Hi Christoph!

Jobs dropped FLASH for several important reasons:

1. Too much polling in there. Processor load was high, eating up batteries.
2. Flash games with "onMouseOver" can't run on tablets.
3. Event model was so oldfashioned, that Adobe decided to drop the VM.

FLASH was the most successful virtual machine ever, hundreds of thousands
of applications, billions of users, dominating the whole market.

Dead within only 2 years! Severe marketing and technical design mistakes by
the Adobe management, IMHO.

Pharo suffers similar problems: GUI is not tablet-ready. Compare to Android
4.0: Android has joined the 2.3 line for mobiles with tablet line and has
invested much much brainpower in finding out, how apps can be designed,
that they can comfortably be used on different resolutions, portrait as
well as landscape. Well done IMHO, even suited for desktop apps.

Pharo also has too much polling code, is eating up batteries as well.

As long as Apple does not allow fullsized interpreters in Appstore, there
is definitely no chance ever for Pharo to be brought onto tablet.

I see no chances for Pharo on ARM, Tablets, whatever ... never ever!

This increasing market with hundreds of millions hardware units is
completely lost for Smalltalkers, once again.

Tablet apps will very soon even dominate the desktop market!

regards, Guido Stepken
 Am 22.02.2012 09:39 schrieb "Christoph Wysseier" <[email protected]>:

> Dear Stef
>
> Am 22.02.12 08:32, schrieb Stéphane Ducasse:
>
>> I'm convinced that having support for multitouch event/ genie and others
>> works (for iPad = $$$$) is important.
>>
>
> Without pretending to know the future, IMHO standalone apps for tablets
> and mobile will disappear over time. Out of my perspective it would be far
> more important to move in the direction of web-based technologies also in
> this area. Looking at the success stories of Pharo and our own strategy I
> do not see the advantages of having multi-touch support for the development
> of such applications.
>
> Or did I misinterpret your intention?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
>

Reply via email to