M horse pure 2 android vs ios

18% OFF Flexible Palm Shaped 8GB USB2.0 Flash Driv

Android 4.2 Cell Phones: Up to 55% OFF and Low to $28.99

Outdoor Multi-Tools: Up to 63% OFF + Low to $0.81

Low to $1.89 for Christmas Gifts, Enjoy the Peace Joy

Up to 71% OFF, Low to $0.99 for Black Friday For ES, EXP:Nov.28

Cables and Connectors Sale: Up to 64% OFF and Low to $0.65

Is it possible you were debugging optimized code which had the local variables optimized away? All of the native platform specific API's you're used are available to you to use in any way you see fit. I have been starting to learn how to write mobile applications with Xamarin to contribute to a friend's project and had not heard of Xamarin University until I saw this comment.

Create account

My only concern will be screen size for those not using the iPhone 6 something largest screen. BuckRogers on Apr 5, 7 inch android phones how to unlock They're both OO languages, and once you've figured out the model it's not going to be hard to port. JamesMontemagno on Apr 4, It's also possible to write laggy and bad native UIs as well.

So, which one should you pick?

I enjoyed both equally both have great points. So, your cross-platform Ruby code has to deal with two different types of memory management systems.

Android Mobile Price in India

Update on Unity doesn't strike me as being all that different than a normal GUI app's message loop. Hopefully this is a nice overview of the platform. Sure most of its ridiculously hard to get, but that's what makes it so damn fun getting it. Hey, Xamarin CEO here, thanks for your feedback.

Free m horse pure 2 android vs ios

01.03.2018 - Because of the non-native nature of Qt, I would strongly recommend avoiding it in favor of something like Xamarin or RubyMotion. There are many who feel the developer hit their high point with the Mass Effect series, some who cherish Star Wars: They are polished and you can't polish with PhoneGap. But don't try to maintain that app, you will regret it. I mean, one of the side effects of all this TWEWY polemic is that we can't consider that classics will still be playable when iOS 17 comes.

Zip files free m horse pure 2 android vs ios

16.02.2018 - I think that too often people pick these frameworks and assume that it's a substitute for good design. Qt is a cross-platform GUI toolkit that draws its own controls using each platform's low-level graphics facilities. But the larger problem I find is that the 2 platforms are made from opposites points, and I don't see Xamarin glueing it together as magic. You can develop primarily in a browser then package a web without requiring pluginsAndroid, iOS, Mac and Windows app from your code with minor modifications. Now "all that is required" is to start work on a Android user experience, implement it and then sew it up against the core library.

Pro serial m horse pure 2 android vs ios windows vista

Hopefully this helps out a bit with some of the issues that you have run into, but again please please feel free to email me with any questions, encounter any problems please reach out to us so we know and can fix them.

You have my direct line: Hi James, What would be the best way to do 2D graphics using Mono? I'm building my own editor, some videos here [1]. Anyways, my only Windows platform dependency is WPF most of the magic is platform independent, and I'm wondering how to make my app cross platform.

The most appropriate I can find is mono. Hi james, I'm following your blog. In last month, you try to prove UI xamarin form capable do all layout Here is the idea, if you dont mind, would you convert ListViewAnimation android to xamarin component Warning: Need that to move and reorder and row sequence I'm sure every project need powerfull listview Love your work Thx.

Have you taken a look at Facebook's new framework, React Native? They touch native components with native performance. Thanks, I've been using it for two months - I know how it works.

I've used Phonegap, and was able to use the back button without any issues. Having been building a decent size app tens of thousands of lines in Xamarin this really reflects our experience.

One particular point is that the memory management is fairly complex under the covers with bridged objects and multiple memory management mechanisms working in parallel, this occasionally rears its head.

Another important point is they do provide a single automation test framework that targets both platforms. If I was starting the app again I'd be very conflicted whether to use Xamarin vs native, though ReactNative looks very interesting too and doesn't have the complexity of running the full.

I wonder if RubyMotion is much better when it comes to memory management. Judging by the docs [1], RubyMotion does indeed not seem to use a GC on iOS but instead relies on ref counting, reusing auto-release pools.

That means cyclic refs are an issue. You have to explicitely use weak references throughout your code. So, your cross-platform Ruby code has to deal with two different types of memory management systems.

I'm not sure this qualifies as a better option to what Xamarin provides. Doesn't seem like a problem to me. The occasional weak reference to break cycles wouldn't hurt anything on Android, would it?

But it's going to be tough to use normal Ruby gems on iOs that aren't aware of the ref counting. Here's a recent extensive benchmark against popular cross-platform toolkits: Great article, we have a similar story but only used Xamarin for 1 iOS app.

If I had option to go back I would not chose Xa marin, we would have used native. Main reason being that we now need to add 3 SDKs to our app and none of them are supported in Xamarin, it seems it will be cheaper and more predictable to rewrite to native than implementing SDKs.

Porting libraries to Xamarin is possible in theory but in practice major effort and hard to do without access to library code. I'm really sorry to hear that you had issues with consuming third-party libraries.

This is actually something we've been recently very focused on improving. First of all, in December we released a new tool called Objective Sharpie that can automatically bind Objective-C libraries into C: We also have docs on doing this for Java on developer.

Some of our customers don't have the time or skill to do this themselves, and so we've recently created a bindings team that wraps third-party native libraries for our customers.

Many of these end up published on http: But some of them we can't immediately publish because we need to get permission from the original library author to redistribute their library. This is especially true for commercial SDKs.

But if you contact us directly, we might be able to give you something. We also do custom bindings through our support team. This is something that unfortunately we haven't made very obvious.

But you can just email support xamarin. Like I said, this is an area we're pretty focused on. If you have any feedback, please feel free to let me know directly: No problems so far.

But when are you gonna let us use Xamarin Studio on Linux? We made this question over and over on the forums or via emails but the answer is ever the same: Originally the problem was about "there are too many linux distros!

This also means, however that I'm more likely to reach for something like Cordova for apps you can go a long way with web based apps for many use cases or React Native. What would be the point of developing with the Xamarin Platform on Linux?

In that case, one might as well not use Xamarin at all. To target the full range of mobile devices, one has to have Windows, a Mac, or both anyway. So there doesn't seem to be much advantage to supporting development on Linux.

The point would be to develop on a platform that I like developing on. Why not develop as much as possible on the one you like? I think this is the key to making a great cross-platform solution.

Pretty much any mobile app that's not a toy relies on native 3rd party sdks, be it ad providers or fancy Ui compinents. Whatever platform first solves the issue of making integration of pods on iOs or AARs on Android a smooth process, will win.

I don't see any options that come close to solving this. Xamarin is not native to either iOS or Android. React Native has no clear path for accessing 3rd party libs at all yet.

Whatever they can come up with will be further complicated by the fact that the JS engine is single threaded. I stand corrected, I must have overlooked that section. Callbacks used to pass return values are still experimental though, and it's unclear how this will port over to Android once that backend works.

My experience with third party libraries has been quite different, for the most part. I've often been surprised at how easy it is to create bindings to libraries written in Obj-C even if no one else has before.

Usually it requires extracting the compiled library from the framework, and then translating each declaration from the library's header into the C binding definition.

In many cases it's a couple of hours work or less. That said, libraries that are provided as source files, with the instructions "just copy them into your project," can be incredibly frustrating.

Our designer would love to use github. Bindings are actually not that bad with Objective Sharpie. What SDKs are giving you trouble? I would agree that for a single platform it is not worthwhile though.

We tried mostly anything and not only tried; we used for production work because clients wanted us to and, outside native, Xamarin really is the best thing we worked with so far.

For it's downsides, the upsides are too good to not take advantage off. Some cons I recognize but the case everyone keeps mentioning that you get into issue when you really want to do complex native platform stuff with animations etc I haven't encountered.

Nor is integrating SDK's an issue. It's just something you plan in your project; it's a one-off. We integrated very large SDKs for hardware products and the hardware vendors, when something goes wrong, always blame the wrapper and it has 0 times been the wrapper; most of the times a bug or undocumented feature by the SDK creator.

The wrapper is so thin and the mapping is so clear that it's actually never an issue. If you don't ever make games for clients it wouldn't really make sense. But if so could you explain what you didn't like about it?

I've used Cocos2d with JavaScript binding a few times and really like it. You can develop primarily in a browser then package a web without requiring plugins, Android, iOS, Mac and Windows app from your code with minor modifications.

I have used Cocos2d for clients and Monogame and Unity as well and the combination as well. I was talking about Xamarin here as app building tool, not for games. I do like Cocos2d.

Most people don't realize how convenient it is to build and maintain your entire codebase iOS, Android, Windows Phone, Windows 8, web client, web server all in one place Visual Studio, mostly using C and Typescript.

Just have a Windows VM on your Mac. It truly is the best of both worlds. Yeah, a huge part of why I still mainly run Windows at home is easy access to Visual Studio.

With third party extensions e. Visual Studio with Web Essentials is awesome. I haven't used WebStorm, but using VS for typescript was way better than using it for javascript.

But, I am old enough to remember evil Microsoft, so I will almost certainly never go there. As far as I understand it, if you are big and have the resources, your best bet is still to develop separate native apps for each platform.

I have more than a year of experience building applications for Android, iOS and Windows with Xamarin. Overall, I much prefer my experience with Xamarin than the alternatives.

Keep in mind that I did have prior experience with C,. NET, and Visual Studio. As far as "recommendations on developing for multiple mobile platforms", I'd be happy to answer slightly more specific questions.

If you have different teams for each platform, it makes sense to go native and duplicate the effort. As soon as you want to share code or resources including employees between more than one platform, Xamarin starts making sense.

If you have a small mobile development team people, you'll probably need to either pick a single platform, or go with Xamarin. If you plan to have a Windows app, Xamarin makes sense.

If the business is already using Microsoft technologies Windows,. However, Xamarin is not a silver bullet. It does comes with some trade-offs in addition to those mentionned in the article.

I work in enterprise world, as such, my mobile development experience is mostly on side projects, across all the three major platforms. As for hobby projects, a few multimedia ones with SDL, which was ok since nothing more was being used besides OpenGL and touch input.

Lots of native API wrapping is required or only available in the commercial version. Xamarin is quite appealing, and even with the usual HN complaints about their prices, they are actually not much different from other commercial solutions for the mobile market.

However due to the pain it is to use the NDK, specially now that Google dropped the ball, I am thinking about focusing on just one platform. If I would be doing this at work, maybe Xamarin would be the solution to go.

Do you think the commercial version of Qt would have covered what you needed? I would also be interested I'd anyone else here is in a position to compare Xamarin and Qt.

It's very hard to compare the two from the outside. Xamarin and Qt are very different. Xamarin Forms builds on top of those things to provide a cross-platform UI toolkit that uses the native controls on each platform.

Qt is a cross-platform GUI toolkit that draws its own controls using each platform's low-level graphics facilities. As such, the controls in a Qt-based application aren't fully native to each platform.

Qt tries to mimic the native controls, but the emulation isn't completely faithful. A particular problem is accessibility for users with disabilities, e. Because of the non-native nature of Qt, I would strongly recommend avoiding it in favor of something like Xamarin or RubyMotion.

The application I'm looking at has a very specialized ui. The functionality also counts for much more than native look and feel from the customers point of view so Qt might still be a runner. No it would not.

On my case, I wanted to make use of the native file pickers, which only became available in Qt 5. Granted, on Android's case the pickers are only available as of version 4. On my specific case, I came to the conclusion that writing my own JNI layer would be less trouble than debugging Qt.

However note that for me this is just hobby development, whenever I feel like coding for it. Compared to Xamarin, The Qt Company seems to still be searching on what platform integration to sell to companies and how.

I have been developing cross-platform mobile apps for the past five years, initially on Phonegap and for the last three years, on Titanium Appcelerator. In general, I think cross platform will save you time and money if you do it properly.

Titanium has been a timesaver for me. My current backend stocklight. It allows you to implement cross platform GUI's using the same view code and you just make platform specific adjustments eg.

Action Bar versus NavigationWindow where neccessary. Personally, I don't think i'll be using Arrow Rails seems like a better choice but it will be great to get LiveView 'instant updates' with their new SDK.

Absolutely check out Genymotion, it blows both the native android and Xamarin emulator out of the water. Xamarin studio sees it as a native device and any issues we've had with it have been minor annoyances rather than major blockers.

Deployment time from the IDE is also pretty nippy. I use Unity3D to develop for multiple platforms and can't recommend it enough -- it is a 3D game engine so it may be too heavy for some applications, but it can do anything you want it to.

