4 ms·
I had a similar experience with the platform. I was very excited, browsed through the APIs to check the required features were there and jumped in. It then took
by hopeless 16y ago
I had a similar experience with the platform. I was very excited, browsed through the APIs to check the required features were there and jumped in. It then took ages to get the right versions of SDKs/XCode and Titanium installed, which also involved searching though forum posts and patching files. Finally I got the "Kitchen Sink" app working. All was good.
I started implementing my app and quickly became flummoxed by the difference between seemingly identical windows (it's all down to "execution contexts" explained here http://iamwil.posterous.com/when-it-comes-to-titaniuminclude-its-a-trick http://iamwil.posterous.com/when-it-comes-to-titaniuminclude... not in the Titanium Docs).
And now Apple have made their subscription functionality the only game in town and that module (StoreKit) will cost a hefty Appcelerator subscription ($2500/yr, IIRC)
Bah... I've abandoned my Appelerator prototype and I'm going to try out PhoneGap which looks like it's really improved in the past ~6 months
Edit: typo
- tannerburson 16y agoI agree, PhoneGap today looks much better than it did when I started this project on Titanium about 6 months ago. I definitely wish I'd gone that route in retrospect.
- wahnfrieden 16y agoTitanium is much, much more tolerable and sane if you ditch Ti.include and use its CommonJS Ti.require() instead.
- drewda 16y agoIs that what screws up global events (at least on Android)?
- phatbyte 16y agoLast time I checked phonegap didn't work with Xcode4, at least not out of the box. You had to hack some scripts to create a project file and stuff.