3 ms·

If iOS had required Lisp instead of Objective-C, then Lisp would have been popular right now. Ruby really needed Rails to get people to try it. I think the ki

If iOS had required Lisp instead of Objective-C, then Lisp would have been popular right now. Ruby really needed Rails to get people to try it. I think the killer use problem is more an explanation then anything else. Java also showed a good marketing, well funded campaign does wonders.

mamon 8y ago
Or, iOS would never took off, because no one would want to write apps for it.
- zzzcpan 8y ago
  Yeah, there is this weird idea on HN that any language can become popular if some big ecosystem adopts it before it becomes big. The reality is more complicated of course. Familiarity, simplicity, learning curve all matter much more, than people want to believe.
  - protomyth 8y ago
    If Steve Jobs when announcing the iPhone SDK had said that Apple's way forward was Lisp and how great the Meta-Object Protocol[1] was for the future, developers, regardless of their beliefs, would have gone and made Lisp popular. Some things have the killer use. Look at Javascript, it is not a good enough language to have developed without Netscape putting it into the browser. It had the killer application that you were basically forced to use. I love prototype-based inheritance but even NewtonScript was a better language. 1) Steve Job's videos for NeXT explaining objects were pretty amazing
zzzcpan 8y ago
> If iOS had required Lisp instead of Objective-C, then Lisp would have been popular right now. It could have dragged iOS popularity with it. Pushing, promoting or forcing something is not enough for it to become popular and widely used.
- protomyth 8y ago
  Given the hype and the company, there was no way Lisp would have drug it down. The only way for it to affect iOS was to provide a worse environment than the web apps. People would have found a way just as the reluctant found a way with Objective-C. Ask Sun about Java and their promotional campaign. When a teacher at a community college in North Dakota gets a call and sent a book to help him decide to teach their language, you can be very effective at pushing.
  - zimpenfish 8y ago
    > People would have found a way just as the reluctant found a way with Objective-C But the people most likely to develop iOS apps at the start were likely already familiar with Objective-C, I think, due to it being the favoured app platform on OSX, no?
    - protomyth 8y ago
      I would have thought the same thing, but if you look at a lot of the early app developers, they did come from other platforms. It was easier for an OS X developer, but there were a lot of new people who complained about Objective-C but just got on with it. A lot of early tutorials are really geared to the bigger group of new developers. On a side note, I really do believe the people behind Swift hate Objective-C and a lot of the old complaints are "solved" by Swift.
SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
> If iOS had required Lisp instead of Objective-C, then Lisp would have been popular right now. Probably. I wonder if we wouldn't have ended up with more Xamarins instead.
- protomyth 8y ago
  Maybe, but one shouldn't discount the amount of documentation that Apple pushes. Look at Objective-C programmers in the age of Swift. Its rather hard to be on the outside of the preferred language.
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    Well, I think that's largely due to the ability to use cute emojis as variable names.
fulafel 8y ago
I think a more believeable alternative history would have been Dylan, which Apple already created for the Newton and which was a Lisp under a more traditional syntax layer.

mamon 8y ago

Or, iOS would never took off, because no one would want to write apps for it.

zzzcpan 8y ago
Yeah, there is this weird idea on HN that any language can become popular if some big ecosystem adopts it before it becomes big. The reality is more complicated of course. Familiarity, simplicity, learning curve all matter much more, than people want to believe.
- protomyth 8y ago
  If Steve Jobs when announcing the iPhone SDK had said that Apple's way forward was Lisp and how great the Meta-Object Protocol[1] was for the future, developers, regardless of their beliefs, would have gone and made Lisp popular. Some things have the killer use. Look at Javascript, it is not a good enough language to have developed without Netscape putting it into the browser. It had the killer application that you were basically forced to use. I love prototype-based inheritance but even NewtonScript was a better language. 1) Steve Job's videos for NeXT explaining objects were pretty amazing

zzzcpan 8y ago

> If iOS had required Lisp instead of Objective-C, then Lisp would have been popular right now. It could have dragged iOS popularity with it. Pushing, promoting or forcing something is not enough for it to become popular and widely used.

protomyth 8y ago
Given the hype and the company, there was no way Lisp would have drug it down. The only way for it to affect iOS was to provide a worse environment than the web apps. People would have found a way just as the reluctant found a way with Objective-C. Ask Sun about Java and their promotional campaign. When a teacher at a community college in North Dakota gets a call and sent a book to help him decide to teach their language, you can be very effective at pushing.
- zimpenfish 8y ago
  > People would have found a way just as the reluctant found a way with Objective-C But the people most likely to develop iOS apps at the start were likely already familiar with Objective-C, I think, due to it being the favoured app platform on OSX, no?
  - protomyth 8y ago
    I would have thought the same thing, but if you look at a lot of the early app developers, they did come from other platforms. It was easier for an OS X developer, but there were a lot of new people who complained about Objective-C but just got on with it. A lot of early tutorials are really geared to the bigger group of new developers. On a side note, I really do believe the people behind Swift hate Objective-C and a lot of the old complaints are "solved" by Swift.

SketchySeaBeast 8y ago

> If iOS had required Lisp instead of Objective-C, then Lisp would have been popular right now. Probably. I wonder if we wouldn't have ended up with more Xamarins instead.

protomyth 8y ago
Maybe, but one shouldn't discount the amount of documentation that Apple pushes. Look at Objective-C programmers in the age of Swift. Its rather hard to be on the outside of the preferred language.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  Well, I think that's largely due to the ability to use cute emojis as variable names.

fulafel 8y ago

I think a more believeable alternative history would have been Dylan, which Apple already created for the Newton and which was a Lisp under a more traditional syntax layer.