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

Instapaper for Retina iPad

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#71

Post by frankus »

smackfu wrote: post #54
vacri wrote: post #10

This is slightly embarrassing: Instapaper doesn’t show Retina-resolution graphics on the new iPad yet. It's only slightly embarrassing for Apple's culture of product secrecy, which prevents them from releasing tools in time for devs to have gear ready for release.

I'm pretty sure the simulator that devs use supports the Retina iPad, and was available before release date. The tricky bit is that the Retina iPad is higher resolution that most people's desktops, so simulation becomes difficult.

I saw a tweet from him the other day saying he's got a 2650x1600 display (HP ZR20W, I believe). So that just barely fits.

The simulator now scrolls, however, so you could in theory test retina iPad apps full size in portrait mode on an 11" MacBook Air.

My 27" iMac (2650x1440) isn't quite tall enough even in landscape mode, but it's not unusable thanks to the scrolling.

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#72

Post by frankus »

I uncovered a bug when naively recompiling a universal (iPad/iPhone) app with the 5.1 SDK. The app had high-res assets for the iPhone but not the iPad.

Apparently the @2x modifier takes precedence over the -Landscape and -Portrait modifiers, resulting in retina iPads preferentially using the high-res iPhone launch screen over the low-res iPad launch screen (which are optimized for each launch orientation).

So you end up with a mildly- (portrait) or greatly-distorted (landscape) launch image on high-res iPads if you simply recompile. I imagine this is what Apple was trying to avoid, with reneging on what their API docs say about modifier precedence.

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#73

Post by dunham »

smackfu wrote: post #54
vacri wrote: post #10

This is slightly embarrassing: Instapaper doesn’t show Retina-resolution graphics on the new iPad yet. It's only slightly embarrassing for Apple's culture of product secrecy, which prevents them from releasing tools in time for devs to have gear ready for release.

I'm pretty sure the simulator that devs use supports the Retina iPad, and was available before release date. The tricky bit is that the Retina iPad is higher resolution that most people's desktops, so simulation becomes difficult.

I think the issue is pretty subtle, since it works when compiled with the new XCode and the Retina simulator comes with the new XCode. So if he downloaded XCode and ran his existing code base on it, it would look like it works fine.

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#75

Post by batista »

huggyface wrote: post #44
rubergly wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a "mistake" from the perspective of users who wish it were on a platform they used, but it's not a mistake from the perspective of Marco, who is busy enough working on the iOS and server components of the service; an Android version wouldn't provide enough revenue to warrant an employee or contractor. Is it a mistake for the developer of TextMate to not spread to Windows?

an Android version wouldn't provide enough revenue to warrant an employee or contractor. A statement with absolutely zero backing. Readability did the analysis and certainly seemed to believe that Android supported their product. Marco doesn't do analysis but instead just parrots the standard rhetoric, seemingly hoping that his words alone will make Android irrelevant and thus unnecessary of effort. His loss.

A statement with absolutely zero backing. Readability did the analysis and certainly seemed to believe that Android supported their product. Marco doesn't do analysis but instead just parrots the standard rhetoric, seemingly hoping that his words alone will make Android irrelevant and thus unnecessary of effort. His loss.

1) You forgot that lots of other companies also did the same analysis as Readability and concluded that the Android is not for them, at least for the moment. You can find several such statements on web pages, and a lot more that speak through their actions.

2) You also forget that Readability and Instapaper don't have the exact same business model.

3) Lastly, you forget that Marco makes his own business decisions, and he bases them on his own insights. He doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to. Would you go lend him a hand for free on the Android version? Even the overhead of dealing with an extra developer to do the port and the support etc, might be something he doesn't want to deal with, whatever the money. (Why should he? Just because some people are bitter that the don't have his app on their platform of choice, or more general, that they don't get a lot of the cool the apps the iOS market has?)

If Marco is content with his choice, then it's not "his loss", as he does not lose anything.

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#76

Post by batista »

Kylekramer wrote: post #56
rsynnott wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.marco.org/2011/12/07/standing-up-for-android He has invited people to do just that; if you make it with his public API, and he thinks it's good enough, he'll let you call it the official Android version and split revenue 50/50.

FWIW, he backed off that pretty quickly. He claimed it was for Shift Jelly only and his words got misconstrued as a public challenge.