I really don't think I could recommend using Unity for a non-game app, though, at least in most cases. It would be a subpar experience for both the developer and the user. How useful is it to develop non-gaming applications including 2D UIs?

And how much overheads it results in in terms of application performance and size? The UI tools are also just finicky enough to make non-game app development a pain. In addition, it does have a little size overhead - the smallest possible build on iOS a blank screen is 12 MB with all the optimizations on, and double that if you need to invoke System functions or libraries that need them.

Have you actually seen a performance comparison when idle? I ask because I have been curious about trying to build a full application inside Unity. Update on Unity doesn't strike me as being all that different than a normal GUI app's message loop.

I don't suppose you have done any work with unity and f have you? I'd be interested to hear any war-stories in that context. If you're small and a penniless startup, I think creating a native app is also often a wise choice -- all in the spirit of getting something delightful out to the market as quickly and effortlessly as possible.

That said, when all the work is done and the critical bugs are squashed, and a cross-platform app works as intended, it's a thing of beauty -- and especially wonderful when it comes time to roll out new features every week.

As a side note, it's very game-focused, but we've put together a matrix with all of the pros and cons of using various cross-platform frameworks. I have worked with various cross platform tools for a few years now and in the end all of them came to the same conclusion: Its faster and easier to get a prototype or very simple non-polished app working that does not rely on specific api's to the mobile too much.

There might be some strange bugs appearing from the cross platform tool that are hard to solve or just simply wanting to achieve a very polished app with smooth transition and the latest 'native' UI components and UI paradigms e.

I also had a few major bugs coming from the interface between the native SDK and the cross platform framework. One example was that suddenly the phone fonts for some Asian languages were not displayed anymore.

These problems often happened when there were some SDK changes on Android or iOS and the cross platform framework had to catch up with these changes. Compared to native developments its also way harder to find good libraries and solve bugs e.

Since last year I stopped all cross platform developments and are now developing for iOS and Android natively and I realised that I am actually developing IN SUM faster natively then before with the cross platform tools.

Main reason for this is that I have a huge focus on polished and high performing UI's and in the past I wasted a huge amount of hours just to fight the weaknesses of the cross platform tools.

So my recommendation for all who want to develop polished and professional iOS and Android Apps is now to go the native route from the beginning. I built the same app using Android and iOS, but considered Xamarin at one point.

I'm still considering it. When I was deciding, I had a look at the Xamarin docs, and it seemed to reference the underlying native idioms quite often. I figured that I'd end up spending the same amount of time learning Xamarin as iOS, so what's the point?

In the end, I found the backend logic was pretty easy to write in Android or iOS. They're both OO languages, and once you've figured out the model it's not going to be hard to port.

After all the phones all have similar hardware, and there's got to be some way to do the same thing. The problem is the UI. I found it was a massive pain to learn two ways to lay out stuff.

Neither is very obvious, and they are not that easy to port from one to the other. They also each have somewhat different aesthetics this friggin changes every time there's an update, which means you need slightly different designs no hardware back button?

After grappling with this for ages, I ended up doing webviews with responsive pages. Makes the thing look like a web page, but a simple one that works like an app and can also be tested on a desktop browser.

I just feel that native is worth the extra time, at least for me. Its really not hard to reimplement OO logic in objective C or Java if you have already written it for one of the two.

You don't get access to native UI elements. Instead, Corona offers OpenGL-based replacements which may or may not be sufficient. You can also pay for Corona Enterprise and write your own platform-specific wrappers around native objects.

Michielvv on Apr 5, I've been on projects with both: For business like apps, Xamarin Forms in my case is miles ahead. Forms isn't really stable We experienced quite a lot of regressions with each new version neither is Corona.

Corona is nice if you have a lot of custom graphics, but if you are going for pretty standard user interaction, you will spend a lot of time recreating what exists on other platforms. Forms and Corona you will run into the limitations, but with Forms it is much easier to adjust those with native code.

I think the main issue with Corona is that they are more focussed on the game case for which it works Finally, I really started to appreciate C after doing Lua, PHP and JavaScript for years.

Especially on a complex app, the static typing really helps making changes to code you did not write yourself. However, the amount of small issues I dealt with that were never solved and still haven't been solved 2 years later are what drove me away.

That and the cost That is incredibly cheap. It's the sort of cheap that's so cheap you wonder what the catch is. Er, that's on top of your Windows license, your Visual Studio license, your Apple Developer License, your Apple Macbook because you can only compile and deploy to the app store with a Macbook You don't need a MacBook.

You can develop on Windows which means you don't have to pay for that Windows license and use a Mac Mini on the network for the OS X build requirements. BuckRogers on Apr 5, I've been using Kivy.

But decided if I did native, I'd only support iOS. Mostly because I don't want to go down the rabbit hole of having to support some random Android device. So I'm looking at learning more about Swift and that ecosystem someday.

I don't know C but I certainly see Xamarin as an upgraded version of Kivy.. It's something I've keeping my eye on for quite some time. If I ever find Kivy and the native iOS development combo to not meet my needs, Xamarin is the next stop for me.

What is your experience with Kivy? Have you submitted to AppStore? Hearing your experience will help. DenisM on Apr 4, Can anyone comment on Xamarin learning curve? If I have experience in both iOS and c, how much time does it take to get up to speed with Xamarin?

We launched an online training program called Xamarin University, and so we have a fair amount of data on how long it takes people to get to the point where they are proficient enough to write a production app.

As you might expect it's highly varied. But the median is about 45 days to pass our certification. I have been starting to learn how to write mobile applications with Xamarin to contribute to a friend's project and had not heard of Xamarin University until I saw this comment.

Now that I have looked at it, I'm a little confused. I can understand charging for 1-on-1 help, interactive classes, and certification exams, but why wouldn't "recorded class videos, class labs and materials" be free?

Don't you want it to be easy for people to use your software so that people will? The learning investment is what makes me most hesitant to use Xamarin. Awesome news for iPhone users! Enjoyed this immensely on my iPad.

My only concern will be screen size for those not using the iPhone 6 something largest screen. Feedback on this would be great, trying to manipulate the small screen. What a thoroughly epic review!!

I've never played Baldur's Gate, but after reading this Man it would have been an instant buy for me if I didn't play it times true number on pc. Icewind Dale is the former, BG the latter.

I think most people would prefer BG2 over ID, but not all. Hm tbh I first played Icewind dale back in the days and then I went for baldurs gate. Icewind dale is better for pure dungeon crawling but baldurs gate got the story.

