5 ms·

That screenshot is Skype from 2011. This is how the app looks today: http://phandroid.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/skype-for-android-tablets.jpg

That screenshot is Skype from 2011. This is how the app looks today: http://phandroid.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/skype-for-android-tablets.jpg http://phandroid.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11... Responsive design is one of Android's most fundamental design principles. It just took a while (and a few million tablet sales) for developers to take the platform seriously. Most new android apps are responsive these days. And those companies that maintain their existing apps are busy adding big screen support.

vor_ 14y ago
The Skype screenshot is from last year. It was't the only one; another was the Netflix app, and Facebook was really bad: http://i.imgur.com/fSQYQex.png http://i.imgur.com/fSQYQex.png I'm glad to hear that companies are busy adding big screen support, though that support is arguably coming late. The main point is that an Android app's interface could be stretched across anything, and this has certainly been a design obstacle in the past.
- cageface 14y ago
  It's not an obstacle it's just laziness. Unlike the iPad you basically get a usable tablet UI for free with Android. Android's fragment API makes it a lot easier than he iPad to adapt to a proper tablet UI if you want.
  - vor_ 14y ago
    > Unlike the iPad you basically get a usable tablet UI for free with Android. I just posted two screenshots showing otherwise. > Android's fragment API makes it a lot easier than he iPad to adapt to a proper tablet UI if you want. And this is just ridiculous. Regardless of whether you prefer iPads or Androids, iPads are most decidedly easier to design tablet UIs for because there are so few screen sizes.
    - cageface 14y ago
      Usable is the operative word here. I've built complex tablet apps with both SDKs. Have you?