[OT] mobile rising

[Joakim]

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 14:36:11 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
> On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 12:35:19 UTC, codephantom 
> wrote:
>>
>> btw. I wonder if anyone has got the linux version of DMD x64 
>> to run on the Windows Subsystem for Linux (available in 
>> Windows 10 I believe).
>
> I'm not that familiar with the Windows Subsystem for Linux, but 
> it looks like it could be very useful. I'll set it up and try 
> to install DMD tonight if I have time.

The linux build of dmd has already been used on WSL to compile 
ldc without a problem:

https://wiki.dlang.org/Build_LDC_for_Android#Notes_for_Bash_on_Ubuntu_on_Windows

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 14:40:11 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
Grøstad wrote:
> On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 09:34:39 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 00:09:51 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
>> Grøstad wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 at 19:46:04 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>>>> Not at all, it makes things easier certainly, but there's a 
>>>> reason why mobile devs always test on the actual devices, 
>>>> because there are real differences.
>>>
>>> Mostly with low level stuff in my experience.
>>
>> And what experience would that be?  I've admitted I've never 
>> developed for Apple platforms, but my understanding is that 
>> even leaving aside the completely different touch-first UI, 
>> there are significant differences.  I wonder what Mac apps you 
>> simply ported the UI over to iPhone and they just worked.
>
> Writing code from scratch for both. No, of course you cannot 
> port it without a little bit of work as the base UI class is 
> slightly different. However it is overall the same Objective-C 
> framework design.
>
> Quoting apple:
>
> «If you've developed an iOS app, many of the frameworks 
> available in OS X should already seem familiar to you. The 
> basic technology stack in iOS and OSX are identical in many 
> respects. But, despite the similarities, not all of the 
> frameworks in OS X are exactly the same as their iOS 
> counterparts»
>
> https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/OSX_Technology_Overview/MigratingFromCocoaTouch/MigratingFromCocoaTouch.html

This link also notes many other significant differences, such as 
mobile hardware being much more constrained and "iOS users have 
no direct access to the file system," as I mentioned.

>>>> You are thinking too much short term here IMHO. The mobile
>>> sector is rather volatile.
>>
>> I have no idea what this refers to: you have a bad habit of 
>> adding asides without any explation or non sequiturs, so that 
>> we're left stumped as to what you're talking about.
>
> Over-quoting is spammy. So I don't, but here you go: The mobile 
> sector is more volatile than the desktop/laptop sector, hence 
> it would be a risky move to dump it. I think that was quite 
> clear from what I wrote though…

It was not clear because it is divorced from reality, which of 
these two markets would you rather be in?

https://mobile.twitter.com/lukew/status/842397687420923904

In fact, Apple alone will likely sell more mobile iPhones and 
iPads this year than every PC vendor combined (see third chart):

http://www.asymco.com/2016/11/02/wherefore-art-thou-macintosh/

They have already cut investment in Macs and are not bothering to 
upgrade the existing Mac line for longer and longer, on the way 
to axing that line altogether. The notion that their iOS line, 
which now brings in the vast majority of their profits and 
revenue, is riskier is a joke.

>> I see, so your claim is that MS, Nokia, HP, Sony, all much 
>> larger companies than Apple or google at the time, could not 
>> have countered them even on a lucky day.  I wonder why this 
>> is, as they certainly had more money, you don't believe 
>> they're that bright? :)
>
> No, it is because they didn't have the resources internally. 
> Money alone does not build teams or knowledge. Apple had worked 
> on similar technology for decades and could recycle the 
> frameworks for their desktop OS.
>
>> Yet the businesses that did build Android, ie google, HTC, and 
>> so on, were much smaller than the corporate behemoths like HP 
>> or Sony that you claimed above couldn't do it.  Your claims 
>> about who could or couldn't do it make absolutely no sense.
>
> Of course it does. They were not into operating systems and 
> frameworks. Sony a little bit by having the Playstation, but 
> that was very narrow and for a very narrow low level segment of 
> programmers.

I see, so MS, Nokia, HP, Sony, and all the rest didn't have 
"resources internally" or knowledge of "operating systems and 
frameworks," but the much smaller search startup google did?  
When google bought Android in 2005, they had yearly revenues of 
$6 billion, a pittance compared to the PC and mobile giants you 
are excusing:

https://www.informationweek.com/google-revenue-up-93--in-2005/d/d-id/1040162

I don't know if you're trying to make me laugh with these excuses 
or what.

>> Their problem was likely that they got in too early and got 
>> discouraged, not that they were "getting in late."
>
> Apple was also in too early and got discouraged, but they 
> reentered when the touch screen tech got better.

Which MS could have done also, but didn't.  Any way you slice it, 
Apple grabbed an opportunity that plenty of other people could 
have- and according to you had the knowledge to, since you say 
many knew mobile was next- yet almost none of them did.  That 
speaks to what I was trying to show with that chart of the mobile 
tidal wave, that everyone, including Apple to some extent, didn't 
see _that_ coming.