Slashdot Mirror


Google Pulls Plug On Programming For the Masses

theodp writes "Google has decided to pull the plug on Android App Inventor, which was once touted as a game-changer for introductory computer science. In an odd post, Google encourages folks to 'Get Started!' with the very product it's announcing will be discontinued as a Google product. The move leaves CS Prof David Wolber baffled. ' In the case of App Inventor,' writes Wolber, 'the decision affects more than just your typical early adopter techie. It hurts kids and schools, and outfits like Iridescent, who use App Inventor in their Technovation after-school programs for high school girls, and Youth Radio's Mobile Action Lab, which teaches app building to kids in Oakland California. You've hurt professors and K-12 educators who have developed new courses and curricula with App Inventor at the core. You've hurt universities who have redesigned their programs.' Wolber adds: 'Even looking at it from Google's perspective, I find the decision puzzling. App Inventor was a public relations dream. Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented groups — this is good press for a company continually in the news for anti-trust and other far less appealing issues. And the cost-benefit of the cut was negligible-believe it or not, App Inventor was a small team of just 5+ employees! The Math doesn't make sense.'"

236 comments

  1. It has been seen before by zget · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone who still does anything serious with Google's products kind of deserves it. Google has been for years putting some product up just to completely discontinue it soon enough. Unlike desktop software, Google discontinuing product means that you really cannot use it anymore. Google is really hurting itself and their image with this shit and ensuring competitors products like from Microsoft will continue to be widely used.

    1. Re:It has been seen before by ShakaUVM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, I was just at a workshop today where the presenter was bitterly remarking that some history-related search function she was going to show us had just been yanked by Google.

      App Inventor always seemed like a toy to me, not really capable of even making, say, an app for checkers. That said, it provided a really nice GUI for doing event/handler coding, easy enough for kids to understand.

      I was debating teaching it to teachers... glad I didn't now.

    2. Re:It has been seen before by oakgrove · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not sure why you went on an off topic rant against Google's other products but in the case of App Inventor, Google has agreed to open source the whole thing. Which is great because as good as AI is, it leaves a bit to be desired. Honeycomb support in particular. Kudos to Google for not just taking their toys and going home but freely giving them away to benefit the rest of us and ultimately ensuring that App Inventor will always be an available tool no matter what happens behind the scenes.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    3. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also the math does make sense 600k per year... JUST for the devs.

      API spin is not good. I am currently fighting this problem internally. Some devs do not realize that changing out APIs or dropping support on the floor for old ones seems to piss people off...

      Dont court me then leave me standing at the altar thinking what the fuck...

      Do it a couple of times and *any* new API you come up with will not be used. Your going to drop it in a year or two anyway...

      MS did not end up in a position of power because of anything special. Its simple compatibility is BUILT in to their culture. They put it in they support it for 10+ years at a crack. They may not be adding new to something but they at least leave it there for you to use.

    4. Re:It has been seen before by Earl+The+Squirrel · · Score: 0

      Yeah, there should be a web page for ALL the various products that Google has killed, and some of the "impact" assessment. I mean how many is it by now?
      Geeze, off the top of my head I can think of a few... Wave, Gears, Bookmark sync, Google Answers, Google Video, Dodgeball, etc, etc.

      Using a Google tool in any sort of "production" environment is a real crap shoot, in my opinon...

    5. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not good enough! We're worried about all the women and children! The poor, helpless things. What will they do now that their entire educational system has been dismantled by google?! Those monsters. Why do they hate children and women and teachers and schools and learning and children so much?

      [tldr; jesus fuck, that summary was annoying]

    6. Re:It has been seen before by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      well, MS likes forwards-self-compatibility, yes, but backwards-compatibility and non-MS-compatibility... not so much.

    7. Re:It has been seen before by gumbi+west · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I was thinking to (a) buy an android device and (b) continue to use gmail, but with google focused on server-client computing and shuttering stuff faster than you can say, "wait, I rely on that." neither of these makes much sense.

    8. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah - Google agreeing to allow others to use the source also really helped the spread of Google Wave too, didn't it? Let's face it - App inventor is now officially dead. I tried it and it felt like fun but not powerful enough - but I will miss it since it was a nice little environment that could have been extended over time.

    9. Re:It has been seen before by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      So, while you're peering into your crystal ball there, (you do have one right?) can you tell me how this stock market crisis is going to shake out? My pins are on needles man!

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    10. Re:It has been seen before by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, I'm not sure how making it open source counts as "pulling the plug." The summary is extremely misleading, to say the very least. I wouldn't even be surprised if Google continues developing AI after open sourcing it. In fact, they mention that they are looking to do precisely that, and because of its educational usefulness.

      Seems like /. should be praising this move by Google. If Google doesn't release source code (see: Honeycomb) they're evil, and if they do... they're evil. I'm guessing someone just doesn't like Google. My guess is they don't want to develop it anymore because it just isn't powerful enough to be used for real app development, but they still want people to be able to use it. Good for Google.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    11. Re:It has been seen before by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Informative

      The summary is extremely misleading, to say the very least.

      Whenever I see something submitted by theodp, I make a bet with myself about whether it'll consist of:

      Taking something out of context
      Wild exaggeration
      Just plain old lies

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    12. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a complete dipshit.

    13. Re:It has been seen before by zget · · Score: 0

      Because when Google pulls of their development team of some of their product, it practically dies. It has been seen so many times now. But please believe it's different this time. Just like an abusive husband won't hit her wife again if she comes back, as he is different now!

    14. Re:It has been seen before by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Anyone who still does anything serious with Google's products kind of deserves it.

      Ya.. exactly. Google is completely untrustworthy. What they may accomplish through all of this is to get some more patents under its belt to lock up the market just a little bit more.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    15. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's going to go down further. Don't need a crystal ball to see that.

    16. Re:It has been seen before by RichardJenkins · · Score: 1

      Seen what? A company offering a service then open sourcing it when they decide it doesn't fit in with what they do any more?

      Services get obsoleted, if you can't accept that for a given project - then yeah, only use one where agreements that satisfy your needs can be put in place.

      As for the apparent oddity in suggesting people get started whilst announcing the closure of the service, I think the first line in TFA clarifies: "With the winding down of Google Labs, Google will discontinue App Inventor as a Google product and will open source the code."

    17. Re:It has been seen before by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      Wow, way to keep it classy. If you are actually comparing spinning off a software program to domestic violence, you need some serious help.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    18. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Tossing some source on a repository doesnt mean shit if they don't provide support and try to build a community around it.

      Apple open sourced Darwin.. What came of that? It was an empty gesture. Apple gets to look like they're giving back, when clearly they're only willing to take from the community.

      "Here's a ton of undocumented bullshit code full of magic numbers if anyone wants to reverse engineer it on your own. "

      Means nothing on its own.

    19. Re:It has been seen before by sarysa · · Score: 1

      Well, everyone knows there are no women on the internet, but all hackers are children. Without AI, Anonymous will run out of new members within the next decade.

      --
      Charisma is the measure of someone's ability to lie with a straight face.
    20. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like an abusive husband won't hit her wife again if she comes back, as he is different now!

      Your gender bending amuses me.

    21. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All you have to do is marry it, and it won't go down any more.

    22. Re:It has been seen before by JuicyBrain · · Score: 2

      Hey !

      Be kind to him. His comment was very helpful. At first, I was confused. I didn't get it at all, but I thought of his analogy for a while and then it hit me...
      Now I know why my girlfriend left me ! :-)

      Thank you, I'll be here all night.

    23. Re:It has been seen before by gorzek · · Score: 1

      How the fuck did this get "Insightful" unless a bunch of people didn't even bother to read the announcement and see that Google is open sourcing it?

      Jesus Christ, Slashdot.

    24. Re:It has been seen before by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

      You can make that argument for just about any proprietary platform. Schools should just use an OSS stack. If it doesn't include what they want, teach their kids to develop it.

    25. Re:It has been seen before by JAlexoi · · Score: 0

      AppInventor released as FOSS in 3...2...

    26. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, way to keep it classy. If you are actually comparing spinning off a software program to domestic violence, you need some serious help.

      Shut up, bitch, and fix me a turkey pot pie.

    27. Re:It has been seen before by Wovel · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Google has not released much if any of their failed projects.

      They claim to be here, but we should wait and see since their track record on promises is pretty dismal.

    28. Re:It has been seen before by VGPowerlord · · Score: 0

      Google has not released much if any of their failed projects.

      They claim to be here, but we should wait and see since their track record on promises is pretty dismal.

      No, they could release it as "Honeycomb Open Source."

      Oh wait, they already have!

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    29. Re:It has been seen before by RKBA · · Score: 1

      Google has been stinking for awhile. Now it's beginning to suck.

    30. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Google Maps, Google Docs, Gmail, Google Translate, Picasa, YouTube, etc.

      All those Google products that people do "serious things" with that have been discontinued. /sarcasm

      That doesn't even include the incremental innovations they've been doing for each of those products.

      Google is really hurting itself and their image with this shit

      No, anti-Google fanboi-ism isn't going to give Google credit for anything regardless of what they do. Kind of like App Inventor and how they're going to open source the code and try to get it supported through the open source channel so it can continue to benefit education.

    31. Re:It has been seen before by smitty97 · · Score: 1

      the definition of open: "mkdir appinventor; cd appinventor; repo init -u git://appinventor.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make"

      ERROR: NOT FOUND

      --
      mod me funny
    32. Re:It has been seen before by bberens · · Score: 1

      Is anyone still using GWT?

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    33. Re:It has been seen before by CFTM · · Score: 2

      Since when does releasing something to open source constitute creating a community around that thing? That's not Google's job. That our job, you know ... the community. And if no one in the community, us, takes it upon themselves to make this entity matter, why should it be Google's responsibility to do so?

      If Darwin had mattered to the community enough, it would have been taken on by someone. But it didn't, so all we're left with are bitter folks who never tried to do anything for the platform they so loved. Obviously, I'm glossing over some of the finer points, as there are outside influences that can cause an open source project to fail, but at its heart an open source project needs to be spearheaded by a community to be successful.

      Google provided the community the rock but didn't push it up the hill ... after all if they did that, they'd be the ones holding the rock at the end of the day and that would be insanity on many many levels.

    34. Re:It has been seen before by CFTM · · Score: 1

      And people reverse engineer pace makers, without the "bullshit code" due to various motivations. Sounds to me like no one was motivated enough with Darwin.

    35. Re:It has been seen before by Flipao · · Score: 1

      Yes, now the Honeycomb source is out you can troll about the App Inventor source for a few months until it's out I guess. Then you can move on to the next project while pointing out they are clearly evil and make claims about their horrible track record.

    36. Re:It has been seen before by whizzard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Whenever I see something submitted by theodp, I make a bet with myself about

      Do you usually win?

    37. Re:It has been seen before by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Depends on how hard she's hit. Perhaps he released her with open sores.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    38. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like so many projects go "open source" the same way old aircraft go to the boneyard.

      Parts may be useful, but the whole is abandoned.

      I don't think /. should praise or not praise anyone, I think the members and us AC's do both automatically.

    39. Re:It has been seen before by __aawbkb6799 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      All you have to do is marry it, and it won't go down any more.

      mod parent up!

    40. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh you're so right. I bet they shut down Gmail any day now. Probably Docs and App Engine will come first though. Then it's only a matter of time before they shut down Youtube, G+, and Search, and then liquidate. Get out while you still can!!! The Skynet is falling!!!

    41. Re:It has been seen before by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      He doesn't need a crystal ball. All he needs to do is say what is going to happen and it will surely happen. You know this is true because he said so.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    42. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Isn't there a joke about the NYT that says if the world was ending tomorrow, the headline would read: "World ending tomorrow, women and children hit hardest."?

    43. Re:It has been seen before by Jonner · · Score: 1

      Anyone who still does anything serious with Google's products kind of deserves it. Google has been for years putting some product up just to completely discontinue it soon enough. Unlike desktop software, Google discontinuing product means that you really cannot use it anymore. Google is really hurting itself and their image with this shit and ensuring competitors products like from Microsoft will continue to be widely used.

      This is not insightful at all. Anyone who read TFA would know that not only is Google planning to release the Android App Inventor as Open Source software, but a non-profit organization will take over management of it. It was a mistake to rely on it in the past because Google could pull it at any time. However, once the code is released it may make sense to "do something serious" with it since they will no longer have that power.

    44. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe, Sir, that GP was referring to a lack of faith in the position that this instance of Google pulling their dev team off of a project is somehow different to every other instance of Google pulling their dev team off of a project (The established result of said action being that the project dies), and comparing that lack of faith to a similar lack of faith in the position that some wife beater has "changed" (the inference being that he is no longer a wife beater).

    45. Re:It has been seen before by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Google Wave?

    46. Re:It has been seen before by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Apple open sourced Darwin.. What came of that? It was an empty gesture. Apple gets to look like they're giving back, when clearly they're only willing to take from the community.

      No Apple user in his right mind wants to go use Darwin+X11 so it's not very visible. But actually the open sourced XNU kernel has been hacked extensively by the people in the hackingtosh community sprouting one fork and a bunch of hacks.

      Then there's the webkit, which apple developed from the khtml base and which is now used by virtually every smartphone out there. Is that not giving back ?

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    47. Re:It has been seen before by davester666 · · Score: 2

      Um, where exactly is this Honeycomb source code you speak of?

      Sure, there are tablets using it, but I'm pretty sure the link would show up on the first page of links googling "android honeycomb source"...and I can't see it.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    48. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And on the internet, the kids are FBI agents. Wait a minute, by transitivity, all hackers are ***CARRIER LOST***

    49. Re:It has been seen before by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      You can run Windows 1 applications on 32-bit versions of Windows 7.

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    50. Re:It has been seen before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People like him need to stop and think about what you'd say to a woman you care about, with two swollen, black eyes.




      The answer is nothing. Goddamnit you already told her twice.

    51. Re:It has been seen before by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      More often that not, especially if I bet on option D - all of the above.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. no surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    App Inventor was the Visual Basic of mobile dev. It allowed any untrained monkeys to churn out malware infested apps in 5 mins.

    1. Re:no surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      App Inventor was the Visual Basic of mobile dev. It allowed any untrained monkeys to churn out malware infested apps in 5 mins.

      Oh look at the trained monkey who writes code the same way.. poor you.

    2. Re:no surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. Writing decent malware takes skill.

  3. So simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented groups

    So simple, even a woman can do it.

    1. Re:So simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      even bisexual half-black-latinos, half-vietnamese can use it.

    2. Re:So simple by Mean+Variance · · Score: 1

      So simple, even a woman can do it.

      Yeah, that caught my eye too. My manager (woman), team architect (woman), staff engineer (woman) and last 3 dev hires (women) really depended on tools to empower themselves.

      Maybe I need some male empowerment since the 3 women on my team of 5 outrank me. Or, that's just how things came together.

    3. Re:So simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So simple, even a woman can do it.

      Yeah, that caught my eye too. My manager (woman), team architect (woman), staff engineer (woman) and last 3 dev hires (women) really depended on tools to empower themselves.

      Maybe I need some male empowerment since the 3 women on my team of 5 outrank me. Or, that's just how things came together.

      Dude, all you need is a dose of 'roids and maybe Viagra. You will be empowered to the max!

    4. Re:So simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heheh... they use tools to empower themselves...

      giggity.

    5. Re:So simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tampons R' Us.

    6. Re:So simple by makubesu · · Score: 2

      I think we'll have to wait for Ice Cream Sandwich to put a woman on this job.

    7. Re:So simple by CCarrot · · Score: 1

      Maybe I need some male empowerment

      Or perhaps you should get a job at a company that doesn't manufacture tampons or kitchen products?

      I bet with that many women working in close proximity to one another, there's a week or so each month where you DREAD going to work, isn't there?

      ...whispers the anonymous coward in a crowded forum...'nuff said.

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
    8. Re:So simple by CCarrot · · Score: 1

      Can you tell us the name of your company?

      I want to make sure I never buy any of your products.

      Munitions R' Us. We're having a blow out sale, do drop by!

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
    9. Re:So simple by internettoughguy · · Score: 1

      Who the fuck modded this up?

    10. Re:So simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not our fault you are all douched up in the workplace.
      How's your man purse holding up?

  4. Overessegerate much? by Haedrian · · Score: 1

    "Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented group"

    How dramatic. If it could do my bed and wash my dishes it'd be perfect.

    1. Re:Overessegerate much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How dramatic. If it could do me in bed and make me a sammich it'd be perfect.

      FTFY

    2. Re:Overessegerate much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You can tell the author is a professor. The National Science Foundation requires that there be an "outreach" component to research, so grant proposals always include a patronizing paragraph about how the proposed work will involve and/or improve-the-lives-of women and disadvantaged schoolchildren from the inner cities. Of course, none of this ever actually happens; they hardly bother to teach the competent undergrads at their own institutions, let alone 17-year-olds who still can't read. That would be a distraction from writing the next proposal. Nevertheless, because this kind of writing is so incentivised, eventually professors end up doing it everywhere whether they're trying to or not. Like here.

      Every time you construct a game with monetary incentives -- like academic research -- people figure out how to win it. Unfortunately, the behaviors that do this usually aren't the ones you actually wanted to promote.

    3. Re:Overessegerate much? by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      It does, I will say, iron shirts acceptably well.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
  5. Open Sourcing != Pulling the plug. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    from TFA:

    "With the winding down of Google Labs, Google will discontinue App Inventor as a Google product and will open source the code. Additionally, because of App Inventor’s success in the education space, we are exploring opportunities to support the educational use of App Inventor on an open source platform."

    1. Re:Open Sourcing != Pulling the plug. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'll end up having the same effect for the users.

  6. If I remember this right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...this thing hardly let you "invent" apps, so much as create boring cookie cutter apps.

    1. Re:If I remember this right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...this thing hardly let you "invent" apps, so much as create boring cookie cutter apps.

      And who are Google to try to remove cookie cutters from women and children? I need my cookies cut!

  7. From the horses mouth... by itchythebear · · Score: 5, Informative

    Quoted from the original source at Google:

    With the winding down of Google Labs, Google will discontinue App Inventor as a Google product and will open source the code. Additionally, because of App Inventor’s success in the education space, we are exploring opportunities to support the educational use of App Inventor on an open source platform.

    source

    --
    If what I just said sounded like a troll, it was probably just a failed attempt at humor.
    1. Re:From the horses mouth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If this is true (open-sourcing the code) then no one has anything to complain about. As they've done before, (Etherpad, for example) Google will take reasonable steps to assure that those who've adopted a particular technology aren't thrown overboard without at least some recourse. It may not be ideal, having to stand up the infrastructure to support the open-source offering, but it's better than just pulling the plug.

    2. Re:From the horses mouth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Hold on there, buck-o! Your "reason" and "facts" have no place on Nu-Slashdot where no opportunity is wasted by 2million+ uid users to bash Google and name-drop Microsoft.

    3. Re:From the horses mouth... by itchythebear · · Score: 2

      Additionally, David Wolber may just be upset because he won't be selling any more books...

      --
      If what I just said sounded like a troll, it was probably just a failed attempt at humor.
    4. Re:From the horses mouth... by PickyH3D · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Just like they took reasonable steps to open source Android 3.0. And Android 3.1.

      The App Inventor is now the community's problem. Had any other company done this, then people would be up in arms that there is no obvious transition.

      How many people are going to transition to whatever fragmented open source offerings appear? Half, at best.

    5. Re:From the horses mouth... by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      If this is true (open-sourcing the code) then no one has anything to complain about.

      False

      but it's better than just pulling the plug.

      True.

      Open source gives you the opportunity to make changes to software. It doesn't give you the ability, time, skills, or business relationships to do so. Google offered this up to build relationships with educators, and then said, 'sorry, nevermind'.

      It is entirely possible that the non profit group being handed app inventor will actually produce a better product out of it. But part of the appeal is that it was Google offering it (which makes a lot of difference to people who aren't techies in the first place), and the idea that this product had the long legs of a major backer. I don't want to do up a course in a language that will be gone before the semester is over, let alone before next year, and then have to start again.

    6. Re:From the horses mouth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. Just like they took reasonable steps to open source Android 3.0. And Android 3.1.

      You entitlement minded little snit. Every byte of GPL'd code for Honeycomb is open sourced and can be downloaded right this minute. Google can release the code to the Apache licensed portion whenever they damn well please. Or not. While you're crying in your beer, cowboy, maybe you can console yourself with the other 25 million-plus lines of code Google has released in their history. Or the complete source to Chromium-OS which is completely transparently developed in the open and can be downloaded at any time. People like you make me sick.

    7. Re:From the horses mouth... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Who says they have to transition? Presumably version 0.0 of the open source version will be the same as the last closed source one. It won't be any worse than the existing version, even if it's no better.

      Going forward, if there's a need someone somewhere will pick it up. If you're that bothered, why don't you do it?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:From the horses mouth... by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      "Google offering it" .... "and then said, 'sorry, nevermind'." ... "the idea that this product had the long legs of a major backer"

      False premises, all three.

      AI was not an offering or a product with any sort of backing. It was Google allowing a small group of Googler's to test out their 20% toy. That's all. This is a commonly-known aspect of Google's modus operendi. It's clearly stated on the About page:

      App Inventor is a part of Google Labs, a playground for Google Engineers and adventurous Google users

      It's amazing how people keep feigning outrage when Google tries to act like a profit-seeking business. It didn't just shut it down, but gave a 3-month notice. "End of the year" means educators can run their existing program for a full semester and update it in time for the next one based on what happens with AI. And Google isn't actually saying that AI will be unavailable to educators - the only thing that we know is going away in 90 days is the current URL:

      Additionally, because of App Inventor’s success in the education space, we are exploring opportunities to support the educational use of App Inventor on an open source platform. As a result of these changes App Inventor will be available through the end of the year but users should expect the current App Inventor URL [appinventor.googlelabs.com] to change sometime in the next 90 days.

      People seriously need to get a grip and relax their overdeveloped cynicism reflex. Then take just one damn minute to understand what's actually going on in the world rather than relying on the ubiquitous sensationalist editorializing and spreading the false information contained therein.

    9. Re:From the horses mouth... by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Just like they took reasonable steps to open source Android 3.0. And Android 3.1

      Don't be obtuse. Google has released the code for every version of Android prior to 3.0. They've clearly stated their intent to release the code for the 3.x branch as well when it is ready. The reason for the delay is that it is currently severely broken for the vast majority of devices that people want to run it on.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    10. Re:From the horses mouth... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      maybe you can console yourself with the other 25 million-plus lines of code Google has released in their history.

      You know, given that the Windows 2000 source was around 29 million lines of code... that a huge company like Google has released a cumulative total of 25 million lines of code doesn't actually sound like a lot.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    11. Re:From the horses mouth... by unrtst · · Score: 1

      Bump. I agree, though I think the parent may just be a good troll.

      It's double painful to hear it mixed with "Had any other company done this, then people would be up in arms..."

      How about turning that around - what other mobile OS companies are open sourcing that much of their offering? Microsoft - zilch (or near zilch). Apple - only the bare minimum (see Safari - they contribute to webkit, but not the browser source).

      Why isn't PickyH3D up in arms about every other piece of proprietary software out there that has ever gone dead? This happens to tons of other companies and products all the time, except they usually aren't so generous as to offer what they have back as open source. What Google is doing with App Inventor is an ideal example of exactly what should happen if a company wants to discontinue a product (I'm not saying it should be legally mandated - just saying it's awesome, and the only other option that could be considered better would be to put it in public domain or BSD license, but that's just picking the finer points).

    12. Re:From the horses mouth... by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      that a huge company like Google has released a cumulative total of 25 million lines of code doesn't actually sound like a lot.

      Of the percentage of companies Google's size in a position to release source code, who has released more? Probably none. Yes, it is a lot. Of course for some of the more, how should I say, entitled among us, no matter how much is given away, it can never be enough. Sad.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    13. Re:From the horses mouth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google Labs is being phased out. Learn more.

    14. Re:From the horses mouth... by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      We did understand. Whether it was a 20% flex time project or dedicated team, they still put it out the door, with their marketing buzz and their brand behind it. You also recognize that educational tools are not exactly top tier product quality from a major company. If you use visual studio you're stuck trying to teach students actual visual studio, as used by real developers, if you use some learning tool you're getting a best effort. That's always the case.

      3 month notice is nothing in the education business. 1 semester is 4 months, and you have to prep the course several months in advance (including factoring in the curriculum into all future course offerings, and figuring out where this will fit, if at all in terms of equivalences and so on). Usually you plan out two courses in succession, where one builds on the other. CS 101 and 102 sort of thing. If I had a course offering based on app inventor I'd be looking for something new at this point. Better to redo everything now than put it in students hands and have it die with the course (which is a big risk), that just makes students unhappy with us for teaching them useless shit. Unfortunately, from what I understand, some schools have already started the fall term in the US.

      Premise 1: Google offered it. True.
      Premise 2: Google changed it's mind. Again, clearly true.
      Premise 3: How long has google kept major products in Labs? Picasa, gmail, calendar, wave etc? The point of a lab is to test out ideas and see if they're any good. If they are, keep them around. Educational resources from non education businesses are always going to be at the level of 'Labs" projects. There's nothing wrong with that particularly. Legalese is not brand perception. They are allowed to do whatever they want with their own product suite. This isn't a lawsuit claiming they are in breach of contract, this is a a reaction to shifting it outside the google family. So again, true. They regularly run major products with millions of users as 'labs' projects.

      The point is to use the power of the Google brand to attract people to use it. The App Inventor Foundation isn't going to have the same ring to it with students, we'd be just as good trying to use Alice or Java or C++ because non techies have no F'in clue what any of those are to start. Saying "this is based on a great new project from Google" or "great new project from Apple" and they sit up and pay attention. I'm about an hour away from waterloo (home of RIM) and they gave us a bunch of tools to do a really interesting set of class projects on blackberries for senior CS students. The moment we told them we were using blackberries everyone groaned. They don't want something that sounds dead, even if all of the students involved have a much better chance of ever being employed by RIM than Apple or Google.

    15. Re:From the horses mouth... by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      It really sounds like you didn't since you're still suggesting a toy entering Google Labs implies support and are making the same suggestion that AI will die and die unexpectedly (the exact points I said people were missing). Just because Google makes something available for public testing does not mean it has any corporate backing, so there was neither an official position, nor a position reversal. I don't know where you got "marketing buzz"- this is nothing like Wave where significant resources were allocated. Developing a prototype that allows building tiny apps on a static version of Android is one thing. Committing to long-term support of an unprofitable product on a rapidly evolving operating system is a whole other matter. As long as something is in Labs, it shouldn't be used for anything mission critical.

      You first explain that three months is too short a timespan to consider changes a curriculum, but then you would blame Google for your decision on basing long-term course planning around a completely experimental and unsupported technology? Google is doing as much as it can to mitigate potential damage, including continuing support for at least a full semester if not indefinitely. If the AI loses support in December and this hurts your schedule, that was only your failure to plan responsibly. You want a reliable technology to teach which is guaranteed to get them a job? Stick with C++. Want to still get kids excited? Use Python and constantly remind them "Googlers use this."

      The Blackberry anecdote... Really? Taking RIM's toys mostly helps RIM maintain a desperately small developer base - it isn't necessarily helping the kids. Your last point is particularly nonsensical since the vast majority of mobile application developers don't work for the companies that built the devices (who need to know real programming like C++ and Java incidentally), so encouraging students to study BlackBerry out of convenience rather a more future-proof platform isn't something to be proud of.

    16. Re:From the horses mouth... by PickyH3D · · Score: 1

      The equivalent to this offering from Microsoft is their admittedly more complicated Visual Studio Express series. Microsoft makes extremely good IDEs, and they have continued to support their free side of it even in the face of a bad economy. Considering the swathes of different Express IDEs available, Microsoft almost certainly is paying more than 5 people to maintain them. This includes their C++ tools as well, and not just everything-.NET.

      Apple used to give away its development tools (XCode), which I am personally not a huge fan of (I have not tried the most recent incarnation of them where they molded many into the XCode program rather than having them all separate), but many people love them. The entire suite is now $5. A nominal buy-in fee, as long as you ignore the fact that you need an Apple computer to get them in the first place.

      Should either of those companies dump those offerings, then I will be equally upset. In general, both proprietary and open source software can go the way of the dinosaurs. But, when it's new, cheap, and useful for learning, I see added value. Especially from a company that prides itself on not doing jerk-things.

      I'm far less concerned that they are or are not open sourcing the code because very few products survive the transition. This was a dead-win for Google to maintain, and practically a waste of time to cancel.

    17. Re:From the horses mouth... by PickyH3D · · Score: 1

      If you're that bothered, why don't you do it?

      Because I am not going to maintain a cheap development tool for a company that is too cheap to do it for themselves.

    18. Re:From the horses mouth... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      But you expect someone else to do it for you? Asshat.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  8. Where is the need... by jaymz2k4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented groups

    I said this when it came out and I'll say it again - where is the real demand for this from these people the author is quoting? I've yet to come across someone itching to create apps but with no desire to learn development. Those people who do want/think they want/have a need for an app have just zero interest in spending the (however small) effort doing it themselves and prefer to lean on techy friends.

    --
    jaymz
    1. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a poll starting at kindergarten, and I think you'll find *quite* a lot of kids want to "Make games and programs like these and become rich" when they grow up... Especially when they hear about their "Dad's uncle's best friend's son who is selling apps for *millions*".

      I mean, this *is* the iPhone generation. And the iPad has been topping christmas and birthday wish lists since it arrived. When kids like tech, kids want to make tech - so let them - and show'em how.

    2. Re:Where is the need... by vlm · · Score: 4, Funny

      Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented groups

      I said this when it came out and I'll say it again - where is the real demand for this from these people the author is quoting?

      Supposedly that demand is the result of anti-kid / anti-woman in other dev tools. Ah that must be emacs with its "kitchen sink" comparisons, you know, keep em barefoot, pregnant and in the KITCHEN. Of course then there is vi. My guess is vi is anti-child, because you hit escape about every 5th keystroke, and everyone knows from horror movies that some mass murder ESCAPEs and kills all the teenagers in the movie. As for perl, well you got the camel book, and camels are from the middle east, and they're not known for their feminist outlook on life.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Where is the need... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      where is the real demand for this from these people the author is quoting

      Teaching. When you introduce kids to music, you start with rhythm sticks and recorders - not a theremin. You don't ask them if they want to be introduced to music - you just start exposing them to it. Some will roll with it and some won't, but all will be more well-rounded for the exposure.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is satire...

      I *HOPE* this is satire...

      This is very funny satire...

    5. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I AM ITCHING and every time I try to learn development, I am instantly completely overwhelmed with the concepts of 'object oriented programming' and with the arcane syntax and the odd rules of declaring a variable (or not) and other stuff, and this is all before I even get a GUI to my app, this is all backend stuff. I am a computer guy for sure, but I learned "10 goto 20" and this stuff has been baffling me for over 5 years now, as I try to pick up languages etc. In an immersed learning environment where this is my life, I could see success. But in my normal life I just don't have that much time to learn and enough people willing to answer my stupid questions.

      AppInventor allowed me to create 1.5 apps and now I am getting the rug pulled from under me.

    6. Re:Where is the need... by scamper_22 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There's also the reality that you can't make programming much more friendly than most of today languages.

      I taught high school computer science and its amazing to see the difference between kids. But more importantly, the concepts are what is hard. It is not the expression of those concepts.

      I don't know what it is with so many academics and educational people who seem to think the concepts are easy... we just need the right way to express them.

      The same kid who struggles with the notion of a variable in algebra is the same kid who will struggle with the notion of a variable in a programming language. No amount of drawing boxes to show it is 'holding' a value will help any more than saying this is X.

      These are just difficult concepts: variables, sequential steps, algorithms... Most of us who program take these things as trivial. Most of us who did quite well in school take these things as given. Most of us who naturally think analytically about issues take these things for granted.

      That's just not how most of the population thinks. I have friends who are teachers who still don't understand what fractions really mean and how to do basic math on them.

      These are just hard concepts. Part of me thinks that such people may never get it until they change their entire way of thinking. If you brain cannot comprehend the idea of a variable; you will never be able to think analytically; and you'll never be able to program.

      I don't say that in a bad way. I'll probably never understand the complexity of modern art until I change my entire way of thinking.

      Yet, time and time again, we see these tools which claim to make programming easy. Do you really think the big block is that a kid cannot comprehend an IF statement, yet if you draw a big diamond in a flow chart, it all becomes clear? No, that's the easy part.

      Time and time again, we see educational academics trying to say we just need to express ideas in a way students can understand.

      Yet, it is the concept that is hard. People can easily learn the different expressions of that concept.

      But anyways. There's no demand for products like this except by academia and the education bureaucracy.

    7. Re:Where is the need... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented groups

      The implicit argument here is that these groups are too dumb to be able to learn proper development themselves, which I find very insulting.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    8. Re:Where is the need... by jimmifett · · Score: 1

      Actually, that is, IMO, a rather stupid approach. I taught my daughter how to read musical scales and how each note represents a key on the piano and started her off with twinkle twinkle little star, a familiar "hello, world" song. You don't start with gimped lame toy instruments. The kids aren't stupid, they know they are playing "fakey" things and are insulted. They are nothing more than mass produced, cheaply made things for parents to expose thier children to an inkling of music without a heavy investment cost. Teaching... right.

    9. Re:Where is the need... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I taught my daughter how to read musical scales and how each note represents a key on the piano and started her off with twinkle twinkle little star, a familiar "hello, world" song.

      That's exactly my point - a piano can be a hell of a thing to master, but it is very simple to hack at - simpler even than a recorder. My point wasn't to use "fakey" things, but to introduce using things with instant gratification.

      There is nothing analogous to a piano in the GUI programming world. That is, there is no language - no way to make "apps" - that is as simple as a piano and also as hard to master (yet as powerful) as a piano.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    10. Re:Where is the need... by Politburo · · Score: 1

      The recorder is a real instrument, and uses the same scales and songs that you used to teach your daughter. Sure the versions in schools are cheap plastic, but it's not gimped in any significant way. You can't play the 3rd octave, but that's irrelevant for a beginning student since they don't even get into 2nd octave..

      I'm not even sure what your beef is. It seems like you want to justify your purchase of a piano, perhaps. (Sorry, "investment")

    11. Re:Where is the need... by krinderlin · · Score: 1

      This.

      My alma mater's computer science department was overrun by this massive Java versus Python debate. It was further driven by this "Hello world" versus "Computational Media" bend too*. I was the primary tutor for the lab and hence was tapped to explain what sorts of problems the tutors were repeatedly covering. The explanation I tried to give repeatedly was that at the end of the semester, the students in the first level introductory class just didn't know what the hell a variable was, a reference was, and they completely lacked the ability to understand even functional, much less OO programming.

      On the side, we started giving surveys to students we tutored. We also managed to pull "anonymized" data on the students, primarily their high school math grades. Direct, almost undeniable correlation. Over 90% of students who failed our introductory classes earned three or more C's on math courses beginning with Algebra. A majority (around 60%, I believe) were in remedial math classes at the college.

      Admittedly, I don't push the remedial math statistic that much. I took a 4 year break between High School and College and failed the university's math placement test. I was placed in remedial pre-algebra. I worked with the department head and he said that he would put me in College Algebra, which at my school was actually a weird hybrid Algebra/Pre-Calculus class. The time out of school left me staring at polynomials and going, "This is a polynomial. There's an algorithm I don't remember to turn this into two polynomials. This is a quadratic. If I arrange it so it equals zero I can use an equation I don't remember to find the values of X for which it crosses the X-axis." A quick review with a tutor the week before and the 100 level class got me back on track and I was on to Calculus, Differential Equations (the absolute ceiling of what I can do in "applied" math) Linear Algebra, Math Modeling For Business, Set Logic (murdered my GPA and cost me summa cum laude), and a few actuarial classes. However, I feel that pre-college math grades are a definite indicator of later failure in Computer Science.

      *Computational Media was used to mean that you give students this pre-built library that represented media is overly simplified forms. For instance, a JPEG could be read in and would be represented as an object with a width, height, and a one dimensional array of Pixels. There was a "sound editor" where you wrote an object that had a function that modified an array of Samples and then you could listen to the before and after effects of the sound. There were a few other things. It was all Java and missed the point that someone who wants to be a computer programmer will find "Hello, World" just as fascinating as "Show Picture".

    12. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, App Inventor is based on MIT's Scratch. So, a visit to the Scratch website might be a place to start...

      http://scratch.mit.edu/

      What greets us when we get there?

      Check out the 1,962,884 projects from around the world!

      So, there you go. You never have to say it ever again. You're welcome.

    13. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're right. I taught myself to program when I was around 7 using books and magazines. People thought I was smart, but I had trouble with other things that other kinds found easy (some math problems, etc). I think people are just wired differently and have different strengths and weaknesses, and overcoming those is very difficult.

    14. Re:Where is the need... by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      What you are trying to describe here is something called abstract symbol manipulation. Some people can do it, others cannot.

      The problem for people conceptually is that you are dealing with manipulating object Q through a symbolic relationship with object X. Even when both objects are real-world things the abstraction of the relationship between X and Q stymies some people. They don't get it, they don't understand the relationship and they are never going to. The same person that can't do this then can take a screwdriver and put something together that utterly frustrated someone else. The two abilities are not related in the slightest bit and this confuses people still further.

      It is important to understand that this is not a learned ability. You either can do abstract symbol manipulation or you can't. You cannot teach it, you don't "get better at it with practice" and the people that cannot do it will never pick it up. Probably the best analogy is sort of a left-brain vs. right-brain kind of thing. There is no doubt that there is a physical manifestation to this in the brain.

      What this means is that the RMSish idea that we should all be programmers and we can only truly be free by being programmers is utter hogwash. It also means that anyone beleiving that all we have to do is retrain assembly line workers and they can be "knowledge workers" in the new economy is barking up the wrong tree. Taking someone that is doing a good job at manipulating physical objects and assuming them to be able to be trained them to manipulate symbolic objects is in for a surprise. As I suspect a great number of people in the adult education field have found and not bothered to tell too many people.

      Jerry Pournelle has touched on this subject some in his non-fiction writings and it is worth digging out as much as you possibly can about this. If people do not understand this - people in education, people in business and people in goverment - we are going to see some very tough times ahead. From everything I have seen, people do not understand this at all and most people in education, business and government think it is just a matter of training. They are wrong.
      We aren't talking about people that are disabled in any sense, but if we don't correct people's impressions of this and how it is immutable we are going to build a society where these people truly are disabled.

      Gosh, if this is true, how come you haven't heard about it? Because it is rather subtle and it certainly imparts a certain class separation which people do not like.

      The next question is the really hard one. If some significant percentage of people simply cannot become "knowledge workers" or "abstract symbol manipulators" in the new economy and all the factory jobs disappear, just exactly what are these people supposed to do? If the mission is to send everyone through college so they can learn to use computers to manipulate abstract symbols, what happens to the people that can't?

    15. Re:Where is the need... by bberens · · Score: 1

      If you're serious, respond to this with some way for me to contact you. I grew up in OO land (as opposed to procedural land) so it's the "natural" way of me to think about coding. I've been writing Java for about 10 years and even though I haven't done more than a tutorial or two on Android development I would be happy to help by answering your "stupid questions" related to the Java language, Object Oriented design patterns, or just object orientation in general.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    16. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The same kid who struggles with the notion of a variable in algebra is the same kid who will struggle with the notion of a variable in a programming language. No amount of drawing boxes to show it is 'holding' a value will help any more than saying this is X.

      For some values of kid. In some other cases, of course drawing a box holding a value can help a person understand the concept.

    17. Re:Where is the need... by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I taught high school computer science and its amazing to see the difference between kids. But more importantly, the concepts are what is hard. It is not the expression of those concepts.

      At my junior high school, we had a computer class that taught some Basic programming. The thrust of it was just to get kids interested in computers, more than to teach real, practical programming concepts.

      After that, there was nothing until junior year, when my high school offered an AP Computer Programming class. It was taught in Pascal (Apple Pascal, if I'm not mistaken). In order to take that class, you had to pass Algebra, Geometry, and Algebra II. By the time I was even old enough to be eligible to sign up for the class, however, I had already taught myself Basic, Pascal, Forth, assembly language, and C. Taking the class would have just been a perfunctory exercise to get the credit on my transcript. What's more, I couldn't imagine what they could possibly talking about in a high school intro programming class that would require all that math. (What does the slope of a line teach you about for-loops, anyway?)

      These days, I can understand how computer science can be considered a branch of mathematics. But back then, on a purely practical level, I couldn't understand how math related to programming, at all. I was busy flunking out of every math class I could fall asleep in, but programming concepts presented no problems for me.

      What's interesting is that, years later, a friend of mine is a math major, and as part of the curriculum they require all math majors to take some CS classes (intro programming). The classes are taught in C++ and/or Java -- she picked Java. I helped tutor her through the whole semester, and it was really interesting to me to see how much she struggled with the programming material. Why did she struggle? Because she had been through calculus, differential equations, linear algebra, analysis, and all these different math classes ... and, just as an example, a variable in Java is NOT the same thing as a variable in mathematics. In a pure functional language with no side effects, maybe it is. But in Java, like most procedural languages, a variable in memory is really only analogous to the mathematical concept of a variable, and my friend had trouble understanding when a variable would contain the answer to some computation and when it wouldn't, or how the value of a variable mapped to the logical concepts of true and false, and all these different programming things that are unique to the practice of programming and don't have much to do with math.

      Everything comes down to how your individual brain is wired, and after that it's all curriculum. There was no reason for me to learn advanced algebra just to play around with a programming language I already understood, if they weren't going to teach me any actual computer science concepts. Likewise, there was no reason for my friend the math major to learn Java or C++. Why not let her learn something like Scheme -- or better yet, Mathematica, which will probably come in handy for her "real" coursework?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    18. Re:Where is the need... by raddan · · Score: 0
      The problem with your argument is that, even for people who 'get it', programming languages have historically been hard to understand. Maybe you've never seen an algorithm written in assembly or FORTRAN and compared the same algorithm to something written in Ruby or Python? The difference in clarity is incredible, but the computer is [essentially] doing the same thing.

      Sure, abstraction, recursion, iteration-- these are not natural concepts for most people. But that does not mean that they are incapable of understanding them. Indeed, people engage in precisely these activities daily. You might:
      1. talk about tomorrow (abstraction)
      2. take all of your groceries out of your shopping bag (recursion)
      3. count the money in your wallet (iteration)

      Those examples are very easy to understand, so what's the problem? The problem is language. The reason is that programming has a rich technical and mathematical history, and that is reflected in its language. Trust me, there is no bottom to the rabbit hole of technicalities. The guy who sits across from me works on "type algebras", and the whole thing is expressed in first-order predicate calculus. Why? Because he needs to move up to the level of meta-programming to be able to talk about types. But really, it's just a fancy way of saying things like "if you have a list of Animals, you should be able to add Dogs to it." Simple to understand, once you express it simply. In my experience, most mathematical concepts are like this.

      The real issue is that people tend not to talk this way, in general terms. They just do this one thing. Taking groceries out of a bag isn't the same as building a brick wall. Of course, once you've developed the knack for talking about things generally, you realize that, in some sense, emptying your shopping bag and building a brick wall have some commonalities-- they have a similar pattern. If you can't express a technical idea to a lay person, you probably don't understand it yourself. You're just throwing words around.

      Don't like the variable -> box analogy? How about a lunch bag? Your mom puts food in it. Your job is to eat whatever is in there. See? You don't know what's in the bag (variable), but you do know that, whatever it is, you (a function) are going to eat it. It just takes practice, like anything else. I have yet to see someone fail to understand these concepts when 1) they're presented clearly, and 2) they're actually making an effort to try to understand them. I recently tutored a person in C++ who was on the brink of a nervous meltdown after his first year in CS, and by the end of our tutoring sessions, he had the basics nailed. It doesn't help when you have technical people who harp on generally unimportant differences, like how "pointers are not the same thing as references" and other time-wasters, and that's what confuses newbies.

    19. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's what crackpot libertarians have told you and it sounds right because you live in some comfy burb somewhere. Look lots of kids and women in the US are very advanataged and there's no difference between women and men (at least in comparison to a lot of the world), but there are billions, yes billions, of people living in cultures where women and poor children literally get little to no access to the foundations of education and thinking that allows further study into various areas. That's what democratizing means, making tools that help draw in less advantaged groups, world wide that means women and children (specifically poor children).

    20. Re:Where is the need... by SpasticWeasel · · Score: 1

      Wait, how in the hell is taking groceries out of a bag recursive in any way? If you have bags containing groceries inside of other bags containing groceries maybe, but taking items out of a bag is a seriously bad analogy.

      --
      No sooner do I get over one, then you put a better one right next to me. Bastards.
    21. Re:Where is the need... by leereyno · · Score: 1

      Why should we as a society waste time trying to teach these concepts to people who will never understand them?

      Vocational schools and other types of training were once offered for those who were not college material.

      Today the unspoken and unexamined assumption that every kid is college material is part of why our public schools are so laughably corrupt and dysfunctional.

      --
      Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    22. Re:Where is the need... by svick · · Score: 1

      Well, you could implement taking groceries out of a bag using a recursive function, but it's certainly not recursive by itself.

    23. Re:Where is the need... by steelfood · · Score: 1

      I have friends who are teachers who still don't understand what fractions really mean and how to do basic math on them.

      And people wonder why the state of education in the US is so poor.

      As for the rest of your post, I have to disagree. The concepts you mention are easy. They're incredibly basic, and are a combination of no more than two separate but related ideas. For example, a fraction is comprised of the concept of dividing something equally, and possessing one or more of those parts. A (strongly-typed) variable is the concept of something unknown combined with the concept of representation. Branching is the concept of choice combined with that of duality.

      What's difficult is teaching the concepts. Everyone learns and understands things a little differently. Some people are more abstract. Others are more visual. Others need practical examples. Finding a way to teach a concept that would satisfy all of the different thought patterns is incredibly difficult. Most people can and will teach a concept the same way they learned it, but that will most likely satisfy only one type of student, if that much.

      And the truth is, some people will get very far with a concept because their way of thinking is more appropriate for the concept, while others will only grasp the basic ideas and will struggle with the more advanced manipulations. And I think people's strengths and weaknesses will show in how quickly or slowly they are able to grasp ever-increasingly difficult concepts. That is indeed a measure of intelligence (with respect to that concept), and I would agree does vary between people.

      But I absolutely do not subscribe to the idea that very basic concepts are difficult to understand. I definitely think that the dots are all there for everyone; it's a matter of making the relevant connections. After all, save for a few truly exceptional people out there, we all begin at the same place, born with the same mental faculties, and start wi the same experiences (eating, sleeping, and crapping).

      The teacher's (and by teacher, I mean anyone who teachers, including parents) job is to facilitate learning--to make it easier for the students to learn. It is to help the students make the connections, because no one can force those connections to happen Matrix-style (yet). However, if the teacher was a poor student, then the students of that teacher will not receive the necessary assistance. I think that is what you're experiencing: the results of several generations of poor schooling that ultimately result in an inability to make accessible even the most basic concepts.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    24. Re:Where is the need... by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      I'm by no means suggesting that if you start with any kid from birth, that you couldn't teach them any of these concepts. That I firmly believe.

      Do I think by the time they reach high school, some of their brains may be so wired to think a certain way that it is near impossible to teach these concepts? Possibly.

      And again, I don't say that as a bad way. Some kids might be raised to be more musical, physical, imaginative... I have no issue with that.

    25. Re:Where is the need... by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      My main argument was not that people are incapable of learning these concepts. Just that they are hard and require a significant change in how someone thinks. I would suspect that after your tutoring that first year CS kid he probably changed his whole way of thinking about problems (not just CS problems... all kinds of problems)

      Of course we teach by examples and metaphors to get the concepts through. That's true in any realm.

      But once you get the 'concept' the textual aspect of programming is not a barrier. There is no need for these graphical programming languages as they just make things tedious and slow for the students... yet they keep coming up.

      I'd much rather the effort be spent on individual learning, or if they want to do something techie... build some flash tutorials to demo these concepts.

      And yes, the programming environment and language are very important. But they're not the barrier. We're not dealing with object oriented stuff or anything yet. I certainly wouldn't choose c++ to intro anything. We're talking high school here :P I wouldn't touch on pointers or references.

      The difference between an int and a String is about as complex as I like to get and even that comes a bit later.

    26. Re:Where is the need... by obsess5 · · Score: 1

      Computing has, over the years, become more and more infested with math, but the two don't really mix when you get right down to it. (There's been a similar situation regarding math in econcomics; e.g., econometricians building models for mathematics sake rather than any economic reality they represent; there have even been calls for not requiring other than basic math courses for undergraduate economics majors.) I'm of the belief, first heard from one of the computer science greats - I can't remember who - that the ability to write clearly is more important to programming than any grounding in mathematics. If you can outline and compose a coherent argument in the written language of your choice, you'll probably be good programmer.

    27. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is nothing analogous to a piano in the GUI programming world.

      Any GUI builder that can attach interpreted language events. And arguably something like jQuery. After all HTML has gotten where it is by people just hacking away at it. A good Javascript library will make event attachment a non-issue. The biggest problem is really the scattered, and often ad hock, documentation.

    28. Re:Where is the need... by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Your camel analysis is wrong, just look at the toes, if that isnt as feminine as an animal can get, I dont know what is.

    29. Re:Where is the need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > but all will be more well-rounded for the exposure.

      Being forced to blow off-key notes from a recorder, and being scolded for doing so, ensured that I never wanted anything to do with music ever again. Very round.

    30. Re:Where is the need... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      If you didn't have the discipline to learn a recorder, music was never your bag.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    31. Re:Where is the need... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Even with jQuery (one of my favorite things ever), recommending JavaScript for a novice programmer isn't a great idea IMHO. Sure, it does stuff right away, but it is a devil to debug. I'd be afraid of putting them off on the whole programming thing.

      But yes, it might be a good start. It's still not as comprehensive as a piano is to music.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    32. Re:Where is the need... by raddan · · Score: 0
      The take-stuff-out-of-a-bag-recursive-function:
      • Base case: There are no items in the bag. Stop.
      • Not base case: There are items in the bag. Take one out. Do take-stuff-out-of-a-bag-recursive-function.

      Not only is it recursive, but you can make it tail-recursive, which means it can also be iterative.

      This is the other reason why newbies are turned off to computer science. Technical people can be incredibly hostile. Lighten up a little. This is a fun subject, and people doing it should be having fun.

    33. Re:Where is the need... by raddan · · Score: 0

      Ah-- I see. I misunderstood what you meant when you said that "needing the right way to express them" is not the problem. I agree-- graphical programming languages don't really solve the problem. OTOH, when I was a teenager, my father worked on a project called Function Machines that, in my mind, deeply tied together the mathematical and programmatic concepts of functions. In Function Machines, functions looked like meat grinders, and, in some way, I've thought about functions as variations on meat grinders ever since. In my graduate computational complexity theory course, this once came out inadvertently, when I started talking about input to reduction functions being meat and the output being a trick played by the butcher. My classmates were like... "what the hell are you talking about?" ;)

      The key thing to remember is that there are many ways to understand something-- everybody has to learn from what they already know. Some of us are fortunate to have technical people in our lives at an early age, and we are exposed to analytical ways of thinking. When we finally get our hands dirty with programming, it comes naturally. Other people have no basis for understanding, or even appreciating, that knowledge. Instilling the appreciation is the hardest part, but that's ultimately what will help them to succeed. Computer science can be incredibly challenging, and if you aren't internally-motivated, you're never going to learn it.

      I highly suggest teaching in something like PHP. PHP gets knocked around by the intelligentsia, but the fact is that it is a simple, procedural, C-like language, largely without things like objects and functional idioms to get in the way. It has the ability to do indirection (references), so when people need to graduate to passing complex data structures around (and you should endeavor to get them to that point ASAP), they can do it. You can set them up centrally, but most of all, they can write cool programs that their friends can use, on the web and on their cellphones. And it is relevant. After that they can explore the wonders of Ruby and the mysteries of C on their own.

  9. why are there complaints? by frist · · Score: 1

    Who in their right mind would build anything, much less a business or curriculum off a google product? What was the end of life google gave you for this product when you did your research into it? Or did you just hop on the latest/greatest google thing du jour bandwagon?

    Someday ppl will figure out that free crap from google comes with no guarantee of any kind. Use at your own risk.

    Even the paid stuff comes with no service.

  10. Better alternative... by TroysBucket · · Score: 0

    There's always Illumination Software Creator. Fully visual app development. And it supports not just Android... but iOS, Flash and more. http://radicalbreeze.com/

    1. Re:Better alternative... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Doesnt fix the bug in iOS app development that requires a $699.00 fee plus $99 a year to start writing Apple iOS apps.

      Apple still has not released a way to write, compile and sign apps without buying at least an entry level mac mini.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Better alternative... by TroysBucket · · Score: 0

      True, developing for iOS still requires a financial investment. That said... Illumination Software Creator -does- allow someone to build an Android app. Then, when they feel like it'll be financially rewarding to them, hit a button and have a full XCode project auto-magically generated and ready to build. Same goes for Python/GTK apps and Flash web apps. (And, soon, HTML5, WP7 and WebOS).

    3. Re:Better alternative... by Americano · · Score: 2

      without buying at least an entry level mac mini

      How is this different from *any other software development,* ever, in history? If you want to program effectively for a platform, you need to have a computer running that platform. Want to program for Windows? Go buy a windows box. Want to program for Linux? Build or buy a PC and load Linux on it. What's that? You have a Windows box already? Great, then either: 1) turn it into a hackintosh; or 2) consider whether or not the money / knowledge you'll get in return for programming on iOS or Mac OS X will be worth that $699 hardware purchase. If it is, buy the hardware and quite whining. If it isn't keep programming for Windows, Linux, WebOS, WP7, and Android on your Windows/Linux system.

      For my money, if I wanted an all-purpose programming system, I would actually go out and buy a mac. Then I'd load VMware on it, and install Win7 and Ubuntu or Red Hat as guest operating systems, and set up dev environments for all of the platforms I intended to build software for, all on a single system, so I can easily move from one to the other.

    4. Re:Better alternative... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      So all Android developers are running linux?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:Better alternative... by Americano · · Score: 1

      Yes, actually, in that Android is a Linux kernel, they are all running Linux somewhere in their development environments.

      See? I can pretend I didn't understand your point, too!

    6. Re:Better alternative... by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      See? I can pretend I didn't understand your point, too!

      Yeah, but you're actually not understanding the point, too. The comparison of what you need to develop for a desktop platform to what you need to develop for a mobile platform is not valid. You are always going to need a PC with a keyboard, a monitor, and compilers on it to develop for any platform. If you're developing for a desktop OS, it makes a good deal of sense to buy a workstation that runs that same OS. If you're developing for a mobile platform, however, you're going to write and compile your code on a PC. It's very common, in fact, for developers to code on one platform and target another. For example, Java developers might use Windows workstations but deploy their code on Solaris. You can't do that if you want to develop for iOS. If you want to develop for that platform, you have to buy an Apple development workstation, even if it's only a Mac Mini. But you don't have to go out and buy a new computer if you want to develop for Android. You can install Eclipse and the Android SDK on Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux. Or a Solaris machine, in all likelihood. The barriers to entry for Android development are much lower than they are for iOS.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  11. It makes total sense by loftwyr · · Score: 1

    They're shutting down google labs, it's a google labs product and, as the blog post reads, "Google will discontinue App Inventor as a Google product and will open source the code" so all that's likely to happen is the URL will change, new eyes will look at and update the code and things will continue as normal.

    Why is making it more accessible a bad thing?

    1. Re:It makes total sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Normal" people usually have a hard time understanding the concept of "open source". To them, GAI was just "another website". Most reactions about it being discontinued are greatly exaggerated.

  12. Mostly because.... It sucked by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    I tried to use it as I got in on the early beta and tried several times to make a basic app. and Gave up in frustration several times.

    Honestly, it was poorly designed from day one, and as a programmer if I was frustrated a "average joe" would have gave up 60 seconds in.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Mostly because.... It sucked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. I tried to use App Inventor to see what it was like, but I really didn't care for it. I wasn't nearly as easy to use as was touted. I never did finish the app I started with it. I would much rather develop in eclipse.

    2. Re:Mostly because.... It sucked by krazytekn0 · · Score: 1

      Maybe you were frustrated because you are a programmer. From the basic information you provided about your experience that cause is as good as the other. But I do agree that it was really hard to use it was ALMOST intuitive and that is way more frustrating that knowing that you have to read a huge book to get it. The idea that the designer apparently thought it could just be figured out and didn't provide the kind of resources you'd really need.

      --
      Not all life is cyber. Extra Income
    3. Re:Mostly because.... It sucked by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Maybe you were frustrated because you are a programmer. From the basic information you provided about your experience that cause is as good as the other. But I do agree that it was really hard to use it was ALMOST intuitive and that is way more frustrating that knowing that you have to read a huge book to get it. The idea that the designer apparently thought it could just be figured out and didn't provide the kind of resources you'd really need.

      The reason it was hard to use is because it was web based with local components in Java. That made the GUI slow and limited.

      Opensourcing it would be the first step in turning it into a standalone IDE that will be more usable. Two features I could think off off the top of my head that would improve it immeasurably are copy/paste and autocomplete lists that would make building common functions faster.

      BTW, in case anyone doesn't know, App Inventor was based on codeblocks.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:Mostly because.... It sucked by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      Honestly, it was poorly designed from day one, and as a programmer if I was frustrated a "average joe" would have gave up 60 seconds in.

      Sums up my experience with Android in general...

  13. Riots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Five colored men destroyed the front yard of stricken uganda, started tonight when a colored man, known only as yellow slashed through the tripto under heart with a razor.. the white friend of the wounded man started after the negro who retreated to the toolshed.

  14. Hurry up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And spin this as google being evil.

  15. The real move, by M0j0_j0j0 · · Score: 1

    The real move here is one and only one, raise the quality of apps, App creator is responsible for a lot of crap.

    1. Re:The real move, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you've got the meme wrong. Android is the Lake Wobegon of mobile platforms:

      All the sales are strong, all the handsets are good looking, and all the apps are above average.

      Your implication that App Inventor allowed people to produce crap would imply that there's ANY CRAP to be found on Slashdot's pet platform.

      Remember:
      -- iOS App Store = useless, locked down, can't find anything useful, LOLNOPORNO;
      -- Android Market = totally awesome, never a problem, and even when there is a problem (which there never is, and never will be), I can load stuff from elsewhere anyway, and I can get whatever porn I want, and there's NO FART APPS OR OTHER USELESS CRAP AT ALL ANYWHERE.

  16. Deceptive OP header by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

    Google is not getting rid of the Android App Inventory, just handing it over the something like sourceforge community. This is by no means a bad thing as there's some great open source educational software available. On that note if your actually trying to use this to make apps, open sourcing it may be the only way to achieve it.

  17. Dear David: by nimbius · · Score: 0

    Google is a corporation, and as such is obligated by federal law to work in the interests of their shareholders and stakeholders accordingly to increase profit both quarterly and yearly in dividend and share-price form.

    as fervently as conservatives may tout the modern corporation as a model for the education system and a beacon of empowerment for minorities, it is not. corporations invest time and energy into consumers, and while often times this may have the ancillary effect of the betterment of all mankind, one need only a cursory evaluation of corporations such as Monsanto, Cargill, BP, and Halliburton to confirm the primary goal of any corporation at any size is revenue.

    personally, im sorry you were tricked. Just because the corporation installs an impressive waterfountain, a modernist sculpture, or a google doodle at its office does not imply its dedication is in these things.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:Dear David: by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Google is a corporation, and as such is obligated by federal law to work in the interests of their shareholders and stakeholders accordingly to increase profit both quarterly and yearly in dividend and share-price form.

      What federal law is that? Microsoft, famously, refused to pay any dividends for the longest time. Furthermore, shareholders are but one interested party in a corporation. Balancing that with community and workers rights is also part of the board of directors jobs.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:Dear David: by nimbius · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_finance publicly traded corporations, as you are correct, may or may not not be required to distribute dividends.

      as a DC court recently ruled, a board of directors may or may not constitute the company.
      http://pac.org/node/5122

      --
      Good people go to bed earlier.
    3. Re:Dear David: by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Google is a corporation, and as such is obligated by federal law to work in the interests of their shareholders and stakeholders accordingly to increase profit both quarterly and yearly in dividend and share-price form.

      Interesting. I know lots of corporations that give money and resources to cultural, educational and other charitable causes.

      Why aren't the officers of those corporations in prison, then?

      Because you're a liar, that's why.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:Dear David: by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Microsoft, famously, refused to pay any dividends for the longest time.

      So what? Modulo tax loopholes, a rising stock price and dividends are effectively the same thing.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  18. True or False: From the article... by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

    "You can use App Inventor to build just about any android app you can imagine"

    A famous quote deserves recognition: "I'll Believe It When I See It"

    1. Re:True or False: From the article... by ctid · · Score: 2

      False. Like most tools like this it is simple but inflexible. There are lots of things that you can do with it but it's nonsense to say "... build just about any android app you can imagine"

      --
      Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
    2. Re:True or False: From the article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unless you have a very limited imagination, in which case the statement is true.

  19. I cannot blame them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hell, I quit compiling anything for android. By the time I wait for the compiler to finish I have already lost money.

    1. Re:I cannot blame them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lost 50 bucks just for reading this stupid post.

  20. Why... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Actually this is the first time I actually heard of the product... Or if I did hear about it it didn't appeal to me. But why would colleges, schools and groups jump at this technology and invest all these resources when its usage is rather shady. Wait for wider acceptance first then you can change your programs. I am not saying it needs to be top dog but it should at least have a good buzz around it.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But...but...they are democratizing app building with this! How dare you represent the oppression and dictatorship of the current android app development model that also happens to requires at least some modicum of intelligence and skill!

  21. See ? Trusting ANYthing with a private company is by unity100 · · Score: 2

    BAD. bad. simple as that. a private company can just pull the plug on something masses rely on, and there may or may not be an alternative, and if not, an alternative may take years to come up. generations grow in the meantime.

    this is why we need open source. so no private profiteers will be able to undo all of us in one fell swoop.

    as for google - im saying this as a web developer ; its baaad bad p.r. for you. even from my perspective.

  22. don't mess with the Bull by hoggoth · · Score: 5, Funny

    > And the cost-benefit of the cut was negligible-believe it or not, App Inventor was a small team of just 5+ employees! The Math doesn't make sense.'"

    One of those 5 employees parked in Sergey Brin's parking spot. The rest was inevitable.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    1. Re:don't mess with the Bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sergey comes to work on a bicycle, just saying.

    2. Re:don't mess with the Bull by doom · · Score: 1

      "'... And the cost-benefit of the cut was negligible-believe it or not, App Inventor was a small team of just 5+ employees! The Math doesn't make sense.'

      5 * 100K * 2 = 1 million/year
      Maybe I don't understand the biz, but that seems like a fair amount to spend on a public relations program.

    3. Re:don't mess with the Bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the cost-benefit of the cut was negligible-believe it or not...

      Don't believe it? Then get started with Math Inventor. Egg plus tree equals bunnies!

    4. Re:don't mess with the Bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sergey comes to work on a bicycle, just saying.

      Why the fuck does Sergey go to work? Seriously what's wrong with people? After you have a certain amount of money (far below the amount Sergey has), the first thing any sane person does is stop working.

    5. Re:don't mess with the Bull by danlip · · Score: 1

      Did you throw in that "* 2" just for kicks?

      And 1 million/year is a pretty small amount of money for Google. It's also a pretty small compared to what other companies spend on advertising - for example several million dollars for a 30 second superbowl ad, and that's just a tiny percentage of the annual advertising budget of many companies.

    6. Re:don't mess with the Bull by doom · · Score: 1

      Did you throw in that "* 2" just for kicks?

      Standard estimate for employee overhead. Your company has to spend roughly $2 for every $1 they pay you.

  23. App Inventor Replacement? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My choice...Illumination Software Creator! It is like Legos for programming: very visual and as simple or complex as you want it to be. Check it out at http://radicalbreeze.com/. It will build for "Windows, Linux or MacOS X desktops, Android devices, Nokia Internet Tablets (such as the N900) and even as Flash powered rich websites." The software runs on Windows, Linux, or MacOS X as well, making it well worth the $50 price tag.

  24. It's Very Clear What Google Is Doing Here by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Funny

    from TFA:

    "With the winding down of Google Labs, Google will discontinue App Inventor as a Google product and will open source the code. Additionally, because of App Inventor’s success in the education space, we are exploring opportunities to support the educational use of App Inventor on an open source platform."

    I think it's pretty obvious what happened here. Because of close brushes with violating their "do no evil" mantra, Larry and Sergey have actually perfected time travel in order to ensure that no present actions result in future evil.

    As a result, the first subject has been sent into the future to report back only negative results from Google's products. When he returned beaten and battered and bruised, he declared that support and extensions of the App Inventor must be halted. Instead of assisting in learning, App Inventor gave uneducated kids the power of super hackers -- creating applications that could be viruses and malware. The explosion of malware on mobile phones sent markets reeling and devastated the world economy ... and then, one fateful morning, as a particularly evil hacker was using App Inventor to build a smarter botnet he had the idea to use App Inventor to create an App that simply used App Inventor to progenate. And he succeeded in making it 0.000001% smarter than he himself was. And so it set out using App Inventor to make more programs that used App Inventor to make programs that were 0.000001% smarter than their parent program.

    Nothing to fear, right? RIGHT?

    A few quadrillion iterations later (which Google's servers handled without any problem) and App Inventor had infected every system in the world. The result was a super brilliant application that could predict and see everything by harnessing the computation power of every implemented Turing Machine in the world. Therefore, Google had to kill App Inventor now while it still had the chance.

    Larry and Sergey debated for hours whether App Inventor was inherently evil or the application of App Inventor. What was worse, was that Larry was convinced that if App Inventor was not left to run its course then mankind would face an even more evil post-apocalyptic future past that when Microsoft's .NET Inventor overtook it.

    And so they came up with a simple, elegant solution that would shift all the blame onto the entire world should App Inventor become the end of mankind: open source it.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:It's Very Clear What Google Is Doing Here by krazytekn0 · · Score: 1

      I am destroying all the turing machines within my immediate control starting after I'm done browsing slashdot for a while.

      --
      Not all life is cyber. Extra Income
    2. Re:It's Very Clear What Google Is Doing Here by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      I read the report produced by the Google Futures project (AKA "Through the Looking Glass"), and I notice the following curious state of affairs: Apple was still making money with mobile devices (apparently Steve Jobs brain was preserved in a jar); Google owned the Internet, wholesale; Microsoft was touting their latest Windows 14 as "the most secure operating system yet"; Mozilla's Firefox v47.1 was still bloated, crashed every other tab, and oddly enough, still managed to introduced an entirely new tool bar that confounded even the most die hard fans. Oh, and Linux was still relatively unknown as a desktop operating system.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    3. Re:It's Very Clear What Google Is Doing Here by svick · · Score: 1

      by harnessing the computation power of every implemented Turing Machine in the world

      You mean zero? There is no Turing Machine in the whole wide world.

    4. Re:It's Very Clear What Google Is Doing Here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Genius!

  25. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what happens when you rely upon a third party for a product or service with no contractual relationship to you. They pull the plug whenever they feel like it and you're left high and dry. How is saving money by using free service from "the cloud" different than the squirrels who play all summer instead of gathering seeds for the winter? To a casual observer unaware of the risks it sure seems dumb to forgo playing to work so hard while the weather's good. When the winter comes everyone will ask how it came to be that they have no food, and they'll dismiss the seed-gatherer who had the foresight to prepare for winter as having had a "lucky guess" about the future. See it not only in IT, but everything on a daily basis. People are idiots and have no ability to foresee the potential dangers in situations, and they don't prepare for bad things to happen.

  26. Does President Obama know about this? by JudgeFurious · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maybe someone should tell him. I'm sure he can make this right.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  27. Re:See ? Trusting ANYthing with a private company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google is not a private company.

  28. Google has reached that point... by postmortem · · Score: 1

    ... where profit matters more than value given to customers.

    Closing of Google Labs was sign of times to come.

    Expect less freebies from them in times to come.

    1. Re:Google has reached that point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the closing of google labs was a clear sign that Google is run by MBAs - and we know already that the One True Way of MBAs is to reduce expenses (cut staff), reduce expenses again (cut more staff) and then pay bonuses (to themselves)
      Expect 50% staff reductions at google within 3 years, and a startup search engine to take the lead within 5 years.

  29. geico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it was the geico ad, wasn't it?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oe-Y-zSd5gs

    Geeze, and I really wanted to make a bro-stash app too

    1. Re:geico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh wait - its downloadable from the market :)

      ok, google can kill app inventor now ;|

  30. Re:See ? Trusting ANYthing with a private company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is why we need open source. so no private profiteers will be able to undo all of us in one fell swoop.

    With the winding down of Google Labs, Google will discontinue App Inventor as a Google product and will open source the code. Additionally, because of App Inventor’s success in the education space, we are exploring opportunities to support the educational use of App Inventor on an open source platform.

  31. App Inventor's biggest problem by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Empowering kids, women, minorities?? That's ridiculous. App Inventor's biggest problem is that it is too low-level. There is almost a one-to-one correspondence between every block in App Inventor and a single Java keyword or operator. Therefore there is NOTHING you can learn with App Inventor that you can't learn by learning to write source code. In fact the blocks themselves obscure meaning, because their visual representation doesn't convey much actual meaningful information. App Inventor could have been really, really good if it worked at a much higher level, and if the construction process wasn't so highly geometrically constrained and brittle.

    1. Re:App Inventor's biggest problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I too was expecting it to be a higher level development tool.

    2. Re:App Inventor's biggest problem by leereyno · · Score: 1

      I'm honestly confused about the women and minorities bit. What does a person's gonads have to do with their ability to use an API? Does skin color help someone code? Products and their continued availability matter to the people who use those products, and unless I'm mistaken that has nothing to do with sex, race, creed, color, religion, or which professional sports franchise a person is a fan of.

      Wolber is pulling nonsense out of his arse to provoke people who can be counted on to display a pavlovian response upon any mention of identity politics.

      --
      Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    3. Re:App Inventor's biggest problem by FTL · · Score: 1

      thisisauniqueid, could you ping my email address? Thanks.

      --
      Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
  32. Re:empowering kids, women, etc, etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    already been nuked for the greater glory of Jeebuz

  33. Scratch by Arlet · · Score: 2

    My kids have used 'Scratch'. I've no idea how this compares on details, but they were having a lot of fun with it, and from what I can see, it certainly creates an understanding of structured programming techniques.

    http://scratch.mit.edu/

    1. Re:Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My kids have used 'Scratch'. I've no idea how this compares on details, but they were having a lot of fun with it, and from what I can see, it certainly creates an understanding of structured programming techniques.

      http://scratch.mit.edu/

      Scratch, +1. Turtles all the way down. Totally Object Oriented, however, not structured;)

    2. Re:Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I recall App Inventor was built on Scratch and Blocks. Blocks at least is already open source. Google then specialized if for Android (pre-Honeycomb) development and had been making improvements to it over the past year. I just discovered it a few weeks ago and love it. I have to say I used it and it made creating apps not only easy and programming simple (Blocks) but also fun. As a programmer, rather than spending twice as much time setting up a project and building it manually and debugging it, App Inventor made it a breeze (for the level of complexity it was capable of, which was surprisingly high). Anyone could also look at a Block diagram and discern exactly what a program did, which is drastically different than deciphering someone elses code and libraries across numerous files and folders even when they had comments. I've done both, Android development using Eclipse and with App Inventor, and I preferred App Inventor because of the coolness factor. It made "coding" fun. Yes I can write functions and classes with a text editor creating dozens of files, or I could drag and drop Blocks in a single screen. What programmers should be looking for is something like this to grow to match their level of skill, rather than seeking to kill it because they are too smart or too good for what they see as a limited elementary app for kids and women. That's an elitist attitude. It's only as limited as you want it to be. Like I said, Blocks is Open Source. I personally want to see technology improve to the point that we all act like Geordi LaForge, programming complex apps and databases using drag and drop on nothing but a touch screen. Yahoo Pipes also comes to mind, but again, such an environment needs to be allowed to grow beyond the Fisher Price toy that it starts out as. But then again, not doing so is job security for programmers.

  34. Pile on! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented groups

    Why, right you are, good sir! Capital idea! Our womenfolk would swoon right over with the vapors should they be forced to learn how to program our electromagnetistic computational whatnots the traditional way! The these "underrepresented groups" you speak of (wink wink), why they suffer constant indignities of many and varied brain fevers when attempting even the simplest mechanical tasks long ago mastered by proper Men of this Enlightened Age. It is demanded by Charity, not to mention we must field everything we have against the Encroachment by Foreign Undesirables! Cheerio, pip pip and all that!

    1. Re:Pile on! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women can't program, how would they reach the keyboard when they're pregnant?! All that typing would hurt the babies.

    2. Re:Pile on! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HA HA HA! This post ROCKS! Kudos to you!

    3. Re:Pile on! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, women have their representation in science, technology, and business subsidized for a couple generations now. Occasionally one slips through the cracks like Marie Curie but generally women are just non-existent at the top of the game in anything that actually matters. I don't think that generalizations suggesting that women have a harder time with some of these things than men is completely out in left field. They're either socially uninterested or biologically challenged in some way. Whichever way it is doesn't matter to me, the result is still the same.

  35. Re:empowering kids, women, etc, etc by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Nuke 'em for Jesus

  36. Renting software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like to bash google for kicks just as much as the next guy, but whenever you use *any* proprietary software you are basically renting it. If you based your spreadsheets on excel and decided not to pay the license, your files are basically junk. The less rent you pay the faster you should expect the software to disappear. Positioning oneself at the mercy of something like AI (as TFS makes it sound) is just dumb.

    What's that? Google is open sourcing AI? Then what was everyone complaining about? Oh, google should continue to host it. We may debate the merits of Don't Be Evil, but it certainly doesn't mean Be a Charity. Perhaps they are expected to be a charity because they've previously sold us that image. I guess they *are* evil after all.

  37. Have most of you even tried it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's safe to say most of the people commenting haven't even tried App Inventor or tried it when it first came out. They've made some big improvements in it all around and it keeps getting better. To anybody that messed around with it for a full day and couldn't make an app, well all I can say is good luck in trying to get Eclipse set up.

  38. Techie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whats a Techie?

  39. PHBs by turgid · · Score: 1

    Google is now in the PHB phase, something that all companies enter when they become "mature."

    This is when the traditional PHBs come in and take control. They cut back on proper R&D and innovation and decree that the company must concentrate on "core business."

    There then follows a period of (hopefully) several years where the company is bled dry by the board of directors and the "investors." Meanwhile, the real innovation is done by small competitors and individuals with the good ideas and motivation.

    A traditional company would ensure that they have a huge patent portfolio to crush this type of competition, to nip it in the bud.

    After a few years, the company will become top heavy and any engineering will be outsourced. All that will be left is a few PHBs and a "brand."

  40. I thought by publiclurker · · Score: 2

    that the children on the internet were all undercover FBI agents?

  41. Just use Radical Breeze Software Creator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from Illumination Software: http://radicalbreeze.com/

  42. Re:See ? Trusting ANYthing with a private company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uhhhh, they open sourced it.

  43. App Inventor's appeal to underrepresented groups by Ellen+Spertus · · Score: 1
    What I think was meant by the OP's clumsy remarks about "kids, women, and underrepresented groups" is that App Inventor has proven successful at attracting members of underrepresented groups. Some successful outreach programs based on App Inventor include:

    The claim isn't that members of these groups can't learn traditional CS, just that they've generally chosen not to.

  44. And Sexist as well by LWATCDR · · Score: 2

    Democratizing app building, empowering kids, women, and underrepresented groups

    Because only adult white males are smart enough to use a programing language?

    I mean really? And they are leaving it up until the end of the year and then open sourcing it. Maybe it just wasn't all that popular or useful.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  45. This kinda sucks by Jay+Tarbox · · Score: 1

    I'm totally not a programmer (dipped my toes in Basica in my youth) and I used this to make a little dialer app specific to my companies PBX setup. It's working great! Unfortunately now I'll never be able to update it if need be.

  46. Why women need special treatment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do women need special treatment for programming?

