I had thought it likely that I'd end up reverting to my old simple phone and only access the Internet with my laptop, as I have always done, but the G1 has enough right that I finally see why so many people are effectively surgically grafted to their smartphones. Judging by the last few days, I've become one of those addicts I formerly mocked. I've even caught myself scrolling the home view (or whatever it's called) back and forth, just to enjoy the smooth parallax action at my fingertips.
Even now I get that "shiny new toy" delight from discovering a new G1 trick. Some "Wow!"-worthy free apps:
- Twisty: Interactive fiction on the go. (Not on Android Market at the moment; I installed this by allowing unknown sources and running ApkInstaller.)
- ShopSavvy, CompareEverywhere: When did you last own a phone that could scan barcodes for price comparisons?
- WikiTude: Try this futuristic app in a photogenic location.
- StreetView: Digital-compass-enhanced deja vu on demand.
- Amazed: Hone your tilting skills.
- Voice Dialer: I have to put on an American accent to get digits working, but I'm impressed it recognizes my atrocious pronunciation of certain names. When will we see more voice control and text-to-speech apps?
- Flashlight: Unexpectedly handy. If only I could find a colour that brings out the printer dot codes. Or even better, an app that could decode the patterns for the secret agent appeal.
The n things I hate about Java
If it weren't for Java, I'd already be writing Android applications instead of writing about them. I've never gotten along well with the language. I'm old enough to remember the hype surrounding its release. I instinctively distrust excessive marketing (which indirectly caused an unrelated language to be named "JavaScript") and my experiences have only reinforced my initial disdain.
When I first examined Java, I was dismayed that autoboxing was unsupported (now fixed) resulting in the "int versus Integer" mess. I also felt they had missed a golden opportunity to leave the most confusing parts of C syntax behind, instead of superficially pandering to veteran programmers. Also, my pro-multiple-inheritance stance obviously clashed with Java. It seemed to me Java was made public before it was ready. Resources spent on marketing may have been better spent on improving the language before release.
Years later, another encounter cemented my opinion. In a project where I had to use Java, I wanted a thread to perform a nonblocking read on a channel. I was mildly perturbed when I found the Java threading API describing certain functions as deprecated because they were impossible to implement safely. How could they get this wrong? Surely they could have studied any of the many previous threading APIs?
More distressing was my lengthy trial-and-error discovery that my desired nonblocking read was impossible, due to some API design detail which I've gladly forgotten. I do remember documentation claiming the issue was addressed in a newer version, but unfortunately I was constrained to an older version. When I eventually worked around the problem, I felt especially frustrated since I could do exactly what I wanted in a few lines of C.
Shifts in my beliefs have further lessened Java's appeal. I was once an object-oriented fanatic, even submitting an object-oriented entry to a programming contest in a futile attempt to "prove" it was the right way to design software. (To clarify, I'm not saying the attempt was futile because it was object-oriented; the blame lies with me.) In those days I shunned Java because it wasn't object-oriented enough. Since I renounced my object-oriented ways years ago, I now feel Java is too object-oriented!
Now, to develop for Android, I must face Java again. That I'm willing to consider this is itself a glowing endorsement of the G1. I remain unimpressed: Java's primary advantage appears to be its fame, not its features. In fact, developers are urged to avoid common object-oriented practices for performance reasons.
Additionally, the downloads are heavyweight; a good net connection is a must. The "Hello, Android" example somehow requires a nontrivial amount of code as well as an XML file. In contrast, for C, a kinda sorta C compiler fits in a few hundred lines, and "Hello, World" fits right here: int puts(const char *);int main(){return puts("Hello, World!");}
This comparison is grossly unfair, as C libraries for such a sophisticated phone would also be nontrivial, but all the same, if the Bell Labs researchers of yore were behind the drawing board, the programming interface would be terse and elegant.
One bright spot is Android's register-based Dalvik virtual machine. A prevailing attitude was (and still is?) that Java could replace C/C++ in most situations: how can this be when the standard JVM is a stack-based snail? This is yet another detail Java should have got right from the start; compare with the design of Inferno's Dis virtual machine.
I hope Dalvik bytecode compilers for more agreeable languages will spring forth soon, as that will eliminate my biggest gripe.
Hardware Hankerings
Some deficiencies can be resolved with a little money. At the top of my wishlist is a standard stereo jack so I can use it as a stand-alone music player; I'll probably get an HTC 3-in-1 USB adapter for this purpose. (New G1 buyers will get an adapter free, but that's little consolation for me.) I'll probably also fork over dough for a bigger micro SDHC card, preferably at least 8GB so I can laugh at standard 4.7GB DVDs.
Other features will have to wait for the next generation. For gaming, I'd love to have an Android device with a nice D-pad or two; see the Pandora. While I'm at it, a video camera as well. One that can face the user so you could videophone others like in many a sci-fi flick. And then I may as well ask for a video out too, so it could be a stand-alone video player. Rather than build in all these gadgets, it may be better to have a few standard ports (perhaps USB) to attach oddball devices. I can't wait to see what they'll come up with.
