
Chameleon - UIKit for Mac development - sahillavingia
http://chameleonproject.org/
======
shaggyfrog
I really don't get the point of this at all. When I've ported iPhone apps to
iPad (i.e. make them Universal) there was always little-to-no work to do on
the underlying model classes, but always a lot of work to do designing new
views since the UI model is so much different (mainly from the bigger screen).
Same deal with Mac OS X, except the UI changes are even more extreme. If I
want my iOS app to work on a Mac's screen, I'll have to spend the time to
redesign the UI. Which is fine, so how is this thing going to save me any time
at all, really?

~~~
glhaynes
It could be useful for lots of folks that know UIKit inside and out but
haven't dealt with AppKit before.

~~~
shaggyfrog
But a Mac's interface is not an iOS interface. There are different constraints
and different best practices, and sometimes completely different widgets. To
make a decent UI, you have to understand the native platform.

~~~
gte910h
Sometimes perfect is the enemy of the good.

The ability of a stopgap measure such as this is a good way to let established
iOS players test the Mac waters without a huge investment.

------
mhd
Right after opening, the app store seemed flooded with programs that had UIs
that clearly showed their iOS heritage. And I've yet to see a singly one where
this actually is good (no, Twitter for Mac isn't one). Going further along
this road doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Yes, you'll save some time. But
unless you're making a throwaway, gimmicky application, you'd better invest
some time in creating a new GUI that'll better integrate into the desktop.
This time, most likely you're not the only thing on the screen.

~~~
gte910h
There is huge value in "throwaway" applications.

The decision to spend considerable time to even test the Mac market is a huge
barrier to entry. This would be a good stepping stone to prove that there is
an audience there.

~~~
nupark
Providing a poor quality application doesn't necessarily tell you anything
about the audience a proper port would have, it can be significantly damaging
to your brand, and is a waste of press attention.

~~~
gte910h
Doesn't _necessarily tell you anything_. But it can. If you can find for 4-5k
that "Yeah, people will buy stuff on mac like our iOS stuff, pull out the
whole hog" it makes an excellent business case.

Also, not everything is brand based. For many things, removing the old thing
from the store completely obliterates all mention ever made of it (as it
wasn't the sort of thing that gets press attention anyhow).

Not everyone is selling apps that make 6-7 figure incomes. Many people are
selling multiples that rake in 4-5 and doing quite nicely with that, and with
no marketing.

------
bonaldi
Am pretty excited about this -- I have an iOS app that would work great as
effectively a desktop accessory on the Mac.

Unfortunately the UIKit implementation isn't there yet -- there's no NIB
loading, table views aren't editable, etc -- though what is done is very
impressive. Will be watching this one.

------
christo16
Definitely a cool, will make porting iOS apps easier. However, a lot of the
ideas in UIKit are meant for a touchscreen and wont translate well.

~~~
joshaber
Sure but it's all in how you use it. Not everything comes over cleanly but a
lot does. AppKit is old and crufty and doesn't play well with Core Animation.
Since Chameleon is Core Animation-based, it's already off to a better start
than AppKit.

------
willstraf
Everyone here is missing the point, this is not exactly meant for direct ports
of iOS applications to Mac OS X. For example, look at Twitter for Mac and
Twitterific in the Mac App Store, they aren't direct / touch-based ports, but
rather, they take cues from their iOS counterparts.

------
Samuel_Michon
Fascinating idea, but as also mentioned in the article: _won't Apple do
something similar?_

There are way more iOS developers than there are Mac developers, and many more
flock to the iOS platform every day. Surely, Apple has some incentive to make
it easy for iOS developers to make software for the Mac.

From the article:

    
    
      Apple already has a version of UIKit that runs on the Mac: 
      every time you launch the iOS Simulator, 
      you're using that framework.

~~~
joshaber
I know right? You'd think Apple would do this themselves but for some reason
they haven't show any interest. Especially weird considering AppKit is so old
and crufty.

------
pohl
_Of course, Apple executives may change their priorities when they see how
many developers are interested in a tool like Chameleon. Many people have
speculated that the popularity of the Jailbreak SDK accelerated the release of
the original iPhone SDK. It would be great if history repeated itself._

Great, so they're trying to position themselves to take credit for what may be
inevitable.

~~~
ugh
Aren’t you way too cynical?

~~~
pohl
I guess i should say: Chameleon looks great, and I applaud their work. I just
pulled the only quotation that peeved me.

In regards to your question, cynicism involves a belief about someone's
motivations, and I'm only going off of what they have put in black & white:
that it would be so awesome if they were able to repeat the most spectacularly
dubious credit-taking in iPhone history. I realize that those 4 months between
the availability of the first iPhone and the announcement of the official SDK
were agonizing and suspenseful, but I don't believe for a second that the most
notoriously secretive tech company didn't already have an SDK in the works. If
I were iconfactory, I wouldn't labor to connect myself with that event.

