Yeah right, that's Apple propaganda if you ask me... Developers have always been coding for different screen sizes and different hardware... On a desktop you also don't know if someone has a webcam if you are coding a chat programm or not... I see that it is a bit more difficult on handsets... but still, it's not like devs can write apps that work on more than one device
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 10:53, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > > One of the problems I can see with multiple platforms is app > incompatibilities. > > With the iPhone app store when you buy an app you know the app will > work. With more Android devices coming out and the current state of > Market I'm concerned that users will end up buying apps which either > don't work on their screen resolution, or simply need features that the > devices don't have. > > Hopefully the powers that be have thought about this and have plans in > place already for more than just endorsed devices like the G1. > > Al. > > Sena Gbeckor-Kove wrote: > > True, but I suspect there will be more Android devices than iPhones in > > short order. For a start Samsung sells the most touch screen devices > > (not Apple) and they're working on multiple handsets. Furthermore, > > NetBooks and other form factors will start showing up late in the year. > > Don't flame me iPhone fanboys (I have one, I have developers writing > > fr it and its a nice platform if you don't mind conforming to the cult > > of Jobs and being hellishly restricted API wise, it'll change). Apple > > is however only a single manufacturer. They make excellent devices > > thogh and have attracted a rabidly loyal fan base of which I am one, > > though less loyal and without the rabies. > > > > ;) > > > > S > > > > > > On 2 Jan 2009, at 22:13, loty wrote: > > > > > >> There is only 1 Android phone on the market - G1 and while there is > >> only 1 iPhone as well number of G1 users is nowhere near the number of > >> iPhone users. Not yet anyway - maybe in a couple of years... > >> I think there are more developers desperately trying to get some money > >> for their apps than there are current Android users willing to pay for > >> them :) > >> > >> On Jan 2, 9:50 am, NitroDesk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> @Dianne, > >>> You are right, i think part of the reason why the demand for the > >>> ability to release paid apps is high so early on is the fantastic job > >>> that has been done on the SDK, the platform that was picked for the > >>> programmability and in general the confidence developers (even at the > >>> time of release) have on the platform that they will be able to stand > >>> behind the apps they build. A lot of this is testament to the trust > >>> that we as developers place on the platform. > >>> So all this clamoring should be taken as a compliment :-) > >>> -Nitro > >>> > >>> On Dec 30 2008, 5:29 pm, "Justin Collum" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> I heard somewhere that there was a 90 day moratorium on not-free > >>>> apps. Looks > >>>> like I heard wrong. > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Dianne Hackborn > >>>> <[email protected]>wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Just to be clear, this is lots of speculation and no facts. :) > >>>>> Some facts > >>>>> I can share: Android is stable as of 1.0 and we will not be > >>>>> breaking > >>>>> compatibility, and in particular we will not be breaking > >>>>> applications in the > >>>>> cupcake branch. > >>>>> > >>>>> Comparing Android to iPhone in that way is also a questionable > >>>>> endeavor, > >>>>> since the way they were released was very different: iPhone > >>>>> shipped for > >>>>> almost a year with no support for third party apps and then > >>>>> released an > >>>>> update to add that feature, while Android shipped from the start > >>>>> with third > >>>>> party app support. I can't comment on adoption of the G1 vs. the > >>>>> original > >>>>> iPhone, but clearly at this point there is a smaller number of > >>>>> Android > >>>>> users, simply because we started from 0 at the point where third > >>>>> party > >>>>> developers were supported. This is something developers should > >>>>> keep in mind > >>>>> and certainly isn't being hidden. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Sven Boden > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I think the answer is guessable (and no I don't work for > >>>>>> Google)... when > >>>>>> the android OS settles down more or less. I expect it a little > >>>>>> while after > >>>>>> the "cupcake" release. Currently some things are still going to > >>>>>> break and if > >>>>>> they would allow you to buy applications from the market, you > >>>>>> would need to > >>>>>> get a new version of the applications very quickly, ... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I also don't think android adoption is as quick as the iphone's. > >>>>>> In a lot > >>>>>> of countries you can't even get an T1 in a "legal/normal way"... > >>>>>> Belgium > >>>>>> e.g. :( . So maybe if applications would come out now as paying > >>>>>> applications > >>>>>> they would disappoint the developers as well qua sales. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>> Sven > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2008/12/29 NitroDesk <[email protected]> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> True, but the most distressing part is the inability to > >>>>>>> distribute > >>>>>>> paid apps on the market, even with the possibility of charging > >>>>>>> for > >>>>>>> them offsite. > >>>>>>> I bet this keeps lots of good apps from showing up on the > >>>>>>> market, and > >>>>>>> worse still, from being developed. > >>>>>>> -Nitro > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Dec 28, 12:48 pm, "Sven Boden" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> There are already sites out there which allow you to charge > >>>>>>>> for android > >>>>>>>> apps, for the "official" site I didn't see anything out there > >>>>>>>> yet. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> Sven > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 2008/12/28 Redhunt <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Has anyone heard any news on when developers will be able to > >>>>>>>>> post > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> apps > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> for a fee ? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Dianne Hackborn > >>>>> Android framework engineer > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>> > >>>>> Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have > >>>>> time to > >>>>> provide private support. All such questions should be posted on > >>>>> public > >>>>> forums, where I and others can see and answer them.- Hide quoted > >>>>> text - > >>>>> > >>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > subsidiaries. > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
