Page 7 of 28 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111217 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 545
Like Tree78Likes
  1. #121  
    Great to see that this thread is also becoming a great way for our developers to let their users know that they are working on awesome TouchPad updates or replacements for their apps.

    With Enyo being talked up so much by HP, one wonders how any devs could be concerned about a patch to a lowly Mojo app just to make it run full-screen. One would expect that any developer worth their salt who is not intending to create a separate TouchPad app would themselves do that much for their users as a matter of principle and self-respect ...

    -- Rod
    LocoTreoGurl and hparsons like this.
  2. Taurec's Avatar
    Posts
    443 Posts
    Global Posts
    462 Global Posts
       #122  
    True Rod. I see the Mojo Patching as a quick fix until a full Enyo Version is avalible. I have two Apps myself in the App Catalog and porting them to Enyo would be a nearly 80% rewrite. That's why I'm currently not doing this. Instead I will create a new Enyo App from the scratch (and I guess most other Devs do it the same way).
  3. Taurec's Avatar
    Posts
    443 Posts
    Global Posts
    462 Global Posts
       #123  
    I cleaned up the List in the first posting a little bit.
    Also added FlightView, SimpleMindMap and Keyring
  4. #124  
    Pack 'n' Track - Strangely enough this app even rotates to match the Touchpad, but it does not run fullscreen.
    Pre3 (AT&T meta-doctored to ROW) webOS 2.2.4 build 3175
    TouchPad WiFi (32GB) - webOS 3.0.5 build 86
    App Catalog (US) - Vodafone (India)

    Treo 180 > 270 > 600 > 650 > 680 > Pre+ > Pre2 > Pre+ > Pre3 & tPad
  5. #125  
    Quote Originally Posted by Taurec View Post
    Btw I'm currently in contact with the Dev from jVault. Hope to confince him to release my changes over the App-Cat or at least alow me to release it here.
    Good luck. I contacted Cohosoft and they told me they're focusing on Android right now and taking a "wait and see" attitude w/ webOS.
  6. #126  
    I haven't read the whole thread, so if this has been discussed, please excuse me. I hope the patch writer is contacting the developers of the apps he is patching before patching them. Developers should be made aware of the intention to patch their apps (especially if the app is released as closed source). The reasons for this are:

    - Developers may have the intention to create TouchPad versions of their apps in the future, even if they're not working on it right now. If someone creates and distributes a full-screen Mojo patch without their knowledge or consent, they would land up competing with their own Mojo apps.

    - If TouchPad users have any issues resulting from the full-screen conversion, most likely they would be contacting the original dev. Developers shouldn't be supporting modifications to their apps that they did not know about or did not approve of.

    - There may be reasons other than aesthetics that the developer has not released a TouchPad-friendly version of the app. For instance I haven't released a TouchPad-friendly version of Music Player (Remix) because there are other issues related to Mojo emulation that prevents certain functions from working properly. And i haven't converted GeoStrings since the TouchPad doesn't have a dedicated GPS chip and therefore the results would be less-than-optimal. Other developers may have their own reasons.

    So IMO, only apps explicitly approved by the original developer should be included in this full-screen patching initiative. The only exception would be open-source apps where the developers have previously (via the app license) granted other parties the ability to edit and distribute modifications. However even then I think it's a good courtesy to contact them.
    Quick Post: The quick way to post messages and photos to Twitter & Facebook (video link)
    Music Player (Remix): The next generation music listening experience on webOS (video link)
    GeoStrings: Set location-based reminders and never forget another task (video link)

    Twitter: @Hedami
  7. #127  
    I'm not totally sure how I feel about this, but it does sort of feel like some steps are being taken to not step on the developers' toes.

    As long as only patches are being distributed, I don't see a big issue. If a dev eventually makes an official tablet version of their app, it'll be far better than a stretched version of their Mojo app, so most people would re-download or re-buy the app as the Enyo version.

    Having said that, here's my stance on this being done to my apps:

    growlr I've already done this (as evidenced in the PreCentral How-To article I wrote and has been linked to in this thread)

    neato! This app works just fine on the TouchPad. Making it large scale is pretty pointless right now. If you patch it, fine, whatever, but do note that if any of my source code is redistributed for this app, I'll have to take action. It is a paid app, after all.

    foursquare Go right ahead! It's open source: http://github.com/foursquare/foursquare-palmpre It'll be a hell of a job to modify. However, I ask that if you work on foursquare that you DO NOT PATCH IT. I would rather that you contribute to the open source project and make real, actual code changes and submit a pull request to me. If I like the way it was done, I'll merge it with the official build of the app and submit it to the App Catalog.

    So, again, growlr is done, neato! is fine as long as it's only a patch, and foursquare shouldn't be patched, but you are encouraged to contribute to the open source project so that the changes can be properly rolled into the App Catalog version.
  8. #128  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    As long as only patches are being distributed, I don't see a big issue.
    You may be fine with this, but the developer of another app may not be. The patch writer does not know this without asking them!

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    If a dev eventually makes an official tablet version of their app, it'll be far better than a stretched version of their Mojo app, so most people would re-download or re-buy the app as the Enyo version.
    Someone else shouldn't make the determination of whether a stretched out Mojo version would compete with a pure Enyo version. It should be up to the app's developer to make that determination for their app. That's the problem with this thread (assuming developers are not being contacted to give permission for the patching).

    And like I said there may be other reasons why a developer does not want their apps running on the TouchPad. Without contacting the developer, the patch writer would not know they are going against their wishes.
    Quick Post: The quick way to post messages and photos to Twitter & Facebook (video link)
    Music Player (Remix): The next generation music listening experience on webOS (video link)
    GeoStrings: Set location-based reminders and never forget another task (video link)

    Twitter: @Hedami
  9. #129  
    I guess I should've been clearer that my comments were my opinions and aren't what I think should be the opinions of other developers.

    But let's face it, stretched Mojo apps look and perform pretty crappily on the TouchPad. Growlr looks really goofy on the TouchPad because I basically put a bandaid on it to make it fit. I can promise you that if I rewrote it for the fullscreen, people would update to that version.

    I think it's still up to the developer and nothing changes with these patches. If a dev thinks a stretched Mojo app is fine and someone patches it for them, they won't do anything. If they want an Enyo version of their app, they'll make one, release it, and people will update. And if the dev uses the "Fat app" format, the user will get an auto-update to their fancy Enyo version. No harm, no foul.

    It's not like these guys are adding features to someone else's apps and then releasing them via homebrew
  10. #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    It's not like these guys are adding features to someone else's apps and then releasing them via homebrew
    The Music app is open-sourced by HP and I discussed my original "remix" project with them back in 2009. That's all I'm asking the OP to do. Talk to the developers before patching the app.
    Quick Post: The quick way to post messages and photos to Twitter & Facebook (video link)
    Music Player (Remix): The next generation music listening experience on webOS (video link)
    GeoStrings: Set location-based reminders and never forget another task (video link)

    Twitter: @Hedami
  11. #131  
    I was just making a joke. I'm aware of MPR's history. It sounds like from this thread that they're doing exactly what you're asking already. People request an app, he checks to see if the Dev has plans for a TP version, then acts accordingly.
  12. #132  
    I'd just like to say thanks for all the hard work and the how to's.
  13. #133  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    I guess I should've been clearer that my comments were my opinions and aren't what I think should be the opinions of other developers.
    Respectfully, I don't think anyone should tell anyone else what their opinions "should be".

    I have to agree with Dan. You have to get a developer's permission before going ahead with any of these patches. I don't think it was cool for the OP to say "hey, I can do these apps but I'm waiting for the developer". Either get confirmation from the developer, or don't announce anything at all, especially since neither FlightView nor Grooveshark are open source (so what is the OP doing with the source?).
  14. #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    I was just making a joke. I'm aware of MPR's history. It sounds like from this thread that they're doing exactly what you're asking already. People request an app, he checks to see if the Dev has plans for a TP version, then acts accordingly.
    I'm just looking for some clarification as to whether patches are released without developer consent. It's not just a question of whether the dev has plans for a TP version. It's a question of whether the developer gives consent to the patch.

