Dan Dilger and Roughly Drafted are awesome!

Dilger should remember that Microsoft bailed out Apple with $150 million when Apple was down on its luck. Also, Adobe and microsoft are the leading software developers on the Mac platform. So, this kind of talk is really frivolous fanboyism. It is Apple that has a record of delivering poor Windows products (Safari & iTunes) and turning all their free offerings into nagware (QuickTime).

If Silverlight has half a chance of gaining any momentum, SproutCore has virtually none.

So, essentially what you are saying is that Apple should bow down to M$, and say, "whatever you do is fine by us!" Can I have what you are smoking? Please? I mean really, what color is the sky in your world? As for fanboyism, apparently competition is good, as long as Apple is not competing. Hmm, sounds a lot like a M$ shill to me........

In an article on C/Net.com, Matt Asay states that either Microsoft's Silverlight or Adobe's AIR would be a better option for developers. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9970263-16.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20. But that doesn't make any sense. Both Silverlight and AIR are proprietary technologies that lock developers, users, and operating system into one proprietary standard or the other. And, while Microsoft is giving away Silverlight today and Adobe is offering AIR for low royalties, don't expect that to last if either standard dominates, or they establish a duopoly market. At that point, Adobe and Microsoft will institute the rapacious licensing fees for which they are both known.

SproutCore is licensed under the MIT open-source license and is built from either open-source or open standard technologies. That means developers know that they will pay nothing now and in the future to develop on SproutCore. And because SproutCore uses the technologies found in any of the major modern web browsers (Internet Explorer, FireFox, Safari, and any browser built on the WebKit) and connects to any back-end technology that can use AJAX, XML, and JSON objects, a SproutCore web app can run on any client and connect to and communicate with any back-end platform. And SproutCore allows for development of web apps that have rich online and offline functionality that can rival applications running on the client.

So SproutCore runs everywhere in any modern browser, costs nothing, provides rich Internet application (RIA) functionality both online and offline. And why, Mr Asay, isn't that a better deal for developers than the proprietary AIR or Silverlight that will almost certainly require an expensive license, that creates an app that runs only in its environment and on clients that have installed its plug-in, and that doesn't use open-source and open standards for either the client or server side?

We are in the early day of RIA development environments, so developers are free to choose any development environment. Unless Mr. Asay can explain why free, open, powerful, and server and client ubiquitous SproutCore isn't a superior choice to the proprietary standard lock-in of either AIR or Silverlight, SproutCore is a dead certain choice for any developer who is bright enough to write code.

Sounds like YOU are the fanboy! Folks, especcially Microsoft fanboys, like to make a huge deal about MS giving apple 150 million dollars, but Gates didn't do this to 'save' Apple. Apple in 1997 was having big problems, yes, but this move was good for both companies, not just Apple. This monetary "gift" was basically a settlement for the case Apple had against MS. In return it looked good for MS to still have some viable competition during the anti trust proceedings they were going through at the time.

This attests to the good work Steve Jobs is doing for Apple. Now, Apple is worth over $70 Billion Dollars, and they make the $0.15 Billion Microsoft gave them in a couple weeks of iTunes sales.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Dilger should remember that Microsoft bailed out Apple with $150 million when Apple was down on its luck.

Quote

Also, Adobe and microsoft are the leading software developers on the Mac platform.

Quote

It is Apple that has a record of delivering poor Windows products (Safari & iTunes) and turning all their free offerings into nagware (QuickTime).

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Now, Apple is worth over $70 Billion Dollars, and they make the $0.15 Billion Microsoft gave them in a couple weeks of iTunes sales.

But Apple really didn't want to lose MS Office on the Mac.

As for skirmishes with Adobe, it irked Jobs no end when Adobe started treating the Mac as a has-been by bringing out updates later and later than their Windows versions. Bad mouthing Apple by all sorts of companies didn't help either. Adobe would not exist were it not for the perfect Mac platform for their software in the beginning - same for the MS Office software. That stuff could not have been conceived for DOS and Gates would never have thought of Windows without first having the experience of getting Office to work on the Mac.

So, Adobe and MS Office exists because of the Mac and because Jobs helped them out.

Adobe thanked Apple by putting out crap on Macs. Avid did the same thing. Jobs said screw-it, bought the video editing software from Macrosoft or whoever it was at the time, put it into the lab and worked on it and put out Final Cut Pro. Ooooch! That bit hard!

Heh! So Adobe, with its tail between its legs, brings a half-way decent video editor, Premier, back to the Mac. They've also been playing better with Mac on the Creative Suite updates. They can't afford to ignore the people that use their software - most of them use Macs.