App Inventor is just COBOL warmed over. Nothing changes. Like COBOL,
I'm sure that App Inventor has it's uses, but neither will eliminate
the need for trained programmers. SQL was also touted as eliminating
the need for programmers, and now it's developed into its own
programming specialty.
On
Let me tell you something: When a company hires you to do an app (or
your management in a large company asks for some new software function
of any sort), nine times out of ten they don''t have the foggiest idea
what they want you to do. Even if they have a 50-page spec, it'll be
more concerned wi
> Like any occupation, unless you're some sort of savant you
> need to spend about 2000 hours (a year) working at it to achieve basic
> competence, and 10,000 hours (five years) to become an expert. If
> you're not prepared to spend that sort of time working at it, then
> find a different occupati
Hate to break up this tender moment, but I'd like to get back to the
original statement:
> Additionally, Android, as it's currently designed, does not have
> "legs". The process model and UI are both too restrictive to be
> extendable to the pads and other new paradigms of the future.
Who would
I meant something far more narrow.
If you work create a phone app as a work-for-hire, whether as a contractor,
vendor, or even as an employee, you will be expected to produce what they're
asking for. Often, in this scenario, it will be on a tight budget, and quite
narrowly defined.
This is in
Yeah, Bob, I think you mostly understand where I was coming from:
1) Don't focus your career on any single technology or product but
rather seek to have a broad-based, multi-specialty background and the
flexibility to move from project to project. And don't short-change
learning the fundamentals.
I read Dan's message a bit differently than it seems everyone else has. I
too have 40+ years of experience, and I think I see where you're coming
from, and I'm not distracted by the "legs" remark.
Yes, there's a lot of competition. What this argues, really, is that you
should either be willing
I agree but with one caveat, the one thing that I think is good about
the iOS approach is that it's instantaneous: there's no 4-5 second
pause while the app freezes and the "force close" dialog pops up.
Perhaps if it was like iOS (instant kill back to home screen) but with
a toast explaining what
Chris if you read the more recent messages I wrote you'll see that I'm
not evangelizing poor architectural design or poor implementation. My
experience in the industry showed me that project management
methodology and architectural design/implementation go hand in hand. I
strongly believe in the fo
: android-developers@googlegroups.com
[mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ali Chousein
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 3:14 PM
To: Android Developers
Subject: [android-developers] Re: Career as an Andoid developer. Is there
any point?
Chris, yes, I said exactly that, but you got it
That is a good example of the many cases where it is NOT a good thing
to do as IOS does!
On May 26, 2:05 pm, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:46 PM, dipu wrote:
> > Developing apps for android is fun. I just do not want to put a nail
> > on every null to avoid force close. Now
> "Agile development" just means not complaining when the specs change.
>
> It's a mind game managers play with developers to keep them thinking
> moving targets are "normal" and "good" when in practice they are not.
There's some truth to that. But basically any development methodology
can be cor
Hi all,
I am a web application developer. In my university time, I was using
Java. Now, I am writing applications in C#. There are some areas unique in
some platforms. But the basic theories of programming are same.
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Miguel Morales wrote:
> Um, that's how it wor
Um, that's how it works. You shouldn't get a force close unless there is a
stackoverflow or memory issue.
Perhaps you are talking about an Application Not Responding error, and
that's due to bad programming.
iPhone doesn't crash when you use the UI thread for any long tasks. You are
just unable
Greg, changing requirements is not a mind-set of managers, but it's a
reality of life. High-tech market is very dynamic and if you want to
adhere to original specs you'll soon go out of business. Seriously, do
you think that managers are happy when the original specs change, the
deadlines are misse
Unless there is a stackoverflow or out of memory issue I do not see
any point in having a Force Close. If I catch all runtime exceptions
around a block of code the OS should ignore all exceptions inside that
call block.
Maybe some Force Close decision is about taking care of memory leaks
or other
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:46 PM, dipu wrote:
> Developing apps for android is fun. I just do not want to put a nail
> on every null to avoid force close. Now even an ardent Agile fan would
> call me a bad programmer. That is where I see religion (or cult). How
> about get a few ex-ms people on bo
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Indicator Veritatis wrote:
> But quite a few other people have complained -- with no less evidence
> -- that Agile methods have failed to deliver on their promise.
"Agile development" just means not complaining when the specs change.
It's a mind game managers pla
Android has been a great platform for developing apps as a hobby. It
is far better than any other Java based mobile platform that I had
tried. I wish java-api-first is not the case in the future. Java AWT/
Swing has been basically a failure in GUI(considering all the time a
effort went into develop
I understand the priorities. What I mean by "extremely simple to do"
is, there is the well designed ContactsContract API, which can
"easily" be extended to support reading SMS and e-mails as well.
However, life is life, and different people have different priorities.
It's understandable, although n
SMS and other app-related APIs (e-mail etc) are outside of my area of
responsibility (which is the core platform). Generally though these things
aren't exposed because the people responsible for them aren't ready to
commit to an API they will maintain and have other higher priorities they
need to
Actually, there probably never will be another opportunity as good as
the one Bill Gates had to write BASIC for the MITS Altair. There were
thousands of programmers with the skills (many with much better
skills), but none had the free time personally and access to free
computer time.
On May 26, 2
On Thursday, May 26, 2011 3:16:07 PM UTC-4, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
>
>
> But again, these have little do to with whether android has "legs" which
> was the original point of discussion.
>
A point which I tacked away from in my first post in this thread. I'm not
worried about the future of andro
Dianne, talking about limitations, as a developer I'm not happy at all
with the fact that Android does not support an official interface for
reading SMS messages (simple, the ones that you've received and sent)
and e-mails. I don't understand why the Android designers didn't
include this in the off
Dan, what you write is correct, but this applies in business in
general, no matter which field you function in. This fact has nothing
to do with whether a platform has been designed well or poorly.
Without the ecosystem of a company it always is and will always be
difficult, tricky and risky to mon
Yes, it's definitely luck. If there were a formula we'd all be doing
it. You have to be the right person with the right idea in the right
place at the right time to have a big winner on the Market or in
business in general. When SimCity came out on the Mac and I was
finishing the Amiga version a
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Chris Stratton wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:14:55 PM UTC-4, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
>
>> I'm still wondering what these "limiting decisions" are.
>
> I find that surprising, considering the amount of time you spend explaining
> to people that the things th
Yeah, that's more or less what I said first, and the "legs" comment
was just an aside. To be successful as an independent developer,
selling your own stuff (even if you have Android and Amazon markets)
it a one in a million shot (literally). To put food on the table and
the kids through college y
I think one point still stands, however. If you're looking for a Career
(I.e. need to support family, kids, on a regular basis) doing anything
speculative will probably end up being harder (or perhaps more stressful)
than working at a firm and making a solid ~70-100k a year. To duplicate that
you'd
I've been with Android since around April 2009. And I can tell you
that the first year *was* painful. Especially the first six months
(April to September ish). However, it has matured to totally awesome
now. I mean c'mon, OpenGL ES 2.0, NDK C++ support including STL, this
list of great things you c
To eliminate misunderstandings, I would like to make the following
additions:
By iterative approach, I mean the "short release cycles" which also
enables you to get immediate feedback and evaluate if you are heading
on the right direction. I guess this is exactly what you mean by
"Agile is 'increm
I don't have the 40 years experience of the original poster.. just a
kid in the industry at 30 years. Little more if counting the time in
college doing programming.
By their nature, all decisions are limiting. As I look back over the
various OS/programming systems I've used, most (LInux ecosystem
but this one has to be near the
> > top of the list.
>
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: android-developers@googlegroups.com
>
> > [mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ali Chousein
> > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 6:27 AM
> > To: Android
y statements in my day, but this one has to be near the
> > top of the list.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: android-developers@googlegroups.com
>
> > [mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ali Chousein
> > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 201
ssage-
> From: android-developers@googlegroups.com
>
> [mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ali Chousein
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 6:27 AM
> To: Android Developers
> Subject: [android-developers] Re: Career as an Andoid developer. Is there
> any point?
>
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:14:55 PM UTC-4, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
I'm still wondering what these "limiting decisions" are.
I find that surprising, considering the amount of time you spend explaining
to people that the things they want to do are not possible, some because
they are not yet
7 AM
To: Android Developers
Subject: [android-developers] Re: Career as an Andoid developer. Is there
any point?
Dan, you are looking from a very classical point of you. I mean the
following:
1. " how much impact these 'limiting decisions' will have in the future..."
2. " thank
> This apporach of initially designing everyhting, trying to think of
> every little detail, forecasting in the future etc. is dead in
> software development. It works in some classical industries like
> avionics, but in consumer electronics, forget it, you cannot build any
> decent product with th
But quite a few other people have complained -- with no less evidence
-- that Agile methods have failed to deliver on their promise.
On May 25, 3:26 pm, Ali Chousein wrote:
> Dan, you are looking from a very classical point of you. I mean the
> following:
>
> 1. " how much impact these 'limiting
The risk you complain about is real, but it was a legitimate question:
I had serious doubts about what you meant by 'legs', too. I am sure
there are many others who have no idea what you were trying to say.
On May 24, 10:54 am, DanH wrote:
> I figured you would, and I'm not interested in getting
Dan, you are looking from a very classical point of you. I mean the
following:
1. " how much impact these 'limiting decisions' will have in the
future..."
2. " thanks to good initial design (or sometimes just clever
emulation), are able to advance their platforms while still
maintaining compatibil
I'm still wondering what these "limiting decisions" are. The only thing I
have heard is limits on what applications are allowed to do, but that
actually gives us more flexibility in maintaining Android -- it is far
easier to remove such limits on apps than it is to introduce new limits that
you fi
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 4:17:17 PM UTC-4, DanH wrote:
I think you're getting the gist of it. It's always hard to tell how
> much impact these "limiting decisions" will have in the future (and
> there will always be differences of opinion about them), but certainly
> they're there.
Persona
On May 25, 1:17 pm, DanH wrote:
> Usually the platform will coast along under the momentum of existing
> apps and users for awhile, but sooner or later the costs make it more
> feasible (for both vendor and customer) to dump the old and switch
> rather than to keep going. Some vendors (not to be
> While I would agree that there are some unfortunate and limiting decisions
> in the design of android (but maybe not agree with you about which those
> are), I'm not sure that this actually matters that much in the long run.
I think you're getting the gist of it. It's always hard to tell how
mu
And it's probably a good idea to acknowledge that we have an Android
"gold rush" going on at the moment so the market will be flooded with
Android developers. And it will be difficult for those in the
position of hiring to sort out who knows what they are doing and those
who don't.
As far as how
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:53:53 PM UTC-4, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Chris Stratton wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 11:29:03 AM UTC-4, DanH wrote:
>>
>> Additionally, Android, as it's currently designed, does not have
>>> "legs". The process model and UI
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Chris Stratton wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 11:29:03 AM UTC-4, DanH wrote:
>
> Additionally, Android, as it's currently designed, does not have
>> "legs". The process model and UI are both too restrictive to be
>> extendable to the pads and other new paradig
On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 11:29:03 AM UTC-4, DanH wrote:
Additionally, Android, as it's currently designed, does not have
> "legs". The process model and UI are both too restrictive to be
> extendable to the pads and other new paradigms of the future.
While I would agree that there are some u
> "D" == DanH writes:
D> You don't believe everyone else is talking religion? Look how
D> people jumped on me.
I think most people would just like to hear why you think this way.
Clearly, since this is an Android forum, most people would probably
disagree with your assessment. But t
Dan,
Religion says, "My God is more good looking than your God". If you ask
the person "Why?", he/she would say "Because my holy book says so".
Well, you came and said "Android has no legs" and many people asked
you what makes you say so. You kept on saying just two things:
1. "My 40+ years exper
We are in a forum and there's no way we can just agree with someone else on
disagreeing with you. everyone ends up sending their
own disagreeing messages.
You say it doesn't have the "legs". People disagree and wanna know why you
think so.
I don't see where religion is.
2011/5/25 DanH
> You don
You don't believe everyone else is talking religion? Look how people
jumped on me.
On May 24, 9:55 pm, Ady Y wrote:
> So it is clear then that your reasons are religious and not technical, as
> you tried to had people think.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Kris,
Take out the "f" word from my answer, and nothing else is indecent, or
harsh, or rude or whatever. Sorry man, if someone comes and says "x
sucks" and the only argument he gives is "My 40+ years of experience
bla, bla" someone out there is going to use the "f" word. If someone
claims that "x
That means that you don't expose your beliefs in the first place if you
don't feel like arguing.
That's what the it means.
Keeping quiet you're contributing to peace and proving that yes, you think
it's useless arguing about religion.
If you come and say
" [iOS/Android/Catholic Church/Islam/Jews/
Man,
Some of this has been extremely harsh, especially given that he pointed out
he *didn't* want to argue. I'm sure someone will fire back with the "but he
can't back it up, he deserves it," but there have been over ten people doing
about the same thing, and I believe the point has been made. T
Dan,
It doesn't matter how many f*g years you've spent in the industry,
but it DOES matter what f*g thing(s) you've achieved. As you age
you "build"(!) experience, even if you are just sitting behind a desk
and surfing the internet anyway. Well, Android is one of those f*g
things which
He won't back it up because he can't. It's as simple as that.
On May 25, 1:44 pm, Spooky wrote:
> On May 24, 9:27 pm, TreKing wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:00 PM, DanH
> > wrote:
> > > [nothing worth quoting]
> > You made a pretty bold but vague statement that clearly has a
> > lot of
On May 24, 9:27 pm, TreKing wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:00 PM, DanH
> wrote:
> > [nothing worth quoting]
> You made a pretty bold but vague statement that clearly has a
> lot of people curious what the logic and rational behind it is.
> You could just state your reasoning behind the state
So it is clear then that your reasons are religious and not technical, as
you tried to had people think.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscri
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:00 PM, DanH wrote:
> One bit of wisdom you pick up after that long is that there's no point in
> arguing religion.
>
I don't think anyone's asking you to argue. You made a pretty bold but vague
statement that clearly has a lot of people curious what the logic and
ration
Imran115,
Like almost anything in technology that has commercial value, highly
skilled specialists will always be in demand. While the ability to
make a living selling individual apps can be a bit hit or miss, if you
are a solid Android programmer, you can easily get a job. I don't
think App Build
One bit of wisdom you pick up after that long is that there's no point
in arguing religion.
On May 24, 8:06 pm, Greg Donald wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 7:39 PM, DanH wrote:
> > No ulterior motive, just my judgment based on 40+ years in the
> > industry.
>
> Given what you said, I doubt anyo
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 7:39 PM, DanH wrote:
> No ulterior motive, just my judgment based on 40+ years in the
> industry.
Given what you said, I doubt anyone here gives a damn how many years
you have in the industry. Not all old people are wise.
So grow a pair and explain what you said so it ca
No ulterior motive, just my judgment based on 40+ years in the
industry.
On May 24, 6:42 pm, Zsolt Vasvari wrote:
> I suspect an ulterior motive. Whether Android, as is, suitable for
> every kind of application, is debatable. But the statement that it
> doesn't have "legs" has already been prov
I suspect an ulterior motive. Whether Android, as is, suitable for
every kind of application, is debatable. But the statement that it
doesn't have "legs" has already been proven wrong.
On May 25, 7:14 am, Doug wrote:
> On May 24, 2:45 pm, Jake Colman wrote:
>
> > Dan,
>
> > Well would you expl
I think it is just one more skill, and a fun one to learn, and as
someone said it seems to be in demand right now as part of the more
general mobile dev push. Google is making it easier to enter with
appdev or whatever, and folks will - I think - do some cool things
with it you would have never th
On May 24, 2:45 pm, Jake Colman wrote:
> Dan,
>
> Well would you explain your comment to me, if not Dianne? I have quite
> a few years of development experience under my belt and would like to
> understand what you mean by that. I have no axe to grind here and I
> promise not to p*** on you.
An
Dan,
Well would you explain your comment to me, if not Dianne? I have quite
a few years of development experience under my belt and would like to
understand what you mean by that. I have no axe to grind here and I
promise not to p*** on you.
...Jake
> "D" == DanH writes:
D> I figur
Ooookay.
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:54 AM, DanH wrote:
> I figured you would, and I'm not interested in getting into a p***ing
> match, so I'm not going to elaborate.
>
> On May 24, 11:09 am, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
> > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:29 AM, DanH wrote:
> > > Additionally, Android, a
I figured you would, and I'm not interested in getting into a p***ing
match, so I'm not going to elaborate.
On May 24, 11:09 am, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:29 AM, DanH wrote:
> > Additionally, Android, as it's currently designed, does not have
> > "legs". The process mod
I have seen that already, and while I don't disagree that for a very large
number of apps javascript/html5 just makes sense.
As it stands, it is just too limited. Try doing any realtime android game
that'll actually work on low-end cell phones using javascript or html5 and
you'll have to get aroun
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:29 AM, DanH wrote:
> Additionally, Android, as it's currently designed, does not have
> "legs". The process model and UI are both too restrictive to be
> extendable to the pads and other new paradigms of the future.
