9 ms·

Ballmer to announce VS 2010 will compile native Mac/iPhone apps at WWDC

72 points by cletus 16y ago

cletus 16y ago
This story is all over the net at the moment. For example: http://blogs.computerworld.com/16201/apple_makes_iphone_dev_deal_with_microsoft http://blogs.computerworld.com/16201/apple_makes_iphone_dev_... I don't know if it's true or not but there's certainly smoke. Perhaps aimed at taking the thorn out of the section 3.3.1 changes relating to third-party tools? I actually understand Steve's point about cross-platform GUIs being the lowest common denominator (just look at Java Swing apps) but it's disappointing that change also hurt MonoTouch, which was a 1:1 iPhone API mapping and not an intermediate layer like the Flash compiler was/is.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  Apple should have a certification program for such 1:1 mapping APIs. That would also take the thorn out of section 3.3.1 while allowing them to retain platform control.
- ergo98 16y ago
  >I actually understand Steve's point about cross-platform GUIs being the lowest common denominator Sure. iTunes on Windows. >I don't know if it's true or not but there's certainly smoke All of the smoke emanating from a single nobody making a completely unsupported claim. It's actually a bit extraordinary how little is necessary when it comes to Apple.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    I always wondered why iTunes for Windows is Carbon based. NeXT had a full OPENSTEP stack capable of running under NT (I did it) and that is what Cocoa is based on.
keithwarren 16y ago
I call BS - if something sounds to good to be true it usually is... Far more likely that time is reserved for A) Bing over Google announcement in iPhone OS 4 or B) Office related announcements (maybe iPad?) Given the investments Microsoft has made on the Mac the most agile team they have who could pull off something like this would be the Silverlight team who already has a .NET runtime (SL is a small .net runtime) running on OSX - one would imagine the jump to iPhone as rather trivial all things considered but there are two reasons this just doesnt make sense. Number 1 is the fact that since SL4 shipped the entire SL team focus has turned to WinPhone7 which uses SL as the app runtime. Second, given all the Apple pronouncements about being against 3rd party runtimes - I cant see them saying 'oh, Silverlight is OK'
- stcredzero 16y ago
  I cant see them saying 'oh, Silverlight is OK' What if the Silverlight development environment could target an Apple-developed and controlled runtime? Apple would retain control, but gain access to an additional developer base as well as a Flash competitor with Apple platform control. I'm not speaking for the credibility of the Register here. (I wish they'd die as much as Adobe would.) However, technically speaking, this is quite possible. It's also an interesting idea. Add in a free SWF to Silverlight cross-compiler, and you have a very strong move against Adobe.
  - keithwarren 16y ago
    There is no such thing as an SL development environment, SL is a runtime and VS and Expression are the primary development environments. Semantics aside though, I just dont see it. Developing an SL runtime is not an easy task, it would take a large team at the very least a year to put one together. I could buy a situation where MSFT hands over the SL runtime source to Apple who then takes it over as part of some long term agreement to guarantee SL apps run on all Apple devices but that is about it.
    - stcredzero 16y ago
      There is no such thing as an SL development environment, SL is a runtime and VS and Expression are the primary development environments. Sorry, should've used a plural. Developing an SL runtime is not an easy task, it would take a large team at the very least a year to put one together. Not true if there's cooperation from the MS development team. There would be compelling reasons for such cooperation. Flash is Silverlight's incumbent competition, after all.
evo_9 16y ago
I think this is real for a number of reasons. First it's a win-win for both sides. Apple needs some positive publicity to help calm the ruckus over 3.3.1 changes, plus all the noise Adobe caused. They also would like to start calming any rumblings from the DOJ that are starting to tremble. This helps on all fronts. Microsoft needs a positive win that says to the world, 'hey we are still relavent!', the mobile train might have left the station, but we're onboard!'. Also, this will certainly kick-up the VS2010 adoption rate, which will net MS a pretty penny too. June 7th is right around the corner, so we'll know soon enough but this rings true to me.
- watty 16y ago
  I don't think this is real. If they wanted more developers and an influx of apps they would have partnered with Adobe. I don't think it makes sense to partner with Microsoft who competes on a hardware and software basis.
- keithwarren 16y ago
  Still relevant? I almost dismiss people out of hand who imply or make statements like this. Like it or not Microsoft is still the 800lb gorilla of the software world.
  - gloob 16y ago
    I find that this site makes more sense if you mentally do s/relevant/trendy or s/relevant/cool. It's annoying when people overload words with completely unrelated meanings, but there's not much you can do about it.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- DrJokepu 16y ago
  I also think it is a win-win but for entirely different reasons. Microsoft failed to get Visual Studio into the mobile app development world, simply because previously it only allowed developing for Windows Mobile which is, honestly, something nobody really cares about. With iPhone development support, they could get new markets for Visual Studio. Apple wins because (I hope I won't offend anyone with that) Visual Studio is just simply vastly superior to XCode. It is a truly great IDE (as opposed to Adobe Flash) that could make OS X / iPhone development an awful lot easier.
