Welcome to Swaine Manor
by Michael Swaine07/18/2003
Editor's note: Folks, I have a treat for you: a new column for Mac DevCenter by Michael Swaine. Michael and I go way back. Of course, I'm talking in "Internet Time," which parallels dog years. So, one year of real time is actually seven years of Internet Time. Mike and I worked together in 1999 on the now-defunct publication, "Web Review," and we ran into each other recently at the O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference. We decided it was time to work together again. This means that every now and then a column will fall out of the sky and land here on Mac DevCenter. So without further ado, I'll now hand the mic over to Mike.
Introduction time. This is Swaine Manor. I'm Mike Swaine, which accounts for half the title. I bought my first Mac in 1985, was writing and publishing (as editor-in-chief of Dr. Dobb's Journal) articles on Mac programming that same year, wrote four different monthly columns for MacUser magazine (on HyperCard, system tweaking, the Internet, and whatever), wrote a couple of books on Mac programming (OK, on HyperTalk and REALbasic, but some of us call that programming), and still work on Macs, running a network of them for the family business.
The Manor part of the title is, of course, an homage to science fiction writer and perennial Byte magazine columnist Jerry Pournelle. Or to Batman. Or to Jerry Pournelle as Batman; maybe we'll find out which over the ensuing months.
Dancing with Apple
Never the most graceful hoofer at the developer dance, Apple has from time to time trod on the toes of its third-party partners. Typically these trod-upon types have been small-footed firms that stray in the way with OS-related products like search tool Watson from Karelia (stomped by Sherlock, that other Baker Street regular) and cowboy-themed system scripting tool Frontier from tenderfoot Dave Winer, but lately the boot has come down farther afield and on bigger bunions.
When Apple released a string of betas of its Safari web browser and published comparisons unfavorable to Microsoft's Internet Explorer for the Mac, and Microsoft subsequently announced that it would no longer be developing IE for the Mac, it was possibly to keep a straight face while denying a cause-and-effect relationship.
After all, Microsoft wasn't even planning to keep IE around as a separate product on the Windows platform now that that antitrust unpleasantness was over.
When Apple blindsided Microsoft with its keynote presentation application and dissed PowerPoint, it would have taken an Ari Fleischer to claim that Microsoft was thrilled about it, but one was still tempted to look the other way.
After all, the victim was Microsoft. Which, one feels compelled to point out, has as of current date, not threatened to halt development on PowerPoint, preferring perhaps to lick its wounded toes in private. And until the Supreme Court says otherwise I think that's the best place for such behavior.
But when Apple added 300-plus features to Final Cut Pro, and came out with Final Cut Express, and added Shake 3 to turn a video editing product into a video editing product line, and Adobe subsequently announced that it would stop developing Premiere for the Mac, it was no longer possible to deny that the team of Cause and Effect were doing their buck and wing act at center stage.
Meanwhile out on the dance floor toes are curling under trying to make less of a target for the flying fickle feet of Apple and its apps.
The Adobe statement had a comfortingly familiar sound. With all that has altered since the return of the RDF, it is nice to know that some things never change. A leopard cannot change its spots, they say, although apparently a jaguar can change into a panther and Apple can decide that megaHertz numbers matter after all.
You Don't Know Jack Horner?
Market share numbers, on the other hand, are still a sore point, but maybe Apple has figured out how to pull out a plum from its single-digit presence in the market pie. The trick: If you don't have the head count, don't count heads. Shift the focus from the person to the persona. An Apple patent, curiously naming as its lead inventor Steve Capps, a Mac hero who nonetheless has been working for Microsoft for a while now, covers multiple personas (personae?) on a mobile device. Each of these personas would, I presume, need its own dot-mac account, Apple-branded flight jacket, and so on. You think I'm kidding. Well, I am, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong. We're talking about Apple, remember.
The Leakest Wink
I want to live in the world of MacOSRumors. Leaks, whether of water or dirt, seek their level, and MacOSRumors lurks at dirt level, sopping up the gossip.
One MacOSRumors scenario that I can't wait to see play out is Linux apps working seamlessly in Mac OS X 10.4. That would be PowerPC Linux apps, of course, but hey. I recall a time, long ago, when it seemed like every other year was the Year of Unix, when analysts assured us all that Unix was going to Break Out and Go Mainstream. It never happened. What happened instead was Linux. Now Apple is one of the few remaining Unix-not-Linux companies. Of course, it's the biggest seller of Unix systems, but with every other company having to come up with a Linux strategy, which in some cases meant killing off its own Unix variant, it's hard not to wonder what Apple is going to do to coexist with Linux. Maybe we'll find out next year.
The Bat Cave
This is the basement level of Swaine Manor, the utility-belt packing zone, devoted to news about development tools--but chiefly those with which I have some hands-on experience. Since as a developer I've devolved into a weekend warrior, these will tend to be scripting systems and other tools with a low-rise learning curve. This month that means REALbasic and Revolution.
REAL Software has released REALbasic 5.2, with "greatly reduced compile times," a greatly desired feature. Compile time was what one of REAL's hands took away when its other hand delivered the greatly improved compiler in version 5.0.
Version 5.1 was an attempt to fix the bugs introduced in version 5.0. To see how greatly that worked out, check to see if the "Fixing bugs versus implementing new features" thread on the REALbasic-Betas list has died out yet. I've been following this saga for a while now, and it's exciting reading. REAL's customers are a feisty bunch.
|
Related Reading
REALBasic: TDG |
I think some of them are the same people who keep nagging me (and quite rightly, too) to update the blinking errata list for my REALbasic for Macintosh book. Guess I'd better do that. Btw, if you're interested in learning REALbasic, I'd recommend getting Matt Neuburg's book. Mine's OK, but for most Mac DevCenter readers, I suspect his more advanced book is more appropriate. There's also a good magazine on RB.
The big scoop regarding REAL Software, though, is that it is on the brink of announcing its third supported platform. Currently, REALbasic lets you develop and deploy on Mac and Windows. Possible targets for the next platform, which I want to get on record before they tell me what they really have in mind and tie my tongue with a nondisclosure agreement, are Palm (which I'm guessing would be deployment-only), Linux, and some Unix variety. I include the last only because it seems like the easiest, not because I think it would be a good market for them.
Uh-oh. Looks like your doggerel-blocking software malfunctioned:
When your business is dangling over the brink
And delays and confusion have led you to think
Your supply chain itself its own weakest link,
Just buy your
Supplier
And remove all the red from your corporate ink.
That may or may not be the logic behind Runtime Revolution's acquisition of its supplier MetaCard. MetaCard, a solid cross-platform development environment that owes a lot to Apple's HyperCard, is the engine inside RunRev's Revolution product. RunRev is the younger of the two companies but its young staff are more interested than MetaCard's Scott Raney in what Scott calls the administrivia of software development, not to mention being better at marketing. And user interface design. And documentation. No offense, Scott. Since RunRev's offices are in Edinburgh, several bad jokes about the Scottish office and the Scott-ish office suggest themselves, but I'll leave those as an exercise for the reader.
CEO Kevin Miller told me, "We are now in complete control of the entire direction of the product," and he promises exciting improvements in the months ahead.
If you're interested in Revolution, in addition to the RunRev site, there's a new e-zine on Revolution called revJournal.
Michael Swaine has been writing about computers and technology for over twenty years. O'Reilly regulars may recall his "Swaine's Frames" column for WebReview.
Read more Swaine Manor columns.
Return to the Mac DevCenter.
You must be logged in to the O'Reilly Network to post a talkback.
Showing messages 1 through 23 of 23.
-
Steve Capps, undercover agent
2003-09-30 12:29:26 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Wow, Steve went to Microsoft just so he could get User Switching into XP, to set them up for this submarine patent from Apple. And here we though he'd gone over to the dark side. When the lawsuit dust settles, he'll retire in Cupertino. Welcome back, Steve!
-
Mention of Revolution
2003-09-10 15:24:45 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I am curious what Mr. Swain thinks about Revolution compared to REALbasic for programming? I think an article comparing both programs would be highly interesting and informative!
-
i think i read something like this on http://www.codon4.com
2003-08-19 19:08:09 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
i think i read something like this on http://www.codon4.com
-
Apple Stepping On Microsoft Toes
2003-08-06 23:17:19 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Mike,
I agree that Apple has been stepping on Microsoft's toes with Keynote and Safari. However, I do not see any other option for them: Office X was released in December 2001, if I recall correctly. It containes a huge number of massive bugs that should have been fixed immediately. In fact, I consider Office X to be beta quality, even by Microsofts standards.
Microsoft has not addressed these known problems. Neither have they announced a new version (the usual Redmond way of dealing with bugs). In fact, there is speculation that Microsoft will axe Office for Mac OS entirely.
I do not think it would be smart for Apple to wait until Microsoft announces that Office is cancelled. This would massively hurt Macintosh sales. Instead, they are warning Microsoft: "Look, we can replace PowerPoint, we can do the same with Word or Excel." I'm waiting to see if Apple will actually follow through with those ...
-
I'll go on record too...
2003-07-25 18:00:41 brandondrew [Reply | View]
If you'll go on record as saying you think it's Palm, I'll go on record as having told REAL software probably over a year ago that they should add Palm (and, <wince> I hate to say it, PocketPC) to their lineup. So I hope you're right. And in my wildest fantasies I might believe it was *my* e-mail that convinced them... where do I collect my royalties? -
add a wink ;)
2003-07-25 18:17:42 brandondrew [Reply | View]
I just noticed my facetiousness sounded a little sarcastic. Sorry: not intended.
Unlike one cranky poster below, I appreciated your article very much and hope to read many more from you. Thanks.
And (hopefully not to start an argument, but) in response to the Keynote vs. PP question (raised below), I don't think the Jury is out at all. PP is loaded with features, but Keynote is fantastic. It's very hard to make an attractive set of slides in PP, and it's very hard to make an ugly set in Keynote. Furthermore, since Keynote does everything in XML, you're not limited to the UI Keynote gives you. You can automate building pretty much anything you want (if you are a developer-type, that is; and if you create a template in Keynote then editing it with some other tool to generate slides is a piece of cake). So, in my not-so-humble opinion, Keynote rocks, and walks all over PP, just as Safari walks all over IE.
-
Apple/Linux
2003-07-25 08:40:42 raizor [Reply | View]
- it's hard not to wonder what Apple is going to do to coexist with Linux.
One would assume OS/X will coexist the way it's BSD cousins coexist with other *nixes(including Linux) by providing a binary compatability layer. Check out the FreeBSD Handbook http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/linuxemu.html
for more information
raizor
-
there's an image
2003-07-25 08:28:34 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
- Jerry Pournelle as Batman
There's an image I wish never entered my mind (especially the 60's style costume).
I think I may be ill
-
Drop this author
2003-07-23 14:33:02 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
This guy is constantly negative about everything. Why waste time having him write for you guys. I'm sure you could do better. Just keep looking. Hope you haven't wasted money signing him on for very long.
-
Your thoughts...
2003-07-23 05:18:53 reluctantswitcher [Reply | View]
Good to see Mike on O'Reilly Mac. Some questions for rumination:
1. Have Real overextended themselves by trying to sell RB into the Windows market ? How do they penetrate into VB-land (and Linux ?) at their current price point? Is Java a better bet for low entry-point developers (will JBuilder for OS X ever be seen again ?)?
2. Is OS X going to benefit from Linux developers looking for a way to earn a living (given that OS X users generally pay for their software - a novel concept for some) ?
3. Apple's USP is their hardware/OS integration - it's the one thing that Wintel can't match. What apps can you see being developed that play to this strength ? iMovie, iTunes, iView are good examples. Others ?
4. How do you encourage non-Mac developers to try OS X as a target platform ? Low cost IDEs ? Cross-platform environments ?
I look forward to the next column
-
From the back of DDJ to the front of MDC
2003-07-22 18:34:12 tychay [Reply | View]
Nice to see your articles here at MacDevCenter.
It's nice to make a point about Apple's history of steamrollering 3rd party developers, but you are only presenting one side of the history:
How about Apple dropping MacBasic for Microsoft in order to extend AppleSoft Basic's license? (You remember that pile of trash that was Microsoft Basic, right?)
How about Apple letting MacPaint and MacWrite languish because developers said that bundling was hurting sales?
How about Apple giving up 4th D to Kawasaki and Acius because developers complaints?
How about Apple spinning off Claris to develop applications? Don't we remember that HyperCard was released by Apple and all the prognosticators (including Pournelle) were saying they were undercutting their new foundling?
And, if I don't think the developers of Final Cut for Macromedia or SoundJam for Cassady and Green feel their lunch was eaten. The former actually got to finish their product; the latter are still making iTunes rock.
Or should we feel safer in the Windows world where a company has been proven in the court of law of wiping out companies (see Stack v. Microsoft) and whole industries (ask Netscape or read the legal decision) through their monopoly of the OS (as any PC vendor), their brand name, dirty tactics (ask IBM about OS/2), and coercion (as Apple about Mac Office and IE bundling)? Please.
Developers have done a good job of holding Apple's steamroller in check by threatening to jump to DOS (and now Windows). The problem is such a threat to Microsoft is laughable. Apple's problem is not the ominous FUD spread by sore losers (Adobe Photoshop, Yes! Adobe Premiere? Puh-leez, it stinks even on Windows), it is the fear that they will drop support of OpenDoc, Data Detectors, QuickDrawGX, (and a zillion other technologies) to chase the NEXT BIG THING.
Hmm Apple releases Developer Tools for free and is improving XCode. I guess we should all lament the downfall of MetroWorks and REAL Software. Oh yeah, and Karelia--they MUST be out of business after Sherlock 3 came out...
Hmm, this sounded more negative than I meant. I do think you have a valid point. It's just that when you pick up one end of the stick, you have to pick up the other end too.
Take care,
terry chay
-
The "We do it better" strategy
2003-07-20 13:43:47 espinoza [Reply | View]
I thought it was clear by now. It started with iMovie and then all the iApps followed. Apple can not just rely on Developers that usually write their applications both for Windows and OS X . They feel the need (understandably) of having some great applications that only run under OS X to attract new users to the platform.
Is it Apple taking advantage of some ultra-secret libraries or code or algorithms to get better programs out? I don't think so. So how is Apple unfair? That they work harder to deliver a great application is just the result of what they have at stake (increase their user base).
There are cases where I do agree Apple has been unfair like stepping on Karelia, specially since Sherlock is not "critical" at all or that much of an improvement over "Watson".
On theother hand...
Internet Explorer on the Mac has been an embarrassment for Apple, termed as the slowest of all browsers on any platform. What has been lost here then?
Keynote and Powerpoint? The jury is out on this one. I for one favor keynote but many people already have Office and Powerpoint gets the job done.
About FCP and Premiere? Who can blame Adobe.. or Apple. Final Cut pro has allways had a cult following. Besides, version 4 is so much better than anything out there.
For good or bad there seems to be a deeper strategy in play here as Apple's own retail store and the Itunes Music Store show. They feel that both Application development and retailing hasn't been fair to Apple's hardware and that it can be done much better than it has been done in the past and I for one think they are right.
Is this type of relationship with third-party partners bad in the long run? I am not sure, but I know somebody can help here with ideas about what path Apple should be taking instead.
Take care...
-
Good to see you again, Michael
2003-07-19 11:21:00 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
This is the perfect venue for a man of your pedigree. I'm glad the Mac Dev Center is gaining some traction, and it is good to see your mug and read your thoughts on things Apple and related.
I have to agree with earlier posters about Frontier. Dave means well, but Frontier was just a pain in the butt to use, and he was not willing to flex because of his principles. I'm glad for all the work he does for the community, but sometimes he doesn't seem to realize that his way of grokking things isn't everyone else's way.
As for Adobe, I say, "waaaaahhhh!" They've taken their relationship with Apple for granted for too long, and they've habitually blamed Apple for quarterly profit woes, et. al. Whiile they've done a good job of supporting OS X with their flagship apps, they've failed to impress with Premier or Acrobat for OS X. The comarketing fiasco with Intel that talked about Premier being better on Wintel didn't help matters. -
Waaaaah!
