Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #67754 > unrolled thread

Has Apple's software quality declined?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Has Apple's software quality declined? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2014-12-22 12:24 -0700
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-22 15:11 -0500
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-22 20:12 +0000
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-22 16:04 -0500
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-22 22:50 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-22 19:07 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-23 04:49 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-22 22:51 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-23 04:46 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-23 00:43 -0500
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-23 14:39 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-12-26 19:39 -0500
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-27 01:44 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-12-23 04:37 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:03 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-12-23 17:46 -0800
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 04:36 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-24 14:39 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-24 13:56 -0800
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-24 22:09 +0000
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-24 18:40 -0500
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 15:09 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-25 09:33 -0700
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 16:38 +0000
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-25 09:46 -0700
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? bob <rcp27g@gmail.com> - 2014-12-28 09:19 +0000
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-29 02:42 +1300
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? android <here@there.was> - 2014-12-28 15:35 +0100
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-29 10:57 +1300
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-12-28 07:43 -0800
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-28 08:49 -0700
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2014-12-28 11:26 -0800
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-28 20:11 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-28 19:35 +0000
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-28 13:05 -0700
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-29 10:57 +1300
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-28 17:23 -0500
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-12-29 22:59 -0500
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-30 09:42 +0000
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? android <here@there.was> - 2014-12-30 12:44 +0100
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-12-30 14:09 -0500
                          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? android <here@there.was> - 2014-12-30 20:51 +0100
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-28 17:55 -0500
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-30 13:03 -0800
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-30 22:20 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-12-31 20:42 -0800
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-31 01:16 +0000
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2014-12-31 15:33 -0600
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:01 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-25 11:34 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 21:59 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-25 17:07 -0500
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 22:38 +0000
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-26 09:05 -0500
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-26 17:01 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-26 15:32 -0500
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-26 21:16 +0000
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-26 17:33 -0500
                          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-26 23:41 +0000
                            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-26 22:48 -0500
                          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-12-26 23:22 -0800
                            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-27 04:26 -0500
                            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-27 14:45 +0000
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-12-23 19:19 -0800
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 04:34 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 23:46 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 05:22 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 07:55 -0500
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 16:20 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:06 +0000
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-24 14:46 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? billy@MIX.COM - 2014-12-24 23:19 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:09 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 03:04 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-12-25 09:20 -0800
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 17:29 +0000
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-12-22 23:44 -0800
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-24 00:42 -0800
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-24 03:58 -0500
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-24 13:52 -0800
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:11 +0000
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:00 +0000
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-12-25 18:41 +0100
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-12-26 14:00 +1300

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

#67884

In article <261220141733458362%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <m7kj80$fct$1@dont-email.me>, sctvguy1
> <sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote:
> 
> > > Apple have a bug reporting system that anyone can put a bug into.  But
> > > nobody sees the data about the bugs.  (The few bugs I've reported have
> > > always come back as "already reported" (or captured or whatever)).
> > > 
> > > None have been resolved to date.
> > 
> > That kind of attitude towards "bugs" would not fly with enterprise 
> > Linux!  RH/Centos/Scientific would be crucified if the bugs were not 
> > listed and fixed!
> 
> you're delusional.

That's exactly what commercial Linux distributors do.  You pay them to 
find and fix bugs immediately.  What are you not understanding?

MacOS is tuned for checking e-mail and surfing the web.  The 
professional features are gone, the open-source components deprecated, 
and Apple has nothing to say about bugs.

-- 
I will not see posts from astraweb, theremailer, dizum, or google
because they host Usenet flooders.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67885

In article <mcmurtrie-F0D85B.23222626122014@news.sonic.net>, Kevin
McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:

> MacOS is tuned for checking e-mail and surfing the web.  The 
> professional features are gone, the open-source components deprecated, 
> and Apple has nothing to say about bugs.

complete nonsense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67886

On 2014-12-27, Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
>
> MacOS is tuned for checking e-mail and surfing the web.

You must not actually do much with your Macs if you truly believe this
tripe.