    If the OP can clarify this, that would be great.
    Quick Post: The quick way to post messages and photos to Twitter & Facebook (video link)
    Music Player (Remix): The next generation music listening experience on webOS (video link)
    GeoStrings: Set location-based reminders and never forget another task (video link)

    Twitter: @Hedami
  15. #135  
    Quote Originally Posted by rsanchez1 View Post
    Respectfully, I don't think anyone should tell anyone else what their opinions "should be".
    Isn't that what I said in my post? I said "I guess I should've been clearer that my comments were my opinions and aren't what I think should be the opinions of other developers." That's me saying that my post was my opinion and wasn't my attempt at saying what should be others' opinion.
  16. #136  
    Quote Originally Posted by DanPLC View Post
    I'm just looking for some clarification as to whether patches are released without developer consent. It's not just a question of whether the dev has plans for a TP version. It's a question of whether the developer gives consent to the patch.

    If the OP can clarify this, that would be great.
    The very first post in this thread explains it:

    "Make sure the owner/devloper of the App you request is not working on a Touchpad/HD Version at the same time!"

    And next to all of the Work in Progress apps he as things like "Waiting for answer from Dev"
  17. #137  
    there have been many similar things in computer history and even big name companies have not objected to people adding features, at 1 time there were games that only ran from disk and people made HD installers for them, they were permitted, same for patches and main exe rebuilds to get support for better hardware/gfx or simple features injected into programs.

    So far all these have been allowed by many people and programming developers, none have had issues so long as the whole thing was not provided and only the main executable was given, its understandable why they wouldnt mind seeing as it basically aids their products sales until they either make a superior package themselves with extras or in the case that they have dropped development and the public update helps continues sales for them.

    i personally dont see any issues with the HD patches provided the original developer can see the changes made so he knows no nasty or strange extras have beens stuffed inside, i mean the only thing hes doing atm is basically a visibility patch, its not like hes adding in core functions and extras.

    its nto like hes said, ill do it all regardless of anyones opinions, he seems to be being sensible here.
  18. #138  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    Isn't that what I said in my post? I said "I guess I should've been clearer that my comments were my opinions and aren't what I think should be the opinions of other developers." That's me saying that my post was my opinion and wasn't my attempt at saying what should be others' opinion.
    Oh, haha, could've sworn I read that as "are" instead of "aren't".

    Gotta take a break from staring at the screen...
  19. #139  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    The very first post in this thread explains it:

    "Make sure the owner/devloper of the App you request is not working on a Touchpad/HD Version at the same time!"
    That's different than saying "Make sure the owner/developer of the app gives consent to the patch". It's not just a question of whether they're working on a TouchPad version.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhephree View Post
    And next to all of the Work in Progress apps he as things like "Waiting for answer from Dev"
    That implies they're waiting for an answer of whether or not the dev is working on a TouchPad version. If the dev says no, does the patch writer move ahead with the patch? Or do they first require consent? What if they can't contact the developer?

    Again I would like clarification from the OP. Hopefully the answer is that the patch is not developed and distributed until the developer gives consent.
    Quick Post: The quick way to post messages and photos to Twitter & Facebook (video link)
    Music Player (Remix): The next generation music listening experience on webOS (video link)
    GeoStrings: Set location-based reminders and never forget another task (video link)

    Twitter: @Hedami
  20. #140  
    Quote Originally Posted by geekpeter View Post
    So far all these have been allowed by many people and programming developers, none have had issues so long as the whole thing was not provided and only the main executable was given
    If the app's developer has no issue with patching their app, then that's fine. But I'm a developer and I would have an issue with one of my apps being patched without my consent. So all I'm saying is I hope the OP will only distribute patches of apps where the developer consented.
    Quick Post: The quick way to post messages and photos to Twitter & Facebook (video link)
    Music Player (Remix): The next generation music listening experience on webOS (video link)
    GeoStrings: Set location-based reminders and never forget another task (video link)

    Twitter: @Hedami
Page 7 of 28 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111217 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions