Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 11:32 UTC
Apple It's rumour time! Analyst Trip Chowdhry, with Global Equities Research, is claiming that Microsoft has been allotted seven minutes during Steve Jobs' WWDC keynote speech. Supposedly, the Redmond giant will unveil that developers will be able to write native iPhone, iPad, and Mac applications using Visual Studio 2010 on Windows. As crazy as this sounds, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who can move beyond the outdated Apple vs. Microsoft attitude.
Order by: Score:
It will be nice if it happens.
by axilmar on Thu 27th May 2010 11:42 UTC
axilmar
Member since:
2006-03-20

It will be very nice if it happens. Lots of people are interested in making Apple apps, but it's kind of difficult given that one should buy a Mac to do so.

Personally, I am quite interested in such a solution, since I don't have the money to buy a Mac or the house space to put it. I also dislike the Mac interface and find it inferior to Windows, and I really like Visual Studio that is a top notch IDE.

Reply Score: 7

RE: It will be nice if it happens.
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 12:02 UTC in reply to "It will be nice if it happens."
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Agreed.

As much as I'm personally not a fan of the vast majority of Microsoft products, I can't rate Visual Studio highly enough. It's simply a dream to program in.

As much as I might often argue that many open source apps are on a par with Windows apps, when it comes to development, QT Creator, KDevelop, Eclipse and Netbeans (as great as they are) don't even come close to VS.

It's just a pity most of my recent development requirements have forced me to move away from VS
[edit]
Actually, if anyone has any tips on cross compiling Linux C++ apps from VS (and would VS's debugger still work?) then it wouldn't be much effort for me to run XP from a VM.....

Edited 2010-05-27 12:08 UTC

Reply Score: 6

sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

As much as I'm personally not a fan of the vast majority of Microsoft products, I can't rate Visual Studio highly enough. It's simply a dream to program in.


I find VS a complete mess of functionality. To me Qt Creator is leanier and more eficient for coding. But then I also think Vim is well suited for any coding task.

Actually, if anyone has any tips on cross compiling Linux C++ apps from VS (and would VS's debugger still work?) then it wouldn't be much effort for me to run XP from a VM.....


If you want crossplatform applications, don't you think you should start thinking about crossplatform toolkits and compilers? VS is for Windows, because Microsoft doesn't support Linux, not because of a deficiency in VS. The best thing you have for C++ crossplatform GUI applications is Qt4 and whatever IDE you want, including Qt Creator.

Reply Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


I find VS a complete mess of functionality. To me Qt Creator is leanier and more eficient for coding. But then I also think Vim is well suited for any coding task.

QTCreator is Leaner, but not more efficient. It's getting there though.

As for Vim - I personally love it. I a end up doing great deal of my PHP development in it. However I wouldn't want to write a C++ application in it. Especially when there are IDEs out there that just make life easier.
Don't get me wrong, I am one of those developers that likes to "get his hands dirty", but at the same time I don't see the point of deliberately making life hard when I can produce the same quality of code but with less stress and/or quicker.

If you want crossplatform applications, don't you think you should start thinking about crossplatform toolkits and compilers? VS is for Windows, because Microsoft doesn't support Linux, not because of a deficiency in VS. The best thing you have for C++ crossplatform GUI applications is Qt4 and whatever IDE you want, including Qt Creator.

You misunderstand me. Most of my code is already portable and I already use QT. However I'm not wanting to use VS to write cross-platform applications, I want to use VS as I like it.
VS is the only IDE that i've felt 100% "at home" with. And knowing that it /does/ (and has done for years) support cross compiling, I'm interested in finding out just how good it would be for cross-compiling Linux applications.
If I can get it set up and it improves my efficiency, then that's brilliant. However if it doesn't, then I'm more than happy to stick with stick with Eclipse or QT Creator. But thus far VS is still (in my opinion) the best IDE around.

Edited 2010-05-27 18:44 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: It will be nice if it happens.
by jokkel on Thu 27th May 2010 14:14 UTC in reply to "It will be nice if it happens."
jokkel Member since:
2008-07-07

You can certainly afford the price and room of a used Mac mini. It's smaller than my external drives.
This is an invented problem.

Reply Score: 2

RE: It will be nice if it happens.
by sbenitezb on Thu 27th May 2010 17:28 UTC in reply to "It will be nice if it happens."
sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

So you can afford VS but not a Mac?

Reply Score: 1

Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

Free vs overly expensive?

Reply Score: 2

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Actually Standard and Professional versions are still cheaper than a Mac, at least in Europe.

Reply Score: 2

axilmar Member since:
2006-03-20

VS Express is free.

Reply Score: 2

dumdiddydum Member since:
2009-10-29

It will be very nice if it happens. Lots of people are interested in making Apple apps, but it's kind of difficult given that one should buy a Mac to do so.


