MW at WWDC 2004

[Peter Lui]

http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/exhibits.html

I don't see MW on the exhibitors list for this years WWDC and I don't
see them mentioned as being part of any sessions. What's the scoop?

[MW Ron]

Post by Peter Lui
http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/exhibits.html
I don't see MW on the exhibitors list for this years WWDC and I don't
see them mentioned as being part of any sessions. What's the scoop?

At this time Metrowerks is still working on what participation they will
have at WWDC. I should be able give definite plans before the start of the
conference.

Some one called me and asked that I reply to this. I'm sorry but this is a
pretty weaselly answer but I really will have news next week.

Ron (going home tomorrow)

[Peter Lui]

Post by MW Ron
At this time Metrowerks is still working on what participation they will
have at WWDC. I should be able give definite plans before the start of the
conference.

With about 5 days to go I still don't see any information at the MW
events calendar:

http://www.metrowerks.com/MW/Events/default.htm

Is MW attending WWDC this year or not?

[MW Ron]

Post by Peter Lui

Post by MW Ron
At this time Metrowerks is still working on what participation they will
have at WWDC. I should be able give definite plans before the start of the
conference.

With about 5 days to go I still don't see any information at the MW
http://www.metrowerks.com/MW/Events/default.htm
Is MW attending WWDC this year or not?

Metrowerks is not formally attending WWDC this year, unless something
happens in the next few days.

Ron

[b***@hotmail.com]

Post by MW Ron
Metrowerks is not formally attending WWDC this year, unless something
happens in the next few days.

Is there a reason you can give? This is disappointing. That and I won't be able to
say hi. I thought the competition would be good for Metrowerks! It's what seemed
to drive it back in the Symantec years. Now MW recommends all the other java
tools. What's next? :(

[Peter Lui]

Post by MW Ron
Metrowerks is not formally attending WWDC this year, unless something
happens in the next few days.

I guess I'm not surprised since Apple gave MW the shaft last year but I
was really hoping MW would attend anyway despite Apple's decade long
shoot itself in the foot strategy towards developer tools.

[Wade Williams]

Post by Peter Lui
I guess I'm not surprised since Apple gave MW the shaft last year but I
was really hoping MW would attend anyway despite Apple's decade long
shoot itself in the foot strategy towards developer tools.

While I don't necessarily agree with Apple's decision not to give MW a
session, Apple is only a tiny bit to blame.

MW can still attend any WWDC they want, they can still host their own
BOF, etc.

And they can force Apple into granting them sessions by INNOVATING
great new technologies that will have the entire Mac development
buzzing.

Unfortunately, MW seems to be taking the opposite path:

"Woe is us. Apple is mean and came out with their own tools. It's all
their fault. Let's drop Java. Let's not show up at WWDC. Let's let
our pace of innovation slow to a crawl........oh look - some exec just
noticed our Mac sales are way down, so he's going to kill of Mac CW.
See? We told you it was all Apple's fault. Nothing we could have done
about it - it was all big mean Apple."

Wade

[MW Ron]

Post by Wade Williams
While I don't necessarily agree with Apple's decision not to give MW a
session, Apple is only a tiny bit to blame.

I don't blame them at all, this was a Metrowerks Decision not to attend

Post by Wade Williams
MW can still attend any WWDC they want, they can still host their own
BOF, etc.

Private BOFs in San Francisco, are expensive, again we chose not to do
this for cost and to ensure we don't say something wrong. In hind sight
this was a bad decision.

Post by Wade Williams
"Woe is us. Apple is mean and came out with their own tools. It's all
their fault. Let's drop Java. Let's not show up at WWDC. Let's let
our pace of innovation slow to a crawl........oh look - some exec just
noticed our Mac sales are way down, so he's going to kill of Mac CW.
See? We told you it was all Apple's fault. Nothing we could have done
about it - it was all big mean Apple."

You have never seen anyone at Metrowerks say anything like that. Again
I'm hoping that we can make an announcement at AdHoc and when I do, I'll
post the message here and the CodeWarrior groups/communty forum.

Ron

[Wade Williams]

Post by MW Ron

Post by Wade Williams
"Woe is us. Apple is mean and came out with their own tools. It's all
their fault. Let's drop Java. Let's not show up at WWDC. Let's let
our pace of innovation slow to a crawl........oh look - some exec just
noticed our Mac sales are way down, so he's going to kill of Mac CW.
See? We told you it was all Apple's fault. Nothing we could have done
about it - it was all big mean Apple."

You have never seen anyone at Metrowerks say anything like that. Again
I'm hoping that we can make an announcement at AdHoc and when I do, I'll
post the message here and the CodeWarrior groups/communty forum.

I'll apologize for being a bit melodramatic and possibly even unfair.

However Ron, in the face of no evidence to the contrary, what else are
the natives to assume?

I realize you're just the messenger, but you should let those up the
chain know that there are currently no good messages to which the
community can point that give them confidence in the future of
Codewarrior on the Mac.

Wade

[Chris Cox]

Post by MW Ron

Post by Wade Williams
While I don't necessarily agree with Apple's decision not to give MW a
session, Apple is only a tiny bit to blame.

I don't blame them at all, this was a Metrowerks Decision not to attend

Post by Wade Williams
MW can still attend any WWDC they want, they can still host their own
BOF, etc.

Private BOFs in San Francisco, are expensive, again we chose not to do
this for cost and to ensure we don't say something wrong. In hind sight
this was a bad decision.

Yet there were several informal meetings with Metrowerks personnel at
WWDC.

I fully understand that Metrowerks and Freescale were in flux around
that time -- I don't see how they could have done much more.

Chris

[Jonathan Hoyle]

Post by MW Ron
Metrowerks is not formally attending WWDC this year, unless something
happens in the next few days.

This is very, very sad news. In fact, this is probably the first time
in close to 10 years you haven't been involved. I'm not sure what
kind of developer's conference it can be when the dominant Mac OS
compiler company is not at least some part of it.

I assume that Metrowerks will have some engineers at least in
attendance? Certainly you will need to have knowledge of OS X 10.4
Tiger for coming iterations. At least last year you had been at the
vendor booths.

Perhaps this will make AdHoc (formerly MacHack) that much more
important this year. Can we hope that you will be in attendance for
that? Also, would that be the place for new product announcements?

Thanks for your input, Ron. I imagine you're taking this at least as
hard as the rest of us. :-(


Jonathan Hoyle
Gene Codes Corporation

[MW Ron]

Post by Jonathan Hoyle

Post by MW Ron
Metrowerks is not formally attending WWDC this year, unless something
happens in the next few days.

This is very, very sad news. In fact, this is probably the first time
in close to 10 years you haven't been involved. I'm not sure what
kind of developer's conference it can be when the dominant Mac OS
compiler company is not at least some part of it.

There is no CodeWarrior or CodeTEST product introduction to be made at
the show but we would like to point out that the current release of
CodeWarrior Development Studio for Mac OS v9.2 is a fully supported tool
chain for which we continue to release updates and patches. Since we
have no forward looking plans that we can talk about at this time, (as
Metrowerks is in a quiet period due to Freescale's impending IPO) we
have chosen to save the expense of attending.

Post by Jonathan Hoyle
I assume that Metrowerks will have some engineers at least in
attendance? Certainly you will need to have knowledge of OS X 10.4
Tiger for coming iterations. At least last year you had been at the
vendor booths.

Yes we will have someone attend the conference, but there will not be
any BOF or any sessions.

Post by Jonathan Hoyle
Perhaps this will make AdHoc (formerly MacHack) that much more
important this year. Can we hope that you will be in attendance for
that? Also, would that be the place for new product announcements?

I plan to attend AdHoc this year and the usual Bash Metrowerks session.

I don't know if any others plan to attend or not.

Ron

[Peter Lui]

Since we have no forward looking plans that we can talk about at this
time, (as Metrowerks is in a quiet period due to Freescale's impending
IPO) we have chosen to save the expense of attending.

Metrowerks must be really hard up because even individual developers
can afford to display in the exhibit hall. Granted, the corporate price
is probably higher but if MW isn't interested in attracting new
customers and assuring the existing ones that it's still interested in
their market, skipping the show is a sure way to promote that.

I've also noticed that Metrowerks has cut back on advertizing. At least
I can't find where they are advertizing.

Metrowerks doesn't have me convinced that it has forward looking plans
given these two situations. Rather it is unfortnately following the
trend of other companies that eventually pull out of their core markets.

[MW Ron]

Post by Peter Lui

Since we have no forward looking plans that we can talk about at this
time, (as Metrowerks is in a quiet period due to Freescale's impending
IPO) we have chosen to save the expense of attending.

Metrowerks must be really hard up because even individual developers
can afford to display in the exhibit hall. Granted, the corporate price
is probably higher but if MW isn't interested in attracting new
customers and assuring the existing ones that it's still interested in
their market, skipping the show is a sure way to promote that.

There is always the chance that a loose lip will say something. While
the cost is the primary this was also a factor.

Post by Peter Lui
I've also noticed that Metrowerks has cut back on advertizing. At least
I can't find where they are advertizing.

We haven't advertised for several years, WWDC and MacHack were our two
basic events.

Post by Peter Lui
Metrowerks doesn't have me convinced that it has forward looking plans
given these two situations. Rather it is unfortnately following the
trend of other companies that eventually pull out of their core markets.

The lack of attendence does not reflect on any long range plans for
CodeWarrior Development Studio for Mac OS nor on the working
relationship between Metrowerks and Apple. This is purely a marketing
decision.

There is absolutely nothing more I can say at this time. I had hopes
for further announcements but not at this time.

Ron

[mack]

Post by Peter Lui
Metrowerks must be really hard up because even individual developers
can afford to display in the exhibit hall. Granted, the corporate price
is probably higher but if MW isn't interested in attracting new
customers and assuring the existing ones that it's still interested in
their market, skipping the show is a sure way to promote that.

You can't blame Metrowerks. What would you do if your competition was free?

Apple's free development tools will only result in fewer choices for
developers. Microsoft understands this. Apple forgot.

[David Phillip Oster]

Post by mack
Apple's free development tools will only result in fewer choices for
developers. Microsoft understands this. Apple forgot.

Microsoft understands the logic of fewer choices and embraces it. To
quote JoelOnSoftware.com:
<http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html>

"The logical conclusion of this is that if you're trying to sell
operating systems, the most important thing to do is make software
developers want to develop software for your operating system. That's
why Steve Ballmer was jumping around the stage shouting "Developers,
developers, developers, developers."
<http://www.ntk.net/ballmer/mirrors.html> It's so important for
Microsoft that the only reason they don't outright give away development
tools for Windows is because they don't want to inadvertently cut off
the oxygen to competitive development tools vendors (well, those that
are left) because having a variety of development tools available for
their platform makes it that much more attractive to developers. But
they really want to give away the development tools. Through their
Empower ISV program
<http://members.microsoft.com/partner/competency/isvcomp/empower/default.
aspx> you can get five complete sets of MSDN Universal (otherwise known
as "basically every Microsoft product except Flight Simulator") for
about $375. Command line compilers for the .NET languages are included
with the free .NET runtime... also free. The C++ compiler is now free.
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/> Anything to encourage
developers to build for the .NET platform, and holding just short of
wiping out companies like Borland."

My comment: there is nothing inadvertent about it.

[Jonathan Hoyle]

Post by David Phillip Oster
It's so important for
Microsoft that the only reason they don't outright give away development
tools for Windows is because they don't want to inadvertently cut off
the oxygen to competitive development tools vendors

I disagree with this entirely. Microsoft isn't giving away their
development tools because they can (and have been) killing the
competition without having to give it away. They gave away Explorer
to kill Netscape, but that isn't required here. Borland and Symantec
are not viewed as serious threats by Microsoft. Sun is the bigger
deal, but Microsoft is pushing C# (its own modification of Java) and
have been successful with that.

Post by David Phillip Oster
...because having a variety of development tools available for
their platform makes it that much more attractive to developers.

What makes you think Microsoft needs to feel "attractive" to
developers? It's not like Windows will die if all the 3rd Party
software went away. Microsoft feels pretty confident that they can
survive quite nicely if the only software that exists are Microsoft
products, or those made with Microsoft development terms. Their
stated goal is to have every computer running Microsoft software
exclusively.

Post by David Phillip Oster
Command line compilers for the .NET languages are included
with the free .NET runtime... also free. The C++ compiler is now free.
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/> Anything to encourage
developers to build for the .NET platform, and holding just short of
wiping out companies like Borland."
My comment: there is nothing inadvertent about it.

Agreed.

Jonathan Hoyle
Gene Codes Corporation

[Wade Williams]

Post by mack
Apple's free development tools will only result in fewer choices for
developers. Microsoft understands this. Apple forgot.

Oh please. Ninety-nine percent of Windows C/C++ developers use MSVC++,
period.

Wade

[Jonathan Hoyle]

Post by Wade Williams
Oh please. Ninety-nine percent of Windows C/C++ developers use MSVC++,
period.

99% ?!? Where do you get THAT figure?? I know a number of Borland
C++ Builder developers, and I understand there are other tools out
there as well (not being a Windows programmer, I don't know anything
about them). Something that extreme would certainly be newsworthy. I
tried to do a Google search to see if there was an article on the
relative marketshare of C++ tools to substantiate this claim of your
but was unable to find anything.

So, do you like make this stuff up as you go along or what?

Jonathan Hoyle
Gene Codes Corporation

[Wade Williams]

Post by Jonathan Hoyle
99% ?!? Where do you get THAT figure?? I know a number of Borland
C++ Builder developers, and I understand there are other tools out
there as well (not being a Windows programmer, I don't know anything
about them). Something that extreme would certainly be newsworthy. I
tried to do a Google search to see if there was an article on the
relative marketshare of C++ tools to substantiate this claim of your
but was unable to find anything.
So, do you like make this stuff up as you go along or what?

OK Jonathan, let me rephrase:

Without giving specific numbers, it is widely known that Microsoft's
tools are the dominant tools in the Windows marketplace. While other
tools exist, it is reasonably certain that they account for only a
minor percentage of the overall market.

Is that better?

My point is, if you survey 100 Windows developers, you're gong to find
a huge percentage use the Microsoft tools.

Wade

[Jonathan Hoyle]

Post by Wade Williams
Without giving specific numbers, it is widely known that Microsoft's
tools are the dominant tools in the Windows marketplace. While other
tools exist, it is reasonably certain that they account for only a
minor percentage of the overall market.
Is that better?
My point is, if you survey 100 Windows developers, you're gong to find
a huge percentage use the Microsoft tools.
Wade

Sorry, Wade, I clearly missed your point. Didn't mean to jump down
your throat on the Microsoft thing, as I guess I misinterpreted what
you were intending to say. Mea Culpa.

As for your point, yes Microsoft owns the majority marketshare in some
Windows programming languages (C++ and Basic being the more obvious
ones), although an insignificant or non-significant player in others
(such as Java). There's nothing wrong with Apple being a primary
developer on some fronts, such as their own Objective C work.
However, what is not good is when Apple (or Microsoft) intends to kill
off any other development environment, such as CodeWarrior or
RealBasic.

Regards,

Jonathan Hoyle

[Wade Williams]

Post by Jonathan Hoyle
However, what is not good is when Apple (or Microsoft) intends to kill
off any other development environment, such as CodeWarrior or
RealBasic.

I would agree. However, I don't see how Apple is trying to kill
anything.

If they wanted to do that, they'd write their own compilers which were
the best available from any company. Then others that didn't have
Apple's knowledge couldn't compete, and it would make no sense for
developer to use any compiler other than Apple's. Instead, they use
gcc, which has a whole host of problems (many of which Apple is slowly
correcting).

In short, I think Apple is trying to put out a quality product that
developers can use if they don't find other solutions useable for some
reason.

Anyone that wants to compete can simply build a better product.
Honestly, up to Xcode 1.2, that hasn't been terribly hard. I
understand 1.5 and 2.0 are far better and raise the bar. Those
companies that missed their chance to leap ahead while Xcode was fairly
awful ought to be kicking themselves.

Wade

[Thorrsten Froehlich]

Post by Wade Williams

Post by Jonathan Hoyle
However, what is not good is when Apple (or Microsoft) intends to kill
off any other development environment, such as CodeWarrior or
RealBasic.

I would agree. However, I don't see how Apple is trying to kill
anything.
If they wanted to do that, they'd write their own compilers which were
the best available from any company. Then others that didn't have
Apple's knowledge couldn't compete, and it would make no sense for
developer to use any compiler other than Apple's. Instead, they use
gcc, which has a whole host of problems (many of which Apple is slowly
correcting).
In short, I think Apple is trying to put out a quality product that
developers can use if they don't find other solutions useable for some
reason.
Anyone that wants to compete can simply build a better product.
Honestly, up to Xcode 1.2, that hasn't been terribly hard. I
understand 1.5 and 2.0 are far better and raise the bar. Those
companies that missed their chance to leap ahead while Xcode was fairly
awful ought to be kicking themselves.

Well, I think the message
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-05/msg00366.html>, also not an
official statement from Apple summarises that it is indeed the goal of
the XCode developers at Apple to drive CodeWarrior out of the market.

And if any of us think it is rational or not to use gcc as a basis to
develop something better than CodeWarrior, well, it hardly matters
what we think because Apple obviously does think gcc can be hacked to
be better than CodeWarrior. This will only hurt CodeWarrior, and
honestly, I think it already has -- with *every* new .1 release of Mac
OS X we needed a new major version of CodeWarrior to get a stable tool
again. This problem did not exist with every .1 release of Mac OS, and
at least I certainly do *not* blame Metrowerks alone for this...

Thorsten

[b***@hotmail.com]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

[Thorrsten Froehlich]

Post by b***@hotmail.com

Post by Thorrsten Froehlich
Well, I think the message
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-05/msg00366.html>, also not an
official statement from Apple summarises that it is indeed the goal of
the XCode developers at Apple to drive CodeWarrior out of the market.

This message is evidence of competition, which Metrowerks welcomed.
Only Metrowerks has control if CW is driven out of the market. Period.

Sure, if you have two products and one is free and almost equal to the
US$300 product, which one would you buy? or better, which one would
your management buy for you? "Period."

Thorsten

[b***@hotmail.com]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

[MW Ron]

Post by Thorrsten Froehlich
Sure, if you have two products and one is free and almost equal to the
US$300 product, which one would you buy? or better, which one would
your management buy for you? "Period."

Metrowerks has always been up against Free tools and has always won the
marketshare. We believe that providing support, better tools and ease
of use that cost of free tools far exceeds the cost of using CodeWarrior.

Ron

[Miro Jurisic]

We believe that providing support, better tools and ease of use that cost of
free tools far exceeds the cost of using CodeWarrior.

In my experience, MW support is about as good as Apple's, but that's because I
have direct access to engineers on both sides.

In my experience, some of your tools are better than Apple's. Some aren't.

In my experience, your ease of use is no longer superior.

In my opinion, it's getting harder to justify the cost of CW on Mac OS.
Certainly, it seems like using Xcode with MW compilers and STL is an interesting
thing to try, because it gives you best of both worlds.

meeroh

[Miro Jurisic]

Post by Thorrsten Froehlich
Well, I think the message
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-05/msg00366.html>, also not an
official statement from Apple summarises that it is indeed the goal of
the XCode developers at Apple to drive CodeWarrior out of the market.

I am not sure how you managed to make that leap. Matt says two things: one, when
Apple's product is better than someone else's, Apple feels it's OK to recommend
Apple's products; two, Apple's goal is to make their products better. IMNSHO,
anything else would be retarded -- would you prefer them to work on a product
but _not_ try to improve it? Or have a good product but _not_ tell anyone about
it?

It's not Apple's fault that MW has barely made any improvements to the IDE for
years. They integrated the profiler (but the profiler gives skewed results on
preemptive OSes), and they added the Package pane to the project. We are still
waiting for code outlining, text-based project format, better target management,
etc.

I understand the "Oh, but Mac OS X was a moving target and we had to spend so
much time just catching up" argument. I agree. However, I don't see MW moving
any faster on any other platform, so I don't think that's sufficient to explain
all of their inertia.

I don't know enough about the management to be sure, but the little things I do
know tell me that MW Mac people (including Ron) are overworked and
underappreciated. That, in my opinion, is the more plausible explanation for the
decline of the product (or the diminished growth).

meeroh

[jean-yves hervé]

Post by Miro Jurisic
It's not Apple's fault that MW has barely made any improvements to the IDE for
years. They integrated the profiler (but the profiler gives skewed results on
preemptive OSes), and they added the Package pane to the project. We are still
waiting for code outlining, text-based project format, better target management,
etc.

On the other, it is Apple's decision to post virtually all new code
samples on their site with XCode projects and no CW project files.
And they started doing so back when CW was used by 90% of Mac developers.

jyh.

[MW Ron]

Post by jean-yves hervé

Post by Miro Jurisic
It's not Apple's fault that MW has barely made any improvements to the IDE for
years. They integrated the profiler (but the profiler gives skewed results on
preemptive OSes), and they added the Package pane to the project. We are still
waiting for code outlining, text-based project format, better target management,
etc.

On the other, it is Apple's decision to post virtually all new code
samples on their site with XCode projects and no CW project files.
And they started doing so back when CW was used by 90% of Mac developers.

We should have provided conversion tools this was our fault. Not
Apple's.

Ron

[m***@excite.com]

Post by MW Ron

Post by jean-yves hervé

Post by Miro Jurisic
It's not Apple's fault that MW has barely made any improvements to the IDE for
years. They integrated the profiler (but the profiler gives skewed results on
preemptive OSes), and they added the Package pane to the project. We are still
waiting for code outlining, text-based project format, better target management,
etc.

On the other, it is Apple's decision to post virtually all new code
samples on their site with XCode projects and no CW project files.
And they started doing so back when CW was used by 90% of Mac developers.

We should have provided conversion tools this was our fault. Not
Apple's.
Ron

Plus, how can CW be called a cross development tool when CW-Palm was
dropped for Mac. Isn't production work done with CW at MW?

Miles

[Jonathan Hoyle]

Post by Miro Jurisic
I don't know enough about the management to be sure, but the little things I do
know tell me that MW Mac people (including Ron) are overworked and
underappreciated. That, in my opinion, is the more plausible explanation for the
decline of the product (or the diminished growth).

I would agree with this assessment as well. It would be nice to
believe that FreeScale fully appreciates the value Metrowerks brings,
but it's certainly not the vibe I'm getting. I would certainly like
to know what drove Greg Dow out.

Both Apple and Metrowerks share some responsibility for this:

APPLE: They have blocked Metrowerks from stage presence at WWDC and
pretty much pushes the agenda that "you need to get off Metrowerks and
move to XCode." Declaring war on your third party developers is
truly a bad thing for the users, and it's very hard to compete with
the creators of the Operating System itself.

METROWERKS: FreeScale, or whoever makes these decisions, chose not to
attend WWDC at all this year. This is the #1 "shoot yourself in the
foot" decisions that Metrowerks has made (or was made for them), as it
contributed to the widespread assumption that Metrowerks is not long
in the Mac development arena.

Lack of information, not announcing new products, no timeline for
product development, etc. has also strongly contributed to the F.U.D.
(I'm not saying that this part is Metrowerks' fault, given the legal
restrictions from the FreeScale spinoff, only that it has contributed
to the problem.) Hopefully AdHoc will help turn this around.

Jonathan Hoyle
Gene Codes Corporation

[Thorrsten Froehlich]

Post by Miro Jurisic

Post by Thorrsten Froehlich
Well, I think the message
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-05/msg00366.html>, also not an
official statement from Apple summarises that it is indeed the goal of
the XCode developers at Apple to drive CodeWarrior out of the market.

I am not sure how you managed to make that leap. Matt says two things: one, when
Apple's product is better than someone else's, Apple feels it's OK to recommend
Apple's products; two, Apple's goal is to make their products better. IMNSHO,
anything else would be retarded -- would you prefer them to work on a product
but _not_ try to improve it? Or have a good product but _not_ tell anyone about
it?

Well, certainly not from that one message. But the other messages from
other Apple developers strongly suggest that someone inside Apple
wants thier QuickTime developers switch to gcc and that is what they
need good inline assembly for. Now, if Apple fully switches to a
pretty much CW-free world internally, that certainly does not make the
job of MW easier.

Post by Miro Jurisic
I understand the "Oh, but Mac OS X was a moving target and we had to spend so
much time just catching up" argument. I agree. However, I don't see MW moving
any faster on any other platform, so I don't think that's sufficient to explain
all of their inertia.

If you look at the competition in the embedded world, they hardly have
reason to provide a better IDE...

Post by Miro Jurisic
I don't know enough about the management to be sure, but the little things I do
know tell me that MW Mac people (including Ron) are overworked and
underappreciated. That, in my opinion, is the more plausible explanation for the
decline of the product (or the diminished growth).

Agreed, but it is also strange that Apple officially seems to have so
little interest in supporting CW. On the other hand, MW managers see
they are "no wanted" by the company defining the platform, i.e. like
on last years WWDC and they also see no growth potential there, it is
not really surprising they decide to rather move elsewhere. Even more
so inside a company that heavily expands its embedded portfolio.

Thorsten

[MW Ron]

Post by Miro Jurisic
It's not Apple's fault that MW has barely made any improvements to the IDE for
years. They integrated the profiler (but the profiler gives skewed results on
preemptive OSes), and they added the Package pane to the project. We are still
waiting for code outlining, text-based project format, better target management,
etc.

Metrowerks is aware of these issues, and is addressing them, pehpaps I
can say more mid August.

Post by Miro Jurisic
I understand the "Oh, but Mac OS X was a moving target and we had to spend so
much time just catching up" argument. I agree. However, I don't see MW moving
any faster on any other platform, so I don't think that's sufficient to explain
all of their inertia.

We have made major changes in other platforms in compiler technology,
debugging and other tools. Our IDE is lagging, if that was what you
meant, yes.

Post by Miro Jurisic
I don't know enough about the management to be sure, but the little things I do
know tell me that MW Mac people (including Ron) are overworked and
underappreciated. That, in my opinion, is the more plausible explanation for the
decline of the product (or the diminished growth).

I don't feel underappreciated. In case anyone is interested I was
promoted oversee all of the desktop tool support last week.

Ron

[Andy Bettis]

[snip]

Post by Miro Jurisic
I don't know enough about the management to be sure, but the little things I
do know tell me that MW Mac people (including Ron) are overworked and
underappreciated. That, in my opinion, is the more plausible explanation for
the decline of the product (or the diminished growth).

I don't feel underappreciated. In case anyone is interested I was
promoted oversee all of the desktop tool support last week.

Hearty congratulations. For my money you're worth the CW price on your
own.

Rev. Andy

[Jonathan Hoyle]

Post by Andy Bettis

Post by MW Ron
I don't feel underappreciated. In case anyone is interested I was
promoted oversee all of the desktop tool support last week.

Hearty congratulations. For my money you're worth the CW price on your
own.

My congratulations as well, Ron! A well-earned promotion. I hope
there was extra $$$ in it for you too.


Jonathan Hoyle
Gene Codes corporation

[Thorrsten Froehlich]

Post by MW Ron
I don't feel underappreciated. In case anyone is interested I was
promoted oversee all of the desktop tool support last week.

Congratulations!

Thorsten

PS: If I was pesimistic I would now ask if MW fired everybody else
doing desktop support and you are now alone doing all the additional
work... ;-)

[MW Ron]

Post by Thorrsten Froehlich
PS: If I was pesimistic I would now ask if MW fired everybody else
doing desktop support and you are now alone doing all the additional
work... ;-)

no I am not alone. :)