I stirred up some conflict on this list. It may be because of readership differences.
If you work for Apple or a big corp, then technical answers is what you can offer or desire. The big picture is someone else's worry. When programming tools change, it's just job security. For a small developer, the big picture is way more important. Changes in Cocoa can be life or death for your app and your livelihood. For freelancers, it's somewhere in between. Change is job security, but not if it kills your client businesses. In the early 90s, Apple had an AEC specialist (architects, engineers & construction). They gave marketing help and listened to AEC developers. Apple had a booth at the NAHB Homebuilder's show for a few years, with many small-to-medium developers there. TurtleSoft also had a line to a few other Apple employees. Those channels all disappeared when Apple almost died, and they didn't come back afterwards. Maybe this list can help with all types of communication. Or maybe it should just be tech-only. What do the current moderators think? Casey McDermott TurtleSoft.com On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 3:04 PM Jens Alfke <j...@mooseyard.com> wrote: > > > On Oct 2, 2019, at 10:14 AM, Turtle Creek Software via Cocoa-dev < > cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com> wrote: > > For > anyone smaller, it's hard to justify the constant need to rewrite code just > to stay in the same place. Return on investment is just not there. Seems > like each new update is more difficult. > > > The people I hear complaining about this are those who, like you, didn't > move to Cocoa. Carbon was a _temporary_ transition API*. It was necessary > when Mac OS X shipped in March 2001, but even though it wasn't yet formally > deprecated, it was clear it would be. The Carbon UI frameworks were > deprecated circa, um, 2006(?). QuickTime has been deprecated nearly as > long. 64-bit systems shipped in the mid-2000s, even before the x86 > transition, and it was obvious then that 32-bit would eventually go away. > > Eighteen years is _forever_ in the tech industry. At the time Cocoa was > introduced, the Mac itself hadn't even been around that long! > > It sounds like keeping an app limping along on 30-year-old APIs, and then > suddenly trying to move it forwards all at once, is a bad idea. By > comparison, keeping a Cocoa app up to date isn't that big a deal. I was > maintaining Cocoa apps during the 64-bit, x86 and ARC transitions and had > to make very few code changes. I've been out of the UI world for about 8 > years, and there have definitely been significant changes in areas like > view layout and document handling, but adapting to those isn't rocket > science. > > Yes, Microsoft is rather fanatical about compatibility. But that's part of > what lost them their lead after the '90s: the amount of development > resources needed to keep everything working exactly the same, and the > difficulty of making forward progress without breaking any apps. > > —Jens > > * Yes it was. I was working at Apple and involved in the Carbon transition > during 1999-2000. > _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
