Fresh Apple: GigaOMApple (7 сообщений)

rss2email.ru

GigaOMApple

http://gigaom.com
рекомендовать друзьям >>

Mac Dev Notes: iOS and Android Development Compared
There is no better development platform than OS X today, and there is no hotter development focus than mobile right now. And mobile development currently has but two proven roads to success: Android and iOS. Each road has its own challenges and costs, and its own opportunity and rewards. Sometimes you don’t have much of a choice which road you take, and more and more often, doing both is best. But if you do have to choose, check out this comparison of the startup costs involved in each, and what you get in exchange for your investment.

Barrier to Entry

With iOS development, the initial startup costs are perceived to be high. Very high, in fact. To be fair, the costs are not that bad when comparing Apples to Apples. Most will argue that since you can only develop iOS apps on a Mac, you must first purchase a Mac before development can begin. Of course, you must also procure some sort of computer to start developing on the Android platform as well. It is however true that Android development can be done on Mac, PC or Linux machine. And there’s the rub. So at least in this regard, Apple does get paid up front for every prospective app that is in development before it ever gets developed, while Google does not.

Accessing the SDK

Each platform has its own software developer’s kit (SDK). Since Xcode 4 was released, the iOS SDK is no longer free for developers. You must now be a registered iOS Developer on the Apple Developer Connection (ADC), which costs $99 annually. Alternatively, you can choose to install Xcode 4 through the Mac App Store for a mere US$4.99. The difference is that with the App Store version you cannot deploy your software to physical devices for testing, you cannot access the online developer forums, and you cannot submit apps to the App Store. Both the ADC as well as the App Store route will require an Apple ID, which at a minimum attempts to identify the individual accessing the SDK.

Android on the other hand is a little more open than iOS when it comes to SDK access. Not only is it completely free to download, you do not even need any sort of User ID or account in order to access the SDK. There’s no registration process whatsoever. Just go to the Android Developer site and download the installer. So not only does Google not gain any revenue from the sale of their development tools, they also don’t have a direct means of ascertaining how many developers have downloaded their SDK.

Installing and Updating the SDK

For the iOS SDK you get everything you need to get up and running in one simple installer package, from Xcode and the Simulator, to Instruments and the SDK itself. Keep in mind that this little bundle weighs in at close to 4.5 GB. Not a small download even by today’s standards. And when it comes to updates, you basically have to download and reinstall with every new version. No incremental updates or patches.

Getting started with Android is a little more confusing at first. You download what you think is the SDK, but it is actually just the starter package. But before you get started, you must ensure that your machine meets the minimum system requirements. You might then have to install Oracle’s Java Development Kit (JDK) when Apple stops shipping OS X with Java pre-installed. Once the starter kit is up and running, you then choose which target platforms and components you plan to utilize. Then it’s time to download and install Eclipse and the Android Development Tools plugin for Eclipse. Don’t have Eclipse? No problem, it’s free too. Now before you get started, you may want to take a look at some of the additional SDK Tools that are available. Not to mention the fact that if you are on Windows, you may need to install a special USB driver in order to deploy to a device. And if what you really wanted to do was develop native android apps, then you will also need to download and install the Native Development Tools or NDK. The perceived upside is that each component can be updated individually. The downside is that you need to check for updates of each component separately.

Target Devices and Release Schedules

Apple has been quite methodical when it comes to releasing not only its iOS devices, but also updates to the iOS platform itself. Developers can accurately predict exactly when updates will be coming, and plan accordingly to ensure that their apps will be stable and fully functional on the next major release. And since the devices all come from one major manufacture, the number of test devices that one needs to maintain is a small one.

Google has little to no control on when updates will be pushed out to the devices that are already in consumers hands. Releases of the Android platform itself have been sporadic and at times very unpredictable. And with the latest major update of Android for tablet devices, the definition of “open” has changed as Google has announced that they will not be releasing the sources in the foreseeable future. With a capable smart-device platform like Android being free to manufactures to embed, deploy and extend, it should be no surprise that there are hundreds of devices on the market that all support Android. While one may be able to adopt a much tighter and proactive testing and update strategy with the iOS platform due to the methodic nature of releases from a single source, with Android a much looser and more reactive testing and update strategy is probably best.

Development Tools

When you do start developing on both platforms, what you will immediately notice is the maturity of the iOS development platform compared to that of the Android platform. With its graphical designer and assortment of testing tools both in the simulator as well as on the device itself, you begin to see that you really do get what you pay for in this case. And the development cycle to build, deploy and debug in the simulator is very, very fast. The focus of Xcode is clearly to get out of the developer’s way and provide the necessary tools to quickly and easily create high-quality apps.

With the Eclipse Plugin for Android, you will notice that you do not have any sort of graphical designer when developing the layouts for your Activities. There are also not nearly the same breadth and depth of profiling tools available. What is most annoying is that the emulator requires configuration and can take quite a long time to initialize. This results in longer development cycles. Even once it is up and running, the Android build, deploy and debug in the emulator cycle is nowhere near as fast as it is in Xcode. But keep in mind the priority of Android is to be open. The collaborative nature of open source does not always lead to consumer satisfaction or turnaround time being the first priority.

Learning Experience

What is maybe most surprising is that the learning experience on the two platforms is also very different. Both platforms have that extreme programming aspect of learning, where you try it in code first, then search on Google for a better way to get it done. This unstructured part of learning a new development technique is common across all languages and technologies. WIth iOS however, there is an alternative and much more structured path one can take as well. Through Apple’s own iTunes University, Stanford has been creating and maintaining a iOS development course that anyone can take online. Additionally, Apple has provided the WWDC technical presentations to any registered ADC developer through iTunesU as well.

iOS and Android development compared.

Conclusion

The differences between iOS and Android development are as different as night and day. From the ability to download and install the SDK, to the strategy one employes when testing apps, to the way one ultimately learns how to develop. Down to the last detail, the two platforms differ in both philosophy as well as technique, so consider carefully before deciding which path you should follow.
Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req'd):
Переслать
Apple Charting New Future for iOS Maps — Without Google?

A new job posting went up at Apple, suggesting the company is continuing to move towards its own mobile map plans, separate from Google. According to the posting, an iOS Maps Application Developer in Cupertino would help “radically improve how people interact with maps and location-based services.” User interface design is a must, as well as a “passion” for location-based technologies.

Certainly, there’s room for improvement in the current Maps app, which has seen relatively few outward updates since introduced with the original iPhone back in 2007. Despite being powered by Google Maps, iOS Maps does not compare well with the latest on Android. Missing features including turn-by-turn directions, 3-D maps, topography, offline maps, and information about places. While Apple is clearly behind Google in map app development, it wouldn’t be totally accurate to say the company has been ignoring map services.

In 2009, Apple acquired PlaceBase, a mapping data service provider, and in 2010, it also purchased another mapping company, Poly9. In both instances, employees as well as software went to Apple. Also, last year, Apple made a major internal change to the Maps program. Starting with iOS 3.2 on the iPad, and with iOS 4 on all devices, Apple began using its own databases instead of those belonging to Skyhook Wireless and Google for location information.

With an iOS 5 preview expected next month, we may not have to wait long to find out if Apple plans on taking over full control of the iOS map app this year. Rumors of MobileMe development suggests new location-based services like Find My Friends are in store. It’s not hard to imagine maps of friends and recommended places overlaid as layers on the built-in Apple Maps app and dynamically updated. Social networking features, combined with more map services, would be a welcome update in iOS 5, and one that would gain Apple some ground over the competition.

Of course, there’s also risk in replacing the current Maps software, too. Google has spent years continuously improving mobile map software, and a less-than-impressive Apple Maps 1.0 could actually hurt the iOS platform (especially if it lacks wow-factor features like Google’s Street View). The problem is that waiting until iOS 6 next year would only see Google increase its market share, while Apple’s own version of Maps continues to languish. From a consumer’s perspective, the best solution probably be for Apple Maps to coexist alongside the current Google-powered Maps, like iBooks and Kindle for e-readers. However, that would mean a continued dependence on Google for a critical part of the iOS platform, and that would be very un-Apple indeed.

Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req'd):
Переслать
Apple Releases iOS 4.3.1 With Multiple Bug Fixes
Apple just pushed out iOS 4.3.1 for iPhone (GSM), iPad, iPad 2 and iPod touch devices. The minor update brings a number of welcome bug fixes, including a resolution for image flicker some where experiencing when connecting the new Digital AV Adapter to televisions.

Here’s a complete list of what the update includes according to Apple:
This update contains improvements and other bug fixes including:
- Fixes an occasional graphics glitch on iPod touch (4th generation)
- Resolves bugs related to activating and connecting to some cellular networks
- Fixes image flicker when using Apple Digital AV Adapter with some TVs
- Resolves an issue authenticating with some enterprise web services
No update is yet available for the CDMA version of the iPhone released for use on the Verizon network. It still runs version 4.2.6, released in February. Some reports suggested that iOS 4.3.1 might bring battery life improvements, but if it does, Apple isn’t talking about it. Check out the update by plugging your iOS device into iTunes and hitting the “Update” button on your device’s summary screen, and then let us know below if the fixes are working for you, and if you notice any other differences versus the previous version.
Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req'd):
Переслать
Controversy: There's an App for That
Recently the App Store has been in the news quite a bit for some controversial apps it accepted, and it seems a route savvy marketers can now use to skip traditional media and go straight for big exposure. Forget newspapers and TV; the best way to get the word out is via the App Store, and the controversy Apple creates when it accepts or rejects an app. But is it good for Apple?

Apple’s acceptance of an app giving information about the "ex-gay" movement caused one heck of a stir. People were talking about it everywhere, and petitions were flying left and right. Regardless of your stance on the issue of the app's acceptance or content, the app’s developers walk away winners. In order to post a negative review, Apple requires someone to download ("purchase") the app even if it’s free. Detractors (and some supporters) rushed to buy a product solely for the fact they didn’t like it. So the app garnered not only tons of press, but sales during its brief existence, too.

Similarly, an app that helps the user find speed traps and DWI checkpoints has inspired law enforcement and even U.S. lawmakers to debate the issue. Until Congress got involved, I had no interest in the app, but I sure downloaded it after all the chatter. I'm predicting the infamous Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church will soon submit an app and publicly display their rejection by Apple, too.

The amazing thing about these apps is that they are merely app-packaged versions of information the developers already had on their websites. Both the "ex-gay" and speed trap websites most likely struggled to get users and publicity prior to releasing apps. For the relatively low price of a developer kit, and some programming, now everyone is talking about them. The small business owner in me gives them a huge thumbs up for getting their message out in a cost-effective way.

Heck, when Apple pulled the "ex-gay" app recently and when (I predict) they pull the speed trap app, we’ll talk about both all the more: more of the developers' message getting out, more hits to the website, and more supporters among the many detractors. Ironically, if Apple rejected these apps outright, they’d get nearly as much publicity. When Apple rejected (excuse me, "did not approve") the Google Voice app, more people started asking what Google Voice was. When Apple rejected a political cartoonist, I wanted to see what he was drawing.

All this chatter is great for Apple. All of a sudden, many iPhone owners wanted to know how to download these apps to either try them out or speak out against them. That likely means more of those registered credit card numbers Steve spoke about in his keynote and more users of the App Store in general. More eyeballs in the App Store is good for developers. Talk about no losers in the app economy!

Apple loves being the center of attention, and the app approval process is a big part of its ability to maintain that focus. These fringe apps keep people talking about Apple and its product. We simply don’t hear this chatter on the Android platform. Android generally accepts everything, so it’s much more difficult to get the word out — positive or negative. With something as controversial as "curing" homosexuality, did Apple not think people would complain? Sure, but in order to post their complaints in a place where it would be most visible to the app’s intended audience, users had to log in and buy the very app they derided.

As a lightning rod for controversy, the App Store is also a terrific PR machine. It may not be the most above-board way to draw attention to your cause or product, but it’s effective, and will likely remain so until (if ever) Apple establishes some hard-and-fast rules for its App Store approval process. And that’s not something it’s unlikely to do any time soon if people keep clicking, downloading and purchasing.
Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req'd):
Переслать
Kodak Faces Another Polaroid Moment in Apple, RIM Dispute
A ruling today on whether or not Apple and Research in Motion violated a patent held by Kodak could add more than $1 billion in revenue to the camera company’s bottom line, according to Kodak CEO, Antonio Perez (via Bloomberg), but only if a court overturns an existing ruling against Kodak.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) will be the ultimate arbiter of Kodak’s fate in this matter. Judge Paul Luckern already ruled in January that Apple and RIM weren’t in violation of Kodak’s patents, which describe a system for image-previews on camera phones. However, Kodak settled with Samsung and LG for allegedly infringing on the same patent, netting a total of nearly $1 billion from the two companies in combined royalty payments after those companies were faced with the possibility of being shut out of the U.S. cellphone market.

While the ITC can’t assign punitive monetary measures in cases like this, it can block the imports of products it finds infringe on U.S. patents, which means the iPhone and BlackBerry devices could be blocked from sale in the U.S. if the ITC finds in Kodak’s favor. Because that would mean an immense amount of lost revenue, companies often opt instead to settle in advance of a ruling and avoid an injunction. The decision today will determine whether or not the ITC will review the judge’s January findings, and if it does, a final decision on the matter would be forthcoming by May 23.

The stakes are high in this case, but much more so for Kodak than for the companies it’s claiming infringed on its patents. A win for Kodak means significant boost to its overall revenue picture, since the resulting royalties would be pure profit without any overhead outside of legal fees for the case. Jim Kelleher, an analyst with Argus Research points out that “most of Kodak’s operating businesses lose money,” so an IP income stream this significant would add considerably to the $838 million it made from patents last year. Income from patent royalties continues to eclipse the revenue Kodak takes in from its other lines of business, including cameras, printers and software. We reached out to Kodak for comment on what a loss would mean for the company’s business, but have yet to hear back. We’ll update as necessary.

