Blackberry wants to force developers to make apps for their phone!

[Tomo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30932399

 

 

App makers should be required to make software for Blackberry handsets, says the boss of the phone company.

In an open letter to members of the US Congress, John Chen said rivals should be obliged to make their widely used apps available on Blackberry handsets.

He said the other firms and developers were "discriminating" against Blackberry by not making the apps.

 

I think they are getting desperate!

[Nick H. Supervisor]

So if I create an app for Android, I should be forced to make the same app available for Blackberry? Are Blackberry going to pay me for doing so?

[Tomo]

So if I create an app for Android, I should be forced to make the same app available for Blackberry? Are Blackberry going to pay me for doing so?

No, it seems they are wanting to change the law to make you do it, for them, for free or else....

[+Zlip792 MVC]

So if I create an app for Android, I should be forced to make the same app available for Blackberry? Are Blackberry going to pay me for doing so?

 

They are proposing Mobile Apps Neutrality.

 

Another read - http://crackberry.com/john-chen-calls-app-neutrality

[+LogicalApex MVC]

So if I create an app for Android, I should be forced to make the same app available for Blackberry? Are Blackberry going to pay me for doing so?

i don't think they are talking about the average developers. They are talking about the big shops like Apple and Google. They are essentially attempting to say that Google, for instance, shouldn't be allowed to make apps for Android only and exclude Blackberry. I'm sure many Windows Phone users would be very happy if Google was forced to stop ignoring them as if they don't exist.

 

Of course, it begs the question of monopolies and all that. And it isn't as easy an answer as "well there are competing mobile OSs". The ecosystem tie-ins are very strong and we are definitely in a duopoly state right now in mobile.

[timbo_sf2]

Didn't Android apps work in BlackBerry? And also BlackBerry (in partnership with Boeing) is planning to release Android device?

[greenwizard88]

They are essentially attempting to say that Google, for instance, shouldn't be allowed to make apps for Android only and exclude Blackberry. I'm sure many Windows Phone users would be very happy if Google was forced to stop ignoring them as if they don't exist.

If only! What Google does should be criminal. Not only do they not make apps or services available for Windows Phone, but they actively hinder using Google services on Windows Phone.

[Ryoken]

If only! What Google does should be criminal. Not only do they not make apps or services available for Windows Phone, but they actively hinder using Google services on Windows Phone.

lol

 

That's because no one uses Windows Phone. Just get used to it already. 

If no one is making stuff for your OS/Hardware, maybe you should take a look at it, before ranting about how they are all out to get you. Companies aren't and shouldn't be required to make ###### just because YOU want it. It's THEIR business. If they want to ignore a market, and their shareholders support them, then deal with it. Even MS already realized part of this, with the death of Windows RT. 

 

Windows Phones are nice, but they don't bring anything different. So till MS makes something that makes people want them, most companies aren't gonna give a hoot about supporting them. People started making Apps for Apple, and Android, because they got people interested and got people buying. Apple and Android didn't launch with every dev making apps for their devices. They made their platforms viable, and the dev's followed. You don't force the devs there at gunpoint to hope if makes people notice your platform. 

Hell, even NOW, there are apps on iOS that aren't on Android cause the devs don't fleet THAT platform is worth their time. (Large user base, but a smaller paying base.).. What next? Force them too?

 

Get over yourselves.

[Anibal P]

If only! What Google does should be criminal. Not only do they not make apps or services available for Windows Phone, but they actively hinder using Google services on Windows Phone.

 

MS can make apps as long as they use the allowed APIs and not dirty hacks like they tried with YouTube. MS needs to get their act together, not Google 

[seta-san]

civil rights and social justice in the digital age!

[DTrump]

i don't think they are talking about the average developers. They are talking about the big shops like Apple and Google. They are essentially attempting to say that Google, for instance, shouldn't be allowed to make apps for Android only and exclude Blackberry. I'm sure many Windows Phone users would be very happy if Google was forced to stop ignoring them as if they don't exist.

