4 ms·
While I don't disagree with your overall point: > just like iOS and OS X, we would really need separate apps for both Why? A desktop computer is powerful enou
by rjtavares 14y ago
While I don't disagree with your overall point:
> just like iOS and OS X, we would really need separate apps for both
Why? A desktop computer is powerful enough to emulate a smartphone, so existing Android apps could be desktop compatible (especially tablet ready apps).
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- mynameisvlad 14y agoIsn't the majority of the slowness on the Android emulator to do with needing to emulate the VM? Windows Phone and iOS emulators/simulators/whatevertheyrecallingthemnow are much faster than Android.
- svantana 14y agoI think the main problem there is that they render graphics on the cpu. Also, an android desktop machine would most likely use an ARM architecture, making the point moot.
- arthulia 14y agoAndroid was ported to x86 (at least Intel Atom) in version 4.1
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- svantana 14y agoBecause in desktop apps we're expecting resizable windows, right-click ability, menus, mouse-over etc. Apps made for fullscreen touch devices would feel a bit crippled.
- rjtavares 14y agoI'm not saying it would be perfect, but it would definitely be better than no apps at all.
- pretoriusB 14y ago"Better than no apps at all" hardly wins the desktop market -- which is what we are discussing here...
- firefoxman1 14y agoI agree. Using touch apps with a mouse is worse than using mouse apps with a touchscreen.