The Epic Android Thread - Page 49 - maemo.org

Active Topics

The N900 is now 15 years old! (9)
to Nokia N900 by Arno_11 - 14 mins ago
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 5 days, 12 hrs ago
more...

Page 49 of 468

Thread Tools

	Capt'n Corrupt	2010-09-29 , 12:24
	Posts: 3,524 \| Thanked: 2,958 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant	#481

Originally Posted by bergie

Qt may even be relevant for Android (and the Tab discussed here): http://code.google.com/p/android-lighthouse/

This is a great find! I've included a video that shows the a QT compiled app working on android.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v67dbcS4ssM

Quote & Reply |

wmarone	2010-09-29 , 14:57
Posts: 1,746 \| Thanked: 2,100 times \| Joined on Sep 2009	#482

Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt

This is a great find! I've included a video that shows the a QT compiled app working on android.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v67dbcS4ssM

Interesting.

It's probably also a special build of Qt against the libc used by Android, which means that you couldn't just grab an ARM targeted Qt application and have it work. I'd be less apprehensive about Android if they moved away from being so separate and Google-centric and towards being more community based (like MeeGo.)

It's gonna take a lot more work than just running Qt apps to get me to like Android

But overall, interesting technologies nonetheless. That PNaCl sounds cool, and I see LLVM is showing up again. The next few years will be something else.

Last edited by wmarone; 2010-09-29 at 15:15. Reason: Interesting yes. But no need for the word so many times! Darn you inner grammar nazi!

Quote & Reply |

The Following User Says Thank You to wmarone For This Useful Post:
Capt'n Corrupt

	Capt'n Corrupt	2010-09-29 , 15:33
	Posts: 3,524 \| Thanked: 2,958 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant	#483

Originally Posted by wmarone

Interesting.

It's probably also a special build of Qt against the libc used by Android, which means that you couldn't just grab an ARM targeted Qt application and have it work. I'd be less apprehensive about Android if they moved away from being so separate and Google-centric and towards being more community based (like MeeGo.)

It's gonna take a lot more work than just running Qt apps to get me to like Android

But overall, interesting technologies nonetheless. That PNaCl sounds interesting, and I see LLVM is showing up again. The next few years will be interesting.

Indeed apps may require a re-compile, but I suspect this may be familiar territory for QT apps targeting multiple devices. Though it presents a quick route for QT developers to capitalize on the installed base of both OSs.

It definitely will be an interesting future.

The bottom line is this: there's a clear trend towards application independence from language and OS, and within the next few years (as little as 5), it won't matter if you're running Android, MeeGo, BBOS, Win7, Ubuntu, etc as most applications will run just as well on any platform without the need to write in a particular language or cross-compile. This will happen regardless of the language, affiliation, development environment and development tools of the developer.

What's more is that as these apps can be web delivered: there will be no need to even install ushering a new wave as software as a service, but with the sophistication and speed of traditional apps!

At that point, the phone/tablet/pc becomes a true appliance, only specs and brand and build-quality will matter to consumers (like all appliances), and platform zealotry will become a thing of the past. Would anyone care what OS their toaster uses or what language is used to set the timer?

This of course won't target all applications, but safely that vast majority (I would guess 99.9%) of applications existing outside of OS specific code.

Some may thing that this is an idealistic vision, but with tech like NaCl, PNaCl, and HTML5 literally racing their way into the forefront, this vision is right around the corner. Much of this functionality is currently built into chromium nightlies and being actively tested! It is also central to Google's Chrome OS strategy. Thankfully the tech is all standardized and/or open source (or is promised to be -- in the case of PNaCl), so it will be available to the community at large to implement in any number of ways!

Quote & Reply |

wmarone	2010-09-29 , 16:18
Posts: 1,746 \| Thanked: 2,100 times \| Joined on Sep 2009	#484

Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt

Indeed apps may require a re-compile, but I suspect this may be familiar territory for QT apps targeting multiple devices. Though it presents a quick route for QT developers to capitalize on the installed base of both OSs.

My problem there is that it places a continued dependence on something that is Google-only. Granted that's not really any different from cross compiling between MeeGo and Symbian...

The bottom line is this: there's a clear trend towards application independence from language and OS, and within the next few years (as little as 5), it won't matter if you're running Android, MeeGo, BBOS, Win7, Ubuntu, etc as most applications will run just as well on any platform without the need to write in a particular language or cross-compile.

True, but this has been possible for some years now and it still hasn't taken off.

What's more is that as these apps can be web delivered: there will be no need to even install ushering a new wave as software as a service, but with the sophistication and speed of traditional apps!

You seem excited, but I still see extensive value in locally hosted software. At the very least, it's harder to be held hostage by local software

At that point, the phone/tablet/pc becomes a true appliance, only specs and brand and build-quality will matter to consumers (like all appliances), and platform zealotry will become a thing of the past.

The end of general purpose computing for the average person would, IMO, be a very bad thing. It'd make it much easier for people to be pushed into the role of pure consumer. I've no doubt that there are entities out there that actively desire this, however. It'd also make it very hard for the concept of Free Software to exist, which bothers me greatly.

But we'll see what happens. Can't sit idle though.

Quote & Reply |

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to wmarone For This Useful Post:
Capt'n Corrupt, daperl

	Capt'n Corrupt	2010-09-29 , 18:03
	Posts: 3,524 \| Thanked: 2,958 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant	#485

Originally Posted by wmarone

True, but this has been possible for some years now and it still hasn't taken off.

But it has. The incredible adoption of javascript and web and web applications has shown the power of platform agnosticism and many applications have been re-written to take advantage of that. The HTML5 spec and coming NaCl will accelerate this trend, especially considering that traditional tools do not have to be foregone, and the capabilities are far greater.

For example: The Unity3D Lego Star Wars game was ported to NaCl to be delivered as a 'web app' in a matter of days. This implies, universal compatibility, no barriers to entry, and an extremely flexible development pipeline. Best of all, there are next to no compromises in performance or capability.

Originally Posted by wmarone

You seem excited, but I still see extensive value in locally hosted software. At the very least, it's harder to be held hostage by local software

I am excited, you are right! I am also somewhat pragmatic in my predictions, and they are not made lightly: certainly without impunity to my credibility. I also tend not to deal in absolutes, and as such I don't think that local software will disappear overnight. I *do* think, however, that developers will have a new venue to maximize their audience with little or no changes to their development patterns (an enticing characteristic) which will be quite popular among them. I expect many developers will willingly fall prey to this new technology.

I also don't think that all of this tech will be 'web' based service. I strongly expect that there will be projects around these standards that open a new avenue for local programs while still providing platform agnosticism! Like you, I think that this is a good thing.

Originally Posted by wmarone

The end of general purpose computing for the average person would, IMO, be a very bad thing. It'd make it much easier for people to be pushed into the role of pure consumer. I've no doubt that there are entities out there that actively desire this, however. It'd also make it very hard for the concept of Free Software to exist, which bothers me greatly.

But we'll see what happens. Can't sit idle though.

Just curious: What do you mean by 'the end of general purpose computing?'

Quote & Reply |

wmarone	2010-09-29 , 18:08
Posts: 1,746 \| Thanked: 2,100 times \| Joined on Sep 2009	#486

Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt

Just curious: What do you mean by 'the end of general purpose computing?'

As you said, the conversion of all these devices to being an appliance. The first thing that comes to mind in that case are things like DVRs, TVs, and game consoles. The computer is no longer capable of doing whatever the user wants, but only what the vendor allows them to do.

What you describe is essentially what Apple is trying to do, indeed given a hardware revision they could attempt to replace the standard desktop entirely for many people, and in place give them something relatively locked down. We're not there yet but Apple and Microsoft are driving hard in that direction, and I'm hard pressed to believe Google isn't as well.

I suppose this diverges from the original course of discussion (and is almost certainly off topic) but I think we need to be wary about having capability shifted out of our hands and into those of others

Quote & Reply |

	Capt'n Corrupt	2010-09-29 , 18:26
	Posts: 3,524 \| Thanked: 2,958 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant	#487

Originally Posted by wmarone

As you said, the conversion of all these devices to being an appliance. The first thing that comes to mind in that case are things like DVRs, TVs, and game consoles. The computer is no longer capable of doing whatever the user wants, but only what the vendor allows them to do.

What you describe is essentially what Apple is trying to do, indeed given a hardware revision they could attempt to replace the standard desktop entirely for many people, and in place give them something relatively locked down. We're not there yet but Apple and Microsoft are driving hard in that direction, and I'm hard pressed to believe Google isn't as well.

I suppose this diverges from the original course of discussion (and is almost certainly off topic) but I think we need to be wary about having capability shifted out of our hands and into those of others

Ah! I see. Thanks for the clarification!

As these technologies are open and standardized (like HTML/Javascript), I see vendor lock-in as being effectively muzzled, or to a much larger degree than they are currently -- vendors cannot force you to use their OS/hardware at threat of no-access to their apps. I see these technologies as empowering the consumer and the developer and decentralizing control over an entire software ecosystem (and ensuring that it remains relevant after device exhaustion!).

This is similar to web Flash games. Sure miniclip.com can host many games, and entice users to visit in order to play, but they cannot (by virtue of the technology) lock users into playing games exclusively through their URL. Even a kid in his basement can host the same game!

Only time will tell in the end! Even the most convincing of arguments must stand trial against the scrutiny of time.

I know this is indeed off-topic, but must say that I have really enjoyed this conversation!

Quote & Reply |

wmarone	2010-09-29 , 18:35
Posts: 1,746 \| Thanked: 2,100 times \| Joined on Sep 2009	#488

Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt

I see vendor lock-in as being effectively muzzled, or to a much larger degree than they are currently -- vendors cannot force you to use their OS/hardware at threat of no-access to their apps.

No, I mean the prospect of having no capability of running such software on your end, independent of the web-based vendor such that they can yank you around without recourse. It's things like this that resulted in the GPLv3.

I see these technologies as empowering the consumer and the developer and decentralizing control over an entire software ecosystem (and ensuring that it remains relevant after device exhaustion!).

Odd, I see it as a centralization of control by removing the software from your hands completely. Certainly, that's what "cloud" services like OnLive essentially propose.

[quote[This is similar to web Flash games. Sure miniclip.com can host many games, and entice users to visit in order to play, but they cannot (by virtue of the technology) lock users into playing games exclusively through their URL. Even a kid in his basement can host the same game![/quote]
Sure, but that's because with the equipment we have now that's possible. With a locked down appliance, it'd be like trying to do that with a PS3.

But yes, we have yet to see what will come.

Quote & Reply |

	Capt'n Corrupt	2010-09-29 , 22:17
	Posts: 3,524 \| Thanked: 2,958 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant	#489

I see what you are saying.

Any software as a service (re: cloud) runs this risk -- which may indeed turn out to be the popular practice. However, for the open community, this will be a chance to reach out further without as many roadblocks in the way (eg. popular platforms that also happen to be closed), and reduce the cost of trying/using open software. If nothing else, I see this blossoming into some exciting new possibilities for open developers

From a tech perspective, it's cool, but we agree that it won't exterminate closed-systems -- not by a long shot. However, it provides ample footing for the open community to extend its outreach, which if nothing else, should be interesting.

But we're way into speculative territory here!