Agreed.

Personally, I am quite interested in such a solution, since I don't have the money to buy a Mac or the house space to put it.


Well, the Mac Mini is about as small as a desktop computer can be. Surely you'd have space for that, no?

I also dislike the Mac interface and find it inferior to Windows, and I really like Visual Studio that is a top notch IDE.


Well, as far as IDE goes this is a matter of personal taste. It's understandable you don't want to use Apple's if you can't see or appreciate the advantages of OS X over Windows.

Reply Score: 1

axilmar Member since:
2006-03-20

Well, the Mac Mini is about as small as a desktop computer can be. Surely you'd have space for that, no?


I don't have space for a 2nd monitor and keyboard. The Mac Mini itself takes very little space.

Reply Score: 2

dumdiddydum Member since:
2009-10-29

KVM switch and boom! you're good to go!

Reply Score: 1

Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Thu 27th May 2010 11:42 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

§3.3.1 will see that this won’t happen. Microsoft have been able to see the Adobe debate in public, it would be stupid to announce iPhone support for Visual Studio only for Apple to say "no". If it did exist, the project will have been canceled already if they have any sense.

The only other possibility is that there could be some agreement between Apple and Microsoft to allow it to go ahead, but I just don’t see it.

Nice to Apple are being so successful in killing innovation and choice for developers.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by Kroc
by moondevil on Thu 27th May 2010 12:00 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I remember that long long long time ago, there used to be a Visual Studio version that supported cross compiling for the Mac, there was even a MFC version for Mac OS.

Not sure any longer which version that was.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by bousozoku on Thu 27th May 2010 14:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
bousozoku Member since:
2006-01-23

I remember that long long long time ago, there used to be a Visual Studio version that supported cross compiling for the Mac, there was even a MFC version for Mac OS.

Not sure any longer which version that was.


Yes, and Microsoft created MS Office for Mac (X was it?) with it, which was the most hated because it looked and worked like a Windows application.

I hope they're really wanting to do native. Obviously, they should want to work in their own tools, although it's hard to feel the native environment when you're working on another platform.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Kroc
by NeoX on Thu 27th May 2010 23:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Kroc"
NeoX Member since:
2006-02-19


Yes, and Microsoft created MS Office for Mac (X was it?) with it, which was the most hated because it looked and worked like a Windows application.


No, I think it was 3 versions before X, Office 98. Office 98 and on were great versions for Mac. It was Office 4 that was a big piece of steaming pile of garbage. It tried to look like windows, was bloated and very unstable. Starting with 98, they re-engineered it and made it a good suite again with drag and drop install with speed and stability.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Kroc
by dagw on Thu 27th May 2010 12:02 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

§3.3.1 says nothing about what IDE or text editor you can use. Visual Studio already supports two blessed languages (C and C++), and adding a Obj-C layer should be fairly easy. Add an option to target Apple's compiler (which I believe is completely Open Source, and can thus be ported to Windows) and call it a day.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by sbenitezb on Thu 27th May 2010 17:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

§3.3.1 says nothing about what IDE or text editor you can use. Visual Studio already supports two blessed languages (C and C++), and adding a Obj-C layer should be fairly easy. Add an option to target Apple's compiler (which I believe is completely Open Source, and can thus be ported to Windows) and call it a day.


IDE support for the language is not the only thing needed to code with easy. You need native platform support or a toolkit like MFC/Qt/GTK. Whatever toolkit you end using, your application won't be a "true" OS X app. Not that it matters much. Once you have your shiny new application ready to compile and print "hello world", you surely want to test it. Where are you going to test it? In Windows? No, you want/need a Mac.

So, buy a Mac if you want to code for Mac. You will need it anyway.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Kroc
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 12:05 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The only other possibility is that there could be some agreement between Apple and Microsoft to allow it to go ahead, but I just don’t see it.


That's the gist of the story, or didn't you read it correctly? Ballmer will appear ON STAGE during the keynote. I thought that part was pretty clear.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Kroc
by REM2000 on Thu 27th May 2010 12:24 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
REM2000 Member since:
2006-07-25

I think the problem is that flash or adobe solution to this was that you develop a flash app and the ide would wrap this up up with an interpreter to run on the iPhone.

If the IDE does native code/executable i don't think apple have a problem.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Thu 27th May 2010 12:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Flash CS5 compiles a native binary, it doesn’t use an interpreter. Apple banned it on principle. It’s no different to monotouch which is also a grey area now.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Kroc
by mrhasbean on Thu 27th May 2010 13:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Kroc"
mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

Flash CS5 compiles a native binary, it doesn’t use an interpreter. Apple banned it on principle. It’s no different to monotouch which is also a grey area now.


