7 ms·

Why choose Xamarin?

29 points by pauloortins 12y ago

will_work4tears 12y ago
How does Xamarin compare to a more open (and free) solution like MonoCross?
- edgyswingset 12y ago
  It's the better choice for a number of reasons when the scale of the application(s) increases a lot. It's a premium product that comes loaded with features you need when you're building something at a scale larger than independently developing a single application. But I think the main differences you'll find, irrespective of scale, are a powerful designer/storyboard tool, Visual Studio integration, and the kind of support you'd expect to find from a paid product.
- ilkhan4 12y ago
  Unless I'm mistaken, MonoCross isn't a replacement for Xamarin (formerly Monotouch and Monodroid). It's a layer on top that abstracts the platforms differences. You'd still need a Xamarin.iOS and/or Xamarin.Android license to use it.
- mousetraps 12y ago
  You can't really compare them. MonoCross is a crossplat MVC framework that you use on top of Xamarin's Monotouch/droid/etc. to increase your shared code. Xamarin allows you to write about the same code for multiple platforms, but it doesn't make it easier to share the same exact code. E.g http://components.xamarin.com/view/xamarin.mobile http://components.xamarin.com/view/xamarin.mobile The code looks similar across platforms, but it's not exactly, the same - you can't make one change and have it carry across to all platforms. Monocross brings you closer to a write-once for all platforms experience. A better comparison is Monocross v.s. MvvmCross
  - will_work4tears 12y ago
    Ah, thanks, I didn't catch that MonoCross required Xamarin - it's not obvious from the homepage at all (or even looking for it on any page). Was hoping to use it to learn some C# (beyond the simple hello world type of thing) - Xamarin's pricing is pretty steep for an amateur/hobbyist.
atwebb 12y ago
I realize that the difference of $700 could be made up in improved development performance but I really, really wish they'd allow VS support for the indie license. It's not a case of saving more it's a risk/reward thing for me. I can see the possible value but, without being able to pick it up quickly in an environment I know I can't justify either spending an extra $700 or picking up another IDE/workspace along with the curve of mobile dev and setups for the different devices. Though I understand the cost, it provides tremendous value and you can't just give that away for free.
- AUmrysh 12y ago
  It's clear to me that Xamarin is trying to get everyone to pay right now. The free license won't even allow you to build the Xamarin.Forms demo, and Forms is one of the most significant new features they added. Cross platform apps with a common UI and codebase, no more separate views for each platform, and data binding! I think they're scaring off small developers by requiring the several hundred dollar investment to use Xamarin, even if it is a great product. Where I work, we chose Xamarin over PhoneGap/Cordova.
  - pauloortins 12y ago
    Totally agree. Prices could be lower and they would have a bigger market share in mobile development.
  - tejas-manohar 12y ago
    Good decision since Xamarin is much more native when compared to PhoneGap/Cordova (Titanium is another thing I've been looking at). The student discounts for $99/year/platform should be the normal price.
  - McGnarlySheen 12y ago
    Every benefit you just mentioned PhoneGap/Cordova has... and it's free...
- pauloortins 12y ago
  Have you ever tried Xamarin Studio? It's not as good as Visual Studio but it's a very decent IDE. I'm currently using it instead Visual Studio.
zura 12y ago
Why not choose C++/Qt/QML?
- general_failure 12y ago
  AFAIK, QML has barely any native UI integration. Are there iOS and Android components? Why does nothing turn up when doing a simple google search?
  - RayDonnelly 12y ago
    This email just in today: http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/android-development/2014-June/000388.html http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/android-development/20... It's native look and feel though, and not native integration. However AFAIK it goes to great lengths to blend in with the actual device you're running it on.
jasallen 12y ago
Xamarin's IDE is not as good as VS, but it is often much better than XCode, and C# and F# are both more pleasant languages to work in for people with the vast majority of experiences (C++, Java, .Net, Ruby), so even without all the cross platform goodness I prefer to work with Xamarin. (Swift may change some of that, I haven't looked into it yet). I've never had a problem easily translating Obj C StackOverflows or blog posts to Xamarin/C# so essentially you get the whole community as well, with no worries about Xamarin specificness. That said, I think their current pricing structure makes sense for them right now. They are not 'quite' at the polish level, not quite at the level that average people can do things averagely. There is still just a little more cross platform knowledge and effort required. The price serves as both a barrier to entry to manage the community size, and provides them enough capital (on top of outside investment) to keep investing toward a fully mass market approach.
fidotron 12y ago
The killer problem with Xamarin is to use it effectively you have to be expert in both Xamarin and the native platform you're targeting. This is because most of the work of mobile apps ends up being tied to the UI, which has a platform specific API. If your app happens to deviate from this, then at least for Android once more you're in platform specific land (for example, services), but I've seen people doing things like rolling their own ghetto mini database in C# to give themselves a portable data model, when it would be faster to use SQLite on Android and iOS, just to justify the decision to use Xamarin at all. So, it can work, but people have a tendency to greatly overestimate how much of a mobile app can actually be platform independent anyway. Games are a different proposition, and this is one reason why Unity has cleaned up.
