Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 196 posts

Re: Android

#151

Post by SapphireSun »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #131
tomjen3 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't know Java, what do you have against it?

To some extent it's aesthetic. Java seems bureaucratic and verbose and just...clunky. Part of this is just where I'm coming from. I started programming as a kid with basic, then assembly, like most programmers my age. Then pascal and C in college, got a job doing C++ and did that for a number of years. Dabbled in a working in php at the end of that, seemed a little sloppy as a language. Then I just stopped programmin…

I have to chime in that I also feel that Java is much as you said. I wanted to write some reflective code, and it took me an hour (admittedly doing it for the first time) and 57 lines of code. Frustrated, I did a mock up of it in python to see what the difference would be. It was only 12 lines, and much more intelligible. It was also much faster to write, but that isn't a fair comparison since the research into the function requirements had already been done.

Re: Android

#152

Post by SapphireSun »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #131
tomjen3 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't know Java, what do you have against it?

To some extent it's aesthetic. Java seems bureaucratic and verbose and just...clunky. Part of this is just where I'm coming from. I started programming as a kid with basic, then assembly, like most programmers my age. Then pascal and C in college, got a job doing C++ and did that for a number of years. Dabbled in a working in php at the end of that, seemed a little sloppy as a language. Then I just stopped programmin…

I have to chime in that I also feel that Java is much as you said. I wanted to write some reflective code, and it took me an hour (admittedly doing it for the first time) and 57 lines of code. Frustrated, I did a mock up of it in python to see what the difference would be. It was only 12 lines, and much more intelligible. It was also much faster to write, but that isn't a fair comparison since the research into the function requirements had already been done.

Re: Android

#153

Post by naner »

_delirium wrote: post #94
naner wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Microsoft's development tools are generally very popular with developers. Yes, very popular with .NET developers. That's the problem with Microsoft, everything is coupled together and isolated from anything non-Microsoft. You're usually either a .NET developer or an everything-else developer. Everyone else has free development tools/environments. Everyone else has vibrant online communities. Everyone else shares…

Apple is fairly similar on that front. If you want to develop iPhone apps, you have to buy into the whole stack: XCode on OS X on a Mac. (Well, technically it's possible to target the iPhone via other methods, but they're not easy or supported, or in some cases even legal.)

Well... Microsoft is a little more weird. The company still freaks out over open source. And when they "officially" started endorsing some open source, it was in the context of their own open source licenses and their own open source hosting website.

Then they try and develop web technology, Silverlight, that is better than Flash by technical standards but is so entrenched in Microsoft-land that hardly anyone wants to do anything with it. You can't author anything for it when using Apple and Linux doesn't even get a runtime (Mono doesn't count, can never be feature-complete).

Apple doesn't seem quite the same. A lot of Apple developers are active in other developer communities. Microsoft developers seem to stick to Microsoft technologies. Perhaps this is because Microsoft has their own implementation of almost everything.

Re: Android

#154

Post by [deleted] »

jwr wrote: post #34

I find it interesting that most people who like Android like it in the future tense. Android is always great, but in that next version, that is just around the corner. That upcoming tablet, that upcoming phone, that upcoming software.

[deleted]

Re: Android

#155

Post by joe_the_user »

jwr wrote: post #34

I find it interesting that most people who like Android like it in the future tense. Android is always great, but in that next version, that is just around the corner. That upcoming tablet, that upcoming phone, that upcoming software.

Indeed,

Android is great in the next version and good enough in the present version to have a strong market share. Never as polished but generally having the features you need...

For people, this show how tasteless and low class the thing is. For others, it's something to believe in...

Re: Android

#156

Post by netcan »

SwellJoe wrote: post #150
netcan wrote: post #148

An interesting thing that comes out in a lot of these topics is how people are historical determinists when it come to tech platforms. "The way OS wars work is..." To me it seems like so much is different that I'd be very hesitant to have such a strong opinion. The players are established companies, it's phones and tablets (cheaper devices with shorter lives), the web is the killer app, software development is easier…

And yet Apple have been making the same mistakes they made during the original PC wars.

That's what I'm talking about (or are you being disingenuous). Calling them mistakes (I assume you mean creating the more closed environment) is assuming that OS wars inevitably play out a certain way.

Re: Android

#157

Post by andrewljohnson »

moultano wrote: post #36

It's already massively outselling the iPhone. Do we even need to speculate that it's going to be an important platform for a long time?

Nokia dumbphones massively outsell iPhones too, but as far as developers are concerned, the only real game in town is iPhone development. Android apps don't make nearly as much money for us mobile developers, and device sales aren't going to solve that problem alone.

So yeah, speculation is warranted. I'm deeply embroiled in the market, and I think the jury is out.

Re: Android

#158

Post by moultano »

andrewljohnson wrote: post #157
moultano wrote: post #36

It's already massively outselling the iPhone. Do we even need to speculate that it's going to be an important platform for a long time?

Nokia dumbphones massively outsell iPhones too, but as far as developers are concerned, the only real game in town is iPhone development. Android apps don't make nearly as much money for us mobile developers, and device sales aren't going to solve that problem alone. So yeah, speculation is warranted. I'm deeply embroiled in the market, and I think the jury is out.

Do they also have a positive derivative?

Re: Android

#159

Post by andrewljohnson »

moultano wrote: post #158
andrewljohnson wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nokia dumbphones massively outsell iPhones too, but as far as developers are concerned, the only real game in town is iPhone development. Android apps don't make nearly as much money for us mobile developers, and device sales aren't going to solve that problem alone. So yeah, speculation is warranted. I'm deeply embroiled in the market, and I think the jury is out.

Do they also have a positive derivative?

So confused by your question :)

Re: Android

#160

Post by ESchmidtSeesYou »

lawfulfalafel wrote: post #76
thought_alarm wrote: post #48

But the iPhone and iPad aren't priced at a premium. Anyway, it's a mistake pit Google against Apple. The real battle will be between Google and Microsoft for the exact same hardware manufacturers and sales channels. (Meanwhile, you can buy an iPad from an Apple Store or from Walmart without any carrier involvement). Google hasn't managed the fragmentation problem very well, they haven't done enough to control the qua…

A lot of companies have to pay an 'Android tax' to Microsoft in order to prevent litigation. HTC paid Microsoft off in order to not be sued[1], Samsung and LG cut a deal that included exchanging patents[2][3], and Motorola decided to fight[4] (my simplifications are not perfect). I am saying all this to say that it's unfair to say that there is a "battle will be between Google and Microsoft for the exact same hardwar…

If you want to sell a Windows Phone 7 handset, you have to pay Microsoft.

If you want to sell an Android handset... you have to pay Microsoft.

They're pretty direct about their legal strategy.

Post reply on HN