload of money to purchase licenses from them. If Bill Gates suddenly went Open Source I'm sure Trolltech would follow.
If your claims are true than be professional and list these ease of learning via CLI over GUI.
Otherwise, be like most of the folks who write without substance.
The entire ATT Wireless Call Suite (Axys Project and its various incarnations past version 4) was developed with NeXTSTEP/Openstep. Until Siemens came in and wanted to rip it apart that Nationwide Suite of MCCA when it became complex was not due to Objective-C's flaws but the Architectural flaws in design by Humans.
United States Postal Project was all Objective-C, Merrill Lynch has tons of Apps for its Enterprise that use Objective-C.
When Apple finally makes its Software Consulting push, firstly in the Federal Markets and later the general Fortune 1000 you will feel real smart about the comment, "Nobody uses Objective-C."
I could build a list of customers but that isn't my place.
No. But it is quite humorous that you believe all Virus Companies are devoid of malevolence.
Oversimplifying what NEXTSTEP/NeXTStep/Openstep was and what OS X is regarding the underpinnings is a bit odd.
You could have added that Openstep had a modified UFS filesystem partition and now OS X, by default has its own HFS+ native file system as well as UFS, and so on and so forth.
Openstep APIs weren't just a "port" of NeXTSTEP APIs. It wasn't a simple NXHost to NSHost port. Most folks had quite a few headaches going from NS 3.3 to Openstep 4.0 and it wasn't until Openstep 4.2 before it was complete, as far as the meaning of "complete" is concerned.
Personally, I'm looking forward to Classic being dumped and Carbon taking its rightful place and ultimately being phased out by Cocoa.
With all the Language choices now accessible to Cocoa it just makes sense.
Bud Tribble got smart and reconnected with Jobs.
As many know what Steve thinks of Sun, "Sun is no Apple."
Hell Java at Apple is more exciting than Java at Sun.
Here is an idea. Don't use OSS compatibility.
Clean, efficient and with their new tabs implementation, exactly all that is needed, at the moment.
Maybe they'll extend it to allow a tab parsed thumbnail view of any select history directory via sheets or something to that effect.
Here is an idea. Get your fingers ready and dial Cupertino and ask these questions.
Is when OpenOffice.org has a Cocoa version of OO.org. Any other port won't do. For Apple to build an Office Killer they know it will be written in Objective-C with AppKit/Foundation and additional APIs native specific for their Office Killer, if and when it becomes Reality.
I should have included my real name.
Tim,
Thank you for being such a perfectionist as well as being one of the most cordial, real, honest and pleasant individuals to talk with throughout my time working at Apple and NeXT.
Sincerely,
Marc J. Driftmeyer
Not to take the wind out of your sails because I agree with your insights but the Cocoa UI you are referring to hasn't to do with Cocoa but with QUARTZ which is proprietary, and rightfully so. I'd hate to think of the comments from Andrew Barnes, Peter Graffanino and the rest of the brilliant engineers who made Quartz happen, if Steve walked in one day and said, "I've have an epiphany! Let's give the world Quartz via Open Source." I'm sure Freedesktop.org is counting on that never happening.
The Cocoa APIs are freely available and accessible, on-line. GNUstep implements the Openstep Standard that NeXT and SUN co-drafted and released in 1994.
I worked with Tim Wasko at NeXT and Apple. You'd be surprised how much of the UI credit should go to him.
His role is basically that of Keith Ohlfs for OS X.
In fact, before I left Tim was still disappointed that Keith couldn't be rehired.
Open Source is growing in the Enterprise and rightly due to the aforementioned vendors adding OSS components, if not systems, to their vendor price list.
Mindshare takes time and advertisement from sources people traditionally find credible.
What needs to be improved is the Documentation processes that will only make adoption of such Systems, along-side paid consulting services, Reality.
Open Source challenges not only the creative aspirations of developers but also the disciplinary aspects of making such visions understandable and easily consumable by the constituents it is meant to aide
Objective-C :: You know that totally static based language.