f



Making applications easily on OS X? How?

Hi!

I'm new to Mac OS X development and I'd like to ask you what free tool to
use if I need to build a big application with multiple windows.

Which free tool can make this:
- Put down a checkbox
- Put down a button
- Double-click on the button
- The onclick event is automatically binded and the source code editor
appears to enter the onclick code
- Enter code: checkbox.checked = true
- Build, run

I'll need also some nice knobs that can be tweaked with the mouse. (these
will be custom controls I guess)

Thanx for any ideas!
Greg


0
Greg
11/14/2003 9:37:23 AM
comp.sys.mac.programmer.tools 504 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

31 Replies
466 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 46

In article <bp27oc$8e$1@namru.matavnet.hu>, "Greg X" <greg1x@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I'm new to Mac OS X development and I'd like to ask you what free tool to
> use if I need to build a big application with multiple windows.
> 
> Which free tool can make this:
> - Put down a checkbox
> - Put down a button
> - Double-click on the button
> - The onclick event is automatically binded and the source code editor
> appears to enter the onclick code
> - Enter code: checkbox.checked = true
> - Build, run

Look into RealBasic and see if it fits your needs.

hth

meeroh

-- 
If this message helped you, consider buying an item
from my wish list: <http://web.meeroh.org/wishlist>

0
Miro
11/14/2003 9:42:11 AM
Hi!

> Look into RealBasic and see if it fits your needs.

I need C++ or something like that, not Basic.
(like MS Visual C++, you know)

Is there any free stuff like that?
....or what commercial tool do you recommend?

Regards,
Greg


0
Greg
11/14/2003 11:06:33 AM
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:37:23 +0100, Greg X wrote:
> Hi!

> I'm new to Mac OS X development and I'd like to ask you what free tool to
> use if I need to build a big application with multiple windows.

> Which free tool can make this:
> - Put down a checkbox
> - Put down a button
> - Double-click on the button
> - The onclick event is automatically binded and the source code editor
> appears to enter the onclick code
> - Enter code: checkbox.checked = true
> - Build, run

> I'll need also some nice knobs that can be tweaked with the mouse. (these
> will be custom controls I guess)

Xcode is free and it comes with the OS (Panther).  Jaguar has Project Builder,
which is an earlier version of the same thing.




-- 
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
0
Dave
11/14/2003 1:42:38 PM
dans l'article bp2m4e$3ph$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu, Dave Seaman �
dseaman@no.such.host a �crit le 14/11/03 14:42�:

>> Which free tool can make this:
>> - Put down a checkbox
>> - Put down a button
>> - Double-click on the button
>> - The onclick event is automatically binded and the source code editor
>> appears to enter the onclick code
>> - Enter code: checkbox.checked = true
>> - Build, run

I don't know any free tool which can do this. However you can have a look at
REALBasic and 4D, they're not too expensive and they are what you're looking
for: a 4th generation language. I don't know if Omnis is still available for
Mac.

This list is more for 3rd generation language developers: C, C++, Obj-C and
Java.

Eric

0
Eric
11/14/2003 2:42:37 PM
In article <bp2cvj$20o$1@namru.matavnet.hu>, Greg X <greg1x@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>> Look into RealBasic and see if it fits your needs.
>
>I need C++ or something like that, not Basic.
>(like MS Visual C++, you know)

Why?

Your requirement list was simple and short: RealBasic can meet all of
your requirements (except that it's not free: on the other hand, it's
pretty darn reasonable for what you get).

BTW, I have done _VERY_ serious C programming and prefer RealBasic for
GUI development.

Craig

0
Craig
11/14/2003 2:47:30 PM
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:42:37 +0100, Eric VERGNAUD wrote:
> dans l'article bp2m4e$3ph$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu, Dave Seaman �
> dseaman@no.such.host a �crit le 14/11/03 14:42�:

>>> Which free tool can make this:
>>> - Put down a checkbox
>>> - Put down a button
>>> - Double-click on the button
>>> - The onclick event is automatically binded and the source code editor
>>> appears to enter the onclick code
>>> - Enter code: checkbox.checked = true
>>> - Build, run

> I don't know any free tool which can do this. However you can have a look at
> REALBasic and 4D, they're not too expensive and they are what you're looking
> for: a 4th generation language. I don't know if Omnis is still available for
> Mac.

I take it you mean, in Xcode you have to control-click on the button and
drag it to form a connection, instead of double-clicking as specified?
And you first have to select a menu item to create a controller class and
give it an appropriate action method in Interface Builder, and then
select the menu item that generates source files for the class?  And then
you have to click on the newly-generated source file in the project
window in order to add your line of code to the stub method that was
generated for you?  All this before you can build and run?

Picky, picky, picky.  But you still only have to type one line of code.
The rest is point and click.  And Xcode is free.


-- 
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
0
Dave
11/14/2003 3:02:16 PM
Hi!

> Why?
>
> Your requirement list was simple and short: RealBasic can meet all of
> your requirements (except that it's not free: on the other hand, it's
> pretty darn reasonable for what you get).
>
> BTW, I have done _VERY_ serious C programming and prefer RealBasic for
> GUI development.

You know I have lots of C++ code I have to use in my OS X ports.
It would be a very big waste if I had to translate every single expression
everywhere into another language.

Regards,
Greg


0
Greg
11/14/2003 3:15:46 PM
> Xcode is free and it comes with the OS (Panther).  Jaguar has Project
Builder,
> which is an earlier version of the same thing.

Well, I haven't seen any feature in Xcode (and Project Builder) that made be
able to
write events for controls easily. (put down the control, click on it, write
code for the event, put down another control, etc...)
I had to create resources without any code, then I had to write separate
code from scratch.

I'd like to use some better IDE/RAD tool. If there is any I can reach.


0
Greg
11/14/2003 3:19:48 PM
> I don't know any free tool which can do this. However you can have a look
at
> REALBasic and 4D, they're not too expensive and they are what you're
looking
> for: a 4th generation language. I don't know if Omnis is still available
for
> Mac.

Well, I have lots of C++ code I have to port to OS X. Basic won't fit my
needs.

> This list is more for 3rd generation language developers: C, C++, Obj-C
and
> Java.

I've just ported my WinXP PCI WDM driver to OS X. It was a breeze with
Xcode, very nice, really.
....but I don't feel like I could make serious user interfaces with Interface
Builder + Xcode.


0
Greg
11/14/2003 3:22:51 PM
> I take it you mean, in Xcode you have to control-click on the button and
> drag it to form a connection, instead of double-clicking as specified?
> And you first have to select a menu item to create a controller class and
> give it an appropriate action method in Interface Builder, and then
> select the menu item that generates source files for the class?  And then
> you have to click on the newly-generated source file in the project
> window in order to add your line of code to the stub method that was
> generated for you?  All this before you can build and run?
>
> Picky, picky, picky.  But you still only have to type one line of code.
> The rest is point and click.  And Xcode is free.

Ok, if Xcode is really nice especially because it is free.
...and for writing drivers it is cool.
....but I have a pretty big user application to port from XP, so this old
fashioned
method style would waste lots of time.
That's why I'm searching for a better IDE/RAD tool.

Regards,
Greg


0
Greg
11/14/2003 3:27:34 PM
In article <bp2rj0$6ut$1@namru.matavnet.hu>, Greg X <greg1x@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>> Why?
>>
>> Your requirement list was simple and short: RealBasic can meet all of
>> your requirements (except that it's not free: on the other hand, it's
>> pretty darn reasonable for what you get).
	...
>You know I have lots of C++ code I have to use in my OS X ports.
>It would be a very big waste if I had to translate every single expression
>everywhere into another language.

Fair enough.  Why didn't you list this as part of your requirements in
the first place?

Given this situation, you probably have a lot of back-compatability
issues to be dealt with.  These need to be identified and fed into
your requirements.  Non-free tools may make sense, especially if they
can save you substantial time (which normally equals $$$).

Craig


0
Craig
11/14/2003 3:40:52 PM
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:27:34 +0100, Greg X wrote:
>> I take it you mean, in Xcode you have to control-click on the button and
>> drag it to form a connection, instead of double-clicking as specified?
>> And you first have to select a menu item to create a controller class and
>> give it an appropriate action method in Interface Builder, and then
>> select the menu item that generates source files for the class?  And then
>> you have to click on the newly-generated source file in the project
>> window in order to add your line of code to the stub method that was
>> generated for you?  All this before you can build and run?
>>
>> Picky, picky, picky.  But you still only have to type one line of code.
>> The rest is point and click.  And Xcode is free.

