reidmain

Good point. A quick Google search doesn't seem to bring up any laws that prevent employers from using polygraph results in determining whether to hire or fire someone.

In most countries polygraph tests are inadmissible in court.

They are typically used in criminal investigations as a way to make suspects feel uneasy so investigators can pick up visual tells.

Friend of mine had her ticket timeout twice because Google Checkout and Wallet kept breaking.

How do they still have these problems after all these years?

How come it is always "Designers Will Code" and never "Developers Will Design"?

Is there some sort of assumption that it is easier to teach a designer to write code than have a developer learn to design?

In my experience the best designers are not the ones who write code but understand how their designs actually transition to the implementation. They structure their mockups and comps so that all the pieces are divided up in their mind in the exact same way a developer would. At that point it becomes the inevitable monkey work of cutting assets and implementing them but because the designer and developer are on the same page there is very little friction.

The designer doesn't know about the code written and the developer doesn't understand how the designer chose those colours, text sizes, gradients, spacing, etc but there is a simple common language that allows them to bridge what they don't understand.

The first difference I picked up on was lowercase r's.

Lowercase Helvetica characters never end on an angle. They are always flat and either parallel on the bottom or the edge of the screen.

Toyota was a pure guess for me.

I'm confused. How is that any easier? It's six of one, half dozen of the other.

I'd much prefer to write Objective-C code than pure C.

That is almost the exact experience I had. I got 17/20 and the ones I screwed up all had capital letters.

I couldn't see any difference between Mattel and Toyota.

Well in this case I subclassed them so I could have the backing data source only weakly reference the items in the dictionary/array and because I subclassed them I can use them wherever NSDictionary or NSArray is an accepted parameter.

Apple's documentation also gives some examples:

https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Cocoa...

https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Cocoa...

From Foundation? NSDictionary, NSArray and NSOperation instantly jump to mind.

I'm 100% with you. I used nibs a lot when I started out but now I've slowly drifted away from them. The only thing I use them for is setting the frame so I can get a general idea of the layout of the view. Sometimes I'll set a few properties like text color and font size but I'll then move those lines into viewDidLoad: so I know exactly what my view will be like when it is loaded.

I've dealt with far too many bugs involving Interface Builder and it's random changes and "upgrading" the second I touch a nib that it's more of a liability now.

People who say it's less "code" are just delusional. Setting the font in IB versus a single line in viewDidLoad: doesn't save you anything. At some point in time that line of code is getting executed and you will at some point have to maintain it.

They are XML now but they are so volatile that merging is still a pain in the ass.

And you've listed about 90% of the things I usual end up subclassing because I've hit some limitation.

Also I wasn't talking specifically about UIKit. Foundation is another great framework that I've subclassed many times.

It's not perfect but Apple puts a lot of work into documenting how to subclass their frameworks. Third-party UI frameworks like this are much less forgiving.

UIKit is designed to be built upon. A lot of Apple stuff may be a black box but it is designed to be subclassed. This is really an all or nothing affair. Either this works perfectly for you or you are shit out of luck and you have to compromise to fit inside their box.

Are there any examples of really successful big name projects using third-party UI frameworks that cost money?

Anything I use in my apps has to be open source in case either I come across limitations or support is dropped. I can't create a dependency in my app that could severely cripple me in the future.

It seems like using Pixate would introduce a huge dependency on your application and everything that Pixate does is mapping down to something already done in UIKit or perhaps CoreGraphics. I can understand the allure of this framework because it would save you writing a lot of code yourself but when you come across a limitation (which you undoubtably will because not even the mighty UIKit does everything we need) and you implemented it yourself you can then easily make improvements rather than waiting for a third-party. Sure you could make requests but if Apple honoured every single improvement request on UIKit they would never ship.

As an iOS developer I'm already in bed with Apple but their track record with AppKit and UIKit speaks for itself. Their frameworks are black boxes but I can build upon the shoulders of giants. Third-party UI frameworks like this feel like I am constraining myself to very explicitly defined limitations and the second I cannot adhere to those limitations I must be the one to compromise instead of striking out on my own.

Is there something that I am missing with these third-party UI frameworks because the opportunity cost has always seem to be too high for me.

I'm very curious how much Pixate differs from NUI.

I looked into doing something like this and it seems like a pretty straight forward idea. Map CSS properties to UIView properties. It felt like it was lot of brute force work. Creating a parser and some sort of renderer for every supported UIView seems like the majority of the work.

I absolutely loved the HFR version. It felt weird for the first scene but after that it was a subtle addition similar to how 3D wasn't gimmicky for Avatar.

Does it take you out of the app or bring up a part of the other app which you use to share and then dismiss and you are back exactly where you were before you attempted to share?

This isn't just for those people running Retina MacBook Pros. iPhone 4 and up, iPad 3 and up and certain Android devices would benefit from Retina assets.

It's not a tiny fraction of the market.

Ah I see the disconnect. You're talking about Android running my microwave. I was thinking about consumer electronics like phones and tablets.

While I agree a lot more devices will be running a more complicated OS with increased capabilities in the I future I don't think it is a foregone conclusion that it will run Android. Android is primarily used on phones, tablets and TVs because of explicit design choices made. Perhaps they will position themselves as a generic OS for electronic devices but they have some work to do before that can happen.

So what happens in Android with those apps? Your app opens your App.net client of choice?

Twitter and Facebook is integrated at a OS level with iOS. A few lines of code gets me access to the user's accounts (with their permission of course).

"I imagine we'll start to see more of this behavior in the future."

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this. Do you mean consumers will use/buy older Android devices for very specific tasks?

I think the exact opposite of this will happen. Your average consumer is not going to want to have multiple devices. They just want to carry their phone around and have it do everything for them.

The adoption rate of the latest version of Android may not be that high but does anyone know how MANY devices are running 4.0 or higher?

I routinely tout the high adoption rate of iOS devices and how it justifies increasing the minimum iOS versions for apps because you still have a massive potential userbase. But because Android has more phones in the marketplace than iOS is it possibly now for developers to make Android 4.0 the minimum and still get a respected number of users?

My understanding is that Googlers get a choice between a Apple computer (primarily MacBook Pro but I think iMac's are a possibility) or a computer running their customized version of Ubuntu.

You can get a Windows machine but you need to jump through some hoops and paperwork to get it.

There was a nice article on Reddit recently about why someone doesn't use nibs but the discussion in the comments may shed some light on your question.

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/15jjfi/why_i_do...

Except for a lot of those you can't pay for it in certain countries until the Blu-ray and iTunes releases like 6 months down the road. The argument can be made that those people should just buck up and wait but when everyone is talking about it sometimes that is just not acceptable.

But Google has no control over the carriers. They can't prevent them from putting that stuff on it. They got in bed with the carriers to distribute as many phones with Android on them as possible.

And for the most part I've got that. I can count on one hand the number of bad experiences I've had with Apple products. I also guess I lucked out a bit because the iOS 6 maps worked fine for me but I do live in Canada's largest city so that is probably a factor.

I've converted dozens of people over to Apple and no one has complained that they should have gone to Android or stayed with Windows.

Really? I think you mean unlocking. Carriers are usually content producers and jailbreaking is mostly done for piracy reasons so I'd be surprised if carriers are onboard.

Garmin and TomTom must be shitting themselves. I can't imagine how many people are just going to be using their smartphones in the next few years. Even built in nav consoles for the latest BMWs can't hold a candle to these apps.