I disagree completely, I’m actually an aspx and vb.net programmer and I just doesn’t have the time to learn another language needed in this case, so I use app inventor because it’s simple and more or less powerful for my needs.
What Andres created is not simply doable with blocks. I mean, I already made it in different apps, but it quickly became a mess of arrangements, so if I can have an extension that do it for me, it’s totally appreciated.
We actually need more extensions to allow less messing around with nested arrangements and graphics crazyness.
1 Like
@gabryk If you disagree with me or not, or if you have time or not to learn a programming language doesn’t change the fact that the App Inventor project is an educational tool to teach people how to code. Period. I never said you can’t use/make some extension that can be done with blocks. By all means, do it. What I said is that the true value of App Inventor is to actually learn how to program your own solutions. Visualising the solution, laying the blocks in the right order, debug you code, and eventually achieve success is a more rewarding experience than just slapping a block to do some easy calculations. That doesn’t teach you anything. Now, if you are not using this learning tool to learn how to program, then that’s a different thing.
Doesn’t mean it cannot change purpose. Maybe that’s 100% right for the MIT version.
So, what is the meaning of this:
In its current MIT version it is a good starting point to experiment, but its limits become more evident the more you use it. Extensions try to expand AI potentiality, and that’s good.
I think AI can became really more of what it is now, providing 100% of flexibility and same potentiality of a classic programming language.
One of the current weaknesses of AI, IMHO, is precisely how messy the designer could become. So I welcome any extensions that allow me to use 1 arrangement instead of 2 (or 3 or 4)…
MIT purpose is to help people teach to make apps & code. It cannot & will never change it’s purpose. Distributions like Thunkable & AppyBuilder are mostly for professional app making. I agree with @Italo
Please, just read, what actually Evan Patton said together with extensions update in App Inventor Open Source Dev forums…
2 Likes
If you make a mess when programming in AI doesn’t mean we all do too. Some people are better organized.
Again, everybody is free to do what they want. Use an extension to do 1+1, it’s your choice.
If you are a teacher, you tell your kids to do an app to calculate 1+1, and then they find somebody did an extension to do 1+1, they will not move a finger to find the solution by themselves. They will just get the extension. They didn’t learn how to code, which STILL IS the purpose of this platform. If it will change some day, we don’t know yet.
Sorry, you’re saying exactly what I’m saying… to me, what Italo said can applied 100% to MIT AI, not to other servers out there. This is what I meant.
What’s the difference between AI and Thunkable? What makes Thunkable or AppyBuilder more professional oriented?
Don’t know why you continue to subtly attack me personally, I’m just expressing my opinion, can’t help if doesn’t coincide with yours.
For instance the availability of admob and IAP components!? MIT does not have them and rightly it will never have them.
App Inventor wasn’t meant for that. I & @Italo said to you a lot of times. MIT is used for teaching people how to code & helps them to solve a problem by thinking. If you want use things like Camera views, admob rewarded videos & etc. then learn to code. Use Android studio.
You also said what I’m saying… I have the feeling there’s some misundestanding with you…
I was talking about other AI servers, not MIT
por favor si alguien me puede pasar este metodo en bloques de inventor
The ads doesn’t make it any more professional oriented. It just means you can place ads in the same apps you can make in App Inventor. I’m talking of real features that makes Thunkable more suitable to develop professional apps. Name some please.
I’m not attacking you. You may be disorganized when programming with blocks, when other people is not. That’s it. You shouldn’t take everything I say as an “attack”, LOL!
This is an example of how you can make a complex app while being organized. Not attacking you or anything, relax! LOL!
As I mentioned at some point, the inventor has 1 difficulties that you can never overcome that is the use of the ram so that between fewer blocks aya in the block panel will be much better.
When I started to program in inventor I had 4 GB and a core duo and I got a point where it could not be built using that hardware configuration.
That limit has an easy explanation. Because originally this platform was not meant to be used as a professional platform. That limit still persists until today.
First of all, the question actually was not, if App Inventor or any of its distributions is more professionally oriented. The question also was not, if providing extensions for simple tasks is useful or not…
The question was about colors and hex values. Usually we use color blocks for colors and we have the possibility to use the make color block to create any color, also we can use integer values. Now is it a good idea to use hex values instead of the existing philosophy?
And probably the next extension developer thinks, it’s a good idea to use CMYK values for another color extension…
We also can ask more generally: should extension developers follow the existing App Inventor design decisions and philosophies or not? What will create less confusion?
Taifun
PS: let me suggest @moderators to move this discussion into a separate thread…
1 Like
I think that if the developer wants to use a different color notation, it should be specified in the title of the extension or in a description. Or offer the same block but with the standard App Inventor color notation. Otherwise, people who is learning (which is the main audience, btw) will find it confusing when installing the extension and not being able to insert a color block in the slots.
Nice example, too bad it is has nothing to do with what I was saying… I was talking about designer and arrangements.
I agree on this, when something new is added it should follow the specifics.
But I also understand what Andres said… @Andres_Cotes maybe you can provide both solutions? Like an hex and an rgb input (accepting the ai color blocks)
Those blocks are for my Video Poker app, which has a very complex matrix of arrangements, which I had to create in the designer by hiding and showing different arrangements to make everything fit and to be able to do that, you have to be well organized. Also, the arrangements turn visible, invisible and change color at runtime.
So the example applies.