

Does making development non-trivial (e.g., iphone apps) result in fewer but better apps? - amichail

Also, perhaps this is why people make money on these iphone apps?  There's definitely a non-trivial barrier to entry.<p>If all of this is true, then what incentive does a company have for improving its SDK in a way other than adding new APIs?
======
radu_floricica
It's a fallacy as old as assembly. "In the old days, men were men and
compilers a thing of the future". Better tools are better, period. No amount
of side effects will change this.

~~~
amichail
Could you elaborate? Don't you see a benefit in keeping less experienced
programmers out?

~~~
radu_floricica
Well, first we should have a reason to believe keeping them out is a good
thing.

But my point is that even if it would be some advantage, the overall cost is
too great. Having a bad API and a steep learning curve is a bad thing for
everybody, good or bad. Even an experienced programmer would do more in the
same amount of time if he had better tools.

Case in point: most good programmers these days work in high level languages
like ruby, lisp, python etc. They enjoy diversity, and they enjoy power. What
advantage would be if you forced them to write C++? They would still be better
(maybe even more so...) then the average, but the total productivity would be
way lower.

