Yes, I finally decided to take the plunge and buy it in December, after a few years using Eclipse. Never going back.
I used to be a big Eclipse proponent, but I must say I don't understand the "I want free tooling" mentality anymore. If it's a tool you are going to use every day, the cost is nothing compared to the productivity gains.
I love emacs and use it every day. And I'm glad that it's free software. But if Apple offered to keep my Mac's emacs install up to date for $4.99 I would pay in a heartbeat.
I have to periodically check whether my version is out of date. When it is, I have to find the download URL, click on it, remember to come back when the package has downloaded, and run the installer. I have to do this on all of my machines.
Sure, this isn't all that much work. But $4.99 isn't that much money, either.
If paying for the software were easy for everyone who has a Mac everywhere, I would feel a little bit uncomfortable, but that would be all. My point is that this move may effectively shut off parts of the world that have no access to the Mac App Store.
Don't get me wrong: I like Apple and used Apple computers since my early days as an Apple II developer. My main computers run Linux, but I like to keep a Mac around. What worries me is that this move actually hurts Apple a lot more than we may realize at first.
Just as a side note that nicely illustrates how politics may interfere with this, when I got my first Apple II (a II+) it was actually a clone (http://orbita.starmedia.com/~cobit2/propagandas/exato_ago85....). At that time, importing computers to Brazil was prohibited. If I wanted to travel abroad, law mandated strict limits on how much money I could carry and buying an Apple II directly would be impossible. There were alternatives, smugglers that could bring almost anything you wanted, but then it would be a crime...
Just curious, I'm assuming that switching to Linux to get automatic updates for all packages would cost you more than $5 in pain in other areas. Is that assumption correct?
I switched from windows to linux as my main OS a little while back. Currently, I run only linux, but I have previously run a dual boot setup with windows 7. That was just a speedbump.
Now, if I want to update anything I type the following in the command line:
sudo apt-get udpdate
sudo apt-get upgrade
... And that is all. Unless you meant some other kind of pain and suffering?
I was referring to the pleasure (in the utilitarian sense) of apt-get being offset by the pain of not having MacOS-specific software and features. I am a Linux user myself, but recognize that not everyone's computing needs are met by it (just as my needs are not met by Windows or MacOS).
I use both Linux and Mac and I can assure you the Mac side is not completely painless. I prefer Linux for work, but, then, I don't develop for Macs.
It's, of course, next to impossible to develop Mac software without a Mac and, since we are talking about Xcode, access to a modern Mac is a necessary condition.
Actually you could download Xcode (and the iOS SDKs) for free from Apple's website. It would only run on your $129/$29 OS, but technically you didn't have to use the shipped copy ever.
You can download download Xcode 3.x free if you log in at connect.apple.com, or on the xcode page on developer.apple.com you click on the "Looking for Xcode 3" link:
This isn't the end of the world, it is not like now you no longer have access to the development tools. I wonder like a lot of people if this has to do with tax laws.
> it is not like now you no longer have access
> to the development tools
XCode 3 may still work now, but what does the future hold? Will it get updates? Or will it slowly become obsolete?
If it just slowly dies, then this is a very shrewd move by Apple because the pain (i.e. "I have to pay to get any dev tools") comes some time in the future and the people can dismiss the nay-sayers right now with, "but you can still get X Code 3 for free!" If Apple were to immediately pull XCode 3, and all access to dev tools was pay-only, then it would be a lot easier for more people to side with the people decrying this move.
Many other people are also suggesting, and I would agree with them that come OS X Lion time Xcode will once again be shipped on the media that the OS comes on.
I don't know what the future holds, I don't work at Apple, and if I did I am pretty sure I wouldn't be allowed to tell you.
Sure we can speculate at this point, honestly I think that Xcode 3 has run its course and that Xcode 4 is the future.
Xcode 4 being priced the way it is may be for tax reasons, Xcode 4 may be shipped with OS X Lion, Xcode 4 may later on be offered as a $50 package on the Mac App Store. We don't know. For now I hope, and tend to agree with people that Xcode 4 will be bundled with OS X Lion and at that point will be free once more.
Yes. Because Xcode has been free for 10 years it's taken for granted that Xcode is free, and because OSX's base install does contain any C compilers, it's in the Xcode install.
> OSX's base install does contain any C compilers, it's in the Xcode install.
I think you ment to say "Doesn't" instead of does. This nullifies any argument that GCC and the Gnu Toolchain are free to download, if in a year from now the OS you buy doesn't contain GCC in the base install in order to download and compile GCC.
I don't know a ton about gcc internals, but I imagine it probably wouldn't be overly difficult to create an installer that puts a precompiled gcc into /usr/bin.
Flash Builder: $699.00
TextMate: $56.00
Coda: $99.00
BBedit: $99.99
Xcode 4: $4.99