latch 16y ago
No way. Why would MS drive more consumers to the iphone only to retain developers? Consumers outnumber developers, what? 10000:1? Also, what signal would MS be sending to its developers about its own future platform. More likely is some native office apps, bing search integration, and maybe silverlight news for MacOS.
- lftl 16y ago
  I'm not saying you're wrong about this announcement, but honestly I see MS's strongest position right now to be with developers and in the enterprise. It's not going to happen overnight, but I think we're seeing a pretty strong shift away from traditional computing for most consumer applications. MS really has no traction in that market (I suppose they could try to build off XBox), but they're still dominant in the business sector. As such I don't think it'd be a mistake for them to focus on developers and tools.
- latch 16y ago
  Worth pointing out that I don't see how this makes much sense from Apple's perspective either. Their march towards HTML5 is going surprisingly well, they aren't hurting for more apps or developers. This'll be about Office 2011 on MacOSX, and maybe, maybe, some native office apps for the iphone. I think even bing on iphone is out of the question.
statictype 16y ago
At first blush, I dismissed it for violating 3.3.1, but now that I think of it, you're allowed to use Objective-C, C or C++. Visual Studio already has a C/C++ compiler so they don't even need to introduce a new language into the mix. And since it looks like Apple is betting the company on the iPhone/iPad (as opposed to Mac OS X) there's no real downside to letting developers on non-OSX platforms build iPhone apps. You would still need the $99 Developer License to load apps onto the device. And Apple gives Xcode away for free so they're not losing money on allowing competing development tools. I still don't think this announcement is going to happen, but it's not the most outrageous thing that could happen. If anything its more likely that Microsoft would reject such an idea than Apple.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  > there's no real downside to letting developers on non-OSX platforms build iPhone apps. To fully enjoy network effects you need to control the whole stack. This is the problem with this rumor: Jobs may be anything but he's not suicidal. Allowing iTunes to run on Windows helped increase sales of iPods and music and preventing those who already had PCs running Windows to considering the competition. Allowing VS2010 to target iPhone/iPod/iPad would increase the number of developers who could develop for the platform, something that I don't think Apple really needs. If nothing else, Apple could raise the bar on apps a bit. This would only lower it.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    If nothing else, Apple could raise the bar on apps a bit. This would only lower it. On the contrary, if Apple had more apps to choose from, then it could afford to be more selective. The only thing is that they're already in a position to be more selective, and they're clearly not! (Perhaps too much work.)
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      You haven't seen many WinMo apps lately, have you?
czhiddy 16y ago
I don't see how this is even remotely possible. How would you run/debug apps you compiled with VS? I highly doubt that Apple would port their platform-specific libraries and frameworks (among others, OpenGL.framework, Kernel.framework, IOKit.framework, IOSurface.framework) to Windows. What happens when you try to use mach ports in your code? Without the ability to run the app you just compiled, this rumored feature is next to useless.
- DrJokepu 16y ago
  Maybe instead of cross-compiling, MS will port Visual Studio to OS X? I don't find it even remotely impossible.
  - barake 16y ago
    This is probably the least likely scenario. MSFT is still working on making functional x64 builds of Visual Studio. Even VS2010 is 32-bit. See http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ricom/archive/2009/06/10/visual-studio-why-is-there-no-64-bit-version.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ricom/archive/2009/06/10/visual-stud... for details.
    - DrJokepu 16y ago
      Just wondering (I don't know much about OS X / iPhone development), why is it necessary to port it to x64? Surely OS X can execute 32 bit apps, just like Windows x64?
      - Qz 16y ago
        The point was highlighting how long it is taking them to do something which presumably is simpler than porting the whole (massive) program to a different OS.
- nwatson 16y ago
  "How would you run/debug apps you compiled with VS?" --> Visual Studio could launch or connect to a virtualized iPhone device and let you debug there. That's the approach you use when developing Android apps with Eclipse ... Eclipse connects to a virtual emulated Android device. I also think if this happens that Visual Studio would support Objective-C (and C/C++) instead of C#/Silverlight on the iPhone. Microsoft would prefer the C# approach but Apple won't allow it.
cyanbane 16y ago
I was thinking that what if they allowed a toned down version of SL on iphone, something without any of the localized storage libs. That would put it pretty much as a UI for any type of webservices (which is really no different than the web at that point). It would mitigate the ability for SL to perform features similar to apple apps (doesn't cannibalize app sales), but also would "get silverlight" onto the iphone. Something good for both MS (hey look at Silverilght, it went where flash couldnt!) and also for Apple ("hey we told you were not against other frameworks, look here we allow silverlight!").
- watty 16y ago
  This goes against everything they've been vehemently defending the past months. An extra layer, non-unique apps, etc. AND Microsoft is a much larger competitor than Adobe.
