Also, I'm certain that someone will package gcc for mac sooner or later now that there's an incentive to do so. There has not been much incentive to do so before now since it was included with Xcode.
edit: though I agree a smaller "build essentials" tool chain would be nice, but that was the case before you had to pay for xcode and nobody has bothered to create one. I can't think of a reason why it wouldn't be possible, only that it's probably not worth the hassle of setting it up and maintaining it (though Apple doing it would be excellent).
A casual developer might be a different class of user ... but anyone who hits the point of writing code & installing libraries instead of applications has adequately stepped outside the role of user.
And even granting that, it is still not a firm enough basis on which to argue such an inflammatory statement as "OS X is not for developers"--when the casual developer is far better served by OS X's included toolchain than s/he is going to find in a default installation of Windows/Linux counterparts.
OS X is not "for" developers when it begins removing the tools that create the lowest barrier to entry for casual development I've seen in a default OS installation in the last 10 years (except maybe Gentoo Linux, one of the most "for developers" systems I've had the pleasure of using).
I think that's the main argument. Getting started with command-line tools and developer-type stuff should be as easy as possible, so that people can try new things and break stereotypes and do more than they thought they could do.
I agree that a smaller (and free) tool chain would be great, but so far as I know there is nothing preventing anyone from making one.
Related, I realize it is now the case, but when did casual users start needing gcc? Time was, in my pre-OSX days, compiling things yourself if you weren't a dev was seen as somewhat pointless, you just get thousands of users all building the same binary instead of building one binary to be downloaded by thousands of users...
But, your point was about developers. When did casual users come into the discussion?
But I still have difficulty believing these casual-developers-but-not-programmers exist in great numbers. Have people told you "I was going to try your thing, but it asked for this weird gcc thing"?
Also, how many Apple developers don't already have an iTunes account?
https://github.com/rmagick/rmagick
There's also a no charge "express edition" of the IDE, but it was heavily crippled last time I checked.
That said, Xcode 3 doesn't satisfy the requirement of being easy or quick to install for a casual user.
Casual users =/= developers
Quick on the other hand, how many 4.5gb installations are quick?
I don't want to paint this as black & white, because things rarely are, but on the continuum of free (as in freedom) vs non-free, you'd have to live in a cave on the moon to still cling to the idea that Apple is anywhere near the free side of the scale.
You, as a developer, have to make a decision about how you will support your principles. Apple has certainly made theirs. They view their entire platform as theirs to do with as they wish. That is the anti-thesis of freedom. Do not expect this to change.
4 might not require Lion but you can guarantee that 4.1 definitely will.