Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Should I Learn To Program iOS Or Android Devices?

Posted by timothy on from the go-straight-for-neural-implants dept.

HW_Hack writes "In my early career in the '90s I had a hardware tech degree, but also a strong interest in software. I completed software courses in assembly, Pascal, HTML, and C as I prepped for a CS degree. I then got my chance to do hardware design for a major US firm and went that direction for a good 18-year career. I now work in a good sized school district doing IT support work at a large high school. I plan to revive my programming skills this winter so I can write apps for the flood of mobile devices. I am very much platform / OS agnostic and I support on any one day OS X, XP, Win 7, Linux servers, and now iOS as we pilot iPads in our school. My question focuses on three topics: Which programming environment (iOS or Android) is easier to jump into from a technical perspective / number of languages needed to master? Which one has a better SDK ecosystem of documentation, programmer support, and developer community(s)? Where is the market and the money going? I do not expect to get rich doing this, but with my insights into K12 needs I hope I can write effective apps for that market."

65 of 403 comments (clear)

  1. Yes by Ranger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you should.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
    1. Re:Yes by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 2, Informative

      EXACTLY!

      As a developer you'll be far more valuable being able to deliver an app to as many platforms as possible.

    2. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      No no no!

      Microsoft Windows Phone 7 is coming out in just a couple of months and just as Microsoft has done on the desktop with superior choices like Windows NT, they will quickly dominate the mobile front as well. Microsoft Windows Phone 7 is programmed completely in the industry leading .net programming language and augmented with the unmatched Silverlight technology providing an unrivaled technological platform with which you will only be limited by your imagination for the applications you can develop. Why play around with a tired platform like ios or android (an operating system only tech geeks can use and understand), when you can go with the undisputed leader in computer technology that is Microsoft. Furthermore, the MetroUI as seen on the ZuneHD audio player makes androd and ios look like sad anachronistic throwbacks. No serious developer will even touch aple and googls stuff when Microsoft Windows Phone 7 is unleashed.

    3. Re:Yes by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Having the knowledge to develop for both platforms is a wise idea. There are some who think that Apple's proprietary-ness will lead them to their doom. I don't think that's the case at all. I know that with "walled garden" of iOS, my apps are checked for proper behavior before being placed in the wild. And, there is a system in place to sell apps and collect revenue. Granted, Apple takes a nice slice for the privilege - but its a thriving environment.

      The language you need to learn is currently Objective-C. Apple has recently changed their development tool policy - so, expect other languages to become available that cross compile down to Objective-C. We'll see. Documentation is very good and there are plenty of 3rd party books out there also.

      Android requires Java and knowledge of the Android SKD. It also has a large community following. Gartner groups predicts that by 2014, Android based phones will outsell iOS phones - simply because it will be on more platforms.

      Android has a hidden danger - malware has already been found in the wild that attack Android phones. And, if the code keeps forking for each device type out there, you will have to know all the nuances of a given platform. This is something you don't have to worry about too much with iOS. I am not familiar with the selling of Android apps - how that ecosystem works - maybe, somebody else can expound on that.

      A third contender will be Microsoft with Windows Phone 7. We'll have to see if their system catches on - the first devices are due out in October. It may be too late for them.

      Blackberry? Well, they have too many devices and versions of their OS. Testing our app for Blackberry required the hiring of service to provide access to test devices and separate builds for each device type. I would discourage Blackberry development.

      If you plan to sell to your services to the business world, learn both environments. There's where the money is to be made - the days of the "big app" making your a zillionaire are pretty much gone.

    4. Re:Yes by Ranger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, I'm learning HTML5, CSS3 and JavaScript. What I want to do on mobile platforms doesn't require an app.

      --
      "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
    5. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Blackberry? Well, they have too many devices and versions of their OS. Testing our app for Blackberry required the hiring of service to provide access to test devices and separate builds for each device type. I would discourage Blackberry development.

      Blackberry has made device emulators freely available for many years.

      Blackberry has had documentation and an SDK freely available for close to a decade.

      Blackberry puts no restrictions on how you sell or distribute your applications.

    6. Re:Yes by aliquis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you should.

      Good enough, didn't answer much of his questions as far as languages, communities, environments, market and so on though.

      Also what about QT? 4.7 just came out:
      http://qt.nokia.com/products/whats-new-in-qt/

    7. Re:Yes by object404 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Learn Flash/Actionscript3/Adobe AIR. It will simply run everywhere. (cue Flash vs HTML5 flame war. off-topic, IE9 ain't coming to XP so screw that -- I'm sick of all the "this will only work on Safari" or "this will only work on Chrome" HTML5 demos. As someone who actually builds stuff for clients instead of just blogging about these technologies, this is a dealbreaker and ***FORWARD*** compatibility headache as Windows XP will never go away for the near future. The original reason I learned Flash coding was because of the bloody headache of cross-browser compatibility.)

      Back on topic, Flash is coming to every single smartphone platform (and even TV set top boxes). 19 of the top 20 mobile manufacturers are already part of the consortium Adobe Open Screen Project and they're working to get Flash running on their respected platforms. Only Steve Jobs didn't sign up for whatever his reasons. Flash is now out on Android, Symbian, Maemo, coming to WinMo 7 (Flash Lite is already out on older versions of WinMo), Blackberry & Palm, definitely on Meego (Nokia Maemo + Intel Moblin).

      Flash CS5 can now be used to make native iPhone apps legally again as per App Store policies (the process is the same as making an Adobe AIR app). Here's a refresher on exporting your AIR project into iOS: Packager for iPhone Refresher.

      There's some surprising current statistics to fix one's perspective on the death of Flash by the iOS gadget crowd. Currently 97% of the internet is Flash capable and iOS only has 1.1% share. Of course, the iOS share will increase as more customers buy them, but think of that when building stuff with the widest reach possible. Also, currently, devs seem to be monetizing the most on iOS, but the App store is now *so* *so* *so* saturated that it's hard for a new app to get noticed amidst all the noise.

      Flash 10.1 is already out on Android Froyo (2.2) and AIR for Android is currently in public beta and should come out soon http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/air2/android/ so Flash is already good to go if you want to target Android.

      Another thing to consider is that Android market share has now overtaken iOS and since there's not enough decent content on the Android and Adobe AIR marketplaces compared to the Apple App Store, if you build a good app on any of those platforms, it's easier to pull in a user base since there isn't much competition yet.

      Your Flash apps would run on Symbian^3 devices which are already out (N8, C3, etc) as they have all Flash Lite 4.0 (A slightly stripped down version of Flash 10 which already runs AVM2 AS3 swfs). In fact, Nokia just launched the $10million Calling All Innovators N8 app contest and Flash is one of the formats you can enter in.

      Not only will your apps run on mobile devices if you build 'em in AIR, they will also run on Desktop Linux, Mac & Windows and that is the biggest plus for me. For complaints about the cost of Adobe tools, you can build SWFs and AIR apps from completely Open Source tools. The Flex SDK is FOSS and you can build apps just with your .AS3 sourcecode + a command line just like with the JDK for Java (or pick any appropriate IDE of your choice to make your life easier). Oh, btw, the commercial Flash Builder is free for students & teachers + developers who're hit by the economic crisis and are currently unemployed -> apply here for license.

      Of course, please don't forget to *optimize* *optimize* *optimize*. Flash is not a slow platform. T

      --
      http://twitter.com/object404
    8. Re:Yes by dr-alves · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As a developer:
      - Android is way easier than iOS.
      - ActionScript is the place when good language design went to die

      As a user
      - iOS apps, if designed natively, are extremely hard to beat in terms of responsiveness, beauty and general "native feeling"

      As a vendor
      - Flash is the common denominator, i.e., it may commoditize the platform, but I've yet to see a flash based app that looks as good as the best native apps
      - Android will have a bigger user base but a worse monetization mechanism than iOS, i.e., more users but which consume less (more due to the neglect of the market than otherwise).

    9. Re:Yes by bm_luethke · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Android has a hidden danger - malware has already been found in the wild that attack Android phones."

      So does the iPhone - there have even been a few that have made it to the front pages of Slashdot. One of the Apple "hidden dangers", as you call them, is some strange confidence that Apple doesn't have these bugs and people act accordingly. Indeed their PDF reader had a remote root exploit that makes any and all Android exploits pale in comparison. Heck, even *the store itself* has been compromised on at least one occasion (most likely by multiple different people too) and a large number of unauthorized purchases initiated by said intruders.

      However, that really doesn't matter that much with respect to what environment to learn and frankly matters little to most people (note how many use Windows). If you want to develop mobile application then it would be suggested that you learn iOS, Android, and RIM.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    10. Re:Yes by glebovitz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, this isn't so far fetched, except you should be saying: "write Nokia Qt, Qt Mobilitiy, and QtQuick" because it runs on Symbian, Meego, and Maemo. With 160 million devices in the market capable of Qt and QtQuick, it wouldn't been a bad plan to learn it. It will also run on tablets and desktops.

    11. Re:Yes by gbjbaanb · · Score: 4, Informative

      a fair point, Air is a common-baseline platform to develop for, more ubiquitous than Windows! Develop for Air and you'll be ok no matter where you want to put your apps.

      There is an alternative: Qt.

      It's a more 'serious' development platform requiring C++ skills (that pretty much get compiled to any platform) with a rather easy to use GUI, and now they also have a wonderful QML 'fluid' capabilities where you can extend the 'boring' old GUI with new fancy features very easily.
      It has support on Android (through the Lighthouse project) and all traditional desktops, and all Nokias (of course) with iPhone support being worked on at the moment.

      Its also free for everybody. If you want to develop for multiple platforms without the 'embarrassment' of using Flash, then this could be a way to go.

