I agree completely. To be really good requires a vast knowledge that spans much more than the couple of programming languages the typical programmer knows. I didn't mean to disparage sys-admins at all. As a matter of fact, I meant it complimentarily as a large part of being a great sys-admin is being able to figure out the problem and act now! Sometimes with furious finger slapping in shell script or SQL cli. Much respect for those guys.
I think maybe back before the 80s when you had to be really hard-core to be committed enough not only to own a computer but to actually be willing to put in the effort of being proficient with it on a technical basis, many of the people in that category were probably the stereotypical nerd. These days with the easy availability of hardware and the accessibility of tools, a much more representative cross-section of the population is getting into the game. I'd say at least 2/3 of the successful programmers I know are just common ordinary dudes that while not being overtly alpha like a jock are certainly not what you would associate with the live-at-home basement dweller we all joke about. As a matter of fact most of those basement "nerds" are usually just gamers and enthusiasts that can regale you with the minutia of which sata cable is the best and which graphics card is the most value for the money but would be totally lost without a GUI to click on. And you can forget about them being able to program anything as who has time for that when there's a RAID, MAN!?!
After writing this, I got on a little bit of a tangent so it isn't all necessarily directed at you, LifeIs0x2A so don't be offended if it seems slightly condescending or obnoxious.
If you're proficient in practically any language, find a small under 10 person company to work for and it almost doesn't matter what you do they'll think you walk on water. Of course, do a good job out of professional pride if nothing else but in small businesses the IT guy that "makes shit happen" gets a ton of respect. Early in my career I started out at a sports wholesale distributor that wanted to insource their IT stuff. A friend of a friend heard about it and got me the interview. As a hobbyist I was already proficient in Python, Java, and web technology in addition to odds and ends like AutoIt and the ilk. I aced the "interview" which was basically, "Can you do computer stuff?" and got started. There was so much slop that could easily be automated I was like a kid in a candy store. One minute I was writing a custom database front-end that shortened the 20 minutes it took to enter products into the website to about 2 minutes and the next moment I was working on the sales/CMS application the salespeople (when it was finished) started running around with. It was great. It got to the point that the bosses daughter was bringing me home cooked meals to my desk everyday already heated up and ready to go. I'll stop there.
The point is if Google won't hire you then fuck them. If you have some skills then alpha the fuck up and network. There are plenty of opportunities for the taking.
Has anyone ever compiled a report on the longer term noteworthy projects of these competitive programmers? I'd be interested in seeing if there is anything I use regularly or admire would be on the list. If they aren't cut out for that I'd bet they'd make hulluva sys-admins though.
This is precisely what I was wondering. If anything I want to establish more of a personal relationship with whichever cloud provider I throw my lot in with. On the off chance that Google abuses the personal contact information then you cut them off and blog to the heavens about it. I guarantee you the internet will eat it up and blog ads will more than pay for the pain and misery you suffered.
Yes, actually it does. There are ways around that like you suggest but it doesn't negate the fact that your warranty is voided when you jailbreak and you can't always hide the evidence. There are many reasons for a device to stop working. There could be a loose connection from the battery or anything. When Apple receives the device and manage to boot it up they see it is jailbroken and your warranty is void. What you are proposing borders on fraud and more scrupulous people than you would not be comfortable doing that.
Apple[...]security[...]browser
Yes, for people like you that swallow the kool-aid by the gallon, I am sure their excuses seem reasonable. More objective people on the other hand see the usefulness of a jit javascript compiler in a webview and wonder why Apple can't figure out a way to make it happen. Anecdotally, can you name one actual case of an Android handset being compromised in the wild due to a vulnerability in the javascript jit compiler? And if you're so concerned about javascript then you should also know that you have to explicitely enable it in an Android webview for it to work anyway.
express informed dissatisfaction
Um, asking for a faster javascript engine that compares to Safari is informed dissatisfaction. It is a glaring flaw in alternative web browsers and webview based mobile apps and if Apple is so concerned about the security implications then they need to figure it out. It would provide a better user experience for millions of people and be one more minor headache for their development team. I'm sure they can handle it being big boys and girls.
If you care at all about the hundreds of millions of non-technical users[...]it is a resonable default.