> Ok, if Xcode is really nice especially because it is free.
> ..and for writing drivers it is cool.
> ...but I have a pretty big user application to port from XP, so this old
> fashioned
> method style would waste lots of time.
> That's why I'm searching for a better IDE/RAD tool.

What do you mean by an "old fashioned method style"?



-- 
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
0
Dave
11/14/2003 4:28:32 PM
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:19:48 +0100, Greg X wrote:
>> Xcode is free and it comes with the OS (Panther).  Jaguar has Project
> Builder,
>> which is an earlier version of the same thing.

> Well, I haven't seen any feature in Xcode (and Project Builder) that made be
> able to
> write events for controls easily. (put down the control, click on it, write
> code for the event, put down another control, etc...)
> I had to create resources without any code, then I had to write separate
> code from scratch.

Why is it so important to click on a control instead of control-dragging to
establish a connection in Interface Builder?

What's the difference?

And what's this talk about resources?

> I'd like to use some better IDE/RAD tool. If there is any I can reach.

Better in what way?  Xcode is already the best.


-- 
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
0
Dave
11/14/2003 4:30:45 PM
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:22:51 +0100, Greg X wrote:
>> I don't know any free tool which can do this. However you can have a look
> at
>> REALBasic and 4D, they're not too expensive and they are what you're
> looking
>> for: a 4th generation language. I don't know if Omnis is still available
> for
>> Mac.

> Well, I have lots of C++ code I have to port to OS X. Basic won't fit my
> needs.

>> This list is more for 3rd generation language developers: C, C++, Obj-C
> and
>> Java.

> I've just ported my WinXP PCI WDM driver to OS X. It was a breeze with
> Xcode, very nice, really.
> ...but I don't feel like I could make serious user interfaces with Interface
> Builder + Xcode.

You don't think the apps that come with Panther have serious user interfaces?


-- 
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
0
Dave
11/14/2003 4:32:50 PM
In article <bp2s8v$759$1@namru.matavnet.hu>,
 "Greg X" <greg1x@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Ok, if Xcode is really nice especially because it is free.
> ..and for writing drivers it is cool.
> ...but I have a pretty big user application to port from XP, so this old
> fashioned
> method style would waste lots of time.
> That's why I'm searching for a better IDE/RAD tool.

Interface Builder is the best; if its not good enough, well, too bad. :)
0
Sean
11/14/2003 5:44:29 PM
In article <bp2s03$709$1@namru.matavnet.hu>,
 "Greg X" <greg1x@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I've just ported my WinXP PCI WDM driver to OS X. It was a breeze with
> Xcode, very nice, really.
> ...but I don't feel like I could make serious user interfaces with Interface
> Builder + Xcode.

That suggests you haven't looked at IB very carefully, because serious 
user interfaces are routinely built with it.

-- 
Tom "Tom" Harrington
Macaroni, Automated System Maintenance for Mac OS X.
Version 1.4:  Best cleanup yet, gets files other tools miss.
See http://www.atomicbird.com/
0
Tom
11/14/2003 6:04:39 PM
dans l'article bp2qpo$6am$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu, Dave Seaman �
dseaman@no.such.host a �crit le 14/11/03 16:02�:

> I take it you mean, in Xcode you have to control-click on the button and
> drag it to form a connection, instead of double-clicking as specified?
> And you first have to select a menu item to create a controller class and
> give it an appropriate action method in Interface Builder, and then
> select the menu item that generates source files for the class?  And then
> you have to click on the newly-generated source file in the project
> window in order to add your line of code to the stub method that was
> generated for you?  All this before you can build and run?
> 
> Picky, picky, picky.  But you still only have to type one line of code.
> The rest is point and click.  And Xcode is free.

And how much time do you need to acquire this knowledge, and all the
knowledge that is required to program using a native language ? The ease is
not only in the tools, it's in the entire toolset.

From what Greg wrote, it seemed to me that's the kind of tool he's looking
for is a mac equivalent of Visual Basic, something which will help him build
an app in a matter of hours, not weeks.

I personally use CW for C++ and Java on Mac, VisualC++ and Sun ONE Studio on
Windows, so I'm not saying 4D, Omnis or REALBasic are better tools.

