Are macs "idea" for programming

[Knight']

GVIM / GCC :p

[Stigmata]

no api :rolleyes:

[aristotle-dude]

Well, developers go where the money is. Right now that money is on Windows, and on Unix/Linux. Not Mac. And even if a small fraction of Windows software is written with .net, its still more software then the mac has written for it. Plus starting with longhorn almost every single Windows app will be .net.

585751325[/snapback]

How did MSFT triumph over Apple? With backwards compatibility. Now MS is turning their back on all of those developers and forcing everyone one to use managed code. That could be a fatal mistake for them.

Do you think Game developers are going to be willing accept the degraded performance?

The money is on linux? Really? Tell that to MSFT's MBU and Adobe then since they derive a significant portion of their income from their mac versions of their programs and neither company has sold any software for linux. Mac is not BSD/unix? Do guys ever bother to click on the links I provide with regard to linux/*nix software on OS X or does remaining ignorant of the truth make it easier to troll?

In case you are confused, I'm talking about desktop software here.

[username();]

How did MSFT triumph over Apple? With backwards compatibility. Now MS is turning their back on all of those developers and forcing everyone one to use managed code. That could be a fatal mistake for them.

Do you think Game developers are going to be willing accept the degraded performance?

The money is on linux? Really? Tell that to MSFT's MBU and Adobe then since they derive a significant portion of their income from their mac versions of their programs and neither company has sold any software for linux. Mac is not BSD/unix? Do guys ever bother to click on the links I provide with regard to linux/*nix software on OS X or does remaining ignorant of the truth make it easier to troll?

In case you are confused, I'm talking about desktop software here.

585751361[/snapback]

Yes, ok Apple has a Unix core, but remember there ripping you off on the hardware. So its not that appealing for large corporations for the most part compared to x86. And ok, there is a relatively small market for Mac software. So I?m guilty for a little exaggeration, I thought we were all mature here.

How is Microsoft turning its back on legacy code? A program written for Windows 95 10 years ago still runs under Longhorn. You can keep running legacy software.

[aristotle-dude]

Yes, ok Apple has a Unix core, but remember there ripping you off on the hardware. So its not that appealing for large corporations for the most part compared to x86. And ok, there is a relatively small market for Mac software. So I?m guilty for a little exaggeration, I thought we were all mature here.

How is Microsoft turning its back on legacy code? A program written for Windows 95 10 years ago still runs under Longhorn. You can keep running legacy software.

585751378[/snapback]

Large corporations don't care about X86 vs. PPC like home users do. They are not interested in game compatibility either. What they do care about is TCO and being able to run their existing software. They also want to have a stable platform to develop on for the future.

Many of theses large corporations are not aware of the options they have. For example, they could switch to cheap mac minis and affordable Xserves and keep around some Citrix servers to run legacy windows software.

Of course, they could do the same thing with X86 boxes and linux or FreeBSD but they would be left with local machines with commercial software to run locally.

Taking windows out of the local machine equation would result in much lower TCO and support costs.

[username();]

Taking windows out of the local machine equation would result in much lower TCO and support costs.

585751433[/snapback]

Supporting a series of Windows PC's is so much cheaper that you can buy the Windows OS, and its still cheaper then on open source, or mac.

[aristotle-dude]

Supporting a series of Windows PC's is so much cheaper that you can buy the Windows OS, and its still cheaper then on open source, or mac.

585751449[/snapback]

Bull****. I used to work in support and sys admin and I'm well aware of the licensing cost of windows, windows upgrades an Windows server licenses. Take all those cost + virus scanners + SQL server licensing + Exchange licensing (including another server to compact the datastore offline to minimize downtime) + cost of salaries for several sys admin & support staff. How can you say that is cheaper than migrating away from windows slowly with Citrix and using OS X + open source software? You would need half the staff. Training costs for IT staff would be minimal compared to the savings of licensing fees.

*edit* I just realised, you are probably talking from experience with a small company. I work for a multi-national organisation.

[username();]

Bull****. I used to work in support and sys admin and I'm well aware of the licensing cost of windows, windows upgrades an Windows server licenses. Take all those cost + virus scanners + SQL server licensing + Exchange licensing (including another server to compact the datastore offline to minimize downtime) + cost of salaries for several sys admin & support staff. How can you say that is cheaper than migrating away from windows slowly with Citrix and using OS X + open source software? You would need half the staff. Training costs for IT staff would be minimal compared to the savings of licensing fees.