andreyf 16y ago
This makes perfect sense, at least from my anecdotal experience: there are tons of people who want to develop for the App Store but don't want to spend thousands to buy a new computer running OSX to do it. At this point, a developer who doesn't have an Apple laptop isn't likely to get one, so there are few hardware sales to lose, but a lot to win by letting Windows-based developers make apps for iP*s.
- roc 16y ago
  So the Windows coders who balk at a several hundred dollar 'Apple tax' are going to instead shell out several hundred dollars for a VS2010 license? Or is the theory that Microsoft would let a feature like this wind up in Express when their own tools to develop for Windows Mobile are only available in vs2010 licenses that cost more than a macbook and app store license combined? EDIT: Which isn't to say that it won't or couldn't be plausible. But if it does happen, it will be all about enterprises: The sorts of places that wouldn't blink at the cost of a Mac, but would balk at having to train, staff and support a completely different toolchain and environment.
  - doty 16y ago
    Actually, Windows Phone 7 tools come in an express edition, so it wouldn't be too strange for the iPhone version to come in an express SKU. (Tools available from http://developer.windowsphone.com/ http://developer.windowsphone.com/) But the tax is more like a thousand dollar tax, as it requires buying a Mac. (Is a Mac mini a reasonable development machine for the iphone?)
    - tjarratt 16y ago
      The mac mini is more than a reasonable machine for development. I use it for gaming, design work in CS4 and development, when I don't feel like using my laptop. That would mean that the 'tax' is only $500, or cheaper if you get it refurbished.
  - sliverstorm 16y ago
    > So the Windows coders who balk at a several hundred dollar 'Apple tax' are going to instead shell out several hundred dollars for a VS2010 license? Many students (an important target demographic) get free access to VS (paid by Uni), while macbooks are definitely not free.
frou_dh 16y ago
I don't believe it, but if we're imagining then officially blessed C# support would be very cool.
- protomyth 16y ago
  The Java -> Cocoa Binding was so poor because of the dynamic nature of Objective-C. I wonder if C# would fair better?
  - DrJokepu 16y ago
    C# 4 supports dynamic typing. (The C# 4 compiler is shipped with .NET 4 which is in turn shipped with VS2010.)
xpaulbettsx 16y ago
This doesn't even pass the giggle test from a technical perspective - iPad/iPhone is so massively tied to the Mac platform, how could you ever write any sort of meaningful integration with VS2010. You'd have to port all of the UIKit/CoreFoundation libraries over, you'd have to make a Windows version of the iPhone Simulator, you'd have to write a Objective-C compiler from scratch (remember, Microsoft would never ship GCC), that was compatible with GCC, the list goes on and on. Now, maybe he's announcing a compatible version of Silverlight, or a way to compile SL applications to iPhone/iPad, which makes far more sense, and would be very compelling for developers. From one codebase, you could have a rich website, a desktop app, a WinPhone7 app, and an iPhone/iPad app, and you could write that app in C#, VB, Python or Ruby. That'd be awesome.
- frankus 16y ago
  I'm not arguing with your overall conclusion, but Apple has been working on replacing GCC in their toolchain with Clang/LLVM.
- vinayak 16y ago
  Honestly that is FUD. Microsoft did ship GCC with SFU 3.5 (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows_Services_for_UNIX#SFU_3.5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows_Services_for_...) How do I know ? I worked on it.
  - xpaulbettsx 16y ago
    That was before GCC switched to GPLv3. However, the point is moot as someone else mentioned Clang, which I could see MS shipping. I did forget about SFU though, good point.
- gte910h 16y ago
  I completely degree with your assessment of the facts. The debugger is GDB. This is not hard to integrate with on windows, as it already is integrated with on windows. The compiler is gcc. Objective-C for gcc already exists on windows. Additionally, several people (Appcelerator, Adobe, Corona, Unity3d) have written machine code compliant compilers, I think Microsoft could likely produce one in a small number of weeks if they were being illogical about gcc. Additionally, Microsoft has pretty much continually shipped gcc for the last 15 years or so depending on the products they were selling in the windows/unix integration sphere (and OS2 tools as well). You don't need to port all the UIKit/CoreFoundation libraries over, just the simulated versions, which already run on x86. I'm pretty sure that could be done in a reasonable timespan, probably 3-4 months at the most. The rest are cross compiled for the device, and cross compiling is largely the same no matter what your host platform is. There is 0 chance Silverlight is in any way involved as an implementation platform for general purpose use (but the iPhone simulator may have been ported using it). The entire point of the 3.1.1 language was to tie everyone to C, C++ and Objective-C.
tszming 16y ago
Because they have the same enemy - Google. (and not to mention Bill and Steve look very much alike now, AAPL will be the next MSFT)
jonpaul 16y ago
Umm... April fools was almost two months ago.
nightlifelover 16y ago