Eric

0
Eric
11/14/2003 11:25:06 PM
> That's why I'm searching for a better IDE/RAD tool.

Maybe you should tell us which RAD tools you're using on other platforms so
we can understand what you're looking for.

Eric

0
Eric
11/14/2003 11:29:46 PM
In article <BBDB22E2.157ED%eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr>,
 Eric VERGNAUD <eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> dans l'article bp2qpo$6am$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu, Dave Seaman �
> dseaman@no.such.host a �crit le 14/11/03 16:02�:
> 
> > I take it you mean, in Xcode you have to control-click on the button and
> > drag it to form a connection, instead of double-clicking as specified?
> > And you first have to select a menu item to create a controller class and
> > give it an appropriate action method in Interface Builder, and then
> > select the menu item that generates source files for the class?  And then
> > you have to click on the newly-generated source file in the project
> > window in order to add your line of code to the stub method that was
> > generated for you?  All this before you can build and run?
> > 
> > Picky, picky, picky.  But you still only have to type one line of code.
> > The rest is point and click.  And Xcode is free.
> 
> And how much time do you need to acquire this knowledge, and all the
> knowledge that is required to program using a native language ?

Given a pre-existing knowledge of C? Less than a day.

> From what Greg wrote, it seemed to me that's the kind of tool he's looking
> for is a mac equivalent of Visual Basic, something which will help him build
> an app in a matter of hours, not weeks.

As can XCode for a comparable app.

G
0
Gregory
11/15/2003 2:29:52 AM
Hi!

> Fair enough.  Why didn't you list this as part of your requirements in
> the first place?

Well, sorry. I took C as the "default language". Next time, I'll try to be
more specific ;)

> Given this situation, you probably have a lot of back-compatability
> issues to be dealt with.  These need to be identified and fed into
> your requirements.  Non-free tools may make sense, especially if they
> can save you substantial time (which normally equals $$$).

I've heard about Codewarrior. Is this anything like Kylix/Delphi/MSVC++?

Thanx,
Greg


0
Greg
11/15/2003 8:30:08 AM
Greg,

>> And how much time do you need to acquire this knowledge, and all the
>> knowledge that is required to program using a native language ?
> 
> Given a pre-existing knowledge of C? Less than a day.

You must be joking. Learning what is simply necessary to write HelloWorld
when you have no knowledge of the toolset takes much more than that.

> 
>> From what Greg wrote, it seemed to me that's the kind of tool he's looking
>> for is a mac equivalent of Visual Basic, something which will help him build
>> an app in a matter of hours, not weeks.
> 
> As can XCode for a comparable app.
> 

Looks like you've never used VB like tools. You couldn't stand that position
if you had.

Eric

0
Eric
11/15/2003 12:11:19 PM
dans l'article bp4o6a$nmp$1@namru.matavnet.hu, Greg X � greg1x@yahoo.com a
�crit le 15/11/03 9:30�:

> Hi!
> 
>> Fair enough.  Why didn't you list this as part of your requirements in
>> the first place?
> 
> Well, sorry. I took C as the "default language". Next time, I'll try to be
> more specific ;)
> 
>> Given this situation, you probably have a lot of back-compatability
>> issues to be dealt with.  These need to be identified and fed into
>> your requirements.  Non-free tools may make sense, especially if they
>> can save you substantial time (which normally equals $$$).
> 
> I've heard about Codewarrior. Is this anything like Kylix/Delphi/MSVC++?
> 

It's like MSVC++, and it has RAD tools (which I don't use).

Eric

0
Eric
11/15/2003 12:13:17 PM
In article <BBDBD677.1583E%eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr>,
 Eric VERGNAUD <eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> Greg,
> 
> >> And how much time do you need to acquire this knowledge, and all the
> >> knowledge that is required to program using a native language ?
> > 
> > Given a pre-existing knowledge of C? Less than a day.
> 
> You must be joking. Learning what is simply necessary to write HelloWorld
> when you have no knowledge of the toolset takes much more than that.

I'm not joking at all, and I think you must be. Presuming a working 
knowledge of C, learning Objective-C well enough to be functional should 
take one well under a day. Learning XCode, Interface Builder and Cocoa 
sufficiently to write a relevant Hello World should take roughly 5 
additional minutes. A graphical but non-interactive HW would take 
exactly zero lines of end-user code. The typical GUI rendition that 
displays it in response to a button click would take one line.

