More Android Goodness

I don't know why no one mentioned this earlier, but Google had an Android Honeycomb show and tell today. Their platform is looking pretty good. I just wish Microsoft stopped trying to lock in developers and started in earnest to make C#/.NET run on many platforms (other than their own see this thread).

Oh, and Google showcased a new API they are calling "Render Script", which supposably makes it relatively easy to incorporate hardware accelerated 2D and 3D animation into your projects.

Are any of you using or going to use Android?

C# was never locked in. You can make your own .Net CLR on your whatever OS. There are already people doing that on Linux and MS officially ok with it, however, Linux founders themselves discouraged the development of it.

C# & .NET on Android: MonoDroid.
C# & .NET on iOS: MonoTouch.
C# & .NET on Mac OS X: MonoMac.
Silverlight on Linux: Moonlight.

@TommyCarlier: Mono, what's that? j/k :O

Guess you missed my link at the top/the original discussion ... I'll bold a section the a first paragraph ..

quoteth ... "

Microsoft needs to realize that they can't continue their current path without bleeding away developers. If Microsoft were to start officially making Visual Studio with Dotnet and Silverlight able to target other operating systems (please don't mention mono, moonlight, or monodevelop ... they lag too far behind), they would be able to keep and attract developers to Windows. And by "offically", I mean keeping Silverlight current on all platforms/operating system and/or agressively maintaining Dotnet assemblies to with work with the latestest MacOS/iOS/Android releases.

As it stands right now, a lot of new and existing developers are buying Apple computers to develop iPhone/iPad software or switching to Eclipse (which can run on Linux) to develop for Android.

Reading this again, the topic is that due to rise of alternate hardware and operating systems, Microsoft should cease their strategy of locking developers into Windows or other Microsoft operating systems, and instead turn about and start making Windows the best platform to create content (read my original remarks about changing Visual Studio and Dotnet to support development for competing operating systems), be that content for Windows or iOS or Android.

Creating HTML5 doesn't require any development tools. All you need is a browser and notepad (or something equivalent). Also, the only reason Microsoft is touting HTML5 is because they want to dissuade developers from writing apps specifically for iPhones, iPads, and Android devices.

When it comes to actual development, you know anything you'd need to open in Visual Studio, Microsoft does everything they can to lock developers into targeting only Microsoft platforms.

This clearly isn't going to work. I know plenty of developers that have bought Macs to develop for the iPhone, and I've know developer's are tearing of from Microsoft to write Android apps.

Microsoft isn't going to have a near monopoly on personal computers much longer as these new hardware devices (tablets and smart phones) are essentially a reboot of the personal computer market.

And a preemptive "no" ... phone and tablet makers and developers aren't going to get in bed with Microsoft (WP7) like they used to before. They don't really care to perpetuate the Microsoft gorilla they've been trapped with all these years.

For those saying fine, Microsoft shouldn't have a monopoly anyways, yes I agree, but that doesn't mean Microsoft should shirk away from a new consumer market. To do so would be conceeding defeat.

I believe Microsoft does make good developer tools, and that the personal computer (laptops and desktop) still has a market cornered; and that is content creation. photographers editing images, authors writing books, programmers writing code. The future for Microsoft (content creation computers) may diminish if they don't design their tools with the capibility to directly target competing platforms.

MS has limited amount of resources and Windows comes first. Besides, the whole point of .Net is to develope on Win VS and without extra steps to run on every.Net platforms. The fact that you need other machine is the wrong approach or something is wrong with the .Net CLR you installed.

And again, MS has limited amount of resources and Windows comes first.

But, then again, .Net is supposed to be multiplatform, so one code should work on all .Net CLR.

@sysrpl: I don't think I will ever go to Android again.  It was the most buggy and unreliable phone I have ever used.  The UI was an inconsistant mess.  I saw pictures of Honeycomb and I was not impressed.  I don't really care for the UI.  It looks dated and it hasn't even come out yet.

It shouldn't too hard for a expirenced C# programmer to jump into Android development.

@JeremyJ:are you serious? its buggy and unreliable? 

first, its a open source free OS as compared to Microsoft WP7 closed(including iOS)

next, give little thumbs up for a non-OS developement company to make something that i have not seen from Microsoft since i started using Windows.

Tell me how many years MS Windows Mobile has been in the market and how much innovation have come out as compared to Android or iOS from 2007 to 2011 how much changes in terms of UI and features.

i have been using Windows since 3.1 and until today Windows 7 i dont see any major UI changes.

I like Windows but Microsoft has to keep up with technology.

if Windows Live were to be on every platform just like Google(mail/maps/voice/talk) and contact syncing i dont think i would have switched. if Windows Live - mail/maps/bing/mesh/photos/skydrive and include contact syncing were to be added to android/iOS/Blackberry/Nokia platform then i think Google will have tough time catching up but MS is bent on using those services only on Windows so who's the loser here...

so until MS thinks outside the box(Windows) it is never going to be a successful company in the mobile space.

@sysrpl:

what I don't understand is why MSFT dropped windows mobile. I understand the need to enforce a common set of features so that the consumer who buys a windows phone gets what they expect. But why not have something with a different brand name, like mobile OS, which provides the .net framework on any mobile device? I want to be able to buy a cheap used cell phone on ebay and write c# / .net apps for the phone. MSFT does not have to provide the drivers for every phone. And neither does the manufacturer of what might be a defunct phone. Just publish the specs so that 3rd party providers could sell the drivers or whatever it is that would be needed to exploit specific features of specific phones.

@SteveRichter:

?? You mean Windows CE? Win CE 7 is out there, and WinPhone7 is build on top of Win CE 7.

Not sure what you mean by drivers because MS don't make drivers as they don't make the hardware. But, if you want to test your app on WinPh7, the developer tools have emulator that test your app on PC.

3 days ago, Bass wrote

It shouldn't too hard for a expirenced C# programmer to jump into Android development.

Or vice versa.

The tablet silence coming from the MS corner is deafening... Windows on ARM... that's all they got? Geez... Live by Intel... Die by Intel I guess

17 hours ago, magicalclick wrote

?? You mean Windows CE? Win CE 7 is out there, and WinPhone7 is build on top of Win CE 7.

maybe I just don't know what I am talking about. Does CE run on everying that Android runs on? The standard issue cell phone - Is it able to run .net code using either the micro framework or CE?

@SteveRichter:

Win CE 7 is basically Win Phone 7, same core, same .Net, same silverlight. It just doesn't have Office and Live Tile. You build your own main page and other stuff. Typically you see this installed in those retail GPS you buy from BestBuys. The Ford Sync is running on Win CE (I guess, I am not sure).

Win CE gives the manufacture complete control of the OS with the same core and .Net support. And since manufacutre has complete control of the OS, you don't see Win CE icon on system boot up. The only way to know it is using Win CE is looking at back of the device.

Mediocrity is the new norm. If someone doesn't think Android is buggy and unreliable, they've never even seen an iPhone or Blackberry, let alone used one.

@Craig_Matthews: There is nothing mediocre abaout Android if you useit on a decent device. Most people that complain go for a cheap phone running the software and expect an iPhone experience.

Personally, I don't like android on Samsung, or Xperia, but it rocks on HTC...now that is good news! Isn't it?

10 hours ago, Craig_​Matthews wrote

Mediocrity is the new norm. If someone doesn't think Android is buggy and unreliable, they've never even seen an iPhone or Blackberry, let alone used one.

You forgot to start that with "Good news, everyone"