3 ms·

>It makes no sense to want to have different platforms but still be bound to not have unique APIs and frameworks for each. The point is, that this is an artifi

>It makes no sense to want to have different platforms but still be bound to not have unique APIs and frameworks for each. The point is, that this is an artificial arbitrary, a line drawn in the sand by market - not technological - forces, and to play along with it is to pander to the divide and conquer strategy begin applied in the effort to capture developer mindshare. Why deal with it at all, when .. with a little effort .. a cross-platform solution that works effectively on all platforms is a tangible, viable product? Just consider the amount of work that had to be done to update apps for the recent changes in iOS' look and feel, and consider what life would be like if instead the effort was made on a cross-platform solution that put the application-standard GUI together, driven by the application-developer, not OS/hardware vendors whose motives are entirely driven by keeping developers away 'from those other platforms'. I've built big Android and big iOS projects. Neither one of them is better than the other, in any sense whatsoever; both platforms have their thorns and pitfalls, and maintaining two separate codebases, with all the pitfalls, is just counter-productive. Better to have one codebase that fits all and keeps the productivity where it needs to be: on the application, and not on keeping up with the joneses ..

coldtea 12y ago
>The point is, that this is an artificial arbitrary, a line drawn in the sand by market - not technological - forces That's wrong. Platforms are different, and offer different APIs and frameworks, because of technological forces too, not just because of some corporate conspiracy for lock in. Case in point, even Open Source OSes offer different platforms and incompatible frameworks. Not all are just a UNIX/POSIX clone. VMS has a different philosophy to UNIX. Lisp Machines even more so. Windows. BeOS. Etc. And that's the core OS. The same goes for platforms and desktop level stuff. Having the same stuff (APIs, GUIs etc) work in all platforms the same, kills diversification and competition between technological implementations and design philosophies. >I've built big Android and big iOS projects. Neither one of them is better than the other, in any sense whatsoever; both platforms have their thorns and pitfalls, and maintaining two separate codebases, with all the pitfalls, is just counter-productive. Well, that's like your opinion man. I find iOS vastly superior for most of my uses cases. I surely don't wish iOS and Android got merged into the same codebase.

coldtea 12y ago

>The point is, that this is an artificial arbitrary, a line drawn in the sand by market - not technological - forces That's wrong. Platforms are different, and offer different APIs and frameworks, because of technological forces too, not just because of some corporate conspiracy for lock in. Case in point, even Open Source OSes offer different platforms and incompatible frameworks. Not all are just a UNIX/POSIX clone. VMS has a different philosophy to UNIX. Lisp Machines even more so. Windows. BeOS. Etc. And that's the core OS. The same goes for platforms and desktop level stuff. Having the same stuff (APIs, GUIs etc) work in all platforms the same, kills diversification and competition between technological implementations and design philosophies. >I've built big Android and big iOS projects. Neither one of them is better than the other, in any sense whatsoever; both platforms have their thorns and pitfalls, and maintaining two separate codebases, with all the pitfalls, is just counter-productive. Well, that's like your opinion man. I find iOS vastly superior for most of my uses cases. I surely don't wish iOS and Android got merged into the same codebase.