On 19 Jan., 13:04, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > Of course what people do now is to just provide different builds of > the same application, using minSdkVersion and maxSdkVersion. The x+1 > problem manifests itself when this latter attribute is left out. If > this had been specified, the user wouldn't even get to see the > application in the marked in the first place.
If you write an app, is that a solution? Say, you're App is Android 1.6 (which came out Sep 15, according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Update_history) and you lock it down to this version, then neither the Motorola Droid crowd nor the proud Google Nexus owners will see your app. I think the underlying problem is that Google puts out too many releases in too short a time for developers to keep up - four since they released Android 1.0 in Oct 2008 (1.5, 1.6, 2.0, 2.1), with three out of this four in the last four months. Do you really want to maintain three or four different versions of your app? At the very least, you need to test them with the new SDK versions. Now Apple has been pretty good about getting all of the iPhones / iPod Touches to the latest OS versions (even though iPod Touch owners upgrade much more slowly since they have to pay for the upgrades), and with their iron grip they just require a certain OS version for certification (I think they only accepted 3.0 apps starting a couple of weeks before the 3.0 release last June). Now rumor has it that the Apple event on Jan 27 will introduce iPhone OS 4.0 which won't be for first-gen iPhones, so Apple's track record could get tarnished here.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en.
