Let me start by stating that this is not an app request!!!
I just want to know if anybody has this port working on a fire tv stick 4k, and if so, then how did you compile it? On the stick itself?
I've compiled it for my linux pc and on my phone and am loving it, but the tv is where this game belongs.
For those unaware,
https://github.com/VDavid003/sm64-port-android/tree/master
https://github.com/VDavid003/sm64AndroidBuilder
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ffJ8Gs50UkM
redminote8txda said:
Let me start by stating that this is not an app request!!!
I just want to know if anybody has this port working on a fire tv stick 4k, and if so, then how did you compile it? On the stick itself?
I've compiled it for my linux pc and on my phone and am loving it, but the tv is where this game belongs.
For those unaware,
https://github.com/VDavid003/sm64-port-android/tree/master
https://github.com/VDavid003/sm64AndroidBuilder
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ffJ8Gs50UkM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just use an n64 emulator. It'll work.
dladz said:
Just use an n64 emulator. It'll work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rather have it native. Widescreen.
TimmyP said:
Rather have it native. Widescreen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm I'd rather have it in 4K with upscaled graphics with a proper controller.
Which is what emulation allows...
Lol how do you think the app works?? It's an emulator locked down, they're probably making money from from ads off the back of someone else's work done on an emulator and a game that's clearly copyright material, lol.
In short to answer your question : I wouldn't use a single game emulator when I can have a better experience with an emulator.
TimmyP said:
LOL. It is a NATIVE PORT. The code for the ACTUAL GAME was decompiled.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not how it works and yes it is against copyright to copy ANY Nintendo game..
This also shouldn't be in the fire TV stick section as this is to do with hacking and apps, not fire TV .
You can't talk to people like this on XDA either.
Your post has been reported.
THREAD CLEANED
@TimmyP
Please check your PM!
So now let's get back to a non-violent communication, shall we?!
Cheers,
mrjuniork (Forum Moderator)
Sorry, it was kinda patronizing.
Mario64 has been decompiled in secret by brute force methods, and is natively available for all platforms. Some hacking group did this, most likely because they knew Nintendo was, yet again, reselling roms.
And to that other newb? Yeah, thats how it works. Go ahead and report that Gladz. Idgaf.
There are Windows, Android, Linux, IOS, Switch, etc ports.
To OP: Yes, the Android build runs on my FS4k.
And here ya go: A whole subreddit dedicated to Mario64 PC port:
https://old.reddit.com/r/mario64pcport/
Sorry I insulted you Gladz. Doesnt make you any less incorrect. This completely destroys emulation.
My game is seamlessly modded and has graphics comparable to SMG in 4k. All coins are in 3d. Trees in 3d. All character models are smooth and updated. Textures enhanced with neural networks. Makes what just came to Switch seem laughable by comparison.
Here is my old cleaned post XDA!
------------------------------------------
LOL. It is a NATIVE PORT. The code for the ACTUAL GAME was decompiled.
You can use supermario64pcbuilder and compile a Windows port and it pulls it straight from github, as long as you have a legal rom and own the game.
If fully supports xbox 360 controllers, 4k, widescreen, different camera controls, texture packs, new models, new animations... AND ITS ALL NATIVE!
So let me ask you... How do YOU THINK IT WORKS? ...
PS: Ill clarify... This is a ONE TIME DEAL that is FAR BETTER than emulation. Super Mario 64... is on PC! (and Android and IOS and Switch(this version))
...
...
Double PS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMbm-qOCZdI
Mods for the NATIVE PC VERSION OF MARIO 64.
mod edit
dladz said:
That's not how it works and yes it is against copyright to copy ANY Nintendo game..
This also shouldn't be in the fire TV stick section as this is to do with hacking and apps, not fire TV .
You can't talk to people like this on XDA either.
Your post has been reported.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL ?... Yea it is sorta unheard of, getting or decompiling the entire source of a commercial game besides something like Doom, but yea it would be wise to actually follow the links and check things out before attacking someone. Sorta the purpose of github anyways.. people don't throw up compiled code - and among devs it is very frowned upon to either steal code, invalidate licenses or add ads. There wouldn't be much tolerance for any of that behavior on github. If someone forks a project or steals code without properly staying within bounds of the license then I imagine it would be pretty easy to get that taken care of - at least on github.
Also from what I have heard, the original source code of mario 64 was leaked, BUT like what @TimmyP was saying this is a full decompile of the source code and took probably several contributors a VERY long time to go through and cleanup and make it recompile. They also DO NOT distribute any of the asset files that are not actual code, so as far as the legalities of it.. it would appear they are in the clear and how you obtain image, and audio assets is none of their business.
(lets just hope they are secretly working on OOT, because what 2 games could you possibly want native code to? These would probably be my top 2 choices, and we got one already)
glitchbit said:
LOL ?... Yea it is sorta unheard of, getting or decompiling the entire source of a commercial game besides something like Doom, but yea it would be wise to actually follow the links and check things out before attacking someone. Sorta the purpose of github anyways.. people don't throw up compiled code - and among devs it is very frowned upon to either steal code, invalidate licenses or add ads. There wouldn't be much tolerance for any of that behavior on github. If someone forks a project or steals code without properly staying within bounds of the license then I imagine it would be pretty easy to get that taken care of - at least on github.
Also from what I have heard, the original source code of mario 64 was leaked, BUT like what @TimmyP was saying this is a full decompile of the source code and took probably several contributors a VERY long time to go through and cleanup and make it recompile. They also DO NOT distribute any of the asset files that are not actual code, so as far as the legalities of it.. it would appear they are in the clear and how you obtain image, and audio assets is none of their business.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right ok, I did have a look and I am a gamer so yes having a game ported is great on all sides..
So to be clear, this ROM would be natively running on android? Great.. so no emulation, no other encoded system, just android?
Clever what they've done with the ROM insertion, as that would be copyright infringement.
Nintendo don't allow copies even if you own the original.. which sucks and I'm not sure how that's legal but it's Nintendo, so much doesn't make sense with them.
It was ported to pc first and since then you've been able to compile it for a lot of devices, some are reporting that this port works better native on the switch than the official Nintendo release.
The port itself is not piracy, compiling for android is not piracy, sharing a finished apk would be piracy
This port is awesome on so many levels, one of them is the possibility of mods, and there are already a good number of mods available.
So back to my original question, anyone got this working on a fire tv stick 4k? @TimmyP you say :"To OP: Yes, the Android build runs on my FS4k." So how did you get it to work? Did you compile on the stick?
dladz said:
Right ok, I did have a look and I am a gamer so yes having a game ported is great on all sides..
So to be clear, this ROM would be natively running on android? Great.. so no emulation, no other encoded system, just android?
Clever what they've done with the ROM insertion, as that would be copyright infringement.
Nintendo don't allow copies even if you own the original.. which sucks and I'm not sure how that's legal but it's Nintendo, so much doesn't make sense with them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It may be a gray area, but you really can't say it is illegal. Of course Nintendo would contend otherwise and at times it is necessary for companies to take things to court just to ensure their copyrights remain valid - regardless of what the judgement or out come may be. Think Xerox vs copying machine. Regardless if you have the ability to replicate something for your personal use then that's been fairly well upheld in courts, VCR, VHS, DVRs - it's not illegal to make a copy, but distribution or mass distribution certainly.
Where this gets murky is that they are not redistributing the finalized rom, nor any of its assets. They are not even sharing the original variable names of the various functions (beyond coincidence). The only literal thing they are redistributing are the binary numbers and similar logic - but even that may differ some since this is a decompile - not the original source and who really know how it comes back out after the original code was written. Compilers create all sorts of optimizations and I would assume some of that may actually be dumped back out into the decompile as it will not possibly be a perfect replica.
Regardless of the fact that the source code may differ the final product does come out to be the same - but again - that is only the case with the proper assets and audio and in all reality someone could literally create replacements for all of those things and you could end up with a final product that has no clearly copyrighted material in it at all.
All I am saying is it doesn't really matter how much you think this is or isn't legal - the way the team has gone about this has not been blatantly or obviously illegal nor the way they have released it. We could even get into conversations about IBM v Compaq too, and again there were and are ways to recreate somethings without it being illegal. It's at the very least a gray area, but you really can't say much more than that.
glitchbit said:
It may be a gray area, but you really can't say it is illegal. Of course Nintendo would contend otherwise and at times it is necessary for companies to take things to court just to ensure their copyrights remain valid - regardless of what the judgement or out come may be. Think Xerox vs copying machine. Regardless if you have the ability to replicate something for your personal use then that's been fairly well upheld in courts, VCR, VHS, DVRs - it's not illegal to make a copy, but distribution or mass distribution certainly.
Where this gets murky is that they are not redistributing the finalized rom, nor any of its assets. They are not even sharing the original variable names of the various functions (beyond coincidence). The only literal thing they are redistributing are the binary numbers and similar logic - but even that may differ some since this is a decompile - not the original source and who really know how it comes back out after the original code was written. Compilers create all sorts of optimizations and I would assume some of that may actually be dumped back out into the decompile as it will not possibly be a perfect replica.
Regardless of the fact that the source code may differ the final product does come out to be the same - but again - that is only the case with the proper assets and audio and in all reality someone could literally create replacements for all of those things and you could end up with a final product that has no clearly copyrighted material in it at all.
All I am saying is it doesn't really matter how much you think this is or isn't legal - the way the team has gone about this has not been blatantly or obviously illegal nor the way they have released it. We could even get into conversations about IBM v Compaq too, and again there were and are ways to recreate somethings without it being illegal. It's at the very least a gray area, but you really can't say much more than that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea it's not what I think! Nothing to do with me at all..Nintendo are quite unique in what they state in their copyright terms..
As I've said before. I am a gamer and I do like emulation, I've used literally every single console/ computer out there and my computing history goes back to the early 80s so I know a thing or two about it.
You might want to have a read of this..like I said not me, this is nintendo.
Source: https://www.nintendo.com/corp/legal.jsp
"Can I Download a Nintendo ROM from the Internet if I Already Own the Authentic Game?
There is a good deal of misinformation on the Internet regarding the backup/archival copy exception. It is not a "second copy" rule and is often mistakenly cited for the proposition that if you have one lawful copy of a copyrighted work, you are entitled to have a second copy of the copyrighted work even if that second copy is an infringing copy. The backup/archival copy exception is a very narrow limitation relating to a copy being made by the rightful owner of an authentic game to ensure he or she has one in the event of damage or destruction of the authentic. Therefore, whether you have an authentic game or not, or whether you have possession of a Nintendo ROM for a limited amount of time, i.e. 24 hours, it is illegal to download and play a Nintendo ROM from the Internet."
Nintendo's lawyers have already attacked videos of Mario 64 and websites for downloads.
So yep, this isn't my opinion dude. This is Nintendo's.
All I'm saying is be careful what you're doing here, merely talking about getting Mario working on a device would be enough for XDA to get some lawyers contacting them.
You do what you will, that's the last I'll say on the matter, I'm not a mod so it's not my responsibility.
On a personal note, I bought Mario 64 back when it was released and completed it up to Yoshi on the roof, it's a good game..and I like the idea of a native android version, I can just understand their legal standpoint, regardless if you have not distributed the game, the process available Nintendo will see as an infringement.
As per your second to last paragraph, if it's running Mario or anything similar, then infringement avoidance is impossible..
Essentially the problem is intent.
I disagree with it. But Nintendo's stance is plain as day,, read the content
dladz said:
Yea it's not what I think! Nothing to do with me at all..Nintendo are quite unique in what they state in their copyright terms..
Source: https://www.nintendo.com/corp/legal.jsp
"Can I Download a Nintendo ROM from the Internet if I Already Own the Authentic Game?
There is a good deal of misinformation on the Internet regarding the backup/archival copy exception. It is not a "second copy" rule and is often mistakenly cited for the proposition that if you have one lawful copy of a copyrighted work, you are entitled to have a second copy of the copyrighted work even if that second copy is an infringing copy. The backup/archival copy exception is a very narrow limitation relating to a copy being made by the rightful owner of an authentic game to ensure he or she has one in the event of damage or destruction of the authentic. Therefore, whether you have an authentic game or not, or whether you have possession of a Nintendo ROM for a limited amount of time, i.e. 24 hours, it is illegal to download and play a Nintendo ROM from the Internet."
Nintendo's lawyers have already attacked videos of Mario 64 and websites for downloads.
So yep, this isn't my opinion dude. This is Nintendo's.
All I'm saying is be careful what you're doing here, merely talking about getting Mario working on a device would be enough for XDA to get some lawyers contacting them.
You do what you will, that's the last I'll say on the matter, I'm not a mod so it's not my responsibility.
As per your second to last paragraph, if it's running Mario or anything similar, then infringement avoidance is impossible..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Removed a few bits as there's a lot that wasn't really addressable. We're talking about the same company that said renting their video games was and should be illegal and fought it in court. Wouldn't allow instruction manuals to be included with copies the rental store owned (copy or original). They also tried to be the only supplier for chips of cartridges and forcing publishers to gamble with a minimum order of 10,000 cartridges for their new game - no wonder you had 3rd parties hacking their way around it and making their own cartridges.
There's law, agreements and what's enforceable - and many companies have a lot of things in their agreements that are not remotely enforceable or following any existing or future law. A company can say a pear is an orange in their agreement if they want to, but it doesn't make it true, nor the person that has to "agree" to it to believe it either.
XDA is safe as long as they do not link to or promote stolen content - the site isn't going to get contacted by Nintendo or Microsoft for linking to an incomplete re-implementation of Mario 64 any more than Microsoft can go after XDA for linking to ReactOS because they re-implemented particular APIs.. Hell Oracle tried going after Goolge too and failed - fortunately one of the judges took an actual programming course and learned what APIs meant and were so he could properly rule in Google's favor at the end of the day. Granted many judges would have likely not bothered like he did.
glitchbit said:
Removed a few bits as there's a lot that wasn't really addressable. We're talking about the same company that said renting their video games was and should be illegal and fought it in court. Wouldn't allow instruction manuals to be included with copies the rental store owned (copy or original). They also tried to be the only supplier for chips of cartridges and forcing publishers to gamble with a minimum order of 10,000 cartridges for their new game - no wonder you had 3rd parties hacking their way around it and making their own cartridges.
There's law, agreements and what's enforceable - and many companies have a lot of things in their agreements that are not remotely enforceable or following any existing or future law. A company can say a pear is an orange in their agreement if they want to, but it doesn't make it true, nor the person that has to "agree" to it to believe it either.