I enjoyed both equally both have great points. My suggestion is to go for icewind dale first to get fired up and then go for baldurs gate! The best part about this game is the fact that the developers weren't shy about putting nearly game-breaking gear in it.

Sure most of its ridiculously hard to get, but that's what makes it so damn fun getting it. Save all your pantaloons!! You'll thank me later. Personally I'd say Baldur's Gate, because I think it has more to it.

From what I've heard, Icewind Dale focuses more on combat and has less story, and BG focuses more on the story aspects. They're both great games, though! Icewind Dale is good but it's a considerably less balanced plate and best enjoyed after BG has familiarized you with the engine.

You know I actually believe it's better to go for ID first to truly learn how to fight. Because in ID you build your team from zero so you get to learn how to fight with different classes while in bg you get to make your main char only and you pick the rest of the party from the story as you progress ofc you can change party members.

I can definitely see that angle. I think putting that many decisions in the player's hands right off the hop can make for an intimidating experience for a starting player, though.

BG only letting you make one character ensures a certain range of balance no matter what choices you make. I guess the real answer is that they're both great, and whichever you play first will help you appreciate certain things in the other.

Mm yeah I see what you mean. Either way you need to study for both games cause there are so many things in them. On a smaller note the first dungeon of ID I mean the area with the tombs is my all time favorite from either game.

Sure BG 2 has some pretty awesome ones too but that area was the best for me probably cause that was the first one I played I guess. Thanks for the help Shaun. I'm starting BG tonight, been waiting to get into these games for awhile.

Is it any easier to control then the first?? I couldn't even figure out what I was doing to get past the tutorial in the first one and eventually gave up. It controls similarly and gives you even less of a tutorial this time.

Personally, I think the controls are pretty good once you learn them, but neither game gives you any help at all with that, which is frustrating. I'll have to look for an online Manuel then cause on the first in I can't tell what the buttons are haha I need like a button map until I learn them.

Bethesda is the only company making RPG anywhere close to as good as this. Wish they would do a FWs game. Not first person, necessarily, but they are great at making real environments. Then have those ol" bioware boys do the story, maybe with a little work from RA Salvatore.

Every time I read one of his RPG reviews, not only do I feel like I'm being schooled, I walk away with a far greater appreciation of the game and it's history. Shaun, I love your reviews and you made me want to play this.

I have an iPhone 6 plus which is always with me, and an iPad which stays at home a lot since I got the big phone. I'm afraid there's no iCloud support at this point. I wish it had it, and I wish I didn't find myself saying that about so many games.

That's what I thought. It's probably possible to move save games around with iTunes, but that's a pain. Will I hate myself if I start this on the iPhone 6 plus?

That's how I plan on doing it. You have to game with what's available to you, you know? Or then you'll hate yourself for not playing when you had the chance. I agree with the tutorial part that thing is hellish.

First run is nice I guess you get to see all the crazy stuff this wizard did and you start getting curious of what he is after but really after that one run you really only just want to get out and move with the game.

Thankfully in the pc version there is a mod that will instantly finish the tutorial and place you outside it and with all the important loot as well. I'm picking this up tonight.

Thanks for freaking awesome review and great feedback from everyone. Hopefully, I won't got stymied by the controls, but I'm sure it's worth figuring out I actually prefer the original Baldur's Gate, I think, warts and all, to BG2, but they're both great.

Except for that horrible, inspired by Warcraft 2, combat. It's turn-based, but I agree that it doesn't really feel like it. That's what people always say. It's about as turn-based as command and conquer, which I believe also had a pause button.

It was the fad at the time. Well, technically it is turn-based, just continuous turns, which in practice plays out different to either turns or real time.

I actually love the combat in Baldur's Gate though, it can get messy but it also feels more flexible than in most turn based games. Part of that might be down to all the spells available but I'm sure ToEE probably had a similar number and didn't feel as flexible to me.

Fantastic review, but one point about how it doesn't make financial sense to make a game this vast anymore: Have you dug into Dragon Age: On my first playthrough I wanted to see everything, but despite my best intentions I still missed content.

I disagree with most of it though lots of bugs, true. It's a beast of a game, easily one of the best and largest cRPGs ever. In a sense it's huge, and I love it too, in fact the original game was designed as a spiritual successor to BG, as you probably know.

But while Inquisition is 'huge' in a sense it's still a lot smaller than BG2- try making BG2 in the style of Inquisition and it would take a lot longer and a lot more money I reckon. I'd wager the worlds are a similar size, but BG surely has more dialogue, a larger number of complex questlines, huge cities etc I know it's an old game but would still have appreciated a spoiler warning in this review as I've literally just started the first BG, now I know something about the endIng which seems like it could be pretty major.

Luckily I stopped myself from reading before I'd seen too much but some minor damage has been done I fear. I'm usually careful about spoilers, even on older games. It probably didn't occur to me this time because BG2 spoils that part of BG1 almost immediately.

There are lots of story points companions, etc I didn't mention, so I hope you can still enjoy the game. As a total noob so far, there is some weird stuff about it, like I don't know if half of the crap I'm picking up is important.

So I drop crap that I assume is not important and move on, pfft. But it's really fun, interesting game. Took about 45 minutes to an hour before I felt comfortable with it. Totally worth it though.

It would be nice if the interface was a little streamlined think that makes sense, but given its age About as clunky, boring, convoluted, frustrating, outdated, fiddly and overrated a game can get.

Thanks for the in depth review Shaun!! While we now accept iTunes Promotional Codes for games, we can't guarantee that your app will be reviewed or covered. Only one promotion code is required.

Feel free to send promo codes to tips toucharcade. While we appreciate the promo codes, notable app pre-announcements and preview copies are also of interest to our readers.

Please feel free to contact us at the same email address about these opportunities. If you receive such an email, please contact us. We have advertising opportunities available to iPhone and iPod Touch developers.

If interested, please see this page for more information:. We welcome news releases, previews, screenshots and video links for existing or upcoming iPhone and iPod Games.

We can't promise a personal reply but we do try to evaluate every title submitted. Please send press releases or general inquiries to tips toucharcade. Submit a Tip Login Create Account.

Click here to support us on Patreon. Star Star Star Star Star. Author Shaun Musgrave Posted On EE by Overhaul Games. Watch Button Watch App. I wish I could play dark alliance on my phone.

Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the EYES! Though he was hamstering it up? I too would like to know how the Baldur Gate games fare on an iPhone screen. You are indeed helpful. No not really who cares!

