Hello
This is not trying to insult anybody on this forum, but i would like to know,
Why it is that on Devices such as Iphone/Android, the apps look good, and are smooth, whereas on windowsmobile they often end up being ugly .
Obviously some are great on windows mobile, and run flawlessly,
however the majority of apps on the internet are unpleasing.
Take for example, towers of hanoi.
I know most will hate the game but oh well.
On the iphone, there are a few apps for towers of hanoi, this being an example
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Now here is the best one available for windows, NOTING IT IS A PAID APP COSTING £6.84
millions of apps are like this, where there is not a satisfactory wm6 equivilant. this is only 1 app i came across in day to day life .
Saying that, most inventive games on iphone dont even have a wm6 equivilant, satisfactory or not.
Please note, i do realize millions of useful apps not available on other platforms are available on wm6, TF3D etc.
However to me ,I am getting annoyed with the lack of nice games for wm6.
Will this change when the windows marketplace is opened properly?
Maybe because WM is designed mainly to be practical? If anyone wants to see gorgeous landscapes simply copy photos of 'em to your phone and view them, on, for example a VGA screen which is incomparable to ****ty HVGA overiszed iPhones screen.
Want more games? Get yourself an emulator, for example SmartGear. It is paid, but (nearly) everything in iphone's app store is paid. After you get the emulator to work you get hundreds of games with excellent playability. But if you want inventions like:
a) pressing onscreen buttons and blowing into the mic to make sound
b) unlocking the screen by removing the simulated fog by your finger
c) game which is clever because its objective is to... press a button! yeah! The longer the better!
sorry, better get yourself an iPhone. If you managed to get this far and you don't want to kill me... wait for MS to designe the UI in a extra shiny finger friendly manner. Most likely developers will follow it.
I actually think a lot of the apps look nice; they could've been nicer, however, i'd prefer function over "form." Also, one of the reasons they don't look very aesthetically pleasing is becasue a lot are .NET applications so they're just there to deliver what the programs offers.
Because it's more difficult...
Because most apps are written by hobbyist programmers and we're forced to use standard .NET controls.
Programming fancy graphics is incredibly difficult and time consuming.
not that i know anything about applications,,
but having to use .net controls sounds pretty ****.
Its just annoying that android and iphone have applications so far ahead of wm.
I think wm6 needs a complete redesign.
Even wm7 shots look dissapointing.
One problem/strength of WM is that it is available running on a diverse range of hardware which is completely opposite to the i-will-ride-on-my-own-bicycle-only-:babycry: philosophy of iPhone. WM apps are designed keeping all these phones in mind, so to let the app get monetized to the max. iPhone apps have the same hardware, as there is only one iPhone, no choice. They have 3D acceleration, Fast processor etc etc on it, so they design graphics heavy apps that will surely run on their one and only target platform. If you have the money, have an iPhone, and play with the apps, if you dont, just f**k off, thats what apple's philosophy is. If you disagree, tell me an apple phone that comes for the price of HTC GENE.
Apps that are targeted for certain WM phones do run with all the iCandy as possible on that phone. I dont have any exact example right now, but i am sure somebody here will provide if needed.
For example, if an app is designed to run on a HTC Touch Pro 2 exclusively, i m sure you'll see much better interface than the one which is designed to run on as many devices as possible, from the low end HTC Gene to ultra high end TouchPro 2.
I hope this will clear things out a bit for everyone.
Just a few corrections of opinion
First off, whoever thinks that attaching some pretty graphics to the screen in .Net/C# is challenging, you seriously need to take more than an introductory class at a community college. It's not hard, you just have to be willing to find the graphics to use. Animation in WM is certainly more daunting and would be far easier to do if MS would have added WPF to the CF 3.5...
...the abundance of abbreviations in that last line just goes to show that programming is getting too annoying
Anyway, to answer one particular point which everybody else glossed over, is that Android ALSO has a lot of pretty apps like the iPhone (even though people ignore it). What people don't talk about is that android actually has it's own interface mechanism a lot like WPF/XAML which is supposed to be very friendly (I haven't really checked yet, but it seems to be popular).
A lot of people blame it on different devices having such different specs. While that SEEMS like a good argument, everybody who says it is blindly babbling without realizing that in 4-5 years the iPhone and Android phones will ALL BE VGA!!!!! If they aren't VGA, then NOBODY WILL BUY THEM!!!!! Hint hint, that means that both of those platforms will suffer the same problem that WM is "credited" with now.
The different resolution quality (VGA vs QVGA) is little more than a matter of releasing the original graphics in multiple sets. The issue of different resolution dimensions (WVGA vs VGA vs other-weird-boxy-GAs) could actually be handled (in most cases) with a simple bit of programming logic in the OnPaint handler.
Now, my answer to the question.....
Fact is, look at the programming communities of Android and iPhone, they both have a massive amount of open source/dev kit type samples, especially focusing heavily on graphics (especially with the iPhone, which focuses almost exclusively on graphics). WM samples tend to focus heavily on systems programming.
One other issue that exists is that interface programming is historically complicated with low-level programming languages. Apple gets by it using a highly customized and extended form of Objective-C. Android solves it with their xaml-like language which makes building the GUI a lot like writing a web page (loose comparison for the less technically inclined, don't flame me over the inaccuracies). Windows Mobile has the .Net framework, which can be made pretty without too much effort, but it suffers from not being fully integrated with the OS, therefore a lot of apps can be sluggish when written in .Net. The other option is to write in C++, which leads us back to the much more complicated UI programming.
There's your REAL reasons. Most programmers either don't have access to (or awareness of) good samples for a lot of the better graphics tricks, and the rest of them don't want to build something that runs too slow that it's going to get tons of complaints. I think there's one other contributing issue, there's not enough people who are willing to get together and partition out the work. It would only take 5-10 decently skilled graphics programmers to work with the high number of skilled systems programmers on this forum and we could see a nearly limitless number of high quality apps that would blow away anything on any of the competing phones.
As a side note, another thought strikes me....I think a LOT of people are waiting on the Tegra chips to start circulating before they start writing a lot. I know that's had me reluctant to put too much work into a few projects.
Because Apple has a bigger line of programmers.
Two aspects I can think of:
Apple has Steve Jobs, who happens to be educated BIG TIME in User Interface. iPhone is specifically designed (H/W and S/W locking together), so achieving it is easier.
WM (we're talking about WM, right?) is still based on PC / Desktop version, and the GUI (up to XP) doesn't change much. I believe 6.5 brings innovation (as I tested some cooked ROM) in smoothing the GUI. However, as an ex UIQ3 user, I believe, even if WM is intended for many devices (more standardized), MS can learn (and seems to be learning) from UIQ. All theme of UIQ changes a lot (scroll bar, text color, background). While for WM, the standard WM 6.1 theme won't even change the white background when we go to 'Setting' for example ..
Just my 2 cents coming from different world
After reading all this i still do not understand why WM apps, not games, are so ugly looking. People can skin various keyboards, Music Players, creat iPhone looking today screens, skin dial pads, calculators etc. Why not simple make the original app good looking? I'm not talking about animations either. Look how much better looking the dialers people are making compared to the standard dialer that some of our phones have like my Touch pro.
I saw someone on this site made a mobile version of Google Translator tool. Its perfect function wise but it could definitely look better. Someone on Ppcgeeks made a movie searching app called Cinemo. It's not ugly but its not as good looking as the Pre's Fandango app. I'm not talking about the Fandango apps function, just the form.
Look how well Weather Panel themes look & how good iContacts look. Why cant WM users have form & functionality?
charm1718 said:
After reading all this i still do not understand why WM apps, not games, are so ugly looking. People can skin various keyboards, Music Players, creat iPhone looking today screens, skin dial pads, calculators etc. Why not simple make the original app good looking? I'm not talking about animations either. Look how much better looking the dialers people are making compared to the standard dialer that some of our phones have like my Touch pro.
I saw someone on this site made a mobile version of Google Translator tool. Its perfect function wise but it could definitely look better. Someone on Ppcgeeks made a movie searching app called Cinemo. It's not ugly but its not as good looking as the Pre's Fandango app. I'm not talking about the Fandango apps function, just the form.
Look how well Weather Panel themes look & how good iContacts look. Why cant WM users have form & functionality?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Standardisation. There are no default "fancy" controls for either MFC or .NET for Windows Mobile like there are for iPhone (and I assume Android).
To make aesthetically pleasing applications for WM requires the programmer to design their own, making each and every application completely different in appearance. These small changes confuse & irrate most users as they can't find what they're looking for, therefore we just use the default controls instead of wasting time on making it pretty.
Secondly, putting graphics onto the screen is all well and good, but you want your app to run on as many resolutions as possible. That means resizing images (ugh) or having a separate image for each resolution making your application larger (ugh).
Blade0rz said:
Standardisation. There are no default "fancy" controls for either MFC or .NET for Windows Mobile like there are for iPhone (and I assume Android).
To make aesthetically pleasing applications for WM requires the programmer to design their own, making each and every application completely different in appearance. These small changes confuse & irrate most users as they can't find what they're looking for, therefore we just use the default controls instead of wasting time on making it pretty.
Secondly, putting graphics onto the screen is all well and good, but you want your app to run on as many resolutions as possible. That means resizing images (ugh) or having a separate image for each resolution making your application larger (ugh).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are all programs skinnable?
I understand that making a program for various resolutions would be tedious but what I dont understand is why do people only make things look good after its seen elsewhwere? Nobody decided to make better looking media player skins until the iPhone came out. This also the same with contacts, dialers & keyboards. If this could have been done before, why wait until someone else does it then copy it?
When I look in Development & Hacking I see apps for specific resolutions. People post asking for different resolutions and someone else might make the changes if they have a device with that resolution. Is there something the developer has to do on his end to make an app skinnable or can they all be skinned?
charm1718 said:
Are all programs skinnable?
I understand that making a program for various resolutions would be tedious but what I dont understand is why do people only make things look good after its seen elsewhwere? Nobody decided to make better looking media player skins until the iPhone came out. This also the same with contacts, dialers & keyboards. If this could have been done before, why wait until someone else does it then copy it?
When I look in Development & Hacking I see apps for specific resolutions. People post asking for different resolutions and someone else might make the changes if they have a device with that resolution. Is there something the developer has to do on his end to make an app skinnable or can they all be skinned?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Skins have to be implemented by the developer. Although, all images that are used within a program have to be stored somewhere (either within the program itself or on your device) so those images can be found & replaced as many people on this board do. This does take some knowledge though.
And the reason people only came out with nice-looking interfaces after the iPhone is because it was innovative. It's a lot easier to copy an interface than it is to pick a design out of your brain & implement it from scratch
There's several reasons why WM has a lot of ugliness in its apps.
One is due to the UI itself. Non-fullscreen apps have both a top and bottom bar cluttering the screen and apps are rarely built to "match" the existing bars. The iPhone has less screen real estate taken up by the UI, so developers can control the look a bit more. Also, as I understand it, WM offers uglier barebones formatting. The iPhone gives devs access to prettier standard controls, menus, and fonts, whereas WM devs start with ugly and aliased controls and the like.
One reason is due to age -- WM has been around a (relatively) long time and many of the apps you're seeing were designed for devices with weaker visual capabilities and were also designed when the mobile app market was smaller and less competitive, so there was less incentive to make things pretty.
Another reason is due to the fact that a lot of WM apps are made by very amateur developers who simply don't have the training and know-how to pretty things up. WM, as a platform, seems most popular amongst IT workers, geeks, and tweakers. This is why there's tons of powerful, functional apps out there -- but a lot of us geeks don't know much about design. I, unfortunately, know about design but not programming.
I really didn't know who and what to quote, too many thoughts, so I'm just kinda re-reading the page and commenting back as I go. Sorry it's super long
charm1718 said:
Someone on Ppcgeeks made a movie searching app called Cinemo. It's not ugly but its not as good looking as the Pre's Fandango app. I'm not talking about the Fandango apps function, just the form.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You compare the Cinemo app made by a single unpaid developer against a corporately paid group of developers with pre-defined branding, graphics, and an advertising department (read: designers) under Fandango. That's a bit unfair
Ignoring function, most people on here could steal the graphics and duplicate the app's look.
Blade0rz said:
To make aesthetically pleasing applications for WM requires the programmer to design their own, making each and every application completely different in appearance. These small changes confuse & irrate most users as they can't find what they're looking for, therefore we just use the default controls instead of wasting time on making it pretty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is untrue. This is a now ancient viewpoint that's still held from the days of windows 3.x when everybody was tired and confused by the wildly bad interfaces that existed for business apps which took weeks and months to learn basic function. Sure, people want to have SOME consistency with their apps like how to close it or how to find menus, but an easy interface doesn't need to use only basic controls. If this were true, then each of the new mobile os's that come out would have failed since none of their interfaces match the other phones before them. The best designs offer more graphics than text, a more interactive and direct way of achieving tasks, and having as many options without cluttering the screen or adding more taps.
charm1718 said:
...what I dont understand is why do people only make things look good after its seen elsewhwere? Nobody decided to make better looking media player skins until the iPhone came out. This also the same with contacts, dialers & keyboards. If this could have been done before, why wait until someone else does it then copy it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also untrue. Sure, the amount of skinning went way up after the iPhone, there's been skinning on the media player for years. There's also been 3rd party apps that are far more attractive and functional for contacts and keyboards. The reason most people didn't see this is that these were usually paid apps or poorly advertised amidst hundreds of garbage apps on various repositories of shareware trash that people posted for WinMo.
typo said:
One is due to the UI itself. Non-fullscreen apps have both a top and bottom bar cluttering the screen and apps are rarely built to "match" the existing bars. The iPhone has less screen real estate taken up by the UI, so developers can control the look a bit more. Also, as I understand it, WM offers uglier barebones formatting. The iPhone gives devs access to prettier standard controls, menus, and fonts, whereas WM devs start with ugly and aliased controls and the like
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WinMo developers can hide the top and bottom bars fairly easily (especially in .Net), so screen real estate is still available. I think many times we don't because we don't want to take away the legitimate use of those bars. As to the rest of what you said, spot on...the controls are ugly as opposed to the prettier ones built into other OS's. But remember what it was like to move from windows 98 (or 2000) to XP, the same thing will happen as winmo updates it's own UI libraries.
typo said:
Another reason is due to the fact that a lot of WM apps are made by very amateur developers who simply don't have the training and know-how to pretty things up. WM, as a platform, seems most popular amongst IT workers, geeks, and tweakers. This is why there's tons of powerful, functional apps out there -- but a lot of us geeks don't know much about design. I, unfortunately, know about design but not programming.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very true, since the educated among us were never given serious classes on UI Design or Graphics Programming. The amateurs are stumbling through even a lot of the functional stuff. The hackers are usually good at changing something, but they can't create something new.
You also say something that brings up a subject I've complained about before (and is part of an argument I've made MANY times that we need a full-scale section just for development/programming instead of the single D&H sub-section we have now). There's a lot of people on here that are good at the functional programming. There's also a few (far less) who are good at the graphics programming. There's also a ton of people who are very good at graphic design and photoshop. A LOT of the apps that are released on here have terrible UI's because the people with functional knowledge don't take/have the time to make it pretty while at the same time those with graphic programming skill are wasting weeks trying to make their program functional while it's got a great UI already done. The two types need to work together and we could easily dominate anything ever done for any mobile OS out there.
btw, I want to add my own personal complaint. One of the most performant and potentially best looking API's belongs to OpenGL ES, which is a 3d rendering functionality all of our phones have built into the recent MSM chipsets. The problem is, only some phones have working drivers, and even less have efficient drivers. I would love to use OpenGL ES to write half of the stuff I want to, but I can't do that with any expectation of it being able to run decently on any phone older than the Diamond...and that's just among HTC phones...There's no certainty of any other handset having proper function or speed. This, to me, is one of the biggest setbacks and prevents a lot of devs from aiming high.
Thank you for clearing some things up. It would be great if the programmers and graphic designers could work together on more projects.
charm1718 said:
Thank you for clearing some things up. It would be great if the programmers and graphic designers could work together on more projects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like to get all three working together on projects. There's a few people who really know how to build the UI code, and there's a few wildly talented people who can put together graphics.
The thing I'd really like to do is get an organized team of people set up to work on projects, similar to how it would be done in any professional shop. A few guys who know systems/db/back-end coding, a few UI experts, and a few graphic designers. Baring that, at least get a list of people who would offer to join in on projects as they were put together.
speed_pour said:
I'd like to get all three working together on projects. There's a few people who really know how to build the UI code, and there's a few wildly talented people who can put together graphics.
The thing I'd really like to do is get an organized team of people set up to work on projects, similar to how it would be done in any professional shop. A few guys who know systems/db/back-end coding, a few UI experts, and a few graphic designers. Baring that, at least get a list of people who would offer to join in on projects as they were put together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you reached out to anyone & tried putting something like this together?
charm1718 said:
Have you reached out to anyone & tried putting something like this together?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've suggested it once before. For reasons that are too varied to get into right now, I expect that it would run into some complications on this forum.
With my current constraints (lack of gainful employment), I'm reluctant to get too deeply involved in organizing such a project unless it had the potential of turning profits. I do see a lot of potential in forming a group that produced both freeware/open source apps along with some commercial apps...I would be happy to be involved in that venture. If any serious developers are interested in a project like this, I would certainly find the time to organize and also be a developer.
I'm wondering, based on experience witch of these people would recommend for mobile app development. (Please mention which of these you actually have experience using.)
I'm an "old school" developer and am proficient in PHP/PERL, HTML, CSS and Javascript. I don't have time to learn a new language like C# and I refuse to use Microsoft's tolls (like .NET, Visual Studio, etc.) but I would spend the time maybe to pickup up RUBY (or maybe Java) if enough benefit was there in the associated mobile app development tool.
I want as close to native as possible with 90%+ cross-platform solution, meaning, 5-10% of the source code may differ due to differences in platform. I will only be developing for Android and IOS (sorry Windows) but may develop for Windows Down the road. Some apps I may develop may be enterprise class that need to get remote data from SQL Server, etc. I have done research and narrowed down my selection and am looking for further insight from those that have actually used these tools. Things that are also important to me include:
- Low cost (I can't afford to pay $100+ a month in fees)
- Good/Large Developer Community
- Good Support from Maker (good roadmap with improvements, bug fixes frequent, etc.)
PhoneGap - This seems like the most popular but it sounds like the "quickest" route for most web developers that are familiar with HTML and Javascript/CSS but to me it sounds like I might want something that is closer to native being that my primary core knowledge has always been as a coder first, and a web developer/designer second.
Appcellerator Titanium - This seems like the other most popular tool that claims to compile so the app uses the devices native controls (via Titanium API) instead of essentially an HTML page masquarading as an app (like PhoneGap) My gut says this one suits my situation better than Phonegap. Why do people use PhoneGap instead of this, because it's easier for non-programmers?
RhoMobile Rhodes - I am wondering how this compares to the two above assuming I learn RUBY on Rails.
Telerik Icenium (now called AppBuilder) - This one I have found the least discussion about.
I just ran across Codename One too which sounded intriguing as would require me to learn Java.
It seems most everyone (that isn't doing native) is using PhoneGap or Titanium and the second two are lesser known so I'm having a hard time finding people that has at least some brief experience using all four or five of these.
Any insight is greatly appreciated.
jazee said:
I'm wondering, based on experience witch of these people would recommend for mobile app development. (Please mention which of these you actually have experience using.)
I'm an "old school" developer and am proficient in PHP/PERL, HTML, CSS and Javascript. I don't have time to learn a new language like C# and I refuse to use Microsoft's tolls (like .NET, Visual Studio, etc.) but I would spend the time maybe to pickup up RUBY (or maybe Java) if enough benefit was there in the associated mobile app development tool.
I want as close to native as possible with 90%+ cross-platform solution, meaning, 5-10% of the source code may differ due to differences in platform. I will only be developing for Android and IOS (sorry Windows) but may develop for Windows Down the road. Some apps I may develop may be enterprise class that need to get remote data from SQL Server, etc. I have done research and narrowed down my selection and am looking for further insight from those that have actually used these tools. Things that are also important to me include:
- Low cost (I can't afford to pay $100+ a month in fees)
- Good/Large Developer Community
- Good Support from Maker (good roadmap with improvements, bug fixes frequent, etc.)
