These developers hit a wall quickly, and have to work harder (or just write poorly thought-out/designed code) over time. That does not mean they are less capable than classicly trained CS programmers; it just means they have to overcome certain learning curves at a steeper incline. Saying this tho - personality, drive, etc makes a huge difference and overshadows this argument. Want to know how to optimize your website for a high-latency 3G mobile connection? I bet that having eaten some TCP/IP 7 layer burrito will help you in some way.
They could have AT LEAST gone with USB3. I mean really, it's 2012 and you release 'the most advanced phone ever' and it's running technology that's 10 years old. It's not as if better, "standard" options don't exist.
What Leo Apotheker did to HP in his short tenure is borderline criminal. If I owned HP stock or were an employee I would be livid - but it's not totally his fault - it is also the Board's fault for bringing in a dinosaur with a complete lack of vision of the marketplace. I knew from the moment they hired him it was going to be a trainwreck. I'm sure many of the astute industry participants/observers here felt the same thing.
I've asked this question before to folks who I know use ClojureScript. The answer is: you don't need a framework like Backbonejs if you're using ClojureScript. Why? The ability to work in a functional language means you are able to express equivalent concepts without the need for alot of plumbing/framework.
IMO there's too much uncertainty over WebOS. There's no real deployment of these devices (dwarfed by even Windows Phone at this point), the helter-skelter handling of killing it and bringing it back has scared people (thanks Apotheker for coming in an destroying WebOS and HP in general!), and a roadmap that hasn't unfolded yet.
What? You make no sense. In your original article you advocate going native for now and eschewing Web tech. Now you say that "you're golden" if you use Web tech? Then you top it off by saying bridging down to native is slow.....
Are you just talking out of your ass? Have you actually built an application using Ansca Corona, Ruby Motion, or Appcelerator Titanium? Have you built a published native and Phonegap app to the Android or iOS store? Well, I have done all of these - and I even speak about it at conferences[1][2]. I can safely say you have no idea what you're talking about or you are pushing a hidden agenda.
Could you please either link to a copy of your talk, or some material? Or alternatively (if possible), just give the 3 sentence version of your talk? I'm just about to decide what to system to build a new project on, and I'm interested in your opinion.
I'm not sure about RubyMotion, but I can speak to Titanium as we use it to build our TripLingo language learning apps.
Appcelerator Titanium does not compile down to anything - rather it bridges a JavaScript runtime to the native layer: either iOS or Android. It's not as fast as coding in ObjC or Android Java, but we see performance which is very close to that of native and have the entire underlying native SDK available for use.
No. I think Scala is a fine language, with lots of neat features. But it does not give the developer enough of a leap - someone has already mentioned a parallel between C -> C++ and Java -> Scala. I think this is a reasonable comparison.
This is why I tell folks to avoid Scala and pick one of two other great options which offer a fundamental change from Java:
* Groovy (dynamic lang, easy to pick up _and_ master)
* Clojure (the power of LISP, steeper learning curve)
There's a bunch of stuff out there which explain why NOT Scala, so I won't regurgitate it here.
