[howsjau]

Can someone please explain why whatsapp won't work (in the future) and why it's so complicated to use android apps. I'm not teck savy or computer-speak literate. So, perhaps in the spirit of reddits ELI5 (explain it like i'm 5)... What's going on? (in another thread, someone mentioned we could kickstart a fund for the whatsapp BlackBerry developer...) -so we could do that or pay BlackBerry, but something tells me it's not just about the money... or is it...?

Posted via CB10

[howarmat]

you arent actually running android therefore you cant run Google Play Services and many apps require them to run properly

[howsjau]

That part I get... seems so obvious... but part of the selling point of bb10 was that it would be able to. Unless i'm mistaken and confused. Aren't the amazon apps android?



Posted via CB10

[conite]

That part I get... seems so obvious... but part of the selling point of bb10 was that it would be able to. Unless i'm mistaken and confused. Aren't the amazon apps android?



Posted via CB10

Android is open source, so anyone can run that. But if you want Google apps and Services, you have to be running pure, 100% Android - not a fork like the Android Runtime on BB10.

As for WhatsApp, they simply don't want to support the miniscule amount of users on BB10.

[kvndoom]

That part I get... seems so obvious... but part of the selling point of bb10 was that it would be able to. Unless i'm mistaken and confused. Aren't the amazon apps android?



Posted via CB10

BB10 supports android apps that are compatible with android 4.3 jellybean and don't require Google play services. That list grows smaller by the day.

In other words, the world has moved on. BB10 is stuck in 2013.

Like conite said, facebook/whatsapp don't feel that it's worth the money to pay someone to develop for BlackBerry. They have the usage statistics to make that decision, we do not.

Blackberry Poptart SE - Cricket Wireless

[The_Passporter]

Can someone please explain why whatsapp won't work (in the future) and why it's so complicated to use android apps. I'm not teck savy or computer-speak literate. So, perhaps in the spirit of reddits ELI5 (explain it like i'm 5)... What's going on? (in another thread, someone mentioned we could kickstart a fund for the whatsapp BlackBerry developer...) -so we could do that or pay BlackBerry, but something tells me it's not just about the money... or is it...?

Posted via CB10

Oh it's all about money alright just not the money in BB10 users pockets that is the focus. Facebook/WhatsApp and many others are discontinuing their app development costs on BB10 by not providing an updated app as they move forward. I still don't understand why these companies don't let the current version of their apps run on BB10 as the do move forward with iOS and Android. They do not have to maintain feature parity on BB10 with the other two, just let it run as it did. For this reason I think there is something larger at play here. For example Telus stated that their BB10 app will not work after a certain date and there is no reason for it to stop since it's made and working fine for everyone. STUPID!!

Funny how when Google first came out as Android they were so friendly and wanted everyone on it with complete compatibility and openness. Now they have introduced Google Play Services which runs only on certain updated versions of their OS and cuts the small guys who want to produce lower end or entry level products out. They want to hoard all your info aggressively, (to help serve you better they say) to help target your wallet more efficiently.

It's all about money and what angle they see fit to get at it.
Hoping the same Dev that created Messenger for Facebook Pro will creat a WhatsApp solution also.

Posted via CB10

[Soulstream]

Oh it's all about money alright just not the money in BB10 users pockets that is the focus. Facebook/WhatsApp and many others are discontinuing their app development costs on BB10 by not providing an updated app as they move forward. I still don't understand why these companies don't let the current version of their apps run on BB10 as the do move forward with iOS and Android. They do not have to maintain feature parity on BB10 with the other two, just let it run as it did. For this reason I think there is something larger at play here. For example Telus stated that their BB10 app will not work after a certain date and there is no reason for it to stop since it's made and working fine for everyone. STUPID!!

Apps will stop working after some time due to server-side updates. Modern apps have 2 components: the client-side components (the app on your phone) and the server-side component (various tasks such as authentication, processing and relaying messages etc). Both have to be in sync for everything to work properly.

