So this is where it could get really "interesting" for Microsoft -- Apple are generally regarded as a consumer oriented company and so far have seemed happy to stay that way, with Microsoft safely running the business world.  If Apple target enterprise with the same success they've had in consumer, how much trouble will this cause Microsoft?

I wonder what the Win8 team thought when they heard this?

Herbie

That said i cannot have come as such a great surprise that apple also want to make money in the enterprise

It's for a really really really large fashion company, I'm surrounded by hipsters with their fruit devices.

Head of IT owns a windows phone 7 tho

So the invasion has been started even before Apple officially pushing it.

If the head of HR want's to use an iPad for core business and Apple provide a suitable enterprise service to run on an Apple server, then IT will have to buy and maintain that Apple server and Apple have made an in-road into that business.

I only hope I'm never forced into learning Objective-C! 

Herbie

Don't think for a minute that writing objective C is to remain less productive than C#

Herbie

48 minutes ago, Dr Herbie wrote

I only hope I'm never forced into learning Objective-C! 

If all else fails, there's always MonoTouch...

4 hours ago, vesuvius wrote

There have been loads of programmes showing coffee shops users for example using it as a billing machine, with the amount of money going into Apple, they can afford to equal or exceed Microsoft in terms of expenditure for creating tools like Visual Studio.

Don't think for a minute that writing objective C is to remain less productive than C#

Well, they'll need to if they're serious. I did read that Apple had a few chaps working on binding Ruby to Cocoa. 

MacRuby

It's one of the fastest Ruby implementations as well. And yeah it's an official Apple project. Apple is very serious about making Ruby a first class language for client development, with IDE support and all.

1 hour ago, DeathByVisualStudio wrote

@AndyC: I think the difference this time around is that business are already using iDevices in the enterprise and Apple is going to make that even easier. The iDevices don't compete directly with PC so their not currently looked at as an either/or choice; they are special purpose. Ultimately Apple sneaks in the enterprise by showing that these "special purpose" implementation negates the need for a PC in many jobs. That's a far cry from Apple pushing enterprise servers.

There's a thought -- pushing iPad as just the client side. A large part of the enterprise is rattling off bespoke solutions. If Apple just launched some dev tools/libraries that improved (from a devs point of view) the consumption of enterprise data sources then they could easily get traction.

Herbie

Bad news is, it will compete with unhip Microsoft directly.

24 minutes ago, ZippyV wrote

Microsoft is certainly not helping developers making enterprise applications for Metro. The System.Data namespace (which allows us to connect to databases) is pretty much non existent.

Metro is pretty much a work in progress. It's going to be just like when Windows Phone was released. They're going to play it off like stuff was omitted due to security concerns when in reality, it's just plain half-baked as an application stack.

2 hours ago, Bass wrote

@Ray7:

MacRuby

It's one of the fastest Ruby implementations as well. And yeah it's an official Apple project. Apple is very serious about making Ruby a first class language for client development, with IDE support and all.

 

Blimey.

Okay, that is very interesting. But this has been sitting at version 0.10 for quite some time.

I sometimes wonder if Apple is deliberately trying to make developers go the extra mile by forcing them to use ObjectiveC. 

Or perhaps it's all about locking them into a skill that can't really be transferred anywhere else. If it's the latter then I'm not sure that MacRuby will be seen as favourably inside Apple.

58 minutes ago, Ray7 wrote

*snip*

Or perhaps it's all about locking them into a skill that can't really be transferred anywhere else. If it's the latter then I'm not sure that MacRuby will be seen as favourably inside Apple.

Like C# as it relates to Java?

Also it is not like Objective-C doesn't work other platforms. Linux has two working Objective-C compilers, Clang and gcc. And guess who developed the Objective-C compiler support? Apple. If they are trying to lock Objective-C devs into their platform they are doing a very poor job of it.

Ruby is a hugely popular language amongst the Mac-using hipster developer community so it is only natural for Apple to back it.

2 hours ago, DeathByVisualStudio wrote

*snip*

Like C# as it relates to Java?

Microsoft put much more effort into standardizing C# than Sun did for Java. I wouldn't attribute the lack of uptake on linux, or MacOS for that matter, to some Microsoft anti-proliferation campaign. Rather, I would attribute it to an ABM-- anybody but Microsoft-- mentality among FOSS developers. Perception lags reality.

-Josh

The portable device alone is... too fragmented I should say... to fit the frame of Enterprisy environment. While iPad has a lead in gerenal acceptance, Microsoft still has a chance to catch up if MSFT can release a set of systems that do integration better and smoother.

