|
Does android support in-app purchases. Got a client who wants to know.
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2012 06:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
NoDamage posted:Just curious, how are you guys dealing with this? 90% of devices are still below 3.0. This, by the way, is why we have so much trouble at work with android compared to IOS. For whatever reason (I suspect its the demographics of IOS buyers, as well as apples tighter control over the software delivery chain) the IOS adoption rate of new versions is extremely high. Something like 80%+ are now on IOS5 or the high end of IOS 4. That makes adopting apples funkier new technologies much easier to adopt in terms of making sure our software has an audience. But god drat it, we still have people complaining to us about not being able to use poo poo on there Android 1.x devices  And its a shame. Most of the poo poo that made me hate android back when v2 was still a barely new thing has been resolved, more or less, except this one loving problem. Still it could be worse. Symbian 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2012 04:07
|
|
|
Google really does need to figure out how to crack down on manufacturers abandoning phones for update. Like maybe make it a condition of the non GPL/BSD userland that they have to provide updates on an automatic-ish basis. Its a fairly serious issue for developers. We're talking at work about dropping droid support for clients unless they are prepared to pay a somewhat more substantial price than IOS because of all the version fracturing and the fact we dont like our name associated with "buggy" products. We where surviving on phonegap for a bit, but its becoming clear HTML5 really isn't as appropriate a mobile technology for apps as it was thought 6 months ago, because people just dont seem to like them. duck monster fucked around with this message at 14:42 on Jul 3, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2012 14:39
|
|
|
I discovered a hack! If you google bluestacks android app player for the mac, it installs the player but doesnt have a functional app store or way to sideload apps in. Bluestacks instead wants to curate its own small collection of apps. Wrong! Open up angry birds, go to watch the movie, and it opens up a web browser. Turns out you can side-load apps in from that! It even packages it up nice and neatly in a little .app player. *This probably works on windows too!* Apparently theres a way to use bluestacks with the SDK for debugging, but I havent worked that out cos I'm not an android dev. But I can tell you this, the bluestacks app player *murders* the lovely android simulator from the SDK for performance. Enjoy!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
kitten smoothie posted:It took a year and a half but some jackass has posted a paid app of mine to half a dozen of those APK share sites. Theres nothing more depressing than realising that for every copy of some software you sell, your servers are serving 3x that amount. It pretty much killed the last company I worked at. I mean I get  with stuff like photoshop or whatever from giant companies that are just absurdly expensive for low budget dudes. Its understandable that people would do it , particularly students or people trying to learn a toolkit to break into the industry (but protip: Dont use warezed tools for work, you'll get caught eventually)But warezing $2 apps from basement devs? Thats hosed in the head, and yet here we are.. But if your product is desirable, well guess what, DRM can't save you and will just annoy legit users who want to keep backups of your software for entirely reasonable reasons. The pirates will barely even notice however, as these things tend to be pretty crackable. duck monster fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2012 03:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
kitten smoothie posted:Yeah, I was reading through the license manager docs later last night and realize it's way too much time for me to implement something that will probably be just as easily broken. He needs to make sure he can give an accurate account of how many actual users he has. We had all sorts of problems because we where patent licencing G729 , and the people we where licencing from where grumbling about us having to pay patent fees for the unlicenced users. We where able to eventually convince them that we where not liable for pirated copies, but it definately harmed a business relationship with a company we had worked *hard* to get the licencing up for. The company sublicenced G729 rights without requiring the insane minimum sales requirements of the major patent pool ($100K minimum) but didn't for mobile devices. We had worked with them to get their pool into a sane proposition for mobile licencing, but when we started getting smashed with piracy they started to question if *we* where being honest. What a fuckup. So with Radio advertising, advertising agencies can get pissy about unverifiable streams, and if you couple this with the fact the RIAA might still want its pound of blood for music licencing fees regarding the pirate copies you still might hve a problem!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2012 04:19
|
|