| ??? 04/14/11 13:54 Read: times |
#181884 - you misunderstood me Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:I often wonder if Keil et al would be available for Apple rather than Windows, had Apple not been so protective and run an "open shop". The success of the PC comes from this wonderful thing called competition which was there (was it) a year after IBM introduced the PC. Apple has never allowed it.
Erik, that is completely wrong. In terms of desktop application programming, Apple is completely open. I know that, what I referred to was that, had Apple allowed cloning the Apple might have been the most popular hardware today. Software that have a limited customer base will always be developed for the most widespread system So all of this is a roundabout way of saying: there is absolutely no reason why Keil could not have ported their compiler to OS X had they chosen to do so. This goes for any company developing desktop software. the choice to not do so is because of the dearth of developers using the Apple. The maintenance cost vs # of users does not jive. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Creating iPhone apps? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| added cost of the connectivity | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Web server dongle | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Code space | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| HTML isn't big | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "only" (sic) 8919 bytes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| All depends on target etc | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You could do a lot in 1kByte | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
It isn't the page itself that consumes code space | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Apps | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Evil incarnate | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| hurdles | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Apple "openness" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Free | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Agree to disagree | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No, quite a lot is missing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| But still sufficient to be useful | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No, definitely usable even if crippled | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| you misunderstood me | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| One More thing | 01/01/70 00:00 |