XDA is safe as long as they do not link to or promote stolen content - the site isn't going to get contacted by Nintendo or Microsoft for linking to an incomplete re-implementation of Mario 64 any more than Microsoft can go after XDA for linking to ReactOS because they re-implemented particular APIs.. Hell Oracle tried going after Goolge too and failed - fortunately one of the judges took an actual programming course and learned what APIs meant and were so he could properly rule in Google's favor at the end of the day. Granted many judges would have likely not bothered like he did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said I don't like it. But that's their standpoint pal.
I personally think it's a matter of time.
On another note, I think the firestick will struggle to run this game..even if it's implemented in the right way..
Just reading the xda news here.
Sounds amazing, compiling shouldn't be a problem
Github link here.
Now I need a legit copy
Related
I did not create this app I just cabbed it and did work on the reg. Games can be played in landscape mode to the right or left. Transperency works. Very fast!
Install both cab files. Will not work on some keyboards unless you turn off T9.
www.4shared.com/file/pgaXlhbT/SNES9XPPC.html
Works great with this app that lets you use a Wiimote or PS3 controller as a bluetooth gamepad.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=689984
I made this for the TP2 to be used with the TVOUT function but it will work on all resolutions.
if it works where can i download the roms for it??
or do i dont need it???
And for the ones interested here's the homepage (source for this build is included).
I haven't played much with emulators on my PDA (frankly the state of emulation on the platform is depressing... but then again so is the state of everything else). Not even sure which version is the best...
For anyone interested here are more builds:
PocketSNES by emu193 (?)
PocketSNES by n0p
SnesGo/PocketSNES by rlei (no sources available)
PocketSNES (the father of all these mods)
Daroebhai said:
if it works where can i download the roms for it??
or do i dont need it???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Requesting warez is not allowed on XDA grounds. First and final warning.
egzthunder1 said:
Requesting warez is not allowed on XDA grounds. First and final warning.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The roms are 100% legal to download and play if he already owns the game cartridge or the rom is a game someone created like many of the super mario hacks. You have no clue if he owns super nintendo cartridges so it is wrong to assume he is gonna partake in illegal activity. So I will go ahead and recomend ********.
porkenhimer said:
The roms are 100% legal to download and play if he already owns the game cartridge or the rom is a game someone created like many of the super mario hacks. You have no clue if he owns super nintendo cartridges so it is wrong to assume he is gonna partake in illegal activity. So I will go ahead and recomend **********
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You gotta be joking, right? It bothers me beyond belief when people try to get smart about things that are as clear as day. With that same reasoning, you should be able to post links for every piece of music, film, and software ever created because you can assume that people are indeed in possession of said materials.
Congratulations. You just earned yourself a vacation from this site for breaking rules and for posting warez even after a warning not even directed to you.
porkenhimer said:
The roms are 100% legal to download and play if he already owns the game cartridge or the rom is a game someone created like many of the super mario hacks. You have no clue if he owns super nintendo cartridges so it is wrong to assume he is gonna partake in illegal activity. So I will go ahead and recomend ********.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No they are not. Some games are in the public domain, and can be posted here and linked to any public domain (pd) rom site. Copyrighted material is different. In this case of games.. You would still need to back up your own games with your own dumping hardware. And with the US DCMA, even backing up your own games with your own hardware is a grey area. (Due to the fact that you are purchasing a license to a game, and not the physical game itself. Look at any EA license.)
Downloading is always a no-no. No matter what that BS TOS/disclaimer says on some rom site. The right to back up what you have is your responsibility and can not be downloaded.
Me backing up my own CD -- Legal.
Me downloading a copy of a CD I own -- Illegal.
(of course this is a simple example, cracking protection schemes is another legal story all together.)
On Topic: Ive found, although not perfect, morphgear is the best for snes emulation. Theres also a few versions of LJP (little-john palm os) which iirc became LJX and got ported to a few different platforms. I know I used to use one version on my old Treo 750. So there have to be a few WM versions out there. Currently cant find any. Will see if I can find any old data backups from my Treo 750.
If anyone wants free, legal roms for snes... http://www.pdroms.de/files/supernes/
I just thought I'd start this thread to ask other developers about their opinion on the matter.
I spent many hours across several weeks reverse engineering the Samsung Galaxy S flashing protocol and then programming, testing and distributing Heimdall as open-source software.
Based on bandwidth consumption Heimdall has been downloaded anywhere between 2000 and 8000 times (depending on whether the source or binaries were downloaded). I have received no more than eight donations, a very sincere thank-you goes out to those eight people! Let's assume that 25% of the total number of downloads were repeat downloaders, so we have somewhere between 1500 and 6000 unique users. So only 0.134-0.534% of users actually donate. Those sorts of donation rates are barely able to cover the cost of bandwidth, if at all.
I know there are a lot of people out there who consider themselves avid supporters of open-source and open-source software. I wouldn't necessarily call myself one of those people, however I do believe there is definitely a time and a place for open-source software, Heimdall being a perfect example.
I also know a lot of people who distribute ROMs, apps, tools, mods etc. are hobbyists who do what they do in their spare time, and the community should be very thankful of that. As for myself, I work as a independent software/games developer, not particularly the most monetarily rewarding profession around.
As much as we do enjoy releasing free software for the community, it is difficult for developers such as myself to justify the work involved when there is little to no return, after all the bills need to be paid somehow.
My question is this, is it possible for developers releasing open-source software directly to the community, not large corporations, to make a living off their work? Furthermore, how do we encourage community members to give back to developers who have donated their time to the community?
Can't you use Google Code instead for hosting? or SourceForge? all provide free bandwidth IIRC.
Don't expect any donations as a rule, if you are expecting profit then either use ads on your website or charge.
I would have thought the primary reason for developing OSS on your phone is to improve the product you originally bought.
Cheers,
MiG
If you want free hosting, I can hook you up at http://www.sgscompilebox.dreamhosters.com/ that I'm paying for anyway for z4mod. Unlimited bandwidth/space. Offer goes out to anybody who wants to host anything for the SGS.
EDIT: Oh, and to answer your question: No, I don't believe it's possible to make a living off making 3rd party open source tools that only a fraction(technical users) of a device's users will use. If you want to make a living off open source, the best bet is through a company such as Canonical, or by creating applications focused at casual users with as much potential marketshare as possible. Or do what most people do: get a regular 'closed' job, and do open source stuff as a hobby.
MiG- said:
Can't you use Google Code instead for hosting? or SourceForge? all provide free bandwidth IIRC.
Don't expect any donations as a rule, if you are expecting profit then either use ads on your website or charge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you fully understand what I'm trying to discuss. The bandwidth costs are fairly negligible, especially if I'm approximately able to cover the costs with just eight donations. A developers time however is substantially more expensive, and in some ways the effort and intention is priceless
I'm not expecting profit as such, nor do I particularly wish this discussion to center around myself (I'm just using my statistics as an example). I'm just curious to know whether people think it is possible to be a "sustainable" open-source developer who contributes software directly to a community? As opposed to large open-source products targeted towards large corporations who pay technical support contracts.
I'm also not a big fan off stuffing ads down the throat of my user-base. Also, in this particular context I seriously doubt that sort of approach would work, especially if third-party free hosting (sourceforge, github etc.) is used.
MiG- said:
I would have thought the primary reason for developing OSS on your phone is to improve the product you originally bought.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not necessarily. In my particular case I've simply released a tool to further enable the community to do something that other users (myself included) could already do, in some capacity or another.
For most developers releasing open-source software isn't so much about improving something they own. It's more about providing something for a community to use and benefit from without constraints. It's not unreasonable to ask the community to support you in return. After all there is nothing that forces developers to ever release the software they develop, unless you've used GPL code which is another matter entirely.
MiG-, based on your answer I'm assuming you're saying, no you do not think it's possible, which is definitely a perfectly valid answer to questions I've asked. Although I would definitely love to hear what more community members, particularly developers, have to say about the topic.
RyanZA said:
If you want free hosting, I can hook you up at http://www.sgscompilebox.dreamhosters.com/ that I'm paying for anyway for z4mod. Unlimited bandwidth/space. Offer goes out to anybody who wants to host anything for the SGS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bit of topic.. you can host roms?
DocRambone said:
Bit of topic.. you can host roms?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Until someone stops me, sure.
RyanZA said:
EDIT: Oh, and to answer your question: No, I don't believe it's possible to make a living off making 3rd party open source tools that only a fraction(technical users) of a device's users will use. If you want to make a living off open source, the best bet is through a company such as Canonical, or by creating applications focused at casual users with as much potential marketshare as possible. Or do what most people do: get a regular 'closed' job, and do open source stuff as a hobby.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with pretty much everything except the part about targeting casual users in order to make money. In my experience technically inclined users, who have an appreciation for a piece of software, are substantially more likely to donate that casual users who lack the knowledge of the work involved. Of course selling software is something that can be more easily achieved when targeting a casual user base, especially if they know nothing of piracy. However it is generally not possible to sell "open-source" software directly.
Benjamin Dobell said:
I agree with pretty much everything except the part about targeting casual users in order to make money. In my experience technically inclined users, who have an appreciation for a piece of software, are substantially more likely to donate that casual users who lack the knowledge of the work involved. Of course selling software is something that can be more easily achieved when targeting a casual user base, especially if they know nothing of piracy. However it is generally not possible to sell "open-source" software directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course it is. Why do you think all of these app stores and market place etc is all catching on? You're never going to get rich off it, but putting up a popular open source application with an advert (and the option to turn it off even) should be able to bring in a pretty good revenue! Social networking seems to do the best for these types of apps.
Also, you'd probably want to diversify if relying on ad money - one banner ad in 25 open source apps, with 100K users each could easily reach a lot of money. And it should be possible to crank out a simple, well made open source app that serves a definite purpose in under 3 months. So with some time investment, in a couple years you'd be able to live off it. No different from closed sourced apps when you you use advertising.
Most important thing though is to make something that
1) the average user understands what it does
2) does the job as simply as possible
3) actually helps the user
4) has as wide a potential market as possible
You could look at firefox as the ultimate in this type of thing.
This is all a lot of work though, I'm sure, and if you're after money, a regular desk job is almost guaranteed to work out better.
RyanZA said:
Of course it is. Why do you think all of these app stores and market place etc is all catching on? You're never going to get rich off it, but putting up a popular open source application with an advert (and the option to turn it off even) should be able to bring in a pretty good revenue! Social networking seems to do the best for these types of apps.
Also, you'd probably want to diversify if relying on ad money - one banner ad in 25 open source apps, with 100K users each could easily reach a lot of money. And it should be possible to crank out a simple, well made open source app that serves a definite purpose in under 3 months. So with some time investment, in a couple years you'd be able to live off it. No different from closed sourced apps when you you use advertising.
Most important thing though is to make something that
1) the average user understands what it does
2) does the job as simply as possible
3) actually helps the user
4) has as wide a potential market as possible
You could look at firefox as the ultimate in this type of thing.
This is all a lot of work though, I'm sure, and if you're after money, a regular desk job is almost guaranteed to work out better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, I mostly meant that it's difficult to "sell" open-source software. If your software is truly open-source then users are likely to download it, compile it and then redistribute it for free, which is sort of reasonable given that it's meant to be open source.
However advertising in a free application is slightly different than selling an application and it does have a lot more potential to succeed. However depending on what you mean by "putting up a popular open source application" I might have moral issues with that. Unless the popular application is your own or you've substantially modified (added a UI etc) to an existing piece of open-source software. Although a lot less likely to happen if your app is free, if it is open-source there is still the chance someone else will distribute it for free, unless of course the non-code assets aren't open.
I definitely do believe that at the moment it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to live off the type of open-source software I initially described. It's a bit saddening though to realise how massively one falls short, hopefully this will change in the future.
About those donations. If I would use it, I would probably donate.
I worked my a** of for the community, providing ROMs and kitchens for 3 years for the HTC S710 and S740 and I got about 4 or 5 donations over that period of time. Sometimes it get's very frustrating, but hang in there, it's worth it after all (there would be no WM 6.5 on the Vox or the Rose without me (dare I say that ), but I wanted it anyway, so I made it and just released it for others as well)!
PS: SAP r3 is open source and it sells veeeeeery good
I think the community can recognize such invaluable work & devote a part of their donations to them, if they are using his software & really think its worth.
I think however small percentage it could be, it would make the developer feel wanted & make him continue devoting his valuable time.
I just read an article either today or yesterday regarding a conference of software developers for android community, & when one developer went to the podium & said he is earning a steady $1-$2 per day, people actually laughed. He retorted, THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE GOOD. Android hasn't penetrated the markets YET like iPhone. So awareness & earnings are still low.
BTW, a nice GUI would change everything.
Just my 2 cents worth.
PS : In continuation to RyanZA's talk, I would like to mention that if you think you have something worth using, MAKE A LOT of noise about it. THAT's how people notice, use & donate. No one can understand a software's worth until you tell them. Like some WWii prime minister said, if you want the world to understand what you are telling, tell it like you are telling a donkey.
Ben, I think you need to differentiate between recognition, fame & money. Ideas are many have you tried http://www.ideaken.com/ ?
Benjamin Dobell said:
Agreed, I mostly meant that it's difficult to "sell" open-source software. If your software is truly open-source then users are likely to download it, compile it and then redistribute it for free, which is sort of reasonable given that it's meant to be open source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most companies "built on open-source" provide binaries, and real support for those binaries, and earn a living from that. In an enterprise environment giving support can earn a lot of money (mainly because a lot of companies have policies to only use software/hardware that has decent support). On my last job we had to use a really crappy software, just because the (really) good alternative didn't had a support center in our country.
For the casual users: the marketplaces + ads are a good place to start. If you manage to create something that casual users will use, then it might pay of. Those users don't actaully care about the software being FOSS or not. Actually there aren't many people who care how free an application really is (except for most people working in IT or similar)
If bandwidth is an issue then host it over megaupload and such, problem solved.
ragin said:
BTW, a nice GUI would change everything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And give users the ability to think they are actually a power user. Most people here at xda can't write even simple scripts, but they do want to try out new and experimental stuff. (on the other hand there are a lot of users who want things that just work, for them give a simple gui saying: "DO DA STUFF")
EarlZ said:
If bandwidth is an issue then host it over megaupload and such, problem solved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate when people upload source code to megaupload. There's github, code.google.com and sf.net. sf.net is although quite old now, the other too are still great when it comes to hosting FOSS stuff.
Github is even nicer since they've added a big "Download" button for the end users.
Hi,
I am new to this community, and i have a question about my phone
I want to get GTA Vice City but i do not have the money right now to but it, so i have found the .apk file on apk _
but when i install the .apk, it wont let me play because it does not have the obb files
Apk mania provides me the obb files but where do i save it on the phone so that i could play on it.
