I love composability as much as the author, but his opinion is, to put it kindly, not well informed. iOS has a myriad of mechanisms for sharing content within a

I love composability as much as the author, but his opinion is, to put it kindly, not well informed. iOS has a myriad of mechanisms for sharing content within and between apps, bot from the same developer and from different developers, with and without prior agreement, and for composing workflows and experiences that are greater than the sum of the parts. Some of these mechanisms are new, and the possibilities have not yet been fully plumbed. Some have been around for a while. But iOS is just getting started. People said the iPad was a "read-only" or "consumption-only" device, but, over time, we have seen tools come out that are great authoring tools for various types of content. The same thing will happen (and already has happened, but is growing over time) with cross-app workflows. As far as the title, "anti-Unix and anti-programmer," taking the first part, well yes it doesn't provide a built in command line for programmers, if that's what he means, although it does happen to be built on UNIX, and it benefits from the maturity of UNIX (and gives back, with OSS tools like LLVM). On the second part, the tools it does provide for programmers are truly wonderful - the Objective-C language, the frameworks, an amazing compiler with static analysis (if you don't know what this gives you, the answer is pure joy), the development environment (though Xcode 4 had a rocky rollout, it has proven itself to be a sweet update), the patterns that are used and encouraged, and the architectural choices, are all very well thought out. Programmers coming from other mobile platforms have told me that they left behind a lot of pain, and found a lot of power on iOS. "Anti-programmer" is a very odd way to describe a platform that makes programmers who get into it happy with their coding experience, makes them money, and gives users a great experience while keeping their private information secure from abuses by ill-intentioned programmers. I can't help but be baffled by where he is coming from. I love UNIX, the command line, and composing commands, but then I love cooking in the kitchen too. Different environments come with different tools. If we want to compare just mobile development environments, iOS is one that has clearly been developed with a careful deliberative process intended to preserve good battery life, protect user data, and avoid painting itself into any architectural corners. There are constraints. There always are. But iOS is growing, with very exciting (for programmers) features with every update, including deep stuff that goes down to the core architectural level of how your data flows in your program, in ways that promise a very, very happy life for iOS programmers on multiple core devices. The future is very bright for iOS programming. The "anti-freedom" charges, the locking out of certain features, you get the same stuff on any platform. Just try to publish an app that abuses the Android logo in any Android market. Not that you would want to, but then, I wouldn't want to publish an app that steals user data, and that's exactly the kind of thing iOS does not give me the "freedom" to do... and that's a good thing. All the mechanisms for preventing abuse could have been done in a much more heavy-handed way, such as by being tied to a central email account that you use to authenticate to dozens of critical services you depend on in your life, that can be yanked and shut down at any time, with a very tenuous appeal process. As developers we are lucky to have a platform that has done things in such sensible ways.