How narcissistic
-
Tim Carmichael wrote:
Swift is Apple specific, if not centric, why would you want to touch it?
True, but I was curious about a new language for iOS development -- I never was taken by ObjectiveC so I thought I'd take a look, mostly out of curiosity. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
I never was taken by ObjectiveC so I thought I'd take a look, mostly out of morbid curiosity.
FTFY ;)
A positive attitude may not solve every problem, but it will annoy enough people to be worth the effort.
-
I was interested in looking at that new language for iOS, "Swift", and encountered this on the "free to everyone" link: Requirements: To view this book, you must have an iOS device with iBooks 1.5 or later and iOS 4.3.3 or later, or a Mac with iBooks 1.0 or later and OS X 10.9 or later. Gawd. Apple has such an ego. It's hard to believe that that ethos has lasted, as it existed when the Apple II was around, some 35 years ago. And is the reason I won't touch anything Apple. Marc
Meh; doesn't look that interesting.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
-
I was interested in looking at that new language for iOS, "Swift", and encountered this on the "free to everyone" link: Requirements: To view this book, you must have an iOS device with iBooks 1.5 or later and iOS 4.3.3 or later, or a Mac with iBooks 1.0 or later and OS X 10.9 or later. Gawd. Apple has such an ego. It's hard to believe that that ethos has lasted, as it existed when the Apple II was around, some 35 years ago. And is the reason I won't touch anything Apple. Marc
I started my career doing assembler on Apple II using ProDOS and have never owned or programmed one since. I went with windows because at the time it was more open, supported and a large community.
If first you don't succeed, hide all evidence you ever tried!
-
I was interested in looking at that new language for iOS, "Swift", and encountered this on the "free to everyone" link: Requirements: To view this book, you must have an iOS device with iBooks 1.5 or later and iOS 4.3.3 or later, or a Mac with iBooks 1.0 or later and OS X 10.9 or later. Gawd. Apple has such an ego. It's hard to believe that that ethos has lasted, as it existed when the Apple II was around, some 35 years ago. And is the reason I won't touch anything Apple. Marc
I hate Apple. Apparently according to the link below they are taking on WhatsApp. WhatsApp, the useful cross-platform messaging system which allows my wife (iPhone, but she won't be told) to communicate with me (Windows Phone). Yes we need to crush that and have something which only works on Apple devices. How they sell this image of being innovators when all they really are is a very aggressive example of the nasty side of capitalism is quite beyond me. Now, where are my pills? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27664941[^]
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
I was interested in looking at that new language for iOS, "Swift", and encountered this on the "free to everyone" link: Requirements: To view this book, you must have an iOS device with iBooks 1.5 or later and iOS 4.3.3 or later, or a Mac with iBooks 1.0 or later and OS X 10.9 or later. Gawd. Apple has such an ego. It's hard to believe that that ethos has lasted, as it existed when the Apple II was around, some 35 years ago. And is the reason I won't touch anything Apple. Marc
But but but they are so pretty and and and Apple have their reasons you hater because Apple are good and pure and have our interests at heart, without these policies their devices wouldn't just work. And and did I mention they so pur-ritty. </HamFistedSarcasm>
PB 369,783 wrote:
I just find him very unlikeable, and I think the way he looks like a prettier version of his Mum is very disturbing.[^]
-
I was interested in looking at that new language for iOS, "Swift", and encountered this on the "free to everyone" link: Requirements: To view this book, you must have an iOS device with iBooks 1.5 or later and iOS 4.3.3 or later, or a Mac with iBooks 1.0 or later and OS X 10.9 or later. Gawd. Apple has such an ego. It's hard to believe that that ethos has lasted, as it existed when the Apple II was around, some 35 years ago. And is the reason I won't touch anything Apple. Marc
-
I was interested in looking at that new language for iOS, "Swift", and encountered this on the "free to everyone" link: Requirements: To view this book, you must have an iOS device with iBooks 1.5 or later and iOS 4.3.3 or later, or a Mac with iBooks 1.0 or later and OS X 10.9 or later. Gawd. Apple has such an ego. It's hard to believe that that ethos has lasted, as it existed when the Apple II was around, some 35 years ago. And is the reason I won't touch anything Apple. Marc
-
I started my career doing assembler on Apple II using ProDOS and have never owned or programmed one since. I went with windows because at the time it was more open, supported and a large community.
If first you don't succeed, hide all evidence you ever tried!
Mike Hankey wrote:
I started my career doing assembler on Apple II using ProDOS
Interesting. I did the same, except on a Commodore PET. Ah, the 6502! My first Windows program was a plunge into the Borland C++ compiler and WinG on Windows 3.1 for a side job I decided to use as a learning experience into Windows programming. It displayed real-time election results that was fed to the convention floor in LA for local elections. Quite fun! Marc
-
But but but they are so pretty and and and Apple have their reasons you hater because Apple are good and pure and have our interests at heart, without these policies their devices wouldn't just work. And and did I mention they so pur-ritty. </HamFistedSarcasm>
PB 369,783 wrote:
I just find him very unlikeable, and I think the way he looks like a prettier version of his Mum is very disturbing.[^]
Keith Barrow wrote:
And and did I mention they so pur-ritty.
I definitely acknowledge that Apple comes up with the slickest physical designs and smoothest apps that I've seen. Marc
-
_Maxxx_ wrote:
Yup, someone else posted that link too. It looks like an interesting language, sort of hybrid of imperative of functional programming. I imagine, if I were an iOS developer, I would cheer too! Marc
-
Mike Hankey wrote:
I started my career doing assembler on Apple II using ProDOS
Interesting. I did the same, except on a Commodore PET. Ah, the 6502! My first Windows program was a plunge into the Borland C++ compiler and WinG on Windows 3.1 for a side job I decided to use as a learning experience into Windows programming. It displayed real-time election results that was fed to the convention floor in LA for local elections. Quite fun! Marc
I had a Commodore64 while in college and had a blast with it. Did some 6502 assembly at that time but fun stuff.
Marc Clifton wrote:
Borland C++ compiler
Borland was the real deal back then, there tools were light years ahead of uSoft. Christopher Duncan and I have had several discussion on this in the past.
If first you don't succeed, hide all evidence you ever tried!
-
I had a Commodore64 while in college and had a blast with it. Did some 6502 assembly at that time but fun stuff.
Marc Clifton wrote:
Borland C++ compiler
Borland was the real deal back then, there tools were light years ahead of uSoft. Christopher Duncan and I have had several discussion on this in the past.
If first you don't succeed, hide all evidence you ever tried!
Mike Hankey wrote:
I had a Commodore64 while in college and had a blast with it. Did some 6502 assembly at that time but fun stuff.
I've always wanted to port this[^] to Windows. It was a great way to teach kids basic programming principles without touching a keyboard.
Mike Hankey wrote:
Borland was the real deal back then, there tools were light years ahead of uSoft.
Indeed. I didn't move to VS (was it called that back then?) until MFC went through a couple incarnations. Marc
-
Mike Hankey wrote:
I had a Commodore64 while in college and had a blast with it. Did some 6502 assembly at that time but fun stuff.
I've always wanted to port this[^] to Windows. It was a great way to teach kids basic programming principles without touching a keyboard.
Mike Hankey wrote:
Borland was the real deal back then, there tools were light years ahead of uSoft.
Indeed. I didn't move to VS (was it called that back then?) until MFC went through a couple incarnations. Marc
Cool looking app, could see where kids could learn and have fun. I wrote a sprite editor for the Commodore, if I remember right in assembler and let the kids go creating sprites then animating them. I've been tasked to create an electronics learning system for my grand children, been mulling it over in my head but haven't finalized anything yet. Right now they have; batteries, the old blade switches, DC lamps, etc. and are really interested and want to learn.
If first you don't succeed, hide all evidence you ever tried!
-
Keith Barrow wrote:
And and did I mention they so pur-ritty.
I definitely acknowledge that Apple comes up with the slickest physical designs and smoothest apps that I've seen. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote: the slickest physical designs Remember when the MAC came out? There was no way to write programs for it (no assembler or compiler). You had to get an Apple LISA. That was the beauty that had a mother board installed upside down, and the memory was IC chips PLUGGED IN to sockets on the mother board, IC chips that managed to work themselves out over time? "slickest physical designs"!!! Dave.