But as has also been pointed out, you weren't writing code in C, C++ or Objective C, which you can do with VS. The other possibility of course is that this has something to do with Apple moving their search to Bing - but damn I hope not!

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Kroc
by henderson101 on Thu 27th May 2010 14:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Kroc"
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

Flash CS5 compiles a native binary, it doesn’t use an interpreter. Apple banned it on principle. It’s no different to monotouch which is also a grey area now.


Ah no, Apples and Oranges.

CS5 uses the Flash framework to create apps. The apps are translated to a subset of the Objective-C runtime. AFAIK, the Flash product doesn't allow the developer and access to the Native API (and that would obviously make sense, as the Flash runtime is cross platform.)

Monotouch links directly to the Cocoatouch API, but uses a different language to do the actual coding in.

Technically, they both break 3.3.1, but Flash breaks it in EVERY way, Monotouch just breaks it because it is not a sanctioned language.

Apple used to have a full Development environment for Windows called Yellowbox. Full Objective-C compiler, full IDE, full Interface Builder. Would be cool to see that on Windows... One can only hope they bring back the Win32 Objective-C framework.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Kroc
by Hiev on Thu 27th May 2010 13:27 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Kroc, could you try to hide your bitternes al least once?

You are starting to get annoying.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Thu 27th May 2010 14:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Bitterness about what? I use neither Visual Studio >6 or have an iPhone. If there’s anything to be accused of, it’s ranting about things I don’t understand.

But also, I commented because we need a reality check. This is not going to happen. If it happens it will be at the behest of Apple only.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Kroc
by apoclypse on Thu 27th May 2010 14:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Kroc"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

Did you not read the article? While its still a rumor at this point. The article said that MS themselves will appear at the WWDC keynote to promote this functionality. I don't know how much behesting Apple has to do but if this turns out to be true, this means its fully sanctioned thing by Apple.

You are letting your bias get in the way of what the article actually said.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Thu 27th May 2010 14:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Kroc"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

What part of 'it's a rumour' are [we] not understanding?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by Kroc
by apoclypse on Thu 27th May 2010 14:46 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Kroc"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

And that was acknowledged in my post. Cause, you know, I actually read the article.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Kroc
by Hiev on Thu 27th May 2010 14:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Kroc"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

I use neither Visual Studio >6 or have an iPhone

Then what are you doing posting in this topic about something you don't like or use?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Kroc
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 14:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Kroc"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Be nice, everyone. You guys are making my unicorn cry.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Thu 27th May 2010 15:48 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Kroc"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Making a mistake, clearly ;)

Reply Score: 1

Makes sense!
by bloodline on Thu 27th May 2010 12:01 UTC
bloodline
Member since:
2008-07-28

It would make a lot of sense for Apple to open up software development... Microsoft are a software company, they would do well to develop for the iPhone ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Makes sense!
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 12:12 UTC in reply to "Makes sense!"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

It would make a lot of sense for Apple to open up software development...
Microsoft are a software company, they would do well to develop for the iPhone ;)

Microsoft already develop for the iPhone and have done for a while:
http://mashable.com/2008/12/13/microsoft-iphone-apps/
http://techcrunch.com/2009/01/08/microsoft-releases-tag-its-second-...

Reply Score: 2

How about some end user love?
by sumone on Thu 27th May 2010 12:03 UTC
sumone
Member since:
2007-02-11

Instead I would be happier if I can sync iPhone with native Windows Live Mail, Calendar or Outlook using Mobile Device Center.

Reply Score: 1

And it's not like there isn't precedent...
by bhtooefr on Thu 27th May 2010 12:08 UTC
bhtooefr
Member since:
2009-02-19

In fact, it happened last time Apple was bigger than Microsoft, when MS was on their deathbed, and Apple didn't have time to develop their own floating point BASIC: http://apple2history.org/history/ah16.html#04

Reply Score: 1

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

In fact, it happened last time Apple was bigger than Microsoft, when MS was on their deathbed, and Apple didn't have time to develop their own floating point BASIC: http://apple2history.org/history/ah16.html#04

Sorry to pick you up on the "last time" comment, but just because Apple's market capitalisation ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10168684.stm ) has now overtaken Microsofts, it doesn't mean that Apple is "bigger" than MS.

MS still have much higher revenues and net profits (and at the end of the day, it's profits that matter).

Reply Score: 3

Makes perfect sense
by BallmerKnowsBest on Thu 27th May 2010 13:50 UTC
BallmerKnowsBest
Member since:
2008-06-02

Whooo-boy, this is sure to put the Apple fanbois into full blown denial-mode... but it makes perfect sense. The reality is that Apple is more similar to Microsoft than they are to any of their other "competitors".

Just try playing the "one of these things is not like the other" game with Apple, Google, and Microsoft and see how looks like the odd man out of that group (hint: it ain't Apple).

This is just more of the same symbiotic relationship that Apple has had with Microsoft for years. Apple makes the perfect token "competitor" for Microsoft; Apple's mostly bark with no bite, so Microsoft gets the appearance of a prominent competitor, without the danger of actual competition.

And Apple? They get a ready-made villain so conveniently easy-to-hate that James Cameron would be jealous, giving Apple fanbois a "Great Satan" to rail against. In that way, Apple fulfills their fans' hipster need to "stick it to the man" -- but like all ivory-tower radicals, they'd rather "fight the power" by proxy (don't want to risk getting those manicured hands dirty, after all).

Hell, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the whole "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ad campaign was cooked up in some back-room meeting between Apple and Microsoft's marketing departments, knowing that Apple fanbois eagerly lap up that sort of lazy, obvious pandering.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Makes perfect sense
by Tony Swash on Thu 27th May 2010 14:57 UTC in reply to "Makes perfect sense"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Whooo-boy, this is sure to put the Apple fanbois into full blown denial-mode...


I have no idea whether this rumour is true or not but if it is true, speaking as an Apple fanbois, my response would be this:

A smug little giggle as we watch Microsoft troop over to the Steve Job's show to try to get a little new business now that Apple's the big boy in town.

Times sure do change and in my opinion for the better.

Congratulations Steve! back in 1998 I thought Apple was dead and the future would be just more ugly, dysfunctional Microsoft crap - never in my wildest day dreams did I think Apple would not only bounce back but triumph.

How good is life sometimes ;)

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Makes perfect sense
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 15:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Makes perfect sense"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

A smug little giggle as we watch Microsoft troop over to the Steve Job's show to try to get a little new business now that Apple's the big boy in town.


Well, as far "trooping over" goes, this is peanuts compared to Gates watching over the Apple faithful during MacWorld 1997, announcing MS would keep Apple afloat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Makes perfect sense
by Tony Swash on Thu 27th May 2010 16:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Makes perfect sense"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Well, as far "trooping over" goes, this is peanuts compared to Gates watching over the Apple faithful during MacWorld 1997, announcing MS would keep Apple afloat.


Yeah Apple were in a desperate state by 1997 after a decade of being run by bozos in suits. I am pleased as punch at how its turned out.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Makes perfect sense
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 18:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Makes perfect sense"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


Well, as far "trooping over" goes, this is peanuts compared to Gates watching over the Apple faithful during MacWorld 1997, announcing MS would keep Apple afloat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY


Loving the booing. Shows just how childish people get in elitist camps (Linux and MS fanboys are just as bad)

Reply Score: 3

True, not surprising
by olafg on Thu 27th May 2010 14:22 UTC
olafg
Member since:
2010-05-27

MS has reason to be afraid of developers switching over to XCode. However, I cannot see VS becoming competitive for Cocoa development in the near future.

Reply Score: 1

Pardon?
by segedunum on Thu 27th May 2010 14:22 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

As anyone who is aware of the company's history knows, Microsoft is a very practical company, and isn't religious about any of its choices.

Excuse me while I get up off the floor from laughing.

All of Microsoft's products are geared to running on one platform - Windows. That's it. That's why you don't see .Net running properly on Linux or Unix systems (Mono doesn't count) and why SQL Server is not available there either even though there is a large installed base of servers. On what planet do you think Microsoft do cross-platform development and aren't religious Thom?

Things have got pretty desperate in Windows Mobile land for them to do this, but hey, it at least keeps developers developing for the iPhone on Windows and using Visual Studio (no Visual Studio for the Mac, note) in these desperate times - which means they're still using Windows on their desktops. You wouldn't see Microsoft agreeing to this if the positions were reversed.

I'm afraid you have no idea what you're talking about Thom. Strategic thinking in the software world is extremely important, and Microsoft have done more than their fair share of it - not that it's wrong. You need to think carefully about what medium and long-term effects you will have on your own platform, because if you follow the short-term money you end up getting eaten later.

If Microsoft 'went where the money was' then we'd all be e-mailing WordPerfect or 1-2-3 files around now and Novell wouldn't have run out of ideas and be getting taken over, and they certainly have followed the money, or at least tried to. Nonsense.

For a recent confirmation, just look at how carefully Apple avoided talking about Windows Mobile when suing HTC - it was all Android.

Because Windows Mobile is utterly useless and irrelevant. However, if you want to take that as a compliment.......

Reply Score: 0

RE: Pardon?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 14:30 UTC in reply to "Pardon?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

On what planet do you think Microsoft do cross-platform development and aren't religious Thom?


Not being religious means they have no qualms about supporting competing products, as long as there's something in it for Microsoft. Microsoft have shown time and time again that as long as it it makes sense money-wise, they'll do pretty much whatever.

