Re: EOF (was Re: Cocoa CGI)
Re: EOF (was Re: Cocoa CGI)
- Subject: Re: EOF (was Re: Cocoa CGI)
- From: "John C. Randolph" <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:11:44 -0700
On Friday, May 18, 2001, at 02:42 PM, Deirdre Saoirse Moen wrote:
If Apple seriously has the goal (as they said with the Apple Store
release) of doubling market share, they could do it pretty much alone
by promoting EO modeler. Heck, they could sell the EO frameworks for
$300/developer and people would pay in droves. As long as you don't
also force them to code in Java.
EXACTLY!
I've made the point many times to people at Apple, that if they ever
force me into Java then they push me right off the Mac. If I'm going to
suffer that slow-motion train wreck of a language, then I'm also going
to take that opportunity to *eliminate* the simply absurd level of
vendor risk that comes with being an Apple customer.
What got NeXTSTEP 300 apps for a ~50K-seat market was the fact that it
had the best development tools available. People *liked* using it, and
writing code for NeXT.
If I ever have to write Java code, I won't even *test* it on a mac, and
I won't care one little bit about not reaching 5% (and falling) of the
market.
One story Apple better have at WWDC is what they're going to do about
EOF, and if the answer is that database apps must be written in Java,
then that answer is worse than no answer at all.
-jcr
"This is not a book to be tossed aside lightly. Rather, it should be
hurled with great force." -Dorothy Parker