These estimates, of course, rely on the notion that one has a reasonable 
ability (including willingness) to learn.


> >> From what Greg wrote, it seemed to me that's the kind of tool he's looking
> >> for is a mac equivalent of Visual Basic, something which will help him 
> >> build an app in a matter of hours, not weeks.
> > 
> > As can XCode for a comparable app.
> > 
> 
> Looks like you've never used VB like tools. You couldn't stand that position
> if you had.

Does VB count as a VB-like tool? I've used several version of that. I 
really prefer Delphi for my Windows development, which may or may not 
count as VB-like in your opinion. Having used VB since 1993, Delphi 
since 1994 and XCode/Project Builder since 2000, I can quite easily 
stand on the position that XCode can help someone build a comparable 
application in comparable time.
0
Gregory
11/15/2003 12:44:10 PM
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 13:11:19 +0100, Eric VERGNAUD wrote:
> Greg,

>>> And how much time do you need to acquire this knowledge, and all the
>>> knowledge that is required to program using a native language ?

>> Given a pre-existing knowledge of C? Less than a day.

> You must be joking. Learning what is simply necessary to write HelloWorld
> when you have no knowledge of the toolset takes much more than that.

I can tell that you have not used Xcode to write HelloWorld.  You can
literally do it without writing a single line of code.

And I'm not referring to the fact that the template application is
already a HelloWorld app; you can change the window's appearance and the
displayed message entirely within Interface Builder, without writing any
code.

>>> From what Greg wrote, it seemed to me that's the kind of tool he's looking
>>> for is a mac equivalent of Visual Basic, something which will help him build
>>> an app in a matter of hours, not weeks.

>> As can XCode for a comparable app.


> Looks like you've never used VB like tools. You couldn't stand that position
> if you had.

Now I know for a fact that you have not used Xcode.



-- 
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
0
Dave
11/15/2003 2:59:24 PM
In article <bp4o6a$nmp$1@namru.matavnet.hu>,
 "Greg X" <greg1x@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Hi!
>
>> Fair enough.  Why didn't you list this as part of your requirements in
>> the first place?
>
>Well, sorry. I took C as the "default language". Next time, I'll try to be
>more specific ;)
>
>> Given this situation, you probably have a lot of back-compatability
>> issues to be dealt with.  These need to be identified and fed into
>> your requirements.  Non-free tools may make sense, especially if they
>> can save you substantial time (which normally equals $$$).
>
>I've heard about Codewarrior. Is this anything like Kylix/Delphi/MSVC++?

You seem to be more used to a components type of rapid application 
development.  Cocoa and Objective C is probably closer to what you want 
to do. (there is also Objective C++)  

CodeWarrior does have a class framework (like MFC ) and a GUI editor for 
that for Carbon applications.  For Mach-O we share the Interface Builder 
with XCode for our GUI development.

There basically is no good or perfect language or system for all people.  
There are a lot of choices and you need to fit the right one for you.  
CodeWarrior lets you do C, C++ (Carbon) and Objective C (Cocoa)for OS X  
and C/C++ for Classic OS 9 as well.

If you want to work in C/C++ CodeWarrior offers a stationery (like the 
VC++ Wizards) and also has lots of example projects for you to start 
with and modify.  You can use and example and modify it slightly and 
have an amazingly complex program in minutes with CodeWarrior... if you 
have the understanding knowledge.

I don't know if this helps or confuses you.   I can have a  Demo copy of 
CodeWarrior sent to you to look at,  just write to me and send me your 
address.

Ron

-- 
          CodeWarrior for creating software,
      CodeTEST for analyzing running software
            The two halves  a whole.
      If you're not using CodeTEST, check it out!
http://www.metrowerks.com/MW/Develop/default.htm

Ron Liechty - MWRon@metrowerks.com - http://www.metrowerks.com
0
MW
11/15/2003 4:38:42 PM
dans l'article bp5f0c$abb$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu, Dave Seaman �
dseaman@no.such.host a �crit le 15/11/03 15:59�:

> Now I know for a fact that you have not used Xcode.

