I use a Mac for work. Mainly (sadly) because XCode. But other than XCode crap, I could do everything else on Linux, BSD, Solaris, etc.
I'm not completely against OS X... until they finally disable non-App Store software sources, the thought of which is, I expect, giving someone at Apple a massive hard-on at this very moment.
OP here, current iOS and Android developer with active accounts on both. Difference being: I'm happy to be an Android developer (will be happier when the Clojure/Android project reaches fruition); every time I have to dip my toes in Apple's filthy ichor of an app ecosystem I want to vomit.
Not about money for me, but if I was a little kid hacker again, money would have been a big deal.
Why do kids have to learn to code for iOS? I learnt to program on a mac and have never written anything more than the most basic Mac os iOS apps; it's just never interested me. I've spent most of my time writing Haskell and C, among others, both of which new coders could learn relatively easily and both of which work on many platforms. New coders don't need to know anything about any company's ecosystem, they need to know how to code in the language they've chosen, be it C, python, Haskell, ruby, C++, java, brainfuck, Modula-2, Ada (highly recommended) or anything else.
You don't. It's $25 to publish on Google Play; you can share a *.apk with whomever you wish.
On iOS, on the other hand, it's $99/yr if you even want to run your own code on your own device. And you have to 'provision' your friends' devices if you want to share with them. It's extortion, it's stupid, it's immoral.
nobody complained about this junk when it was nintendo and sega doing it, for a lot more. It's just that this time; 1) people have this illogical apple hatred and 2) people buy into google's spiel about being open.
The app store, is a tradeoff. It's some inconvenience for developers in exchange for a trusted, safe marketplace for applications for consumers.
> nobody complained about this junk when it was nintendo and sega doing it, for a lot more.
I'm sure someone did, but they didn't have the internet to vent their frustrations.
> 1) people have this illogical apple hatred
I'd say there's valid reasons to dislike Apple's stance on many issues.
> 2) people buy into google's spiel about being open.
Every OS Google has is open-source - Chrome OS, and Android. Yes, we know they do have services that aren't, and some that require payment, but you can use, fork, and hack on Android or Chromium if you want to.
Is Google a 100% open source company? No. I would personally prefer Firefox OS and Ubuntu become the major smartphone players, but Google is better than Apple or MS.
> The app store, is a tradeoff. It's some inconvenience for developers in exchange for a trusted, safe marketplace for applications for consumers.
It's not about the app store. It's about restrictions on side-loading your own app onto a device you own. With an Android device, I can test my own apps without having to sign up for anything. I hear Firefox OS is just as open, and they make it very easy to test out your HTML5 apps (even without it being hosted on a website).
This is a late reply, but just in case you read it.
> I'd say there's valid reasons to dislike Apple's stance on many issues.
That's not apple hatred, and it's not what I'm talking about.
> Every OS Google has is open-source - Chrome OS, and Android. Yes, we know they do have services that aren't, and some that require payment, but you can use, fork, and hack on Android or Chromium if you want to.
I don't know what your argument is, but also consider that apple has an opensource core to their OS too - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system). But they have a closed source shell on top of that? So does android.
> Google is better than Apple or MS.
This is what i'm talking about when I say illogical apple hatred. Google is not better than Apple or MS.
> It's not about the app store. It's about restrictions on side-loading your own app onto a device you own
If people could sideload anything on their devices, it would break trust in the platform. Apple want a platform that people trust, and most people want that too. It's not fundamentally wrong to be different, but just understand that you're a minority on this planet and that people who don't want to sideload apps are the majority.
Using examples from late 80s boxed software is absurd, and you also don't know anything about whether developers at the time complained about the restrictions or not.
Development practices for the web era are nothing like those of 30 years ago, unless you like to do it wrong.
What are you talking about late 80s? it's still happening with consoles today. On XBox, for example, you need a dev kit. They have a lengthy sign up process, they don't allow students or universities to get one, etc. It costs $$$.
Yeah development practices have changed, but you also have a choice of platforms.
Any platform has tradeoffs and those tradeoffs have an impact on your development process. That's what a platform is. It's an environment, and that environment imposes restrictions. So there is a tradeoff between restrictions to benefits.
Problem solved, if kids have access to Android. Apple is aggressively pursuing the edu market, and seems to be winning there. This is antithetical to the "kids learning to code" ideal.
I don't care what kids code on, I care about access. And forcing people to pay $99 to run their own code on their own devices is beyond unconscionable.
The $99 is to publish apps - I've made a couple of little quick fix utils for work projects by building and deploying straight to the phone via USB, no subscription required.
When you're talking about K-12 edtech education, in many cases the kids have the patforms their schools/districts endorse. And in many, if not most cases, that's iOS.
plus, we're not talking about $99 to publish, we're talking about $99 just to run your own code on your own device. I don't know about you, but when I was a 10yr hacker, that would have been a deal breaker.
>> When you're talking about K-12 edtech education, in many cases the kids have the patforms their schools/districts endorse. And in many, if not most cases, that's iOS.
It seems that what you are asking is whether the school should take steps to ensure that kids can develop mobile applications. If that is the case then the school could just set up a single app store account as part of a mobile development course. If the school really wants people to develop mobile applications then the $99 fee is meaningless. I doubt that there is any overwhelming demand to do that on the part of students or teachers.
Of course, any kid can develop a whole plethora of applications for a variety of platforms at very low cost if they really want too. Considering that it wasn't too long ago that it took thousands of dollars to even get a computer(and many people I know didn't grow up having access to a computer of their own) your criticism is essentially looking a gift horse in the mouth. There are a lot of factors that come into play with encouraging kids to get into computers, a $99 deployment requirement for an expensive device isn't one of them.
If you are in K12, you have a cellphone, it's as simple as that. Want to learn how to program, Jailbroke your iPhone, get an Android, or pay $99 and learn. You have options.
Is it idiotic to give iPads to school students? Yes. Is it apples fault that schools waste money on iPads? Ok, a little. But to claim that apple is the obstacle that prevents children from learning how to program wrong.
OP here... I think my tongue-in-cheek intent might have been lost in dry prose.
That being said... I meant what I said about apple's mindshare. Take, for instance, LA County's iPad boondoggle[1]. EdTech is a particularly gnarly sector, and the fact that districts are going after iOS to this degree is a damn shame.
I annoyed my teachers in elementary school demonstrating binary finger counting to 1024 when they were insisting that students stop finger counting because "you could only count to 10"
I'm not completely against OS X... until they finally disable non-App Store software sources, the thought of which is, I expect, giving someone at Apple a massive hard-on at this very moment.