Help a nerd out. Or Icewind Dale on my iPad? I miss Morte and Grace. So what did you think? Which would you recommend playing first Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale? That's a really good question I gave up on the first because of the controls.

Winzip m horse pure 2 android vs ios teamviewer free

Oct 01, · Julie’s gadget diary – I’m switching back to AndroidRead More. I’m switching back to Android” Thank you for your thoughts on iOS vs Android. Android vs. iOS - It's a two-horse race, and the lead horse is in trouble. Recent smartphone acquirers are increasingly choosing iOS over Android.

31.01.2018 - And last one, when feature listview drag and drop swap row available on android? Originally the problem was about "there are too many linux distros! One plus 5t price in nepal 7 days - Quark oneplus... One of the classics!!! Because of the non-native nature of Qt, I would strongly recommend avoiding it in favor of something like Xamarin or RubyMotion.

Credit m horse pure 2 android vs ios.

28.01.2018 - So I drop crap that I assume is not important and move on, pfft. In addition, it does have a little size overhead - the smallest possible build on iOS a blank screen is 12 MB with all the optimizations on, and double that if you need to invoke System functions or libraries that need them. Unlike the original game's Enhanced Editionthe new content here is actually pretty good, though the passing decade of time and change of writers means the text doesn't always seamlessly flow from the original writing. Oneplus two home button not working at all - Windo... JamesMontemagno on Apr 5, We tried mostly anything and not only tried; we used for production work because clients wanted us to and, outside native, Xamarin really is the best thing we worked with so far.

Veins m horse pure 2 android vs ios bit download.

02.03.2018 - Apple is much trickier. They are polished and you can't polish with PhoneGap. It is pretty extensive, but if there is something missing please please please let us know and we will work with the documentation team to add it. One plus 5t price in nepal 5 rupees - Free downloa... Don't you want it to be easy for people to use your software so that people will? Titanium has been a timesaver for me.

Jan 10, · M - HORSE Pure 2 4G Phablet inch Android MTK Octa Core GHz 4GB RAM inch / Android / 1G RAM + 16GB ROM / Android & IOS. USD Free Shipping, Wholesale Price, M-HORSE Pure 2 Inch Smartphone Full Screen 4GB 64GB MTT Octa Core Dual Rear Camera Android Touch ID. M-Horse Pure 2 Android Phone (Black) - The M-Horse Pure 2 is a Large Screen Bezel-less Phone with a powerful performance, attractive design, and affordable price tag.

In general, we follow the. As for forms, you are correct, we built it for a class of users that had different requirements than those that are building consumer applications.

Now, while I am the first one to tell developers to use our native APIs to create great consumer experiences, just last week I ran into a gorgeous looking app and only later I discovered that the gorgeous UI was actually built entirely with Forms, even the animations.

More importantly, the app was built on record time by a single developer. I could not believe it need to ask the customer for permission to disclose that their product is built with our product.

So I walked away with a new insight: Xamarin sample layout is not esthetic. You should look at telerik example. And last one, when feature listview drag and drop swap row available on android?

Hi, I am not affiliated with Xamarin but I have been using Xamarin in production for the last two years on many applications and could not imagine doing native development in any other way.

Now "all that is required" is to start work on a Android user experience, implement it and then sew it up against the core library. Anyway there seems to be a quite of bit of confusion that Xamarin.

Forms is a package that runs on top of the Xamarin platform that provides a DSL to rapidly create CRUD enterprise applications that spits out the equivalent native user interface implementation depending on which platform you run on.

It is extendable and becoming highly customizable. Can't wait until they drop the "sealed" modifiers - hint, hint, nudge, nudge natfriedman! All of the native platform specific API's you're used are available to you to use in any way you see fit.

Admitely the there has been some minor naming changes to be in accordance with the http: NET background then it makes complete sense. That said if you're coming directly from.

NET, thinking that you can ship iOS or Android without learning the domain knowledge of each platform then you're in for a royally rude awakening. Xamarin does not abstract away the differences between the platforms - ie.

Step one in decent architecture is to divide your application up into a Core library and use interfaces to bait and switch in a different concrete implementation depending on what platform is running your application.

For more info see: NET to create elegant, testable User Interfaces that run on any mobile or desktop platform. It is the framework that powers GitHub for Windows and various other undisclosed projects ;- Step three is to architect your network services and data persistence exactly as detailed here: For more information on the above see https: DenisM on Apr 5, Excellent write up, cleared things up for me.

Xamarin guys should just take it and put on their website. Whilst it may require more work than Xamarin Forms, MvvmCross is a way of creating cross-platform applications using Xamarin without any of the issues you've documented above.

I have helped ship two commercial apps with MvvmCross and it works pretty well. MvvmCross is pretty legit. I felt that it really made Xamarin worthwhile. I found it quite a bit easier to keep the platform specific code to a minimum and when I needed to write it it was abstracted out as much as possible.

Why do you say "cross-platform" isn't a real problem? It sure seems to me like mobile app developers need a way to share large chunks of their code, and possibly even some UI code, between platforms while still delivering native apps.

I believe it is recommended to use one relative layout instead of multiple linear layouts, because depth quickly becomes slower than the more complex measurements needed for a relative layout.

I find layouting on Android really bad TBH and there are so many presentations and guidelines on what not to do. Its hardly more performant. But here is some more info: But the larger problem I find is that the 2 platforms are made from opposites points, and I don't see Xamarin glueing it together as magic.

But you are right, the layouts and measurements even differ per api level as they get optimisations and are really complex. It would be awesome if Xamarin could combine both platforms native performs, but I don't see that happening: Avalaxy on Apr 4, My experience with Xamarin: I've been working for half a year with Xamarin Forms.

I Think using Xamarin is the way to go, there is no need to re-code something for 3 different platforms when you can just have a shared codebase. Tools like Cordova and Phonegap don't work.

They produce a very crappy experience that doesn't use the native OS functions, doesn't look and feel native, feels slow and has many bugs for example they can't use the hardware back button.

Many components have bugs, and the code often behaves in very very weird ways I had exceptions not being caught by catch blocks for example, many debugger functions don't work properly with mono like locals and very, very often exceptions are thrown without ANY indication what caused them or where they occurred exactly.

It's getting better mostly because of StackOverflow, but it's still not sufficient. It doesn't have intellisense and it's just generally very awkward. I don't think the 'big cost' is a valid argument against Xamarin.

