▲ 78 points
back
26 comments
And they've already raised the prices.
Edit: Actually, they've just changed their "startup" pricing and it isn't publicly available anymore. It might actually be better, if they allow you to have more than 3 devs.
More importantly, they've removed IntelliJ and Eclipse integration from the Solo/Indie plan to match Xamarin keeping Visual Studio integration out of their Indie plan.
Exactly. However, it looks like their IntelliJ based IDE is still included in Solo, which I missed initially because they put it at the top of the chart. That's a considerable improvement over MonoDevelop
RoboVM has been free for libgdx users. Xanarin is disliked by independent developers for its pricing structure. Will RoboVM remain free to use? I hope so
"If you haven’t already, please make sure to start your 30 day free trial of RoboVM to get a license key which now is required in order to use RoboVM."
The open source version remains on their GitHub page here: https://github.com/robovm/robovm
libGDX and PlayN folks get a free license with debugger support for commercial and non-commercial games.
Thanks badlogic. Can you provide any details about why libGDX gets special treatment? I'm curious
badlogic, I can't reply to a comment thread going as deep as your last comment. Did Xamarin specifically put in the acquisition that it will remain free for libGDX developers? Because my faith in Xamarin is not high that they won't remove free integration with RoboVM, as Xamarin loves charging developers high prices, and thus me developing games using libGDX and RoboVM becomes a risky decision.
It will stay free for libGDX folks.
Because our libGDX community had a bog impact on RoboVM over the past year.
Some components are open source. So as long as you don't need the Interface Builder or Eclipse/IntelliJ support, it'll still be free. They did raise prices though.
This is no longer true going forward. You must pay to use the newer versions at all; the RoboVM github repository hasn't been updated since early September and will no longer be developed.
>Xanarin is disliked by independent developers for its pricing structure.
Define "independent developers". Because a lot of them do use Xamarin.
Read https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7954406 if you like.
A lot of people are vocal about the price, use it or not; you can't pretend it's not true.
It's a pretty common trend for people to complain about prices period though on hn (I've seen people people complain about Intellij and it's pretty reasonable IMHO).
However, I do think their asking price for the edition that lets you use Visual Studio is a bit steep (I also pay for it, but still think it's kind of high).
Xamarin is IMHO the best cross-platform SDK, but I wouldn't recommend it, or any cross-platform SDK, to indie devs unless that dev's background is in C# and they really really want to keep using C# AND they know what they want a cross-platform SDK for. It's best for shops with several C# devs.
The official RoboVM page doesn't mention anymore the free option. They have some open source (at least for now) code on Github and you can fork it if you wish.
As the copyright holder RoboVM (or Xamarin) can chose at any time to close source the code and change the license for new versions.
Interesting business move. Since it appears the plan is to get RoboVM customers to use Xamarin Insights and Xamarin Test Cloud does that mean that Xamarin's original product of C#/XAML to native iOS and Android dev environment is going to come to be seen as the razor to the services metaphorical blades if you will?
Kudos to the Xamarin management for this strategic move.
(CIL BYTECODE / JVM BYTECODE) => LLVM => NATIVE
Isn't RoboVM in the same place license wise as Android? Start with loosely defined subset of Java. Transform to something that isn't Java byte code and doesn't adhere to the Java VM specification. Doesn't pass the TCK and never will.
Up until now RoboVM has been featured frequently by Oracle in an attempt to mask their weakness in the mobile space (since Oracle doesn't acknowledge Android). I wonder how quickly this will stop.
I never really looked at RoboVM, would anyone whose used it care to weigh in on the positives and negatives of RoboVM?
It has limitations on runtime introspection and modification, but once you learn them, you can use idiomatic java and/or scala. That said, the limitations make it difficult to easily port.
The only limitation is the lack of runtime byte code genration. Reflection and proxies work as intended.
One big positive is that it uses the same class libraries as Android, so if you're already targeting Android and not using runtime code generation, you don't have to port any of your non-UI code.
How easy would it be for a competitor to use their code? It seems to me to be difficult given Xamarin's positive reputation, but are there any legal or technical barriers for a competitor to offer support, patches, etc., and contribute upstream?