
Multiple APK Support in Android Market - DanielRibeiro
http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2011/07/multiple-apk-support-in-android-market.html
======
kogir
This is better than nothing, and I suppose it's far too late to do anything
else, but I was really hoping they'd force manufacturers to provide updates
and unify the platform a little.

If you have to test on all the devices and make individual builds for
different devices, development sucks. I was at Loopt when we supported J2ME,
where every phone that was supposed to be the same[1] was different, and per-
device builds were the only solution. It was a nightmare. In the long term, I
fear Android won't be much better in that regard.

[1] Java runs the same everywhere! All the JREs are validated by Sun and pass
the same tests!

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
Even if they force manufacturers to provide updates, that doesn't completely
solve the problem. Just look at how many iOS devices are on older releases
just because users have never plugged them into their computers to get
updates. And just because Android allows carriers to push updates OTA doesn't
mean users will actually install them.

~~~
cageface
It would certainly help though. The statistics I've seen suggest that Apple
has been pretty successful at getting users to upgrade and that's with a
relatively manual upgrade process too:

[http://blog.jcmultimedia.com.au/2011/03/is-it-worth-
supporti...](http://blog.jcmultimedia.com.au/2011/03/is-it-worth-supporting-
ios-3-in-2011.html)

~~~
kalleboo
Wow, 11% still on iOS 3? That compares to less than 4% still on Android 1.x
[http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-
ve...](http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-
versions.html)

~~~
e28eta
I think that's due to numbers of devices sold rather than update behavior. I
believe iOS had a large market share lead during the Android 1.x days, and
that most of those 2.x devices were sold with 2.x. It's my understanding iOS
users do a "better" job _upgrading_

------
nuclear_eclipse
Money quote:

> _Multiple APK support gives you a variety of ways to control app
> distribution. For example, you could use it to create separate APKs for
> phones and tablets under the same product listing. You could also use it to
> take advantage of new APIs or new hardware capabilities without impacting
> your existing customer base._

That is absolutely fantastic news.

~~~
spearo77
The less fantastic news, is that your ratings will be averaged over each
phone/tablet/API version. As you leave features out of older-API versions,
those users will be unhappy and leave negative reviews.

Until Google presents reviews and ratings associated to specific versions, and
now APKs, these reviews and ratings will continue to be problematic.

~~~
mcantor
_As you leave features out of older versions, those users will be unhappy and
leave negative reviews._

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this? It seems like you're saying users
will be unhappy because they can't get new features without having to update,
which seems odd.

~~~
kalleboo
On our iOS camera app, owners of early iPod Touch devices leave 1-star reviews
because our app doesn't add a hardware camera to their device.

There are some stunningly idiotic users out there.

~~~
buff-a
"UIRequiredDeviceCapabilities (Array or Dictionary - iOS) lets iTunes and the
App Store know which device-related features an application requires in order
to run. iTunes and the mobile App Store use this list to prevent customers
from installing applications on a device that does not support the listed
capabilities."

[http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/genera...](http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/general/Reference/InfoPlistKeyReference/Articles/iPhoneOSKeys.html)

------
daniel_solano
One thing that I hope doesn't get lost amidst the jubilation is that I do not
think that this changes the recommended way to create Android applications.
Generally, developers should write applications to allow the same code run in
as many different configurations as possible. Using the compatibility library
should help developers create applications that are designed to scale from
low-end phones to high-end tablets.

If anything, I believe that the biggest boon is not so much in creating
device-specific builds, but being able to leave out some things that are
unnecessary to keep application sizes low. If you know that a particular
package is going to be used only on small, low-resolutions screens, there is
no need to include the artwork for tablets.

------
djb_hackernews
What about bug reports? How will developers know which apk has the bug if the
user doesn't also submit which device, version, screen size etc it has?

~~~
radley
We automatically add that info to our feedback button emails...

------
mcantor
I wish the market made a distinction between "reviews from people for whom the
app is working" and "reviews from people for whom the app is broken". Most
apps work fine on my G2, and it's useless when the first page of reviews is
filled with 1-stars saying "FC's (force closes) on my Samsung Matrix
Galactus++ Z".

------
jared314
I wonder what is holding automatic apk dependency downloading back. I'm sure
the licensing and cost issue is tractable.

------
jbk
This is great, especially for NEON/non-NEON builds...

------
rounak
Android, you horrible, messed up son of a bitch