Hey, Xamarin CEO here, thanks for your feedback. Is it possible you were debugging optimized code which had the local variables optimized away? Similarly, when an uncaught exception is thrown, it comes with a stack trace with line numbers.

Were you not getting these? What limitations were you running into? To get it in Visual Studio you have to install an extension: I'm sorry about the trouble you had, and I'd like to get to the bottom of those issues.

Please feel free to contact me at nat xamarin. Our app Pacifica http: It's far from a crappy experience. I think that too often people pick these frameworks and assume that it's a substitute for good design.

You still need to put in the effort. There's also the fact that the bar is a bit lower to get an app finished and released with something like Ionic. So you might see more apps that aren't quite up to par, but that doesn't mean that it isn't possible to create something beautiful with them.

I gave your app a try. I think its fairly good. It was a - bit - choppy when clicking on sign up, but once signed in, I couldn't tell it apart from a native app. The 'swipe to move to next screen' was pretty good too.

Sure, the apps never feel completely native but you can still invoke native features including the back button on Android, reuse the same code to make a web app and while bugs happen it isn't any worse than trying to create a cross-browser web app which is essentially what you're writing.

Pretty much every software development choice is a trade off and PhoneGap is a good one sometimes. There is a huge conflation of "feeling native" and the "native controls" aspect of PhoneGap's features.

Can you access the camera on a phone using PhoneGap? Sure, but you know those apps you use every day? They are polished and you can't polish with PhoneGap. Scrolling is snappy, navigation doesn't lag, etc.

But you're dealing with trade-offs unless you have unlimited resources. If you want the slickest possible iOS UI, native is likely the way to go but it costs significantly more resources if you want to support other platforms as well.

You're not getting anything for free and you have to decide what you want to spend your resources on. Sure, I'm not disputing tradeoffs. I agree the latter is better but I don't see the former as significantly worse.

If you have limited resources, you've usually got the choice between supporting multiple platforms with a decent UX or a limited number of platforms with a great UX. Having an app that isn't "significantly worse" can be the difference of having 5, or 1 million users.

While it's impossible to prove, there is loads of evidence to suggest even just ms of UI delay can cause UX problems. I wish there was, because it would selling native solutions so much easier.

The only proof really is the fact that the most downloaded apps in the world all use native, and many FB and LI come to my mind tried the hybrid solution and it failed miserably. Obviously I'm not going to advocate apps that have ms delays no matter what framework you use.

It's also possible to write laggy and bad native UIs as well. Was the Facebook app really a failure that made the difference between and 1 million users?

I think Facebook is an example of a company that has unlimited resources to throw at app development and can afford to spend a lot for even a little better anyways. My only point is that writing native apps for multiple platforms does not come for free.

While usually better than hybrid apps, the development costs need to be considered. MBCook on Apr 4, If you have limited resources perhaps supporting multiple platforms from the start isn't a good idea.

Yes, it depends on the app if it's worth it. You need to consider that developing two native apps is probably twice the cost of developing one cross-platform app for two platforms.

I think developers are overly aware of the differences between native and non-native apps, and overestimate how much a casual app user cares about a native experience to be honest. I'd love to implement native experiences for all apps I write but I have to take budgets into account.

MBCook on Apr 5, I would expect the opposite. They may not be able to put a name to the issues or even describe them, but I'd expect average people to show a clear preference for native apps basically every time in a side by side test.

I think developers tend to underestimate how important good UI responsiveness and feel is. Why couldn't you use RubyMotion? JamesMontemagno on Apr 4, Hey there, I am James Montemagno a developer evangelist at Xamarin.

I have been developing native apps with Xamarin for nearly 4 years now across iOS, Android, and of course Windows I was a customer for 2 years before joining Xamarin. I just wanted to clarify a bit about Xamarin and Xamarin.

It is important to know that Xamarin. Forms is a cross platform UI layer that sits on top of the core Xamarin platform. NET code and then building out native user interfaces for each platform.

Forms is extremely extensible, but it is not for every app, especially if you need a lot of custom UI or API access. For data entry, proofs-of-concept, or other simple apps it is great and we have a guide to help you select: The nice thing here is that either approach can use a shared-code backend.

I think I can address some of your concerns below: I would love to know which components you were having issues with and I can work with the team. There are a lot of settings in Visual Studio and Xamarin Studio as far as when to break on exceptions so I would love to help out here.

If you are exclusive to using Xamarin. Forms then yes you will have a limited set of controls, since Xamarin. Forms is a subset of common controls. Forms as this approach will automatically give you access to every control on each platform you are creating.

We are always looking to expand our documentation across all of our products and highly recommend checking out our updated developer portal: Forms related documentation as well as http: It is pretty extensive, but if there is something missing please please please let us know and we will work with the documentation team to add it.

In addition to this documentation we do have a book that has been written by Charles Petzold on Xamarin. Forms that is freely available: I apologize that this is tricky to find.

Have you taken a look at Facebook's new framework, React Native? They touch native components with native performance. Thanks, I've been using it for two months - I know how it works. I've used Phonegap, and was able to use the back button without any issues.

Having been building a decent size app tens of thousands of lines in Xamarin this really reflects our experience. One particular point is that the memory management is fairly complex under the covers with bridged objects and multiple memory management mechanisms working in parallel, this occasionally rears its head.

I'm not sure this qualifies as a better option to what Xamarin provides. Doesn't seem like a problem to me. The occasional weak reference to break cycles wouldn't hurt anything on Android, would it?

Some of our customers don't have the time or skill to do this themselves, and so we've recently created a bindings team that wraps third-party native libraries for our customers. Many of these end up published on http: But some of them we can't immediately publish because we need to get permission from the original library author to redistribute their library.

This is especially true for commercial SDKs. But if you contact us directly, we might be able to give you something. We also do custom bindings through our support team. This is something that unfortunately we haven't made very obvious.

But you can just email support xamarin. Like I said, this is an area we're pretty focused on. If you have any feedback, please feel free to let me know directly: No problems so far.

The point would be to develop on a platform that I like developing on. Why not develop as much as possible on the one you like? I think this is the key to making a great cross-platform solution. Pretty much any mobile app that's not a toy relies on native 3rd party sdks, be it ad providers or fancy Ui compinents.

Whatever platform first solves the issue of making integration of pods on iOs or AARs on Android a smooth process, will win. I don't see any options that come close to solving this. Xamarin is not native to either iOS or Android.

