This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Java Buzz
by Fred Grott.
Original Post: Chicago Startups
Feed Title: GrottWorkShop
Feed URL: http://shareme.github.io/atom.xml
Feed Description: Android development with a passion for Android, Java, and Agile.
So I am looking for something special in a Chicago StartUp that I can grab first as an outside contractor where I complete one android project but later come on as employee. I have noticed some things so let me detail them.
Technical Debt
Non-Tech co-founders not willing to go the extra mile to partiicpate in technical discussion to understand what technical debt they are paying and what debt they will pay in future per different implementations and different development processes.
Now I am not saying that they understand all technical details. However when a non-tech co-founder only wants to review mobile apps in mobile device as opposed to boht that and a discussion of technical debt faced per development processes they generally face a increasing wrong decision as they than get blind sighted by the development process that they did not review or ask about. If their decision process is wrong in this area there are generally more areas where they are applying the same miss-informed roll of the dice and praying for luck rather than a more appreciated analytical approach.
I had to just explain to some co-founder that a server Model and Mobile View and Controller in a native mobile app is tightly coupled not loose coupled and hence the need for agile mobile native development and that is something that their technical co-founder in conjunction with their non-technical co-founder should have caught.
Co-founders
The non-tech co-founders are excelling in their areas of expertise but when dealing with the picking of a tech co-founder and other tech staff they are not upping their analytical analysis A-game. That means it could be an indicator of not applying analytical analysis to for example determine the proper business model to pursue and that is kind of important choice as most Chicaog Startups have finite seed capital and often times its on the slim side.
Android Mobile
Chicago startups still do not understand the cost difference between hiring just an average android developer as opposed to hiring and agile android application developer as opposed to hiring an iphone developer as most of the time the Chicago startup only has enough seed capital to develop a native mobile application for only one mobile platform.
While the costs in hardware are different, iphone is higher which is somewhat non-obvious to most people so let me put it this way. IPhone costs about $8,000 in equipment and software while even buying 3 android devices(the most required) is about $5,000. But that is not where most of the cost difference shows up.
The area that the most of the cost difference between the lower priced android development and the higher priced iphone develoment shows up in is the development time required to develop that native application. Most android native applications can be developed in 3 months or less but on the iphone side development time is doubled. Which would you spend if you were a startup, $40,000 or $80,000? If they are making a wrong decision in this area than they are denying $40,000 from a different area that maybe cannot afford to be withou that $40,000 which indicates a decision and analytical analysis strategy that one should not bet on.
You would think given the cost difference that more startups upon hearing that world wide market penetration is higher for android than iphone that more Chicago startups would choose to start out developing the mobile application on the android mobile platform first. That is just not the case that I am seeing.
Biases
Some of that previous choice of iphone over android despite difference in development costs can be explained by the over-reliance on UX/UI professionals as they tend to be biased towards iPhone and Chicago seems to be filled with those biased UX/UI professionals. However, that does not excuse the failure to evaluate the actual costs minus the UX/UI biases. I seem to be focusing on the extra capabilities of the non-tech co-founders.
So far it seems to allow me to weed-out those Chicago startups that would not have great odds of success but will that blind-side me if they have excess seed capital? It would seem that excess seed captial combined with an improper way or process of analyzing things would make a disasterous combination so hopefully my process of picking finds an acceptable Chicago Startup in the near future.
If you are a Chicago startup that needs to build a native mobile application you might want to join in an email conversation with someone like me to understand the technical debts faced upon choosing either iphone or android as that first mobile platform. But even more importantly the higher costs of development if you choose not to use agile methods in native mobile and developer side development.
Samsung vs Apple Verdict
No matter whcih side youi are on, Apple just told the American buying public that the 50% less in costs Samsung Android devices are the exact same as iphone. That means the market penetration for the USA for android will swing towards android as that battle drags on as the general public is being fed the Apple marketing line that they are the same. That is not a great marketing strategy choice for Apple as they got burned before when they made that choice, remember the MS vs Apple suit about MS stealing the Mac OS GUI? It turned out with Apple both in market share. Remember always before the Apple marketing line to the general public was that iphone was unique.
Chicago Startups need to take advantage of the near short-term USA market swing towards Android and focus the first native mobiel application they develop on the android platform.
Previous Topic