*edit* I just realised, you are probably talking from experience with a small company. I work for a multi-national organisation.

585751507[/snapback]

Well, buying Mac hardware isn?t cheap (buying any new hardware isn?t cheap for any company, large or small), nor is migrating a completely new set of server software from the older ones.

Also, I would like to see an open source DB that is free that can rival either Oracle or MS SQL Server. Truth is, mySQL doesn?t match some of the features real software deployments need. mySQL is good, but its not MS SQL Server or Oracle good.

Furthermore, please point out a mail server as good as Exchange that is as easy to administer.

[macssuck]

So let?s look at how we make a form with a web browser in .net:

	class myWebBrowser
	{
 ?[System.STAThread]
 ?static void Main(string[] args)
 ?{
 ?	System.Windows.Forms.Form myWebBrowserForm = new System.Windows.Forms.Form();
 ?	myWebBrowserForm.Controls.Add(new AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser());
 ?	myWebBrowserForm.ShowDialog();
 ?}
	}

Tell me, how do you do the same in that little code, and with that ease in Cocoa?

585751234[/snapback]

First I thought ?Wow, that's not very much of a challenge.? But then I thought ?what good is just a browser display on a form?? So I started adding things:

• Back/Foward history (the "<" and ">" buttons)
  
• Reload page button ("R" button)
  
• Stop loading button ("S" button)
  
• Text-size control ("+" and "-" buttons)
  
• An Address bar (so you can actually use it to go places
  
• Printing ("P") button.
  
• Faxing
  
• Inline spell checking
  
• iPhoto integration (copy pages into iPhoto library for when you're viewing photos)
  
• Google Integration (right click any selected word to search in google)
  
• Dictionary Lookup (right click any word to find definition in OED)
  
• Text-to-speech synthesis, so you don't have to actually read the page
  
• Full clip-board support
  
• Full drag/drop support
  

So I made all that, anIt took me no lines of code, as in zero, none, notta, nile, notta, nil.

Then I used that browser to make this post.

EDIT:

Here's a screenshot, just in case you're curious.

[username();]

First I thought ?Wow, that's not very much of a challenge.? But then I thought ?what good is just a browser display on a form?? So I started adding things:

• Back/Foward history (the "<" and ">" buttons)
  
• Reload page button ("R" button)
  
• Stop loading button ("S" button)
  
• Text-size control ("+" and "-" buttons)
  
• Printing ("P") button.
  
• Faxing
  
• Inline spell checking
  
• iPhoto integration (copy pages into iPhoto library for when you're viewing photos)
  
• Google Integration (right click any selected word to search in google)
  
• Dictionary Lookup (right click any word to find definition in OED)
  
• Text-to-speech synthesis, so you don't have to actually read the page
  
• Full clip-board support
  
• Full drag/drop support
  

So I made all that, and you knoIt took me no lines of code, as in zero, none, notta, nil nil.

Then I used that browser to make this post.

585751570[/snapback]

You do know that it takes code to make the UI. So if I wanted to add all those things, it would add a few lines.

[aristotle-dude]

Well, buying Mac hardware isn?t cheap? (buying any new hardware isn?t cheap for any company, large or small), nor is migrating a completely new set of server software from the older ones.

Also, I would like to see an open source DB that is free that can rival either Oracle or MS SQL Server. Truth is, mySQL doesn?t match some of the features real software deployments need. mySQL is good, but its not MS SQL Server or Oracle good.

Furthermore, please point out a mail server as good as Exchange that is as easy to administer.

585751535[/snapback]

If you think Exchange is easy to admin, then you have not used much of it's functionality, had data store corruption or have you reached the data store size limit.

Most companies would be better served with a standard IMAP mail server combined with LDAP directory services.

Ease of administration should be of a lower priority than ease of maintenance data store corruption is not fun. OS X Server has a number of GUI tools for administration of various network services.

Here are the mail services including a webmail portal::

http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/mail_services.html

It's built on open source but they provide a nice GUI to administer it.

http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/

http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/tiger/

Mac OS X Server

(Unlimited-Client)

$999.00 - really cheap.

or $499.00 for a 10 client server.

