This is cool and all, but I'm really wondering to myself if it is really necessary?
Every AIR app I've run across (Flash or HTML based) has always ended up in the trash can. Either it's too slow, too obtuse, inconsistent user experience from the rest of my OS, etc. I find even the much flaunted Balsamiq to be inexcusably slow, so slow in fact I still prefer booting up XP in a VM and using Axure (which is better software anyways, but that's another topic for another day).
And I really wonder if these guys think they can do what Sun, Microsoft and - to a lesser extent - Adobe, have failed to do: build a cross platform UI toolkit without the aforementioned deficits. And then the filesystem abstractions and socket abstractions and the list goes on and on.
And, really, coding native isn't that hard on either platforms (I don't know much about Linux desktop dev, but I know plenty about Windows and just enough to shoot my mouth off with OSX). And it's not likely you're building anything of any serious complexity with AIR, Titanium, etc. anyways. I can almost guarantee you that I could build their example twitter client in Cocoa in roughly the same time and with roughly the same LoC metrics. I'm not saying that because I have a big penis, I'm just wondering what the true value of these cross platform tools are when they only deliver on a small percentage of what my particular OS has to offer.
It almost feels like you are sacrificing usability for a developer's laziness. For example, I built this in ~10 hours: http://videos.massify.com/prototype/shave.demo.mov - including the custom UI widget to visually create a video clip.
Certainly, I think your point about performance is a very valid one. Adobe Air lacks performance, especially combined with Flex - but I think that's more of an issue with Flash on OSX than anything else.
In my experience, Titanium (which Bowline is built on) has good performance. Certainly they're using all the native APIs on each platform.
Personally, I find coding native trickier than html/js/ruby - but that may just be lack of practice. However, I'm sure you'll agree with me when I say developing and maintaining one codebase, instead of three, is easier.
So, it comes down to developer laziness ;), and here I agree too. However, you could apply the same argument to use of Rails to build a website over C.
It's certainly an argument that's been around for a while. I personally prefer to think of it in terms of efficiency, if being lazy (writing less code) will help me build something faster, I'm all for it. I certainly couldn't code up 3 native apps in the same time as it took me to write that Twitter client.
I could build their example twitter client in Cocoa in roughly the same time and with roughly the same LoC metrics. I'm not saying that because I have a big penis, I'm just wondering what the true value of these cross platform tools are...
Well... you just said it. Cross. Platform. Sure, you could write it in Cocoa. But then you'd have to write it again on GTK+. And again on whatever the Windows kit is called (I don't know).
If you're lucky enough to be familiar coding for all three platforms, that's great for you. The last question remains: Do you want to be maintaining three separate codebases for the same product?
If you're lucky enough to be familiar coding for all three platforms, that's great for you. The last question remains: Do you want to be maintaining three separate codebases for the same product?
The question isn't what you want, but what your market wants, and whether you can afford to deliver it.
And I really wonder if these guys think they can do what Sun, Microsoft and - to a lesser extent - Adobe, have failed to do: build a cross platform UI toolkit without the aforementioned deficits. And then the filesystem abstractions and socket abstractions and the list goes on and on.
The Tcl/Tk guys did this. Check out StarKit. Only it turns out that not many people really need to do this - but the tools to do it have been available for years and years.
>It almost feels like you are sacrificing usability for a developer's laziness.
More like sacrificing usability for time/money. You may be able to create a Cocoa app in the same time as a Titanium app, but can you create a Cocoa, Windows, and Linux app in the same time? Probably not. Not all apps need native features.
Every AIR app I've run across (Flash or HTML based) has always ended up in the trash can. Either it's too slow, too obtuse, inconsistent user experience from the rest of my OS, etc. I find even the much flaunted Balsamiq to be inexcusably slow, so slow in fact I still prefer booting up XP in a VM and using Axure (which is better software anyways, but that's another topic for another day).
And I really wonder if these guys think they can do what Sun, Microsoft and - to a lesser extent - Adobe, have failed to do: build a cross platform UI toolkit without the aforementioned deficits. And then the filesystem abstractions and socket abstractions and the list goes on and on.
And, really, coding native isn't that hard on either platforms (I don't know much about Linux desktop dev, but I know plenty about Windows and just enough to shoot my mouth off with OSX). And it's not likely you're building anything of any serious complexity with AIR, Titanium, etc. anyways. I can almost guarantee you that I could build their example twitter client in Cocoa in roughly the same time and with roughly the same LoC metrics. I'm not saying that because I have a big penis, I'm just wondering what the true value of these cross platform tools are when they only deliver on a small percentage of what my particular OS has to offer.
It almost feels like you are sacrificing usability for a developer's laziness. For example, I built this in ~10 hours: http://videos.massify.com/prototype/shave.demo.mov - including the custom UI widget to visually create a video clip.
Anyways, cool work, nice demo, good luck!