Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Sun 5th Nov 2006 22:59 UTC
David Chisnall takes a look behind the scenes at Apple's upcoming revamp of the Objective-C language. As with any new language, some things are good, some are ugly, and some are both.
Thread beginning with comment 179312
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-08-27
<em>...you have to pay a four-figure sum (per developer) to build commercial applications with it.</em>
s a professional Qt consultant, I can say from direct experience as a Qt consultant that this isn't an issue for professional developers. Shareware developers quibble about it, but they don't count. If you're making six figures for your software, a four figure price is peanuts.
And it's also available Open Source, so if you're only making three figures a year on your software, deduct your failed business attempt on your taxes and go Open Source yourself.
<em>One is that Qt apps don't behave like normal Mac apps...</em>
Most people can't tell the difference. In fact, many rabid Mac advocates can't tell the difference either unless they're specifically looking for it. What most people see as un-Mac-ness are merely Windows/Qt programs ported to Mac/Qt with no additional work. And it's certainly a heck of a lot closer in look and feel that Java/SWT!
Of course it's not perfect. Since it isn't pure Cocoa, it doesn't feel like pure Cocoa. But so what? Users don't care about little stuff like this. Over in the Windows world Microsoft can't even manage to get .NET apps to look like Windows apps, but no one cares.