    12. Re:Yes by naz404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      - ActionScript is the place when good language design went to die

      You're talking about ActionScript 1. You should check out ActionScript 3, the current iteration. It's for all intents and purposes, the same syntax as JAVA. ActionScript 2 is a variant of JavaScript (it's an ECMAScript implementation).

      --
      http://www.object404.com
    13. Re:Yes by dr-alves · · Score: 2, Informative

      "your full of crap" - always nice to bring the big guns to a moderate discussion

      As for Android vs iOS, I know both and I like the dev platform (Xcode) iOS is full of quirky stuff such as weird macros whose function is not clear at first glance or manual memory management. Android is Java, while it might be quite verbose sometimes it is simpler as a language and easier to learn that Objective C

      As for HTML5/CSS3/Javascript well that's the revolution that we've all seem to be expecting for a few years now and I've yet to see the promised full blow, 3d native looking, responsive apps.
      It might be the common denominator but it is still far away in terms of features AND development environment from the native platforms.

    14. Re:Yes by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which of your bits of anti-HTML5 FUD prevents you from simply offering Chrome Frame to IE users?

      I'd also be curious which demos you've seen which only work on Safari, or only work on Chrome. It seems like they "only" work anywhere except IE, and some even work with newer versions of IE.

      And yes, if you build your apps for AIR, they'll run on modern desktop OSes -- if people install it. Which would make them morons, because if it's really something for which HTML would be a viable alternative, why would I want to install your app instead of bookmarking it? Is it that hard to see that one of these options is both more convenient and secure?

      If you run them in a plugin, that means you are part of the problem -- you are part of a phenomenon which holds the Web back.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  2. Android by incubuz1980 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    iPhone is too proprietary it is a dead end.

    1. Re:Android by bennomatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sounds like someone's been drinking the goog-aide!

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    2. Re:Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, iPod touches, iPhones and iPads still haven't really caught on with the mainstream consumer yet. Consumers can regularly be seen debiting the merits of a cell phone based on the openness of the product - not the functionality or usability. I believe Apple has sold some product units but i'm expecting all the millions of owners to ditch their iDevices any day now simply because Android is less proprietary.

    3. Re:Android by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wouldn't say "dead end", but the fact remains that as long as Apple has capricious and arbitrary rules for their app store (which, knowing them, will probably be until the end of time), iOS development is a risk. There is a very real possibility that your app which you invest hard work into will be rejected for no real reason. At least on Android, you can sell your app to people even if it is removed from the market for some reason (and far less apps are unjustly removed from the Android market than Apple's app store).

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    4. Re:Android by DurendalMac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Saying it doesn't make it true. You know what? END USERS DON'T GIVE A DAMN. FOSS advocates need to come to grips with that. They don't give a crap if it's open or not. They want it to be simple and do what they want, and for most consumers, the iPhone fits the bill. Android may also fit for a lot of folks. Also, iPhone users spend more money on apps than Android users, so it's certainly not a dead end.

      What is it about open source zealots that utterly blinds them to reality? FOSS is all fine and dandy, but end users usually don't know or don't give a damn. They'll buy whatever they think is nifty.

    5. Re:Android by xouumalperxe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      [citation needed]

      Fair enough. Here you go. It's a bit outdated (being from March and all), but I doubt the situation changed significatively in the last 6 months.

    6. Re:Android by znerk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      FOSS is all fine and dandy, but end users usually don't know or don't give a damn.

      ... because FOSS advocates aren't end users? Interesting viewpoint...

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    7. Re:Android by znerk · · Score: 3, Informative

      [citation needed]

      Fair enough. Here you go. It's a bit outdated (being from March and all), but I doubt the situation changed significatively in the last 6 months.

      I asked for a citation because I felt it was inaccurate. A quick google search proved your point, but with some reservations...

      On 17 March 2009, there were about 2,300 applications available for download from the Android Market, according to T-Mobile chief technical officer Cole Brodman.
      By December 2009, there were over 20,000 applications available for download in the Android Market.
      By August 2010, there are over 80,000 applications available for download in the Android Market, with over 1 billion application downloads
      . Recent months (in 2010) have shown an ever increasing growth rate, recently (in May 2010) surpassing 10,000 additional applications per month.

      copypasta from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_Market

      In addition, that's just the "official" "app store". There are links to 3 "alternative stores" on that same wiki page. I would post a link to Apple's alternative stores, but there don't seem to be any that are available without jailbreaking your device. Apple appears to have failed at quelling the android uprising.

      As of September 1, 2010, there are at least 250,000 third-party applications officially available on the App Store, with over 6.5 billion total downloads.

      copypasta from the similar article for apple's "marketplace".

      This data appears to contradict me, and reinforce your position. There are, apparently, more apps for iOS than for android. However, it would appear that Apple's momentum is slowing, whereas android's momentum appears to be increasing. Development of new iPhone apps appears to have dropped below 10,000 new apps per month, whereas android is now above that line, and continuing to increase.

      I suppose the argument could go either way, if we want to get picky, but it still stands to reason that android is still picking up steam, and iOS is slumping - probably largely due to the bad press the iPhone and iPad have received as of late, whereas no one seems to have anything bad to say about 'droid.

      And a parting shot:
      If the number of available apps is your only beef with android, what will you do when the developers stop developing for iOS, due to the myriad restrictions placed upon the apps that even make it into the store?

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  3. Go Android by log0n · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't already have a Mac, iOS requires Apple hardware for development. You also need to learn objective-C which doesn't get much play outside of a Mac environment. None of that is bad, just a hurdle.

    Personally, while iOS is currently ahead of Android (user base, # of devs, apps, etc) I think before long it's going to start playing catch up to Android. Android has got a lot of momentum.

    1. Re:Go Android by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hated java before I took up writing for android. What I learned was that I hated java libraries and the million and one legacy additions. In particular, I hated swing. Java's synatax without all that is actually kind of nice.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    2. Re:Go Android by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This software can be virtualized on most modern PC configurations.

      IIRC, he may be breaking the EULA if he does that.

    3. Re:Go Android by lederhosen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Java might not be the best language around, but I find it much better than Objective C. What part of Objective C do you prefer?

    4. Re:Go Android by Timmmm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've never used Objective C. It may be rubbish too!

      You're right though, my main objection is with Eclipse, which is one of the... no it *is* the worst IDE I've ever used.

    5. Re:Go Android by gnasher719 · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you don't already have a Mac, iOS requires Apple hardware for development.

      Another good reason to develop for iOS.

    6. Re:Go Android by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Informative

      In one word: delegates. Delagates make GUI programming MUCH simpler in the Cocoa world than they do in the Java GUI world(now on servers they aren't nearly as useful, but I digress). Basically just telling a widget to do a callback on me when some event happens instead of forcing myself to register for each and every event I may or may not be interested in is a huge timesaver. Not to mention that unlike Java, in Objective-C there is 0 problem with only implementing PART of an interface(ie the part I am interested in).

      Other nicities like core data, key-value observing also make life a lot easier in Objective-C than they are in the Java world. Now would I ever code enterprise apps in Objective-C? Doubtful since Apple seems to show very little interest in making enterprise-capable APIs, but for GUIs Cocoa is a dream.

      --
      Monstar L
    7. Re:Go Android by dokebi · · Score: 3, Informative

      Huh, it's the opposite for me. Eclipse is the *BEST* IDE I've used.

      I used be a purist. I wrote my PhD thesis in Vim. Afterwards, I switched to EMACS (org mode rocks!). I still use it every day as my main notebook system. But when I started writing software more or less full time, I tried many many different IDEs and always end up with Eclipse. Why?

      * Supports many different languages. At one point, I was writing and debugging python, perl, java, javascript, flex all at once. Eclipse let me do this without switching ides. No IDE comes even close.
      * Good emacs binding. (emacs+)
      * Excellent Java support: good refactoring, auto completion, "quick fix" (god, I love that feature. Must for syntax heavy java).
      * FindBugs for Java
      * Amazing auto format for Java. With Android development, you just load their xml template, turn on "format code on save", and I don't have to worry about lining up my brackets, sorting imports, or any of that. Just hitting Save formats everything.
      * Native widgets and font rendering (I really hate netbeans font rendering. No anti-aliasing? In 2010?)

      Sure, it's got its share of bugs. Sometimes it gets hosed based on some changed setting. I take a working snapshot every now and then. It's a memory hog. Give it at least 512MB on startup, if not a whole gig (-Xms512m -Xmx1024m in eclipse.ini). Still, it's an amazing piece of free software. And add the ridiculous number of plug-ins available, there is no need to use anything else. And it's Free!

      (I guess if you are using writing for Windows, you are stuck with Visual Studio, the same if you write for Mac, you're stuck with XCode. I can't say anything about those--I'm a linux user.)

      --
      In Soviet Russia, articles before post read *you*!
    8. Re:Go Android by dokebi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why did you switch to EMACS?



      Org mode. It was that compelling for me.
      --
      In Soviet Russia, articles before post read *you*!
  4. Learn them both. by brion · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Working with both systems will give you a deeper understanding of each, as well as allowing you to sell to a larger customer base, should that be something that appeals to you.

    --

    Chu vi parolas Vikipedion?

  5. App first, platform second by Planesdragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You should never, EVER think platform, then app. Think audience, application, and THEN learn what you need.

    Your school district is using iPads? Then learn iOS. You have an android phone at home, or have java experience? Learn Android. You want to just make something work? Get the Android, iOS, and WebOS SDKs, and test like @#% so your mobile phone works everywhere. (Heck, get Blackberry and windows mobile if you can.)

    1. Re:App first, platform second by rrossman2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Haven't really played with it yet, but you can get the BlackBerry Dev tools for free. They provide a plug-in for Eclipse to develop the Java apps for BlackBerrys, even provide tutorials, examples, and even phone simulators. Granted it's not the platform you're looking into, but I know Symbian phones will run MIDP java apps (they have the full stack in the S60/S80 OS), so an app that will run on a BB *should* also run on a Symbian phone. I'm not sure if an MIDP app would also run on an android or not... but just wanted to toss that out there

    2. Re:App first, platform second by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Informative

      I looked at Dalvik (java like language)

      Dalvik is the name of Android's VM and bytecode format, which isn't particularly Java-like (for one thing, it's register-based, not stack based). The actual language used for Android development is Java. Not "Java like", but actual Java, as defined by Java Language Specification.

  6. Yes by shriphani · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You definitely should. One of the biggest benefits of building apps for mobile phones is that you don't need to market your app - the app stores are excellent distribution channels and your app isn't stuck out there waiting to be discovered by the masses for the next 20 years. Major indie mac developers have made the switch to the iPhone and now more actively focus on iOS devices than they do on the Mac. This is a general trend. Smartphones' potential is still being discovered. Try to profit from the gold rush while you can.

  7. More is more by wombatmobile · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why not aim to learn both iOS and Android? You'll please more people and incur the wrath of less. If you pick just one, you have to deal with the tens of percents that can't run your apps, which is difficult.

    Yes, it will take more time and effort to learn to environments, but not much more. Most of your time will be spent designing and testing the apps, not implementing code.

  8. Yes. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes. You should hedge your bets and learn both. The smartphone wars are far from over, and most smartphone content producers are releasing for, at the very least, both iOS and Android. Some also simultaneously release for Blackberry and Windows Mobile as well.

    Each platform has its relative strengths and weaknesses. Writing code on Android pretty much means learning Java; similarly, writing code on iOS pretty much means learning Objective C. Neither language is likely to become obsolete very soon. The startup costs for writing code on Android are a bit lower; you don't need to buy anything to write Android apps. If you expect to write iOS apps, you need a Mac and you need XCode. On Android, you need Eclipse and the Android Eclipse SDK.

    But, like I said, I wouldn't learn just one.

    --
    My blog
    1. Re:Yes. by catbutt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As someone who has learned both, I don't suggest this approach for most. Especially if you are just getting back into programming. There is an immense amount to learn for both, and much of the knowledge does not carry over. They are very different.

      I suggest picking one of them and learning it well. If you make something that seems to have potential, hire someone to port it -- or then take the time to learn another platform.

      Just my suggestion. Trying to learn both at once can be quite overwhelming.

    2. Re:Yes. by Radtoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There actually are more viable language choices. Android can not just support Java, but JVM languages - which is an important distinction. Want something like Lisp? try Clojure. Want something like Haskell or Java? Try Scala. Also, it supports C/C++. There is also fairly good support for scripting languages (Python, Perl, JRuby, Lua, BeanShell, JavaScript, Tcl, and shell) at the moment, though the scripting languages cannot currently do everything and run more slowly. Even more languages are supported through experimental implementations...

      Apple so far has ObjC, C, Cpp and intends to allow more, like Squeak.

      Even apart from this, programmer freedom & choice is more on Android's side - not just because of the programming languages, but also because the OS is free & open source - which even leaves you the choice of not using Google's store or create a tailored version of it all, right down to the OS. No such luck on Apple's side. They intend to press you into their App Store monopoly, and I'd say that might be enough of a reason to not pick IOS up at all, despite the larger user base. Besides, Android has nicer phone hardware (especially the high-end HTC ones)... which should also matter a little to an enthusiast user / developer.

  9. The post itself by niw3 · · Score: 2, Funny

    must be flagged as flamebait.

  10. Personally, Android by ResQuad · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm not a hardcore programmer (PHP/Perl... lite stuff), but I thought it would be fun to try out mobile app development. I happened to have an iPhone, mac, etc... so I started there. Even with the books and intro material, I found it very difficult to get into. My C and similar is very rusty, so that was part of the problem. For the heck of it, I tried android and that was MUCH easier to get into. My Java was never great, but better than my C - which again - helped. All in all, I much more enjoyed the experience of working on the Android platform because it tended to have lower barriers to entry (less hardware, less software, etc), be easier (Java _is_ a simpler language) and be fun.

    Though get a good book for android. Last I checked, the official docs online from Google were for like 1.0-1.5 and we're on 2.2. In short, horribly out of date (usable in some cases, but out of date).

    --
    snowulf.com
    1. Re:Personally, Android by wembley+fraggle · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is a great iPhone application programming course on iTunesU, which includes an introduction to ObjC and rapidly moves into powerful programming techniques for iOS. Better yet, it uses a lot of the examples from the SDK as the course material (there's no book), and the slides are provided as part of the program. It's all free to boot. Definitely worth watching for a good introduction to the platform. Plus, it's all free.

      It's the Stanford University CS 193P, iPhone Application Programming, Spring 2010 course that I watched.

    2. Re:Personally, Android by chartreuse · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ditto. Though I see it's Winter 2010. They did it last year, too, though a) I don't know that it's available now, and b) the iOS platform itself evolves quickly enough that capabilities and best practices have changed since then.

      If you sign up for the developer program ($100/yr, and necessary to put your code on the device instead of the simulator) you can also get access to videos of sessions from the developer's conference for free and get advice straight from the horse's mouth.

      I'd also recommend getting a book or two. I'd recommend O'Reilly's C Pocket Reference if you're rusty in C. Erica Sadun's iPhone Developer's Cookbook, Second Edition covers a lot that you'd need, though the way she organizes her code can make it difficult to reuse if you're just starting out. I can dis-recommend the Sam's "24 hour" iPhone programming book, unless it's been revised and corrected -- it's almost as likely to hinder you as help.

      You'd also inevitably be using Apple's own SDK documentation, which can be quite overwhelming to begin with, and web searches both at Apple's developer forums and at large on error messages and class/method names are often fruitful once you get a handle on iOS.

      I'd estimate it would take one month of spare time to get your bearings, and 2-3 to really know what you're doing. What can blindside you is that a lot of advanced graphics and sound applications -- games, for example -- require some C++ afaik. (So much for my plans for avoiding it.)

  11. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I disagree... I originally learned IOS back in the late 1990s when it was at version 9. I still use IOS equipment that have version 12.4 and 15.0 all over the place. learning IOS was the best thing I ever did. I have a CCNA.

  12. iOS first, better for your background by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Informative

    First of all, given a C base you'll probably be a little more comfortable with Objective-C, because you can fall back on C when you need to. The language itself is a superset and the superset is a really different mindset than C itself is, but it's a very nice OO language with some great features.

    But also, currently iOS has a ton of awesome educational material. Apple itself provides a lot of documentation, and if you pay the $99/year fee to develop for devices (you should) then you also get all of the videos from the past developer conference, plus of course there's the free iTunesU videos from Stanford on iPhone development.

    There are also a ton of third party books and at this point probably local Cocoaheads groups you could attend meeting with questions.

    I think for some time to come Apple is going to be the leader in the space of mobile development, but especially around education - there are a lot of kids applications on the iPhone and Pad and a ton of parents are buying these devices in part so that kids can use them. I have been astounded at how fast this has happened, especially with the iPad.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:iOS first, better for your background by michaelok · · Score: 2, Informative
      I've been impressed with the Stanford course. The material is quite dense, I find I have to pause the tape every once in a while and take notes, so they move fast. A good background in some other language like C, and even an OO background like C++ would be useful, as concepts carry over well from Java. In fact, Java was influenced by Objective-C.

      The course material is very good too, such as the lecture presentations and the assignments. In the '09 semester I believe they did a Twitter-style app, in the Spring 2010 semester, which you can also download from itunes, they do a flickr app. They bring in various speakers, including Apple employees working on the various supporting libraries.

      The only minor quibble I would have is that the Xcode app has changed from the version used in the course, so sometimes you can't follow the instructions exactly.

      Given the OPs background in C and hardware, I'd agree with the folks on this thread that suggest going the iOS/Android/Flash route vs. using a web application. It would seem to me easier, given that background, of using a GUI framework like Cocoa, than figuring out a web framework. And this gets to the most important point - what are his requirements? The school uses iPads, so he probably has some ideas for some time of application that would benefit the school. This is probably the best way to learn - scratch an itch, and start from the top down, rather than learning every nuance out there, since these frameworks and platforms can be huge and complex.

  13. I wouldn't invest in iOS development by Rix · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Apple is making exactly the same mistakes they made in the early desktop market: they're refusing to license their software to more nimble hardware manufacturers, so they'll get passed over.

    1. Re:I wouldn't invest in iOS development by itsdapead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple is making exactly the same mistakes they made in the early desktop market: they're refusing to license their software to more nimble hardware manufacturers.

      Here's a clue: which of the early makers of desktop computers survived the Wintel monoculture of the late 80s and 90s and is still an influential, if minority, platform today? Hint - it begins with "A". What happened to CP/M and GEM, MSX and Unix which were licensed to multiple manufacturers?

      Anyway, Apple have already tried that. Twice, actually: Apple with "classic" Mac OS and Steve Jobs with NeXTStep before he returned to Apple. That went well, didn't it?

      What has worked spectacularly since the release of the iMac in 1998 is tying the software to premium-priced "designer label" hardware (but not quite as premium-priced as the old NeXT cubes). But you're right - Apple should drop their winning formula and go with the one that has already been proven to fail.

      The fly in the ointment is that "more nimble hardware manufacturers" don't care whether they ship machines with Windows or MacOS as long as they make their money (usually by selling upgrades, peripherals, extended warranties and finance rather than the computers themselves). They'll be more than happy to attract custom from existing Apple converts, cannibalizing Apple's sales, Windows users to switch. So you've got guaranteed cannibalization of Apple's existing sales but no guarantee whatsoever that the clone-makers and their resellers will aggressively promote MacOS to Windows users. Look at Dell and Asus's feeble efforts to sell Linux-based machines...

