With respect to iPhone/iPad development, Cocoa is the most beautiful and consistent framework I have worked with. It's the best implementation of MVC I've worked with. Objective-C is a little crufty but message passing languages are so much more elegant than method calling languages like C++/C#/Java.

With respect to Android based tablets, Google has done a huge disservice and fragmented the market by pushing Chrome OS for tablets.

It should have been Android all the way up -- handhelds to desktops -- freeing the market to throw all sorts of crazy hardware variants into any number of form factors.

Let's see those 2 sentences that make really no sense: "it can't just read and write willy-nilly to the file system, access hardware, or interfere with other apps. In my mind, this is one of the best features of the OS." and: "As a developer, it's a bit sad losing the ability to come up with crazy plugins and daemons and system-level utilities, but I believe it's a tradeoff worth making."

I've now owned Android devices since the G1 (the first), now switching to the Nexus One. The nerd i am i probably installed hundreds of those apps, that are not approved by someone. Not one of them did somehow brick my phone! The worst thing that happens is that apps don't do what i want, some even crash (but that's surprisingly rare). But still, they can run in the background, communicate with each other, etc.

So, why am i telling this: If smart engineers can think about what a smartphone OS should be like, it will support save mechanisms for multitasking, for daemons and plugins. Behind Androids Interface are a lot of very neat concepts working.(intents/broadcasts, man, i love that concept!)

From what i can tell:

- iPhone OS is some stripped down Mac OS version, which probably has its deficits in some areas. I believe that Apple just doesn't give us multitasking because it has heavy impact on batterylife or security (because the OS wasn't made for mobiles, in the beginning).

- When chosing between a _free_ development platform on Java, with Eclipse on every major platform and a subscription based development only with Mac OSX and a language that is basically used nowhere else (Obj-C)... well, the choice is clear for me. Google did a pretty good job with the Eclipse integration and it's toolchain.

I find it ironic that an Android developer is saying this. Android only has what, 256MB of available disk space for 3rd party programs? That is extremely limiting for all kinds of useful apps that might need a local database, or for large apps like games.

Also, the Android marketplace has similar limitations to the App store, but none of the safety. Google can and will pull your app if it doesn't like it, however, their post-release approval process lets malicious apps get through. There's already been one phishing app released. It seems like Google has all of the bad features of an open PC (viruses, worms, malware) and all of the bad features of a sandbox (complete control over code execution, unless you root your device).

That's nonsense. It depends on the device. Also, the G1 has far less then 256 MB free for apps, yet a typical app is around 100kB large. Also data can be on the SD Card and future version of android will be able to install apps on the sd card as well (maybe even the current version, don't know).

"Google can and will pull your app if it doesn't like it"

Where is the proof for that? Afaik they still have to show the behavior Apple is showing constantly by pulling normal apps. Guess what, you can easily install and use another market application and Google won't forbid you to do so: http://slideme.org/ is a good example. You can install it easily on an _unrooted_ device like other applications.

I agree that the android market could use some approval process for applications that need security (like banking apps). Something like the SSL-Info in your browser. But that's about it. Also could you please point me to any viruses and worms you are mentioning?

By the way, what do you mean by "complete control over code execution, unless you root your device"? who is controling what exactly? If you mean native code (i suppose you mean the sandbox is the dalvik vm), i should point you to http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/1.5_r1/index.html .

I found the Backgrounder app to be a great way to multitask on iPhone OS. First of all, it gives you a visual indication on the icon of every currently running app, including the Apple ones that are always running like Phone, Mail, Safari, and iPod. Second, it's very intuitive and easy to use, you simply hold the home button down for 1 second instead of quickly pressing it, if you want to background the app instead of just exiting to the home screen. Third, it passes the number one use case very handily: I can listen to Pandora while surfing in Safari seamlessly, and it almost makes my iPhone seem like a functional computer.

iPhone 3GS with backgrounder is seriously a powerful device, and lets me have an insight into how powerful the iPad will be.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanboy. I won't be buying an iPad until I'm sure it can be jailbroken, and probably not rev. 1, because I'm sure rev. 2 will have the missing features like webcam, etc. I'm just saying that a jailbroken iPhone/iPad will be an impressive device.

In the propaganda video Apple has on their site there is a brief talk by the tech guy. Incidentally he is the only guy in the video who doesn't come across to me as a total douche-bag when talking about the iPad.

He mentions that Apple owns the hardware and the software. Usually that is just Apple marketing BS but in this case I think it actually really applies. There is a tight integration between all of the hardware, software and even the uni-body aluminum casing. The decisions they've made for everything (from chip design to UI design) is with the entire device in mind.

Android, not so much. It must necessarily be a more generalized framework. There are some reasons that is a benefit but for this type of device I wager it is actually a detriment.

The main positive the media is taking away from the iPad is its speed. I was impressed by the claimed battery life. I don't believe any Android tablet will be capable of delivering a similar level of performance on these two key factors.

I think Android is a huge mistake on an unpocketable portable device, and I don't think Google disagrees. It might work out on a TV / Media Center device, but Boxee is so far ahead there that it's quite unlikely.

Google's plan for Smartbooks and iPad competitors is ChromeOS. I think they'll succeed handily if they ship it with only a content-addressed-filesystem exposed (think 'media picker'), and with a fleshed-out Google Native Client for local apps. I'd love for them to get some competent hardware manufacturers lined up with solid build quality, but Apple has that market mostly cornered (the Nokia netbook looks great though).

Why? Or, more, importantly if iPhone OS work why doesn't Android work?