For instance, that's why they're putting so much effort into making it easy to run an open source server stack on Windows (as opposed to using all-Microsoft tools). Microsoft knows that people want those open source tools, so they'll help getting them to run optimally on Windows - even when they have their own, competing products.

That's what I mean by not being religious. I thought that was pretty obvious.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Pardon?
by segedunum on Thu 27th May 2010 15:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Pardon?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Microsoft have shown time and time again that as long as it it makes sense money-wise, they'll do pretty much whatever.

Microsoft have done a succession of things that eat money and don't make financial sense at all in the hope that one day everything will gravitate towards Windows, Office, Sharepoint, Windows Mobile or something else. For the two big ones that eventually worked. For the other things, they're still banging away at them even though they're losing a lot of money and there is no indication there will be a repeat of what happened with Windows and Office. You might call that a bit religious. Hell, they have people called 'Platform Evangelists' for crying out loud.

Again, you're rather fuzzy on undestanding Microsoft's history Thom.

Microsoft knows that people want those open source tools, so they'll help getting them to run optimally on Windows - even when they have their own, competing products.

Until the situation reaches what they feel is a critical mass and either the stack is taken in-house and extended or dropped altogether (Java) - regardless of what money they could make by leaving the environment alone. It's happened time and again.

That's what I mean by not being religious. I thought that was pretty obvious.

Well, no. They are about as religious as anyone can be about their own platform, and no, this is not as simple and naive as saying "They're following the money" - as explained. They're not making any money out of this. It's purely a defensive thing about stopping developers leaking from Windows and Visual Studio to other platforms.

It's a naive and unrealistic view of things that doesn't match up with reality.

If it indeed is true..... Personally, I have a hard time believing they would bolster another platform like this, but they wouldn't want to lose developers to another platform either.

Edited 2010-05-27 15:15 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Pardon?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 15:14 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pardon?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

It's purely a defensive thing about stopping developers leaking from Windows and Visual Studio to other platforms.


Yeah, and who sells Windows?

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Pardon?
by segedunum on Thu 27th May 2010 15:49 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pardon?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, and who sells Windows?

I suppose you can dress anything up in organisations with balance sheets. You're splitting hairs now Thom. They're not seeking to make money from other platforms, are they? This is about heading off strategic loss of face for Windows and Visual Studio where development is concerned.

No revenue whatsoever will be made from this and no losses will probably be felt for years, if the worst case scenario plays out of people seriously ditching Visual Studio and Windows for Xcode and Mac OS X because they want to develop iPhone applications. Easy solution, you might say. Port Visual Studio and developer tools to Mac OS X and make money from it! Errr, no. They want to make sure that never happens because they have an attachment to Windows.

Trust me, anyone who has something called a 'Platform Evangelist' is religious. The problem is that Microsoft has made so much money from the two religious attachments that paid off that you can hardly see the wood for the trees regarding the losses on the religious attachments they have and won't give up.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Pardon?
by segedunum on Fri 28th May 2010 00:42 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Pardon?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Besides, Microsoft has said no. I didn't think they would bolster a rival platform like this, no matter how much of a developer threat it might be.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Pardon?
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 16:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Pardon?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Not being religious means they have no qualms about supporting competing products, as long as there's something in it for Microsoft. Microsoft have shown time and time again that as long as it it makes sense money-wise, they'll do pretty much whatever.

For instance, that's why they're putting so much effort into making it easy to run an open source server stack on Windows (as opposed to using all-Microsoft tools). Microsoft knows that people want those open source tools, so they'll help getting them to run optimally on Windows - even when they have their own, competing products.

That's what I mean by not being religious. I thought that was pretty obvious.

While I agreed with your original article and found x comments to be bordering on trolling, I do not agree with your reply:
-> Microsoft run plenty of their platforms at a loss (XBox, online portals, etc) to drive people away from competing products that are both popular and profitable.
-> They undercut Linux (a "free" OS) on netbooks to drive people towards Windows.

Microsoft are like the Tesco / Wallmart of IT - they'll constantly undercut the competition and happily run entire departments at a loss until they own the local market and then they'll hike the prices right up.

So all this "non-religious" cross-development is nothing more than selling Kellogs Cornflakes in store knowing that most consumers will inevitably end up buying the supermarkets own brand. Thus it's not offering customers choice or "what they want" - it's just a baited hook to lure more customers in before trapping them/us into Microsofts own platforms.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Pardon?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 16:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pardon?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

"Not being religious means they have no qualms about supporting competing products, as long as there's something in it for Microsoft. Microsoft have shown time and time again that as long as it it makes sense money-wise, they'll do pretty much whatever.

For instance, that's why they're putting so much effort into making it easy to run an open source server stack on Windows (as opposed to using all-Microsoft tools). Microsoft knows that people want those open source tools, so they'll help getting them to run optimally on Windows - even when they have their own, competing products.

That's what I mean by not being religious. I thought that was pretty obvious.

While I agreed with your original article and found x comments to be bordering on trolling, I do not agree with your reply:
-> Microsoft run plenty of their platforms at a loss (XBox, online portals, etc) to drive people away from competing products that are both popular and profitable.
-> They undercut Linux (a "free" OS) on netbooks to drive people towards Windows.

Microsoft are like the Tesco / Wallmart of IT - they'll constantly undercut the competition and happily run entire departments at a loss until they own the local market and then they'll hike the prices right up.

So all this "non-religious" cross-development is nothing more than selling Kellogs Cornflakes in store knowing that most consumers will inevitably end up buying the supermarkets own brand. Thus it's not offering customers choice or "what they want" - it's just a baited hook to lure more customers in before trapping them/us into Microsofts own platforms.
"

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Pardon?
by flynn on Thu 27th May 2010 17:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pardon?"
flynn Member since:
2009-03-19

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

I feel your pain Thom. It seem some people are not capable of understanding the simple concept of a 'loss leader'. I'm not sure what part of a short term loss to facilitate long term gain is so difficult for people to comprehend.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Pardon?
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 18:20 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Pardon?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


I feel your pain Thom. It seem some people are not capable of understanding the simple concept of a 'loss leader'. I'm not sure what part of a short term loss to facilitate long term gain is so difficult for people to comprehend.

I get that point.

However Thom was also arguing that Microsoft aren't religious about their platform.

So if you're talking long term, then they are religious about their platform as they run services at a loss to promote their platforms (thus his point about MS not being religious is false).

However if you're talking short term, then Thom's point about them not being religious is true, however his point about them going where the money is, is false.

Thus his two points can't coexist.


That said, personally I think the problem here isn't that we disagree with each others points, but rather we're explaining exactly the same points but so badly that they sound contradictory (case in point, yourself stating that some people can't understand "loss leader" when I explained exactly that principle in my post which you and Thom were replying to).

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Pardon?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 18:26 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Pardon?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

However Thom was also arguing that Microsoft aren't religious about their platform.


I did?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Pardon?
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 18:52 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Pardon?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

"However Thom was also arguing that Microsoft aren't religious about their platform.


I did?
"

You said:
Not being religious means they have no qualms about supporting competing products, as long as there's something in it for Microsoft


But as I said before - I think we're arguing the same points hehe

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Pardon?
by segedunum on Fri 28th May 2010 00:52 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Pardon?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

"However Thom was also arguing that Microsoft aren't religious about their platform.


I did?
"
Yes. Apparently Microsoft aren't religious period.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Pardon?
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 18:25 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pardon?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

"and thus making money for their own platform" - which shows they're religious about their own platform.


As I said before - I don't disagree with your original article. However you seem to switch between long term strategy and short term observation when making your points but if you look at Microsoft in either just the short term game or just the long term game, your points about MSs adoption of other platforms and making money don't coexist.

I explain this better here though:
http://www.osnews.com/permalink?426895

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Pardon?
by segedunum on Fri 28th May 2010 00:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pardon?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

As long as it comes from Windows or one of their other new fangled platforms it's OK, otherwise they're not interested. That's why Windows Mobile and the Xbox and other business units have made such huge losses over the years. It's complete stubborness, but fortunately for them they can afford it right now.

You were trying to argue that Microsoft are not religious about their own platforms and products if it means they can make some money. Not so. They've incurred huge losses for their 'evangelism' because they want to make money on only their own terms.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Pardon?
by dpJudas on Thu 27th May 2010 22:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Pardon?"
dpJudas Member since:
2009-12-10

Although I do agree with you that Microsoft isn't the Great Satan as often described, they do things that can only be explained by "religious" behavior.

For example, if you had ever tried developing an asp.net application you would notice that the default error page shown selects some font sizes that look absolutely awful in any other browser than Internet Explorer. Now, had this been ANY other company than Microsoft this would naturally have been fixed a long long time ago (its a 10 year old 'feature' of .Net now).

There are countless examples over the years where it would make perfect business sense to support a certain feature set or platform but where the "religion" of Microsoft simply forbids them to pursue that opportunity.

Microsoft's basic principle has always been to only support other platforms if that serves as a way to get people onto their own platform and when they succeed they stop maintaining the other platform.

This rumor, if true, is no different: they know they lost the current round in the mobile OS war and are now attempting to get back in by stopping that people must acquire a Mac to develop for the iPhone and iPad.