After an app has stopped being supported, it will usually still work fine for some time (see the FB app on BB10) while the server-side part is still compatible with the client side. At one moment in time, things begin to change on the server side so drastically, that the client can't communicate anymore with the server.

Why not run two versions of the server-side code then? The answer is simple and it comes down to costs. While the old code works, changes done to the new code will have to be tested against the old code as well and this will have to be done over and over again for each new feature. Also the new code will most likely start to contain "hacks" and workarounds for compatibility reason.

let's imagine a scenario for whatsapp that may or may not happen. You stop support for BB10 and leave the client and server code unchanged. In 3 months, you add feature X to the Android and iOS versions of the app. Feature X slightly changes the protocol used for messaging. Not much, but enough for the BB10 version to no longer understand messages coming from iOS/Android devices. Another translation layer must be build on the server side so that clients can understand eachother. At some time, this translation layer may become full of workarounds and so large that the effort will cost too much money for so few users.

Most people don't actually see and understand the server side of the apps they use. between app updates that change very little on the client side, the changes to the server side can be much greater in scope and effort.

So again, it's the 99% vs the 1% and the 1% just isn't worth it.

[dkonigsberg_wa]

let's imagine a scenario for whatsapp that may or may not happen. You stop support for BB10 and leave the client and server code unchanged. In 3 months, you add feature X to the Android and iOS versions of the app. Feature X slightly changes the protocol used for messaging. Not much, but enough for the BB10 version to no longer understand messages coming from iOS/Android devices. Another translation layer must be build on the server side so that clients can understand eachother. At some time, this translation layer may become full of workarounds and so large that the effort will cost too much money for so few users.

This scenario actually highlights one of the major problems with leaving old and unmaintained clients functional in the wild for extended periods of time. The difference is, thanks to end-to-end encryption, that server-side translation layer may not even be possible anymore. So now these are the options that remain:
1) iOS/Android/WP phones could detect when they're talking to a deprecated platform, and adjust what they can/do send (suddenly that "translation layer" needs to be baked into every client, possibly with server-side support, and it becomes a lot more work)
2) Deprecated platforms can say "We got a message, but couldn't understand it." (at least users know they're missing out)
3) Deprecated platforms can simply drop messages they can't understand (don't think anyone would want this)

[Richard Buckley]

I still don't understand why these companies don't let the current version of their apps run on BB10 as the do move forward with iOS and Android. They do not have to maintain feature parity on BB10 with the other two, just let it run as it did.

Posted via CB10

Actually this is the easiest question to answer. There was a time when developers concentrated on designing enduring protocols that could endure for long periods of time. New features could be implemented on top of existing protocols. To some degree this is still an industry best practice. But with social media users seem to want something new and exciting every month. On top of that the practice of defining an API and letting third party development use it has become fraught with problems. Facebook, WhatsApp and others can't really promise security and privacy if third parties are able to access user data by writing an application.

And remember, a bad third party application doesn't just hurt its users in this case. If you are used the official WhatsApp client to talk to someone using a third party client and the information gets leaked who do you go after. See the history of SnapChat for the answer.

So the demand from users for new features, even features they don't know they want yet, just something new, forces continued update of the API and the client. And crappy third party development means that system owners can't let third party development happen. Money explains the rest.

LeapSTR100-2/10.3.2.2876

[berryoz]

Wait. WhatsApp will supported until June 2017, and I think the support will continue. We'll see. In any case, we will install on our BB APK-WA 10 and WA can work.
You can install google play on BB 10. You can install APK from the emulator.

[Chemy JMHT]

Here he was asking for a 5 years old like answer and you guys knows a lot of that to make it that easy at first.

I think I knew the server side of an app a little, and that's right, it's like the first cell phones working with analog signals and the new ones working with digital signals which in comparison it's like keeping a some cassettes (music) and an MP3 player together, there is not enough market to keep doing cassettes anymore.

[early2bed]

I still don't understand why these companies don't let the current version of their apps run on BB10 as the do move forward with iOS and Android.

Because casual users like the OP will be under the impression that these apps are fully functional on BB10 smartphones:

That part I get... seems so obvious... but part of the selling point of bb10 was that it would be able to. Unless i'm mistaken and confused. Aren't the amazon apps android?

The last thing you want, as a developer, is people thinking that your app/service is crappy. It's better to state and implement THIS DOES NOT WORK and steer your potential users to the optimal experience.

No matter were you draw the line, people are going to ask why they can't have more. If you don't fully support a platform then they will ask why you can't just let it kind of work. If you let it kind of work then they ask you why you are holding back features that other users have access to.

The best time for a user to make a decision about this is before they buy a smartphone. The best way to help the user make the right decision is to make sure the app fully works or does not work.

[howsjau]

Thanks for all the answers. Very informative and clear. Seeing it from the server side makes sense.



Posted via CB10

[DaFoxGrey]

Here is a post that explains it in detail the Google Play issue from 8/2014:
http://forums.crackberry.com/blackbe...-store-953753/

It's even more complicated now for BlackBerry as they now do have official Android devices, so it is even less likely the ART in BB10 will ever be updated.

[Troy Tiscareno]

It's even more complicated now for BlackBerry as they now do have official Android devices, so it is even less likely the ART in BB10 will ever be updated.

In fact, BB stated almost a year ago that the BB10 Android Runtime will not be updated, nor will the developer tools, APIs, or anything else that would be needed for continued development - and that already a year after development on those things had actually ended (in the fall of 2014, when the BB10 development team was laid off or reassigned).

Given that, anyone expecting an update to the runtime is either doing so out of ignorance or is in a state of denial.

[anon(8080272)]

No matter were you draw the line, people are going to ask why they can't have more.

I've never heard it put better than this.

[arjp11]

Sorry for being extreamly naive. Why not emulate android instead of use a runtime? Or is there even a difference between the two?

[Troy Tiscareno]

Sorry for being extreamly naive. Why not emulate android instead of use a runtime? Or is there even a difference between the two?

The only effective difference is that performance and battery life would be worse when using emulation. It wouldn't change any of the underlying issues.

The simple fact is this: Google owns the Play Store and Google Mobile Services, and thus Google makes the rules for who gets to use them and what they're required to do. Google's current rules say: you must be running Android - real, Google-certified Android - as the sole OS on the device, and your build must pass our tests, and you must meet a number of other requirements and accept a number of other restrictions in order to get a Google Play/GMS license. Anyone is free to build their own Android without Google's stuff (as Amazon has done, with their own Amazon Marketplace instead of Google Play, and their own services in place of Google's) - but if you want Google's stuff, you have to agree to Google's license - and Google isn't stupid. They aren't going to let other companies use their services - that they've spent years, and billions of dollars, to create, maintain, support, and service - to compete against them. That's like Coke going to Pepsi and demanding that Pepsi pay for Coke's advertising - it's never gonna happen.

Google has every right to control the Play Store - they created it, they support their developers, they invest in R&D and developer tools and APIs, etc. No one complains that Apple's App Store isn't available on everyone else's platform, but it's no different. And if BB had built a successful ecosystem of its own, and Microsoft or Palm or Nokia demanded access to it, you'd laugh at them. There's an old saying: to the victor goes the spoils...

[Ronindan]

The only effective difference is that performance and battery life would be worse when using emulation. It wouldn't change any of the underlying issues.

