5 ms·

I'll have to admit, that's exactly why I don't find the idea of developing for iOS/webOS/Android very appealing: the necessity of buying corresponding hardware.

by apl 16y ago

I'll have to admit, that's exactly why I don't find the idea of developing for iOS/webOS/Android very appealing: the necessity of buying corresponding hardware. Maybe even client-side application development in its entirety. I can work on platform-agnostic web applications from wherever I want - Linux, Mac OS X, even Windows. Sure, there's a testing phase, and I need to deploy on a specific system. But other than that, I don't have to worry about new and expensive hardware revisions et cetera.

kbatten 16y ago
If your goal is to make money, then a few hundred dollars to buy into the platform is meaningless. If your goal isn't to make money then why would you develop for a platform that you don't have access to?
- minalecs 16y ago
  author was able to develop without having access to hardware, and the product looks great. I imagine they will make lots of money with it.
swah 16y ago
What about emulators?
- bmj 16y ago
  My experience with Windows Mobile (not Windows Phone 7) emulators is that because of the huge variety of devices, they only give you an idea of whether the software will work on the OS. The issue is, of course, that each family of hardware is different, and Microsoft often allows the vendor to tweak the OS a bit. It strikes me as an advantage to developers, at least regarding hardware, that Apple controls the whole package. You can develop in an emulator and know how your software will behave on the device.
  - pornel 16y ago
    Apple has simulator. It's conceptually similar to WINE — runs x86 code (not ARM) with Mac OS X-hosted versions of iOS frameworks.
- armandososa 16y ago
  They are close to the real thing. But not quite. Multitouch events, for example, are hard to accomplish.
armandososa 16y ago
Honestly, I don't find appealing the development of cross-platform web sites. In those cases you have to target the lowest common denominator better known as IE6 and you'll be doing practically the same that you've been doing the last 6+ years. Besides being a good business opportunity, developing for PadPressed was incredibly fun and challenging in a way that no other website ever was. I got to use the latest technologies that a browser has to offer, like CSS3's transitions and animations and HTML5's new webSQL API (or whatever it's called). You know? just the opportunity to completely ignore Internet Explorer makes it worthwhile. And the iPad is a very nice device even for non-development related stuff.
coderdad 16y ago
I do think this is a valid. I am doing this in my spare time, so I develop for the things that give me the best return and are what I want. I started with iPhone and then moved to iPad. I don't really want to buy another phone to develop with or another tablet, so I won't. I would be better served I think to build another app for iOS than to port an app to a store in an ecosystem that I'm not personally active in.

by apl 16y ago

kbatten 16y ago

If your goal is to make money, then a few hundred dollars to buy into the platform is meaningless. If your goal isn't to make money then why would you develop for a platform that you don't have access to?

minalecs 16y ago
author was able to develop without having access to hardware, and the product looks great. I imagine they will make lots of money with it.

swah 16y ago

What about emulators?

bmj 16y ago
My experience with Windows Mobile (not Windows Phone 7) emulators is that because of the huge variety of devices, they only give you an idea of whether the software will work on the OS. The issue is, of course, that each family of hardware is different, and Microsoft often allows the vendor to tweak the OS a bit. It strikes me as an advantage to developers, at least regarding hardware, that Apple controls the whole package. You can develop in an emulator and know how your software will behave on the device.
- pornel 16y ago
  Apple has simulator. It's conceptually similar to WINE — runs x86 code (not ARM) with Mac OS X-hosted versions of iOS frameworks.
armandososa 16y ago
They are close to the real thing. But not quite. Multitouch events, for example, are hard to accomplish.

armandososa 16y ago

Honestly, I don't find appealing the development of cross-platform web sites. In those cases you have to target the lowest common denominator better known as IE6 and you'll be doing practically the same that you've been doing the last 6+ years. Besides being a good business opportunity, developing for PadPressed was incredibly fun and challenging in a way that no other website ever was. I got to use the latest technologies that a browser has to offer, like CSS3's transitions and animations and HTML5's new webSQL API (or whatever it's called). You know? just the opportunity to completely ignore Internet Explorer makes it worthwhile. And the iPad is a very nice device even for non-development related stuff.

coderdad 16y ago

I do think this is a valid. I am doing this in my spare time, so I develop for the things that give me the best return and are what I want. I started with iPhone and then moved to iPad. I don't really want to buy another phone to develop with or another tablet, so I won't. I would be better served I think to build another app for iOS than to port an app to a store in an ecosystem that I'm not personally active in.