l3v5y, on Nov 18 2009, 13:17, said:
With projects like this
for the Amplitude application, it certainly seems feasible, though I'm not sure I agree with "Mobile apps require very little development".
Does anyone out there agree?
Had the statement been "Mobile devices require significantly less development" then I think that there would be more room to agree with what was said. I suppose it depends on the types of applications that you are developing. I usually develope what most would classify as enterprise solutions.
Typically if I am working on a mobile application it is made with a single user in mind and made to act as a client; it's functionality is usually dependent on server functionality. When I am doing development for a server, service, or what ever your term preference is then I'm going to be working with something that has more moving parts. Typically the server side solution is going to require multiple machines. Some of these machines are running unique applications to provide specific pieces of functionality while others may be there for redundancy to be ready to run when another machine fails. These machines tend to have more sensative data and their functionality is usually more critical to the business. More effort is made on securing the servers from a software perspective and from a physical security perspective. Those servers may also need to interface to third party solutions further increasing the potential complexity of the solution.
So for the scenarios in which I usually work I can see statement as being true. For some other scenarios I am sure that his statement will seem totally unjustifiable. It is hard to nail down whether or not his statement is true without further information on the context in which he meant it.