|
On 2014-03-07, 4:57 PM, "Joel M. Benisch" wrote:
Interesting issue/discussion.....
On the one hand, WO does not have the potential critical sales mass to warrant selling it as a supported product.
On the other hand, WO has so much strategic value that Apple can't afford to release it into the wild ?????
WTF.....
I know some economists who could have a blast discussing that one over a case of good beer.
Seems totally reasonable to me. Apple has nothing to gain by making it into a supported product. It does not align with their business of selling consumer devices. Apple has nothing to gain by releasing it. Nothing. Why would a business spend its
resources on some activity of no value to it?
But setting all the theory aside ......
If WO really is such a superior set of tools and libraries (Gentlemen's Club Membership aside), it would seem that Apple ought to be able to find a way to use it in the enterprise arena as a tool to support the whole "Apple Is More Elegant", "Apple Has
Taste", "Apple Provides A Lower Total Cost Of Ownership" story ???
Apple left the Enterprise area some time back. They identified more profitable markets to play in. From what I can see, they have done rather well!
Chuck
We all pat each other on the back regularly about the great applications we've built years ago that are still humming along and are very inexpensive for our clients to maintain. In other words, we don't do "throw away code" !!! We rarely have to "do
it over" after we've done it once.
I just seem to smell a little profit center here....
Not necessarily in the direct sale price of the WO units that can be sold.
But in the follow on sales of Apple devices that play well with WO.
Microsoft has used their tools to cause unknowing developers to build HTML that only Windows (Internet Explorer) can interpret.
I'm not suggesting that Apple do the same on the sly the way MS does/did.
But clearly WO could be made to support features of iOS that don't have comparable counterparts in the competing mobile OSes.
It has baffled me for years that WO has not been treated as the high powered trojan horse that it could be.
But what do I know?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel M. Benisch CPCU, President 973-992-6300 x303
PaperFree Corporation 973-992-6666 FAX
Livingston, NJ 07039-8249 WE CREATE PRODUCTS WE WOULD WANT TO USE!
On Mar 7, 2014, at 7:21 PM, Aaron Rosenzweig wrote:
Am I right or what? WO is an elite “gentleman’s club” There are those “in the circle” and those outside.
If Mark wants to send a note of praise to someone, why not? Even if it is Tim Cook. Will anything bad come of that? It may fall on deaf ears but that’s ok.
Mark, I’m glad you love WO.
For those who may wonder, I’ll summarize what I believe Pascal is alluding to:
Even if WO sold very well, “well” would be a relative term. Compared to their other product lines, a good line of sales related to WO would mean nothing compared to Apple’s other product lines. How many developers are there in the world? Compare that to
consumers.
Apple does not need to make other programmer’s lives easier on the server. It would be nice but there is no need (for Apple).
If Apple were to open source WO, it may mean they have less of an ace up their sleeve in negotiations with other companies when legal issues crop up. “You want to sue me for this? then I’ll sue you for your use of Key-Value-Coding so why don’t we just
not sue each other ok?” Open sourcing WO could weaken Apple’s stance in legal battles for no monetary gain.
The ONLY way to open source WO would be to buy it from Apple… but even then… it would have to be a lot of money to make it worth the legal trouble of figuring out if that is a good financial deal for Apple.
I can think of a few cases where Apple technology was freed up to the world but in both of those cases they had strong supporters on the inside to make it happen:
1. Apple released it’s Smalltalk and core team to Walt Disney and Disney let it be open source:
2. Apple Newton’s “Dylan” language was released and became a commercial product for a while:
On Mar 7, 2014, at 6:04 PM, Pascal Robert < email@hidden> wrote:
Please please please... Someone went as far as asking for support by talking to an Apple Senior VP, and the answer was: NO! Stop thinking that Apple will help us after 5 years without any help from Apple. They even stopped contributing to Wonder 3 years
ago.
Envoyé de mon iPhone
Hi all.
It is sad to hear the despondency permeating through the email list today.
I think many of us have achieved so much with this technology stack, solutions that would be much more difficult with other technologies.
I think Apple is missing a trick here. Perhaps I am naive but isn’t their focus on vertical integration? WebObjects is and could be the server side answer for iOS in the enterprise. For me, we’re just about to deploy our first iOS apps running on iPads
in our outpatient clinics, linking to our WebObjects applications handling all of the complex business logic that we need in healthcare. We’ve achieved this on a shoestring and it’s due to the great design - seen in WebObjects and of course, by logical extension
in the related frameworks inherited from NeXT in modern Apple operating systems.
Personally, I want Apple stuff in the enterprise - in my enterprise - in my outpatient clinic. I think it would make a tremendous difference to how we provide healthcare. WebObjects is such a good fit for iOS devices I just cannot believe that Apple does
not want to support such a great and productive technology.
Whatever the case, my WebObjects applications are still running and we are getting more and more users here in this part of the UK! It is just a shame Apple seems to have given up on it.
I’ve copied in Tim Cook to this. At the back of my mind, I’m hoping he’ll take an interest, realise overnight what a great technology this is and how it can be a great product for both large and small enterprises, can form part of a great technology stack
and support iOS, and as such, re-incarnate WebObjects - the technology we love! Mr Cook - could Apple un-deprecate this technology please? It is really rather good!
Best wishes,
Mark
--
Dr. Mark Wardle
Consultant Neurologist, University Hospital Wales, Cardiff, UK
Email: email@hidden or email@hidden Twitter: @mwardle
Telephone: 02920745274 (secretary) or facsimile: 02920744166
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ( email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
|