 

Of course, it begs the question of monopolies and all that. And it isn't as easy an answer as "well there are competing mobile OSs". The ecosystem tie-ins are very strong and we are definitely in a duopoly state right now in mobile.

Yep, first thing I thought of was "Well, then you need to include Windows Phone too."  As a Windows Phone user, having companies forced to make apps for all platforms would be great.  AS A USER.  As a part time developer for the platform, it would be a nightmare since I barely have time to do the development that I do now.  There is no way I could continue doing it if I also had to do apps for iOS, Android, Kindle, Blackberry, Sailfish, Firefox, etc.  Besides, where do you draw the line between "viable" platforms? That line is already gray between iOS/Android and Windows Phone (unfortunately).  How far do you go?

[seta-san]

Anibal P, on 22 Jan 2015 - 10:24, said:

MS can make apps as long as they use the allowed APIs and not dirty hacks like they tried with YouTube. MS needs to get their act together, not Google 

they aren't being given the APIs. that's why they were forced to do the "dirty hacks". Also google's requirement that the app be made in HTML 5 is arbitrary since the HTML 5 spec isn't even finalized. they might as well required them to write it in HTML 6

[DTrump]

they aren't being given the APIs. that's why they were forced to do the "dirty hacks". Also google's requirement that the app be made in HTML 5 is arbitrary since the HTML 5 spec isn't even finalized. they might as well required them to write it in HTML 6

Don't give them any ideas!

[seta-san]

DTrump, on 22 Jan 2015 - 10:47, said:

Don't give them any ideas!

I think that's what i'm going to like about windows 10. all apps will be universal I think. they can't provide an app for xbox without also providing it for phones.

[+Eternal Tempest MVC]

they aren't being given the APIs. that's why they were forced to do the "dirty hacks". Also google's requirement that the app be made in HTML 5 is arbitrary since the HTML 5 spec isn't even finalized. they might as well required them to write it in HTML 6

 

HTML 5 was finalized, but the parts they could not agree on (such as HTML video codex / format), they left out.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2840132/html5-finalized-finally.html

 

So, they means they be forced to support the mobile firefox, Ubuntu mobile?

[GotBored]

Besides, where do you draw the line between "viable" platforms? That line is already gray between iOS/Android and Windows Phone (unfortunately).  How far do you go?

 

Android 84.7%, iOS 11.7%, Windows Phone 2.5%. This was the market share of smartphones at the end of 2014.

 

Even though iOS is fairly small compared to Android all their phones are considered premium products because they are mid-high end phones which are pricey products and its users make many purchases in the app store, android on the other hand has many high-end products with lots of users who have disposable incomes also and make many purchases in the app store but a big chunk of that market share is because of the low end android phones where the users aren't very active on the app store. About 3 years ago it was a lot more profitable to release on iOS but currently its about even with android being only slightly higher even though it has a much larger market share.

 

Windows phone on the other hand is the bottom of the barrel alongside blackberry, kindle, Java ME and Symbian mobile OS when it comes to market share and app profitability. 

 

It isn't a gray line, its clear as black and white. Windows Phone and the others aren't viable options to develop for at the moment.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

Android 84.7%, iOS 11.7%, Windows Phone 2.5%. This was the market share of smartphones at the end of 2014.

 

Even though iOS is fairly small compared to Android all their phones are considered premium products because they are mid-high end phones which are pricey products and its users make many purchases in the app store, android on the other hand has many high-end products with lots of users who have disposable incomes also and make many purchases in the app store but a big chunk of that market share is because of the low end android phones where the users aren't very active on the app store. About 3 years ago it was a lot more profitable to release on iOS but currently its about even with android being only slightly higher even though it has a much larger market share.

 

Windows phone on the other hand is the bottom of the barrel alongside blackberry, kindle, Java ME and Symbian mobile OS when it comes to market share and app profitability. 

