14. Interface and Application Programming: Amalia Bordoloi and Angel Fang¶

Group assignment:

Compare as many tool options as possible.
Document your work on the group work page and reflect on your individual page what you learned.

Overall Comparison: Processing vs. MIT App Inventor¶

Feature	Processing	MIT App Inventor
Type	Text-based IDE for creative coding	Block-based visual app builder
Programming Style	Java-based code	Drag-and-drop blocks
Best For	Visual/interactive prototypes, serial data (e.g., Arduino)	Mobile apps with simple UIs, Bluetooth/IoT interaction
Hardware Integration	Strong with serial (e.g., Arduino, sensors)	Strong with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices (e.g., ESP32, Arduino)
Ease of Use	Beginner-friendly code, but requires typing	Very beginner-friendly, no code required
Offline Use	Yes (Processing IDE)	Yes with offline App Inventor version (optional)

Processing¶

Pros¶

Great for visual programming, drawing, and real-time data visualization
Excellent for communicating with Arduino via serial port
Supports external libraries (e.g., ControlP5 for GUI)

Cons¶

Not for mobile or web apps
GUI requires manual coding and is less modern

MIT App Inventor¶

Pros¶

Easily create Android apps with Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, sensors
Ideal for educational environments or rapid mobile app prototyping
Built-in blocks for hardware like micro:bit, Arduino (via Bluetooth), ESP32 (via Wi-Fi)

Cons¶

Limited customization compared to full code
Only Android (iOS support is experimental)

It is better to use processing if you want a desktop interface with real-time visuals, you are reading or writing data to hardware over serial, or you are making an interactive art/tech display. It is better to use MIT APP Inventor if you want a mobile interface, your device communicates with Bluetooth or Wi-Fi, or you want a block-based, beginner-friendly workflow.

To see full conversation with ChatGPT about this week, visit Amalia’s Interface Week.

Last update: May 16, 2025