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  14. Re:iOS by Wovel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except one 99c app like angry birds netted the developers more than the gross of the entire android marketplace..

  15. Re:Jesus phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    What.... the.... fuck...

  16. remain agnostic by metalmaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Choose sides, and you will surely lose at the end of the day. Apple's iDominance will die out. Android will fork to the point of there being a new distro daily. The best way to remain relevant is to develop the core ideas behind your application THEN learn how to implement them using the tools at hand. Consumers care about what works. Lets face it, what works today might not work tomorrow.

  17. If you're only going to learn one... by Pedrito · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you're only going to learn one, go Android. Java is reusable in other environments and frankly, it's just easier.

    My personal opinion is that Objective C is pretty tedious and annoying. The syntax is ugly and non-intuitive. Again, this is my personal opinion. But having done years of C, C++, C#, I find it bizarre that Objective C syntax is non-obvious. Not that it is particularly complex, but if you know C++, Java and C# seem pretty obvious, whereas Objective C is just very different in syntax.

    Finally, Java is platform agnostic. Objective C has few platforms that it's good for and you have to buy Apple hardware to build iPhone apps which to me is plain stupid and I think in the long run, it's going to be one of the things to hurt the iPhone.

    Just my own opinions based on my experience with both. I sat down and immediately started writing Android apps using the SDK and simulator with no previous Java experience. Even after several days of playing with existing iPhone apps, I had difficulty even following what was happening in the code, understanding the stuff I was seeing in the watch windows, and figuring out exactly what the various syntactical crap meant.

    1. Re:If you're only going to learn one... by maccodemonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "My personal opinion is that Objective C is pretty tedious and annoying. The syntax is ugly and non-intuitive. Again, this is my personal opinion. But having done years of C, C++, C#, I find it bizarre that Objective C syntax is non-obvious. Not that it is particularly complex, but if you know C++, Java and C# seem pretty obvious, whereas Objective C is just very different in syntax."

      How is it not obvious? Your complaint seems to be that it is different, while admittedly not complex. Different != not obvious.

      Objective C is an old language, and when it came out, it was a possible competitor to the still pretty shiny and new C++. It's an old enough language, that when Java was written, Java took a lot of cues from Obj-C. Apple didn't go out of their way to make a different language because back when Obj-C was created there wasn't a standard syntax for OOP programming.

      Obj-C is dead simple, and honestly, not confusing if you take the time to learn it. However, it seems many people these days are afraid of languages that look different and immediately write it off, when it's pretty gosh darn elegant. Every time I ask people why they dislike Obj-C, they can't get any further than the brackets. It just amazes me how many people write off iOS because they think Obj-C is hard (which, alone, is mind numbing, considering the biggest draw of OS X on the desktop for software engineers is how easy Obj-C is compared to C++).

      If the ability to learn is dead in software engineering, we're all in a lot of trouble.

  18. Palm didn't license their OS by Rix · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you're talking about the old PalmOS. The original Palm company was sold to 3M with the provision that Handspring (composed of the people who originally built and ran Palm) would get a license to continue building products with it. Third parties were never allowed to produce PalmOS devices.

    It's not just Microsoft's strategy. All the old UNIX vendors withered under Linux, which could be run on commodity hardware.

    There will never be one hardware vendor to rule them all. It just doesn't work that way. If you insist on tying a platform to a single vendor, it will die.

  19. Re:Write Portable Code by turgid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If those platforms lock you into languages and development environments that tightly, I'd be ignoring them completely and looking for something else to develop on.

    Seriously, is that what the world's coming to? Is it the 1980s all over again?

    --
    Stick Men
  20. Go iOS. by MikeFM · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd suggest iOS because it is harder to learn meaning you have less competition and more is a more unified platform meaning more potential customers will have easy access to buying your app.

    Also people who buy Android tend to be cheaper, thus buying the cheaper Android devices, and are less likely to spend a lot of money on apps.

    Of course why not learn both. Android is pretty easy to learn and most of the time it isn't difficult to port an app from iOS to Android or vice versa. Sure they're different languages but the app logic can be very similar and Java and Obj-C aren't horrible dissimilar. Tools exist to make the job easier too. Or if you're geeky you can write your own programming language that can compile to Android/Java and iOS/Obj-C. I've been playing with my own toy language which is similar to Python in syntax. Also did a little Brainfsck one but that isn't really practical. Was amusing myself with the idea of allowing users to script certain elements of a program in Brainfsck.

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  21. A four step decision process by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want the money, go for iOS.

    Otherwise, if you are a FOSS adept, go for Android.

    Otherwise, if you have a Mac already, go for iOS.

    Otherwise, go for Android.

  22. Not true by aclarke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hear people on /. saying this all the time and I simply don't think it's true. I've been coding post-university for > 14 years so I consider myself a "senior developer". I used to know c way back in the day, and have done some Java coding and a bit of C#, but Objective C still to me isn't "a few late nights" simple.

