How does Apple not support developers? They give out a completely free (and unsurpassed) development environment, have lots of useful documentation and examples (unlike that micro-categorized crap that Microsoft has in their knowlege base, making it damn near impossible to find the information I need), and (at least up until a year or so ago) took part in public mailing lists.
Furthermore, they build on existing open source code, and actually listen to what the developers actually want, rather than to impose some lame idea from the top down so that it permeates the platform at all levels.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the "monkey boy" clip was from an internal Microsoft function, where Mr. Ballmer was referring to Microsoft's own developers, not the developer community in general.
I think that jfpoole is quite correct in his contention that developers are an integral aspect of computer use. I recall in my early Apple IIe and IIgs days when everyone was running out to get a computer, and then wondering what they would do with these computers. I gathered an array of literacy and other education software that was equal to the Apple-friendly educational software that was being utilized by the one large schoolboard here in St.John's that had adopted Apple as their computer of choice. Sadly, this board eventually went all for PCs when Apple abandoned their II line of educational computers.
Oh, I quite agree that developers are an integral part of the whole computing experience, and at least as essential to the success of a platform as its creator. (If I didn't believe that, I would probably be a philosopher or theoretical mathemetician instead of a lowly programmer.)
My dispute was in the implication that Apple doesn't adequately support developers. I've read that comment from a few sources, and still do not understand it. As I said before, I find Apple's developer support much better than I've seen elsewhere.
All I want to say is that I'm glad I don't work for Microsoft, because I don't think I could take being subjected to that spectacle sitting in the audience....
...but I guess when you have billions, you can get away with that kind of behaviour and still command respect and loyalty from atleast some of your underlings. The only motivation I would have gotten out of that display, would be to send my resume to Corel.
I gather from everyone's comments that this is real. I thought it was a spoof at something Steve Jobs did. I laughed throughout the whole thing - Balmer just doesn't look the part of an enthusiastic rah-rah.
Both the developer documentation and the developer tools for Windows are far better than what's available for Mac OS X. Even third-party developer documentation for Windows is far better than what's available for Mac OS X.
As for Ballmer, a lot of people at Microsoft think he's a goof (I went to a Microsoft screening of The Phantom Menace, and there was an "ad" that featured Ballmer as Dr. Evil; everyone thought it was great), but I still think he commands a fair bit of respect. I'm certain no one would leave Microsoft for Corel because of it (especially since the environment at Microsoft is so incredibly better than the environment at Corel).
I dunno, I still remain unconvinced. I've never had a problem finding the information I need about Mac programming, either from Apple or from a third party archive like <http://cocoa.mamasam.com>.
I believe there's a copy or two of Programming Windows at work; perhaps I should track one down and flip through it. From the table of contents, though, I can't see much in there that isn't covered equivalently in Apple's documentation, the mamasam mailing list archive, or any given "Introduction to Cocoa" book.
Perhaps it's just me, though. I get scared off by all of the MFC and Carbon kind of bindings between C++ and the user interface, and the endless lists of property definitions needed for Delphi or the Java IDEs I've tried, whereas the whole structure of Cocoa just seems so logical that it just need not have hundreds of pages of explanation.
FWIW, C# and .NET look like they could be quite interesting, but the strong typing and huge hierarchy of classes are somewhat off-putting, to say the least.
I forgot to mention... don't get me started on the "developer tools" from Microsoft. Visual Studio (which costs several hundred dollars, BTW) is one of the worst applications I have the misfortune to have to use. It hangs constantly for long periods of time while looking to see if files have changed, takes forever to load (or close) a solution, it insists on descending separately into every .vcproj when you build a solution (as opposed to building a higher-level database of dependencies so that it knows in advance which projects to rebuild), takes forever to link if you don't have "incremental linking" enabled, and has terrible problems with consistency of terminology. Throw in a very cluttered user interface and a few modal dialogs (which are much better than in previous versions of the application, but still there), and it is a very frustrating experience.
Project Builder provides easy access to a project's structure, I can organise the files any way I choose, it is quick to build, and all dialogs are modeless.
Better still, I can always open a good terminal window and use standard UNIX tools to edit, build, and run my software when I want to.