[Paul Miller2]

And I think if just found "some kind" of work-around!

It seems that message feature within to old app is not that dead as it might look like - I noticed some things (did some testing):


1.) You are still able to see who is online;
2.) It seems that you still can send messages (but will after that you will find in your inbox that error message of "no support anymore".

and here the "kind of work-around".

3.) I just noticed, when some one sent you a message - the top icon will still light up as in the picture (also with that error message):

Attachment 413277

So I installed Nemory Studios "Facebook Messenger LITE" from the AppWorld (with the app alone you don't get any notifications when a mail comes in, you have to check manually).
But that combination of the old Facebook app + Messenger LITEkinda works without having to check manually.

Posted via CB10

Thanks. I'll try the nemory messenger to see if that makes it easier


Otherwise - do the new BlackBerry androids have hub integration for native FB apps?

Posted via CB10

[JG_Agustin]

Thanks. I'll try the nemory messenger to see if that makes it easier


Otherwise - do the new BlackBerry androids have hub integration for native FB apps?

Posted via CB10

Yes, the official Facebook and Messenger apps integrate with the Hub on BlackBerry Android devices, but the experience is not the same.

The Hub on Android is an app and not part of the OS per se, thus when you open a notification from apps such as Facebook, Messenger or WhatsApp, it will open the app and take you to it.

The only similar experience, IMHO, is with regards to email accounts and BBM.

Posted via CB10

[JG_Agustin]

Ok im sure there is something already on this just haven't found so it ask me to log out and log in after 10.3.3 so is there going to be any type of hub notifications or should I just delete the fb app and use Internet? I noticed nothing in hub for fb which that's fine if that's the case but it's saying something about loggin back in to sync or something?

Posted via CB10

It was announced since March that the official BB10 app would no longer be supported: http://m.crackberry.com/facebook-bla...e-not-going-it

Thus, no surprises, it's broken. Furthermore, 10.3.3 includes the Web link that replaces the native app, that's why it's asking you to log out. You can't get Hub notifications from the "browser" version, so I suggest trying the options in post #23.

Posted via CB10

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Yes, the official Facebook and Messenger apps integrate with the Hub on BlackBerry Android devices, but the experience is not the same.

The Hub on Android is an app and not part of the OS per se, thus when you open a notification from apps such as Facebook, Messenger or WhatsApp, it will open the app and take you to it.

The only similar experience, IMHO, is with regards to email accounts and BBM.

Posted via CB10

I've been surprised that they haven't added SMS/MMS support to HUB+. I understand there isn't much they can do with other 3rd Party Apps, but the Texting App they have control over.

[JG_Agustin]

I've been surprised that they haven't added SMS/MMS support to HUB+. I understand there isn't much they can do with other 3rd Party Apps, but the Texting App they have control over.

Agreed, BlackBerry should develop its own app for SMS. With the stock Messenger app it kind of works if you go back to the Hub from an SMS using the triangle back button, but not the arrow on the top left.

[spookyentertainment]

Ok so it says log out then what happens? It's going to be a fb shortcut that syncs with hub? When I log back in

Posted via CB10

[JG_Agustin]

Ok so it says log out then what happens? It's going to be a fb shortcut that syncs with hub? When I log back in

Posted via CB10

Read thoroughly what I post, please: it's only a Web link and there are no Hub notifications. It's been officially this way since late March. The native app continued working regularly until now that the messaging feature is broken.

10.3.3 includes the "upgrade" to a Web shortcut, no more native app, period. Thus, I've posted some alternatives on this thread.

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

Thanks for that reply!

You're welcome.

But what's so hard about getting those APIs?
Do they just refuse to give those out?
Is it too 'much work' implementing others OS in that?
Do they want money for those and BlackBerry isn't willing to pay for that?

A decade or so ago, Facebook was a small company that was trying to grow, and this new phenomenon called "mobile" was starting to happen, but FB simply didn't have the resources to do everything themselves. So, they created public APIs that were published and allowed developers on any platform to write apps that could interface with their servers. Thus, you had smart TVs, set top boxes, DVD and Blu-Ray players, watches, PDAs, and of course, smartphones and tablets running many old and new OSs all with FB clients. FB grew into a multi-billion dollar company.