>
Care to explain that? I very much disagree.
--
D
The basic problem is that you've got millions of high school students
and college dropouts who fancy themselves programmers, and they're all
writing Android apps, hoping to come up with the next big hit. A very
small number will develop into decent programmers, and an even smaller
(microscopic) nu
Programming apps in the traditional sense, on your own might not be a great
career path. But android developers are in very high demand right now. You
would be shocked to see big name companies and their inability to get on
mobile, they know they have to but they don't know how. Additionally the
I'd go further:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/hdcc1/qemu_has_been_ported_to_javascript_linux_now_runs/
2011/5/24 Doug
> Well, before you rashly declare web inferior to native, you might want
> to watch this talk from Google I/O:
>
>
> http://www.google.com/events/io/2011/session
On May 24, 1:49 pm, Justin Anderson wrote:
> @Zsolt
> Now I'm curious... What apps have you published so far?
>
I publish a personal finance app. It took me a 1 1/2 years to develop
it from the point I first downloaded the Android SDK to whenI first
published it. And it's been under developme
Well, before you rashly declare web inferior to native, you might want
to watch this talk from Google I/O:
http://www.google.com/events/io/2011/sessions/html5-versus-android-apps-or-web-for-mobile-development.html
Doug
On May 23, 5:20 pm, Miguel Morales wrote:
> Sorry, that was a bit too brief
On May 23, 10:25 pm, Zsolt Vasvari wrote:
> Not to sound braggy, but my app has been netting $3000+/mo in
> sales for the past 6 months, after Google's cut.
The previous poster in this thread mentioned that they get, on
average, about $100/month. Even half of that, to me, would be a
huge boost,
@Zsolt
Now I'm curious... What apps have you published so far?
Thanks,
Justin Anderson
MagouyaWare Developer
http://sites.google.com/site/magouyaware
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Kevin TeslaCoil Software <
ke...@teslacoilsw.com> wrote:
> I quit my day job several months ago for my "Android
I quit my day job several months ago for my "Android Apps career" and
am doing very well and love it. But it's not like I set out to be an
Android App developer. I taught myself programming and programmed the
hell out of whatever I could, went to university for Electrical
Engineering/Robotics, got
Not to sound braggy, but my app has been netting $3000+/mo in sales
for the past 6 months, after Google's cut.
It all depends what your app is -- if it's a toy app, expect toy
income from it. If it's an app that adds serious value to people's
lives, expect an income go along with that. It's comp
I would have to agree that for the most part creating Android Apps would not
be a career. While it is true that a few developers may be able to make it
a career the majority of us do it for fun...
I have three apps on the Android Market (2 paid and 1 free)... All apps are
rated 4 or 4 1/2 stars a
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:11 PM, imran115 wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I was wondering what peoples thoughts maybe on the application that
> Android are developing, that allows people with no programming
> experience to create apps. I am currently learning the basics in
> Android development and wan
This is certainly nice.
I have had a chance to play around with "Scratch" and lego like
programming interface to teach programming concepts to teens and
gaming concepts to programmers.
It is wonderfully intriguing to tie the idea to productivity applications.
I don't believe it will replace the
I think some folks will probably do some cool things with it.
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Miguel Morales wrote:
> Sorry, that was a bit too brief and actually not completely related.
> But, what I meant was that because of the layers of non-complexity the
> browsers and app makers provide th
Sorry, that was a bit too brief and actually not completely related.
But, what I meant was that because of the layers of non-complexity the
browsers and app makers provide there are limits to their use.
Even though a browser implements javascript and you can do many things with
it, it's non complex
On May 23, 3:43 pm, Miguel Morales wrote:
> This is because those interfaces are not turing complete. They're useless
> once you reach a certain level of complexity.
> This is why browser apps are only for the most basic of apps.
Care to elaborate on that last statement?
Doug
--
You received
Of course not, that's ridiculous. There has never been a GUI that can even
come close to the functionality you get with typing code using the
programming language.
Of course, betting your career on Android is ridiculous too. Strive to
become a good programmer and engineer, then you won't be shor
Hi everyone,
I was wondering what peoples thoughts maybe on the application that
Android are developing, that allows people with no programming
experience to create apps. I am currently learning the basics in
Android development and wanted to pursue it as a career. Is there any
point, as just abou
90 matches
Mail list logo
