Unofficial Clubhouse app for Android
github.com
github.com
Don’t shoot the messenger.
Btw, I'm sure you'll be pretty surprised finding out how much current iphone 5 owners make a year..
The main thing I was commenting on though was iPhone being much easier to develop for. This is indisputable.
Iphone being easier to develop for is indisputable. Lolz!
Lots of "poor guys", a lot of them with money, in this world that look at apple and think overpriced hardware...
Can you develop for android on mac? Yes. Can you develop for android on Linux, yes, windows yes. Can you use a common language that is very easy to find devs for, yes.
To make an iphone app, You need a mac laptop and a paid developer account. Unlike java, swift is barely used for anything else than apple products, so devs for apple products are more expensive.
I mean, agree personal views and preferences may determine peoples choices and in many ways the apple store experience is much better than android, but "indisputable" is stretching the meaning of the word too far.
We’re not talking about long term - this is just about when you’re doing the bare minimum to get going, as all startups must.
You can launch a successful app iPhone only. You can’t launch a successful app android only (happy to be enlightened if you can prove me wrong with an example).
Startups only have limited development resources. So what do you do? Many decide to do iPhone only - in the beginning
You’re missing the point about iPhone being easier to develop for. Yeah anyone is free to develop android, but the android ecosystem is a mess. So many versions of android with varying features and so many phones to test on. Some stuck on decade older software. Whereas on iOS 90% of people are on the latest OS and 99% are only 1 or 2 steps behind with VERY similar features. There’s only 2 shapes of phone with another 2 sizes. My iPhone test setup is my iPhone 12 max and an old iPhone 6S. If it works on both of those I know I’m good. Developing for android is just much more time consuming.
I really don’t know why this is controversial. As you say, Clubhouse are a business and they do want to compete with FB Insta twitter etc. For them going iPhone first must therefore be a rational choice. I’m just trying to explain that choice rationally.
If you think this is wrong, what’s your reasoning for them then? Do you think they’re just snooty and letting that get in the way of sound logic?
So many people overlook all of this. I don't have a Mac, I don't have an Apple developer account, and I don't know iOS/Swift. But guess what I do have: Linux and Windows computers, and the knowledge of Java.
A lot of people are in my boat, and for all of them, it's hard to say how making an iPhone app would be easier than making an Android app. I've made toy Android apps before. I didn't find it that hard. Certainly not as hard as learning a new language/IDE! (Android Studio is free and is built on top of IntelliJ, which I'm already familiar with.)
I wonder if it was intentional or just a matter of priorisation.
Find it hard to believe it wasn't intentional. The class associations with iPhone are quite strong.
I assume both? Intentionally prioritise iPhone over Android, because thats still (rightly or wrongly) considered the higher value platform to target. Instagram did this back when they launched in 2010 too.
But it looks likely it'll be only iPhone during their current invite-only phase.
Shifting from GitHub Issues as the default project management is a good prime candidate for starting to move the needle. Public-facing Clubhouse-the-project-management-app would be easier for non-eng contributions, holding open OKR processes, and having some clear ways for non developers to contribute.
Fwiw I tried to help on growth / product on one consumer OSS product I love- there just wasn’t a mechanism for someone to say yes, and there was a need for centralization to do some of the obvious next practices any startup would do. It’s easy for engineers to contribute, but ambient hostility and concern about marketing / growth / product tactics make it tough to turn rock solid OSS technology into competitive OSS products.
Suppose you had met the original author at the very beginning of the project and convinced them that marketing/growth/etc. is important. