Slashdot Mirror
Vine Launches On Android
Dawn Kawamoto writes "Twitter's free social media video app Vine is now on Android. But while the app rocked on the iOS platform, especially among teens, its move to Android has...dare I say...been a bit of a tangled mess. It launched on Google play without the capability for the two apps to sync, nor does it have such features as front-facing camera, search, mentions and hashtags. Another biggie is it doesn't yet allow users to post their six-second videos to Facebook. Vine says it's working on these features and all should be good soon. For now, however, a swing on the vine may not be a robust experience."
"If we crack down on 3rd party developers, that means we don't have to measure our software against the standard they set, right?"
The kids were nothing to look at either.
Bad puns are simply that. Bad.
I am tired of going on tech sites and reading about phones and apps. I want something important, something news worthy. I could care less about a shitty 6 second video clip that some marginally famous ass hair made.
Watch out for thatOOOHtreeeee!
"You might as well get your son a ticket to hell as give him a five string banjo." -unknown minister
Does it still have creepy substandard amateur porn?
Another biggie is it doesn't yet allow users to post their six-second videos to Facebook.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
You mean like win phone? lulz
More accurately, if we make our platform open, we can clearly demonstrate that certain application developers don't seem to be particularly competent.
And yet the article notes that the same application developers seem to have done a pretty bang-up job on iOS.
At what point do you begin to admit to yourself that maybe your platform *is* part of the reason "certain application developers" are having trouble delivering the same quality they've already delivered on another platform?
Are you sure it's the same developers that work on both iOS and Android versions? often times iOS shops just outsource the Android dev and you end up with a really shitty product.
And yet the article notes that the same application developers seem to have done a pretty bang-up job on iOS.
At what point do you begin to admit to yourself that maybe your platform *is* part of the reason "certain application developers" are having trouble delivering the same quality they've already delivered on another platform?
Er... *of course* it's easier to support iOS than Android? I'm a big fan of Android, and a devloper for the last 3 years, but the idea that you can support 1000+ phones vs about 5 for exactly the same cost is ludicrous. However, the overhead is small, the OS is designed to scale well. Every team I've worked in have had roughly the same speed as the iOS teams doing the same thing.
It's a bit stupid to compare 2 platforms based on one app, where the Android has only just been released & is basically still beta, and the iOS has been out for months. Chances are they didn't start development at the same time.
http://developers.slashdot.org/story/13/06/01/0429200/too-many-smart-people-chasing-too-many-dumb-ideas
"If we call our platform 'open,' that means we don't have to worry when it takes developers far longer to deliver far worse software than on competing platforms, right?"
Meanwhile in Redmond on the end of an infinitely superior phone: "Oh hey there Steve, how's that windows phone thing working out for you? Got any market chairs to throw around latelty? Man, I'd love to chat on the phone all night but I've got this successful mobile OS to play with."
I hope there's no Ikea shop nearby.
This is exactly the point.
Google should be looking at this, and devoting significant amounts of lean tissue and brainpower to figuring out how to "support 1000+ phones." We keep hearing "Android is write once, run anywhere," and yet in practice, it seems like this is a hard ideal to achieve. But rather than admit the obvious - that it's a hard problem, and one which needs some serious mitigation efforts, the problem is always "LOL BAD DEVS" or "LOL RTFM."
You can't have it both ways - either your platform is super easy to support, and worth supporting for high-profile apps, or it's actually HARD to support across all the devices, and this is an intractable problem that comes with the platform.
Well, they are, moving all the new functionality announced at Google IO as services provided by Google Play, which will be rolled out to all devices post-2.1.
Ultimately the restricted platform will lose in mobile in the same way as it did in desktop computing. People have different needs, and one vision cannot provide for them.
... also it's only *slightly* harder, and the benefit is worth it. Limited phones to one or two models, being told what you can and can't run, being forced to a single software repository is ridiculous, and I'm amazed that people tolerate it. I'm sure the fans will be happy when Apple *invents* widgets and customizable screens in the next few versions of iOS.
It is not particularly endearing to have your favoured platform treated as a second class citizen in time and quality though. I've started dumping services and companies that do it. If you're only going to support a single platform, perhaps it should be a good mobile web site instead. Tying things to only Apple only ever benefits Apple in the end.
Nobody cares.
Yeah, true. But since pretty much every mobile website I've come across has been inferior to the most thrown together app, I still favour apps. While designers and hipsters favour iPhones, the first cut of most apps is probably going to go that way.
The article says they got 13 million users in a year. I feel like the company would have come out with an Android version faster than that...maybe like 2-3 million users.
So what is vine?
The website says absolutely nothing, there are apps for two OSs I don't use, no web interface, no description...?
Does it have ANY market share? Why should we care?