> The professional features are gone

I'm a professional who is paid very well to use Macs day in and day out
to get shit done. Whatever is preventing you from getting shit done
ain't preventing me from getting anything done. Sounds like you have a
personal problem there.

> the open-source components deprecated,

Anyone with a clue knows full well that Mac OS X is built largely on
open source. Apple just made the news by rolling out an NTP update.  And
Apple updates open source components all the time in Mac OS X and iOS.
So apparently open source is not as "deprecated" as you seem to think.
 
> and Apple has nothing to say about bugs.

Just because Apple doesn't open their bug database to th public doesn't
mean they don't address bugs in their software products.

You are being rather foolish.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67784

In article <cfrc8gFn7a0U1@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
> > with Apple's recent OS releases. 
> >
> ><http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-softwar
> >e-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
> 
> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
> memory?

Good benchmarks are:
1) Developer revenue versus other platforms
2) Duration for which casual customers are without advertised features
3) Professional throughput versus other platforms


I'd guess that #2 is same as ever.  I'd say that #1 and #3 are in 
decline.

What is troubling is that Windows is not as dead as it should be.  
Google and Apple have both been moving towards a more closed system, and 
that's an area where Microsoft is going to utterly kick ass.  Google and 
Apple exist as major players because they started out with systems that 
were easy to develop for, easy to use, and easy to integrate with the 
rest of the world.  Apple killed that with iTunes and the "walled 
garden" concept years ago.  Apple has also been eliminating professional 
products while ignoring software performance.

My next work computer will be a Debian flavor Linux.  Mavericks was the 
last OS that performed even marginally well for software development.  
Use of Yosemite remains forbidden due to issues.

-- 
I will not see posts from astraweb, theremailer, dizum, or google
because they host Usenet flooders.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67786

On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:19:33 -0800, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:


> What is troubling is that Windows is not as dead as it should be. Google
> and Apple have both been moving towards a more closed system, and that's
> an area where Microsoft is going to utterly kick ass.  Google and Apple
> exist as major players because they started out with systems that were
> easy to develop for, easy to use, and easy to integrate with the rest of
> the world.  Apple killed that with iTunes and the "walled garden"
> concept years ago.  Apple has also been eliminating professional
> products while ignoring software performance.
> 
> My next work computer will be a Debian flavor Linux.  Mavericks was the
> last OS that performed even marginally well for software development.
> Use of Yosemite remains forbidden due to issues.

I just finished reading "Steve Jobs" and "The Innovators" by Issacson.  
Both mentioned the "walled garden" approach to keep people on the Apple 
plantation.  There are millions of iMacs out there that are being 
outdated by the constant software shift, as are other Apple products.
I run Scientific Linux, a clone of RH/Centos, and it has 10 year support.
My 2002 iMac, running Tiger, is strictly used as a music server for my 
hundreds of iTunes purchased songs.
I need some OS that is rock stable, that is why I have an enterprise 
Linux, pimped up with all the apps and goodies.  I would hate to have 
spend a couple of thousand dollars on a new iMac, and then have the OS/X 
be crappy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67789

In article <m7dfon$g0o$1@dont-email.me>, sctvguy1
<sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote:

> I just finished reading "Steve Jobs" and "The Innovators" by Issacson.  
> Both mentioned the "walled garden" approach to keep people on the Apple 
> plantation. 

all companies do that, *especially* microsoft.

> There are millions of iMacs out there that are being 
> outdated by the constant software shift, as are other Apple products.
> I run Scientific Linux, a clone of RH/Centos, and it has 10 year support.
> My 2002 iMac, running Tiger, is strictly used as a music server for my 
> hundreds of iTunes purchased songs.
> I need some OS that is rock stable, that is why I have an enterprise 
> Linux, pimped up with all the apps and goodies.  I would hate to have 
> spend a couple of thousand dollars on a new iMac, and then have the OS/X 
> be crappy.

the least expensive mac is $499 new (less for refurb or used).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67790

On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 23:46:24 -0500, nospam wrote:

> In article <m7dfon$g0o$1@dont-email.me>, sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net>
> wrote:
> 
>> I just finished reading "Steve Jobs" and "The Innovators" by Issacson.
>> Both mentioned the "walled garden" approach to keep people on the Apple
>> plantation.
> 
> all companies do that, *especially* microsoft.
> 
>> There are millions of iMacs out there that are being outdated by the
>> constant software shift, as are other Apple products.
>> I run Scientific Linux, a clone of RH/Centos, and it has 10 year
>> support.
>> My 2002 iMac, running Tiger, is strictly used as a music server for my
>> hundreds of iTunes purchased songs.
>> I need some OS that is rock stable, that is why I have an enterprise
>> Linux, pimped up with all the apps and goodies.  I would hate to have
>> spend a couple of thousand dollars on a new iMac, and then have the
>> OS/X be crappy.
> 
> the least expensive mac is $499 new (less for refurb or used).

He wrote about "vertical integration" which Jobs preferred(keeping all 
hardware and software tightly integrated), and Gates who believed in 
"horizontal integration" letting the software spread over all kinds of 
hardware.  Linux is really "horizontal" in that in can be installed on 
almost anything, even iMacs.
It seems like Jobs and Gates were really alike in wanting to keep their 
customers "walled in", just by different methods.  But in the Gates 
example, it was easy for people to find other operating systems to run on 
all the myriad hardware.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67797

In article <m7diic$nh0$1@dont-email.me>, sctvguy1
<sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote:

> He wrote about "vertical integration" which Jobs preferred(keeping all 
> hardware and software tightly integrated), and Gates who believed in 
> "horizontal integration" letting the software spread over all kinds of 
> hardware. 

microsoft is the king of proprietary, with such things as web servers
that only work with internet explorer, c#/.net, wmv/wma, active-x, etc.

> Linux is really "horizontal" in that in can be installed on 
> almost anything, even iMacs.

so what?

> It seems like Jobs and Gates were really alike in wanting to keep their 
> customers "walled in", just by different methods.  But in the Gates 
> example, it was easy for people to find other operating systems to run on 
> all the myriad hardware.

what matters are apps, which linux lacks, not the operating system.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67802

On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 07:55:39 -0500, nospam wrote:

> In article <m7diic$nh0$1@dont-email.me>, sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net>
> wrote:
> 
>> He wrote about "vertical integration" which Jobs preferred(keeping all
>> hardware and software tightly integrated), and Gates who believed in
>> "horizontal integration" letting the software spread over all kinds of
>> hardware.
> 
> microsoft is the king of proprietary, with such things as web servers
> that only work with internet explorer, c#/.net, wmv/wma, active-x, etc.



Which is why most servers, server farms, etc. run a form of enterprise 
Linux.  Most professionals run RedHat, with Centos running a close second.




>> Linux is really "horizontal" in that in can be installed on almost
>> anything, even iMacs.
 
>> It seems like Jobs and Gates were really alike in wanting to keep their
>> customers "walled in", just by different methods.  But in the Gates
>> example, it was easy for people to find other operating systems to run
>> on all the myriad hardware.
> 
> what matters are apps, which linux lacks, not the operating system.


Most of the apps that Linux lacks are the proprietary Adobe apps, which 
are used by audio/video specialists.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67811

Okay, so one time? In band camp? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> was all, like:
> I need some OS that is rock stable, that is why I have an enterprise 
> Linux, pimped up with all the apps and goodies.

Wow. Just, wow.

-- 
Wonderful girl! Either I'm going to kill her or I'm beginning to like
her.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67800

On 2014-12-24, Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
> In article <cfrc8gFn7a0U1@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
>> > with Apple's recent OS releases. 
>> >
>> ><http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-softwar
>> >e-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
>> 
>> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
>> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
>> memory?
>
> Good benchmarks are:
> 1) Developer revenue versus other platforms
> 2) Duration for which casual customers are without advertised features
> 3) Professional throughput versus other platforms
>
> I'd guess that #2 is same as ever.  I'd say that #1 and #3 are in 
> decline.

While you may consider those good metrics for gauging software quality,
those are definitely *not* the metrics used by professional software 
makers to gauge the quality of software. Again, without actual evidence
showing a declining trend, what I hear people saying is they wish
software didn't have major problems, which is a pipe dream.

[unrelated stuff deleted]

> My next work computer will be a Debian flavor Linux.  Mavericks was the 
> last OS that performed even marginally well for software development.  

Millions of software developers, including me, disagree with your
assessment. 

> Use of Yosemite remains forbidden due to issues.

Yeah, right! LOL...

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67806

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes, quoting
Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us>:

> > My next work computer will be a Debian flavor Linux.  Mavericks was the 
> > last OS that performed even marginally well for software development.  
> 
> Millions of software developers, including me, disagree with your
> assessment. 

Millions?

> > Use of Yosemite remains forbidden due to issues.
> 
> Yeah, right! LOL...

Are you using Swift?  How's Xcode working for you?

I could have filed this myself...

Kill Swift, Fix Xcode
http://www.openradar.me/17628154

...but there's no point to in expressing one's displeasure
to people who just flat don't want to hear it.  Which is as
well why I won't be appending a small book's worth of other
OSX problems to this note.

Billy Y..
-- 
        sub     #'9+1   ,r0             ; convert ascii byte
	add     #9.+1   ,r0             ; to an integer
	bcc     20$                     ; not a number

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67812

Okay, so one time? In band camp? billy@MIX.COM <billy@MIX.COM> was all, like:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes, quoting
> Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us>:

>> > My next work computer will be a Debian flavor Linux.  Mavericks was the 
>> > last OS that performed even marginally well for software development.  
>> 
>> Millions of software developers, including me, disagree with your
>> assessment. 

> Millions?

Well, tens of millions.

> Kill Swift, Fix Xcode
> http://www.openradar.me/17628154

That is about the most jack-assed "bug" report I've ever seen. 


-- 
'But it'll kill him!' 'It could have been worse.' 'What?' 'It could have
been us.'

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67818

On 2014-12-24, billy@MIX.COM <billy@MIX.COM> wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes, quoting
> Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us>:
>
>> > My next work computer will be a Debian flavor Linux.  Mavericks was the 
>> > last OS that performed even marginally well for software development.  
>> 
>> Millions of software developers, including me, disagree with your
>> assessment. 
>
> Millions?

There are certainly millions of software developers in this world, and a
certain number of them use Macs for some sort of software development.
If not millions, it's certainly in the hundreds of thousands. The exact
number isn't very relative to the point that a great many people do
software development every day on Macs, and there is no huge uproar of
Mac software developers claiming that Mavericks was the last OS that
performed marginally well for software development, which is a pretty
absurd blanket statement to make.

>> > Use of Yosemite remains forbidden due to issues.
>> 
>> Yeah, right! LOL...
>
> Are you using Swift?  

Yep, occasionally. Why do you ask?

> How's Xcode working for you?

Great. I compile with Xcode two to five times a week, depending on what
I'm working on at the time. And I have no significant issues with it. In
fact, during the past 5 years, Xcode and Cocoa have matured quite a lot
and lots of headaches that used to exist are gone. I've written software
since the mid 1980s on platforms ranging from TRS-80s, to Windows, to
numerous versions of desktop and server-grade Linux, Solaris, BSD,
embedded real time operating systems, to Mac OS, and find the Mac OS /
Xcode software development environment to be a pleasure to work with for
the most part. I ain't alone, either. Is it perfect? Of course not.
There's no such thing as a perfect development environment. But it is
certainly not what I consider to be "marginal".

> I could have filed this myself...
>
> Kill Swift, Fix Xcode
> http://www.openradar.me/17628154

That "bug report" is more political than anything. Swift is a beta, and
will be a moving target until the official release. Since the language
itself is in beta, it's unwise to use it with the expectation that all
facets of the language will be stable. That's plain old common sense for
anyone who has been in this field for more than a few days.

> ...but there's no point to in expressing one's displeasure
> to people who just flat don't want to hear it.  Which is as
> well why I won't be appending a small book's worth of other
> OSX problems to this note.

Good, because it really doesn't matter to the rest of us getting shit
done despite these relatively minor issues.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67843

In article <cg1d59F9gkvU1@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2014-12-24, billy@MIX.COM <billy@MIX.COM> wrote:
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes, quoting
> > Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us>:
> >
> >> > My next work computer will be a Debian flavor Linux.  Mavericks was the 
> >> > last OS that performed even marginally well for software development.  
> >> 
> >> Millions of software developers, including me, disagree with your
> >> assessment. 
> >
> > Millions?
> 
> There are certainly millions of software developers in this world, and a
> certain number of them use Macs for some sort of software development.
> If not millions, it's certainly in the hundreds of thousands. The exact
> number isn't very relative to the point that a great many people do
> software development every day on Macs, and there is no huge uproar of
> Mac software developers claiming that Mavericks was the last OS that
> performed marginally well for software development, which is a pretty
> absurd blanket statement to make.
> 
> >> > Use of Yosemite remains forbidden due to issues.
> >> 
> >> Yeah, right! LOL...
> >
> > Are you using Swift?  
> 
> Yep, occasionally. Why do you ask?
> 
> > How's Xcode working for you?
> 
> Great. I compile with Xcode two to five times a week, depending on what
> I'm working on at the time. And I have no significant issues with it. In

Using XCode two to five times a week is NOT professional use of a Mac.  
Try all day long, 5 days a week, with 100K to 1M active files (not 
lines) from a team of developers.  That's when you start to wonder why a 
brand new Mac is slower than the old Mac, and that's when those rare 
issues for you become a constant loss of work.

Thankfully, I don't need to use XCode.  I've never seen it work for 
generic Java or C/C++ any better than zillions of free half-assed IDEs, 
and it can't touch a good IDE.



> fact, during the past 5 years, Xcode and Cocoa have matured quite a lot
> and lots of headaches that used to exist are gone. I've written software
> since the mid 1980s on platforms ranging from TRS-80s, to Windows, to
> numerous versions of desktop and server-grade Linux, Solaris, BSD,
> embedded real time operating systems, to Mac OS, and find the Mac OS /
> Xcode software development environment to be a pleasure to work with for
> the most part. I ain't alone, either. Is it perfect? Of course not.
> There's no such thing as a perfect development environment. But it is
> certainly not what I consider to be "marginal".
> 
> > I could have filed this myself...
> >
> > Kill Swift, Fix Xcode
> > http://www.openradar.me/17628154
> 
> That "bug report" is more political than anything. Swift is a beta, and
> will be a moving target until the official release. Since the language
> itself is in beta, it's unwise to use it with the expectation that all
> facets of the language will be stable. That's plain old common sense for
> anyone who has been in this field for more than a few days.
> 
> > ...but there's no point to in expressing one's displeasure
> > to people who just flat don't want to hear it.  Which is as
> > well why I won't be appending a small book's worth of other
> > OSX problems to this note.
> 
> Good, because it really doesn't matter to the rest of us getting shit
> done despite these relatively minor issues.

-- 
I will not see posts from astraweb, theremailer, dizum, or google
because they host Usenet flooders.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67844

On 2014-12-25, Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
> In article <cg1d59F9gkvU1@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-12-24, billy@MIX.COM <billy@MIX.COM> wrote:
>> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes, quoting
>> > Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us>:
>> >
>> > How's Xcode working for you?
>> 
>> Great. I compile with Xcode two to five times a week, depending on what
>> I'm working on at the time. And I have no significant issues with it. In
>
> Using XCode two to five times a week is NOT professional use of a Mac.  

*sigh* I meant two to five *days* a week. On the days I use Xcode, of
course I'm compiling multiple times while coding and debugging. I mean,
duh.

> Try all day long, 5 days a week, with 100K to 1M active files (not
> lines) from a team of developers.

I work on projects with millions of lines of code frequently in various
development environments, Xcode being just one of them.

> That's when you start to wonder why a brand new Mac is slower than the
> old Mac, and that's when those rare issues for you become a constant
> loss of work.

Bullshit. Xcode is no worse than others, and certainly better than
others, when it comes to workflow.

> Thankfully, I don't need to use XCode.

Which explains how you know so much about it in real world use - oh
wait.

> I've never seen it work for generic Java or C/C++ any better than
> zillions of free half-assed IDEs, 

Bullshit. I have several C/C++ projects in Xcode and it works just fine.

> and it can't touch a good IDE.

Which IDEs in particular can't Xcode touch, according to you?

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67775

On 12/22/2014 11:24 AM PT, Neill Massello typed:

> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
> with Apple's recent OS releases.
>
> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>

It's not just Apple too. :/
-- 
"We have to break with what must be broken with once and for all... and 
we have to take the suffering upon ourselves... Freedom and power--power 
above all. Power over all the tumbling vermin and over all the 
ant-hill!" --Fedor Dostoevsky
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )         If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67794

On 2014-12-22 19:24:30 +0000, Neill Massello said:

> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
> with Apple's recent OS releases.
> 
> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/> 
> 

Forget about iOS, OS X has seen more and more new technology, but the 
older underlying stuff has grown stale and some crap never worked right 
in the first place.  OS X Server is an unmitigated disaster, for 
example.  Even from a fresh install it is likely to get itself 
completely hosed in very short order.

Other problems are found with UNIX system administration.  There are 
lots of new processes (especially since 10.8) that are poorly 
documented and which can really chew up the CPU.  What are they doing?  
Why?  Who knows.

Apple needs to get their shit together and fix some underlying 
technology issues.  Perhaps they can go for a two-type release cycle - 
release the new OS with its features, and then the version following 
fixes all the shit they broke.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67795

On 14-12-24 03:42, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:

> Apple needs to get their shit together and fix some underlying 
> technology issues.  Perhaps they can go for a two-type release cycle - 
> release the new OS with its features, and then the version following 
> fixes all the shit they broke.

No. They need to release only when it is ready.

Focus named releases on core software available to developers. This is
the stuff that is announced at WWDC.

Then during the year, you introduce new UI features are applications in
point releases.

Much better then releasing all at same time and then spending the year
to fix bugs because so much was released before it was ready.

This is what happens when marketing has more power than engineering.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67803

On 2014-12-24 08:58:27 +0000, JF Mezei said:

> On 14-12-24 03:42, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
> 
>> Apple needs to get their shit together and fix some underlying
>> technology issues.  Perhaps they can go for a two-type release cycle -
>> release the new OS with its features, and then the version following
>> fixes all the shit they broke.
> 
> No. They need to release only when it is ready.

Ah, but I think Apple, along with the rest of the computer industry, 
has given up on the idea of honing software before release.  We have to 
catch the new wave by integrating Twitter and Facebook into the OS 
itself - there's no time to make sure that the mouse cursor doesn't 
disappear, or that the firewire driver works right, or that we're not 5 
years behind the industry on our OpenGL implementation!

> Focus named releases on core software available to developers. This is
> the stuff that is announced at WWDC.

I would say that they need to freeze the OS, finish the half-done apps 
(like the iWork suite, Aperture, and Maps) and fix all the underlying 
Unix and library shit that has gone virtually unmaintained - some parts 
for about a decade!

> Then during the year, you introduce new UI features are applications in
> point releases.

This I can agree with.  Who wouldn't like a new bonus application or 
feature every now and then?  They could even charge for these if they 
were somewhat finished and stable on release.

> Much better then releasing all at same time and then spending the year
> to fix bugs because so much was released before it was ready.

I think you're assuming a lot if you think Apple fixes bugs.  They 
often just ignore them.  Server is a classic example - there are bugs 
in it that date back to its introduction!

> This is what happens when marketing has more power than engineering.

Yeah and it's disturbing because in the old days, Apple software was 
often more reliable than it is now.  I have some vinatage machines 
running OS 7.5.3 and that is a very, very solid piece of work.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web