The simple fact is this: Google owns the Play Store and Google Mobile Services, and thus Google makes the rules for who gets to use them and what they're required to do. Google's current rules say: you must be running Android - real, Google-certified Android - as the sole OS on the device, and your build must pass our tests, and you must meet a number of other requirements and accept a number of other restrictions in order to get a Google Play/GMS license. Anyone is free to build their own Android without Google's stuff (as Amazon has done, with their own Amazon Marketplace instead of Google Play, and their own services in place of Google's) - but if you want Google's stuff, you have to agree to Google's license - and Google isn't stupid. They aren't going to let other companies use their services - that they've spent years, and billions of dollars, to create, maintain, support, and service - to compete against them. That's like Coke going to Pepsi and demanding that Pepsi pay for Coke's advertising - it's never gonna happen.

Google has every right to control the Play Store - they created it, they support their developers, they invest in R&D and developer tools and APIs, etc. No one complains that Apple's App Store isn't available on everyone else's platform, but it's no different. And if BB had built a successful ecosystem of its own, and Microsoft or Palm or Nokia demanded access to it, you'd laugh at them. There's an old saying: to the victor goes the spoils...

But.....but Google should help BB out since - it is BB... they deserve to be helped by every one in the tech industry ;-)

crackberry logic

[The_Passporter]

Apps will stop working after some time due to server-side updates. Modern apps have 2 components: the client-side components (the app on your phone) and the server-side component (various tasks such as authentication, processing and relaying messages etc). Both have to be in sync for everything to work properly.

After an app has stopped being supported, it will usually still work fine for some time (see the FB app on BB10) while the server-side part is still compatible with the client side. At one moment in time, things begin to change on the server side so drastically, that the client can't communicate anymore with the server.

Why not run two versions of the server-side code then? The answer is simple and it comes down to costs. While the old code works, changes done to the new code will have to be tested against the old code as well and this will have to be done over and over again for each new feature. Also the new code will most likely start to contain "hacks" and workarounds for compatibility reason.

let's imagine a scenario for whatsapp that may or may not happen. You stop support for BB10 and leave the client and server code unchanged. In 3 months, you add feature X to the Android and iOS versions of the app. Feature X slightly changes the protocol used for messaging. Not much, but enough for the BB10 version to no longer understand messages coming from iOS/Android devices. Another translation layer must be build on the server side so that clients can understand eachother. At some time, this translation layer may become full of workarounds and so large that the effort will cost too much money for so few users.

Most people don't actually see and understand the server side of the apps they use. between app updates that change very little on the client side, the changes to the server side can be much greater in scope and effort.

So again, it's the 99% vs the 1% and the 1% just isn't worth it.

I think if someone had described in detail as you did the way things work on both sides I may have stopped complaining out loud a long time ago lol. Thank you for the excellent explanation and education.

Posted via CB10

[Bishkin]

Sorry for being extreamly naive. Why not emulate android instead of use a runtime? Or is there even a difference between the two?

Nobody wanted that bad enough, if they did they would have bought an Android. And why would BB or third parties want to do it since Android is already free.

[Bishkin]

I think if someone had described in detail as you did the way things work on both sides I may have stopped complaining out loud a long time ago lol. Thank you for the excellent explanation and education.

Some of us knew you going to keep your options open. Hopefully better late than never.

[DiegoV_G]

Because bb10 is not android. And bb10 is dead

Posted via Passport SE

[jevinzac]

Android is open source, so anyone can run that. But if you want Google apps and Services, you have to be running pure, 100% Android - not a fork like the Android Runtime on BB10.

As for WhatsApp, they simply don't want to support the miniscule amount of users on BB10.

Jolla runs Google apps and services, so no, you are wrong, you don't need to have a pure 100% Android OS.
I think the OS should be hackable or something, to run Play services.

Posted via CB10

[Soulstream]

Jolla runs Google apps and services, so no, you are wrong, you don't need to have a pure 100% Android OS.
I think the OS should be hackable or something, to run Play services.

Posted via CB10

What he meant to say was: "But if you want Google apps and Services in an OFFICIAL AND LEGAL WAY".

At the end of the day Google apps and services are still Android apps so of course they might run on phones that include the runtime. But stuff like sideloading or patching apps is non-marketable stuff and no serious OS manufacturers will advertise this.