I plug my phone in my computer, i go to phone - android but there is not obb files which apk mania tells me to save it at,
Hope someone understands my problems and could help me.
It says i cannot post outside link so i could not provide the apk mania site for gta vice city, but google it
You should not be posting threads about illegally downloaded software.. Unless you want banning?
Not sure
Magician_rd said:
Hi,
I am new to this community, and i have a question about my phone
I want to get GTA Vice City but i do not have the money right now to but it, so i have found the .apk file on apk Mania
but when i install the .apk, it wont let me play because it does not have the obb files
Apk mania provides me the obb files but where do i save it on the phone so that i could play on it.
I plug my phone in my computer, i go to phone - android but there is not obb files which apk mania tells me to save it at,
Hope someone understands my problems and could help me.
It says i cannot post outside link so i could not provide the apk mania site for gta vice city, but google it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not 100% sure on this one but you could try saving the OBB files in the folder where the APK was installed and maybe that would work.
Hope it helps, if not let me know what happend.:good:
MJewhurst said:
Im not 100% sure on this one but you could try saving the OBB files in the folder where the APK was installed and maybe that would work.
Hope it helps, if not let me know what happend.:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no that would not work. the obb files would need to be stored in the phone in the folder marked 'android'. there you would need to place the files in the folder marked 'obb'
Go to phone android if you didn't find the obb folder then create one and paste the files inside it
Sent from my GT-N8000 using xda premium
Magician_rd said:
Hi,
I am new to this community, and i have a question about my phone
I want to get GTA Vice City but i do not have the money right now to but it, so i have found the .apk file on apk Mania
but when i install the .apk, it wont let me play because it does not have the obb files
Apk mania provides me the obb files but where do i save it on the phone so that i could play on it.
I plug my phone in my computer, i go to phone - android but there is not obb files which apk mania tells me to save it at,
Hope someone understands my problems and could help me.
It says i cannot post outside link so i could not provide the apk mania site for gta vice city, but google it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
<your internal memory drive>/Android/obb
Your internal memory would be named sdcard0 or sdcard I guess.
If the folder obb doesn't exist, then create it using a file explorer.
Extract the apkmania files, and place the folder inside obb.
Apkmania mentions this on every page. But it's ok, I kind of had it hard the first time too
Hope this helped
Sent from my GT-N7100.
Those who help noobs go to heaven. True story.
---------- Post added at 11:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 PM ----------
mklass said:
You should not be posting threads about illegally downloaded software.. Unless you want banning?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey man, not questioning any principles, but just a random general query. Aren't ALL custom ROMs and kernels etc illegal softwares in the eyes of Samsung/HTC etc? How does xda decide which are or which are not?
Sent from my GT-N7100.
Those who help noobs go to heaven. True story.
SacGuru said:
Hey man, not questioning any principles, but just a random general query. Aren't ALL custom ROMs and kernels etc illegal softwares in the eyes of Samsung/HTC etc? How does xda decide which are or which are not?
Sent from my GT-N7100.
Those who help noobs go to heaven. True story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm certainly no voice of moral authority but I guess you could argue that using custom ROMs doesn't take any money away from Samsung / HTC etc (if anything it probably makes them more money) whereas using pirated software does take away money from the developers.
CitizenLee said:
I'm certainly no voice of moral authority but I guess you could argue that using custom ROMs doesn't take any money away from Samsung / HTC etc (if anything it probably makes them more money) whereas using pirated software does take away money from the developers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you are somewhat right. There just seems to be a superficial difference between 'downloading an illegal software' which this forum approves of, and 'dowloading a software illegally' which it does not.
What bugs me is that some times there remains no difference beetween the two. For example, I use a script to make my external memory card function as my as the internal memory, me being someone with high storage needs, even for applications, than the manufacturer provided 16gb. No one on xda would disapprove of that. However Sammy does, and incurs a loss as otherwise I would have bought a 64 gb model from them somehow.
Have we collectively decided at some point along the line that the big bad manufacturer can be fooled whenever required, whereas the developers who are not as prosperous should be helped?
Please do note that this remains just a query. I support xda and the developers here completely in all they do, along with the very minimal payment (cost of a pint or two) they sometimes ask for, and never wish to go go against the forum rules.
Sent from my GT-N7100.
Those who help noobs go to heaven. True story.
But you did make a purchase from them. Once you bought it, you're free to staple to your head if you so desire. The flipside is the OP didn't purchase from the developers. If he had paid for, and couldn't get it to work, and was looking for a way to enable it, that's the acceptable route.
-----
I would love to help you, but help yourself first: ask a better question
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
spycedtx said:
But you did make a purchase from them. Once you bought it, you're free to staple to your head if you so desire. The flipside is the OP didn't purchase from the developers. If he had paid for, and couldn't get it to work, and was looking for a way to enable it, that's the acceptable route.
-----
I would love to help you, but help yourself first: ask a better question
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That sounds really flimsy.
There are mods and even ROMs which provide us with some special characters on our stock keyboard, which are infact only available on some paid keyboards. Aren't we stealing the right to profit of those developers when we are not buying from them? Of course we are not directly stealing their softwares, but doesn't it imply almost the same thing.
Large sms (>3) get converted to mms by default, which should cost you a little data charge. We use mods and ROMs which include these mods to avoid that data charge, and only pay for a text nessage. That is like paying for a voice call when you have made a video one.
A developer such as apkmania buys the game. Believing in your principles of being free to even 'stapling it to his head' if he so desires, he modifies and redistributes it just so others can play it. And somewhere there, he is believed to overexploit his right. For users like the OP, any such game is no different than a mod, a script which extends the capability of his device.
It all comes down to one's personal opinion. There are people who believe modifying your device or loading custom firmwares on them is downright dishonest. You are right of course, from how you and I see things, but in their eyes there would be no difference between using a custom ROM or a pirated copy of a game.
Sent from my GT-N7100.
Those who help noobs go to heaven. True story.
put the folder you have downloaded from Apkmania to that path
sdcards0/android/obb
if it doesn't work..so put it in that path
sdcards0/android/data
it should work...but just use the folder name as you downloaded from apkmania
don't change the name of it
SacGuru said:
That sounds really flimsy.
There are mods and even ROMs which provide us with some special characters on our stock keyboard, which are infact only available on some paid keyboards. Aren't we stealing the right to profit of those developers when we are not buying from them? Of course we are not directly stealing their softwares, but doesn't it imply almost the same thing.
Large sms (>3) get converted to mms by default, which should cost you a little data charge. We use mods and ROMs which include these mods to avoid that data charge, and only pay for a text nessage. That is like paying for a voice call when you have made a video one.
A developer such as apkmania buys the game. Believing in your principles of being free to even 'stapling it to his head' if he so desires, he modifies and redistributes it just so others can play it. And somewhere there, he is believed to overexploit his right. For users like the OP, any such game is no different than a mod, a script which extends the capability of his device.
It all comes down to one's personal opinion. There are people who believe modifying your device or loading custom firmwares on them is downright dishonest. You are right of course, from how you and I see things, but in their eyes there would be no difference between using a custom ROM or a pirated copy of a game.
Sent from my GT-N7100.
