4 ms·

> "a new system that can run iOS apps on an Android device for the first time" We at Apportable (YC W2011) have been doing that for 3 + years in a much for com

> "a new system that can run iOS apps on an Android device for the first time" We at Apportable (YC W2011) have been doing that for 3 + years in a much for commercially viable way. We strive for source compatibility and are not building an emulator that requires taking libraries from an iOS device.

azinman2 12y ago
But the focus is on games. I am developing an app that is not a game that makes heavy use of UIKit and core animation... When can I use apportable realistically?
- zbowling 12y ago
  We started with games and it's most of what you see on the site, but it's never been our only focus. If you hit our sales team up at contact@apportable.com, we have product that is in beta that you could get access to that might work for you.
aye 12y ago
Oh, boy. I was seriously addicted to EyeLord for a little while. If I want to build an Obj-C app for Android, is https://github.com/apportable/NDKSignalTest https://github.com/apportable/NDKSignalTest a good place to start?
- zbowling 12y ago
  That's an awesome bug test case. I guess if you are the kind of dev that likes to start by copying StackOverflow question code (and not the SO answer code), then that is a perfectly acceptable project to start with to get started with to make successful apps on Android. :-) Also I have an urge to pop some eye balls in EyeLord right now.
nokiaman 12y ago
Your way requires the developer to use Apportable to port an iOS app to Android. If the developer has agreed with Apple to not port the app to Android, it will never be available. Their way gives the power to the user. The user copies across iOS app binary and system libraries and it's done. Basically, your way empowers the developer, their way empowers the user. You need to be commercially viable because your investors demand it. The price you charge developers may prevent some developers from porting their app. They don't need to be commercially viable because they're a research project. If they release their source code, the community of hackers will develop a free and easy to install system to allow users to run any iOS app on Android.
- peapicker 12y ago
  "The user copies across iOS app binary and system libraries and it's done." So, the user gets to violate the Apple copyrights. sigh
  - cookiecaper 12y ago
    Copyright is fundamentally open to interpretation. Android users may have a reasonable fair use case, regardless of what Apple says.
  - gue5t 12y ago
    I'll violate Apple copyrights until the day I die. Copyright is protectionist, monopolist bullshit, and it gets in the way of empowering users--and "empowering users" is the only ethical purpose of technological development. Anything else will merely work to reinforce existing imbalanced power structures. Additionally, copyright doesn't disallow you from copying a file from one device you own to another. Copyright is about the distribution of ideas between people, not about arrangements of bits.
    - 72deluxe 12y ago
      I'm curious: Would you have the same stance if you released some (non-free) software or a non-free hardware product and it was really successful? Would you want people to ignore the copyright then? Would you be happy for it to show up entirely cloned in the far East? People seem to have this disgust of Copyright / paying for music / paying for films / paying for software and justify it with vague arguments about "fat cats" and "sticking it to the man" but then would obviously object to people taking their own stuff....
      - gue5t 12y ago
        Piracy and dismissal of copyright isn't an egalitarian act of rebellion; it's a humanist recognition of the right of any person to freely engage with the world around them. I have enough material wealth, and if I make something that's actually useful it would be great to see people building versions of it that better suit their specific needs. That said, it is fun to say "fuck the man", and often doing the right thing coincides with it for a while. Rhetoric like that can be a good way to get some people out of their comfort zones on topics like copyright, and then more nuanced analysis can lead to the realization of the importance of building sustainable, respectful means of production. DRM, Copyright, etc. are net losses to society. They may be the only way 100mm-dollar-budget movies can exist, but I think it's better to have a culture where the people have democratic control over the objects of their culture instead of being at the mercy of content conglomerates, cease-and-desist letters for fan works, and geographic youtube restrictions.
downandout 12y ago
You're saying that Apportable lets users run iOS apps on Android? Just from briefly looking at your site, it looks like you just enable developers to easily port iOS apps to Android. In my view those are two completely different things.
pinkyand 12y ago
In general Apportable sounds great. But in reality - we see little results, relatively. Lots of IOS only apps, still. None of the big guys, who would surely be interested in offering devices/app-stores with full access to ios apps have bought you. So i wonder: why is that gap between the marketing and reality ? and maybe an emulator will close that gap ?
- argonaut 12y ago
  Is it the technology you doubt? If so, you can easily try out apportable and see it for yourself. There are a lot of reasons why people don't use Apportable, most of them don't have anything to do with Apportable's actual technology. Those reasons include: not willing to pay for it, and the fact that iOS design patterns (human interface guidelines) are completely different from Android design patterns. You cannot simply port over the exact same buttons and table views from iOS. Apportable will port those over just fine, but you basically need to redesign the entire app to be different on Android to have something that isn't jarring. At which point you may as well write everything in Java.
- rsynnott 12y ago
  > None of the big guys, who would surely be interested in offering devices/app-stores with full access to ios apps have bought you. To do that, they'd need developer cooperation. Developers are notoriously unwilling to deal with any app stores but the Apple and Google ones; look at the state of the Amazon and particularly the Samsung ones.