Then their next step will be to improve the Windows Mobile SDK and when the time is right they will discontinue the Mac support. Just like they have always done.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Pardon?
by gnufreex on Fri 28th May 2010 02:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Pardon?"
gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

How about SQL server on Linux? Oracle has Linux port, what about non-religious Microsoft? ROFL.


Microsoft is most religious company I know. Temple of proprietary software zealotry. Free Software side does not have counter weight to their zealotry. BoycottNovell.com is not as FLOSS zealous as Microsoft is proprietary zealous.

Microsoft might do anything for money, but they do not look only on money. They more look how to hurt competitor. If they have one option which brings them 2 billions but is neutral to competition (neither hurts them or helps them) and other option which bring them 100 million but screws over and hurts competition, they will chose 100 million option.

They never think about how to make better technology. They always think how to screw other guy, remove users choice and sell their overpriced and bug riddled crap. And they are very religious about that. In crap they believe.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pardon?
by nt_jerkface on Thu 27th May 2010 17:14 UTC in reply to "Pardon?"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

All of Microsoft's products are geared to running on one platform - Windows. That's it.


That's not true, they released a standalone hypervisor server for free and it officially supports both Suse and RHEL. That amounts to being able to use their software to manage Linux servers which is a huge change from 10 years ago.


That's why you don't see .Net running properly on Linux or Unix systems (Mono doesn't count) and why SQL Server is not available there either even though there is a large installed base of servers.


Yea but they already give asp.net development tools away for free on the assumption that you will run your web app on Winserver. You can't expect them to give away the farm.

As for SQL Server on Nix that would be interesting but I doubt there would be much of a market when mixed shops tend to use an open source DB on the backend. SQL Server gets very expensive and would likely be a waste of money if you already have Nix servers setup.

Reply Score: 2

Nothing to see here but a professional troll
by jokkel on Thu 27th May 2010 14:24 UTC
jokkel
Member since:
2008-07-07

Every few weeks some analyst makes a wild and far fetched statement about Apple. Without having any inside information. Analysts are just professional trolls, who want their name to be in the news.
I've heard ridiculous statements like this so often. If an analyst says anything about Apple, he's just making things up. Even if it doesn't make any sense at all.
I've heard it too often: iPod is a fad, Apple has to license Mac Os to Dell, the iPad won't sell etc

Apple has nothing to gain, but only to lose by suppotring MSVS.

Reply Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26


Apple has nothing to gain, but only to lose by suppotring MSVS.


Huh? Apple stands to gain much more hobbyist developers from this.

It's Microsoft that is taken for a bitch here. In a way that image is gratifying, even if Apple is the one holding the leash.

Edited 2010-05-27 18:15 UTC

Reply Score: 2

My guess is Office
by bjossir on Thu 27th May 2010 14:48 UTC
bjossir
Member since:
2007-01-14

The coming MS Office for the Mac (2011) will have support for VBA. That or some MS cloud functionality for the IPhone/IPad. But VS to build Cocoa stuff - no way.

Edited 2010-05-27 14:49 UTC

Reply Score: 1

MS Office Mobile
by Cody Evans on Thu 27th May 2010 15:05 UTC
Cody Evans
Member since:
2009-08-14

Does anyone else think they are announcing Ms Office Mobile for iPhone and iPad?

Reply Score: 1

What's in it for MS?
by Shane on Thu 27th May 2010 15:06 UTC
Shane
Member since:
2005-07-06

What's in it for Microsoft? It would be a significant undertaking, and to what end? The Apple toolchain for iPhone/iPad development is more than just an IDE. There's also Interface Builder, the simulator, Instruments.

Reply Score: 1

Silverlight
by chrish on Thu 27th May 2010 15:48 UTC
chrish
Member since:
2005-07-14

I think a Silverlight announcement would be more likely, which would (sort of) amount to the same thing.

Then again, given the stance on Flash, maybe not.

Reply Score: 1

DragonFireSDK
by gektor on Thu 27th May 2010 15:54 UTC
gektor
Member since:
2010-05-27

Actually there is a VS based SDK (DragonFireSDK) that allows to develop iPhone apps on Windows.

Reply Score: 1

nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

The goal is likely to bring Xcoders over to VS development as a way of encouraging them to port their iphone games to Wp7.

Well this at least will be the first WWDC that I actually have an interest in.

Reply Score: 2

OpenSTEP and Yellow Box
by kedwards on Thu 27th May 2010 19:41 UTC
kedwards
Member since:
2009-04-25

Cocoa has a platform independent history. NeXT OpenSTEP was released for Windows and Solaris. When Apple purchased NeXT and began to work on what is now known as Mac OS X, Apple released Yellow Box(Cocoa) for Windows.

Apple always had the tools to release an iPhone SDK for Windows, but it's more money in their pockets keeping the SDK on the Mac platform.