 

It isn't a gray line, its clear as black and white. Windows Phone and the others aren't viable options to develop for at the moment.

Very far from even... Money is still heavily on the iOS side of things...

 

Monument Valley is a very popular game and shows the stark difference between Android and iOS revenue. Android users by and large don't spend money on apps. Probably due to the immense amount of low end users who either don't want to or can't afford to funnel money to apps after they have settled device acquisition costs.

http://monumentvalleygame.squarespace.com/blog/2015/1/15/monument-valley-in-numbers

[Xeridionix]

I can't stop laughing at this... 

[Ryoken]

they aren't being given the APIs. that's why they were forced to do the "dirty hacks". Also google's requirement that the app be made in HTML 5 is arbitrary since the HTML 5 spec isn't even finalized. they might as well required them to write it in HTML 6

Why should Google be required to give anyone API's ? Or do anything to help anyone in competition with them?

 

If they don't want to support Windows Phone at all, they are fully within their right. It would be like going back a few years and saying Apple should sue every site for using Flash, cause it doesn't work on iOS.. too bad. 

 

Man people have gotten self-entitled. Youtube access is not a guaranteed RIGHT. It's a service provided free by a company, who can at any time stop offering it, charge for it, limit access to it, or do whatever they damn well please. They don't owe YOU as a consumer anything. They don't owe MS anything. Or their mobile platform.

[xendrome]

No, it seems they are wanting to change the law to make you do it, for them, for free or else....

 

Change what law? There isn't currently any law that dictates application development cross platform. They are just being idiots and I can't wait for the day they totally shut their doors.

[TechJunkie81]

And this isn't from The Onion.  Wow.

[adrynalyne]

they aren't being given the APIs. that's why they were forced to do the "dirty hacks". Also google's requirement that the app be made in HTML 5 is arbitrary since the HTML 5 spec isn't even finalized. they might as well required them to write it in HTML 6

Dirty hacks such as...leaving ads out, which is Google's revenue source is against the TOS.  Which MS did.

 

Granted, the rest was just Google being a jerk, but still, MS had to know better re: ads.

[seta-san]

Jason Stillion, on 22 Jan 2015 - 11:10, said:

HTML 5 was finalized, but the parts they could not agree on (such as HTML video codex / format), they left out.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2840132/html5-finalized-finally.html

 

So, they means they be forced to support the mobile firefox, Ubuntu mobile?

I stand corrected. but at the time it wasn't.

adrynalyne, on 22 Jan 2015 - 12:25, said:

Dirty hacks such as...leaving ads out, which is Google's revenue source is against the TOS.  Which MS did.

 

Granted, the rest was just Google being a jerk, but still, MS had to know better re: ads.

they didn't leave the ads out. they attempted to reverse engineer google's ad API and implement it into the app. it was less than correct and displayed the incorrect ads. but it's not for lack of trying

[adrynalyne]

I stand corrected. but at the time it wasn't.

they didn't leave the ads out. they attempted to reverse engineer google's ad API and implement it into the app. it was less than correct and displayed the incorrect ads. but it's not for lack of trying

Oh?

 

http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/15/4334030/google-demands-microsoft-remove-youtube-windows-phone-app

[seta-san]

adrynalyne, on 22 Jan 2015 - 13:02, said:adrynalyne, on 22 Jan 2015 - 13:02, said:

Oh?

 

http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/15/4334030/google-demands-microsoft-remove-youtube-windows-phone-app

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/16/4627342/microsoft-google-battle-over-youtube-windows-phone/in/3603277

 

yeah. Microsoft came back a couple months later with attempting to bring ads

 

 Sources at Google tell us that the company isn't happy with the way Microsoft has implemented YouTube ads, as there's no guarantee the correct ads will be served and tracked correctly. However, insiders at Microsoft tell us that Google has refused to assist Microsoft in implementing ads in the correct way, instead insisting that it uses the HTML5 APIs it knows Microsoft is unable to use right now.