- keithwarren 12y ago
  YMMV but for me, there was not 'learning' of Xamarin. There really is no Xamarin framework - there is the mobile frameworks themselves for which there is an almost 1:1 translation. CalculateFoo in ObjC or Java will in nearly every case be CalculateFoo in C#. In the cases where the recommended method is to use a higher level abstraction (like for table data in iOS), the option to use a mirror of the ObjC pattern is there but there is an easier approach available if you choose that. The key for me was understanding the idiosyncrasies of both Android and iOS and their patterns and then using C# to craft as much reusable code as possible. It drives my approach and I failed to get the re-use level I wanted on my first true cross platform app build, but since I have learned those lessons I have gotten much better at it. (note: I have yet to use Xamarin.Forms, this experience is based on Xamarin in the past 15 months)
- pan69 12y ago
  The power of Xamarin is obviously that you have a single language (C#) even if you have a "fat" UI's that are platform specific. Having a single language means that you can have your business logic as a single code base rather than it in two or more languages with all the consequences of code base specific bugs. But I do agree with you, Xamarin is not a build once run anywhere kind of solution. If you want to build Android app with it you still need to be very familiar with all the ins and outs of Android, same for iOS.
yesimahuman 12y ago
It's a common misconception that phonegap and cordova don't have the same access to native APIs. They do, but they are limited by what plugins are available, and your ability or interest to build ones to fill the "gap." For example, I wrote a plugin recently to send low-level broadcast UDP packets on Android and iOS through Cordova. The plugin API is just a bridge and sets up a calling convention for Javascript-to-native code.
- cwyers 12y ago
  Well, but if Xamarin comes with the functionality of that sort of plugin included, it's totally fair to say Xamarin has X and Cordova doesn't.
- general_failure 12y ago
  link to plugin please?
- McGnarlySheen 12y ago
  100% true. I'm going to piss many off by this statement I'm sure... but if you are a web developer Xamarin offers no advantages against PhoneGap/Cordova I don't know anyone that is "just a C# developer" and hasn't done any web development, maybe Xamarin makes sense for those. Take a look at Ionic Framework if you think PhoneGap/Cordova can't provide a native look and feel.
jaegerpicker 12y ago
Personally I much prefer Ruby Motion to Xamarin. I like ruby more, it's a closer work flow to my standard python/django, Ruby/Rails based workflow (terminal and text editor based). Intellij provides a great ide (MUCH better than Xamarin studio, one of my least favorite IDE's all though visual studio is even better than intellij's offerings IMO). In version 3.0 they will offer Android support and at that point I think Ruby Motion will be the best native app option. Almost forgot to mention that, all of the ruby is compiled down to actual Native obj-c runtime code. Great performance and look, as good as a regular Obj-C or Java app.
- declan 12y ago
  Thanks! I wasn't aware of that announcement. Last month's blog post says: "If you have a RubyMotion app for iOS or OS X and want to port it to Android, you can even share some of the code." (http://blog.rubymotion.com/post/87048665656/rubymotion-3-0-sneak-peek-android-support http://blog.rubymotion.com/post/87048665656/rubymotion-3-0-s...) I haven't used Ruby Motion myself -- do you know how much of the code can be reused excluding platform-specific UI stuff? There's a significant difference between 5% and 95%. :)
  - revelation 12y ago
    From the blog post, that seems like a rather perilous approach.. what are the chances they get all the builtin Ruby stuff to work the same way despite basing it on Java equivalents?
    - jaegerpicker 12y ago
      This is mostly true with Xamarin also, platform code is platform code. Most of your code sharing is business logic/accessing rest api's/core algorithms. UI/platform type of code is always going to be hard to port. That being said MacRuby (which is basically what Ruby motion is and JRuby (ruby on the jvm which I think the Android is based upon) are pretty close to source code compatible last I checked so I think it's likely a good chance.
    - declan 12y ago
keithwarren 12y ago
It amazes me that the constant complaint on here is the price. Seriously folks, if you are a professional developer (by that I mean your primary ability to earn money for you and your family is the development of software) then the cost of a Xamarin license should be looked at as a factor of time. How much time will it save you? Lets imagine your current project to build an iOS and Android app of identical functionality you are estimating at 6 weeks for each platform. 12 total weeks. Lets say that Xamarin tech gives you a 10% boost (it will be much higher but lets be conservative), that means over the 60 business days, you get back 6. Assume you have 8 hours of work per day and you just bought 48 hours of your time. The basic license which does nearly everything most people need is the Indie license and $300 per platform. Six hundred dollars to buy 48 hours of your time back means the purchase is viable if you value your time at more than 12.50 per hour. If you value your time less than that, you have bigger problems than which mobile tooling to use. The truth is the productivity factor is much higher than 10% and the license is good for a year, pick up a couple other projects like this through the year and that number collapses. For me this year I will probably do 4 cross plat projects with Xamarin and my productivity diff is north of 50%. The purchase is a no brainer.