3 hours ago, JoshRoss wrote

*snip*

Microsoft put much more effort into standardizing C# than Sun did for Java. I wouldn't attribute the lack of uptake on linux, or MacOS for that matter, to some Microsoft anti-proliferation campaign. Rather, I would attribute it to an ABM-- anybody but Microsoft-- mentality among FOSS developers. Perception lags reality.

-Josh

I really don't know squat about Mono other than it's a Linux (and related) partial implementation of SL and the .NET stack but it was my impression that while Microsoft didn't try and kill it, it also didn't fund it. Now I know that's not the same thing as trying to get a language standardized but it certainly doesn't help C#'s adoption outside of the Windows world. If you've got no where to use C# other than Windows then what good is having it officially sanctioned as a standard? Marketing?

19 minutes ago, DeathByVisualStudio wrote

*snip*

I have no idea what I'm talking about but I'll make up some oh-so-hilarious anti-Microsoft crap.

For once, I agree.

8 hours ago, DeathByVisualStudio wrote

*snip*

Like C# as it relates to Java?

I take your point, but let's focus on the word 'transferable'. I know lots of developers that can move between Java and C# without even changing gears. I think it's much harder with ObjectiveC because it's such an odd mix of language paradigms: low-level C, a little bit of SmallTalk messaging and few more bits tacked on over the years to try to keep up with the newer languages.

I don't like the language which is why I've been reluctant to learn it (turns out that I don't have a choice now). I'm not saying it's rubbish, but what I am saying that it's certainly not a skill that can be transferred between platforms.

1 hour ago, DeathByVisualStudio wrote

*snip*

I really don't know squat about Mono other than it's a Linux (and related) partial implementation of SL and the .NET stack but it was my impression that while Microsoft didn't try and kill it, it also didn't fund it.

Fund it? Why should they fund it?

Now I know that's not the same thing as trying to get a language standardized but it certainly doesn't help C#'s adoption outside of the Windows world. If you've got no where to use C# other than Windows then what good is having it officially sanctioned as a standard? Marketing?

Well, I thought the whole point of FOSS was that they would do the heavy lifting themselves. MS's expertise is in on the Windows platform. Surely it makes more sense for Linux people to handle the Linux port. which I think they did with Mono.

7 hours ago, Bass wrote

MacRuby is open source and actively developed on Github. Lock in isn't Apple's modus operandi. If Apple didn't want to people to use Ruby they wouldn't financially back it and add Ruby language support in XCode.

Also it is not like Objective-C doesn't work other platforms. Linux has two working Objective-C compilers, Clang and gcc. And guess who developed the Objective-C compiler support? Apple. If they are trying to lock Objective-C devs into their platform they are doing a very poor job of it.

Ruby is a hugely popular language amongst the Mac-using hipster developer community so it is only natural for Apple to back it.

Yup. Point taken.I think I was focussing on the lack of movement on the blog and the fact that it seems to have been stuck at version 0.1 for quite some time, which was probably a little unfair.

I shall keep an eye on it though, and take it for a spin when I have more time.

Lock in isn't Apple's modus operandi.

But that we're going to have to agree to disagree on. Lock-in is everyone's modus operandi.

Partially at least. See GNUStep.

14 hours ago, PaoloM wrote

*snip*

For once, I agree.

Welcome to the seller where we haters live Paolo. I'm glad to see you emulate my greatness.

12 hours ago, Ray7 wrote

*snip*

I take your point, but let's focus on the word 'transferable'. I know lots of developers that can move between Java and C# without even changing gears. I think it's much harder with ObjectiveC because it's such an odd mix of language paradigms: low-level C, a little bit of SmallTalk messaging and few more bits tacked on over the years to try to keep up with the newer languages.

I don't like the language which is why I've been reluctant to learn it (turns out that I don't have a choice now). I'm not saying it's rubbish, but what I am saying that it's certainly not a skill that can be transferred between platforms.

I'd have to agree with you there.

12 hours ago, Ray7 wrote

*snip*

Fund it? Why should they fund it?

*snip*

Well, I thought the whole point of FOSS was that they would do the heavy lifting themselves. MS's expertise is in on the Windows platform. Surely it makes more sense for Linux people to handle the Linux port. which I think they did with Mono.

Good point about FOSS experts doing the heavy lifting however IMO it would have helped the adoption and overcome some of the ABM if Microsoft would have put some dollars behind it to speed its development and compatibility with the Windows .NET/SL stack. If .NET/SL were more cross-platform I think we would have seen a broader adoption of C#. Just my opinion of course.

Funny, I just had a demo from Motorola (not Mobility) on RhoMobile (a PhoneGap-like solution) and guess what language they use... Ruby with HTML5/JavaScript for the UI.