PhoneGap - This seems like the most popular but it sounds like the "quickest" route for most web developers that are familiar with HTML and Javascript/CSS but to me it sounds like I might want something that is closer to native being that my primary core knowledge has always been as a coder first, and a web developer/designer second.
Appcellerator Titanium - This seems like the other most popular tool that claims to compile so the app uses the devices native controls (via Titanium API) instead of essentially an HTML page masquarading as an app (like PhoneGap) My gut says this one suits my situation better than Phonegap. Why do people use PhoneGap instead of this, because it's easier for non-programmers?
RhoMobile Rhodes - I am wondering how this compares to the two above assuming I learn RUBY on Rails.
Telerik Icenium (now called AppBuilder) - This one I have found the least discussion about.
I just ran across Codename One too which sounded intriguing as would require me to learn Java.
It seems most everyone (that isn't doing native) is using Cordova/PhoneGap or Titanium and the second two are lesser known so I'm having a hard time finding people that has at least some brief experience using all four or five of these.
Any insight is greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both Phonegap and Appcelerator compile into a native package containing a mix of native and javascript and with both you develop your code using Javascript. As you've pointed out, one of the key differences is that Appcelerator will use the native device OS widgets rather than web widgets. In simple terms the layout is abstracted into an XML format which is then rendered into native equivalents during compilation for each of the platforms.
Depending on your application, native widgets may be important, or not. For example if you're developing a game then it could actually be advantages not to use the native widgets and have an essentially identical look and feel across all device platforms and screen aspect ratios.
The other difference is that Phonegap is free, (though their optional build service is not). Appcelerator is priced on a monthly subscription, but you also get some cloud features included in that.
Other popular cross platform tools to check out: Xamarin (native widgets, C# development, non-Free), ReactJS (native widgets, Javascript development, free-open source)
You can also try using Ionic and Cordova frameworks, They support cross-platform development and in my opinion have good documentation support
Hey,
I'm a developer and I want to start with app development. No games, just productivity stuff. Without experience, I would tend to native apps, because you can use all api's, designs etc. I think cross platform frameworks is just a hype like java for web. HTML and CSS are the best choice for web and nobody is talking about java in web-dev. Now, I have a feeling that you're trying to use this technology in Apps because html5 and css3 a fancy. But this is just my opinion and maybe I'm wrong. As I mentioned, I do not have any experience in app-dev. Therefore, I want to ask you, because you have the experience.
Are cross platform frameworks a great choice to develop apps for iOS, Android and Windows 10 (Mobile)? Is it really time saving and do I have the same or similar possibilities? Or is it better to maintain three different platforms? Maybe the time effort isn't so much higher. I don't know. How high is it? Should I start with a cross platform framework and switch later to native apps, or is it better to start with native apps?
I hope you can share your experience with me. It is also great if you link something that reflects your opinion.
Thanks
neon
"nobody is talking about java in web-dev"
Not true Many pages and server side app are created in java. JEE, JSF etc. Problem is hosting for page. Hosting for PHP is cheaper and more popular. That is why PHP is more popular than Java in web-dev.
Anyway, in mobile platform, in my opion, better way is native apps. Cross platform frameworks are great, but only for some of the types application. Most applications can be made faster and look prettier if they are native. Many things is hard when you use crossplatform, and sometimes development takes longer. Much depends on type of application and requirements. Of course it's only my opinion. Many people think differently.
It depends. First of all it is important to know which API or librarys you want to use. If you have some intensive tasks or calculations you should go with native apps because they are often much faster then hybrid-apps written in JavaScript. If you don't have much intensive tasks and you have a completely new idea and want to make money with it you shoud go with hybrid-apps because it is a huge plus to have an App for Android AND iOS.
Thanks for you responses.
@Asmok78
You are right. PHP is more popular because it is cheaper.
