Nothing happens for free. Whether you’re planning to incorporate a native iPhone app, a mobile website, or an Android app (let’s not even talk about Microsoft, or Blackberry platforms, right now) you’re going to be spending some bucks. Unless you’ve got the same size pockets as Walmart or Amazon, it’s probably not going to be feasible to do them all. What, then, is your best choice?

Let’s do a little cost comparison. It costs at least $30,000 to design, implement and deploy a brand- quality iPhone app. If you want to build the same for a non-iOS smartphone the cost will be similar, but remember you’ll likely have to build the same app several times if you want to really reach as many smartphone users as possible.

With the surge of smartphones, tablets, and other mobile tools in the marketplace, programmers are creating more apps than ever to fill the need these devices have created. But just like car enthusiasts used to debate whether Chevy or Ford were the best cars made, today the great debate rages over who will become the dominant force in mobile app development—Android or Apple’s iOS.

The answer depends on who’s doing the arguing. If you’re going to talk about devices, well, it’s a lot easier to create apps for Apple devices because there are fewer screen sizes to deal with. There’s the iPhone, the iPad, and Apple’s assortment of laptops and desk monitors. And that’s it. Compare that to Android’s plethora of phones and devices (there are five separate screen resolutions for AT&T’s Android phones alone) and you start to see some of the hurdles developers face.

More mobile devices mean more mobile apps—it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out, does it? But while Android-based smartphones greatly outnumber iPhones in terms of sales, it’s the iPhone, along with Apple’s other mobile products, that developers prefer when building apps.

It’s not that Apple’s platform is perfect, not by a long shot. Objective C is not universally loved (one programmer called combining SmallTalk and C as pleasant as mixing milk and lemonade) and many programmers prefer the simple, sturdy dependability of Java. While performance is prioritized with Apple’s OS, it can actually complicate the process of app building, since the device is predisposed to approach everything in terms of speedy display. You want more than basic info or functionality in your app? Okay, but you’ll have to work for it.

Remember reading about the California Gold Rush in school? Some poor sucker found gold in a stream and before you could say “lottery ticket” hordes of people showed up with shovels and picks, convinced they were going to be millionaires. A few found gold and got rich, but most never made a dime. Not from gold-mining anyway.

Today’s rush to join the world of web app creation is a kind of like the Gold Rush. Everybody thinks they’re going to make millions inventing the next Angry Birds or social media site. A few will make some decent money; one or two guys will make a serious pile creating something amazing in their spare time, but most won’t make anything. And if they hired a company to build it for them, they may end up losing their shirts. Remember, most mobile apps take about $35,000 to build.

With the proliferation of mobile devices growing ever larger, it’s become necessary to consider not just what content to put on your website, but how it will be viewed, and from where. Because assuming your website is only going to be viewed on a computer monitor is about as outdated as an eight-track tape deck.

Today’s Internet enthusiast is just as likely (some evidence would say more likely) to look at your website from their smartphone. But here’s the problem—that awesome website you just paid big bucks for only looks awesome when viewed on a great, big LCD monitor. Try to bring it up on your phone and you’ll spend more time scrolling up and down, and left and right, to read it than you’ll want to spend.

A few months back I bought a groovy Samsung Galaxy tablet. It was an older version; the one with the seven-inch screen and the Android 2.2 (Froyo) Operating System. But it was still a cool little gizmo, and I felt very tech-spiffy when I’d whip it out to read Jane Austin or look up gourmet recipes on the web.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t use it for the main reason I’d bought it. As a freelance writer and a graduate student I was looking for an affordable, light-weight alternative to lugging my heavy HP laptop all over creation. Especially when walking across campus during the intense, sweltering summers of Tennessee. I didn’t need the full firepower of my laptop, but I did need a device that would let me open documents I’d e-mailed from my laptop. Most of all, I needed those documents—like the manuscript I was editing—to retain the notes and corrections symbols I’d added when working on it back home. But, it turned out, that was asking too much. There just wasn’t a fully-featured Microsoft Word app available for a Galaxy tablet. Damn.