No, it is not. Those hundreds of millions of users are getting a poorer experience and they don't even realize it nor would they know why even if they did. The security implications are very manageable and it is a cop-out to keep parroting the party line and then reaching for the jailbreak card. Jailbreaking does not help anybody that doesn't do it which is the vast majority of users of the OS. If Apple wanted to be truly responsible they wouldn't allow travesties like the Facebook webview app to even exist on their platform. The thing is atrociously obnoxiously slow and the primary reason is lack of jitted javascript. So instead of getting a reasonable performance app that jit would provide or forcing Facebook to use native widgets, you get this in between garbage. Facebook shares some of the blame but Apple is the one that made it possible by trying to inflate appstore numbers with expedient toolkits yet not giving developers all the resources they need to make performant apps.
Fuck this, I'm done with it. Now go on your little rant about how I'm an "Apple hater" (completely untrue) or how security should trump user experience no matter how small the risk blah blah blah. Don't forget to wipe your mouth though as I think there's still some bullshit hanging.
Google Voice has a fantastic mobile website where they use some javascript trick to defeat the inherent latency of pressing buttons on a mobile webview screen. It's not hugely interactive though so could you give me an example of a great mobile site that has some complexity and shows how it should be done?
Android has no package manager in the apt-get sense
Which is really strange considering Cydia on iOS is nothing but a front end to apt-get with dependency checking and the whole nine. Of course you could distribute "packages" to rooted devices that could install system binaries and libraries but it would be more akin to what you see on Slackware where you just extract a tar onto your file system. I think to do any kind of sophisticated preinstall etc. scripts like you get in a deb package would have to be done as a two step process. User downloads apk and installs it and on first run, the apk acts as an installer that does all the heavy lifting. Unfortunately this approach would suffer from lack of coordinated efforts so somebody would have to oversee the whole affair as an alternative market where in order to get admission your app couldn't step on any other apps. It could be done though if you were committed.
Not exactly. At the risk of oversimplification, a virtual machine like Virtualbox or VMWare just isolates the guest OS in memory. Most execution can be passed to the native underlying hardware so its really quick. x86 isn't the easiest architecture to virtualize as all instructions can't just be passed through but Intel and AMD have made some big strides so virtualization is pretty good but still not as good as something like IBM's System/370 that was built from the ground up to be virtualizable.
An emulator like qemu on the other hand can be used to run a guest OS that expects a different architecture, i.e., emulating ARM on x86 for something like the Android emulator (have you seen how slow that thing is?). Since most consoles other than the original xbox don't run on x86 hardware or anything close to it, they have to be emulated which forces a translation layer slowing things down considerably. There are tricks to speed emulation up and modern 3D accelerated programs usually target a software api like opengl or directx so there is much less translation involved assuming the underlying OS has support for those APIs. Also, hardware emulation can be sped up by various tricks and lots of emulators like zsnes employ some really clever stuff including being partially written in assembly but you still need at least a 233 MHz Pentium II which is massively more powerful than what is being emulated.
You're saying that the PS3 and XBox are more powerful than my i7 PC?
No, you misunderstand. I'm saying emulating them would take a ton of computer power. To emulate the Super Nintendo, you need an x86 PC that's is multiple orders of magnitude more power than the little 16-bit 65c816 Ricoh 5A22 3.58 MHz processor the thing has. Now scale that up to PS3 and XBox 360 standards. Now imagine the next generation after that. At some point due to just computers not scaling up in speed like they used to and consoles reaching parity, it stands to reason that emulation will be extraordinarily difficult to do at speed.
And in order to maintain PCI compliance, you have to restrict access to non-essential personnel, keep your anti-virus updated, encrypt customer data over the network, assign ID's to people with access, yada yada yada. So at least there's that.
Yep, and judging by the buzzword compliant style of verbiage on the website, be prepared to pay out the ass for it. Seems like it would be a bit of a jarring experience. If I'm in my bank app, I would have to switch my brain to the "Nina" context. If I'm in Google Now, I have to switch to that context. I realize this may not be a big deal at all but it is a somewhat disconnected experience. Not only that but app makers can modify Nina in different ways so not only is it different than the standard phone voice input but it's different from itself depending on which app you're in that uses it. Then there's the stigma of talking to your phone anyway since it doesn't even get the "hold it up to your ear" pass that Siri gets. I'll wait and see but I wouldn't expect this to make any huge impact. If anything it will help spur on Apple and Google's efforts.
As time goes on and as subsequent generations of consoles become more complicated in both their hardware and embedded operating systems, emulating them will become increasingly difficult. I don't know how long it can last.