    Seriously they're either interested or not. And if they're not don't try to sucker them in.

    I don't see the fashion industry trying to lure more men into the business.

    1. Re:Why women need special treatment? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't see the fashion industry trying to lure more men into the business.

      The University of Washington's School of Education announced, quite a few years ago, it was going to preferentially admit men to the program in an attempt to address the longstanding gender skew of the teaching force. They were forced to backtrack (and even apologize!) pretty quickly - women really got up in arms over the proposal.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Why women need special treatment? by leereyno · · Score: 1

      This is what happens when E Pluribus Unum is replaced by quarreling tribal groups perpetually demanding preferential treatment in compensation for past slights - both real and imagined.

      Just as correlation does not imply causation, disparity does not imply discrimination.

      --
      Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
  47. Google Labs is being phased out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "As part of phasing out Google Labs, we will be shutting down Breadcrumb by Sept. 2, 2011."
    Source

    It's not just app inventor, they're shutting down Labs.
    I knew there was a reason they moved the link to the bottom of the page months ago.

  48. OH NOES ! by Chuby007 · · Score: 1

    will my fart machine still work ?

  49. Job Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps the pressure was on from the rest of Google to not flood the job market with young, talented CS majors that were inspired by the App Inventor.

  50. We will see what happens. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good, maybe they have plans to drop Java from android and write a GUI similar to X11 where people will have a choice on how and what they want to write their applications in; While keeping a java runtime for app backwards compatibility.

    I cant be the only one that hates Java with a passion.

  51. just my 2 cents, seems obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously 5 employees has nothing to do with the financial decision. The most obvious answer is that anyone and their brother can make an app with App Inventor, hence the flood of sound boards and useless apps. The point being that the flood makes good apps hard to gain attention amongst users and the indie developers that create them less likely to make well and continue to create more good apps. I think the better decision would have been to make a separate "inventor" section for inventor created apps, the better of which could be submitted for Google's approval (or a user voting measure) in order to be submitted to the primary app market.

    The flood of silly apps and knockoffs, +1s , and other wastes of market space spreads the attention of users with $$ to spend on quality apps to thin.

  52. Re:empowering kids, women, etc, etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And steal all their fish.

  53. Programmers do have to be paid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "And the cost-benefit of the cut was negligible-believe it or not, App Inventor was a small team of just 5+ employees! The Math doesn't make sense."

    Let's do some math here:

    5 employees dedicated to a project for one year * $100,000 per employee = $500,000 per year

    Half a million dollars per year is not exactly free. There is also an opportunity cost there, those 5+ employees could have been working on other projects which potentially would have brought in more revenue.

  54. cost by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    5 employees == $600k per year in salary, plus benefits, plus bonuses, stock options, the office space to house them, their computers and maintenance on those computers, other IT costs associated with those employees, and so on. if you have hundreds of "cheap" projects like this, the cost adds up.

  55. Rent shment, wages shmages, insurance shminurance by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Hey, what's all that there * 2 malarkey?

    It better not be for payroll taxes and overheads. Ah say, ah say, ah say we don't like none of that fancy MBA shit round these here parts, boy. We might not know the difference between sales and profits, but we know what Hollywood accounting is. It's bad, that's what it is.

    So if we decide a steak that costs 20 bucks in a restaurant is overpriced because you could buy the same meat at a supermarket for 5, then it is, OK?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  56. Patent Trap by Nemo's+Night+Sky · · Score: 1
    How do we know this isn't the result of the e-patent wars against Android?

    Wolber adds: 'Even looking at it from Google's perspective, I find the decision puzzling.

    Microsoft and Apple likely both have "App" patents. I'm sure there is a secret cross-licensing agreement sealed with a NDA, preventing Google from continuing to support App Inventor. I base my statements on absolutely no evidence other than prevalent trends in the community and the absence of evidence itself. I am simply saying it should be considered as a possibility.

  57. In related news by leereyno · · Score: 0

    World to end: Women and minorities hardest hit

    --
    Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
  58. Funniest part by Goaway · · Score: 1

    The funniest part of this incredibly horrible summary is the bit where it calls the post by Google "odd", because it contradicts the story they've decided on.

    Obviously, not only are Google EVIL for KILLING OFF THIS IMPORTANT SOFTWARE, they are also INSANE because they seem to be saying that they are not killing it off!

  59. control it or lose it by sylvandb · · Score: 2

    If you don't control it, you don't own it. If you don't own it, you cannot rely on it.

    Anything less than full control (i.e. you have the source and you can do with it what you will) means your usage is subject to the whims of those who do control it.

    In other words, control it or lose it.

    Buying service in the 'cloud'? Good luck with that. If you don't control it, your service provider controls you.

    Relying on some closed source product provided by a big-name or no-name tech company? Good luck with that. That product might be discontinued tomorrow. This is why companies will often require source code for mission critical business apps, if not hands on access at least held in escrow, "just in case."

    Yeah, I'm a control freak.

    Now you know why.

    1. Re:control it or lose it by coolmadsi · · Score: 1

      Relying on some closed source product provided by a big-name or no-name tech company? Good luck with that. That product might be discontinued tomorrow. This is why companies will often require source code for mission critical business apps, if not hands on access at least held in escrow, "just in case."

      Its a good thing Google are planning on open sourcing it then.

    2. Re:control it or lose it by sylvandb · · Score: 1

      no doubt

  60. Alice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's also Alice: http://www.alice.org/

  61. What about QBasic by hofmny · · Score: 2

    I got my start with that class in 10th grade. Who needs network support and 8-bit+ graphics? You can use the screen command to make random pretty colors appear. That was all I needed :P

  62. Well said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Even looking at it from Google's perspective, I find the decision puzzling. App Inventor was a public relations dream. Democratizing app building,....it doesn't make any mathematical sense

    That's the problem with these ivory tower educators. They couldn't care less about the politics involved in having app inventor in the first place. They rush headlong to support a company - Google - that is clearly in with the government.

    They're right to be angry, but really, we all forked down this road along time ago. This is what happens when the proprietary system, together with the legal system (corrupt) wins it.

    It just doesn't matter how advanced companies get, if they are ruled by government, they are nothing, and will eventually go back to printing paper if they're lucky.

  63. When You Put Your Trust In The Cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is what can happen when you put your trust in the cloud. I once bought some software that required online or phone authentication. When my hard drive die and I needed to re-install the software, the company was out of business. I could not re-install the software. I'll never trust business models like that again.

  64. Functional Programming by claytongulick · · Score: 1

    > and they completely lacked the ability to understand even functional, much less OO programming

    I just want to take a moment to clarify terms. I think what you meant was procedural programming, not functional. Functional Programming (FP) is a reasonably advanced paradigm that many feel is a successor to OOP, it is used widely in languages such as Scheme, LISP, Python, ECMA Script derivatives, etc...

    I don't have time to list all the pros/cons/differences/theories here, but a basic example off the top of my head (using js and jquery) would be:

    $(collection).each(function()
    {
        $(this).click(function(event)
            {
                  $.ajax({
                        url: ...,
                        data: ...,
                        success: function(data, status, xhr)
                        {
                              $(data).each(function()
                              { //do something
                              }
                        }, ...
                  });
            });
    });

    This kind of thing is a fairly basic example of anonymous inlines, but I think you can see it is a wildly different paradigm than OOP. FP is also frequently associate with map, reduce, and other set based iterators, generally with lambdas or anonymous inlines.

    By and large FP is more common in dynamic languages, but some statically typed languages also have a pretty good go at it, for example, C# has been moving towards FP and has pulled off some pretty impressive (painful?) tricks in order to do it statically.

    In my experience, OOP advocates are pretty passionate about how much they dislike FP, the code above is a good example - strong OOP guys really hate that stuff.

    --
    Drinking habits can be dangerous. You can choke on the cloth and the nuns will wonder where their clothes are.
    1. Re:Functional Programming by krinderlin · · Score: 1

      You are correct. I meant procedural programming. I actually like Functional in some contexts, especially that bit up there. That is damn sexy. Ruby's some weird amalgam of Object Oriented and Functional also, right? I recall doing things like 10.times({print HEY THERE!;}); and tossing functions around between objects. Scheme was an eye opener, for me. It got me out of being an Object Oriented snob and more towards a much more agnostic approach to programming. Most of our department seemed convinced that functional programming had too many parentheses for beginners though...

      Now that I think about it, though, Functional might be the best way to start Freshman programmers off. Again, though, it comes back to Math. I just wish they'd make a Core only semester and require an introductory Discreet math class. My program wouldn't let you into Discreet Math till after Calculus, and by then I spent the whole class skipping the homework and tutoring non-Comp Sci majors in the class for extra money.

      On the other hand, it'll put the script kiddies on an even footing with the "Likes fixing computers and writing batch files" people. That's the other side of Computer Science programs that I have issue with. The smart acne kids in the back making fun of everyone else because they can click a few buttons on some malware kit and edit a few bash scripts. Puh-lease.

    2. Re:Functional Programming by claytongulick · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the thoughtful response!

      I don't know if FP makes sense to start people off with, I feel like it is almost a maturity or (to be completely corny) a 'zen' thing in programming. One of the "first you have to know the rules, in order to break the rules" kinds of things. I feel like a developer has to go through 'maturation' stages: the rigors of learing main() procedural based stuff, encountered the problems with it, learned how OOP solves (tries to solve?) those problems, but then been bitten by the over-architecting madness that OOP can lead to, then get enticed by the flexibility of FP and dynamic languages. Once you have gone through those stages, you can really start to appreciate each different style based on its relative merits, and pick the one that most effectively applies to the problem domain.

      I develop everything from firmware on 8 bit micros (where I do almost 100% procedural C or ASM), to Flash/Flex/Javascript RIA's (where I do almost entirely FP) to rigid B2B services (where I tend to formalize interfaces using OOP) to Android apps (where I'm forced to use Java). Each realm has an appropriate technology, and I think it really helps developers to go through all of the various "phases" of development to really stop taking the "everything looks like a nail" approach.

      For agile, rapidly changing, evolving problem domains I like python/django (for web), for large shop, multi-team business critical stuff I like UML and C#/Java, for UI's I tend to do Flex/Air or HTML5 stuff. Each of those really lends itself to different development paradigms, and I think it is valuable to be conversant in all of them.

      It would make me happy, however, if Google were to support Python as a first class language on Android. Java is fine, but I think the small app, rapidly evolving nature of mobile development lends itself to a more dynamic/functional approach than a formal OOP approach. Other than that, the Android platform is pretty nice to work with.

      And while I'm griping, I *really* wish Python would add anonymous inlines. Sometimes the lambdas just don't cut it, and the "keep the implementation close to the call" principal is always violated when you're forced to stick a function label on a block of code.

      --
      Drinking habits can be dangerous. You can choke on the cloth and the nuns will wonder where their clothes are.
  65. python options? by ThorGod · · Score: 1

    I'd say "just teach them python", but that assumes some decent IDE exists out there to help kids make GUI driven scripts (for free).

    Eclipse, I think, is one option...

    In general, though, I'm glad I got over my almost decade-long prejudice against scripting languages.

    --
    PS: I don't reply to ACs.