Humm I'm not sure what the actual rumor is.. VS 2010 for the Mac or just the ability to dev for the iPhone or the iPad using VS on Windows? From the technical both would be possible but I guess there would be some effort required to do either of these: - VS on a Mac: VS 2010 uses WPF for the gui. Therefore it would have to run on a Mac. I guess the .net platform probably already runs on a Mac (there is Silverlight for a Mac) and since WPF uses Direct-X they would need to hook it up with OpenGL. However since VS is huge this would take a lot of effort I guess, so rather unlikely. - The second rumor, that the VS on Windows would be able to produce iPad/Phone apps seems easier to do from a technical perspective, since they could use Clang/LLVM. But I don't really see the point here: There are more then enough people developing for the iPhone/iPad and this would probably hurt Microsofts Windows Mobile plans.. as well as Apples Mac sales.. So it's a rumor - that's all probably complete BS. We will see..
DrJokepu 16y ago
Honestly, I'm a bit surprised by the responses in this thread. The rumour might be true or false but that's not what I find surprising. Are there technical problems regarding the rumour? There are, certainly. However, we developers know that technical problems can be solved and Apple and Microsoft certainly have the resources to do so. Are there business issues? Is this an unexpected move? Certainly, it is. But Apple has a history of unexpected business moves and business innovation, as does Microsoft even if it is uncool to acknowledge that. Even if the rumour is false (I don't know) I don't find it unbelievable at all, because (a) it makes sense (b) this move would be both typically "Apple" and typically "Microsoft", if you look at the history of these companies. Hell, Microsoft started as a programming tool company.
- watty 16y ago
  I think the problem with most of the unbelievers on this thread is that it doesn't make sense and it doesn't seem like a move Apple would make.
- nw 16y ago
  I dare say Microsoft has the best IDE out there.
  - malkia 16y ago
    It does, as it works for a lot of people just fine, but it's not without it's quirks. Some things that are better in XCode: filtering of options, error bubbles, keyboard mappings. Some things that are better in MSVC: Debugging! Maybe because I had to use MSVC for the last 10 years, and I'm so used to it. XCode is also not bad, but would need more time adjusting to the keyboard shortcuts
    - nitrogen 16y ago
      Some things that are better in Eclipse: refactorings. Adding method parameters, changing their order, extracting methods, promoting or demoting classes, etc. At least when it comes to Java, Eclipse seems to have more options and a greater success rate than VS2008 with C#. Debugging Java with Eclipse is about the same as debugging C# with VS in my experience, though it seems that VS's output console is slower than Eclipse's, and both are slower than a pure terminal.
raganwald 16y ago
So... Is this one reporter tossing his speculation on top of another reporter's speculation? And now leading to us speculating about his speculation?? I'm honestly amazed we are falling for this. It's exactly the same thing I see every holiday season at the grocery-store checkout: "Psychic reveals which star will die of a drug overdose this year, who is going to get married, and why a giant earthquake is going to flatten Toronto." It's a simple game that delights the rubes. Make a lot of guesses, take credit for the ones you got right last year, and hand wave the ones that didn't come true. How is this any different? p.s. Here's a suggestion: Create a poll asking HNers to vote on which wild-assed-guess is going to come true and keep all the talk of vapourware in one place!
j_baker 16y ago
This is something that could feasibly happen. But still, I'll believe it when the words come out of Ballmer's mouth.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
eli 16y ago
It's not that crazy. Remember when an iPod could only sync with a Mac?
mortenjorck 16y ago
In the case that this is true, this would be far and away Apple's biggest-ever sacrificial move against the Mac for the sake of iPhone OS. Ending OS X's exclusivity as the dev kit for iPhone OS would send an extraordinarily profound signal about the company's priorities.
- Tamerlin 16y ago
  Dropping the "computer" part from the name was probably a bit of foreshadowing...
- raganwald 16y ago
  Question: How many Macs do you think they have sold to developers who (a) wanted to build an iPhone application but (b) didn't already own a Mac? That's the market they are 'sacrificing'. I doubt it's significant. update: Apple reports that they sold 3.05 million Macintosh® computers in Q42009 alone. I can't see them giving a damn about selling Macs to iPhone developers.
jeiting 16y ago
The App Store has enough crappy apps. I don't think opening the platform up to VS is going to bring in any more @atebits or the like. If you want to be serious about iPhone/iPad you will get a Mac.
b3b0p 16y ago
Iirc, first generation iPod did not work/sync on Windows, so what is so unbelievable about Apple having the iPhone SDK working on Windows with Visual Studio now? Although personally I don't think this is going to happen. As a hardware company, i'm sure they make many extra sales from companies and developers purchasing for the sole purpose of targeting the iPhone/iPad/iTouch and Mac OS X users.
UpFromTheGut 16y ago
Don't get too excited, although I don't personally have authority to dismiss this, I have word that this is a completely FALSE rumor (sorry, I can't back that up-- at least do yourself the favor of being skeptical). Edit: Confirmed http://twitter.com/Microsoft/status/14850981422 http://twitter.com/Microsoft/status/14850981422 (Microsoft official Twitter) Quote: "Steve Ballmer not speaking at Apple Dev Conf. Nor appearing on Dancing with the Stars. Nor riding in the Belmont. Just FYI."
latch 16y ago
Microsoft has said Ballmer won't be speaking at WWDC...talk about getting it wrong: http://twitter.com/Microsoft/statuses/14850981422 http://twitter.com/Microsoft/statuses/14850981422
thought_alarm 16y ago
Strategically ridiculous and technically preposterous. How does this nonsense get published? The only story here is how so many people apparently don't understand computers or the computer industry.

