3 ms·

Almost none of the following APIs are available to web applications on Android: https://developer.android.com/about/versions/marshmallow/android-6.0.html https

by evv 10y ago

Almost none of the following APIs are available to web applications on Android: https://developer.android.com/about/versions/marshmallow/android-6.0.html https://developer.android.com/about/versions/marshmallow/and... Edit: I'm getting down-voted, presumably because people think web apps should have different capabilities than native apps. To those responding this way: why? I can't imagine why you'd prefer the locked-down app distribution channel of the Play Store, in comparison to the open web..

cptskippy 10y ago
I think there's a distinction between an HTML App like those made with PhoneGap/Cordova and a Web Application like Gmail.com. And I personally don't think that's a bad thing to restrict most of those APIs from Web Applications. Do I want or need a webpage to be able to turn my Camera Flash on and off? Nope Nope Nope. I think a lot of the newer APIs being exposed to the Web via the Browser are not very well thought out and will eventually be removed because of the risks they present.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  Personally, I think if Android had a better permissions setup then I'd be happier with being able to control those options, but I agree.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
threatofrain 10y ago
Asking ignorantly here -- are you saying that those API's are accessible to Google Chrome and not to other browsers? That Google is playing in an unfair playing field?
- gcp 10y ago
  are you saying that those API's are accessible to Google Chrome and not to other browsers Those APIs are available to all Android apps, including other browsers. The only complaints I've heard are about Push-style APIs and power saving essentially forcing you to use Google Services.
  - cptskippy 10y ago
    Yeah that's actually a good point. There is no assurance that your App's Service component will remain active and GCM is the only way to reliably push to an Android device. However you can write an App that persists in the App Tray as an icon that could maintain the App's Service component. The drawback there however is the persistent notification.
    - kuschku 10y ago
      > The drawback there however is the persistent notification. Well, the actual drawback is that you end up with over a dozen such notifications, your entire UI is full with them, and there’s no way to get rid of them, even if you developed the apps yourself.
      - pgeorgi 10y ago
        Developers could band together, build one such app that does the communication part and forwards any incoming message to the right destination using intents. (ie what GCM does) On the phone they could then look if GCM is around (and use it) or if that other notification app is around (and use it) or propose to install said app. It's negligible in terms of user confusion because people on non-GCM systems likely know what they're getting into (except for those using Amazon Fire).
        kuschku 10y ago
        That still wouldn’t solve the problems of many open source devs. I, for example, develop an app connecting to servers that the users self-host. I can’t modify the server, nor can I easily get it to send notifications. But I want to be able to show notifications. Luckily I can open a port to it and wait for them. It’s impossible to solve with GCM.
        pgeorgi 10y ago
        XMPP supports that, so it should be possible to provide an optional extension to your protocol to do likewise. http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0357.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0357.html

by evv 10y ago

cptskippy 10y ago

I think there's a distinction between an HTML App like those made with PhoneGap/Cordova and a Web Application like Gmail.com. And I personally don't think that's a bad thing to restrict most of those APIs from Web Applications. Do I want or need a webpage to be able to turn my Camera Flash on and off? Nope Nope Nope. I think a lot of the newer APIs being exposed to the Web via the Browser are not very well thought out and will eventually be removed because of the risks they present.

CaptSpify 10y ago
Personally, I think if Android had a better permissions setup then I'd be happier with being able to control those options, but I agree.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

threatofrain 10y ago

Asking ignorantly here -- are you saying that those API's are accessible to Google Chrome and not to other browsers? That Google is playing in an unfair playing field?

gcp 10y ago
are you saying that those API's are accessible to Google Chrome and not to other browsers Those APIs are available to all Android apps, including other browsers. The only complaints I've heard are about Push-style APIs and power saving essentially forcing you to use Google Services.
- cptskippy 10y ago
  Yeah that's actually a good point. There is no assurance that your App's Service component will remain active and GCM is the only way to reliably push to an Android device. However you can write an App that persists in the App Tray as an icon that could maintain the App's Service component. The drawback there however is the persistent notification.
  - kuschku 10y ago
    > The drawback there however is the persistent notification. Well, the actual drawback is that you end up with over a dozen such notifications, your entire UI is full with them, and there’s no way to get rid of them, even if you developed the apps yourself.
    - pgeorgi 10y ago
      Developers could band together, build one such app that does the communication part and forwards any incoming message to the right destination using intents. (ie what GCM does) On the phone they could then look if GCM is around (and use it) or if that other notification app is around (and use it) or propose to install said app. It's negligible in terms of user confusion because people on non-GCM systems likely know what they're getting into (except for those using Amazon Fire).
      - kuschku 10y ago
        That still wouldn’t solve the problems of many open source devs. I, for example, develop an app connecting to servers that the users self-host. I can’t modify the server, nor can I easily get it to send notifications. But I want to be able to show notifications. Luckily I can open a port to it and wait for them. It’s impossible to solve with GCM.
        pgeorgi 10y ago
        XMPP supports that, so it should be possible to provide an optional extension to your protocol to do likewise. http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0357.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0357.html