1. danicas's Avatar
    Hey I was wondering if the android app player was working on OS 1.0.7.3312? I installed it on my PB but it won't open. Any help will be amazing. Thanks
    10-21-11 05:26 PM
  2. mister_turtle's Avatar
    The old Android Player leak does not work on 1.0.7.3312.

    The beta OS 2.0 has the Android player baked into it and there is no "Android Player" icon that will show up.
    10-21-11 05:35 PM
  3. supraking's Avatar
    Sigh, doesn't anyone search before they post?

    ^ What turtle said, the Android Player does not work on the newest versions of the 1.x OS.
    10-21-11 05:54 PM
  4. TheScionicMan's Avatar
    Sigh... Doesn't anyone research before they give half answers?

    There is an Android Player .bar file from the OS2 Dev Beta, but unfortunately, it doesn't seem to work in the current OS version.

    http://forums.crackberry.com/playboo...nstall-662783/
    10-21-11 06:37 PM
  5. ph03n1x's Avatar
    Sigh... Doesn't anyone research before they give half answers?

    There is an Android Player .bar file from the OS2 Dev Beta, but unfortunately, it doesn't seem to work in the current OS version.

    http://forums.crackberry.com/playboo...nstall-662783/
    yea sigh can someone half read before they answeryes it works with the os 2 beta and has been said it doesnt work with 1.0.7 and yes it does work on os2 im using it right now
    10-22-11 08:58 PM
  6. TheScionicMan's Avatar
    Thanks for confirming what I said.
    10-23-11 12:24 AM
  7. xsacha's Avatar
    The old Android Player in 1.07.2760 was 170MB.
    The new Android Player in 2.0 is only 40MB.

    So obviously most of Android is now integrated in to the 2.0 image. The android.bar won't be of much use in any earlier firmware.
    10-23-11 04:49 AM
  8. TheScionicMan's Avatar
    The old Android Player in 1.07.2760 was 170MB.
    The new Android Player in 2.0 is only 40MB.

    So obviously most of Android is now integrated in to the 2.0 image. The android.bar won't be of much use in any earlier firmware.
    That would be presumably, not obviously. They may have only tightened up the code.
    10-23-11 01:22 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD