Design Element
Comment on "Frameworks Versus Open Source Apps"
by Stephen — Sep 05
It seems to me that this is part of the life-cycle of cocoa frameworks at large.
They start out as private in Apple apps, then when they are mature and robust enough that you can use them in unforeseen ways without needing an intimate knowledge of any "cooperative" classes, they get released.

Ever since disc-burning became an available framework and Project Builder's special tabbar became public every time I see a new feature in Apple apps that I think I can apply I say to myself "Give it a year or 2 and it will be NSCoolFeature" - It pretty much always turns out that way. I think the only reason it takes so long is that they are protecting us until the framework is ready.

I couldn't agree more that this is in Everyone's best interest. Developers use the latest tools to not be reinventing the wheel, customers have to buy the latest OS to use those apps, and the platform benefits because we end up with the neatest ideas because nobody is wasting their time implementing spell-checking.

Maybe the frameworks should be open-source, yes. Though then apple risks (I guess) someone finding a way for all Cocoa apps to run on linux and bam! But having a few open-source frameworks is a Good Idea, I think. But open-sourcing the app is completely counter-productive, because it allows people to expend their efforts working on existing products or worse, waste their time creating redundant YetAnotherBillysFavoriteTextEditor, instead of creating something new and creative with existing functionality. I for one would like to see that all the sudden my spreadsheet can include a calendar or my code editor sports instant messaging or file-sharing app can burn a CD - All for about 2 days-work on the programmer's part thanks to NSDiscBurning or NSInstantMessage or the iCal frameworks.

Back to "Frameworks Versus Open Source Apps"
Design Element

Copyright © Scott Stevenson 2004-2015