4 ms·

I think this is true to a certain extent. They'd rather have developers create UIs with Swift/ObjC, which tend to look and perform better on Mac. i.e. it's pro

by vemv 6y ago

I think this is true to a certain extent. They'd rather have developers create UIs with Swift/ObjC, which tend to look and perform better on Mac. i.e. it's probably more about fostering great UIs for the end customers rather than curbing Java altogether as a platform.

kitsunesoba 6y ago
Yes, it’s more likely that an app written with Swift/Obj-C and AppKit/UIKit/SwiftUI will be more tailored to macOS specifically and will better take advantage of platform facilities than apps written with a different language and toolkit (such as Java+ Swing). Apps built with third party tools tend to be more lowest-common-denominator.
- p2t2p 6y ago
  Nobody cares, proved by electron and popularity of web apps in general. The only b thing Apple will achieve is to speed up the native going into irrelevance and being replaced with things like electron. Regular people don't care about "looks and feels native" zealots. All the relevant software has distinct, software specific looks. Adobe suite, Fusion, bunch of engineering tools, IDEs.
  - Oreb 6y ago
    Regular Mac users _used to_ care. For many years, one of the defining characteristics of Macs was the high quality native apps, all with consistent look, feel and behavior. Mac users would refuse to use apps that weren't sufficiently Mac-like. Developers of Mac apps had a similar passion and perfectionism for good UX and UI. Somewhere along the way, this part of Apple culture got lost. I think Apple's commercial success is part of the reason. The traditional Mac user base got diluted by lots of newcomers who didn't have the same high expectations and requirements for good and consistent user interfaces. The traditional Mac developers got diluted by programmers from other platforms, who – although not being technically inferior in any way – did not have the same passion or understanding of Apple's UI philosophy, often not even bothering to study the Human Interface Guidelines.
    - kitsunesoba 6y ago
      A lot of Mac users still care, as is evidenced by the continued existence of the likes of Panic and OmniGroup.
  - kitsunesoba 6y ago
    > Adobe suite, Fusion Funny thing is that those are both products that many are reaching for alternatives to whenever viable. As powerful as they may be as tools, there's quite a lot that's throughly mediocre or even bad about them. There are examples of truly great apps that use their own look and feel, but I don't think either of those are among them.
toyg 6y ago
It’s about fostering lock-in and staying in control. Which is why they felt the need to build something like Metal in the first place.

by vemv 6y ago

kitsunesoba 6y ago

Yes, it’s more likely that an app written with Swift/Obj-C and AppKit/UIKit/SwiftUI will be more tailored to macOS specifically and will better take advantage of platform facilities than apps written with a different language and toolkit (such as Java+ Swing). Apps built with third party tools tend to be more lowest-common-denominator.

p2t2p 6y ago
Nobody cares, proved by electron and popularity of web apps in general. The only b thing Apple will achieve is to speed up the native going into irrelevance and being replaced with things like electron. Regular people don't care about "looks and feels native" zealots. All the relevant software has distinct, software specific looks. Adobe suite, Fusion, bunch of engineering tools, IDEs.
- Oreb 6y ago
  Regular Mac users _used to_ care. For many years, one of the defining characteristics of Macs was the high quality native apps, all with consistent look, feel and behavior. Mac users would refuse to use apps that weren't sufficiently Mac-like. Developers of Mac apps had a similar passion and perfectionism for good UX and UI. Somewhere along the way, this part of Apple culture got lost. I think Apple's commercial success is part of the reason. The traditional Mac user base got diluted by lots of newcomers who didn't have the same high expectations and requirements for good and consistent user interfaces. The traditional Mac developers got diluted by programmers from other platforms, who – although not being technically inferior in any way – did not have the same passion or understanding of Apple's UI philosophy, often not even bothering to study the Human Interface Guidelines.
  - kitsunesoba 6y ago
    A lot of Mac users still care, as is evidenced by the continued existence of the likes of Panic and OmniGroup.
- kitsunesoba 6y ago
  > Adobe suite, Fusion Funny thing is that those are both products that many are reaching for alternatives to whenever viable. As powerful as they may be as tools, there's quite a lot that's throughly mediocre or even bad about them. There are examples of truly great apps that use their own look and feel, but I don't think either of those are among them.

toyg 6y ago

It’s about fostering lock-in and staying in control. Which is why they felt the need to build something like Metal in the first place.