On May 2, 2012, at 8:37 PM, ext Nicola De Filippo wrote:
> Hi,
> >Hi,
>
> > However, you must expect binary compatibility problems in the future.
> > Intel is looking to grab a share of the market, and remember also that MIPS
> > got themselves Android certified before Intel did. There may
>> If you access the camera (or other local resource) from Java using the
>> standard APIs, you don't need to care about binary compatibility -
>> that's what the Dalvik VM does.
>>
>
> One so wishes. I have a camera app for Android written using plain
> Android SDK and java. It crashes on some d
On 05/03/2012 01:17 AM, Stephen Bryant wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday 02 May 2012 21:41:33 Harri Pasanen wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Binary compatibility with phones/tablets is more than just CPU. As soon
>
> > as you start accessing Camera, GPS, etc. you typically need to test on
>
> > device. Screen
Hi,
On Wednesday 02 May 2012 21:41:33 Harri Pasanen wrote:
[...]
> Binary compatibility with phones/tablets is more than just CPU. As soon
> as you start accessing Camera, GPS, etc. you typically need to test on
> device. Screen resolution, GPUs , RAM, storage memory all differ, so
> even if you
Hi,
On Wednesday 02 May 2012 10:44:36 Jason H wrote:
> Intel has the x86 Andoid problem fixed with binary translation. Your NDK
> arguments are moot.
I disagree.
Firstly, Intel's binary translator won't help those with MIPS devices.
Secondly, it doesn't work with all apps. Here's a quote from
On 05/02/2012 09:41 PM, Harri Pasanen wrote:
> On 05/02/2012 12:05 PM, Stephen Bryant wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime).
>>
I forgot to mention this discussion which is quite enlightening:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/phonegap/BFyBYj
On 05/02/2012 12:05 PM, Stephen Bryant wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime).
>
> > I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt?
> I can
>
> > not say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable.
>
As usual it de
Intel has the x86 Andoid problem fixed with binary translation. Your NDK
arguments are moot.
From: Stephen Bryant
To: interest@qt-project.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 6:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime
Hi,
> in the company there
Hi,
>Hi,
> in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime).
> I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt? I can
> not say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable.
> The native binary that you compile when using Qt will give much better
Hi,
> in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime).
> I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt? I can
> not say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable.
The native binary that you compile when using Qt will give much better
performa
Hi,
in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime).
I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt? I can not
say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable.
I do not like losing...
BR
Nicola___
11 matches
Mail list logo