[LuxuryTouringZone]

They tried that already, back in 2013 when they still had a bit more extra cash on hand (remember the BlackBerry Jam sessions back then?). They still got less than a quarter of the promised apps at launch, and it went downhill from there.

And you think they have any chance of encouraging developers to build native apps now after BlackBerry has already said that further development of BB10 has effectively stopped - other than a few planned security updates over the next few months?

Now, that is some serious wishful thinking.

Posted via CB10

Considering that there's still several good developers around, they could reach out to them and let them know that the operating system is here to stay for the time being. 2016 may be the year of "security updates", but 2017 could be a different story. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

[ohaiguise]

I'm happy to only have access to Amazon Appstore on BB10 as it has all the apps I need. Not sure if that makes a difference.

[deadcowboy]

I'm happy to only have access to Amazon Appstore on BB10 as it has all the apps I need. Not sure if that makes a difference.

Download Snap, even if it's not being developed and stuck in beta. Still better.

Posted via CB10

[jtultu]

By the way has the dev of snap discontinued?

Z30STA100-2/10.3.2.2876

[Doggerz]

By the way has the dev of snap discontinued?

Z30STA100-2/10.3.2.2876

Someone posted that he switched platforms and discontinued the project. I've used Snap from the start and it's been one of the few BB10 aps that really was useful and belonged in BlackBerry World. The guy deserved to be compensated for sure. Really appreciated all he did over the last few years.

Z30STA100-5 / 10.3.2.2876 / T-Mobile USA

[Elephant_Canyon]

2016 may be the year of "security updates", but 2017 could be a different story.

Yup. 2017 will be the year Blackberry announces BB10 is EOL.

[crucial bbq]

The impression I've always had was that Android Runtime was supposed to be a temporary stop-gap measure to get apps on BB10 until developers created native apps. I never got the impression that it was planned to be permanent. Unfortunately, the developers failed to create native apps.

Based on documentation from BlackBerry and published on their own website I am under the impression that ART was meant for ported apps. From what I see, Android devs are encouraged to port their apps not only to .bar but also to the BB10 runtime. If, for what ever reason the dev feels the app would run best in an Android runtime then they have the option to utilize ART.

Barnes & Noble is actually via Samsung. B&N ditched its fork of Android.

The two main points that have been mentioned as non-negotiable for GPS access are boot behavior and no simultaneous Android forks.

Based on its most current device, BBRY is compatible.

If a new BB10 device launches with the runtime, we can then say OHA proponents are wrong. For now? They seem quite correct.

Nook HD was built in-house. So, it came before the Samsung/B&N partnership. Nook HD also got Google Play prior to Samsung building the tablets/eReaders as well. However, one month after GPlay came to Nook HD B&N announced they will discontinue the line in favor of the Samsung tablets. Still took another year or so. Point being that Google granted access to Play on an Android device that was forked; then again perhaps this shows the power of Samsung?

Android forks: this is the goofy part. Based on what is known about the "rules", BlackBerry (or Samsung, HTC, LG, et al) could build an iOS device, or a WinPhone, and that is somehow totally okay with Google. Of course that is true: HTC, LG, Acer, and one or two others do/did WinPhones and Samsung has Tizen. Yet, if anyone releases a forked version of Android, all heck breaks loose. That is because Android is really Google OS and ASOP is not as open Google wants you to believe.

Then, to restate, BB10 obviously is okay by Google so it comes down to whether or not a runtime in addition to a runtime (that is, ART on BB10) constitutes a fork or not?

Tizen is a bit different because Samsung wants to build its own ecosystem entirely. They have their own Android market place, Samsung Pay, and now Tizen. Then there is Cyanogenmod, who have since become a for-profit Inc. backed by Microsoft and with the intention of an "Android-sans-Google" future landscape. Google forced CM, Inc. to remove the CM ROM installer from Play, citing that the app itself was "harmless" but for reasons that it "voids warranties". OnePlus One shipped with, and still ships with, CM (in some markets it ships with ColorOS) while the OnePlus Two ships with their own Oxygen OS. ColorOS does not ship with GApps, but Cyanogenmod on OnePlus One does. So, what's going here? Clearly this would not only be in violation of "OHA" or "Compatibility" but is also utilizing a direct threat against Google (CM OS), I mean, with OnePlus going with three different versions of Android and all.

Nearly everything we are arguing about is from the past. The future of Android is looking rather strange these days: China and Russia telling Google to take a hike; China and India doing what they want with Android, anyways. CM and other custom ROMs appearing more and more in "emerging markets"; Samsung looking to build their own empire; MS may build another Android running CM; Oracle and proprietary api's; Europe taking Google to court; and on and on. Google Play is really Google's only card now. They can either ease up and roll with the fact that users are going to install Play/GApps on "non-Compliant" handsets, or they could lose. It would also be in their best interests to come out and finally admit that Android is really Google OS.

While I agree that Google is the big bad wolf. Its funny how the US Government goes after companies for Antitrust regulations. Except those it like or gets paid off by, Google parks billions overseas and pays very little in taxes, but the little guy with the account overseas is dragged through the mud.

It is safe to say that despite which side of the political fence one falls most Americans agree that lobbying Congress should stop.

The FTC took Google to court in the past over anti-trust complaints; verdict was in favor of Google. Last I heard a few months ago the FTC was considering a second attempt following in Europe's steps.

Seems like somewhere somehow BlackBerry found away to screw something up I mean they have money and had money before BB10 came out so it wasn't a matter of cash.

Posted via CB10

For what it is worth even Microsoft had a tough time making it happen.

[LuxuryTouringZone]

Yup. 2017 will be the year Blackberry announces BB10 is EOL.

Fear, uncertainty and doubt...

[PHughes]

Upgrade to priv it has lollipop 🍭 runtime...

Your use of the term, "upgrade," is a bit unorthodox.

[Ziffster]

Unfortunately, the OHA's member list is woefully out of date (Motorola, The Astonishing Tribe, etc), but one can reasonably assume that BlackBerry is privy to this cloak and dagger business.

OHA is in many regards a dinosaur, many of Googles own actions are technically in violation as are extensions such as Knoxx by Samsung (since Knoxx is closed source and components of the code run at the kernal level). The Priv itself also technically violates OHA requirements by the known deviations Blackberry has made in order to harden the OS.

I suspect that Google received something else in exchange for Google Play access rather than Blackberry necessarily being forced to join the OHA.... perhaps something like a cross licensing agreement since if I am not mistaken Google was accused by BB of a number of patent infringements. There is also the recent announcement by QNX that there auto infotainment system will support the current Android Runtime which would be a violation of OHA (since QNX is a Blackberry Division) if forced to join, but with over 50% of the Auto Infotainment market (a market Google wants into) Google may have not wanted to force Blackberry to pull the Android runtime out of QNXAuto.

As for BB10, there is a lot of speculation that both Google Playstore and Apple iTunes may have ticked off enough developers by ripping them off with hosting fees that HTML5 based Apps which can run on any device may start to take hold. This movement to platform independent apps is already gaining momentum in India. All it would take is for someone with clout to drive the movement - Intel with Tizen has already started down this path, Microsoft has also shown signs of going this direction with how badly Windows Phone has been doing, and in hindsight if Blackberry had pushed HTML5 rather than there own App ecosystem when BB10 was launched they may have attracted the same rebel movement which drove Android initially as at the time their browser was head and shoulders the best HTML5 implementation in the market.

[Soapm]

The impression I've always had was that Android Runtime was supposed to be a temporary stop-gap measure to get apps on BB10 until developers created native apps. I never got the impression that it was planned to be permanent. Unfortunately, the developers failed to create native apps.

What was the incentive to developers? Small user base doesn't promise a big return...

[BCITMike]

What was the incentive to developers? Small user base doesn't promise a big return...

$10k per app. They also offered developer resources to all the major players, no one took them up on it.

Many companies just didn't want the hassle of supporting more than 2 platforms.

[Soulstream]

Based on documentation from BlackBerry and published on their own website I am under the impression that ART was meant for ported apps. From what I see, Android devs are encouraged to port their apps not only to .bar but also to the BB10 runtime. If, for what ever reason the dev feels the app would run best in an Android runtime then they have the option to utilize ART.


Nook HD was built in-house. So, it came before the Samsung/B&N partnership. Nook HD also got Google Play prior to Samsung building the tablets/eReaders as well. However, one month after GPlay came to Nook HD B&N announced they will discontinue the line in favor of the Samsung tablets. Still took another year or so. Point being that Google granted access to Play on an Android device that was forked; then again perhaps this shows the power of Samsung?

Android forks: this is the goofy part. Based on what is known about the "rules", BlackBerry (or Samsung, HTC, LG, et al) could build an iOS device, or a WinPhone, and that is somehow totally okay with Google. Of course that is true: HTC, LG, Acer, and one or two others do/did WinPhones and Samsung has Tizen. Yet, if anyone releases a forked version of Android, all heck breaks loose. That is because Android is really Google OS and ASOP is not as open Google wants you to believe.

Then, to restate, BB10 obviously is okay by Google so it comes down to whether or not a runtime in addition to a runtime (that is, ART on BB10) constitutes a fork or not?

Tizen is a bit different because Samsung wants to build its own ecosystem entirely. They have their own Android market place, Samsung Pay, and now Tizen. Then there is Cyanogenmod, who have since become a for-profit Inc. backed by Microsoft and with the intention of an "Android-sans-Google" future landscape. Google forced CM, Inc. to remove the CM ROM installer from Play, citing that the app itself was "harmless" but for reasons that it "voids warranties". OnePlus One shipped with, and still ships with, CM (in some markets it ships with ColorOS) while the OnePlus Two ships with their own Oxygen OS. ColorOS does not ship with GApps, but Cyanogenmod on OnePlus One does. So, what's going here? Clearly this would not only be in violation of "OHA" or "Compatibility" but is also utilizing a direct threat against Google (CM OS), I mean, with OnePlus going with three different versions of Android and all.

Nearly everything we are arguing about is from the past. The future of Android is looking rather strange these days: China and Russia telling Google to take a hike; China and India doing what they want with Android, anyways. CM and other custom ROMs appearing more and more in "emerging markets"; Samsung looking to build their own empire; MS may build another Android running CM; Oracle and proprietary api's; Europe taking Google to court; and on and on. Google Play is really Google's only card now. They can either ease up and roll with the fact that users are going to install Play/GApps on "non-Compliant" handsets, or they could lose. It would also be in their best interests to come out and finally admit that Android is really Google OS.

It is safe to say that despite which side of the political fence one falls most Americans agree that lobbying Congress should stop.

The FTC took Google to court in the past over anti-trust complaints; verdict was in favor of Google. Last I heard a few months ago the FTC was considering a second attempt following in Europe's steps.

For what it is worth even Microsoft had a tough time making it happen.

I think Google learned from the trials against Microsoft for anti-trust. Google actually made a smart move by allowing OEMs to load services from other companies as well as long as their own services are loaded as well. The latest Samsung Galaxy S7 also comes with Microsoft services pre-loaded as well as the usual Google ones. By not preventing OEMs from doing so, they can say it's a fair competition (and I tend to agree)