That's true, C++ is a very complex language that lets the programmer to involve different aspects for the program.
What does that even mean?
Another thing I find boggling is, since when was complexity a good trait in a programming language?
EDIT: To actually answer your question OpenGL ES is an off-shoot of OpenGL based off OpenGL 2.0. The programming models are almost identical, so if you are familiar with one, you can use the other with ease. You can see most of the details here.
That's true, C++ is a very complex language that lets the programmer to involve different aspects for the program.
What does that even mean?
Another thing I find boggling is, since when was complexity a good trait in a programming language?
EDIT: To actually answer your question OpenGL ES is an off-shoot of OpenGL based off OpenGL 2.0. The programming models are almost identical, so if you are familiar with one, you can use the other with ease. You can see most of the details here.
I didn't expressed well, sorry.
I never said complexity is a good thing in a language. On the contrary, I was trying to say that C++ is too "heavy". You need to care about memory.
Basically complex things are made with complex languages.
...
So, OpenGL ES has a fixed function pipeline... It is a bad thing, isn't it?
That's true, C++ is a very complex language that lets the programmer to involve different aspects for the program.
What does that even mean?
Another thing I find boggling is, since when was complexity a good trait in a programming language?
EDIT: To actually answer your question OpenGL ES is an off-shoot of OpenGL based off OpenGL 2.0. The programming models are almost identical, so if you are familiar with one, you can use the other with ease. You can see most of the details here.
I didn't expressed well, sorry.
I never said complexity is a good thing in a language. On the contrary, I was trying to say that C++ is too "heavy". You need to care about memory.
Basically complex things are made with complex languages.
...
So, OpenGL ES has a fixed function pipeline... It is a bad thing, isn't it?
No, OpenGL ES 2 *doesnt* have a fixed pipeline. The fixed pipeline was removed from normal OpenGL, then added back.
I wouldn't call it a bad thing, just a thing. Fixed pipeline graphics libraries ( GL 1.1, DX9 ) were certainly a heck of a lot easier to learn, but less flexible and more importantly, less well suited towards modern GPUs.
In a way silicon design changed from optimizing video cards to perform a lot of functions fast, to performing many many many many many more simpler tasks much much faster. So, on modern hardware, it should perform a heck of a lot faster. I am butchering that in my over simplification, but thats the gist of it.
Frankly, the world has moved on and fixed pipeline SDKs are a dying breed. This is one of the big flaws to XNA, it was built around DX9 and a fixed pipeline. Part of this is a shame though, as it really was a lot easier to comprehend fixed function pieplines. They were basically just a huge library of functions burned onto silicon. Now you use smaller building blocks to perform the same action... often adding a great deal of complexity, but also a great deal of flexibility.
As to C++, I wouldn't consider it's ability to directly allocate memory complex, that speaks more to being a low level language. I mean C has the same functionality and it's one of the simplest production languages out there.
What makes C++ complex is the cruft. It's basically 4 programming languages smushed together with 20 years of cruft added on. Hell, C++ templating is itself a turing complete language. On top, some parts of the language are just (needlessly?) complicated, the inheritance system is certainly one such beast, the linker is another, while the preprocessor is arguably another.
Karsten_
I love the C++ syntaxis, the structure, the complexity.
I only use C/C++ for my projects. I want to be a proffessional C++ programmer. I really don't like to program in other languages.
But the complexity of C++ is a fact. I don't want to mislead anyone.
riverreal,
I dont mean to sound insulting, I really don't but C++ when written properly does not need manual memory management. This demonstrates that you are following a typical trend of this forums. Not trying out C++ before making an opinion and just going by what the rest of the users say. C# however, with threads and critical resources *does* require extremely manual management whereas C++ can use RAII.
As for Seraph and stuff about slash dot.. Not sure. Sounds a bit too trendy for me. Kinda like github and web developers and twitter API integration. Not really my "kinda scene" ;)
I started using Vim exclusively once Microsoft Visual Studio 6 changed and cost me time getting used to the 2002/3 .NET version.
Slashdot? Trendy? HAHA! 
Is tweed trendy? ;)
As to C++, you can't blame him or many others. Pick up almost any (modern!) book on C++ and they teach it horribly. If C++ started over with C++11 and removed all the cruft and legacy crap... removed the C underpinnings and make it clear that manual memory allocation was a task of last resort, then the language might not be such a terrible thing to recommend to beginners. I have a Safari books online membership and recently looked at the lasted "revised for C++ 11" version of many iconic books, and most of the time they just added a few chapters to the end of the book... they are still functionally teaching C++ like it's 1993.
As it stands right now, with the language, the history, the resources, the existing code... C++ is a collection of hand grenades waiting to explode.
riverreal,
Oh OK. Sorry for my accusation ;).
I am a guest lecturer at a University and hear the students groan as soon as C++ is mentioned. This is purely a result of all the millions Microsoft has thrown into marketing C# (by discrediting C++ and Java) and the frustration of having to explain this to them is admittedly carried with me onto these forums.
Back on topic...
I saw this mentioned by another developer on this forums. I dont know too much about it on iPhone but it looks really polished (and not just open-source but also an apache project).
http://cordova.apache.org/
See, this is the kinda stuff that I have trouble taking you seriously after hearing ( and the type of stuff that makes me not visit Slashdot). Microsoft is one of the biggest C++ contributors out there, on the board, strongly support C++ internally, wrote their APIs primarily in C++, made it a first class language across Windows 8, and employee some of the foremost C++ minds like Herb Sutter. They also make what is perhaps the worlds best C++ IDE and optimizing compilers... if not perhaps a bit lagging in the standard compliance category.
C# is a great language on it's own merits, not as a result of marketing. Hell, C# is generally sold in the same SKU as C++!
Now you could argue that Microsoft went to war with Sun, but the weapon in this case wasn't C#, but J++. Plus frankly, at the time, Java was so awful it needed an implementation like J++.
Most of the information from all answers in this thread is complete bullshit and has nothing to do with the OPs origional request which is what are good tools for developing iOS and Android Apps and not one single post has tried to answer his question.
If you are a complete beginner then using the languages and software recommended by the manufacturers is the way to go. This means that:
For iPhone you should use Xcode and Objectivve C.
For Android you should use Eclipse and Java.
If you are wanting to get your foot wet in doing cross platform games then something like Construct2 or Game Maker or even Unity.
If you are more experienced and a lot more code orientated and want to make games then something like moai or another engine that I can really recommend gameplay3D from rim.
Of course if your apps are not going to be games then really just stck with the manufacturers recommendations. THere are other solutions like html5 engines or flex to iOS but if you get stuck trying to sign an app then you have almost no support. Genuinly if you are serious about creating anything for iOS then buy a mac.
The big downside to C++ on iOS is, well, XCode support for C++ stinks. I would go far as to say XCode stinks, but some people seem to like it for reasons I can't quite fathom.
What? XCode has very good C++ "support", using LLVM/Clang for compilation and static analysis. They've a quite nice integration going there, really, so where are you getting your facts? And that last part -- I like XCode, in fact, I prefer it highly over Visual Studio and I'm a professional (if that lends some kind of magical power to my opinion). If you can't fathom that, I'd say you're far from reality and just limiting yourself out of some illogical reason.