It will be interesting to see if this rumor is true or not. Apple likes to be a control freak when it comes to the iPhone/et al development. If they do decide to have a SDK for Windows I don't think its going to come from Microsoft, I think they will (re)release a Windows version of Xcode.

http://mac-guild.org/rhapsody/yellow-windows.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenStep

Reply Score: 1

This just in
by Stratoukos on Thu 27th May 2010 20:03 UTC
Stratoukos
Member since:
2009-02-11

From Microsoft's official twitter account.

Steve Ballmer not speaking at Apple Dev Conf. Nor appearing on Dancing with the Stars. Nor riding in the Belmont. Just FYI.

http://twitter.com/Microsoft/status/14850981422

Reply Score: 1

RE: This just in
by kragil on Thu 27th May 2010 21:07 UTC in reply to "This just in "
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

Yeah, I knew it was just a stupid rumor and MS will never support cross platform development. They hate cross plattform, always have.

And anyways how would that be NOT a PR desaster? Supporting Iphoney and maxiPad right before their own phones come out? Being at the whim of Steve? Only allowing C and C++ where they want to push people to .NET? Never going to happen PERIOD

This was so obviously just some stupid Apple hype bullshit, kinda sad that this rumor mill time waste bullshit hits OSnews.

Edit: PS. And I really don't see the point that VS Iphone development would make any money for MS? Do you people know how much work it would be to support the IphoneOS APIs in VS?? Anybody who knows wouldn't say such a thing in a public forum. Monotouch needed years to accomplish that. And read "The mythical man month" if you think MS can do it in a few months.
But I know some people will claim that selling very expensive VS licenses will make up for that, where Xcode is free. Yeah, right .... face palm

Edited 2010-05-27 21:22 UTC

Reply Score: 2

kedwards
Member since:
2009-04-25

Haha, I thought I remembered seeing this somewhere earlier this year:

http://www.sdtimes.com/MAC_DEVELOPERS_EMBRACE_NET_WITH_VISUAL_OBJEC...

April 1, 2010 — Bellevue, Wash., April 1 – Declaring a “bright new day for our friends in Macintosh-Land,” Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer today unveiled Visual Studio 2010 for Mac OS X, expected to be available this summer.

Speaking to a full crowd at the Meydenbauer Center, Ballmer reminded the audience that Microsoft is one of the oldest and most competitive ISVs for Apple’s Macintosh platform. The company’s Excel spreadsheet software first appeared for the Mac in 1985, he bellowed, two full years before Microsoft released a Windows version. “We never stopped loving the Mac,” he shouted, waving an iPhone. “Every day, our Windows 7 dev team is inspired by the great work being done by the visionaries in Cupertino.”

Standing in front of a giant poster of the new Visual Studio for Mac OS X, his voice hoarse with emotion, Ballmer screamed, “Now it’s time to give something back!”

The centerpiece of Visual Studio for Mac OS X is Visual Objective-C, a native implementation of Apple’s preferred object-oriented programming language, which is used on both Mac OS X and the iPhone SDK. According to Ballmer, Visual Objective-C will also appear in Visual Studio 2010 SP1 for Windows. Applications written in the Smalltalk-inspired language will require only a simple recompile to run on both Mac and Windows 7 systems, he said.

Playing to the cheering developers attending the software launch, Ballmer then showed Visual Basic for Mac OS X, another component of the Visual Studio for Mac OS X suite. “You asked for it, you got it!” he shrieked, before being buried by an avalanche of rose petals and hotel room keys tossed by ISVs and industry analysts.

Ballmer said that the Visual Studio for Mac OS X suite (expected to ship by Apple’s Worldwide Developer Conference, coming to San Francisco June 8–12) is designed to woo developers from Apple’s Xcode. “I know you love your Xcode,” he roared, “but I promise you’ll love your Visual Studio for Mac even more!”

On-stage demonstrations at the event included Macintosh integration with Visual Studio Team System; using Visual Studio with Apple’s iPhone SDK to build a voice-recognition spreadsheet application for iPhone and iPad; and porting BioShock 2 from Windows to Mac OS X 10.6 “Snow Leopard.” Ballmer sheepishly apologized for the tool chain’s lack of support for versions of Mac OS X prior to 10.5 “Leopard,” saying, “We’re only human, okay?”

As he was leaving the stage, Ballmer turned back. “Oh, just one more thing,” he cried—and then showed off the company’s full .NET Framework 4.0 for Mac OS X, available for free download from the Microsoft website. “We love you, Apple!” he whooped, bringing the event to a triumphant close.

Edited 2010-05-27 21:51 UTC

Reply Score: 1

analysts, bloggers
by l3v1 on Fri 28th May 2010 11:39 UTC
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

remember, analysts are bloggers in suits


More like, bloggers are analysts in diapers ;)

Reply Score: 2