No, I haven't -yet- since I'm waiting for 10.3 to be more stable for
development purposes. It's getting close, but it's not as stable as Jaguar
yet. And I can't afford to spend time doing beta testing for Apple. I've
used PB+IB a lot, and I found them much less productive than CodeWarrior.

Very frankly this debate seems a complete joke to me. The amount of
knowledge and skills it requires to write an app using languages like C,
C++, Obj-C, Object Pascal or Java is tremendous compared to what is required
with tools like VB, Omnis or 4D. So it may be possible for some
super-experts like you (with extraordinary skills and born with
instant-learning capabilities) to build apps with new toolsets in a matter
of minutes.

However, for ordinary human beings like me, not having to deal with concepts
such as file-based projects, struct alignment, linker settings, bundles,
access paths and so on, cuts the learning curve by a tremendous factor.

I know what I'm talking about since I've spent several years with both kind
of tools.

Eric

0
Eric
11/15/2003 6:19:38 PM
In article <BBDC2CCA.15858%eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr>,
 Eric VERGNAUD <eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> Very frankly this debate seems a complete joke to me. The amount of
> knowledge and skills it requires to write an app using languages like C,
> C++, Obj-C, Object Pascal or Java is tremendous compared to what is required
> with tools like VB, Omnis or 4D.

No. The actual skills are slightly different. The difference in amount 
of invested effort is even more slight.

> So it may be possible for some super-experts like you (with extraordinary
> skills and born with instant-learning capabilities) to build apps with new
> toolsets in a matter of minutes.
> 
> However, for ordinary human beings like me, not having to deal with concepts
> such as file-based projects,

Which has been an aspect of VB development in every version I've used.


> struct alignment, linker settings, bundles, access paths

Very little of which _must_ be learned to make one productive.


> I know what I'm talking about since I've spent several years with both kind
> of tools.

As have I, and I completely disagree with what you've been saying here.
0
Gregory
11/16/2003 1:47:00 PM
dans l'article gwestonREMOVE-1B7285.08465916112003@netnews.attbi.com,
Gregory Weston � gwestonREMOVE@CAPSattbi.com a �crit le 16/11/03 14:47�:

>> struct alignment, linker settings, bundles, access paths
> 
> Very little of which _must_ be learned to make one productive.

And if you don't, you get completely stuck the first time you include a 3rd
party library, or start mixing C+ and Objective-C (I ran in that issue a few
days ago). Is that what you call productivity ?

>> I know what I'm talking about since I've spent several years with both kind
>> of tools.
> 
> As have I, and I completely disagree with what you've been saying here.

Which is not a surprise, since you're an overskilled developer, unlike the
rest of us.

Did you ever notice that Oracle is providing Oracle Developer Suite, that
Sybase is providing PowerBuilder, and that Microsoft is providing VB, FoxPro
and Access, not only VC++ and .NET. Are you deaf and blind enough not to
relate that *fact* to the unability of a vast majority of developers to
provide reliable apps written in C, C++ or Objective-C, and to the
undeniable fact that it takes longer ?

Or maybe you think you're right, and the entire industry is wrong.

Suggestion: try FileMakerPro, you'll find yourself with a desktop database
in 10 seconds. Try 4D, you'll find yourself with a client/server
multiplatform app and a web server in 10 minutes. If you say you can do the
same with Xcode in 10 minutes, you're simply a lier.

Which doesn't mean everyone SHOULD use 4D, VB, Omnis or whatever, nor that
these tools are better than Xcode. They're juste different tools, requiring
different levels of skill - and not only different skills -, for different
purposes.

It's perfectly legitimate for you to choose Xcode. Telling people they
should use it *whatever their needs and skills are* is simply misleading
them.

Eric

0
Eric
11/16/2003 3:32:52 PM
In article <BBDD5734.15CCE%eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr>,
 Eric VERGNAUD <eric.vergnaud@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> dans l'article gwestonREMOVE-1B7285.08465916112003@netnews.attbi.com,
> Gregory Weston � gwestonREMOVE@CAPSattbi.com a �crit le 16/11/03 14:47�:
> 
> >> struct alignment, linker settings, bundles, access paths
> > 
> > Very little of which _must_ be learned to make one productive.
> 
> And if you don't, you get completely stuck the first time you include a 3rd
> party library,

Really? Fascinating. Sounds like a local problem.