2003-07-21 07:42:53 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Adobe's been gouging for nearly two decades - their treatment of typeface licensing on the LaserWriter was nothing short of a money-grab. And come ON - $150 every year for Illustrator upgrades? If you milked a cow that way it would die in a week. Adobe's Mahogany Row Gang needs to wake up and live in the real world with the rest of us. Adobe is digging their own grave, great apps notwithstanding.
-
Microsoft and Apple, old habits haven't died yet...
2003-07-19 07:18:20 acroyear [Reply | View]
"[...] Microsoft. Which, one feels compelled to point out, has as of current date, not threatened to halt development on PowerPoint, preferring perhaps to lick its wounded toes in private."
I think its yet another example of how Microsoft's relationship with the Mac simply hasn't changed since the first one (or even the Lisa) in the early 80s. The Mac has generally always been a better user experience, and Microsoft's Mac team has often been called the "R&D Lab" for future Windows versions, both in the OS and in the core Office app.
I.E., on the other hand, was one of those foot-in-the-door strategic moves. It wasn't to really support the Mac as much as it was yet another blow against Netscape. Microsoft never put their full resources into making it the best browser for the Mac, or else it would have had more feature support on par with the Windows version. When $150 million bought desktop dominance of IE (a cheap bargain, if you ask me), Netscape's final nail was set; the Mac was a tool against Netscape, not an end in and of itself, in that instance.
IE on the Mac was never a "how do we do this well so we can make the Windows version better" the way that the Office for Mac is viewed.
Now that Apple is making a headstrong commitment to having the "best" browser for the Mac, and IE seems destined to being strongly tied into the next-gen .NET (which will go hand-in-glove with the next Windows and likely not portable to the Mac at all, continued support of IE for Mac is just wasted dollars.
Better now to drop the support and hope a little FUD of "we're not supporting a soon to be dead platform" comes out of it, leading more end-users back or over to Windows. Won't work, of course (Jobs is smarter than that), but its how Microsoft thinks.
-
Mike Swain link broken
2003-07-18 23:19:00 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Hey Mike Swain,
While you're introducing yourself, you might considering fixing the link to your own page - htp:// doesn't work...
-
Welcome back
2003-07-18 20:55:23 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Mr. Swaine, good to se you back, writing on the Mac. I have enjoyed your articles for many years. -
Welcome back
2003-07-19 00:07:27 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Likewise, welcome! It's like meeting an old friend after so long as to be forgotten (almost!)
And it would be fair to note that Adobe dropped the ball - and dropped the developers - progenitors of Premiere, who went on to develop Final Cut Pro (nee' Key Grip), breaking free from the artificial restrictions restricting them from revising Premiere into it's elegant, easy and efficient descendant? Sure, Adobe preserved the 'look and feel' of earlier versions, lest they shock their user base into stunned confusion. But it doesn't take a leap of faith or time to ponder the differences to see that Ubillos et. al. were on the brilliant path when they chose to bolt to Macromedia (on their way to Apple, where the product belongs.)
Manifest destiny of the digital kind!
-
Stomping on Frontier?
2003-07-18 17:12:29 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Sometimes the most improbable ideas get repeated enough that they start to become accepted wisdom.
The idea that Apple did some disservice to Dave Winer is one such idea. Frontier's lack of acceptance and eventual relegation as a niche product has less to do with Apple and much, much more to do with Dave Winer and his utter intransigence.
I can still remember a long dialog that developed on one of the AppleScript mailing lists that involved several developers, myself included, telling Dave, at Dave's behest mind you, that the syntax and interface for Frontier was far too difficult to use. Hence our reticence to use it over AppleScript.
Dave's response was to argue that we were wrong and the the syntax and UI factors in the app were simple to use and didn't need changing.
Frontier was a rather nasty piece of work written and promoted by a rather nasty piece of work. Hence its staggering lack of popularity.
No amount of work by Apple could have ever done as much damage to Frontier's fortunes as a few conversations with Dave Winer.
So lets place the blame where it belongs, at Dave's feet, and quite blaming Apple.





