I have used PhoneGap in conjunction with www.vsnomad.com and it is pretty good. But you are essentially still dealing with a HTML5 app that has been wrapped in a native code wrapper. I used it with jQuery Mobile and there were quite a few performance issues that needed to be fine tuned.
> ** ** > > An alternative to consider is PhoneGap. In keeping with the tradition of > spontaneous statistics, I’d guess maybe 80-90% of the things people are > using Mono for could be just as effectively done with PhoneGap and still > give the benefit of cross-platform ‘native’ apps with very minimal learning > curve compared to learning Objective-C, Java etc. And it’s free. If you’re > writing a typical app and not relying on anything like MonoGame over the > top of Mono, I think the trade-off of using Javascript instead of C# for > the client is minor and well worth it.**** > > * * > > ** ** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Stephen Price > *Sent:* Monday, 1 July 2013 11:17 AM > > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: HTML5 capabilities**** > > ** ** > > I disagree that it is expensive. Visual Studio Ultimate is expensive. > Xamarin is a tenth of the cost, and comparable with other vendors. Telerik > for example. **** > > ** ** > > Oh you wanted Free? You could just write for all three of those platforms > manually, and learn each different platform's syntax. (something I decided > NOT to do some years ago, for the want of not spreading my knowledge too > thin an becoming a jack of all trades, master of none.)**** > > ** ** > > Personally, I'd grab the Free version (that they do have), play with that > until you get a feel if its going to fit the bill. (you never really know > until you take it for a spin). Then upgrade and consider it an investment. > You are a software developer and you need tools. If you were a carpenter, > would you skimp on spending $1000 on your carpentry tools? Would you buy > the crappy cheap tools or get the higher priced tools, knowing the quality > of your work will be that much better? **** > > Fill your toolbox with quality tools.**** > > ** ** > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Price <[email protected]> > wrote:**** > > Looks interesting. Testing would be a pain, you'd need to have a device of > each platform. Oh wait. I already do. :)**** > > ** ** > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Fredericks, Chris <[email protected]> > wrote:**** > > +1 for Xamarin – Full native code, cross platform development for Windows, > Android, iOS and Mac OS X in C#.**** > > **** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Michael Ridland > *Sent:* Monday, 1 July 2013 9:51 AM > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: HTML5 capabilities**** > > **** > > Hi Greg**** > > **** > > We've spent the last 18 months building a mobile version of our ERP > software @ www.happen.biz. About 9 months of that was using html5 which > we pushed to it's limits but in the end it just wasn't 'good' enough, by > good enough I mean primarily fast enough. We tried out Xamarin and never > looked back, we now have a rock solid mobile app which is fast and sexy. * > *** > > **** > > So my opinion is Xamarin Rocks. Great for c# teams. **** > > **** > > Grids, splitters, trees, drag-and-drop, animated charts - well this > doesn't work on mobile devices anyway, you actually need to rethink a users > interaction with your software, and rethink, and rethink. You need to also > spend alot of time using other high quality mobile apps to see different > ways a user can interact with your app. **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Craig van Nieuwkerk <[email protected]> > wrote:**** > > Have you considered Xamarin? Native applications written in C# > www.xamarin.com**** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote:**** > > Folks, a few times over the last year I've raised the topic of writing > browser based applications that can reach the most mobile devices with the > least coding effort. Sadly we learned (from the replies) that there is no > easy road. It looks like you have to "go native" in Object C or Java, or > use HTML5 and accept reduced functionality. All of these options are a > rather frightening for us because we only have C++ and C# skills in the > group and we'll have to hire specialists or undergo intense training.**** > > **** > > A colleague using the latest Borland C++ kits says it has a product called > Prism which claims to target different platforms with a common code base. I > said that sounds like black magic, but my colleague is so busy that he > hasn't had time yet to evaluate Prism. A quick search hints that Prism is > actually Oxygene <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi_Prism>, which would > take us down a completely different road.**** > > **** > > So this leaves us with the optional of HTML5 ... but we're wondering just > what it can and can't do. Is it possible to write a "real application" in > HTML5, with grids, splitters, trees, drag-and-drop, animated charts, etc. I > find it hard to believe that HTML5 could reproduce this functionality in > our Silverlight 5 app. Can anyone here explain just what HTML5 is capable > or incapable of doing?**** > > **** > > Cheers,**** > > Greg K**** > > **** > > **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > Click here <https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/MZbqvYs5QwJvpeaetUwhCQ==> to > report this email as spam.**** > > > This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. www.websense.com >
