Oh god that's both hilarious and sad at the same time. Maybe Apple should contract Microsoft to write their own documentation for them?

Sadly, Apple actually does have good documentation for Core Image. It just never made it into their new system and is instead languishing in the "archive":

https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Gr...

Apple deployed a new documentation system, and no one stopped to make sure all the "old" stuff got translated through.

And the sad thing is, that there is almost no added information in the Microsoft version except for some _documentation theater_.

I find Microsoft's documentation as unusable as Apple's, with the difference that nowadays I can hunt down the source code for dotnet core while Apple's source is still private.

Can you explain what you mean by this? I have never heard the term "documentation theater", yet it seems like you're using it pejoratively here. The Microsoft version has a summary of the intended purpose of the class, a brief code snippet showing what its use might look like, images demonstrating the output of using the class, and lists of all available constructors, properties, and methods along with a brief description of each. If this is "documentation theater", please sign me up for more.

His point is that none of those things actually tell you about the class, it’s just theater. If you want to know what it really does, you need to look at the source code, that’s where the truth lies.

I disagree. The images showed me what it does, or at least gave me an idea what it would do.