>You'll get a lot more mileage if you intelligently use a little bit of
>the phone features in the context of a really great app than using
>stuff for the sake of using it.
>I'd imagine, anyway.
I agree, using features just for the sake of using them will hardly
get you anywere.
On Apr 29, 12:41 am, "Kevin Galligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You'll get a lot more mileage if you intelligently use a little bit of
> the phone features in the context of a really great app than using
> stuff for the sake of using it.
>
> I'd imagine, anyway.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ho, but you are not implementing the ones below:
>
> > >take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider,
> > >AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other Android-specific components,
> > which
> > >are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not to mention those
> > >android-specific api "constraints".
>
> > CowBay says that if you are not implementing those than you've failed
> > criteria 2. Based on your list above seems to me like you've
> > failed. :)
>
> > I'm just messing with you. I was being sarcastic with CowBay.
> > I also implemented all the features you listed above except
> > Orientation . It just doesn't make sense that every single application
> > has to have LBS, or use content provider or Services. Some
> > applications simply do not require this features. So no, I don't think
> > that just because you did not implement these three things that it
> > necessarily means that you failed criteria two.
>
> > On Apr 28, 11:59 pm, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Can you think of a submission that uses more Android features than
> > > mine?
>
> > > On Apr 28, 10:58 pm, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > I probably have the most performant and processing intensive use of
> > > > the Android Platform showing the most effective use of the platforms
> > > > 2D graphics capabilities. I also use compelling features including the
> > > > following:
>
> > > > * Vibration
> > > > * Orientation
> > > > * Animations
> > > > * Touch Screen
> > > > * Progress Bars/Dialogs
> > > > * Lifecycle Implementation
> > > > * And other Android specific features
>
> > > > Accelerometer is the only major feature I am missing.
>
> > > > On Apr 28, 7:24 pm, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > I think my chances are slim, but not because I'm not making effective
> > > > > use of Android. From Judges perspective they will not know the
> > > > > difference. I'm using touch functionality, a lot of the GUI
> > > > > components, pop ups, etc, etc. Based on your logic even tberthel has
> > > > > a worse chance of winning than me. All he is doing is using the
> > > > > drawing utilities from what I've seen from his demos. In fact, a lot
> > > > > of the applications I've seen all they do is use the 3d or 2d drawing
> > > > > utilities and that is it. This is true specially for a lot of the
> > > > > games.
>
> > > > > On Apr 28, 9:11 pm, "Cow Bay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > i feel kinda sorry for your possibility to lose ADC, for it sounds
> > like you
> > > > > > fail ADC Judging Criteria 2, " Effective Use of the Android
> > Platform" >:{)
>
> > > > > > still wishing you good lucks....
>
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Incognito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > To: "Android Challenge" <[email protected]>
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 4:05 PM
> > > > > > Subject: [android-challenge] Re: Android/Applets/J2ME
>
> > > > > > >sounds like your apps were originally designed and implemented
> > > > > > >platform-agnostic. that is, they were not originally for android
> > because,
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > >they had been, imho, it would not seem so easy as you describe.
>
> > > > > > True, that was my goal. I wrote my code so that it would initially
> > > > > > work on J2SE, J2ME, and Android. This forced me to write the
> > business
> > > > > > layer platform-agnostic and just write interfaces that were
> > platform
> > > > > > specific.
>
> > > > > > >take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider,
> > > > > > >AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other Android-specific
> > components,
> > > > > > which
> > > > > > >are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not to mention those
> > > > > > >android-specific api "constraints".
> > > > > > >>how did you convert those?
>
> > > > > > I'm not using LBS so no problem there. However, if I were I would
> > just
> > > > > > put that behind a generic interface.
> > > > > > Services - My application does not require to be running on the
> > > > > > background so I didn't need to convert this.
> > > > > > Android Intent, content provider - I didn't have to use this
> > feature
> > > > > > so I did not have to create an interface for it. IPhone does has
> > > > > > something very similar to this though.
> > > > > > They pass URL's between applications.
>
> > > > > > What I did have to create interfaces for are the drawing utilities,
> > > > > > Threads, GUI objects, like buttons, text fields, text buttons,
> > touch
> > > > > > and key event handling, etc.