No, he didn't (backtrack). He said, in the original statement, that he challenges anyone to make on, and he will call it "the official Instapaper app for Android"

He probably didn't expect many takers on the offer, but when they emerged it became OBVIOUS that this couldn't happen with more than one taker --only one could be the "official app for Android"), so clarified it with him picking only one to proceed with.

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#77

Post by batista »

MatthewPhillips wrote: post #61
gtufano wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really know. Assuming that this is a free market, I think the fact that nobody stepped up on Android (with a noticeable success) is probably an indicator of the fact this could not be an error. More seriously (hoping we can have a quiet discussion about differences in market between iOS and Android): Instapaper makes (probably serious) money selling the app. Can you make (serious) money in Android without Ads…

I don't particularly care if Marco makes an Android app, it's his product, his time, he should do what he wants. But let's assume that his analysis (as biased as it is) is correct. It still might be a net positive to make an Android version if you consider this. All Android sales are potentially a double sale. Android has a majority market share on phones and iPad has a (overwhelming) majority market share in tablets…

All Android sales are potentially a double sale.

If the app-making was free. You forgot the "opportunity cost".

Android has a majority market share on phones and iPad has a (overwhelming) majority market share in tablets.

Yes, but does Android have a majority market share on apps sold? From what I have heard, I don't think so.

They just have a majority market share in phones because even people who don't care about a smart phone or apps get an Android phone for free with their contract. Whereas iPhone users are more picky in general about the phone they get, and more prone to fork out for apps. (Notice how I said "in general" --nerds are a small minority of smart phone buyers).

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#78

Post by batista »

c1sc0 wrote: post #29
hboon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the retina display makes it so much better for reading.

More beautiful, sure, but better ? I doubt it, my guess is it'll strain your eyes just as much as any other backlit display.

There's nothing inherent in e-ink that makes it less stressful than a backlit display. Photons are photons, whether they are reflected from a light bulb or the sun to the book and then your eyes, or they are send from a led behind the screen to your eyes.

Some early e-ink manufactures used to claim that e-ink is better than backlit for the eyes, but they retracted those claims because there was no scientific evidence behind them.

You just need to set the brightness of the iPad appropriately, to match what the relative brightness of an e-ink reader would be. You can also adjust the colors, i.e have a sepia background etc.

Battery life and reading in the sun is indeed much better with e-ink devices, though.

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#79

Post by huggyface »

batista wrote: post #75
huggyface wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

an Android version wouldn't provide enough revenue to warrant an employee or contractor. A statement with absolutely zero backing. Readability did the analysis and certainly seemed to believe that Android supported their product. Marco doesn't do analysis but instead just parrots the standard rhetoric, seemingly hoping that his words alone will make Android irrelevant and thus unnecessary of effort. His loss.

A statement with absolutely zero backing. Readability did the analysis and certainly seemed to believe that Android supported their product. Marco doesn't do analysis but instead just parrots the standard rhetoric, seemingly hoping that his words alone will make Android irrelevant and thus unnecessary of effort. His loss. 1) You forgot that lots of other companies also did the same analysis as Readability and conclud…

Lastly, you forget that Marco makes his own business decisions

How so? I didn't forget that whatsoever. Many devs do make individual choices to support only one platform or another, for many reasons (business reasons, bias, etc). That's life.

The person I responded to claimed that Arment had empirical reasons for his claims. Hardly. Arment is a cheerleader of the worst kind, with little professionalism about the market as a whole.

Re: Instapaper for Retina iPad

#80

Post by batista »

huggyface wrote: post #79
batista wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A statement with absolutely zero backing. Readability did the analysis and certainly seemed to believe that Android supported their product. Marco doesn't do analysis but instead just parrots the standard rhetoric, seemingly hoping that his words alone will make Android irrelevant and thus unnecessary of effort. His loss. 1) You forgot that lots of other companies also did the same analysis as Readability and conclud…

Lastly, you forget that Marco makes his own business decisions How so? I didn't forget that whatsoever. Many devs do make individual choices to support only one platform or another, for many reasons (business reasons, bias, etc). That's life. The person I responded to claimed that Arment had empirical reasons for his claims. Hardly. Arment is a cheerleader of the worst kind, with little professionalism about the mark…

Professionalism lies in delivering a good product and keeping YOUR customers happy.

It has nothing to do with market research etc. You can say he is not "market savvy" maybe, but not unprofessional.

Post reply on HN