Another point too is computers just aren't getting faster like they used to. I mean what kind of hardware would it take to emulate a PS3 or XBox 360? And when their successors come out, how long will we have to wait for computers to surpass those enough for emulation to be practical speedwise?
Apple to Apple for a access to a lower level service go through the process and get it granted. There have been about a 1/2 dozen successful applications where apps have asked for higher levels of access.
Which one of the old mobile OSs was it that used to restrict CPU time from third party apps yet their native apps that shipped with the device got a first class share? Windows Mobile? Symbian? I don't exactly recall but that was one of the number one developer complaints of the platform. The last thing we need is a trip back to the bad old days. Legitimate restrictions that make for a better user experience for their customers I understand. You don't want devs just running amok on a mobile platform. But when an arbitrary decision like "no Nitro for YOU" gets in the way of me fully enjoying my webview wrapper of choice on a device I paid money for, I, as a consumer have a right to say something about it. And the "security" excuse is just weak.
Or users that would like to use Opera as their default to open links?
1) Jail brake
2) Change the default via. developer SDK
3) Have your company change the default via the enterprise / university SDK
4) Keep wanting
5) Pick a different phone.
1 - 3) Yes, I can do any one of those things but the first one voids your warranty and all of them are cop-out answers for functionality that shouldn't even be in question.
4) This is the internet, consumers don't have to just sit quietly and "want". And you don't speak for Apple so you don't know what they think about feedback from customers anyway. People do companies a favor by expressing dissatisfaction in products.
5) Of course but on the way out the door I'll be happy to let Apple know why they lost my business.
Er, then give them the freaking real estate and carry on. The apps are top notch and add considerable value to the device when done correctly. Just having the full Maps API available to developers on iOS like we have on Android would have been a boon and certainly not worth getting into a turf war over.
If you need performance in an app, don't use a WebView. You are in an app after all... you have the ability use any native code you like.
Except when you're developing an alternative browser that due to the arbitrary limitations set by Apple must wrap a webview. Personally, I prefer Mercury browser on my iPad. It sure would be nice to take advantage of Nitro.
Meanwhile enjoy your improperly sandboxed OS of choice that does accelerate WebView equivalents in an app...
You're confused. You don't have to use webview on Android as you can ship your own rendering engine thereby making the point moot. And if you do use a webview, you use the one the version of the OS shipped with and you have full access to the JavaScript engine. Since Google decoupled Chrome from Android, and will be updating it independently, it doesn't make sense for webviews to be dependent on it as any bug could be a showstopper for an entire class of apps. And how is Android improperly sandboxed? With Jellybean, apps with no permissions can't read the sdcard anymore unless you let them. As far as an Android app seeing what all is installed on the phone, this is necessary in order for the intent system to work properly which is something I wouldn't expect you to know about since iOS doesn't even have that functionality unless you code it up bespoke on a per app basis and even then it is extremely limited. The supposed issue of an app being able to open the browser is moot since if the app doesn't have the internet permission, it can't connect to the internet anyway even through an external browser. Basically your FUD about the Android sandbox is either outdated or pure bunk anyway.
Too bad Google doesn't let you chose other providers for alternate transit routing like Apple does in iOS6 though. What Google gives with the one hand, they tale away with the other.
But that's only with their own app and can almost certainly be chalked up to licensing and availability. You are free to include your own providers with no fear of being kicked off for "duplicating functionality".
Pardon me, instead of Arbitrary I should have said "because of a choice that Google made in order to try and hurt the iOS platform".
If they really wanted to hurt iOS (as if they really could), they just wouldn't develop any apps for it at all. Kind of like Apple's attitude towards Android. Where's Safari for my Xoom? Chrome on my iPad is a first class experience. Who is trying to hurt whom here?
The FACT is that as a developer of applications that use maps I have far more flexibility now in what I can do than I did when Google supplied the map data. The FACT is that as a developer of map based applications I can be integrated alongside the native maps app and called out for when the user is in a specific region.
Obviously well integrated map and location functionality is very important on a mobile device. However, it isn't Google's job to hold Apple's hand and deliver a robust full-featured API to their device. That is the device integrator's job and Apple up until now has failed you. Yet you blame Google. I could understand if it was a situation like on OS X where it can almost be seen as MS's duty to bring full featured Office functionality as that is a grotesquely complex program and being perfectly compatible with the various formats and interfaces is an unreasonable expectation. In that case, yes, you could say it is MS's "fault" if they lay down on the job. But in the case of mobile Maps, Google doesn't have any kind of a monopoly and they;don't owe you nor Apple an API no matter how many times you stomp your feet.