Those who help noobs go to heaven. True story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since we can think every 3rd party software as it is able to be considered together with the main software of the device and also exdends the capabilities of it we have to find another way to determine the difference. This way is to take the developers (or creaters let's say) into account. When Apple sued jailbreak, US court decided people had any right to do with their handsets because iOS software was not to be considered seperately from iDevices so people are free to modify it as they wish. This decision gives us a good perspective of "haking" and "modifying"
For example Microsoft can be defined seperately from your computer. Your PC would be still a PC without a Windows on it. So MS has right to sell it seperately or sue you if you crack it. No one says "I am buying a Windows laptop", people say "I am buying a Asus laptop". But when you buy your phone you say "I am buying an Android phone". This defines the "Android" together with the "phone". So as long as you buy the phone, you buy the "Android" with it and you have every right to modify it within the laws because that is what manufacturers do excatly. You have more right to modifiy it than them because you pay money for the device, they don't! And yet they give you broken software (maybe intentionally, maybe Samsung is collecting info from the memory bug and selling them?)
For a 3rd party app/game which you have to pay "to another creator" to have you have no rights on it (because if you remove the software from your phone, it is still considered as an Android phone working with the features you have been promised)! You do NOT even have anything to claim on the updates. Just because you have Photoshop 3 it doesn't mean you will have PS 5 for free. They are considered seperate softwares from the same "maker". Getting free updates is something that the "creator" of the saftware agreed on to give you more in order to take more from you Google gives you updated software so you can buy your very expensive phone by believeing you can use it for a certain amount of time. Or you can buy an Android phone instead of Apple phone or Windows Phone.
About the "new or modified software can prevent you buying a 3rd party app which as that thing as a feature"; this is a matter of preference. You can say "I have already a keyboard on my device, no need to buy another one", or you can also say "Hey I can theme this keyboard as red and it has a better prediction than the stock one" and buy it. For a long time many features have been getting included by many firmwares and it is OK I believe because this time we have to seperate and define the softwares as "games/apps" and "feature adders".
BTW;
I personaly use hacked/cracked software because my country does not allow me to view every content on Google Play and I also have to pay more than anyone on the earth for a device. In Turkey Galaxy Note 2 16 Gb is sold for 1025$ (veries between 1100-1000 actually). I don't think there is a more expensive one in the world. That's my excuse as a student who gets 750$ a month. Once I move to another country or get a good job I will start by supporting the CM team then buy the games.
But although this is my way of "balancing" (I consider myself already paid for the next 100 games by just buying the phone for that price) things or giving a reaction to unfair taxes I believe in supporting the devs. Because so called "big" compaines are NOT even able to support our devices as developers/app makers/game makers are doing here. Samsung is a big fat lier for example. They give us broken firmwares and breake their promises. If it wasn't for the CM team, for example, Galaxy S would be long dead by now.
All other potentially interesting arguments over legal technicalities and attitudes aside; the OP own a smartphone worth hundreds of <local currency> and yet is claiming they can't afford to pay a few <local currency> for a single game. That's bull**** right there. If he just came out and said, "Guys, I'm a cheap bastard who's for help to pirate my software," I'd at least respect him but starting with the excuse of not being able to afford it is nonsense.
Comparing custom ROMs and priated software isn't really comparing apples with apples.
I think of it like this...
Using custom ROMs is like buying a car and then taking it to a tuner to mod the engine.
Using pirated games is like breaking into the dealer and just stealing the car.
Also, no one has ever been busted for using custom ROMs, whereas plenty of people have been trouble with the law for using pirated software.
This thread should be locked and closed.
Thread Closed:
Warez is against XDA rules and this is relating to helping someone with warez. If you want the app, support the developers.
6. Do not post warez.
If a piece of software requires you to pay to use it, then pay for it. We do not accept warez nor do we permit any member to promote or describe ways in which Warez, cracks, serial codes or other means of avoiding payment, can be obtained. This is a site of developers, i.e. the sort of people who create such software. When you cheat a software developer, you cheat us as a community
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
~ The-Captain
Wondering if it's worthwhile before I invest time in creating a Mac OS X VM + Xcode to port my android apps to iOS.
lapucele said:
Wondering if it's worthwhile before I invest time in creating a Mac OS X VM + Xcode to port my android apps to iOS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
just realised this may be the wrong subforum to post the above question. Could this thread be moved?
lapucele said:
just realised this may be the wrong subforum to post the above question. Could this thread be moved?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually I clicked on here thinking myself that this was for "application porting" as I came from the front page, and then it wasn't till I saw you replied to your own thread with the above that I realised? I think there is a bug in the forums, not you posting in the incorrect location?
Anyway to discuss your topic, I have recently downloaded all the necessary stuff to do as you are considering. One thing to be careful of is the fact that Apple from my understanding will give you their wrath if they find out.
Apple software is ONLY to be run on Apple hardware, If they find out (and they have their ways from what I have heard) you instantly banned for life. I guess nothing stopping you starting again, but remember your app is pulled and you kind of couldn't get away with releasing it under a different name account again later on without them knowing?
There's always the cydia market place which I hear is still fairly profitable...up until recently I wasn't even aware that is was a paid market place, I had always been of the impression that it was a hackers market for people who 1) mod their device tweak it like us android users 2) jailbroken (but stock and no alternative to iTunes) 3) People who pirate apps.
However i have learned that it has quite a following an even some developers release on both iTunes and Cydia.
Anyway just my thoughts. I am in contact with a developer that is into the whole cydia thing so if you have any questions you want answers for give me a holla
James
Jarmezrocks said:
Actually I clicked on here thinking myself that this was for "application porting" as I came from the front page, and then it wasn't till I saw you replied to your own thread with the above that I realised? I think there is a bug in the forums, not you posting in the incorrect location?
Anyway to discuss your topic, I have recently downloaded all the necessary stuff to do as you are considering. One thing to be careful of is the fact that Apple from my understanding will give you their wrath if they find out.
Apple software is ONLY to be run on Apple hardware, If they find out (and they have their ways from what I have heard) you instantly banned for life. I guess nothing stopping you starting again, but remember your app is pulled and you kind of couldn't get away with releasing it under a different name account again later on without them knowing?
There's always the cydia market place which I hear is still fairly profitable...up until recently I wasn't even aware that is was a paid market place, I had always been of the impression that it was a hackers market for people who 1) mod their device tweak it like us android users 2) jailbroken (but stock and no alternative to iTunes) 3) People who pirate apps.
However i have learned that it has quite a following an even some developers release on both iTunes and Cydia.
Anyway just my thoughts. I am in contact with a developer that is into the whole cydia thing so if you have any questions you want answers for give me a holla
James
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow thanks for the heads up! i've heard varying stories too. i totally didn't think of the 3rd party app stores.
lapucele said:
wow thanks for the heads up! i've heard varying stories too. i totally didn't think of the 3rd party app stores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just thought I'd mention as I only heard yesterday, but the newest edition of the app store for Apple is called AppCake for Apple. Apparently Apple is now going about systematically shutting down every 3rd party non-apple owned store including the non so legitimate suppliers of of Apple after market hardware products. That means everyone with anything that connects to an apple product that isn't apple or made by apple is a target. Geeese they don't let up do they? Developers mention that Apple will never be able to shut them down :silly: that they can and will do what they like with their iDevices cause they own them.
Oh and other thing to look out for if you go to Apple/iTunes, is this company Lodsys who are world renowned for being patent trolls who are systematically targeting individual developers for breaches in copy right for, get this......'in app purchasing' they claim that they invented it and are now suing several developers from iTunes (them personally) for using the iTunes supplied SDK for in app purchasing. Apple is doing the right thing and trying to defend these developers but the World IP org and US patents office can't do a god damned thing about it until things hurry up and get pushed through a ballot of senators to have groups like them shut down. Until then they are working their best and fastest with trying to sue as many people as they can! Unfortunately for most its a loosing battle as they don't have the money or resources to fight these bastards so they end up paying up. In an new interview I heard one company claimed it was cheeper to settle for 100K out of court than what it was to commit to defending them selves even though this group targeting them was 100% wrong.
But not meaning to scare you...or anything just keeping you filled in. Me personally I would write them a letter saying 4 words on one line followed by 4 words on a second line "Go f*%# your self" "See you in court" and go seek one of my dad's barrister friends to do it no win no fee. Screw that. I would be flaunting that I have in app purchasing sayin come at me bro
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/04/app-developers-lodsys-back
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/05/hey-patent-trolls-pick-someone-your-own-size
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/...t-patent-trolls-and-not-going-take-it-anymore
Jarmezrocks said:
Actually I clicked on here thinking myself that this was for "application porting" as I came from the front page, and then it wasn't till I saw you replied to your own thread with the above that I realised? I think there is a bug in the forums, not you posting in the incorrect location?
Anyway to discuss your topic, I have recently downloaded all the necessary stuff to do as you are considering. One thing to be careful of is the fact that Apple from my understanding will give you their wrath if they find out.
Apple software is ONLY to be run on Apple hardware, If they find out (and they have their ways from what I have heard) you instantly banned for life. I guess nothing stopping you starting again, but remember your app is pulled and you kind of couldn't get away with releasing it under a different name account again later on without them knowing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No you guys are right. This is for porting apps across platforms, but people seem to confuse it with ROM porting.
Q. I know pretty much zero about iOS, and generally have always been anti apple. Are you trying to say that using something like j2 on lets say a virtual box on windows, is somehow a detectable and bannable offense in apple land? It's late and i might be just be misreading, but would like to know.
Mostly because i picked up a job on an Android app, and have been talking a bit about putting the app out for iphones after I finish up the android version, but don't really know where to begin.
out of ideas said:
No you guys are right. This is for porting apps across platforms, but people seem to confuse it with ROM porting.
Q. I know pretty much zero about iOS, and generally have always been anti apple. Are you trying to say that using something like j2 on lets say a virtual box on windows, is somehow a detectable and bannable offense in apple land? It's late and i might be just be misreading, but would like to know.
Mostly because i picked up a job on an Android app, and have been talking a bit about putting the app out for iphones after I finish up the android version, but don't really know where to begin.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Research and Understanding
Yes that is exactly what I am saying. To run Apple in a VM is in breach of their TOS and Usage policy. It also entitles them to seek prosecution also; so not just a ban from iTunes. Going by Apples past history I wouldn't put it past them? Although now with Tim Cook in charge of things I think Apple is going about things a bit more differently now? For better or worse (people had their opinions of Steve Jobs - personally I disliked him but did appreciate his success and achievements for what they stacked up to be, personal opinions aside it takes a great person to do such) Apple is starting to become a bit more valued in collaborations as this is what Tim Cook always wanted working for Apple that he was never able to have whilst Steve was the master of the helm. Tim Cook was more about getting the job done and sharing. Steve's ongoing vendetta litigations were not Tim Cooks choice and/or advice. He didn't want such things from what I have read? More recently his involvement in legal matters has been observed as retracted and no confronting; he has proceeded to do these actions as part of Steve Jobs dying wishes and nothing more.
As far as I can tell he wants to nothing more than to get things out of the way and over and done with so that he and his company can move on.
My thoughts on this as an observer in the mobile tech industry is that I think Apple has dropped the ball a bit, and it is probably far too little far too late. However with a company with that much money behind it? There's only speculations about what holds in the future of Apple? They are certainly not going away or going to fall in to ruins that's for certain.
What I mean is that, yes there has been a heap of legal stuff seen by Apple and most of it very negative, but my feeling is that this won't be the case here on into the future, so the likelihood of facing a court for breach of Terms of Use are likely to be very small. I am sure that editing a build.prop is considered a breach of Google's TOS for use of a device in their Playstore?
Suggestions
My suggestion is to give it a try I have had some issues setting up my VM but have got all the necessary resources including all the software. I have just become too busy and it is not high on the priority list at the moment. I wanted to try gain an understanding of how Apple detects it's visitors. I mean iTunes is cross platform Windows and Mac (There is no release for Ubuntu or Linux AFAIK? only Wine type hacks) I know when I visit the iTunes webpage I am automatically prompted to download a Windows installer package. So they must have some form of automatic detection? Being that the likes of Virtualbox uses a shared internet connection I would speculate that you would need to choose the correct adapter settings so that your VM is seen to be a running physical machine and not a able to be identified as a shared connection or virtualised connection?
I didn't get this far as my installation has many issues. I still have the VM though for future interest. Feel free to PM me if you give it a try and don't succeed and I am happy to share what things I discovered in my problem solving.
Understanding Limitations for Cross Platform Mobile Development
As for the porting to OS's I believe there are many offerings around now that provide developers with a cross platform arrangement. Essentially only the UI resources need to change and then that plugs into a framework structure for your application to run in. You compile the code individual applications that are specific to the platform but you ARE able to develop your main code independent of the platforms. Languages such as Flex or Rubi on rails are going to be your best bet from my research?
Things You Should Consider
1. Single code repository
2. Individual application frameworks - compilation of application runtime for independent OS type
3. Limitations are stipulated and governed by what is allow at the lowest possible denominator. i.e. You can only build code into your single code repository that can accessed by the functionality of both(or all) platforms. What I mean is that there is no use building a single code repository that uses a function that is limited on one platform and not the other, another example is restrictions dictated to you by the likes of such companies like Apple. They have a strict guidelines and what is potentially available to you may not be in its context. Just because certain functionality is available to you in the Apple platform and you have even seen it in use on Apple devices does not necessarily mean that you can build and release it. In it's context Apple may not like what you are doing with your app and not approve it.
Your single point of code and it entirety has just shrunk in functionality to both devices now. So be careful and Anticipate what you might think the outcome is for your Application facing such scrutinisation and what it could possibly mean for your project as a whole?
On this note I have heard of developers making scripts and add-ons for their said central repository that allows them to restrict things ats compile time. For instance having greyed out selections in menus and a toast like notification to users like "Sorry this functionality is only available to Android users" and things like that.
Hope this helps contribute towards people considering on such ventures. Do your research. Find out what types of apps have been rejected from being published and find the reasons for why?
lapucele said:
Wondering if it's worthwhile before I invest time in creating a Mac OS X VM + Xcode to port my android apps to iOS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will check it in next week
I'm Curious....I have a Fire TV with Kodi and love it. Thinking of getting another…BUT can/will Amazon send out an update that will stop a Kodi from functioning on a Fire TV Box?? Don't want to waste money on another if it's destined to fail.
Thanks
I'm curious about this as well. It kind of boggles my mind that a simple exploit can give you access to everything.
If you are not rooted, Amazon can do whatever they want with firmware updates. It is their ecosystem. However, as long as they allow sideloaded applications (which if they want development of apps, they have to allow) Kodi can continue to be sideloaded.
That said, what "exploit" is the previous poster referring to?
Yes they can.. Would they. highly unlikely..
Lots of people asking this question now that kodi has been removed from app store. I actually understand amazon removing the app (don't like it) but it makes sense. They do after all, sell media and having that app in their store is a little like Starbucks advertising the special deals Dunkin Donuts is currently offering. But most people who know better than I do don't think you need to worry about kodi no longer working.
Btw--Ive never been clear about the rules regarding android. Its basically Linux which has always been open source. From what I gather that means you can modify it however you like but you need to leave it open. The word "open" must be interpreted very liberally because when you look at AFTV it runs android but it seems pretty well locked down to me. But I can't really comment on it. If anyone can share some good info on the legal reasons behind it, please do so.
It seems to me the vast innovation here was started by the public. And technology in general is a government subsidized industry. The pentagon uses tax dollars usually in the name of "security" and over decades develop things that go from very undesirable even by big business then get polished up and made into consumer products. Often times its just handed over to big business. This isn't really a commentary on capitalism. Im just taking a look at how we get from the public funding and/or the public actively developing tech to the point where people here can't even mess around with a product they paid for? I don't know that it makes sense but you certainly can argue its profoundly unfair.
Thank you for all the answers and im sorry for what I have caused!!! I love the Fire TV... I don't personally care if its Android 4, 4.4 etc.. As long as it works for Kodi im happy!
Ok everyone,
Thread cleaned....
As you all can see almost all posts have been removed. The OP asked a rather simple question. It wasn't an open invitation to rant and rave about assorted topics ranging from Kodi to your displeasure with xda-developers.com and what you think this website is personally not doing for you. In addition to all kinds of other off-topic nonsense. Also, it's still a mystery why some people can't have a discussion without it turning into personal attacks and flaming. Some of the posts removed were downright awful and disgusting.
This isn't the streets. This is a private website where rules and respect for one another apply. If any of you have trouble following the rules as they were laid out here, please find a new website to frequent.
Regards...
I've posted a response here after the fact - that mentioned again, that the moderators here are also cleaning any evidence of a political standing against the crisis facilitated by Amazons move, to retract the most frequently used open source media player from their store and engaging in a smear campaign against "ownership of device" interests. Which translates to - users rights to use a file player on a device they own. And in this process harmed my standing more than any of the slanderous comments that spiraled out of control here before.
The response got deleted subsequently, without any indication or even a comment as to why.
The political statement, I'd like to repeat, was -
Amazon crossed a line here. The company violated the trust relationship they had established in regards to their early adopters. They used their monopoly on distribution within their device infrastructure to remove a legal competitor and started a public smear campaign against him, based on a lie. Use and even heavily (ab)use the Fire TV you have already bought, if you have to, but stop recommending it to your peers and parents. There are cheaper, more up to date, more potent TV boxes on the horizon ( http://goo.gl/z1n9fj ), from companies that arent primarily interested in making this a fight about licensing and subscription models, chained to the hardware itself. Following a standing, where no user should be allowed to use a media player on a device they have bought from them anymore.
Amazons anti competitive move came unprovoked and is aimed at removing common ground between users of their product and company interests. They changed their position, it is time to change yours.
Background information can be found here: http://www.aftvnews.com/amazon-apps...piracy-while-google-play-store-approves-kodi/
Please do not censor political speech. The original post had more room for positional nuance and argumental flashing out of positions, and frankly was a better posting - this one is more concise.
When people are reduced to a state of waiting and worrying - structurally this cant be accepted as normal.
https://kateheddleston.com/blog/how-our-engineering-environments-are-killing-diversity-introduction
@harlekinrains: return your device and go away if you hate it that much
That way nothing could be learned from it. You dont hate the product. You hate the entity that killed of the common ground principle and mounted a campaign against the normal use of open source video player software on their device.
This is a pivotal moment. We have to be able to talk about it.
Oh get off it. This is not a pivotal moment for anything. You are straight up delusional.
You are wrong. I'll explain again.
The company just killed off the only remaining public sign, that they honor the silent agreement, that users have to be able to use video player software on the device, by banning the most commonly used open source media center from their entire distrubution infrastructure. And moreso - openly declaring it illegal, on their grounds, without giving any explanations.
Remember there is no independent judicial system to aid the consumer in the case of this being anti competitive behavior.
In technology and business relations, we refer to those important public facing signs as "canaries in the colemine". Killing them is considered to be an aggressive act, because you are eliminating the signs of there being a common interest you, as the company, care to honor as well.
Thats what activates people like me.
Because the issue we suddenly are facing is, that we do not get any more public indications of policy changes, before they can go into effect.
If you proclaim "Amazon will still honor other agreements, because they really have to...." you are proclaiming this, totally blind and only out of trust. This is what characterizes a dependency.
Remember - Amazon themselves didnt allow for Kodi to be installed on the Fire TV through their infrastructure. This already wasnt normal as far as Android distribution agreements are concerned. What they did now is to publicly position themselves against it (the most commonly used open source media player software out there).
Now you get these threads popping up with people being more and more uncertain, because they are confronted with conflicting proposals what they should be allowed to use on hardware they bought. This is a new and recent development, which is why we have to talk about it now.
And the way to address it, is not to calm them down - but to explain to them, that all bets are off, and we simply dont know anymore if, or when Amazon will retaliate further.
Because there is no public sign of mutual recognition left and their last move already was unprecedented, and hostile - and was executed without any prior provocation.
You can see that something is very "off", by the fact that even the companies "product bloggers" are taking an open stance against this move.
It is my opinion that whoever removed the Kodi app didn't understand the purpose. And Amazon will go the way of reinstating it (vs. removing every other media app that can play an internet link) once there is enough feedback and it gets the attention of a manager somewhere.
It is also my opinion that you are delusional in the depth of your concern over this app removal and the FireTV in general. There are far more concerning issues in life to be angry about. A media streaming device is not worth your emotions. Which is why this is the most I have ever, and will ever write about this. I am here to help contribute by answering questions and learn from the developers. You made a great contribution in one of your posts. You are obviously capable. Stick to that and check your soapbox at the door.
There are lots of other hardware options out there to put Kodi on, there always will be. There are many other media center applications on the Amazon app store. Nothing is "pivotal" about Kodi not being listed now. I put my money where I want. No one is forcing me to do anything. So no, I am not wrong. Because it is my opinion and choice. Nothing you can say will change my opinion on this. Especially coming from you.
Lastly, I assume this will all get deleted again and I hope so. This has nothing to do with the question from the OP. Kodi was never even a compatible app for the FireTV in the App Store. It always had to be sideloaded. So Amazon has changed nothing regarding the usage on the FireTV. And they won't be doing anything further in the future to stop it from being sideloaded either.
Edit: Don't reply to me. I am not going to respond to you. You keep editing your prior post over and over. You are obviously too emotional about this topic and I don't engage with people that are crazy.
You might be right.
But I dont care about opinions (*hm* double entendre.. ), I need coverage. And we are starting to get it right now.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/06/17/bezos_bozos_swing_ban_hammer_at_media_player/
@aftvnews, we still might need you later. Start thinking allegiances.
I take internet/consumer rights VERY seriously but its hard to get worked up here. I was sort of annoyed by the abrupt tone of the note amazon sent to team kodi but this changes almost nothing for aftv. Maybe some tablet or fire phone users are upset?
Imho this is team kodi's fight. And i would support them if they choose to better educate amazon.
Thread closed.
Certain people or particular person can't seem to stop with the long-winded rants (spam). Please either take your grievances to Amazon.com or Google+. No one here can provide you with the "help" that you need.
Regards...