> or start mixing C+ and Objective-C (I ran in that issue a few
> days ago). Is that what you call productivity ?

No. And I might agree with you if I shared your experience. But I don't. 
And even still, you're talking about something that you learn once. It 
amortizes away against a typical development career.
 
> >> I know what I'm talking about since I've spent several years with both kind
> >> of tools.
> > 
> > As have I, and I completely disagree with what you've been saying here.
> 
> Which is not a surprise, since you're an overskilled developer, unlike the
> rest of us.

Don't even know what that means. I'm "overskilled?" I've got, 
effectively, one skill: I know how to learn. And I happen to believe 
that most people can learn how to learn, with the biggest hurdle being a 
common tendency to hamstring ourselves by refusing to accept that an 
unfamilar concept might be valid.

> Did you ever notice that Oracle is providing Oracle Developer Suite,

Yep. I've used it.

> that Sybase is providing PowerBuilder,

That too. In fact, PowerBuilder is the only toolchain I've used that I 
completely gave up on.

> and that Microsoft is providing VB, FoxPro and Access, not only VC++ and .NET.

Yep. Used them all. Is FoxPro still around? I thought they killed it 
years ago.

> Are you deaf and blind enough not to relate that *fact* to the unability of
> a vast majority of developers to provide reliable apps written in C, C++ or
> Objective-C, and to the undeniable fact that it takes longer ?

Oh look. You've decided to be insulting not just to me but to pretty 
much everyone that isn't you. There is no "fact" that the vast majority 
of developers are unable to produce reliable apps in C, C++ or 
Objective-C. There's also no "fact" that software inherently takes 
longer to write in those languages than the other tools you cite. Those 
are your little fetishes.

> Or maybe you think you're right, and the entire industry is wrong.

I'll take door #3. I'm right _and_ in agreement with the industry. 
You've horribly misread reality.

> Suggestion: try FileMakerPro, you'll find yourself with a desktop database
> in 10 seconds.

I've been using FileMaker Pro since v2.1, and I spent too long working 
as an Oracle DBA. You're right. I can have a poorly-designed database in 
seconds. Are you going to suggest that a DBMS is an appropriate 
development system for all - or even most - categories of software?

> Try 4D, you'll find yourself with a client/server
> multiplatform app and a web server in 10 minutes. If you say you can do the
> same with Xcode in 10 minutes, you're simply a lier.

I never said any such thing, and it's frankly quite insulting that 
you're trying to twist the conversation that way.


> Which doesn't mean everyone SHOULD use 4D, VB, Omnis or whatever, nor that
> these tools are better than Xcode. They're just different tools, requiring
> different levels of skill - and not only different skills -, for different
> purposes.

No. Just different kinds.


> It's perfectly legitimate for you to choose Xcode. Telling people they
> should use it *whatever their needs and skills are* is simply misleading
> them.

Happily, I've never said any such thing. You're invited to produce 
evidence to the contrary. I'm very much a proponent of choosing the 
right tool for the job.
0
Gregory
11/16/2003 10:25:23 PM
Greg X <greg1x@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ...but I have a pretty big user application to port from XP, so this old
> fashioned
> method style would waste lots of time.
> That's why I'm searching for a better IDE/RAD tool.

If the user interface is so large that it would not be practical to 
build it with IB, you clearly do not need a RAD tool. Then you need
to write some code, and generate the UI.

Stephan
0
Stephan
11/17/2003 10:44:00 AM
Greg X wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> I'm new to Mac OS X development and I'd like to ask you what free tool to
> use if I need to build a big application with multiple windows.
> 
> Which free tool can make this:
> - Put down a checkbox
> - Put down a button
> - Double-click on the button
> - The onclick event is automatically binded and the source code editor
> appears to enter the onclick code
> - Enter code: checkbox.checked = true
> - Build, run
> 
> I'll need also some nice knobs that can be tweaked with the mouse. (these
> will be custom controls I guess)

Xcode and AppleScript Studio fit these requirements nicely.  Free from 
http://developer.apple.com.

Don't make custom controls unless you absolutely have to.  The available 
controls are very tweakable, and make for a nice consistent interface.


0
clvrmnky
12/10/2003 5:46:54 PM
Reply: