2 ms·

In fairness, the "evangelist" title at Apple goes way back to the time when technology ("home computers?!") really did need evangelizing to the press and the ge

by quesera 12y ago

In fairness, the "evangelist" title at Apple goes way back to the time when technology ("home computers?!") really did need evangelizing to the press and the general public. Then, as now, Apple believed in their mission with a fervor that suggested the nomenclature. See 1980s Guy Kawasaki, etc.

flomo 12y ago
Interesting historical trivia. But it's worth noting that Apple's 1990s developer strategy was almost a total failure, whereas Microsoft's "talk to actual developers" approach was much more successful. Note I'm not making some sort of Mac/Windows analogy because the whole communication space has changed radically. Just making the point that the title "evangelist" implies more of a marketing role.
- quesera 12y ago
  Well, Apple's 1990s everything strategy was almost a total failure. But yes, I could write volumes about the ways Apple could improve developer relations, and a recurrent theme would be the one-way nature of most interactions. Even big developers have a tough time of it, sometimes. The labs at WWDC are valuable. And the tech talk tours sound like an attempt (have not attended), but it's a long-standing, systemic problem that is probably insoluble without extraordinary effort. On the other hand, Cocoa is beautiful, and it all works out well in the end.
  - flomo 12y ago
    Sure. And I should make clear the 1990s are a fundamentally wrong analogy because 1990s Apple barely understood that PowerPC chips needed a compiler, much less create Xcode or a developer productivity tool like Swift. In my mind it's mostly a matter of positioning. An "Evangelist" is there to sell me something. A "Developer Something" is there to listen to me bitch. Speaking of Cocoa, from what I've heard about NeXT, it was a small company and the developers were one step away from the customers. Perhaps it is 'beautiful' because of a lot direct feedback.

by quesera 12y ago

flomo 12y ago

Interesting historical trivia. But it's worth noting that Apple's 1990s developer strategy was almost a total failure, whereas Microsoft's "talk to actual developers" approach was much more successful. Note I'm not making some sort of Mac/Windows analogy because the whole communication space has changed radically. Just making the point that the title "evangelist" implies more of a marketing role.

quesera 12y ago
Well, Apple's 1990s everything strategy was almost a total failure. But yes, I could write volumes about the ways Apple could improve developer relations, and a recurrent theme would be the one-way nature of most interactions. Even big developers have a tough time of it, sometimes. The labs at WWDC are valuable. And the tech talk tours sound like an attempt (have not attended), but it's a long-standing, systemic problem that is probably insoluble without extraordinary effort. On the other hand, Cocoa is beautiful, and it all works out well in the end.
- flomo 12y ago
  Sure. And I should make clear the 1990s are a fundamentally wrong analogy because 1990s Apple barely understood that PowerPC chips needed a compiler, much less create Xcode or a developer productivity tool like Swift. In my mind it's mostly a matter of positioning. An "Evangelist" is there to sell me something. A "Developer Something" is there to listen to me bitch. Speaking of Cocoa, from what I've heard about NeXT, it was a small company and the developers were one step away from the customers. Perhaps it is 'beautiful' because of a lot direct feedback.