[BBplaybookJS]

Does anyone else agree that by and large the majority of the ported android apps, even the highly vaunted ones seem markedly inferior to the native PlayBook apps?

[BuzzStarField]

Does anyone else agree that by and large the majority of the ported android apps, even the highly vaunted ones seem markedly inferior to the native PlayBook apps?

I believe in basing my opinion on a thorough analysis of the facts before making a broad generalization about the state of App World. It might be instructive to know how you arrived at your conclusion. Do you have absolute and quantifiable criteria for determining if one app is "markedly inferior" to another? I will need this information to perform a meaningful comparison. Also please provide a list of the "highly vaunted" Android-based apps so I can perform an objective evaluation of each against the native counterpart.

[BBplaybookJS]

LOL no and neither am I presenting a university thesis, just voicing an opinion based on personal experience. Why so defensive?

[BuzzStarField]

LOL no and neither am I presenting a university thesis, just voicing an opinion based on personal experience. Why so defensive?

I don't think I am being defensive. We could have a nice discussion if you could voice your opinion in terms that are meaningful. As it is, I must answer your original question with a ", I I don't agree with your opinion, and leave it at that

But I'm still interested in discussing the issue though. In what way are Android apps inferior? Is it RIM's implementation of the player; or is because Android apps are inherently inferior to "native" PlayBook apps; or are Android developers the problem; or is it some other reason? If you could mention a few example apps, it would really help me understand where you are coming from.

[BBplaybookJS]

Most of the apps I downloaded don't take advantage of the features inherent in the Playbook OS some just work poorly or freeze. It has been my experience that apps designed for the Playbook just work better, generally. And that is of course a generalization. I have not tried every app either native or ported android, nor have I any interest not sideloading. I'm not complaining I just have come up on the conclusion that unless I see a burning need I will probably avoid them.

I also would prefer to reward those who took the time to develop apps specifically for Playbook.

[RRFrance7]

BBplaybookJS is completely right, I am typing this on my playbook as I am a huge fan of the playbook, I also love games and apps, unfortunately as you all know, the playbook app world is quite limited and is you want any good apps you need to sideload the converted android file which in my opinion is ! They screwed that up along with the 4 playbook's I purchased, it was a buy 1 get 1 free deal, exclusive to me and me only, rim needs to get their shot together.

[BuzzStarField]

Most of the apps I downloaded don't take advantage of the features inherent in the Playbook OS some just work poorly or freeze. It has been my experience that apps designed for the Playbook just work better, generally. And that is of course a generalization. I have not tried every app either native or ported android, nor have I any interest not sideloading. I'm not complaining I just have come up on the conclusion that unless I see a burning need I will probably avoid them.

I also would prefer to reward those who took the time to develop apps specifically for Playbook.

There's probably a number of things at play: Some of the freezes (maybe even most) are because of bugs in the player. Other freezing may be the result of behaviour differences between the simulator (if, in fact the developer used it) and an actual device. I know that with my Air app last year, it suffered from all sorts of performance/freezing problems. It took a couple of updates from RIM and some quick work on my part to overcome the growing pains. This stuff can't be done until you get your hands on an actual device.

There are usability problems with the player (aside from bugs). You can't kill android apps when they act up and navigation with the "back" swipe is just foreign to me. I can't get used to the device-within-a-device look and feel. I find the experience quite awkward.

I have two or three apps but if a decent native version came out I would probably switch. I don't like the way that iSpeech was switched from a native app to an android one.

I am hoping that RIM can integrate the player a lot better and I think that android apps need to be identified as such in App World so that we can make informed decisions when buying them.

I am also hoping that android developers note the better performance of "real" PB apps and port their offerings to a native SDK. This would be the best outcome as far as I am concerned. I hope that CBers will not blame the developers who took the huge step of "going blackberry". If their apps are less than stellar, it may not be their fault at all. I hope that they find the encouragement that the need to keep them around long enough to hone their skills.

[Neil B]

Most of the apps I downloaded don't take advantage of the features inherent in the Playbook OS some just work poorly or freeze. It has been my experience that apps designed for the Playbook just work better, generally. And that is of course a generalization. I have not tried every app either native or ported android, nor have I any interest not sideloading. I'm not complaining I just have come up on the conclusion that unless I see a burning need I will probably avoid them.

I also would prefer to reward those who took the time to develop apps specifically for Playbook.

Developers who ported apps for the free Playbook are coming from a different platform, and in many cases couldn't test the app properly (because they hadn't received their Playbook yet), and they only had a few weeks to get it all ready.

Because of this, my app, Solar Explorer (though not a port) is affected because it has a feature for the back button to zoom out the view, but that doesn't work on Playbook because there isn't a back button. I had no idea, I couldn't test it, and I wasn't familiar with Playbook when I submitted it.

It's not a huge issue for Solar Explorer because all features are accessible using the toolbar, but my second app, Exoplanet Explorer (which I have just released), relies on the back button.

Now that I'm familiar with the Playbook, I've made modifications to my new app so that it better supports the Playbook.

Not all developers will make an effort to improve things, but some of them will and some will go as far as writing a native version of their app for a future release. It just takes time.