    Sure, a few late nights will let you pick up the syntax, but the real value of a platform, whether it's JEE, .NET or iOS development, are the libraries and everything that goes beyond the bare syntax. Understanding what method to use where takes a LOT more than just a few late nights. Additionally, every language brings with it its own pitfalls, security issues, etc., that a newbie developer is just not going to pick up right away.

    Sure, after a couple weeks of hard studying you can start to program in a new language. I'm not debating that. Additionally, some languages and environments are going to be easier than others. But the vast majority of developers are not going to be even nearly up to speed on a new language without having a severe impact on the timeline of a project.

    --

    www.clarke.ca
    1. Re:Not true by xtracto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Spot on.

      I have been programming since I was 9 years old (LOGO, GWBASIC, Pascal, C, then C++ then Java) around 1988) and if someone asks me in what languages am I fluent I would just say Java, and C, because these are the ones I have used *for work* in the last 5 years (granted, I have also used a plethora other languages ,like PHP, python, ASM, some SQLs and whatnot).

      Some time ago I read an article by Joel Spolsky regarding this topic (can someone whore some Karma by posting the link? plz). The problem is that "newbie" programmers think that knowing a programming language is just a matter of knowing the control flow instructions, memorizing the keywords and maybe learning one or two library functions.

      However, the truth is when using a language for *production* code, there really is a difference between a guy who knows the ins and outs of the language, the subtleties, and just reading a book and doing a bunch of hello worlds.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  23. Bollocks by edxwelch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's something stinky about flash on mobiles. They tried to make it the next big mobile platform before (aka Flashlite) and it flopped.

    Three big flash developers Nitrome, Semi Secret Software and Astro Ape Studios, are rewriting their games for iPhone natively rather than using CS5, because flash is too slow.

    http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/30368/InDepth_iOS_Flash_Devs_Cautiously_Optimistic_Of_Apples_New_Tools_Policy.php

    1. Re:Bollocks by object404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No. The main problem with Flash Lite was that it was always 1 or 2 generations behind the desktop version and it was a real headache as this left Flash Lite crippled in functionality (Flash Lite 1.x had no arrays - frikken arrays man! wtf?, Flash Lite 2.x had no cacheAsBitmap which would speed up performance, etc) and because of the different implementations, this left the mobile landscape very fragmented, and it was a real headache. I still get a lot of trauma flashbacks when I think of Flash Lite 1.x

      Now, since the desktop and mobile versions of Flash are essentially the same, this is no longer as bad a problem.

      As I mentioned before, you'd get optimal performance results on native code, but depending on the needs of your App, Flash should be enough. The Eco Zoo, a really cute and impressive full-3D Flash site with N64-level polygon graphics (built by Masayuki Kido aka ROXIK on his custom Sharikura 3D Engine) runs pretty fast on the Google Nexus One (and this is surprising because it wasn't targeted at mobile at all! See what real optimization can accomplish? Those Japanese coders are really crazy good!). This videoblog review by Thibault Imbault will show you actual Flash 10.1 performance on the Nexus One.

      Also, you mentioned you're doing this in the context of K-12. You can't go wrong with Flash then as it's the de facto standard for building multimedi animated and interactive e-learning content.

      --
      http://twitter.com/object404
  24. Thanks for your time by HW_Hack · · Score: 2, Informative

    I want to thank the Slashdot community for comments - suggestions - perspective - etc. And yes even the zingers - diatribes - and "in my opinion .." posts. I knew this could be considered a flame-bait post but i have to be honest here ... I don't even own a iPhone or smart phone or an android device. So parts of this market are not obvious to me. However I have been testing/using an iPad for our school district and it has impressed me. I'll also say Apple got as many things wrong in the iPad as they got right. And I have so far only cursory insights into the SDKs for either device.

    So this was a post to help me gather more input. While I was indeed swayed towards android briefly --- I will take a serious shot this Fall - Winter - Spring coding in iOS environment. This is partially driven by my current work in K12 (Apple and i-devices have a strong pull) but also because Apple understands that average consumers don't care whats "under the hood" (open or closed environments) they just want easy to use devices and a "safe" one stop shopping place for apps. For all their faults - Apple has had the "corporate fortitude" to build the iTunes realm and foresight to make the app store. This is the part of the android ecosystem I find most concerning. There is no doubt Google could pull such things off if they focused on it, but IMHO Google doesn't want to invest the effort into it.

    Thanks for the all the fish ...

    --
    Its not the years, its the mileage .....
  25. Righhhhht. by Mathinker · · Score: 2, Informative

    Insightful? I rather doubt that "Angry Birds" is the average development model, especially for someone who looks to Slashdot for free advice:

    The initial cost to develop Angry Birds was estimated to exceed €100,000, not including money spent on the subsequent updates.

    Don't know about you, but I'm not about to put up $134K of my own money for a chance to make it rich from the iOS marketplace. (Yes, they sold ~6.5 million copies --- in this case.)