4 ms·

From a developer's point of view, how does the power of Android compare to that of the iPhone OS? I haven't developed on either, but articles I've read so far s

by zhyder 17y ago

From a developer's point of view, how does the power of Android compare to that of the iPhone OS? I haven't developed on either, but articles I've read so far seem to indicate the two have pros and cons but are pretty evenly matched overall. Of course the iPhone still attracts more developers because it has more users. Let's assume that Android-based smartphones become increasingly successful as many predict, and that users find Android smartphones about as appealing as iPhones. Tablets running Android have been announced, though no apps have been optimized for the larger screen size yet. If Google released tablet-optimized versions of the stock apps, and made the appropriate tweaks to the SDK and the Market, wouldn't Android-based tablets be a close match to the iPad? How come there hasn't been any excitement about the potential of Android-based tablets?

pkaler 17y ago
I can't claim to be an Android expert but coding Java in Eclipse is a big pain in the butt. Some people love Eclipse. I am not one of those people. With respect to iPhone/iPad development, Cocoa is the most beautiful and consistent framework I have worked with. It's the best implementation of MVC I've worked with. Objective-C is a little crufty but message passing languages are so much more elegant than method calling languages like C++/C#/Java. With respect to Android based tablets, Google has done a huge disservice and fragmented the market by pushing Chrome OS for tablets.
- roc 17y ago
  I think the disservice was more that Chrome OS is locked-down Linux vs scaled-up Android. It should have been Android all the way up -- handhelds to desktops -- freeing the market to throw all sorts of crazy hardware variants into any number of form factors.
blasdel 17y ago
I've commented here before about the shittiness of Android as a platform: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1064415 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1064415 I think Android is a huge mistake on an unpocketable portable device, and I don't think Google disagrees. It might work out on a TV / Media Center device, but Boxee is so far ahead there that it's quite unlikely. Google's plan for Smartbooks and iPad competitors is ChromeOS. I think they'll succeed handily if they ship it with only a content-addressed-filesystem exposed (think 'media picker'), and with a fleshed-out Google Native Client for local apps. I'd love for them to get some competent hardware manufacturers lined up with solid build quality, but Apple has that market mostly cornered (the Nokia netbook looks great though).
- netcan 17y ago
  I think Android is a huge mistake on an unpocketable portable device Why? Or, more, importantly if iPhone OS work why doesn't Android work?
jsz0 17y ago
Probably because all the Android tablets that have come out so far have been pretty terrible. The Archos device got slammed pretty hard. I haven't used it myself but checking out the specs it's really just not in the same ball park. Slower, smaller, lower quality display, stuck on a year old version of the Android OS -- in fact it got the 1.6 update 8 days ago and it's fragmented off into it's own Archos App Store/Market/Catalog/whatever. Not encouraging. In fairness the Archos device is primarily a PMP and has some unique features that might make it a better choice for some people. This seems to be the direction most of these Android tablets are taking. I don't know of any tablet running Android that is directly comparable to the iPad.
buster 17y ago
As a developer for Android devices, i must say this article makes me really sad. How can a developer be satisfied with limitations and just put the "but it's how it is to be more secure" stamp on it. Let's see those 2 sentences that make really no sense: "it can't just read and write willy-nilly to the file system, access hardware, or interfere with other apps. In my mind, this is one of the best features of the OS." and: "As a developer, it's a bit sad losing the ability to come up with crazy plugins and daemons and system-level utilities, but I believe it's a tradeoff worth making." I've now owned Android devices since the G1 (the first), now switching to the Nexus One. The nerd i am i probably installed hundreds of those apps, that are not approved by someone. Not one of them did somehow brick my phone! The worst thing that happens is that apps don't do what i want, some even crash (but that's surprisingly rare). But still, they can run in the background, communicate with each other, etc. So, why am i telling this: If smart engineers can think about what a smartphone OS should be like, it will support save mechanisms for multitasking, for daemons and plugins. Behind Androids Interface are a lot of very neat concepts working.(intents/broadcasts, man, i love that concept!) From what i can tell: - iPhone OS is some stripped down Mac OS version, which probably has its deficits in some areas. I believe that Apple just doesn't give us multitasking because it has heavy impact on batterylife or security (because the OS wasn't made for mobiles, in the beginning). - When chosing between a _free_ development platform on Java, with Eclipse on every major platform and a subscription based development only with Mac OSX and a language that is basically used nowhere else (Obj-C)... well, the choice is clear for me. Google did a pretty good job with the Eclipse integration and it's toolchain.
- fragmede 17y ago
  Cydia, the app store for jailbroken iPhones has a backgrounder app. Give it a try. What they don't tell you is that it sucks, maybe because the iPhone doesn't really have the ram to run apps in the background or maybe because the iPhone OS wasn't designed that way, but for some reason I'm leaning towards the former as an explanation.
  - illumin8 17y ago
    Cydia, the app store for jailbroken iPhones has a backgrounder app. Give it a try. What they don't tell you is that it sucks, maybe because the iPhone doesn't really have the ram to run apps in the background or maybe because the iPhone OS wasn't designed that way, but for some reason I'm leaning towards the former as an explanation. I found the Backgrounder app to be a great way to multitask on iPhone OS. First of all, it gives you a visual indication on the icon of every currently running app, including the Apple ones that are always running like Phone, Mail, Safari, and iPod. Second, it's very intuitive and easy to use, you simply hold the home button down for 1 second instead of quickly pressing it, if you want to background the app instead of just exiting to the home screen. Third, it passes the number one use case very handily: I can listen to Pandora while surfing in Safari seamlessly, and it almost makes my iPhone seem like a functional computer. iPhone 3GS with backgrounder is seriously a powerful device, and lets me have an insight into how powerful the iPad will be. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanboy. I won't be buying an iPad until I'm sure it can be jailbroken, and probably not rev. 1, because I'm sure rev. 2 will have the missing features like webcam, etc. I'm just saying that a jailbroken iPhone/iPad will be an impressive device.
reggieband 17y ago
> How come there hasn't been any excitement about the potential of Android-based tablets? In the propaganda video Apple has on their site there is a brief talk by the tech guy. Incidentally he is the only guy in the video who doesn't come across to me as a total douche-bag when talking about the iPad. He mentions that Apple owns the hardware and the software. Usually that is just Apple marketing BS but in this case I think it actually really applies. There is a tight integration between all of the hardware, software and even the uni-body aluminum casing. The decisions they've made for everything (from chip design to UI design) is with the entire device in mind. Android, not so much. It must necessarily be a more generalized framework. There are some reasons that is a benefit but for this type of device I wager it is actually a detriment. The main positive the media is taking away from the iPad is its speed. I was impressed by the claimed battery life. I don't believe any Android tablet will be capable of delivering a similar level of performance on these two key factors.

by zhyder 17y ago

pkaler 17y ago

I can't claim to be an Android expert but coding Java in Eclipse is a big pain in the butt. Some people love Eclipse. I am not one of those people. With respect to iPhone/iPad development, Cocoa is the most beautiful and consistent framework I have worked with. It's the best implementation of MVC I've worked with. Objective-C is a little crufty but message passing languages are so much more elegant than method calling languages like C++/C#/Java. With respect to Android based tablets, Google has done a huge disservice and fragmented the market by pushing Chrome OS for tablets.

roc 17y ago
I think the disservice was more that Chrome OS is locked-down Linux vs scaled-up Android. It should have been Android all the way up -- handhelds to desktops -- freeing the market to throw all sorts of crazy hardware variants into any number of form factors.

blasdel 17y ago

I've commented here before about the shittiness of Android as a platform: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1064415 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1064415 I think Android is a huge mistake on an unpocketable portable device, and I don't think Google disagrees. It might work out on a TV / Media Center device, but Boxee is so far ahead there that it's quite unlikely. Google's plan for Smartbooks and iPad competitors is ChromeOS. I think they'll succeed handily if they ship it with only a content-addressed-filesystem exposed (think 'media picker'), and with a fleshed-out Google Native Client for local apps. I'd love for them to get some competent hardware manufacturers lined up with solid build quality, but Apple has that market mostly cornered (the Nokia netbook looks great though).

netcan 17y ago
I think Android is a huge mistake on an unpocketable portable device Why? Or, more, importantly if iPhone OS work why doesn't Android work?

jsz0 17y ago

Probably because all the Android tablets that have come out so far have been pretty terrible. The Archos device got slammed pretty hard. I haven't used it myself but checking out the specs it's really just not in the same ball park. Slower, smaller, lower quality display, stuck on a year old version of the Android OS -- in fact it got the 1.6 update 8 days ago and it's fragmented off into it's own Archos App Store/Market/Catalog/whatever. Not encouraging. In fairness the Archos device is primarily a PMP and has some unique features that might make it a better choice for some people. This seems to be the direction most of these Android tablets are taking. I don't know of any tablet running Android that is directly comparable to the iPad.

buster 17y ago

As a developer for Android devices, i must say this article makes me really sad. How can a developer be satisfied with limitations and just put the "but it's how it is to be more secure" stamp on it. Let's see those 2 sentences that make really no sense: "it can't just read and write willy-nilly to the file system, access hardware, or interfere with other apps. In my mind, this is one of the best features of the OS." and: "As a developer, it's a bit sad losing the ability to come up with crazy plugins and daemons and system-level utilities, but I believe it's a tradeoff worth making." I've now owned Android devices since the G1 (the first), now switching to the Nexus One. The nerd i am i probably installed hundreds of those apps, that are not approved by someone. Not one of them did somehow brick my phone! The worst thing that happens is that apps don't do what i want, some even crash (but that's surprisingly rare). But still, they can run in the background, communicate with each other, etc. So, why am i telling this: If smart engineers can think about what a smartphone OS should be like, it will support save mechanisms for multitasking, for daemons and plugins. Behind Androids Interface are a lot of very neat concepts working.(intents/broadcasts, man, i love that concept!) From what i can tell: - iPhone OS is some stripped down Mac OS version, which probably has its deficits in some areas. I believe that Apple just doesn't give us multitasking because it has heavy impact on batterylife or security (because the OS wasn't made for mobiles, in the beginning). - When chosing between a _free_ development platform on Java, with Eclipse on every major platform and a subscription based development only with Mac OSX and a language that is basically used nowhere else (Obj-C)... well, the choice is clear for me. Google did a pretty good job with the Eclipse integration and it's toolchain.

fragmede 17y ago
Cydia, the app store for jailbroken iPhones has a backgrounder app. Give it a try. What they don't tell you is that it sucks, maybe because the iPhone doesn't really have the ram to run apps in the background or maybe because the iPhone OS wasn't designed that way, but for some reason I'm leaning towards the former as an explanation.
- illumin8 17y ago
  Cydia, the app store for jailbroken iPhones has a backgrounder app. Give it a try. What they don't tell you is that it sucks, maybe because the iPhone doesn't really have the ram to run apps in the background or maybe because the iPhone OS wasn't designed that way, but for some reason I'm leaning towards the former as an explanation. I found the Backgrounder app to be a great way to multitask on iPhone OS. First of all, it gives you a visual indication on the icon of every currently running app, including the Apple ones that are always running like Phone, Mail, Safari, and iPod. Second, it's very intuitive and easy to use, you simply hold the home button down for 1 second instead of quickly pressing it, if you want to background the app instead of just exiting to the home screen. Third, it passes the number one use case very handily: I can listen to Pandora while surfing in Safari seamlessly, and it almost makes my iPhone seem like a functional computer. iPhone 3GS with backgrounder is seriously a powerful device, and lets me have an insight into how powerful the iPad will be. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanboy. I won't be buying an iPad until I'm sure it can be jailbroken, and probably not rev. 1, because I'm sure rev. 2 will have the missing features like webcam, etc. I'm just saying that a jailbroken iPhone/iPad will be an impressive device.

reggieband 17y ago

> How come there hasn't been any excitement about the potential of Android-based tablets? In the propaganda video Apple has on their site there is a brief talk by the tech guy. Incidentally he is the only guy in the video who doesn't come across to me as a total douche-bag when talking about the iPad. He mentions that Apple owns the hardware and the software. Usually that is just Apple marketing BS but in this case I think it actually really applies. There is a tight integration between all of the hardware, software and even the uni-body aluminum casing. The decisions they've made for everything (from chip design to UI design) is with the entire device in mind. Android, not so much. It must necessarily be a more generalized framework. There are some reasons that is a benefit but for this type of device I wager it is actually a detriment. The main positive the media is taking away from the iPad is its speed. I was impressed by the claimed battery life. I don't believe any Android tablet will be capable of delivering a similar level of performance on these two key factors.