Someone start a countdown please...
Where's plusminus when we need him ;)
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anything can happen. Well, it will be really exciting to find out what
> the judges pick as the top 50 apps. Just a couple of more days!
>
> On Apr 29, 1:33 am, "Muthu Ramadoss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But it would be odd to announce the top 50 with 10 various XFinders..
> >
> > Imagine..
> >
> > 1. FriendFinder
> > 2. DateFinder
> > 3. TaxiFinder
> > 4. CatFinder
> >
> > LOL.. It all depends on the judges and what they are smokin that day ;)
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Muthu Ramadoss <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Yes, LBS is almost like a core service that your applications can
> > > leverage. Agree there are tons of apps that are already doing this.
> >
> > > The apps must be distinguished by the functionality they offer:
> >
> > > FriendFinder and TaxiFinder are two different kinds of applications
> which
> > > happen to use LBS to carry out the functionalities they offer.
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > >>For a mobile app, LBS becomes such an important factor:
> >
> > > > >>* Find the nearest stuff.
> >
> > > > >>Dating - find the nearest date
> > > > >>Gaming - find the nearest store
> > > > >>Cooking - find the nearest market
> > > > >>Cab - find the nearest cab
> > > > >>Tourist - find the nearest interest
> > > > >>Students - find the nearest library
> >
> > > > Agree, but how many LBS applications can you have? There is no way
> > > > that 50 LBS applications will win. Most of the LBS applications
> > > > submitted are probably just repeats of the same type of application.
> > > > i.e. I'm sure that several people wrote LBS dating apps or LBS
> > > > chatting apps, or LBS find your friend apps, etc, etc
> >
> > > > On Apr 29, 12:59 am, "Muthu Ramadoss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > For a mobile app, LBS becomes such an important factor:
> >
> > > > > * Find the nearest stuff.
> >
> > > > > Dating - find the nearest date
> > > > > Gaming - find the nearest store
> > > > > Cooking - find the nearest market
> > > > > Cab - find the nearest cab
> > > > > Tourist - find the nearest interest
> > > > > Students - find the nearest library
> >
> > > > > ...
> >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:11 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
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
> >
>
--
take care,
Muthu Ramadoss.
http://mobeegal.in
find stuff closer.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
