89 messages in com.googlegroups.android-challenge[android-challenge] Re: Android/Apple...
FromSent OnAttachments
tberthel28 Apr 2008 12:30 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 12:42 
Kevin Galligan28 Apr 2008 12:44 
tberthel28 Apr 2008 12:47 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 12:50 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 12:51 
tberthel28 Apr 2008 12:54 
tberthel28 Apr 2008 12:55 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 13:01 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 13:17 
Kevin Galligan28 Apr 2008 13:18 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 15:02 
Kevin Galligan28 Apr 2008 15:17 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 16:18 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 16:21 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 17:05 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 17:24 
Cow Bay28 Apr 2008 17:31 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 18:10 
Cow Bay28 Apr 2008 18:11 
Cow Bay28 Apr 2008 18:57 
Kevin Galligan28 Apr 2008 19:12 
tberthel28 Apr 2008 20:57 
tberthel28 Apr 2008 20:59 
Kevin Galligan28 Apr 2008 21:01 
Chris28 Apr 2008 21:24 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 21:33 
Kevin Galligan28 Apr 2008 21:41 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 21:58 
Muthu Ramadoss28 Apr 2008 21:59 
Muthu Ramadoss28 Apr 2008 22:00 
Kevin Galligan28 Apr 2008 22:02 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 22:19 
Muthu Ramadoss28 Apr 2008 22:23 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 22:24 
Muthu Ramadoss28 Apr 2008 22:32 
Incognito28 Apr 2008 23:00 
Muthu Ramadoss28 Apr 2008 23:06 
Shane Isbell28 Apr 2008 23:07 
Muthu Ramadoss28 Apr 2008 23:14 
Chris28 Apr 2008 23:25 
Chris28 Apr 2008 23:30 
Muthu Ramadoss28 Apr 2008 23:37 
Incognito29 Apr 2008 00:00 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 02:21 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 02:25 
Hielko29 Apr 2008 05:06 
Muthu Ramadoss29 Apr 2008 08:32 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 10:00 
Kevin Galligan29 Apr 2008 10:18 
Chris29 Apr 2008 10:43 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 11:00 
Chris29 Apr 2008 11:41 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 12:30 
Incognito29 Apr 2008 12:33 
Kevin Galligan29 Apr 2008 13:12 
Izard29 Apr 2008 14:26 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 14:50 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 14:52 
Izard29 Apr 2008 17:11 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 19:50 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 20:00 
Hielko29 Apr 2008 20:26 
Izard29 Apr 2008 20:34 
Izard29 Apr 2008 20:45 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 20:50 
tberthel29 Apr 2008 20:58 
Izard29 Apr 2008 21:06 
Incognito29 Apr 2008 21:15 
Izard29 Apr 2008 21:22 
Kevin Galligan29 Apr 2008 21:25 
Living Sword29 Apr 2008 21:28 
Incognito30 Apr 2008 00:05 
Incognito30 Apr 2008 00:09 
Chris30 Apr 2008 00:20 
Izard30 Apr 2008 03:53 
Hielko30 Apr 2008 04:45 
Muthu Ramadoss30 Apr 2008 05:57 
Chris30 Apr 2008 08:05 
Muthu Ramadoss30 Apr 2008 08:23 
Chris30 Apr 2008 08:39 
tberthel30 Apr 2008 09:02 
Peli30 Apr 2008 09:09 
Peli30 Apr 2008 09:13 
Finn Kennedy30 Apr 2008 09:29 
Dan Morrill30 Apr 2008 18:15 
Kevin30 Apr 2008 21:29 
Kevin30 Apr 2008 21:31 
Hielko01 May 2008 01:18 
Subject:[android-challenge] Re: Android/Applets/J2ME
From:Kevin (kgal@gmail.com)
Date:04/30/2008 09:31:03 PM
List:com.googlegroups.android-challenge

PS. I'm sure there are cooler apps already posted to the community than TeeDroid, but I stopped looking. I don't want to see my app, but better. That would be rough.

On Apr 30, 9:16 pm, "Dan Morrill" <morr@google.com> wrote:

I am not touching this thread with a 40-foot pole.

Oh, wait.....

- Dan

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Chris <crhu@gmail.com> wrote:

I wish Dan would hop into this thread....if for nothing else but to tell us to knock it off or keep going!

On Apr 30, 8:24 am, "Muthu Ramadoss" <muth@gmail.com> wrote:

I agree with one thing:

The judges profile will play a big part in determining the winners. The judges are given a set of instructions by google, but how they interpret those rules is something only the judges can control.

The combination of the 4 judges will also be crucial.

I'm sure Peli can come up with a mathematical formula for finding out the winners ;)

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Chris <crhu@gmail.com> wrote:

If there's a competition between Innovation vs Useful, Useful will

win

most

of the time.

In the real world, I completely agree. But, this is a challenge meant to showcase a new platform first and an application second - I think that is what some people aren't getting.

To highlight this point look at the judging criteria listed in the previous post:

"We welcome all types of applications but are looking to reward innovative, useful apps that make use of Android's capabilities to deliver a better

mobile

experience."

