Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android without the mothership

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–167 of 167 posts

Re: Android without the mothership

#161

Post by ce4 »

privong wrote: post #2

I have been running this setup (Cyanogenmod + f-droid, no google apps) for the past 9 months and have been quite happy. I use owncloud for keeping my calendar, contacts, and files sync'ed. K9mail + APG for (signed/encrypted) email. As the article notes OsmAnd is workable, but the what is available through f-droid is 2 versions behind (apparently with low chance of future updates due to difficulties building it). Many…

Regarding OsmAnd: You can download free fully-featured releases on the project's site as well [1] (and you may consider a PayPal donation instead of paying via the Play Store then [2]).

[1]: http://download.osmand.net/releases/ [2]: https://code.google.com/p/osmand/

Re: Android without the mothership

#162

Post by npsimons »

DominikR wrote: post #139
king_jester wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apps that are provided with for free on Google Play, IAP or no IAP, don't have any fear of piracy from being installed from another source. If Google Play is not available when your app runs, if the user could use that app for some purpose, it is a really good idea to make sure it doesn't crash. Indeed, most free apps with IAPs don't require you to buy the IAP immediately at launch, you can use the app to some degree…

It just depends on how much extra cost is invoked by having more users who never pay. (for example support, server costs) I just don't think that you can follow some rule dogmatically, because for some it might be worth the exposure, for some the extra costs might outweigh the benefits. This is something that I would decide on a case by case basis.

I just don't think that you can follow some rule dogmatically

Sure you can, if the rule is "don't write shitty software that crashes". In which scenario do you think users are more likely to buy: when an app crashes with no indication of what caused it, or if an app pops up a message along the lines of "we couldn't connect to Google Play; is it disabled for some reason?"

Re: Android without the mothership

#163

Post by quadrangle »

DominikR wrote: post #103
jlujan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I have occasionally downloaded apps through one of the APK downloader services mentioned in the article comments -- I've had mixed luck. One of the biggest issue of running Apps (open source or not) is the inclusion of the Play Store API in the app itself. These apps when not logged into the play store usually crash with NullPointerExceptions. Please... if you are an Android developer... expect your third-party serv…

I agree that an app shouldn't crash, but piracy is a problem. Google In-App purchases are safe, so if that's how you monetize, I don't see why the app should be allowed to work anywhere else but in Google's environment. It's different if the app is open source or you don't need to monetize (sadly, not everyone can afford that luxury), but even there it depends on how important those Play Store API features are to the…

There is no such thing as "piracy" in these situations. There may arguably be a freeriding problem though.

Re: Android without the mothership

#165

Post by suy »

grey-area wrote: post #68
CmonDev wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Why push for developers to waste time porting between c++ and java" Yes, using something like C# and Mono would be a huge win.

What would be really nice would be seeing a language-agnostic device. Based on linux, with the same APIs available to everyone, so that as on desktop linux, a thousand languages can bloom, and everyone can use the development language of their choice (including yet to be invented languages). GUI bindings would be the issue here of course, but it is not insurmountable. It's a shame that the software landscape is so do…

SailfishOS (Jolla). At this moment is a bit Qt/C++ centric, but I use daily a Python written application (GPodder), and the technology that makes it possible (PyOtherSide) has a Ruby version in early stages. Is a completely normal linux, with the usual tools that you might expect on a linux distro (D-Bus, Bluez, tracker, etc.).

Re: Android without the mothership

#166

Post by DominikR »

npsimons wrote: post #162
DominikR wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just depends on how much extra cost is invoked by having more users who never pay. (for example support, server costs) I just don't think that you can follow some rule dogmatically, because for some it might be worth the exposure, for some the extra costs might outweigh the benefits. This is something that I would decide on a case by case basis.

I just don't think that you can follow some rule dogmatically Sure you can, if the rule is "don't write shitty software that crashes". In which scenario do you think users are more likely to buy: when an app crashes with no indication of what caused it, or if an app pops up a message along the lines of "we couldn't connect to Google Play; is it disabled for some reason?"

I stated clearly, that every developer should aspire to develop apps, that do not crash.
Post reply on HN