72 points by cletus 16y ago

This story is all over the net at the moment. For example: http://blogs.computerworld.com/16201/apple_makes_iphone_dev_deal_with_microsoft http://blogs.computerworld.com/16201/apple_makes_iphone_dev_... I don't know if it's true or not but there's certainly smoke. Perhaps aimed at taking the thorn out of the section 3.3.1 changes relating to third-party tools? I actually understand Steve's point about cross-platform GUIs being the lowest common denominator (just look at Java Swing apps) but it's disappointing that change also hurt MonoTouch, which was a 1:1 iPhone API mapping and not an intermediate layer like the Flash compiler was/is.

stcredzero 16y ago
Apple should have a certification program for such 1:1 mapping APIs. That would also take the thorn out of section 3.3.1 while allowing them to retain platform control.
ergo98 16y ago
>I actually understand Steve's point about cross-platform GUIs being the lowest common denominator Sure. iTunes on Windows. >I don't know if it's true or not but there's certainly smoke All of the smoke emanating from a single nobody making a completely unsupported claim. It's actually a bit extraordinary how little is necessary when it comes to Apple.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  I always wondered why iTunes for Windows is Carbon based. NeXT had a full OPENSTEP stack capable of running under NT (I did it) and that is what Cocoa is based on.

keithwarren 16y ago

I call BS - if something sounds to good to be true it usually is... Far more likely that time is reserved for A) Bing over Google announcement in iPhone OS 4 or B) Office related announcements (maybe iPad?) Given the investments Microsoft has made on the Mac the most agile team they have who could pull off something like this would be the Silverlight team who already has a .NET runtime (SL is a small .net runtime) running on OSX - one would imagine the jump to iPhone as rather trivial all things considered but there are two reasons this just doesnt make sense. Number 1 is the fact that since SL4 shipped the entire SL team focus has turned to WinPhone7 which uses SL as the app runtime. Second, given all the Apple pronouncements about being against 3rd party runtimes - I cant see them saying 'oh, Silverlight is OK'

stcredzero 16y ago
I cant see them saying 'oh, Silverlight is OK' What if the Silverlight development environment could target an Apple-developed and controlled runtime? Apple would retain control, but gain access to an additional developer base as well as a Flash competitor with Apple platform control. I'm not speaking for the credibility of the Register here. (I wish they'd die as much as Adobe would.) However, technically speaking, this is quite possible. It's also an interesting idea. Add in a free SWF to Silverlight cross-compiler, and you have a very strong move against Adobe.
- keithwarren 16y ago
  There is no such thing as an SL development environment, SL is a runtime and VS and Expression are the primary development environments. Semantics aside though, I just dont see it. Developing an SL runtime is not an easy task, it would take a large team at the very least a year to put one together. I could buy a situation where MSFT hands over the SL runtime source to Apple who then takes it over as part of some long term agreement to guarantee SL apps run on all Apple devices but that is about it.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    There is no such thing as an SL development environment, SL is a runtime and VS and Expression are the primary development environments. Sorry, should've used a plural. Developing an SL runtime is not an easy task, it would take a large team at the very least a year to put one together. Not true if there's cooperation from the MS development team. There would be compelling reasons for such cooperation. Flash is Silverlight's incumbent competition, after all.

evo_9 16y ago

I think this is real for a number of reasons. First it's a win-win for both sides. Apple needs some positive publicity to help calm the ruckus over 3.3.1 changes, plus all the noise Adobe caused. They also would like to start calming any rumblings from the DOJ that are starting to tremble. This helps on all fronts. Microsoft needs a positive win that says to the world, 'hey we are still relavent!', the mobile train might have left the station, but we're onboard!'. Also, this will certainly kick-up the VS2010 adoption rate, which will net MS a pretty penny too. June 7th is right around the corner, so we'll know soon enough but this rings true to me.

watty 16y ago
I don't think this is real. If they wanted more developers and an influx of apps they would have partnered with Adobe. I don't think it makes sense to partner with Microsoft who competes on a hardware and software basis.
keithwarren 16y ago
Still relevant? I almost dismiss people out of hand who imply or make statements like this. Like it or not Microsoft is still the 800lb gorilla of the software world.
- gloob 16y ago
  I find that this site makes more sense if you mentally do s/relevant/trendy or s/relevant/cool. It's annoying when people overload words with completely unrelated meanings, but there's not much you can do about it.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
DrJokepu 16y ago
I also think it is a win-win but for entirely different reasons. Microsoft failed to get Visual Studio into the mobile app development world, simply because previously it only allowed developing for Windows Mobile which is, honestly, something nobody really cares about. With iPhone development support, they could get new markets for Visual Studio. Apple wins because (I hope I won't offend anyone with that) Visual Studio is just simply vastly superior to XCode. It is a truly great IDE (as opposed to Adobe Flash) that could make OS X / iPhone development an awful lot easier.