[macssuck]

You do know that the UI does count as code?

585751574[/snapback]

Cocoa UI objects are not generated by code. Interface Builder creates 'live' objects and the archives them to disk. The objects are restored (unarchived) when the program runs, which is one of the significant differences between Cocoa and .Net Forms, WinAPI, GTK, Swing, etc. But you knew that.

I didn't need to write any code to do any of that and neither did my IDE, it just create the objects in interface builder by drag/dropping them.

Aside form the .Nib (which is the archived objects) here are the only other files in that project and their contents.

main.m

#import <Cocoa/Cocoa.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { return NSApplicationMain(argc, ?(const char **) argv); }

browser_prefix.pch>

#ifdef __OBJC__
 ? ?#import <Cocoa/Cocoa.h>
#endif

That's /everything/ in that project aside from the files that store the saved settings for my IDE window positions, visible pallets, compiler settings, etc.

(To be fair, I had a little help from a mac programmer who pointed me in the right direction)

So if I wanted to add all those things, it would add a few lines.

Then why don't you get to that and come back to us with a total "lines of code count". I've never been able to imitate Cocoas "for free" functionality with .Net without dozens of lines of code, but maybe you're a better .Net programmer than I am.

Edited April 10, 2005 by macssuck

[aristotle-dude]

LOL Yeah, I made a simple browser a while back in a matter of minutes. I also remember talking a copy of Safari and using interface builder to de-metalize it with a couple mouse clicks by editing its nib files. Extensibility and inheritance two of the cornerstones of OO development and OS X supports them very well as did its predecessor (NeXTStep).

[jamend]

I'm sorry but multitasking on XP sucks. They f*cked it up trying to bring game compatibility to NT. I preferred Windows 2000 Pro as it was not so likely to allow one process to hog the entire system. I speak from "real" experience with MSFT tools at work.

585751227[/snapback]

Multitasking did not change between 2000 and XP...

So you are saying that you cannot write a C/C++ application with the included GCC? :rolleyes:

You are confusing Objective C (language) with the Cocoa API. If you have your heat set on C/C++, you can program against the BSD subsystem or against the Carbon API (for GUI apps).

Really? What about Real Basic?

They are even offering as free upgrade for windows VB developers.

http://www.realsoftware.com/realbasic/vb6/index.php

Now granted, they are offering that for the windows version but all those VB 6 developers could be targeting windows, mac and linux users with products developed with it.

Do you honestly see a lot of desktop software being developed with .NET anytime soon?

MS could lose some developer mindshare.

585751314[/snapback]

No, I never said that you can't code for Macs with C/C++, but Objective C is what is used most, and if you want support with developing for the Mac then it's most likely to be in Objective C. Also, there are many consumer applications and even more enterprise applications developed with .NET, although I've never seen anything done with Real Basic before.

[macssuck]

but Objective C is what is used most, and if you want support with developing for the Mac then it's most likely to be in Objective C.

Cocoa and Java as well as Carbon and C++ are both supported APIs on Mac OS X. Microsoft, Apple, Macromedia and Adobe have been using the second for their 'flagship' applications on Mac OS for years and show no signs of changing.

Also, there are many consumer applications and even more enterprise applications developed with .NET, although I've never seen anything done with Real Basic before.

585751725[/snapback]

Nice argumentum ad populum.

More applications being developed with .Net languages than Objective C or RealBasic doesn't prove that .Net is a better API any more than a billion people living in China or India proves that America is a crumby place to live.

[jamend]

More applications being developed with .Net languages than Objective C or RealBasic doesn't prove that .Net is a better API any more than a billion people living in China or India proves that America is a crumby place to live.

585751765[/snapback]

Thanks for not taking context or what my actual point was into consideration :rolleyes:

[aristotle-dude]

Multitasking did not change between 2000 and XP...

No, I never said that you can't code for Macs with C/C++, but Objective C is what is used most, and if you want support with developing for the Mac then it's most likely to be in Objective C. Also, there are many consumer applications and even more enterprise applications developed with .NET, although I've never seen anything done with Real Basic before.

585751725[/snapback]

Multitasking did indeed change for the worse in XP. You can choose to not believe me but I have experienced it many times at work as a developer/DBA.

:angry:

[macssuck]

Thanks for not taking context or what my actual point was into consideration :rolleyes:

585751776[/snapback]

You're right, the second part of my comment was based on something taken out of context and I withdraw it.

The first part was of my comment was correct and I stand by it.

[jamend]

You're right, the second part of my comment was based on something taken out of context and I withdraw it.

The first part was of my comment was correct and I stand by it.

585751823[/snapback]

Let's try this again...

I was responding to this specifically:

Do you honestly see a lot of desktop software being developed with .NET anytime soon?

585751314[/snapback]

All I said was that I think .NET is very popular, and that in contrast, Real Basic (which he was comparing .NET to) isn't. I didn't make any claims to whether their popularity made one or the other better (actually, that's what he seemed to be inferring).

Multitasking did indeed change for the worse in XP. You can choose to not believe me but I have experienced it many times at work as a developer/DBA.

:angry:

585751808[/snapback]

I choose not to believe it based on my own expierence... don't get too worked up about it eh.

[macssuck]

All I said was that I think .NET is very popular, and that in contrast, Real Basic (which he was comparing .NET to) isn't. I didn't make any claims to whether their popularity made one or the other better (actually, that's what he seemed to be inferring).

585752090[/snapback]

I withdrew that comment, why are you still harping on about it?

The part I stand by is my response to:

No, I never said that you can't code for Macs with C/C++, but Objective C is what is used most, and if you want support with developing for the Mac then it's most likely to be in Objective C.

The major applications for Mac OS X are written in Carbon and C++ including all of Microsoft's, Macromedia's, Adobe's, and Quark's applications. Even the Finder is still a C++ application.

I don't know exactly what you mean by "wanting support", but Apple provides resources to developers regardless of API or language and quality resources are available for both C++ and Objective C programmers.

[Help]

First I thought ?Wow, that's not very much of a challenge.? But then I thought ?what good is just a browser display on a form?? So I started adding things:

• Back/Foward history (the "<" and ">" buttons)
  
• Reload page button ("R" button)
  
• Stop loading button ("S" button)
  
• Text-size control ("+" and "-" buttons)
  
• An Address bar (so you can actually use it to go places
  
• Printing ("P") button.
  
• Faxing
  
• Inline spell checking
  
• iPhoto integration (copy pages into iPhoto library for when you're viewing photos)
  
• Google Integration (right click any selected word to search in google)
  
• Dictionary Lookup (right click any word to find definition in OED)
  
• Text-to-speech synthesis, so you don't have to actually read the page
  
• Full clip-board support
  
• Full drag/drop support
  

So I made all that, and you knoIt took me no lines of code, as in zero, none, notta, nil nil.

Then I used that browser to make this post.

EDIT:

Here's a screenshot, just in case you're curious.

585751570[/snapback]

WOW!! I have never programmed in Cocoa before, (still can't afford a mac) but that is really impressive.

Multitasking did indeed change for the worse in XP. You can choose to not believe me but I have experienced it many times at work as a developer/DBA:angry::angry:

585751808[/snapback]

lol, I am using a slow machine and I definitely concur with that, the only reason that's stopping me from using 2000 is compatibility and slow start-up.

[N45800]

There are also free Visual Studio Express releases for VB.NET, C#, etc., and you can get full C++ compatibility by either getting Microsoft's Services for Unix and using GCC natively or using something third-party like cygwin or MinGW32.

Edit: Also, Macs don't even use C++ for development. They have their own spin-off of C called Objective C. RAD (rapid application development, ex. VB, .NET) is also somewhat lacking on the Mac.

585751105[/snapback]

Macs use C++ as well, but they mainly code in Cocoa, which is a derivative of Objective C which has been a standard since the early 1990's or earlier if I remember correctly.

For simpler applications you can just use AppleScript, which is very easy to learn, even for a non-programmer

See here for some examples and comparison between AppleScript and VB

http://www.xvsxp.com/scriptability/

Here is a sample...

to make your computer speak to you:

VB

var vt = WScript.CreateObject("Speech.VoiceText");

vt.Register("", WScript.ScriptName);

var phrase = "Is there something I should say?";

if ( WScript.Arguments.length )

phrase = WScript.Arguments(0);

vt.Speak(phrase, 1);

while ( vt.IsSpeaking )

WScript.Sleep(100);

WScript.Quit();

AppleScript

say "Hello, World!"

or if you want more options...

say "Good Morning!" using "Good News" saving to "Voice.aiff"

As for an earlier argument on opening a dialog box, here is a dialog displaying the HDs free space in applescript

tell application "Finder" ?to display dialog (free space of startup disk) as string

As compared to VB (from Microsoft's Site)

Set objWmiService = GetObject("winmgmts:")

Set objLogicalDisk = objWmiService.Get("Win32_LogicalDisk.DeviceID='C:'")

WScript.Echo objLogicalDisk.FreeSpace

Tell me again which OS is simpler to code simple apps for.

Supporting a series of Windows PC's is so much cheaper that you can buy the Windows OS, and its still cheaper then on open source, or mac.

585751449[/snapback]

Actually, the price for licensing on XP is very high, as compared to Linux which is free but hard for beginners to administer, and OS X which is 1000$ for an infinite amount of users or 500$ for 10. As well as the fact that many of the features can be installed into OSX Client with a CLI for free (But without the ease of administration).

As an example, QuickTime Streaming Server comes with 10.3 Server, Darwin Streaming Server can be installed on 10.3 and Linux and Windows for free (from Apple) to broadcast Music and Video, but it is controlled through a web interface rather than a native app.

Also, Apple computers usually come with more/better hardware. All Apple computers have built-in FireWire, USB 2, Modem and at least 10/100 ethernet, Every Mac has a Graphics card (very useful, the entire OS is actually rendered in vectors via the graphics card, as compared to bit-mapped XP, and it also stores all windows as a texture on the graphics card to help with some of the 3D effects such as shadowing, transparency, and Expos?. http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/quartzextreme/ for more info) and each computer has at least a CD Burner/DVD Player standard. As well as all of their computers (even desktop machines) can easily get wireless internet (hardware and software wise) or, in the case of laptops, ship with wireless internet built in. I also have to say that the backlit keyboard feature in the 15 and 17 inch PowerBooks is very useful for some of my friends (and my sister) who cannot type.

A little bit off topic here, but it is also really easy to modify the keyboard on the laptops, I took off all my keys on the keyboard (iBook) and put them back on in less then 5 minutes with a house key ( I was trying Dvorak ). My cousin tried to do the same thing on his Sony laptop, he tried the D key first, and is now in need of a working D key for his laptop.

Another thing that was not mentioned is the many additional apps to help debugging and programming on OSX that are installed with Xcode. I counted over 25.

Sample guide to one of the (free) utilities (Shark).

http://developer.apple.com/tools/sharkoptimize.html

As well as some additional information about some of the other tools here...

http://developer.apple.com/tools/

And as a last side topic, I have tried and am fairly literate in C++, Java, and Cocoa (all work fine in OSX) and for me, Cocoa is the simplest as well as the best overall (except the retain count, which is useful and much more powerful than the alternatives, but confusing sometimes). As well as the fact that it is weakly typed and very powerful.

[macssuck]

Macs use C++ as well, but they mainly code in Cocoa which is a derivative of Objective C

Cocoa is a collection of frameworks similar to OpenStep, it can be used with Objective C(++), Java, AppleScript out of the box using xCode. Cocoa is /not/ a programming language.

Objective C is a superset of C just like C++, both aimed to add object oriented programming on top of standard C. Objective C's syntax and functionality was modeled heavily on smalltalk. I'm not sure of the exact evolution of C++'s syntax but it feels a lot like Simula. Your mileage may vary.

For simpler applications you can just use AppleScript, which is very easy to learn, even for a non-programmer

AppleScript is easy to read, hard to write. It's just different enough from English to be confusing when it starts complaining about errors. Once you understand the language it's pretty trivial to bash out something to do simple jobs but then that's true of pretty much every language.

See here for some examples and comparison between AppleScript and VB

WSH is considerably more powerful than AppleScript: it has you dealing directly with the Windows APIs, Applescript limits you to GUI scripting (which is painful) and the functionality exposed by application's applescript dictionaries.

The differences here are due to the different groups these languages are targeting. AppleScript is supposed to be easy and enable users to script simple workflows quickly. WSH is intended to perform more complicated scripting and feels geared towards professional developers (at least that's how the documentation reads to me).

Every Mac has a Graphics card (very useful, the entire OS is actually rendered in vectors via the graphics card, as compared to bit-mapped XP, and it also stores all windows as a texture on the graphics card to help with some of the 3D effects such as shadowing, transparency, and Expos?.

Mac OS X isnot> vector based and it won't be any time soon. Even 10.4 is still using bitmaped graphics for everything.

You're also over-stating some of the functionality of Quartz Extreme but there's no point in spending too much time arguing that in this thread. "Everything" will be changing with Quartz 2D Extreme sometime in the short-term future so I'll wait until then to discuss it.

[N45800]

AppleScript is easy to read, hard to write.  It's just different enough from English to be confusing when it starts complaining about errors.  Once you understand the language it's pretty trivial to bash out something to do simple jobs but then that's true of pretty much every language.

WSH is considerably more powerful than AppleScript: it has you dealing directly with the Windows APIs, Applescript limits you to GUI scripting (which is painful) and the functionality exposed by application's applescript dictionaries.

The differences here are due to the different groups these languages are targeting.  AppleScript is supposed to be easy and enable users to script simple workflows quickly.  WSH is intended to perform more complicated scripting and feels geared towards professional developers (at least that's how the documentation reads to me).

585757410[/snapback]

I was referring to AppleScript as a simple scripting language that comes with OSX, WSH is the nearest comparable Windows feature.

Out of curiosity, what features of Mac OS X cannot be accessed by AppleScript that Windows has that can be accessed by WSH?

Mac OS X is not vector based and it won't be any time soon.  Even 10.4 is still using bitmaped graphics for everything.

You're also over-stating some of the functionality of Quartz Extreme but there's no point in spending too much time arguing that in this thread.  "Everything" will be changing with Quartz 2D Extreme sometime in the short-term future so I'll wait until then to discuss it.

585757410[/snapback]

Wasn't the graphics in 10.3 done with Quartz?

Last I checked, Quartz was defined as a "vector-based 2D drawing library"

and according to one source

[Quartz 2D's] APIs allow you to create text and images by specifying a sequence of commands and mathematical statements that place lines, shapes, color, shading, translucency, and other graphical attributes in two-dimensional space. You do not need to specify the attributes of individual pixels. As a result, a shape can be efficiently defined as a series of paths and attributes rather than as a bitmap.

Quartz 2D accepts input from a variety of sources and can produce output in several different formats, including PDF, PostScript, and of course bitmaps suitable for screen display.

Quartz 2D has several "sibling" APIs that also produce bitmapped data for screen display: QuickDraw, QuickTime, and OpenGL. QuickDraw actually uses some Quartz 2D APIs in its back end, but QuickTime and OpenGL do most of their own drawing.

All of the bitmapped data produced by Quartz 2D, QuickDraw, QuickTime, and OpenGL is passed to the Quartz Compositor for eventual display on the screen.

I am not positive, but I think that it works in vectors and then outputs it to bitmaps to be displayed, so it more or less is still using vectors on a low level.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

First I thought ?Wow, that's not very much of a challenge.? But then I thought ?what good is just a browser display on a form?? So I started adding things:

• Back/Foward history (the "<" and ">" buttons)
  
• Reload page button ("R" button)
  
• Stop loading button ("S" button)
  
• Text-size control ("+" and "-" buttons)
  
• An Address bar (so you can actually use it to go places
  
• Printing ("P") button.
  
• Faxing
  
• Inline spell checking
  
• iPhoto integration (copy pages into iPhoto library for when you're viewing photos)
  
• Google Integration (right click any selected word to search in google)
  
• Dictionary Lookup (right click any word to find definition in OED)
  
• Text-to-speech synthesis, so you don't have to actually read the page
  
• Full clip-board support
  
• Full drag/drop support
  

So I made all that, and you knoIt took me no lines of code, as in zero, none, notta, nil nil.

585751570[/snapback]

How is that different (from the developer's perspective) than using the Designer in Visual Studio or SharpDevelop? In both of those you can just drag and drop UI features from the toolbox to the form and position/modify them however you want without ever looking at the code.

And writing event-handling code is insanely easy.

As for seperating the UI from the code completely, that's the point of Avalon and XAML. There are already some great tools for working with XAML interfaces and the Avalon CTP. I'm sure when it's released you'll see a plethora of excellent tools for that.