azinman2 12y ago

But the focus is on games. I am developing an app that is not a game that makes heavy use of UIKit and core animation... When can I use apportable realistically?

zbowling 12y ago
We started with games and it's most of what you see on the site, but it's never been our only focus. If you hit our sales team up at contact@apportable.com, we have product that is in beta that you could get access to that might work for you.

aye 12y ago

Oh, boy. I was seriously addicted to EyeLord for a little while. If I want to build an Obj-C app for Android, is https://github.com/apportable/NDKSignalTest https://github.com/apportable/NDKSignalTest a good place to start?

zbowling 12y ago
That's an awesome bug test case. I guess if you are the kind of dev that likes to start by copying StackOverflow question code (and not the SO answer code), then that is a perfectly acceptable project to start with to get started with to make successful apps on Android. :-) Also I have an urge to pop some eye balls in EyeLord right now.

nokiaman 12y ago

Your way requires the developer to use Apportable to port an iOS app to Android. If the developer has agreed with Apple to not port the app to Android, it will never be available. Their way gives the power to the user. The user copies across iOS app binary and system libraries and it's done. Basically, your way empowers the developer, their way empowers the user. You need to be commercially viable because your investors demand it. The price you charge developers may prevent some developers from porting their app. They don't need to be commercially viable because they're a research project. If they release their source code, the community of hackers will develop a free and easy to install system to allow users to run any iOS app on Android.

peapicker 12y ago
"The user copies across iOS app binary and system libraries and it's done." So, the user gets to violate the Apple copyrights. sigh
- cookiecaper 12y ago
  Copyright is fundamentally open to interpretation. Android users may have a reasonable fair use case, regardless of what Apple says.
- gue5t 12y ago
  I'll violate Apple copyrights until the day I die. Copyright is protectionist, monopolist bullshit, and it gets in the way of empowering users--and "empowering users" is the only ethical purpose of technological development. Anything else will merely work to reinforce existing imbalanced power structures. Additionally, copyright doesn't disallow you from copying a file from one device you own to another. Copyright is about the distribution of ideas between people, not about arrangements of bits.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    I'm curious: Would you have the same stance if you released some (non-free) software or a non-free hardware product and it was really successful? Would you want people to ignore the copyright then? Would you be happy for it to show up entirely cloned in the far East? People seem to have this disgust of Copyright / paying for music / paying for films / paying for software and justify it with vague arguments about "fat cats" and "sticking it to the man" but then would obviously object to people taking their own stuff....
    - gue5t 12y ago
      Piracy and dismissal of copyright isn't an egalitarian act of rebellion; it's a humanist recognition of the right of any person to freely engage with the world around them. I have enough material wealth, and if I make something that's actually useful it would be great to see people building versions of it that better suit their specific needs. That said, it is fun to say "fuck the man", and often doing the right thing coincides with it for a while. Rhetoric like that can be a good way to get some people out of their comfort zones on topics like copyright, and then more nuanced analysis can lead to the realization of the importance of building sustainable, respectful means of production. DRM, Copyright, etc. are net losses to society. They may be the only way 100mm-dollar-budget movies can exist, but I think it's better to have a culture where the people have democratic control over the objects of their culture instead of being at the mercy of content conglomerates, cease-and-desist letters for fan works, and geographic youtube restrictions.

downandout 12y ago

You're saying that Apportable lets users run iOS apps on Android? Just from briefly looking at your site, it looks like you just enable developers to easily port iOS apps to Android. In my view those are two completely different things.

pinkyand 12y ago

In general Apportable sounds great. But in reality - we see little results, relatively. Lots of IOS only apps, still. None of the big guys, who would surely be interested in offering devices/app-stores with full access to ios apps have bought you. So i wonder: why is that gap between the marketing and reality ? and maybe an emulator will close that gap ?

argonaut 12y ago
Is it the technology you doubt? If so, you can easily try out apportable and see it for yourself. There are a lot of reasons why people don't use Apportable, most of them don't have anything to do with Apportable's actual technology. Those reasons include: not willing to pay for it, and the fact that iOS design patterns (human interface guidelines) are completely different from Android design patterns. You cannot simply port over the exact same buttons and table views from iOS. Apportable will port those over just fine, but you basically need to redesign the entire app to be different on Android to have something that isn't jarring. At which point you may as well write everything in Java.
rsynnott 12y ago
> None of the big guys, who would surely be interested in offering devices/app-stores with full access to ios apps have bought you. To do that, they'd need developer cooperation. Developers are notoriously unwilling to deal with any app stores but the Apple and Google ones; look at the state of the Amazon and particularly the Samsung ones.