latch 16y ago

No way. Why would MS drive more consumers to the iphone only to retain developers? Consumers outnumber developers, what? 10000:1? Also, what signal would MS be sending to its developers about its own future platform. More likely is some native office apps, bing search integration, and maybe silverlight news for MacOS.

lftl 16y ago
I'm not saying you're wrong about this announcement, but honestly I see MS's strongest position right now to be with developers and in the enterprise. It's not going to happen overnight, but I think we're seeing a pretty strong shift away from traditional computing for most consumer applications. MS really has no traction in that market (I suppose they could try to build off XBox), but they're still dominant in the business sector. As such I don't think it'd be a mistake for them to focus on developers and tools.
latch 16y ago
Worth pointing out that I don't see how this makes much sense from Apple's perspective either. Their march towards HTML5 is going surprisingly well, they aren't hurting for more apps or developers. This'll be about Office 2011 on MacOSX, and maybe, maybe, some native office apps for the iphone. I think even bing on iphone is out of the question.

statictype 16y ago

At first blush, I dismissed it for violating 3.3.1, but now that I think of it, you're allowed to use Objective-C, C or C++. Visual Studio already has a C/C++ compiler so they don't even need to introduce a new language into the mix. And since it looks like Apple is betting the company on the iPhone/iPad (as opposed to Mac OS X) there's no real downside to letting developers on non-OSX platforms build iPhone apps. You would still need the $99 Developer License to load apps onto the device. And Apple gives Xcode away for free so they're not losing money on allowing competing development tools. I still don't think this announcement is going to happen, but it's not the most outrageous thing that could happen. If anything its more likely that Microsoft would reject such an idea than Apple.

rbanffy 16y ago
> there's no real downside to letting developers on non-OSX platforms build iPhone apps. To fully enjoy network effects you need to control the whole stack. This is the problem with this rumor: Jobs may be anything but he's not suicidal. Allowing iTunes to run on Windows helped increase sales of iPods and music and preventing those who already had PCs running Windows to considering the competition. Allowing VS2010 to target iPhone/iPod/iPad would increase the number of developers who could develop for the platform, something that I don't think Apple really needs. If nothing else, Apple could raise the bar on apps a bit. This would only lower it.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  If nothing else, Apple could raise the bar on apps a bit. This would only lower it. On the contrary, if Apple had more apps to choose from, then it could afford to be more selective. The only thing is that they're already in a position to be more selective, and they're clearly not! (Perhaps too much work.)
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    You haven't seen many WinMo apps lately, have you?

czhiddy 16y ago

I don't see how this is even remotely possible. How would you run/debug apps you compiled with VS? I highly doubt that Apple would port their platform-specific libraries and frameworks (among others, OpenGL.framework, Kernel.framework, IOKit.framework, IOSurface.framework) to Windows. What happens when you try to use mach ports in your code? Without the ability to run the app you just compiled, this rumored feature is next to useless.

DrJokepu 16y ago
Maybe instead of cross-compiling, MS will port Visual Studio to OS X? I don't find it even remotely impossible.
- barake 16y ago
  This is probably the least likely scenario. MSFT is still working on making functional x64 builds of Visual Studio. Even VS2010 is 32-bit. See http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ricom/archive/2009/06/10/visual-studio-why-is-there-no-64-bit-version.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ricom/archive/2009/06/10/visual-stud... for details.
  - DrJokepu 16y ago
    Just wondering (I don't know much about OS X / iPhone development), why is it necessary to port it to x64? Surely OS X can execute 32 bit apps, just like Windows x64?
    - Qz 16y ago
      The point was highlighting how long it is taking them to do something which presumably is simpler than porting the whole (massive) program to a different OS.
nwatson 16y ago
"How would you run/debug apps you compiled with VS?" --> Visual Studio could launch or connect to a virtualized iPhone device and let you debug there. That's the approach you use when developing Android apps with Eclipse ... Eclipse connects to a virtual emulated Android device. I also think if this happens that Visual Studio would support Objective-C (and C/C++) instead of C#/Silverlight on the iPhone. Microsoft would prefer the C# approach but Apple won't allow it.

cyanbane 16y ago

I was thinking that what if they allowed a toned down version of SL on iphone, something without any of the localized storage libs. That would put it pretty much as a UI for any type of webservices (which is really no different than the web at that point). It would mitigate the ability for SL to perform features similar to apple apps (doesn't cannibalize app sales), but also would "get silverlight" onto the iphone. Something good for both MS (hey look at Silverilght, it went where flash couldnt!) and also for Apple ("hey we told you were not against other frameworks, look here we allow silverlight!").

watty 16y ago
This goes against everything they've been vehemently defending the past months. An extra layer, non-unique apps, etc. AND Microsoft is a much larger competitor than Adobe.

andreyf 16y ago

This makes perfect sense, at least from my anecdotal experience: there are tons of people who want to develop for the App Store but don't want to spend thousands to buy a new computer running OSX to do it. At this point, a developer who doesn't have an Apple laptop isn't likely to get one, so there are few hardware sales to lose, but a lot to win by letting Windows-based developers make apps for iP*s.

roc 16y ago
So the Windows coders who balk at a several hundred dollar 'Apple tax' are going to instead shell out several hundred dollars for a VS2010 license? Or is the theory that Microsoft would let a feature like this wind up in Express when their own tools to develop for Windows Mobile are only available in vs2010 licenses that cost more than a macbook and app store license combined? EDIT: Which isn't to say that it won't or couldn't be plausible. But if it does happen, it will be all about enterprises: The sorts of places that wouldn't blink at the cost of a Mac, but would balk at having to train, staff and support a completely different toolchain and environment.
- doty 16y ago
  Actually, Windows Phone 7 tools come in an express edition, so it wouldn't be too strange for the iPhone version to come in an express SKU. (Tools available from http://developer.windowsphone.com/ http://developer.windowsphone.com/) But the tax is more like a thousand dollar tax, as it requires buying a Mac. (Is a Mac mini a reasonable development machine for the iphone?)
  - tjarratt 16y ago
    The mac mini is more than a reasonable machine for development. I use it for gaming, design work in CS4 and development, when I don't feel like using my laptop. That would mean that the 'tax' is only $500, or cheaper if you get it refurbished.
- sliverstorm 16y ago
  > So the Windows coders who balk at a several hundred dollar 'Apple tax' are going to instead shell out several hundred dollars for a VS2010 license? Many students (an important target demographic) get free access to VS (paid by Uni), while macbooks are definitely not free.

frou_dh 16y ago

I don't believe it, but if we're imagining then officially blessed C# support would be very cool.

protomyth 16y ago
The Java -> Cocoa Binding was so poor because of the dynamic nature of Objective-C. I wonder if C# would fair better?
- DrJokepu 16y ago
  C# 4 supports dynamic typing. (The C# 4 compiler is shipped with .NET 4 which is in turn shipped with VS2010.)

xpaulbettsx 16y ago

This doesn't even pass the giggle test from a technical perspective - iPad/iPhone is so massively tied to the Mac platform, how could you ever write any sort of meaningful integration with VS2010. You'd have to port all of the UIKit/CoreFoundation libraries over, you'd have to make a Windows version of the iPhone Simulator, you'd have to write a Objective-C compiler from scratch (remember, Microsoft would never ship GCC), that was compatible with GCC, the list goes on and on. Now, maybe he's announcing a compatible version of Silverlight, or a way to compile SL applications to iPhone/iPad, which makes far more sense, and would be very compelling for developers. From one codebase, you could have a rich website, a desktop app, a WinPhone7 app, and an iPhone/iPad app, and you could write that app in C#, VB, Python or Ruby. That'd be awesome.

frankus 16y ago
I'm not arguing with your overall conclusion, but Apple has been working on replacing GCC in their toolchain with Clang/LLVM.
vinayak 16y ago
Honestly that is FUD. Microsoft did ship GCC with SFU 3.5 (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows_Services_for_UNIX#SFU_3.5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows_Services_for_...) How do I know ? I worked on it.
- xpaulbettsx 16y ago
  That was before GCC switched to GPLv3. However, the point is moot as someone else mentioned Clang, which I could see MS shipping. I did forget about SFU though, good point.
gte910h 16y ago
I completely degree with your assessment of the facts. The debugger is GDB. This is not hard to integrate with on windows, as it already is integrated with on windows. The compiler is gcc. Objective-C for gcc already exists on windows. Additionally, several people (Appcelerator, Adobe, Corona, Unity3d) have written machine code compliant compilers, I think Microsoft could likely produce one in a small number of weeks if they were being illogical about gcc. Additionally, Microsoft has pretty much continually shipped gcc for the last 15 years or so depending on the products they were selling in the windows/unix integration sphere (and OS2 tools as well). You don't need to port all the UIKit/CoreFoundation libraries over, just the simulated versions, which already run on x86. I'm pretty sure that could be done in a reasonable timespan, probably 3-4 months at the most. The rest are cross compiled for the device, and cross compiling is largely the same no matter what your host platform is. There is 0 chance Silverlight is in any way involved as an implementation platform for general purpose use (but the iPhone simulator may have been ported using it). The entire point of the 3.1.1 language was to tie everyone to C, C++ and Objective-C.

tszming 16y ago

Because they have the same enemy - Google. (and not to mention Bill and Steve look very much alike now, AAPL will be the next MSFT)

jonpaul 16y ago

Umm... April fools was almost two months ago.

nightlifelover 16y ago

Humm I'm not sure what the actual rumor is.. VS 2010 for the Mac or just the ability to dev for the iPhone or the iPad using VS on Windows? From the technical both would be possible but I guess there would be some effort required to do either of these: - VS on a Mac: VS 2010 uses WPF for the gui. Therefore it would have to run on a Mac. I guess the .net platform probably already runs on a Mac (there is Silverlight for a Mac) and since WPF uses Direct-X they would need to hook it up with OpenGL. However since VS is huge this would take a lot of effort I guess, so rather unlikely. - The second rumor, that the VS on Windows would be able to produce iPad/Phone apps seems easier to do from a technical perspective, since they could use Clang/LLVM. But I don't really see the point here: There are more then enough people developing for the iPhone/iPad and this would probably hurt Microsofts Windows Mobile plans.. as well as Apples Mac sales.. So it's a rumor - that's all probably complete BS. We will see..