>
> > > > > > On Apr 28, 8:32 pm, "Cow Bay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > sounds like your apps were originally designed and implemented
> > > > > > > platform-agnostic. that is, they were not originally for android
> > because,
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > they had been, imho, it would not seem so easy as you describe.
>
> > > > > > > take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider,
> > > > > > > AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other Android-specific
> > components,
> > > > > > which
> > > > > > > are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not to mention those
> > > > > > > android-specific api "constraints".
>
> > > > > > > how did you convert those?
>
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Incognito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > To: "Android Challenge" <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 2:02 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: [android-challenge] Re: Android/Applets/J2ME
>
> > > > > > > >>So, I'd guess if you want an iphone app in its native
> > platform, you're
> > > > > > > >>going to have a much easier time just manually building it
> > after your
> > > > > > > >>java version is done, then update it based on diffs.
>
> > > > > > > At first glance that sounds like a really good idea. It would
> > probably
> > > > > > > be true for small apps. i.e. A couple of thousand lines.
> > > > > > > I have tens of thousands of line of code written (distributted
> > among
> > > > > > > several applications), easily close to 100,000 lines, and more
> > than
> > > > > > > 1000 automated unit test cases.
> > > > > > > Trying to manually convert all this code to objective C would be
> > > > > > > extremely tedious. I would never have the patience to rewrite
> > code
> > > > > > > that I already wrote once in a language and that has been tested
> > and
> > > > > > > debugged thoroughly. Automating this is the best route for me.
> > Then
> > > > > > > when I want to make changes to my code I make the changes only
> > in Java
> > > > > > > and then I run the utility to convert the code to Objective-C,
> > thus
> > > > > > > porting the changes over to Objective-C.
>
> > > > > > > >>Even if objective-C has every language feature of Java, and
> > > > > > > >>is syntactially very similar (or easily transformable), you
> > have all
> > > > > > > >>the dependent libraries to worry about.
>
> > > > > > > Is not as bad as you think. For the IPhone specific
> > functionality,
> > > > > > > i.e. drawing, touch events, key events, I'm using interfaces that
> > > > > > > abstract or hide the actual API. So my applications speak to my
> > > > > > > interfaces and then my interfaces speak to the actual platform
> > APIs.
> > > > > > > Very similiar to what Java Standard Edition does.
> > > > > > > So all I have to do is connect my interfaces with the actual
> > hardware
> > > > > > > or platform specific API's and I'm all set to go.
>
> > > > > > > On Apr 28, 4:18 pm, "Kevin Galligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I don't know your software background, and I don't know what
> > > > > > > > objective-C is like, but I'd highly suggest not doing that. I
> > imagine
> > > > > > > > the commercial thing sucks. Rolling your own would be
> > incredibly
> > > > > > > > painful. Even if objective-C has every language feature of
> > Java, and
> > > > > > > > is syntactially very similar (or easily transformable), you
> > have all
> > > > > > > > the dependent libraries to worry about. I'm sure the
> > commercial thing
> > > > > > > > does a partial conversion, which would then require you to
> > massage it
> > > > > > > > into a working application. When you want to update your
> > original
> > > > > > > > app, you'd then wind up manually updating both anyway.
>
> > > > > > > > So, I'd guess if you want an iphone app in its native
> > platform, you're
> > > > > > > > going to have a much easier time just manually building it
> > after your
> > > > > > > > java version is done, then update it based on diffs.
>
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > >>IPhone has Java? I thought it was objective-C, or are you
> > doing
> > > > > > > > > >>multiple implementations?
> > > > > > > > > I'm writing a utility that will transform java code to
> > objective-C
> > > > > > > > > code. There is one company that already does this but they
> > want you to
> > > > > > > > > pay money and they never answered me when I asked them about
> > the price
> > > > > > > > > so I'm going this route.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 3:44 pm, "Kevin Galligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > IPhone has Java? I thought it was objective-C, or are you
> > doing
> > > > > > > > > > multiple implementations?
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Incognito <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > My applications can run in J2ME and Java (or Applet) and
> > soon they
> > > > > > > > > > > will be able to run in the IPHONE. I'm hoping to release
> > them for
> > > > > > > sale
> > > > > > > > > > > in J2ME and IPhone soon.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 3:30 pm, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Android Challenge" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
