3 ms·
Seems like this is bought and paid for by Google and will be teaching an Android-centric view of mobile development. This is obviously their choice, but if they
by flyosity 15y ago
Seems like this is bought and paid for by Google and will be teaching an Android-centric view of mobile development. This is obviously their choice, but if they don't include any type of Objective-C and Cocoa development in their curriculum they're doing students a huge disservice.
- Turing_Machine 15y agoI prefer iOS myself, but there are reasons other than Google's sponsorship at work here. Apple is dead set against allowing user-created or downloaded code to run (other than JavaScript). That means that tools like AppInventor just aren't as practical for iOS (sure, every student could fork over $99 to become a developer, but...). In fact, Apple pulled the Scratch port from the App Store some time ago (Scratch is a similar visual programming language, also from MIT). I understand Apple's reasons for exercising tight control over distribution, and even agree with them to a large degree. It would be nice, though, if you were at least allowed to download code to your own phone without being a registered developer. That would definitely make iOS more student-friendly. What I'd really like to see is the ability to distribute apps to a limited number of devices (similar to the current ad hoc provisioning), so students could play around with networked apps. Apple could still require a registered dev account before allowing stuff in the App Store for distribution to the general public.