DrJokepu 16y ago

Honestly, I'm a bit surprised by the responses in this thread. The rumour might be true or false but that's not what I find surprising. Are there technical problems regarding the rumour? There are, certainly. However, we developers know that technical problems can be solved and Apple and Microsoft certainly have the resources to do so. Are there business issues? Is this an unexpected move? Certainly, it is. But Apple has a history of unexpected business moves and business innovation, as does Microsoft even if it is uncool to acknowledge that. Even if the rumour is false (I don't know) I don't find it unbelievable at all, because (a) it makes sense (b) this move would be both typically "Apple" and typically "Microsoft", if you look at the history of these companies. Hell, Microsoft started as a programming tool company.

watty 16y ago
I think the problem with most of the unbelievers on this thread is that it doesn't make sense and it doesn't seem like a move Apple would make.
nw 16y ago
I dare say Microsoft has the best IDE out there.
- malkia 16y ago
  It does, as it works for a lot of people just fine, but it's not without it's quirks. Some things that are better in XCode: filtering of options, error bubbles, keyboard mappings. Some things that are better in MSVC: Debugging! Maybe because I had to use MSVC for the last 10 years, and I'm so used to it. XCode is also not bad, but would need more time adjusting to the keyboard shortcuts
  - nitrogen 16y ago
    Some things that are better in Eclipse: refactorings. Adding method parameters, changing their order, extracting methods, promoting or demoting classes, etc. At least when it comes to Java, Eclipse seems to have more options and a greater success rate than VS2008 with C#. Debugging Java with Eclipse is about the same as debugging C# with VS in my experience, though it seems that VS's output console is slower than Eclipse's, and both are slower than a pure terminal.

raganwald 16y ago

So... Is this one reporter tossing his speculation on top of another reporter's speculation? And now leading to us speculating about his speculation?? I'm honestly amazed we are falling for this. It's exactly the same thing I see every holiday season at the grocery-store checkout: "Psychic reveals which star will die of a drug overdose this year, who is going to get married, and why a giant earthquake is going to flatten Toronto." It's a simple game that delights the rubes. Make a lot of guesses, take credit for the ones you got right last year, and hand wave the ones that didn't come true. How is this any different? p.s. Here's a suggestion: Create a poll asking HNers to vote on which wild-assed-guess is going to come true and keep all the talk of vapourware in one place!

j_baker 16y ago

This is something that could feasibly happen. But still, I'll believe it when the words come out of Ballmer's mouth.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

eli 16y ago

It's not that crazy. Remember when an iPod could only sync with a Mac?

mortenjorck 16y ago

In the case that this is true, this would be far and away Apple's biggest-ever sacrificial move against the Mac for the sake of iPhone OS. Ending OS X's exclusivity as the dev kit for iPhone OS would send an extraordinarily profound signal about the company's priorities.

Tamerlin 16y ago
Dropping the "computer" part from the name was probably a bit of foreshadowing...
raganwald 16y ago
Question: How many Macs do you think they have sold to developers who (a) wanted to build an iPhone application but (b) didn't already own a Mac? That's the market they are 'sacrificing'. I doubt it's significant. update: Apple reports that they sold 3.05 million Macintosh® computers in Q42009 alone. I can't see them giving a damn about selling Macs to iPhone developers.

jeiting 16y ago

The App Store has enough crappy apps. I don't think opening the platform up to VS is going to bring in any more @atebits or the like. If you want to be serious about iPhone/iPad you will get a Mac.

b3b0p 16y ago

Iirc, first generation iPod did not work/sync on Windows, so what is so unbelievable about Apple having the iPhone SDK working on Windows with Visual Studio now? Although personally I don't think this is going to happen. As a hardware company, i'm sure they make many extra sales from companies and developers purchasing for the sole purpose of targeting the iPhone/iPad/iTouch and Mac OS X users.

UpFromTheGut 16y ago

Don't get too excited, although I don't personally have authority to dismiss this, I have word that this is a completely FALSE rumor (sorry, I can't back that up-- at least do yourself the favor of being skeptical). Edit: Confirmed http://twitter.com/Microsoft/status/14850981422 http://twitter.com/Microsoft/status/14850981422 (Microsoft official Twitter) Quote: "Steve Ballmer not speaking at Apple Dev Conf. Nor appearing on Dancing with the Stars. Nor riding in the Belmont. Just FYI."

latch 16y ago

Microsoft has said Ballmer won't be speaking at WWDC...talk about getting it wrong: http://twitter.com/Microsoft/statuses/14850981422 http://twitter.com/Microsoft/statuses/14850981422

thought_alarm 16y ago

Strategically ridiculous and technically preposterous. How does this nonsense get published? The only story here is how so many people apparently don't understand computers or the computer industry.