React Native has no clear path for accessing 3rd party libs at all yet. Whatever they can come up with will be further complicated by the fact that the JS engine is single threaded.

I stand corrected, I must have overlooked that section. Callbacks used to pass return values are still experimental though, and it's unclear how this will port over to Android once that backend works.

Usually it requires extracting the compiled library from the framework, and then translating each declaration from the library's header into the C binding definition. In many cases it's a couple of hours work or less.

That said, libraries that are provided as source files, with the instructions "just copy them into your project," can be incredibly frustrating. Our designer would love to use github.

Bindings are actually not that bad with Objective Sharpie. What SDKs are giving you trouble? I would agree that for a single platform it is not worthwhile though.

We tried mostly anything and not only tried; we used for production work because clients wanted us to and, outside native, Xamarin really is the best thing we worked with so far. For it's downsides, the upsides are too good to not take advantage off.

Some cons I recognize but the case everyone keeps mentioning that you get into issue when you really want to do complex native platform stuff with animations etc I haven't encountered. Nor is integrating SDK's an issue.

It's just something you plan in your project; it's a one-off. We integrated very large SDKs for hardware products and the hardware vendors, when something goes wrong, always blame the wrapper and it has 0 times been the wrapper; most of the times a bug or undocumented feature by the SDK creator.

I have used Cocos2d for clients and Monogame and Unity as well and the combination as well. I was talking about Xamarin here as app building tool, not for games. I do like Cocos2d.

Just have a Windows VM on your Mac. It truly is the best of both worlds. Yeah, a huge part of why I still mainly run Windows at home is easy access to Visual Studio. With third party extensions e.

Visual Studio with Web Essentials is awesome. I haven't used WebStorm, but using VS for typescript was way better than using it for javascript. With that explanation out of the way, let's break down this port of one of the all-time greats of the genre.

Incredibly, the developers behind the game were relative rookies, though perhaps that was just what a genre that had been largely populated, and nearly devastated, by complacent kings of the early computer gaming era.

Bioware had followed it up with a solid, if not terribly exciting, expansion several months later, but there was no way of knowing if they had simply caught lightning in a bottle or were going to on to greater things.

Shadows Of Amn drove home a point that most gamers of today know very well: Bioware was going to be a major player in the RPG genre for the foreseeable future. Grab any pack of RPG fans and you'll likely be able to get a good argument going about Bioware's merits, successes, failures, if and where they peaked, and so on.

There are many who feel the developer hit their high point with the Mass Effect series, some who cherish Star Wars: The disagreements are plentiful when it comes to Bioware, but the one thing most will agree on is that Baldur's Gate 2 was an outstanding sequel and one of the best games the developer has ever created.

Their stated goal was to make a game better than the original Baldur's Gate in every way. By most accounts, they succeeded. The game basically picks up where the first one left off, but in a fairly clever way for those who missed the original story.

You play the hero from the first game, who you can once again design to your specifications or select from a few default builds. The original story was essentially wrapped up, with the hero discovering they were one of the descendents of the slain god Bhaal, the Lord of Murder, and thwarting the plot of the wicked Bhaalspawn Sarevok, who sought to claim the dead god's title for his own.

Having rid the Western Heartlands of this menace, the hero and his companions set off on a new journey, only to have the lot of them get smacked over the head with socks full of quarters.

The point is, you and your friends have been captured, tossed in a dungeon, and are being experimented on by an evil wizard. Some of them have not survived the torture, while other have made it through with scars left inside and out.

For your part, you seem to have a bit of a spotty memory from the whole mess, and naturally, you've been relieved of all of your awesome gear. This plot device gives the game an excuse for you to not know who your companions are, should you be new to the series.

Initially, it's all about escaping your current situation, and this is the worst part of the game by far. It's sort of meant as a tutorial, but it's a bit too long, not very exciting, and actually makes very little effort to teach you anything.

Luckily, once you suffer through it, there's a great big world rich with possibilities waiting for you. Your goal is to find out what that evil wizard was up to, and the pursuit of that will take you on a lot of adventures.

Unlike the original game's Enhanced Edition, the new content here is actually pretty good, though the passing decade of time and change of writers means the text doesn't always seamlessly flow from the original writing.

To their credit, Overhaul Games did a much better job this time around than they did with the original game. The new content feels more properly fleshed out, and there are fewer bugs on the whole.

Which is not to say Baldur's Gate 2: Enhanced Edition is bug-free. Even after its first patch, which took over a year to release, the game still has a lot of little issues. Post-patch, there is at least nothing game-breaking that I could find.

The truth is that this is such a huge game with so many dangly bits that it was probably a real nightmare to recode and add content to without the whole thing collapsing on itself.

That's not an excuse, more a means of understanding. On the positive side of things, the graphics look fantastic in their new higher resolution, and the user interface is smartly-designed for touch controls.

It plays very well on the iPad, though some of the original problems still exist. Your characters will sometimes interpret your instructions in the most intriguing ways, pathfinding the longest possible way to that monster on the other side of the room.

It doesn't help that this game makes extensive use of tight quarters in its dungeons, making setting up your battle formation a comedy of errors at the best of times.

The problems only get worse if you're playing on anything but the largest iPhone. Sadly, this game has the same hilarious bug the original game does, where you can minimize important parts of the UI right off the screen, with the tab to bring them back virtually unreachable without pulling off some arcane wizardry in your device settings.

It also suffers from the possibly unsolvable problem of cramming an awful lot of buttons and information onto a very small screen. You can zoom in and out, which helps a lot, and you can also increase the size of the text, though that sometimes breaks things.

These things mitigate the problems to an extent, but you're still having to poke around in very detailed locations where a wrong step can have disastrous results. You can zoom in, but that sacrifices your wider view, and that can be fatal.

So, while you can play this game on your iPhone, unless you're sporting a beefy 6 or 6 Plus, you probably shouldn't. The iPad is the clear way to go here. If you're coming to this game for the first time and you're wondering what all the fuss is, let me fill you in.

It sits perfectly on the razor's edge between the older, complex, gameplay-driven RPGs of the s and early s and the modern, streamlined, story-driven RPGs of today. It has an awesome story with plenty of choices for how you interact with other characters.

Sure, most of the time it's the usual choice between petting a puppy or burning it, but with all of the different characters in play, there's a lot of things to see by role-playing your character in various ways.