[BuzzStarField]

BBplaybookJS is completely right, I am typing this on my playbook as I am a huge fan of the playbook, I also love games and apps, unfortunately as you all know, the playbook app world is quite limited and is you want any good apps you need to sideload the converted android file which in my opinion is ! They screwed that up along with the 4 playbook's I purchased, it was a buy 1 get 1 free deal, exclusive to me and me only, rim needs to get their shot together.

But blaming RIM is not going to solve the problem. I think that they are working hard to fix the player. (they would have to be nuts not to do so.) I appreciate your difficulty with having to sideload the apps that you want. Do you have any suggestions for how RIM should attract the devs to the platform?

The way I see it, if the "free" playbook was not enough I don't see much else RIM can do - except maybe keep on promoting PB as a good place to make a dollar. But it seems to me that allowing developers to charge for their apps is not exactly what consumers want. In fact they make a huge fuss whenever a developer charges more for his PB app than he did over on the Android platform. You guys are going to have to loosen up your wallets if you want more developers here.

[BBplaybookJS]

There's probably a number of things at play: Some of the freezes (maybe even most) are because of bugs in the player. Other freezing may be the result of behaviour differences between the simulator (if, in fact the developer used it) and an actual device. I know that with my Air app last year, it suffered from all sorts of performance/freezing problems. It took a couple of updates from RIM and some quick work on my part to overcome the growing pains. This stuff can't be done until you get your hands on an actual device.

There are usability problems with the player (aside from bugs). You can't kill android apps when they act up and navigation with the "back" swipe is just foreign to me. I can't get used to the device-within-a-device look and feel. I find the experience quite awkward.

I have two or three apps but if a decent native version came out I would probably switch. I don't like the way that iSpeech was switched from a native app to an android one.

I am hoping that RIM can integrate the player a lot better and I think that android apps need to be identified as such in App World so that we can make informed decisions when buying them.

I am also hoping that android developers note the better performance of "real" PB apps and port their offerings to a native SDK. This would be the best outcome as far as I am concerned. I hope that CBers will not blame the developers who took the huge step of "going blackberry". If their apps are less than stellar, it may not be their fault at all. I hope that they find the encouragement that the need to keep them around long enough to hone their skills.

I agree you have hit the nail on the head. For the most part, aside from a good Book Reader(which PlayBook has as a native app) I'm really not that big an app person.

[BuzzStarField]

I agree you have hit the nail on the head. For the most part, aside from a good Book Reader(which PlayBook has as a native app) I'm really not that big an app person.

Thanks for giving me an opportunity to hit that nail!

And never one to miss an opportunity to make a pitch, I invite you to try Neil's astronomy app - its a beautiful piece of work even if it is Android. You might like my AIR app too. You may not remember how everybody here was saying that RIM made a huge mistake in going with Adobe. I think that we have proven that the trolls who infected this place at PB's launch were absolutely wrong. I think people will be proven wrong about Android as well. So I invite you to try two pretty decent science apps side-by-side and I think that you'll see that either platform is pretty good.

[torches]

I think BBplaybookJS is spot on; Android apps simply don't run as smoothly as native apps. However, although I am no tech person, that is to be expected isn't it? Given that they are "ported/simulated" apps within a emulator...I don't think BBplaybookJS is making an invalid point. The responses seemed a tad harsh...

As for the PB's AppWorld selection, we will need to give it time for it to develop, getting some big name developers on board will deffo. help (e.g. Zinio). Also, as BB10 approaches, I suspect we may see more developer interest as the BB10 is built on the similar/same (?) platform as the PB.

[BBplaybookJS]

Thanks for giving me an opportunity to hit that nail!

And never one to miss an opportunity to make a pitch, I invite you to try Neil's astronomy app - its a beautiful piece of work even if it is Android. You might like my AIR app too. You may not remember how everybody here was saying that RIM made a huge mistake in going with Adobe. I think that we have proven that the trolls who infected this place at PB's launch were absolutely wrong. I think people will be proven wrong about Android as well. So I invite you to try two pretty decent science apps side-by-side and I think that you'll see that either platform is pretty good.

If you're referring to the What's Up I have it, but have yet to have much opportunity to check it out. What was the other one?

[BuzzStarField]

If you're referring to the What's Up I have it, but have yet to have much opportunity to check it out. What was the other one?

See post earlier in this thread by fellow CBer Neil B, developer of Solar Explorer and Exoplanet Explorer. See also reveiw in CB front pages:

Inside App World: An Android developer's perspective

[BuzzStarField]

I think BBplaybookJS is spot on; Android apps simply don't run as smoothly as native apps. However, although I am no tech person, that is to be expected isn't it? Given that they are "ported/simulated" apps within a emulator...I don't think BBplaybookJS is making an invalid point. The responses seemed a tad harsh...

As for the PB's AppWorld selection, we will need to give it time for it to develop, getting some big name developers on board will deffo. help (e.g. Zinio). Also, as BB10 approaches, I suspect we may see more developer interest as the BB10 is built on the similar/same (?) platform as the PB.

Didn't mean to be a tad harsh, if that is the impression that I gave you. I just think that the sentiment that you raised in your second paragraph needs to be applied to the current crop of Android apps in App World.

It's far too soon to declare that the player is non-starter - give it a few months so that RIM can fix the performance issues and the developers can adapt to their new environment.