Re: How viable is Cocoa development?

FROM : Gregory Weston
DATE : Sat Jan 26 03:09:00 2002

Erik M. Buck" <<email_removed>> comments:

> I might add that Apple has abandoned many more APIs than just MacApp.  They
> have stranded many developers over the years.  Don't even start on QuickDraw
> GX...

and Phillip Mills <<email_removed>> adds:

> OpenDoc.  That abandonment was my pinnacle of disbelief.


I have to comment on these. I've been a Mac OS (as well as other platforms)
developer since well before either of those technologies were offered, and I
boggle every time I hear someone trot either of them out as an example of how
Apple abandons developers after getting them hooked on some hot new technology.
The truth is that both QDGX and OpenDoc were available for years with
essentially no adoption before Apple pulled the plug on them.

I know of one commercial GX product that shipped. It came out simultaneously
with a Classic QD version of the same program. The GX version was faster and
offered more features, and it was a dismal failure in the market. I never saw
another GX-centric product hit the shelves. The most significant OpenDoc product
to come out (despite years of hype from both Apple and - of all organizations to
promote an Apple technology - Ziff-Davis' columnists) was a technology demo from
Apple. Lots of stuff announced. Virtually none of it made it to the consumer.

A pertinent question, which noone who complains about GX and OD seems willing to
answer, is exactly how long a company is expected to put their resources and
credibility into products that aren't seeing enough adoption to pay for the
people supporting them. Did Apple abandon these technologies? Yes. Did they
strand developers by doing so? You'd have to do some pretty fancy arguing to
show that.


In the same thread, Steve Gehrman <<email_removed>> asks:

> Look at iPhoto. Every button they use is non standard Cocoa, why can't
> I have access to those buttons. Why can't I have brushed steel windows?

For good or ill, the brushed steel windows are a branding strategy. I would
suspect it's not really in Apple's best interests as a system vendor _or_ an
application vendor to help third parties dilute their branding and destabilize
the user experience (which, I might argue, Apple does well enough on their own).

G