Asmok78 wrote that most applications can be made faster and it depends an the application. spcialx wrote something equal. So, as an example, all my ideas are based on a client server architecture where users can sync there local data with a server to work collaborativ. As an example it could be an app for all three platform (iOS, Android and Windows 10(Mobile)). A user can manage a tasklist and share tasks with other users, or you have a project and one user can assign tasks to other users.
I guess it will be faster to get a first working app with a crossplatform framework. But I also guess, that in the long run it will be better to dev native apps. So why not start directly with native apps?
ne0n said:
[...]
I guess it will be faster to get a first working app with a crossplatform framework. But I also guess, that in the long run it will be better to dev native apps. So why not start directly with native apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your assumption is completely right.
I'm working on a hybrid app right now. While it can be tempting, as soon as you get out of common features and patterns you can run into all sorts of problems and I found some quite hard to debug and solve. In the end I've busted all my deadlines. Performance are just OK for most uses, but still not comparable to native. All in all it depends on what you are trying to do, cross-platform apps might be ok for some use cases, but native apps are well worth the extra effort.
I think you should go native for apps. But not for games.
Sent from Tapatalk. Try LucidPod - lightweight podcast player.
Android NDK is there for performance reasons. If you plan to create something serious, then dedicated development cycles for each platform may be the obvious choice.
with web app, you can create app with nice and easy ui, can communicate with system api via plugin but sometime you need custom there control, and you need experience with native app , if it basic, you can do with only web app.
hybrid app is slower than native, only for small app.
Asmok78 said:
"nobody is talking about java in web-dev"
Not true Many pages and server side app are created in java. JEE, JSF etc. Problem is hosting for page. Hosting for PHP is cheaper and more popular. That is why PHP is more popular than Java in web-dev.
Anyway, in mobile platform, in my opion, better way is native apps. Cross platform frameworks are great, but only for some of the types application. Most applications can be made faster and look prettier if they are native. Many things is hard when you use crossplatform, and sometimes development takes longer. Much depends on type of application and requirements. Of course it's only my opinion. Many people think differently.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, I'm a java web guy. Tomcat, Struts 2 and JSP for me (though I'm slowly switching to Spring instead of Struts). The sheer power of Java, the stuff you can do, vs PHP (disclaimer: I coded PHP for 10 years professionally and now hate it, especially with the advent of Wordpress and Drupal) is absolutely staggering. Add to that a tonne of amazing libraries one can just plug straight in and you get a really useful bit of kit. Sorry, off-topic.
So yeah native is best. I work on a timesheeting/expenses solution for big mobile telcos in the UK and we looked at some cross-platform solutions at first, with Xamarin getting a decent run out but in the end we concluded it just wouldn't do the job, and went native. The issue really was that you'd end up with an app that wasn't quite right on either platform, and had to really write some nasty hacky stuff to make anything that took advantage of the advantages or preferred style of a particular platform. It just wasn't worth the effort in the end.
With Unity3d you can build for like 20 platforms.
Cross-Platform vs Native | Development Tools
1. Native apps are usually developed to work on a single mobile platform by using the native programming language mainly used for user interactions.
2. Cross platform requires different platforms for development are used for PhoneGap, Titanium, and Xamarin by using HTML and JavaScript mainly used for iOS, windows, and Android.
"no one is discussing java in web-dev"
Not genuine Many pages and server side application are made in java. JEE, JSF and so on. Issue is facilitating for page. Facilitating for PHP is less expensive and more mainstream. That is the reason PHP is more well known than Java in web-dev.
Anyway, in portable stage, in my opion, better way is local applications. Cross stage systems are incredible, yet just for a portion of the sorts application. Most applications can be made quicker and look prettier on the off chance that they are local. Numerous things is hard when you utilize crossplatform, and infrequently improvement takes longer. Much relies on upon kind of utilization and necessities. Obviously it's lone my sentiment. Numerous individuals think in an unexpected way.
whats the end goal/how big is your buget?
for example: business apps, they're not that heavy on interactions/animations - you may be better off with cross platform as it will generally cost less to create it that way
if heavy on interactions/animations: native would be a better choice and may cost more because it may be developed for multiple platforms, which in turn would make it more expensive.
Hi,
If you ask me I will go with the cross platform if I'm building the app from scratch as it's easier to make any changes and most importantly saves a lot of time.