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

181–190 of 196 posts

Re: Android

#181

Post by metageek »

bad_user wrote: post #173
naner wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

> " 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 " This is more to do with Flash being a defacto standard than anything else. I've been a Linux user since 10 years ago, and I haven't forgotten the piss-poor support of Adobe for Flash on Linux. Heck, they finally decided to start porting Flash to Linux because of co…

I've been a Linux user since 10 years ago, and I haven't forgotten the piss-poor support of Adobe for Flash on Linux.

Hard to forget it when it won't go away. No 64-bit plugin, no accelerated video. (Their explanation that there are too many video acceleration APIs was pretty weak: if they adopted one, it would become the standard.)

Re: Android

#182

Post by metageek »

pkaler wrote: post #40

I know of no Android tablet available in the $199 price range. Someone please point one out if one exists. The argument that Windows won because Macintosh was priced at a premium is a dubious argument. Apple is able to purchase flash memory, processors, and touch screens in bulk. They own Intrinisty and PA Semiconductor. Apple looks like Walmart on their supply side and looks like Barney's on the retail side. There i…

Archos 7: $199. Archos 28: $149. Archos 32: $199.

Re: Android

#183

Post by borism »

jawee wrote: post #146
guyjin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isn't the nook an android tablet? (albeit a very specialized one.)

It isn't worth calling it Android.. I think when people think Android they think of the default interface, the ability to install applications from the App Market, and so on. I have a nook and it's basically stripped down to just a few customized apps (besides the reader function a couple games, a basic media player, and a web browser). However, I do think it's important in that it shows the versatility of Android as…

You should check out nookDevs

Re: Android

#184

Post by stakent »

biafra wrote: post #116
billjings wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have just about completely ditched the android emulator because it is irritatingly slow and I'm constantly finding it with its pants down trying to talk to eclipse. At our company we've also found that it doesn't give an accurate idea of how readable the text is in your interface, or how easy it is to interact with, partly because it's just too big on the screen and partly because it's sluggish. It is at its most u…

I use the emulator for continuous integration. Its really helpful for unit- and integration-testing. Combine it with Robotium and you can thoroughly test you application across screen sizes and Android OS Versions.

Thank you for pointing out Robotium.

Can you elaborate more about your test setup?

TIA

Re: Android

#185

Post by billjings »

biafra wrote: post #116
billjings wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have just about completely ditched the android emulator because it is irritatingly slow and I'm constantly finding it with its pants down trying to talk to eclipse. At our company we've also found that it doesn't give an accurate idea of how readable the text is in your interface, or how easy it is to interact with, partly because it's just too big on the screen and partly because it's sluggish. It is at its most u…

I use the emulator for continuous integration. Its really helpful for unit- and integration-testing. Combine it with Robotium and you can thoroughly test you application across screen sizes and Android OS Versions.

I'd like to second a thank you for pointing out Robotium, since I was trashing the emulator in the first place. I will definitely be checking that out for my next project.

Re: Android

#186

Post by Fluxx »

ericflo wrote: post #175
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.

Android is "good enough" now for lots of people, which shows in its sales. That Android owners can point at future products and get excited for upcoming features is just icing on the cake.

This is very true. Apple products are luxury products which, IMO, are worth the money. UX, design and the "it just works" factor are worth the premium. But for most people, cost/availability is the gating factor so Android phones are totally fine for them.

Re: Android

#187

Post by spacemanaki »

MrScruff wrote: post #123
redthrowaway wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a CS student, I'm a bit surprised that our curriculum contains no .NET whatsoever. We learn Java, C and C++ (both with gcc), Python, Perl, Bash scripting and ARM assembly, plus others depending on electives. While some of the lab computers run XP, all of our work has to be platform-independent. We work in *nix, and most of the professors use MBPs. It seems to me that the program really might be selling some of our…

I'm sure you've been told this before but it really matters very little what language you are taught in your degree. During the course of your career you'll learn many languages and APIs. It's the principles of sound software engineering that will stand you in good stead.

That being said... I resent my school using (almost) only Java for its curriculum. When I started learning JavaScript, Scheme, and Common Lisp this past year and discovered languages with first class functions and closures, my feelings of resentment only grew.

Re: Android

#188

Post by _delirium »

metageek wrote: post #181
bad_user wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> " 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 " This is more to do with Flash being a defacto standard than anything else. I've been a Linux user since 10 years ago, and I haven't forgotten the piss-poor support of Adobe for Flash on Linux. Heck, they finally decided to start porting Flash to Linux because of co…

I've been a Linux user since 10 years ago, and I haven't forgotten the piss-poor support of Adobe for Flash on Linux. Hard to forget it when it won't go away. No 64-bit plugin, no accelerated video. (Their explanation that there are too many video acceleration APIs was pretty weak: if they adopted one, it would become the standard.)

There's finally a 64-bit plugin (for all 3 major OSs), though it's still an "Adobe Labs" offering rather than part of the main product: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/

Re: Android

#189

Post by evgen »

billmcneale wrote: post #169
evgen wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will definitely lag in number of handsets, but will also completely destroy the Android players in terms of profit. If you consider the ecosystem as a whole, I am betting that Microsoft will also knock Android down into third-place in terms of third-party developer profit as well.

The profit argument stopped being true a few days ago, when Google announced their earnings including the mobile break down.

Google does not profit from Android, they profit through mobile advertising which has very little to do with a specific phone OS. The profit argument simply points out that the people who are producing Android phones have the lowest profit/handset in the industry and having a "sell more regardless of the low profit levels" strategy such as what Nokia used for the past decade is a recipe for disaster.

Re: Android

#190

Post by apetrovic »

mahmud wrote: post #44
tomerico wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can share my experience from developing with Silverlight and c# for a few years (Though for the past year I've developed exclusively in java). First of all the language. c#, especially in the latest iterations has become incredible. Featuring the goodness of both statically and dynamically typed languages. It has become very elegant and powerful. Sadly, I can't say anything similar on Java. Is has been very slow to…

Excellent! Android allows you to define your UI in XML as well[1]. It's not that novel, Flex does the same thing too. But not to be too dismissive, it would nice to hear of experts in both to tell us what Android might be lacking. Regards UI editor, yes, Android doesn't have any WYSIWYG UI editors. There is one, but it's 3rd party and not as polished as you describe MS's to be. -- [1] http://developer.android.com/gui…

I wrote some code for Android, and I'm currently working on WPF application for windows (which should be similar to Silverlight). Saying that Android XML UI description files are comparable to XAML + Visual Studio XAML designer + Expression Blend is like saying that C# and Java are the same because the source code for both languages can be written using vi - technically it's correct statement, but it completely misses the point.
Post reply on HN