If Apple is trying to hit 18+ months between OS releases, what use is there in 
having a conference every year? They used to do that and that meant every other 
conference was a re-hash of what you already knew. Complete waste of money. I 
stopped going because of that.

Why does everything have to be a conspiracy against Mac development?

Dave

On Apr 28, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Patrick wrote:

> That could be a possibility, but a 1 year alternating schedule is too (in my 
> opinion) long of a time. By the time WWDC 2011 hits, we'll probably be 
> speculating on iPad 2.0 and iPhone 4.5 or whatever...no one would really give 
> a crap about 10.7 at that point. Unless of course it's just truly amazing in 
> some kind of way.
> 
> --- In [email protected], Dave Camp <d...@...> wrote:
>> 
>> On Apr 28, 2010, at 8:35 AM, Patrick wrote:
>> 
>>> Just wondering what everyone thinks about this? If you haven't heard yet, 
>>> WWDC 2010 will only consider iPhone/iPad apps for the ADA awards.
>>> 
>>> To me this kind of enforces the notion that Apple doesn't too much give a 
>>> crap about the Mac development platform any longer. Tthe iPhone and iPad 
>>> are closed environments where Apple has total control, compared to the 
>>> desktop where it's totally open and I think Apple is liking the 
>>> uber-control right now.
>>> 
>>> What do you guys think? And is this going to change your focus in anyway?
>> 
>> Or, it could just be that Apple is moving to an alternating iPhone and Mac 
>> OS X WWDC schedule. That would make sense for many reasons:
>> 
>> - Lots of new iPhone stuff announced this year
>> - Gives them more time to work on 10.7
>> - Reduces pressure at the conference.
>> - Apple has been trying to increase the time between Mac OS X releases.
>> 
>> As someone who does both iPhone and Mac work, last years conference was 
>> really hard to get the most out of due to overlapping Mac and iPhone 
>> sessions. If they went to an alternating schedule I think both iPhone and 
>> Mac devs would get more useful sessions out of each conference.
>> 
>> Dave

Reply via email to