110 likes | 206 Views
Dirk van Schalkwyk Supervisor: Dr Greg Foster Co-Supervisor: Mrs Madeleine Wright. Project Title: A Comparative Study of JME and Flash Lite for Mobile Data Services. Agenda. Background Problem Statement Project Objective Work Covered thus far. Background.
E N D
Dirk van SchalkwykSupervisor: Dr Greg FosterCo-Supervisor: Mrs Madeleine Wright Project Title: A Comparative Study of JME and Flash Lite for Mobile Data Services
Agenda • Background • Problem Statement • Project Objective • Work Covered thus far
Background • Over 2 billion worldwide mobile subscribers • 3.9 billion worldwide subscribers by 2010, 50% of world’s population • 350 billion text messages sent every month worldwide [Kona Survey, 2007] • $95 billion spent on 3G licenses • NTT DoCoMo to spend up to $1.7 billion on its Super 3G network with speeds of 300Mbps (fibre-optic)
Problem Statement • In 2006, voice calls declined by 28% for prepaid and 22% for postpay customers (UK) • High investment in mobile technologies • Mobility companies turn to mobile data services • Need the right development tools to ensure the rapid and efficient creation, deployment, and management of custom content on mobile phones
Definitions • Mobile data service: • any service on a mobile phone other than voice e.g. SMS (Short Message Service), Number Portability [Vodacom, 2007] • Flash Lite • a version of Adobe Flash Player designed for mobile phones • JME (formerly J2ME) • a Java Platform consisting of a set of technologies and specifications developed for mobile phones
Project Objective • Develop a prototype incorporating selected APIs developed under Flash Lite and JME • Test effectiveness of competing standards • Conclusion drawn from the software engineering process and run-time target system
Mobile development comparison • Application development • Foundation language • Learning curve • Debuggers available • Emulators available • IDE available • Cross-platform deployment • Installer packaging options
Mobile development comparison • 2. Capabilities • Graphical interface • Functionality • Phone data access • Runtime speed
Mobile development comparison 3. Growth • Developer community and support • Market penetration
Work done thus far • Demo