How is it hypocritical to point out that were Google is removed as a controlling entity I have more options as a developer?
You aren't just being hypocritical, you're being downright di
An app can also easily spawn a background thread to, say, handle posting a message while the UI is free to get on with other stuff. You can sort of do it in Javascript but it is never as fast as a native app.
This is a very important point. Java and Objective C are much more robust and full-featured than javascript and make things like multi-threading a breeze. A lot of people on here use native RSS readers on their desktops and don't think twice about it. An RSS reader like akregator and the "engadget app" are different only in degree.
Sadly most sites that can't be bothered to optimize for mobile are the very ones that wouldn't even dream of a mobile app. Speaking of optimizing for mobile, has anyone else noticed how ass-tastic Slashdot looks on an Android tablet vs. the iPad? On my Xoom with the default User Agent, I'm an ugly stretched cell phone version of the site while on my iPad I get what looks pretty much like the desktop version. You'd think "geek".net would be on top of that kind of thing.
Looks and functions so much worse than Google Maps. Oh wait, it's better.
Yeah, but Google has already previewed their much improved Maps for iOS 6 so that's the one the Apple app will be competing with. I don't know how far Google is willing to go to put a great Maps experience on a competitor's platform but if they are committed, just like with the Google Now vs. Siri thing, Google can almost certainly make a better Maps app than Apple since they have the experience and the data that Apple can't match. Personally I use Android and iOS devices and I love it when apps are decoupled from the underlying platform. Maps, Youtube, etc. should be a separate download so they can be updated without having to wait for a whole new version of the OS to come out. Most of the original Google Apps for Android including, incidentally Youtube and Maps in addition to GMail, Chrome Browser and probably some others I'm forgetting are now a download from Google Play and are updateable that way. Yes, your phone will still come with that stuff but the apps aren't in lockstep anymore. This is a good thing and should be celebrated for what it is.
Instead of iOS developers being limited in what they can do with a map (like no turn by turn directions) by arbitrary Google limitations, iOS map based apps can now do anything they like atop a map.
How about iOS developers that need high perfomance javascript in their webviews? Or users that would like to use Opera as their default to open links? On Android not only can I make any browser (or none of them) the default but I can fine tune it down to the point that links from different sites seamlessly open in my browser of choice, e.g., some sites just look better in Opera like Slashdot, some better in Chrome like CNet. And because a developer restricts API access or doesn't offer a particular API at all doesn't mean it's some "arbitrary decision". There are many things that go into those types of decisions and just because Apple brass is accusing Google of essentially "being mean" and you parroting the party line doesn't make it so. Think carefully lest you be hypocritical.
My girlfriend has a Kindle Fire and the Youtube app on that thing is phenomenal. As in it never buffers especially compared to my Xoom. I'm pretty sure they are proxying it somehow and feeding a compressed version but still it's pretty smooth and exceeds the experience I get.
As a part time mobile developer, I can kind of understand why. For any truly interactive site running a lot of javascript and doing anything ajaxy, the performance on a mobile device more is nothing short of ass-tastic. You go to a lot of sites and get greeted with some weird javascript popup that's almost impossible to click close on as the button just doesn't respond well. And a lot of sites take a long time to load especially blogs like theverge.com. A mobile app for those sites almost always loads the content quicker, has native controls for scrolling etc. so you don't have to rely on the craptacular javascript emulated UIs, and just does a better job of formatting the content to the screen. Of course all that could just be the fault of the website in question but I just don't see (for example) how engadget.com could ever be as good on the iPad as the engadget app. They both show the same content but the app is so much faster and has additional features that would be very difficult to do on the actual site with web dev tools. The only real issue is that if you had an app for every single site that needed one you'd have one cluttered phone. Maybe they could just disappear and automatically pop up if you put the url in the browser or clicked a bookmark. This could be done right now at least on Android since you can trigger apps to respond to custom uri's. Like slashdot://slashdot.com when clicked as an embedded link or in a bookmark could automatically open a "Slashdot" app.
Of course with suitably fast mobile devices, the speed advantage of the apps starts to get smaller and smaller. On my Xoom with Jellybean I don't bother to use any mobile site apps as the sites work perfectly well in the browser and all controls work well. My first gen iPad not so much.
These devices should come with the basic app market/store and as little else as possible.
Yep, it's a joy installing something like Cyanogenmod or similar on an Android handset and getting nothing but the most barebones pack-ins even when installing the gapps. You get just what you need as far as extras. The browser, the market, a terminal, and a few extras like calculator. No streaming apps, no gmail, youtube, nothing. Not even Maps is included. If you want it, play.google.com has it. I wouldn't have it any other way.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree completely. To be really good requires a vast knowledge that spans much more than the couple of programming languages the typical programmer knows. I didn't mean to disparage sys-admins at all. As a matter of fact, I meant it complimentarily as a large part of being a great sys-admin is being able to figure out the problem and act now! Sometimes with furious finger slapping in shell script or SQL cli. Much respect for those guys.
I think maybe back before the 80s when you had to be really hard-core to be committed enough not only to own a computer but to actually be willing to put in the effort of being proficient with it on a technical basis, many of the people in that category were probably the stereotypical nerd. These days with the easy availability of hardware and the accessibility of tools, a much more representative cross-section of the population is getting into the game. I'd say at least 2/3 of the successful programmers I know are just common ordinary dudes that while not being overtly alpha like a jock are certainly not what you would associate with the live-at-home basement dweller we all joke about. As a matter of fact most of those basement "nerds" are usually just gamers and enthusiasts that can regale you with the minutia of which sata cable is the best and which graphics card is the most value for the money but would be totally lost without a GUI to click on. And you can forget about them being able to program anything as who has time for that when there's a RAID, MAN!?!
After writing this, I got on a little bit of a tangent so it isn't all necessarily directed at you, LifeIs0x2A so don't be offended if it seems slightly condescending or obnoxious.
If you're proficient in practically any language, find a small under 10 person company to work for and it almost doesn't matter what you do they'll think you walk on water. Of course, do a good job out of professional pride if nothing else but in small businesses the IT guy that "makes shit happen" gets a ton of respect. Early in my career I started out at a sports wholesale distributor that wanted to insource their IT stuff. A friend of a friend heard about it and got me the interview. As a hobbyist I was already proficient in Python, Java, and web technology in addition to odds and ends like AutoIt and the ilk. I aced the "interview" which was basically, "Can you do computer stuff?" and got started. There was so much slop that could easily be automated I was like a kid in a candy store. One minute I was writing a custom database front-end that shortened the 20 minutes it took to enter products into the website to about 2 minutes and the next moment I was working on the sales/CMS application the salespeople (when it was finished) started running around with. It was great. It got to the point that the bosses daughter was bringing me home cooked meals to my desk everyday already heated up and ready to go. I'll stop there.
The point is if Google won't hire you then fuck them. If you have some skills then alpha the fuck up and network. There are plenty of opportunities for the taking.
Has anyone ever compiled a report on the longer term noteworthy projects of these competitive programmers? I'd be interested in seeing if there is anything I use regularly or admire would be on the list. If they aren't cut out for that I'd bet they'd make hulluva sys-admins though.
This is precisely what I was wondering. If anything I want to establish more of a personal relationship with whichever cloud provider I throw my lot in with. On the off chance that Google abuses the personal contact information then you cut them off and blog to the heavens about it. I guarantee you the internet will eat it up and blog ads will more than pay for the pain and misery you suffered.
The first one does NOT void your warranty
Yes, actually it does. There are ways around that like you suggest but it doesn't negate the fact that your warranty is voided when you jailbreak and you can't always hide the evidence. There are many reasons for a device to stop working. There could be a loose connection from the battery or anything. When Apple receives the device and manage to boot it up they see it is jailbroken and your warranty is void. What you are proposing borders on fraud and more scrupulous people than you would not be comfortable doing that.
Apple[...]security[...]browser
Yes, for people like you that swallow the kool-aid by the gallon, I am sure their excuses seem reasonable. More objective people on the other hand see the usefulness of a jit javascript compiler in a webview and wonder why Apple can't figure out a way to make it happen. Anecdotally, can you name one actual case of an Android handset being compromised in the wild due to a vulnerability in the javascript jit compiler? And if you're so concerned about javascript then you should also know that you have to explicitely enable it in an Android webview for it to work anyway.
express informed dissatisfaction
Um, asking for a faster javascript engine that compares to Safari is informed dissatisfaction. It is a glaring flaw in alternative web browsers and webview based mobile apps and if Apple is so concerned about the security implications then they need to figure it out. It would provide a better user experience for millions of people and be one more minor headache for their development team. I'm sure they can handle it being big boys and girls.
If you care at all about the hundreds of millions of non-technical users[...]it is a resonable default.
No, it is not. Those hundreds of millions of users are getting a poorer experience and they don't even realize it nor would they know why even if they did. The security implications are very manageable and it is a cop-out to keep parroting the party line and then reaching for the jailbreak card. Jailbreaking does not help anybody that doesn't do it which is the vast majority of users of the OS. If Apple wanted to be truly responsible they wouldn't allow travesties like the Facebook webview app to even exist on their platform. The thing is atrociously obnoxiously slow and the primary reason is lack of jitted javascript. So instead of getting a reasonable performance app that jit would provide or forcing Facebook to use native widgets, you get this in between garbage. Facebook shares some of the blame but Apple is the one that made it possible by trying to inflate appstore numbers with expedient toolkits yet not giving developers all the resources they need to make performant apps.
Fuck this, I'm done with it. Now go on your little rant about how I'm an "Apple hater" (completely untrue) or how security should trump user experience no matter how small the risk blah blah blah. Don't forget to wipe your mouth though as I think there's still some bullshit hanging.
Google Voice has a fantastic mobile website where they use some javascript trick to defeat the inherent latency of pressing buttons on a mobile webview screen. It's not hugely interactive though so could you give me an example of a great mobile site that has some complexity and shows how it should be done?
Android has no package manager in the apt-get sense
Which is really strange considering Cydia on iOS is nothing but a front end to apt-get with dependency checking and the whole nine. Of course you could distribute "packages" to rooted devices that could install system binaries and libraries but it would be more akin to what you see on Slackware where you just extract a tar onto your file system. I think to do any kind of sophisticated preinstall etc. scripts like you get in a deb package would have to be done as a two step process. User downloads apk and installs it and on first run, the apk acts as an installer that does all the heavy lifting. Unfortunately this approach would suffer from lack of coordinated efforts so somebody would have to oversee the whole affair as an alternative market where in order to get admission your app couldn't step on any other apps. It could be done though if you were committed.
Heh. I wish.
Not exactly. At the risk of oversimplification, a virtual machine like Virtualbox or VMWare just isolates the guest OS in memory. Most execution can be passed to the native underlying hardware so its really quick. x86 isn't the easiest architecture to virtualize as all instructions can't just be passed through but Intel and AMD have made some big strides so virtualization is pretty good but still not as good as something like IBM's System/370 that was built from the ground up to be virtualizable.
An emulator like qemu on the other hand can be used to run a guest OS that expects a different architecture, i.e., emulating ARM on x86 for something like the Android emulator (have you seen how slow that thing is?). Since most consoles other than the original xbox don't run on x86 hardware or anything close to it, they have to be emulated which forces a translation layer slowing things down considerably. There are tricks to speed emulation up and modern 3D accelerated programs usually target a software api like opengl or directx so there is much less translation involved assuming the underlying OS has support for those APIs. Also, hardware emulation can be sped up by various tricks and lots of emulators like zsnes employ some really clever stuff including being partially written in assembly but you still need at least a 233 MHz Pentium II which is massively more powerful than what is being emulated.
You're saying that the PS3 and XBox are more powerful than my i7 PC?
No, you misunderstand. I'm saying emulating them would take a ton of computer power. To emulate the Super Nintendo, you need an x86 PC that's is multiple orders of magnitude more power than the little 16-bit 65c816 Ricoh 5A22 3.58 MHz processor the thing has. Now scale that up to PS3 and XBox 360 standards. Now imagine the next generation after that. At some point due to just computers not scaling up in speed like they used to and consoles reaching parity, it stands to reason that emulation will be extraordinarily difficult to do at speed.
His offer amounts to between $24 and $26 per share, a premium of as much as 47% over Best Buy's stock price at Friday's close..."
Um, SOLD!!
The cloud offers scalable, redundant and PCI compliant servers
And in order to maintain PCI compliance, you have to restrict access to non-essential personnel, keep your anti-virus updated, encrypt customer data over the network, assign ID's to people with access, yada yada yada. So at least there's that.
Yep, and judging by the buzzword compliant style of verbiage on the website, be prepared to pay out the ass for it. Seems like it would be a bit of a jarring experience. If I'm in my bank app, I would have to switch my brain to the "Nina" context. If I'm in Google Now, I have to switch to that context. I realize this may not be a big deal at all but it is a somewhat disconnected experience. Not only that but app makers can modify Nina in different ways so not only is it different than the standard phone voice input but it's different from itself depending on which app you're in that uses it. Then there's the stigma of talking to your phone anyway since it doesn't even get the "hold it up to your ear" pass that Siri gets. I'll wait and see but I wouldn't expect this to make any huge impact. If anything it will help spur on Apple and Google's efforts.
As time goes on and as subsequent generations of consoles become more complicated in both their hardware and embedded operating systems, emulating them will become increasingly difficult. I don't know how long it can last.
Another point too is computers just aren't getting faster like they used to. I mean what kind of hardware would it take to emulate a PS3 or XBox 360? And when their successors come out, how long will we have to wait for computers to surpass those enough for emulation to be practical speedwise?
Apple to Apple for a access to a lower level service go through the process and get it granted. There have been about a 1/2 dozen successful applications where apps have asked for higher levels of access.
Which one of the old mobile OSs was it that used to restrict CPU time from third party apps yet their native apps that shipped with the device got a first class share? Windows Mobile? Symbian? I don't exactly recall but that was one of the number one developer complaints of the platform. The last thing we need is a trip back to the bad old days. Legitimate restrictions that make for a better user experience for their customers I understand. You don't want devs just running amok on a mobile platform. But when an arbitrary decision like "no Nitro for YOU" gets in the way of me fully enjoying my webview wrapper of choice on a device I paid money for, I, as a consumer have a right to say something about it. And the "security" excuse is just weak.
Or users that would like to use Opera as their default to open links?
1) Jail brake
2) Change the default via. developer SDK
3) Have your company change the default via the enterprise / university SDK
4) Keep wanting
5) Pick a different phone.
1 - 3) Yes, I can do any one of those things but the first one voids your warranty and all of them are cop-out answers for functionality that shouldn't even be in question. 4) This is the internet, consumers don't have to just sit quietly and "want". And you don't speak for Apple so you don't know what they think about feedback from customers anyway. People do companies a favor by expressing dissatisfaction in products. 5) Of course but on the way out the door I'll be happy to let Apple know why they lost my business.
Er, then give them the freaking real estate and carry on. The apps are top notch and add considerable value to the device when done correctly. Just having the full Maps API available to developers on iOS like we have on Android would have been a boon and certainly not worth getting into a turf war over.
If you need performance in an app, don't use a WebView. You are in an app after all... you have the ability use any native code you like.
Except when you're developing an alternative browser that due to the arbitrary limitations set by Apple must wrap a webview. Personally, I prefer Mercury browser on my iPad. It sure would be nice to take advantage of Nitro.
Meanwhile enjoy your improperly sandboxed OS of choice that does accelerate WebView equivalents in an app...
You're confused. You don't have to use webview on Android as you can ship your own rendering engine thereby making the point moot. And if you do use a webview, you use the one the version of the OS shipped with and you have full access to the JavaScript engine. Since Google decoupled Chrome from Android, and will be updating it independently, it doesn't make sense for webviews to be dependent on it as any bug could be a showstopper for an entire class of apps. And how is Android improperly sandboxed? With Jellybean, apps with no permissions can't read the sdcard anymore unless you let them. As far as an Android app seeing what all is installed on the phone, this is necessary in order for the intent system to work properly which is something I wouldn't expect you to know about since iOS doesn't even have that functionality unless you code it up bespoke on a per app basis and even then it is extremely limited. The supposed issue of an app being able to open the browser is moot since if the app doesn't have the internet permission, it can't connect to the internet anyway even through an external browser. Basically your FUD about the Android sandbox is either outdated or pure bunk anyway.
Too bad Google doesn't let you chose other providers for alternate transit routing like Apple does in iOS6 though. What Google gives with the one hand, they tale away with the other.
But that's only with their own app and can almost certainly be chalked up to licensing and availability. You are free to include your own providers with no fear of being kicked off for "duplicating functionality".
Pardon me, instead of Arbitrary I should have said "because of a choice that Google made in order to try and hurt the iOS platform".
If they really wanted to hurt iOS (as if they really could), they just wouldn't develop any apps for it at all. Kind of like Apple's attitude towards Android. Where's Safari for my Xoom? Chrome on my iPad is a first class experience. Who is trying to hurt whom here?
The FACT is that as a developer of applications that use maps I have far more flexibility now in what I can do than I did when Google supplied the map data. The FACT is that as a developer of map based applications I can be integrated alongside the native maps app and called out for when the user is in a specific region.
Obviously well integrated map and location functionality is very important on a mobile device. However, it isn't Google's job to hold Apple's hand and deliver a robust full-featured API to their device. That is the device integrator's job and Apple up until now has failed you. Yet you blame Google. I could understand if it was a situation like on OS X where it can almost be seen as MS's duty to bring full featured Office functionality as that is a grotesquely complex program and being perfectly compatible with the various formats and interfaces is an unreasonable expectation. In that case, yes, you could say it is MS's "fault" if they lay down on the job. But in the case of mobile Maps, Google doesn't have any kind of a monopoly and they ;don't owe you nor Apple an API no matter how many times you stomp your feet.
How is it hypocritical to point out that were Google is removed as a controlling entity I have more options as a developer?
You aren't just being hypocritical, you're being downright di
An app can also easily spawn a background thread to, say, handle posting a message while the UI is free to get on with other stuff. You can sort of do it in Javascript but it is never as fast as a native app.
This is a very important point. Java and Objective C are much more robust and full-featured than javascript and make things like multi-threading a breeze. A lot of people on here use native RSS readers on their desktops and don't think twice about it. An RSS reader like akregator and the "engadget app" are different only in degree.
Sadly most sites that can't be bothered to optimize for mobile are the very ones that wouldn't even dream of a mobile app. Speaking of optimizing for mobile, has anyone else noticed how ass-tastic Slashdot looks on an Android tablet vs. the iPad? On my Xoom with the default User Agent, I'm an ugly stretched cell phone version of the site while on my iPad I get what looks pretty much like the desktop version. You'd think "geek".net would be on top of that kind of thing.
Yeah, because this:
http://imgur.com/a/vK6tr
Looks and functions so much worse than Google Maps. Oh wait, it's better.
Yeah, but Google has already previewed their much improved Maps for iOS 6 so that's the one the Apple app will be competing with. I don't know how far Google is willing to go to put a great Maps experience on a competitor's platform but if they are committed, just like with the Google Now vs. Siri thing, Google can almost certainly make a better Maps app than Apple since they have the experience and the data that Apple can't match. Personally I use Android and iOS devices and I love it when apps are decoupled from the underlying platform. Maps, Youtube, etc. should be a separate download so they can be updated without having to wait for a whole new version of the OS to come out. Most of the original Google Apps for Android including, incidentally Youtube and Maps in addition to GMail, Chrome Browser and probably some others I'm forgetting are now a download from Google Play and are updateable that way. Yes, your phone will still come with that stuff but the apps aren't in lockstep anymore. This is a good thing and should be celebrated for what it is.
Instead of iOS developers being limited in what they can do with a map (like no turn by turn directions) by arbitrary Google limitations, iOS map based apps can now do anything they like atop a map.
How about iOS developers that need high perfomance javascript in their webviews? Or users that would like to use Opera as their default to open links? On Android not only can I make any browser (or none of them) the default but I can fine tune it down to the point that links from different sites seamlessly open in my browser of choice, e.g., some sites just look better in Opera like Slashdot, some better in Chrome like CNet. And because a developer restricts API access or doesn't offer a particular API at all doesn't mean it's some "arbitrary decision". There are many things that go into those types of decisions and just because Apple brass is accusing Google of essentially "being mean" and you parroting the party line doesn't make it so. Think carefully lest you be hypocritical.
My girlfriend has a Kindle Fire and the Youtube app on that thing is phenomenal. As in it never buffers especially compared to my Xoom. I'm pretty sure they are proxying it somehow and feeding a compressed version but still it's pretty smooth and exceeds the experience I get.
Of course with suitably fast mobile devices, the speed advantage of the apps starts to get smaller and smaller. On my Xoom with Jellybean I don't bother to use any mobile site apps as the sites work perfectly well in the browser and all controls work well. My first gen iPad not so much.
These devices should come with the basic app market/store and as little else as possible.
Yep, it's a joy installing something like Cyanogenmod or similar on an Android handset and getting nothing but the most barebones pack-ins even when installing the gapps. You get just what you need as far as extras. The browser, the market, a terminal, and a few extras like calculator. No streaming apps, no gmail, youtube, nothing. Not even Maps is included. If you want it, play.google.com has it. I wouldn't have it any other way.