The Bioware-standard plot twist in the sequel is perhaps not as strong as the one found in the original game, but it's also less predictable, so that's something.

There are tons of locations to visit, and they all bustle with life in a way the original game wished it could have. Side quests abound, many of which tell mini-stories that are incredibly interesting in their own right.

You don't have to do any of them, but you'll want to. You can also develop relationships with your party members, something we take for granted these days, but was quite novel at the time.

Now, say you're rolling your eyes at all this story business. You're in it for the gameplay, to heck with all of these dialogue trees. Well, I'm happy to tell you that you're going to have a great time in Baldur's Gate 2 as well.

If you like to get under the hood in RPGs, you're going to find tons of complexity here. There are not only several job classes to play as, each class sub-divides into kits, allowing you even finer control over what type of character you play as.

There's a frankly ridiculous amount of equipment to find, tons of magic spells to copy into your spellbook and memorize overnight, and a huge selection of party members to form your group from. You'll have to keep your alignment in mind when you're recruiting, however.

Yes, you like that, don't you? Best of all, none of this extra planning is for naught. Baldur's Gate 2 is a much more challenging game than the first, so while you might be able to hack your way through the main plot without digging too deeply, you're going to have get your hands a bit dirty if you want to see and do all there is in this game.

There are lots of different ways to approach situations, allowing for greater tactical diversity and a better feeling of ownership over whichever path you choose to success. This also gives the game a lot of replay value.

How you handle the game as a thief is pretty different to how you do things as a paladin, for example. Oh, and the loot. The loot is glorious, friends.

There are so many things you can pick up and carry with you if you're not overburdened. Plenty of pieces of enchanted gear to discover and wrest from the hands of the unfortunate prior owner. Lots of little bits of lore hidden in books and such that are well-written and sometimes provide meaningful, if not always useful, insight into the Forgotten Realms world.

You can ignore all of it, if you want, but if you're into that kind of thing, you're well-served here, make no bones about it. Then there's the sheer quantity of it all. This game is unbelievably huge.

There are tons of quests, dozens of locations, and more than sixty different types of monsters to battle. All of it is hand-designed, with not one meter of randomly-generated terrain to fill space.

It simply doesn't make business sense to make games on this scale anymore. The production values are excellent, too. The hand-designed nature of the environments means the game is free to include a lot of complex and beautiful visual touches.

The animations are excellent, particularly for the monsters. The Beholder, as much a mascot of Forgotten Realms as anything, is a gorgeous little sprite. Make sure you get a good look at it while it's mauling you to death.

The voice-acting is extensive and quite good, though it's a bit weird how Jim Cummings voices pretty much half of the cast in Throne Of Bhaal. The music is also excellent, knowing when to come and go for maximum impact.

This game had a pretty big budget for its time, and it shows. Enhanced Edition is a very good port of an incredibly good game. It has its share of issues, and its developer is known for letting a long time go between updates, but there's nothing here that should stop you from playing it if you have a device with a decent-sized screen.

If you're rocking a 4-inch screen or smaller, you may want to hit the brakes on picking this up. I mean, with patience and in the presence of no other options, you might still be able to have a good time here, but it's obvious that it was never meant to be played through such a small window and it suffers considerably as a result.

Otherwise, if you like RPGs at all, this is probably one of the essential entries in the genre on any platform, full-stop. Great review, as always. But upon reading the title of it, and at this day and age, I couldn't help to think "ok, one of the best CRPGs of all time is avaliable on iOS, but for how long?

I mean, one of the side effects of all this TWEWY polemic is that we can't consider that classics will still be playable when iOS 17 comes. Or iOS 9, for that matter. So all the fuss and work on porting something to be more or less playable on iOS becomes nothing, really.

Sorry for going off-topic, is just that this is so sad. Ideally, by the time iOS 17 came out, it'd be able to emulate older iOS versions. That's assuming Apple would choose to do something that makes sense, however I think by the time iOS 17 comes I'll be willing to pay 10 bucks again to any whichever company is doing the newest remaster.

Awesome news for iPhone users! Enjoyed this immensely on my iPad. My only concern will be screen size for those not using the iPhone 6 something largest screen. Feedback on this would be great, trying to manipulate the small screen.

What a thoroughly epic review!! I've never played Baldur's Gate, but after reading this Man it would have been an instant buy for me if I didn't play it times true number on pc.

Icewind Dale is the former, BG the latter. I think most people would prefer BG2 over ID, but not all. Hm tbh I first played Icewind dale back in the days and then I went for baldurs gate.

Icewind dale is better for pure dungeon crawling but baldurs gate got the story. I enjoyed both equally both have great points. My suggestion is to go for icewind dale first to get fired up and then go for baldurs gate!

The best part about this game is the fact that the developers weren't shy about putting nearly game-breaking gear in it. Sure most of its ridiculously hard to get, but that's what makes it so damn fun getting it.

Save all your pantaloons!! You'll thank me later. Personally I'd say Baldur's Gate, because I think it has more to it. From what I've heard, Icewind Dale focuses more on combat and has less story, and BG focuses more on the story aspects.

They're both great games, though! Icewind Dale is good but it's a considerably less balanced plate and best enjoyed after BG has familiarized you with the engine. You know I actually believe it's better to go for ID first to truly learn how to fight.

Coments:

26.01.2018 Togrel :

Watch family friendly and Christian movies and TV shows at Pure Flix online or on your mobile phone, tablet, Roku, Apple TV, or Amazon Fire TV. Start your free month. M-Horse Pure 1 vs iPhone 8 Plus. M-Horse Pure 1 vs iPhone 8 Plus, Jesus Lugo on RULES OF SURVIVAL – ULTRA GRAPHICS (iOS/Android) – iPhone X Gameplay;. Apple iPhone X vs Google Pixel 2 XL vs Galaxy Note 8 vs LG V Specs and size comparisons. iOS Android 8 Pixel XL 2 for me, big battery, pure android and.

10.03.2018 Zutaxe :

Jan 31, · Dissidia Final Fantasy Opera Omnia from Square Enix has finally released on iOS and Android devices in English. Dissidia Final Fantasy Opera Omnia Pure. Vegan Shocked When Chef Responds To Protest By Carving Up Meat In Front Of Them. Oh the horror! /s. Some thoughts after (almost) a year I came from a pure but you can build these out in the Xamarin Designers for both iOS and Android inside of Visual Studio.

7 inch android phones how to unlock - 4