I agree with cliveowen (you da bomb in Children of Men, yo!) in that the language isn't everything. But for different reasons. The Android documentation is sp

I agree with cliveowen (you da bomb in Children of Men, yo!) in that the language isn't everything. But for different reasons. The Android documentation is spectacularly good, IMO, though admittedly it is more reference focused than tutorial focused (which works for me, YMMV). Eclipse sucks but Android Studio is pretty nice, and in either case you don't need to use an IDE if you don't want to. I use Sublime Text 2 and command-line builds most of the time, using Android Studio only when I want to do on-device visual debugging. The Java thing is a bit more true, the language can feel somewhat painful at times, especially since it is frozen in time at Java 6 for the most part, with a few little bits of Java 7 thrown in at random with little to no clear guidance from Google on where it is headed post-Oracle lawsuit. Also there are places where the OS APIs are a bit too Java-esque in terms of being overly abstracted without a compelling reason why. Also the whole activity/fragment lifecycle and the way services work is a bit weird at first for people used to writing traditional apps, but any competent developer will learn to live with it pretty quickly. It still tends to be a sticking issue anyway because of the fact that a lot of designers (who are mostly iOS-centric, as the original article alludes to) don't really "get it" and thus design in ways that don't fit the OS app lifecycle (and don't get me started on their "pixel perfect" designs). All that aside I had no idea Android Developers were seen as hard to find. Maybe I need a raise!