- atwebb 12y ago
  It amazes me that you've completely missed out on some of the reasons for people complaining about the cost. My comment is one you're railing against and I think you're off base. Even going by your factor of time, I have to bet $1,000 that this product will be worth both that money and the time that I have to put into learning and dealing with it. There's no VS trail (as far as I know). So other than going off of blog posts and advice, I have to pay at least $300 and then learn both the tool and it's IDE or gamble an extra $700 that it will be useful in an IDE/environment I'm already familiar with.
  - keithwarren 12y ago
    Being honest, there will be very little learning curve going from VS to Xamarin Studio. They tried to make that switch as painless as possible. You are right, there is a factor of learning that needs to be baked into your consideration but there comes a point where you put a little trust in people who came before you and tell you 'I have done this, I have been where you are - follow me and you will be fine'. On the flip side, Nat Friedman is incredibly approachable. I am sure if you simply email him and tell him your concerns he will accommodate you with a longer trial period or some kind of money back guarantee, that just how he is.
sschalk 12y ago
There are so many factual errors and outdated assumptions in your thread that i wont take the time to do a writeup. To put it short: - You're wrong. - Given the current speed of Javascript on mobile, Xamarin is just a job creation tool for unemployed .NET/WPF Developers. - You cannnot reuse run-of-the-mill web devs for hybrid app development. - Good web developers are just as expensive as good native devs. - Hybrid app development is not easier than native development. Have a nice weekend.
- McGnarlySheen 12y ago
  I agree with most of this. Thank you.
- McGnarlySheen 12y ago
  I forgot to add this to anyone who disagrees with this comment. Take a look at Ionic Framework if you think PhoneGap/Cordova can't provide a native look and feel.
rational-future 12y ago
The big question IMHO is will Microsoft buy Xamarin or not. If they do the price will certainly fall drastically. On one hand it will give MS way more apps on their app store. On the other if Xamarin becomes very popular Apple may block Xamarin built apps from it's app store.
- EShy 12y ago
  Apple tried blocking certain platforms in the past, at that time Xamarin wasn't included since they are following the guidelines set in Apple's developer terms of use. Apple changed their mind very quickly about that decision too. Xamarin still requires a mac. Your code is still compiled using LLVM (or whatever engine Apple will introduce later). The resulting app that is uploaded to Apple looks just like an app that was built using XCode. It will be interesting to compare a simple app and see the difference in the resulting package between Xamarin and XCode
- sschalk 12y ago
  I don't think they will. They just integrated Cordova into VS 2014 ootb.
ogdenyogly 12y ago
I have done a lot amount of development in MonoTouch / MonoDroid (full time for about 2.5 years now). I started using them back when they were beta, and I would wager we have one of the larger apps written in Xamarin (about 250kloc). First of all, it's tricky. It took our team a long time to get the rhythm of simultaneous Android/iOS development. For a long time every single push broke something. Some annoyances: Visual studio project files don't merge. You need a special xml aware merge tool to do this. Even then, its a pain in the ass. It can be very tricky to abstract the differences between Droid and iOS if you're interacting with the OS a lot. Some things to know: Just because you're in C# land, doesn't mean your API is. You're going to spend a lot of time implementing stuff in C# that feels wrong because your API is ObjC/Java. Sometimes there isn't a good mapping between NS data types between the APIs. You're going to spend a LOT of time in the iOS / Droid docs, so you'd better be comfortable with ObjC / Java. Overall I'm happy with the experience.
romanovic 12y ago
Someone mentioned Titanium earlier. Titanium shares the major advantages Paulo points out in his case for Xamarin (i.e. single language, cross-platform, native apps, access to native APIS). But Titanium also has a couple clear advantages over Xamarin: - Titanium is FOSS - Xamarin's cost is merely very inconvenient; its closedness is much more repulsive - Titanium doesn't sideline those of us who develop on linux (a linux-based OS rules the mobile market, after all) On the other hand, C# is a beautiful, evolved language that I would love to try out with mobile development, and I can appreciate a shiny IDE. However, as long as the above conditions apply, I'll always consider open and developer-friendly solutions like Titanium first before resorting to Xamarin.
montspencer 12y ago
Xamarin recently released special pricing for small businesses and startups. Just FYI!
gte910h 12y ago
I want to use Xamarin like http://www.remobjects.com/elements/hydrogene/ http://www.remobjects.com/elements/hydrogene/ remobjects c# works. (Well, I guess I'd prefer to use it in F# too). How well does it work to ignore the .Net parts and just use the nice IDE/Packaging/Not java story?

Why choose Xamarin?

29 points by pauloortins 12y ago

will_work4tears 12y ago

How does Xamarin compare to a more open (and free) solution like MonoCross?

edgyswingset 12y ago
It's the better choice for a number of reasons when the scale of the application(s) increases a lot. It's a premium product that comes loaded with features you need when you're building something at a scale larger than independently developing a single application. But I think the main differences you'll find, irrespective of scale, are a powerful designer/storyboard tool, Visual Studio integration, and the kind of support you'd expect to find from a paid product.
ilkhan4 12y ago
Unless I'm mistaken, MonoCross isn't a replacement for Xamarin (formerly Monotouch and Monodroid). It's a layer on top that abstracts the platforms differences. You'd still need a Xamarin.iOS and/or Xamarin.Android license to use it.
mousetraps 12y ago
You can't really compare them. MonoCross is a crossplat MVC framework that you use on top of Xamarin's Monotouch/droid/etc. to increase your shared code. Xamarin allows you to write about the same code for multiple platforms, but it doesn't make it easier to share the same exact code. E.g http://components.xamarin.com/view/xamarin.mobile http://components.xamarin.com/view/xamarin.mobile The code looks similar across platforms, but it's not exactly, the same - you can't make one change and have it carry across to all platforms. Monocross brings you closer to a write-once for all platforms experience. A better comparison is Monocross v.s. MvvmCross
- will_work4tears 12y ago
  Ah, thanks, I didn't catch that MonoCross required Xamarin - it's not obvious from the homepage at all (or even looking for it on any page). Was hoping to use it to learn some C# (beyond the simple hello world type of thing) - Xamarin's pricing is pretty steep for an amateur/hobbyist.

atwebb 12y ago

I realize that the difference of $700 could be made up in improved development performance but I really, really wish they'd allow VS support for the indie license. It's not a case of saving more it's a risk/reward thing for me. I can see the possible value but, without being able to pick it up quickly in an environment I know I can't justify either spending an extra $700 or picking up another IDE/workspace along with the curve of mobile dev and setups for the different devices. Though I understand the cost, it provides tremendous value and you can't just give that away for free.

AUmrysh 12y ago
It's clear to me that Xamarin is trying to get everyone to pay right now. The free license won't even allow you to build the Xamarin.Forms demo, and Forms is one of the most significant new features they added. Cross platform apps with a common UI and codebase, no more separate views for each platform, and data binding! I think they're scaring off small developers by requiring the several hundred dollar investment to use Xamarin, even if it is a great product. Where I work, we chose Xamarin over PhoneGap/Cordova.
- pauloortins 12y ago
  Totally agree. Prices could be lower and they would have a bigger market share in mobile development.
- tejas-manohar 12y ago
  Good decision since Xamarin is much more native when compared to PhoneGap/Cordova (Titanium is another thing I've been looking at). The student discounts for $99/year/platform should be the normal price.
- McGnarlySheen 12y ago
  Every benefit you just mentioned PhoneGap/Cordova has... and it's free...
pauloortins 12y ago
Have you ever tried Xamarin Studio? It's not as good as Visual Studio but it's a very decent IDE. I'm currently using it instead Visual Studio.

zura 12y ago

Why not choose C++/Qt/QML?

general_failure 12y ago
AFAIK, QML has barely any native UI integration. Are there iOS and Android components? Why does nothing turn up when doing a simple google search?
- RayDonnelly 12y ago
  This email just in today: http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/android-development/2014-June/000388.html http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/android-development/20... It's native look and feel though, and not native integration. However AFAIK it goes to great lengths to blend in with the actual device you're running it on.

jasallen 12y ago

Xamarin's IDE is not as good as VS, but it is often much better than XCode, and C# and F# are both more pleasant languages to work in for people with the vast majority of experiences (C++, Java, .Net, Ruby), so even without all the cross platform goodness I prefer to work with Xamarin. (Swift may change some of that, I haven't looked into it yet). I've never had a problem easily translating Obj C StackOverflows or blog posts to Xamarin/C# so essentially you get the whole community as well, with no worries about Xamarin specificness. That said, I think their current pricing structure makes sense for them right now. They are not 'quite' at the polish level, not quite at the level that average people can do things averagely. There is still just a little more cross platform knowledge and effort required. The price serves as both a barrier to entry to manage the community size, and provides them enough capital (on top of outside investment) to keep investing toward a fully mass market approach.

fidotron 12y ago

The killer problem with Xamarin is to use it effectively you have to be expert in both Xamarin and the native platform you're targeting. This is because most of the work of mobile apps ends up being tied to the UI, which has a platform specific API. If your app happens to deviate from this, then at least for Android once more you're in platform specific land (for example, services), but I've seen people doing things like rolling their own ghetto mini database in C# to give themselves a portable data model, when it would be faster to use SQLite on Android and iOS, just to justify the decision to use Xamarin at all. So, it can work, but people have a tendency to greatly overestimate how much of a mobile app can actually be platform independent anyway. Games are a different proposition, and this is one reason why Unity has cleaned up.

keithwarren 12y ago
YMMV but for me, there was not 'learning' of Xamarin. There really is no Xamarin framework - there is the mobile frameworks themselves for which there is an almost 1:1 translation. CalculateFoo in ObjC or Java will in nearly every case be CalculateFoo in C#. In the cases where the recommended method is to use a higher level abstraction (like for table data in iOS), the option to use a mirror of the ObjC pattern is there but there is an easier approach available if you choose that. The key for me was understanding the idiosyncrasies of both Android and iOS and their patterns and then using C# to craft as much reusable code as possible. It drives my approach and I failed to get the re-use level I wanted on my first true cross platform app build, but since I have learned those lessons I have gotten much better at it. (note: I have yet to use Xamarin.Forms, this experience is based on Xamarin in the past 15 months)
pan69 12y ago
The power of Xamarin is obviously that you have a single language (C#) even if you have a "fat" UI's that are platform specific. Having a single language means that you can have your business logic as a single code base rather than it in two or more languages with all the consequences of code base specific bugs. But I do agree with you, Xamarin is not a build once run anywhere kind of solution. If you want to build Android app with it you still need to be very familiar with all the ins and outs of Android, same for iOS.

yesimahuman 12y ago

It's a common misconception that phonegap and cordova don't have the same access to native APIs. They do, but they are limited by what plugins are available, and your ability or interest to build ones to fill the "gap." For example, I wrote a plugin recently to send low-level broadcast UDP packets on Android and iOS through Cordova. The plugin API is just a bridge and sets up a calling convention for Javascript-to-native code.

cwyers 12y ago
Well, but if Xamarin comes with the functionality of that sort of plugin included, it's totally fair to say Xamarin has X and Cordova doesn't.
general_failure 12y ago
link to plugin please?
McGnarlySheen 12y ago
100% true. I'm going to piss many off by this statement I'm sure... but if you are a web developer Xamarin offers no advantages against PhoneGap/Cordova I don't know anyone that is "just a C# developer" and hasn't done any web development, maybe Xamarin makes sense for those. Take a look at Ionic Framework if you think PhoneGap/Cordova can't provide a native look and feel.

jaegerpicker 12y ago

Personally I much prefer Ruby Motion to Xamarin. I like ruby more, it's a closer work flow to my standard python/django, Ruby/Rails based workflow (terminal and text editor based). Intellij provides a great ide (MUCH better than Xamarin studio, one of my least favorite IDE's all though visual studio is even better than intellij's offerings IMO). In version 3.0 they will offer Android support and at that point I think Ruby Motion will be the best native app option. Almost forgot to mention that, all of the ruby is compiled down to actual Native obj-c runtime code. Great performance and look, as good as a regular Obj-C or Java app.

declan 12y ago
Thanks! I wasn't aware of that announcement. Last month's blog post says: "If you have a RubyMotion app for iOS or OS X and want to port it to Android, you can even share some of the code." (http://blog.rubymotion.com/post/87048665656/rubymotion-3-0-sneak-peek-android-support http://blog.rubymotion.com/post/87048665656/rubymotion-3-0-s...) I haven't used Ruby Motion myself -- do you know how much of the code can be reused excluding platform-specific UI stuff? There's a significant difference between 5% and 95%. :)
- revelation 12y ago
  From the blog post, that seems like a rather perilous approach.. what are the chances they get all the builtin Ruby stuff to work the same way despite basing it on Java equivalents?
  - jaegerpicker 12y ago
    This is mostly true with Xamarin also, platform code is platform code. Most of your code sharing is business logic/accessing rest api's/core algorithms. UI/platform type of code is always going to be hard to port. That being said MacRuby (which is basically what Ruby motion is and JRuby (ruby on the jvm which I think the Android is based upon) are pretty close to source code compatible last I checked so I think it's likely a good chance.
  - declan 12y ago

keithwarren 12y ago

It amazes me that the constant complaint on here is the price. Seriously folks, if you are a professional developer (by that I mean your primary ability to earn money for you and your family is the development of software) then the cost of a Xamarin license should be looked at as a factor of time. How much time will it save you? Lets imagine your current project to build an iOS and Android app of identical functionality you are estimating at 6 weeks for each platform. 12 total weeks. Lets say that Xamarin tech gives you a 10% boost (it will be much higher but lets be conservative), that means over the 60 business days, you get back 6. Assume you have 8 hours of work per day and you just bought 48 hours of your time. The basic license which does nearly everything most people need is the Indie license and $300 per platform. Six hundred dollars to buy 48 hours of your time back means the purchase is viable if you value your time at more than 12.50 per hour. If you value your time less than that, you have bigger problems than which mobile tooling to use. The truth is the productivity factor is much higher than 10% and the license is good for a year, pick up a couple other projects like this through the year and that number collapses. For me this year I will probably do 4 cross plat projects with Xamarin and my productivity diff is north of 50%. The purchase is a no brainer.

atwebb 12y ago
It amazes me that you've completely missed out on some of the reasons for people complaining about the cost. My comment is one you're railing against and I think you're off base. Even going by your factor of time, I have to bet $1,000 that this product will be worth both that money and the time that I have to put into learning and dealing with it. There's no VS trail (as far as I know). So other than going off of blog posts and advice, I have to pay at least $300 and then learn both the tool and it's IDE or gamble an extra $700 that it will be useful in an IDE/environment I'm already familiar with.
- keithwarren 12y ago
  Being honest, there will be very little learning curve going from VS to Xamarin Studio. They tried to make that switch as painless as possible. You are right, there is a factor of learning that needs to be baked into your consideration but there comes a point where you put a little trust in people who came before you and tell you 'I have done this, I have been where you are - follow me and you will be fine'. On the flip side, Nat Friedman is incredibly approachable. I am sure if you simply email him and tell him your concerns he will accommodate you with a longer trial period or some kind of money back guarantee, that just how he is.

sschalk 12y ago

There are so many factual errors and outdated assumptions in your thread that i wont take the time to do a writeup. To put it short: - You're wrong. - Given the current speed of Javascript on mobile, Xamarin is just a job creation tool for unemployed .NET/WPF Developers. - You cannnot reuse run-of-the-mill web devs for hybrid app development. - Good web developers are just as expensive as good native devs. - Hybrid app development is not easier than native development. Have a nice weekend.

McGnarlySheen 12y ago
I agree with most of this. Thank you.
McGnarlySheen 12y ago
I forgot to add this to anyone who disagrees with this comment. Take a look at Ionic Framework if you think PhoneGap/Cordova can't provide a native look and feel.

rational-future 12y ago

The big question IMHO is will Microsoft buy Xamarin or not. If they do the price will certainly fall drastically. On one hand it will give MS way more apps on their app store. On the other if Xamarin becomes very popular Apple may block Xamarin built apps from it's app store.

EShy 12y ago
Apple tried blocking certain platforms in the past, at that time Xamarin wasn't included since they are following the guidelines set in Apple's developer terms of use. Apple changed their mind very quickly about that decision too. Xamarin still requires a mac. Your code is still compiled using LLVM (or whatever engine Apple will introduce later). The resulting app that is uploaded to Apple looks just like an app that was built using XCode. It will be interesting to compare a simple app and see the difference in the resulting package between Xamarin and XCode
sschalk 12y ago
I don't think they will. They just integrated Cordova into VS 2014 ootb.

ogdenyogly 12y ago

I have done a lot amount of development in MonoTouch / MonoDroid (full time for about 2.5 years now). I started using them back when they were beta, and I would wager we have one of the larger apps written in Xamarin (about 250kloc). First of all, it's tricky. It took our team a long time to get the rhythm of simultaneous Android/iOS development. For a long time every single push broke something. Some annoyances: Visual studio project files don't merge. You need a special xml aware merge tool to do this. Even then, its a pain in the ass. It can be very tricky to abstract the differences between Droid and iOS if you're interacting with the OS a lot. Some things to know: Just because you're in C# land, doesn't mean your API is. You're going to spend a lot of time implementing stuff in C# that feels wrong because your API is ObjC/Java. Sometimes there isn't a good mapping between NS data types between the APIs. You're going to spend a LOT of time in the iOS / Droid docs, so you'd better be comfortable with ObjC / Java. Overall I'm happy with the experience.

romanovic 12y ago

Someone mentioned Titanium earlier. Titanium shares the major advantages Paulo points out in his case for Xamarin (i.e. single language, cross-platform, native apps, access to native APIS). But Titanium also has a couple clear advantages over Xamarin: - Titanium is FOSS - Xamarin's cost is merely very inconvenient; its closedness is much more repulsive - Titanium doesn't sideline those of us who develop on linux (a linux-based OS rules the mobile market, after all) On the other hand, C# is a beautiful, evolved language that I would love to try out with mobile development, and I can appreciate a shiny IDE. However, as long as the above conditions apply, I'll always consider open and developer-friendly solutions like Titanium first before resorting to Xamarin.

montspencer 12y ago

Xamarin recently released special pricing for small businesses and startups. Just FYI!

gte910h 12y ago

I want to use Xamarin like http://www.remobjects.com/elements/hydrogene/ http://www.remobjects.com/elements/hydrogene/ remobjects c# works. (Well, I guess I'd prefer to use it in F# too). How well does it work to ignore the .Net parts and just use the nice IDE/Packaging/Not java story?