3 ms·

I'm not a dev, but I'd actually be afraid of releasing an app for ipod touch for something so reliant on internet access purely because of the low ratings it wo

I'm not a dev, but I'd actually be afraid of releasing an app for ipod touch for something so reliant on internet access purely because of the low ratings it would probably get from clueless ipod touch owners...

Kadin 15y ago
I suspect this is a big part of the decision. It certainly would be if I were making the call ... if the UX isn't perfect, you're going to get idiots giving it 1-star reviews and generally complaining. I'm not sure I'd want to release anything that didn't have a standalone/offline mode for the Touch, just because I suspect that users operate them out of range from WiFi much of the time. (Or at least I see users playing with them where there isn't Wifi pretty often.) Maybe someone will find an unofficial way of easily getting it onto the Touch ... that would make users who really know what they're doing happy, while also preventing the sort of people who are going to give it a 1-star rating when it doesn't work in the subway from installing it.
- shinratdr 15y ago
  > I suspect this is a big part of the decision. That doesn't really help things. If this was a conscious decision because they assume iPod touch users are mentally deficient, well then it just bit them in the ass. Apparently Google didn't realize that they could just download the app in iTunes to leave a bad review.
ugh 15y ago
That doesn’t make much sense. iPod touch owners can still download the app, they just won’t be able to install it. Many of them will be pretty annoyed by that and leave angry reviews. iTunes doesn’t even prompt me about the lacking device support (I don’t have an iPhone, only an iPod touch), it just downloads. To date the Google+ app has seven reviews in the US app store. Five short five-star ones, two one-star reviews: one complaining about the lacking iOS5 Beta support (incredibly stupid but people apparently write stuff like that) and one complaining about the lacking support for iPod touches. Excluding the iPod touch may make some sense for apps that fly under the radar – but for something that gets as much exposure as Google+? I doubt it.

Kadin 15y ago

I suspect this is a big part of the decision. It certainly would be if I were making the call ... if the UX isn't perfect, you're going to get idiots giving it 1-star reviews and generally complaining. I'm not sure I'd want to release anything that didn't have a standalone/offline mode for the Touch, just because I suspect that users operate them out of range from WiFi much of the time. (Or at least I see users playing with them where there isn't Wifi pretty often.) Maybe someone will find an unofficial way of easily getting it onto the Touch ... that would make users who really know what they're doing happy, while also preventing the sort of people who are going to give it a 1-star rating when it doesn't work in the subway from installing it.

shinratdr 15y ago
> I suspect this is a big part of the decision. That doesn't really help things. If this was a conscious decision because they assume iPod touch users are mentally deficient, well then it just bit them in the ass. Apparently Google didn't realize that they could just download the app in iTunes to leave a bad review.

ugh 15y ago

That doesn’t make much sense. iPod touch owners can still download the app, they just won’t be able to install it. Many of them will be pretty annoyed by that and leave angry reviews. iTunes doesn’t even prompt me about the lacking device support (I don’t have an iPhone, only an iPod touch), it just downloads. To date the Google+ app has seven reviews in the US app store. Five short five-star ones, two one-star reviews: one complaining about the lacking iOS5 Beta support (incredibly stupid but people apparently write stuff like that) and one complaining about the lacking support for iPod touches. Excluding the iPod touch may make some sense for apps that fly under the radar – but for something that gets as much exposure as Google+? I doubt it.