At 4/21/14 11:31 AM, Innermike wrote:
I feel like due to the size of the iOS section you're trying to discourage iOS development?
???? What makes you think I'm 'trying to discourage iOS development' when I've been on the iOS scene and developing apps before the AppStore was even released? Especially since I'm paying for my uni expenses from my own projects.. I encourage iOS development, who wouldn't considering Flappy Bird was making its developer $50k a day just through ads?!
I don't see how worrying about retina display support is any more of a chore than worrying about the million different android devices out there and the massive range of screen sizes and capabilities. Especially if say, you're developing an app with cocoa touch (besides, now that the last 4 iterations are all retina and the adoption rate is so high, some developers forgo non-retina support entirely). By no in app licensing what do you mean? No in-app purchases? Cause you can do that, but please correct me if you meant something else.
You must have missed when I explicitly stated:
If you don't comply with any of Apple's restrictions mentioned above, your app won't be accepted into the store.
You're just repeating what I've said already. In-app licensing meaning: serial keys, 'donate-to-unlock', shareware, traditional PC-like software installation, etc.; something the Play Store allows.
Also, how bad is not being able to write your app in assembly, really?
What?
As for apple's restrictions and review process, I guess that's just a matter of preference, if people can't put in the little it takes to comply, are they really confident that they're making anything worthwhile? Or at least that's the way I've always seen it, though I can appreciate the "wild wild west" slant of the android scene.
What?
I'm no 1337 c0d3R so I honestly don't even know how "compiled for armv8 arch/64bit + armv7 only" is a disadvantage so I'll just take your word for that.
You don't need to be a '1337 c0d3r' to know what x86 is do you? Just a bit of experience reading make files, some C here and there or maybe even a bit of assembly. If you've ever only worked with these high level languages then I guess it makes sense since they do simplify cross-compatibility (Haxe is a very good example, something I might switch over to this week actually). I never said it was a 'disadvantage' so I don't know what made you think that. Here in the mobile scene we use the architecture name instead of iOS/Android because of the rapid advances in the platforms and the difference between each architecture. The iPhone 5S is as fast as a 2.1ghz Core 2 Duo Macbook, a generational leap in less than a decade, and as a developer compatibility always matters even more so in the mobile space!
Not trying to start a platform war or anything, just saying developing for iOS isn't as much of a pain as some people make it out to be, and I think it's probably worth going on both platforms.
Both Android and iOS target armv7, only iOS targets armv8, well until Android 5 and some 64-bit tablets and phones comes out. armv6 (6 years ago) is now considered the PPC of the mobile era.