But over the last few years, FB has been fighting against an ever-growing threat of hackers who want users' information, and also privacy issues that have given them lots of bad press and has threatened their business model, which relies on advertising (primarily), which requires a high volume of users. Thus, their priorities have changed, and security has become much more important. They also got to the point where those public APIs were holding them back from making changes (including security-related changes) to their platform, reducing their competitiveness and risking their public image. Also, the mobile world has consolidated, with clear winners and losers, and it's no longer necessary to support a bunch of platforms that haven't proven themselves successful.

Facebook then made the decision to close their APIs and require that all access to their platform was going to (eventually) require a first-party app or direct access via a modern web browser (which is essentially another first-party app for their platform). Niche platforms were not going to get a first-party app, and would have to default to access via the browser, which of course means no OS integration. That decision was announced publicly back in March of this year (and given to existing developers months prior to that).

The cut-off date was technically a few months ago, but it's taken until now for Facebook to start making changes that actually broke some clients (or at least, some features). As things move forward, and more changes are made and more features added, more features will break on old clients, or they'll be locked out entirely. That's intentional - FB wants everyone on a modern, secure version of their client - but they apparently aren't going to lock everyone out instantly, but rather will let them get locked out organically, as they develop and roll out changes that break things. That will keep large masses of people from getting locked out at the same time, which would create a big backlash. If they break access for smaller groups, any backlash will be small enough to be insignificant - which is a smart way of handling changes that, while only affecting a fairly small percentage of their users, will still be very unpopular for those very users.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

You're welcome.



A decade or so ago, Facebook was a small company that was trying to grow, and this new phenomenon called "mobile" was starting to happen, but FB simply didn't have the resources to do everything themselves. So, they created public APIs that were published and allowed developers on any platform to write apps that could interface with their servers. Thus, you had smart TVs, set top boxes, DVD and Blu-Ray players, watches, PDAs, and of course, smartphones and tablets running many old and new OSs all with FB clients. FB grew into a multi-billion dollar company.

But over the last few years, FB has been fighting against an ever-growing threat of hackers who want users' information, and also privacy issues that have given them lots of bad press and has threatened their business model, which relies on advertising (primarily), which requires a high volume of users. Thus, their priorities have changed, and security has become much more important. They also got to the point where those public APIs were holding them back from making changes (including security-related changes) to their platform, reducing their competitiveness and risking their public image. Also, the mobile world has consolidated, with clear winners and losers, and it's no longer necessary to support a bunch of platforms that haven't proven themselves successful.

Facebook then made the decision to close their APIs and require that all access to their platform was going to (eventually) require a first-party app or direct access via a modern web browser (which is essentially another first-party app for their platform). Niche platforms were not going to get a first-party app, and would have to default to access via the browser, which of course means no OS integration. That decision was announced publicly back in March of this year (and given to existing developers months prior to that).

The cut-off date was technically a few months ago, but it's taken until now for Facebook to start making changes that actually broke some clients (or at least, some features). As things move forward, and more changes are made and more features added, more features will break on old clients, or they'll be locked out entirely. That's intentional - FB wants everyone on a modern, secure version of their client - but they apparently aren't going to lock everyone out instantly, but rather will let them get locked out organically, as they develop and roll out changes that break things. That will keep large masses of people from getting locked out at the same time, which would create a big backlash. If they break access for smaller groups, any backlash will be small enough to be insignificant - which is a smart way of handling changes that, while only affecting a fairly small percentage of their users, will still be very unpopular for those very users.

I've noticed a trend away from "smart TV's" this year..... they are "smart displays" that leave most of the heavy lifting to your smart device. Think Vizo is even including and Android Tablet with some of their higher end Displays now.

Getting and keeping Apps like FaceBook, Netflix, Hulu to work on anything other than Android or iOS is just not something they want to do long term... even if they could.

[Troy Tiscareno]

I've noticed a trend away from "smart TV's" this year..... they are "smart displays" that leave most of the heavy lifting to your smart device. Think Vizo is even including and Android Tablet with some of their higher end Displays now.

Getting and keeping Apps like FaceBook, Netflix, Hulu to work on anything other than Android or iOS is just not something they want to do long term... even if they could.

My day job is as an Audio/Video systems designer and programmer. It's only been the last, say, 2 years that I've found SmartTVs to be even usable, as previously the ancient, low-powered SoCs they put in TVs were so slow, and so quickly obsolete that the whole concept was a waste of money. But Sony's recent Android TV-based TVs are actually pretty good, and Samsung's Tizen TVs and LG's WebOS TVs are usable, though still not great.

Regardless, though, a TV should last 10+ years (IMO 15-20), and that means that any "smart" device that you put inside a TV today is going to be crazy obsolete in 5 years, much less 10, 15, or 20 - which is why a small external box (AppleTV, Android TV, Roku, etc.) that contains all of the "smarts" - and can be cheaply and easily replaced every 3-5 years, is still the right way to go.

[Slash82]

You're welcome.



A decade or so ago, Facebook was a small company that was trying to grow, and this new phenomenon called "mobile" was starting to happen, but FB simply didn't have the resources to do everything themselves. So, they created public APIs that were published and allowed developers on any platform to write apps that could interface with their servers. Thus, you had smart TVs, set top boxes, DVD and Blu-Ray players, watches, PDAs, and of course, smartphones and tablets running many old and new OSs all with FB clients. FB grew into a multi-billion dollar company.

But over the last few years, FB has been fighting against an ever-growing threat of hackers who want users' information, and also privacy issues that have given them lots of bad press and has threatened their business model, which relies on advertising (primarily), which requires a high volume of users. Thus, their priorities have changed, and security has become much more important. They also got to the point where those public APIs were holding them back from making changes (including security-related changes) to their platform, reducing their competitiveness and risking their public image. Also, the mobile world has consolidated, with clear winners and losers, and it's no longer necessary to support a bunch of platforms that haven't proven themselves successful.

Facebook then made the decision to close their APIs and require that all access to their platform was going to (eventually) require a first-party app or direct access via a modern web browser (which is essentially another first-party app for their platform). Niche platforms were not going to get a first-party app, and would have to default to access via the browser, which of course means no OS integration. That decision was announced publicly back in March of this year (and given to existing developers months prior to that).

The cut-off date was technically a few months ago, but it's taken until now for Facebook to start making changes that actually broke some clients (or at least, some features). As things move forward, and more changes are made and more features added, more features will break on old clients, or they'll be locked out entirely. That's intentional - FB wants everyone on a modern, secure version of their client - but they apparently aren't going to lock everyone out instantly, but rather will let them get locked out organically, as they develop and roll out changes that break things. That will keep large masses of people from getting locked out at the same time, which would create a big backlash. If they break access for smaller groups, any backlash will be small enough to be insignificant - which is a smart way of handling changes that, while only affecting a fairly small percentage of their users, will still be very unpopular for those very users.

That might be the reason behind that.
But it's a thing that I can't understand - when it's about security and against being hacked:
Does it really make sense to give those private API to Android?
I mean, sure there might be some secure Droids out there and some users have a eye on security.
But every phone maker can use Android - that might be the easiest entery point for hacking.

And the other thing is, what is the point of holding back that private API to BlackBerry?
They want make money with selling those APIs and BlackBerry is not willing to pay?
Or BlackBerry OS10 is less "trustworthy" than any cheap Droid phone maker?

That doesn't make sense to me.

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

FB isn't giving their newer APIs to anyone. They're writing their own, first-party apps for major platforms using their private APIs. They just aren't supporting niche platforms, except via the web.

This is what a lot of people here wanted: for companies to "move their apps to the web." And this is why many of us have been telling people that native apps offer advantages that web apps never will: fuller OS integration.

[hcaliste]

Tried to install messenger lite, it gives me an error message then jumps to BlackBerry world and tries to install candy crush! What gives?

Posted via CB10