If the ruling goes against Kodak, it could potentially cut off the company’s ability to lay claim to any other patent revenues related to the use of camera phone previews. In 1989, for example, Kodak lost a patent battle with Polaroid regarding instant photography, and essentially had to cede the then-lucrative market entirely to Polaroid. Digital images eventually steamrolled the instant camera space, but Kodak still missed out on billions in potential revenue.

Apple and RIM have countersued Kodak in federal court, and Apple filed a complaint against Kodak with the ITC, too, following Kodak’s original complaint submission. Apple and RIM stand to take a hit on their gross margins if Kodak succeeds, but if the photography company fails, it stands to lose much, much more.
Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req'd):
Переслать
iPad 2 International Launch: Lines, Ship Times Point to Low Stock
The iPad 2 is in the midst of its international launch (depending on where you fall on the international dateline) and, by all accounts, the device is selling well. Reports of lines at international Apple Stores abound, and online orders seem all to be showing two- to three-week shipping windows.

Apple mirrored the U.S. launch in pretty much every regard with its first batch of international launches: online order availability beginning at 1 a.m. local time, and in-store retail sales (at Apple locations and at retail partners like Best Buy) beginning at 5 p.m. There were no pre-orders, and there was no way to reserve an iPad 2 for in-store pick-up in advance, as has been the case with some previous product launches.

Many, myself included, assumed the iPad 2′s early sell-out success in the U.S., combined with possible supply chain problems stemming from the disaster in Japan, might lead to a delay of Apple’s international launches, but Apple itself allayed those fears earlier in the week, and launches have proceeded as planned in time zones where it’s already past 5 p.m.

But the price of sticking to the planned international launch timeline may be quick stock-outs, if existing information is any indication. While the iPad 2′s shipping time in the U.S. via the online store recently improved from four to five weeks, to three to four, it looks as though international customers hoping to purchase online were greeted almost immediately (if not immediately) with an estimated two- to three-week wait. That makes lining up the surest way to find an iPad anytime in the immediate future, and as lines like the one at the Toronto Eaton Centre here in Canada already numbered in the hundreds eight hours ahead of when the iPad 2 actually goes on sale, it’s fair to assume that a decent number of customers will be left wanting.

I applaud Apple for sharing the iPad 2 wealth with international markets, instead of just redirecting supply to satisfy the U.S. demand and fulfill online orders placed in that country, but be aware that the trade-off is that if you want an iPad 2 today, getting out early to the nearest retail location is probably your best bet.
Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req'd):
Переслать
Senate Going After Roadblock Apps is a First Amendment Issue
I want to talk about Apple’s rights regarding roadblock warning apps, but first, let’s get something straight: if you get behind the wheel of an automobile while impaired in any fashion it is my sincere desire that you be caught and harshly penalized, hopefully well before you hurt or kill yourself or any innocent bystander. Simply put: if you drive impaired you’re an idiot. If someone you know and love was the victim of a drunk driver, you have my sincerest sympathies; I wish there were better mechanisms to prevent an impaired individual from even getting behind the wheel of a vehicle.

For me, as a creative professional (I’m a writer and photographer), the First Amendment of the Constitution is not selective: it simply states that Government cannot tell you what you can, or cannot say. I may not agree with what you have to say, and may very well find it offensive, but I will defend your right to say it.

The First Amendment in a Nut Shell, and How it Applies

I’m not saying Apple shouldn’t pull the apps; I’m just uncomfortable with lawmakers making the request. According to the U.S. constitution: “[c]ongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

If you submit a controversial app to Apple, like a roadblock reporting app, Apple is within their rights to refuse to publish it. Since the First Amendment only refers to “the Government,” not a company, is barred from censuring you. Apple can refuse to publish what they want. Likewise, GigaOM, and any other corporation I freelance write for can refuse to run any piece for any reason.

Congress, or in this case a few Senators, insisting Apple pull the app, to my non-Constitional-lawyer’s eyes, straddles the line of the First Amendment. Their actions infringe on Apple’s Right of Free Speech as an American publisher. It’s a blurry line, here. Four Democratic Senators do not a Congress make, nor has any law or formal action passed either the Senate or the House. The Senators are working around this issue by asking nicely.

What Should Apple Do?

Frankly, I’m a little surprised Apple even published the apps; I don’t think they should have in the first place. If they do pull the apps, I’m not going to mourn their loss at all. But I do believe that decision to publish should be Apple’s decision to make; not that of Congress or a group of Senators.
Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req'd):
Переслать