Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How Microsoft Lost the API War
- Thread starter groovebuster
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Good stuff
Yeah that was a good article, and it seems very true to me, because every day I write web app code that can not yield as "solid" a user interface as a rich client can give, and it really does seem most users don't care much.
Their UI expectations are now conditioned by the web, and so the lowest common denominator wins again.
Personally, I'd really like more power in the "browser" to make more capable, complete web apps, but it won't happen by Microsuck giving it to us, it'll be people like Mozilla/Firefox and mainly (hopefully, eventually) the decree's of the w3c.
Yeah that was a good article, and it seems very true to me, because every day I write web app code that can not yield as "solid" a user interface as a rich client can give, and it really does seem most users don't care much.
Their UI expectations are now conditioned by the web, and so the lowest common denominator wins again.
Personally, I'd really like more power in the "browser" to make more capable, complete web apps, but it won't happen by Microsuck giving it to us, it'll be people like Mozilla/Firefox and mainly (hopefully, eventually) the decree's of the w3c.
It'll more like be that the web is integrated into applications, as with iTunes, not the way the majority of web applications are today.
He's right about the Windows team bending over backwards to patch stupid application flaws. Why they didn't tell the original developers that they messed up is beyond me. Of course, Apple didn't do either.
The Windows APIs may be dying but it's not dead yet. Besides, there are older APIs still alive.
I would disagree with the amount of "great desktop software" on Windows being larger than on Macintosh. There is more desktop software, but rarely is any of it great, and there is more at the bottom of the pile.
As far as January 1st, 2000, when large machine applications written in COBOL, RPG (II, II), and PL/I weren't converted, they had problems.
He's right about the Windows team bending over backwards to patch stupid application flaws. Why they didn't tell the original developers that they messed up is beyond me. Of course, Apple didn't do either.
The Windows APIs may be dying but it's not dead yet. Besides, there are older APIs still alive.
I would disagree with the amount of "great desktop software" on Windows being larger than on Macintosh. There is more desktop software, but rarely is any of it great, and there is more at the bottom of the pile.
As far as January 1st, 2000, when large machine applications written in COBOL, RPG (II, II), and PL/I weren't converted, they had problems.
While it's a very interesting read, I'd disagree with quite a few of his points.
He seems to state the lack of software is the reason for Apple's lack of marketshare. I think that's a gross over simplification. There are many more (in my opinion, more important) reasons people don't use a Mac: cost, lack of choice, fewer retail outlets, lack of familiarity etc.
I'm also astonished he criticises Apple's early approach to software development - they published some very strict guidelines, which if followed would result in quality, durable software. He seems to think Apple (like Microsoft) should bend to the whim of every 3rd party developer.
And then he's surprised that the end result for Microsoft is a "buggy OS". What a shock!
I mean, the example he gives (SimCity) is a horrendous one! Using a memory block after freeing it? WTF? By patching the OS around these bugs, not only are you increasing your code size and execution time, you're also failing to stop developers from using similarly sloppy code in the future. Bizarre..
He seems to state the lack of software is the reason for Apple's lack of marketshare. I think that's a gross over simplification. There are many more (in my opinion, more important) reasons people don't use a Mac: cost, lack of choice, fewer retail outlets, lack of familiarity etc.
I'm also astonished he criticises Apple's early approach to software development - they published some very strict guidelines, which if followed would result in quality, durable software. He seems to think Apple (like Microsoft) should bend to the whim of every 3rd party developer.
And then he's surprised that the end result for Microsoft is a "buggy OS". What a shock!
I mean, the example he gives (SimCity) is a horrendous one! Using a memory block after freeing it? WTF? By patching the OS around these bugs, not only are you increasing your code size and execution time, you're also failing to stop developers from using similarly sloppy code in the future. Bizarre..