The takeaway line is "apps that make use of Android's capabilities to deliver a better mobile experience." Throwing progress bars and vibrations into a 2D game is not what the judges mean by using Android's capabilities to deliver a better mobile experience. That is the status quo -the judges want next gen.

On Apr 30, 5:58 am, "Muthu Ramadoss" <muth@gmail.com> wrote:

If there's a competition between Innovation vs Useful, Useful will

win

most

of the time.

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Hielko <hie@tweakers.net> wrote:

On Apr 30, 6:06 am, Izard <izar@gmail.com> wrote:

That's a compelling point of view, and judges may actually think exactly this way. Especially considering mobile operators in the Alliance (and may be Google too) will always prefer network connected games to standalone as it drives their revenue up.

The business model won't be the same everywhere, but I suppose that most people that want Android will also want a subscribtion with unlimited internet access for a fixed price. That's certainly how it is going to be in the Netherlands.

While Wi-fi army and Parallel Kingdoms are clearly type of games that are enabled by the platofrm, if I abstract from the judging process and think about man-hours to be spent/wasted playing this "innovative" kind of games and tetris/puzzles/platformers, I think the winner will not be so apparent. People are actually playing simpler games on their phones while commuting (the most widespread usage model for mobile games, I've been seeing almost every second person playing something unsophisticated on mobile phone/PDA or reading in the underground when I lived in a megapolis)

This is a very good point. On the ADC page google states: "We welcome all types of applications but are looking to reward innovative, useful apps that make use of Android's capabilities to deliver a better mobile experience." The keywords here are innovative and useful. Perhaps the most unsophisticated games are the most 'usefull', but the complex games are certainly more innovative. We will see how this turns out in the judging.

On Apr 30, 12:06 am, Hielko <hie@tweakers.net> wrote:

I would be very suprised if your games, and similair games,

would

make

it to the top 50: simple because there is little innovation. Games like Wifi Army or Parallel Kingdoms will have a far better probability to make it in the top 50.

That said: I hope for you that the judges don't share my

opinion

:)

On Apr 29, 11:25 am, tberthel <trav@hotmail.com>

wrote:

Every APK has the Manifest and the others are, "other Android-specific components" which includes my whole list. So, I think I meet the "CowBay Standard".

On Apr 28, 11:33 pm, Incognito <andr@yahoo.com>

wrote:

Ho, but you are not implementing the ones below:

take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider, AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other Android-specific components, which are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not to

mention

those

android-specific api "constraints".

CowBay says that if you are not implementing those than

you've

failed

criteria 2. Based on your list above seems to me like you've failed. :)

I'm just messing with you. I was being sarcastic with CowBay. I also implemented all the features you listed above except Orientation . It just doesn't make sense that every single application has to have LBS, or use content provider or Services. Some applications simply do not require this features. So no, I

don't

think

that just because you did not implement these three things that it necessarily means that you failed criteria two.

On Apr 28, 11:59 pm, tberthel <trav@hotmail.com

wrote:

Can you think of a submission that uses more Android

features

than

mine?

On Apr 28, 10:58 pm, tberthel <

trav@hotmail.com>

wrote:

I probably have the most performant and processing

intensive

use of

the Android Platform showing the most effective use of

the

platforms

2D graphics capabilities. I also use compelling

features

including the

following:

* Vibration * Orientation * Animations * Touch Screen * Progress Bars/Dialogs * Lifecycle Implementation * And other Android specific features

Accelerometer is the only major feature I am missing.

On Apr 28, 7:24 pm, Incognito <andr@yahoo.com>

wrote:

I think my chances are slim, but not because I'm not

making

effective

use of Android. From Judges perspective they will not

know

the

difference. I'm using touch functionality, a lot of

the

GUI

components, pop ups, etc, etc. Based on your logic

even

tberthel has

a worse chance of winning than me. All he is doing is

using

the

drawing utilities from what I've seen from his demos.

In

fact, a lot

of the applications I've seen all they do is use the

3d

or

2d drawing

utilities and that is it. This is true specially for

a

lot

of the

games.

On Apr 28, 9:11 pm, "Cow Bay" <nmlg@gmail.com>

wrote:

i feel kinda sorry for your possibility to lose

ADC,

for

it sounds like you

fail ADC Judging Criteria 2, " Effective Use of the

Android Platform" >:{)

still wishing you good lucks....

----- Original Message ----- From: "Incognito" <andr@yahoo.com> To: "Android Challenge" < andr@googlegroups.com> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 4:05 PM Subject: [android-challenge] Re:

Android/Applets/J2ME

sounds like your apps were originally designed and implemented platform-agnostic. that is, they were not

originally

for

android because,

if

they had been, imho, it would not seem so easy as

you

describe.

True, that was my goal. I wrote my code so that it

would

initially

work on J2SE, J2ME, and Android. This forced me to

write

the business

layer platform-agnostic and just write interfaces

that

were platform

specific.

take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider, AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other

Android-specific components,

which

are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not

to

mention those

android-specific api "constraints".

...

read more »

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Android Challenge" group. To post to this group, send email to andr@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
andr@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---