7 ms·

Just wanted to say thanks for Xcode. Bundling it with OS X was brilliant and made it so much easier to get started writing software. I even used it for Java! I

Just wanted to say thanks for Xcode. Bundling it with OS X was brilliant and made it so much easier to get started writing software. I even used it for Java! I have written more LoC in Xcode than in any other tool, and though its focus has shifted away from the software I write, I still consider it fondly.

anonymouse008 5y ago
Seconded! Xcode alone almost justifies the 30% cut on apps. A single developer can do remarkable things because of Xcode + Swift + SwiftUI+ Package Manager + all the fixings for cross platform (Linux, Windows... etc). Strong opinion: this will win all the things (building a language tightly with a development environment, old intersection of software + hardware vibes) Relatedly: Vapor is doing great things Swift Server Side, and Tokamak is bringing SwiftUI to the web like WebObjects aimed to do... I have yet to go deep into embedded works with Swift, but I believe that CL left some goodies based on his previous experience. Even after being 5th degree burned by Mac gatekeeper, I hold these opinions -- eventually it will be write once, run everywhere. Seeing where it's all heading makes one as giddy as a young Woz
- kaba0 5y ago
  > Xcode alone almost justifies the 30% cut on apps Come on, that’s ridiculous even if I take it as an exaggeration. On what grounds would it have anything to do with the revenue one creates through an app they made? It would be an equivalent of the canvas’s manufacturer Mona Lisa is painted on wanting recognition for their work.
  - anonymouse008 5y ago
    > Come on, that’s ridiculous even if I take it as an exaggeration. > It would be an equivalent of the canvas’s manufacturer Mona Lisa is painted on wanting recognition for their work. Come on, that’s ridiculous even if I take it as an exaggeration. Are we really trying to equate the millions of man hours it takes to get an M1 and A1_ into production, then fine tune the assembly calls for Swift, then the UI frameworks, QA, testing, planning, etc., till the point an app can be downloaded from the App Store by anyone on earth, ... to a canvas? ------- In my mind, it is a buy in to the Apple ecosystem present and future. Yes my models look different without the 30% or 15% cut, but I have written apps in almost all languages now, and my time from idea to MVP, that can scale leveraging iCloud Sync, etc, is 1/10th that of anything else I've tried with Swift/Xcode/AppStore. Additionally, developers get to ride in on Apple's market segment. They are doing a lot of heavy lifting to create a customer persona that we can follow if we learn a bit about the cohort... which is another separate value beyond a technical one (think FB level attributes baked into just targeting AppStore)... Finally, I believe the current pricing encourages all of us to hold our apps to a higher standard, and I appreciate that. Things of intangible value (game coins) have high price elasticity because they directly derive little value... so producers of this good want to lower the cost because it affects their ability to profit. Apple has instead said, 'actually, no, we know the nature of what we sell, the good and the bad. Intangibles can be powerful tools or they can be soul sucking mind-holes. If your product is so price elastic, it doesn't hold the value we are trying to promote on AppStore.' Honestly Apple shouldn't have anti-trust issues... its current messaging presently doesn't realize its value and strength, which gives it trouble. Last bit: this is written in haste, so please don't take any of this personally or curtly... it's meant in respect.
ardit33 5y ago
I agree. People find it normal to get an IDE for free, but when Apple released XCode for free, it was an innovation. (VB Basic/Pro, Borland, and all cost money when they started). The only competitors were Eclipse, and VI/VIM and other lightweight editors. But, even Eclipse, initially was part of the IBM premium enterprise tools, called Websphere. So, just like they released the iOS updates for free, and MacOS X for free, (in 2008-2009), Apple has been a true innovator in this space. Microsoft and Co were always chasing behind.
- mrpippy 5y ago
  Development tools for classic MacOS cost money too, since they were commercial software like anything else. Metrowerks CodeWarrior, Lightspeed/Symantec C/C++/Pascal, even Apple’s own Macintosh Programmers Workshop.
- danachow 5y ago
  Eclipse was free and open source from the beginning and predates Xcode. That it was derived from an even older commercial product doesn’t seem that relevant.
  - tomnipotent 5y ago
    Eclipse was originally a rewrite of IBM VisualAge in Java.
    - danachow 5y ago
      And how is that relevant to whether it was a FOSS IDE project prior to Xcode.
      - tomnipotent 5y ago
        Everything about it was heavily influenced from the work done on an existing platform, and it was only greenfield in that it was built in Java. It would not have had the start it did if not for the closed-source proprietary product that preceded it.
alberth 5y ago
Still costs $99 to publish to App Store.
- umvi 5y ago
  It's worse than that. It's $99 per year you want to keep it in the store. Stop paying the tax and it's taken down, even if it was free software to begin with.
- nlitened 5y ago
  Developers boasting 300—500k total comps who are greedy to spend 100 bucks a year on their tools is freaking insane to me, man. How much does gas cost for truck drivers?
  - fivea 5y ago
    > Developers boasting 300—500k total comps In what world do you live in, exactly? Plenty of FANG engineers don't get paid a fraction of that. If you dare gaze away from your belly button and, say, outside the US borders, there are plenty of developers who barely earn 20k pre-tax.
  - rustybolt 5y ago
    In my country I made less then 25k a year with two masters degrees in STEM fields when I started. If you're a starting independent developer, you probably make less. It's also not 'spending 100 dollars on their tools', it's spending $100 yearly to upload your app to the app store. You have to spend money on tools on top of that. Truck drivers get their gas costs reimbursed. If they wouldn't, I'm sure that would complain about gas prices as well.
    - mathverse 5y ago
      This is irrelevant. You are publishing an app to a global market where pricing is the same everywhere.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      Just like one can submit software expenses on IRS declaration, same deal.
eschaton 5y ago
Thanks from a happy user of some of those early lines of code you wrote. ;)

anonymouse008 5y ago

Seconded! Xcode alone almost justifies the 30% cut on apps. A single developer can do remarkable things because of Xcode + Swift + SwiftUI+ Package Manager + all the fixings for cross platform (Linux, Windows... etc). Strong opinion: this will win all the things (building a language tightly with a development environment, old intersection of software + hardware vibes) Relatedly: Vapor is doing great things Swift Server Side, and Tokamak is bringing SwiftUI to the web like WebObjects aimed to do... I have yet to go deep into embedded works with Swift, but I believe that CL left some goodies based on his previous experience. Even after being 5th degree burned by Mac gatekeeper, I hold these opinions -- eventually it will be write once, run everywhere. Seeing where it's all heading makes one as giddy as a young Woz

kaba0 5y ago
> Xcode alone almost justifies the 30% cut on apps Come on, that’s ridiculous even if I take it as an exaggeration. On what grounds would it have anything to do with the revenue one creates through an app they made? It would be an equivalent of the canvas’s manufacturer Mona Lisa is painted on wanting recognition for their work.
- anonymouse008 5y ago
  > Come on, that’s ridiculous even if I take it as an exaggeration. > It would be an equivalent of the canvas’s manufacturer Mona Lisa is painted on wanting recognition for their work. Come on, that’s ridiculous even if I take it as an exaggeration. Are we really trying to equate the millions of man hours it takes to get an M1 and A1_ into production, then fine tune the assembly calls for Swift, then the UI frameworks, QA, testing, planning, etc., till the point an app can be downloaded from the App Store by anyone on earth, ... to a canvas? ------- In my mind, it is a buy in to the Apple ecosystem present and future. Yes my models look different without the 30% or 15% cut, but I have written apps in almost all languages now, and my time from idea to MVP, that can scale leveraging iCloud Sync, etc, is 1/10th that of anything else I've tried with Swift/Xcode/AppStore. Additionally, developers get to ride in on Apple's market segment. They are doing a lot of heavy lifting to create a customer persona that we can follow if we learn a bit about the cohort... which is another separate value beyond a technical one (think FB level attributes baked into just targeting AppStore)... Finally, I believe the current pricing encourages all of us to hold our apps to a higher standard, and I appreciate that. Things of intangible value (game coins) have high price elasticity because they directly derive little value... so producers of this good want to lower the cost because it affects their ability to profit. Apple has instead said, 'actually, no, we know the nature of what we sell, the good and the bad. Intangibles can be powerful tools or they can be soul sucking mind-holes. If your product is so price elastic, it doesn't hold the value we are trying to promote on AppStore.' Honestly Apple shouldn't have anti-trust issues... its current messaging presently doesn't realize its value and strength, which gives it trouble. Last bit: this is written in haste, so please don't take any of this personally or curtly... it's meant in respect.

ardit33 5y ago

I agree. People find it normal to get an IDE for free, but when Apple released XCode for free, it was an innovation. (VB Basic/Pro, Borland, and all cost money when they started). The only competitors were Eclipse, and VI/VIM and other lightweight editors. But, even Eclipse, initially was part of the IBM premium enterprise tools, called Websphere. So, just like they released the iOS updates for free, and MacOS X for free, (in 2008-2009), Apple has been a true innovator in this space. Microsoft and Co were always chasing behind.

mrpippy 5y ago
Development tools for classic MacOS cost money too, since they were commercial software like anything else. Metrowerks CodeWarrior, Lightspeed/Symantec C/C++/Pascal, even Apple’s own Macintosh Programmers Workshop.
danachow 5y ago
Eclipse was free and open source from the beginning and predates Xcode. That it was derived from an even older commercial product doesn’t seem that relevant.
- tomnipotent 5y ago
  Eclipse was originally a rewrite of IBM VisualAge in Java.
  - danachow 5y ago
    And how is that relevant to whether it was a FOSS IDE project prior to Xcode.
    - tomnipotent 5y ago
      Everything about it was heavily influenced from the work done on an existing platform, and it was only greenfield in that it was built in Java. It would not have had the start it did if not for the closed-source proprietary product that preceded it.

alberth 5y ago

Still costs $99 to publish to App Store.

umvi 5y ago
It's worse than that. It's $99 per year you want to keep it in the store. Stop paying the tax and it's taken down, even if it was free software to begin with.
nlitened 5y ago
Developers boasting 300—500k total comps who are greedy to spend 100 bucks a year on their tools is freaking insane to me, man. How much does gas cost for truck drivers?
- fivea 5y ago
  > Developers boasting 300—500k total comps In what world do you live in, exactly? Plenty of FANG engineers don't get paid a fraction of that. If you dare gaze away from your belly button and, say, outside the US borders, there are plenty of developers who barely earn 20k pre-tax.
- rustybolt 5y ago
  In my country I made less then 25k a year with two masters degrees in STEM fields when I started. If you're a starting independent developer, you probably make less. It's also not 'spending 100 dollars on their tools', it's spending $100 yearly to upload your app to the app store. You have to spend money on tools on top of that. Truck drivers get their gas costs reimbursed. If they wouldn't, I'm sure that would complain about gas prices as well.
  - mathverse 5y ago
    This is irrelevant. You are publishing an app to a global market where pricing is the same everywhere.
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Just like one can submit software expenses on IRS declaration, same deal.

eschaton 5y ago

Thanks from a happy user of some of those early lines of code you wrote. ;)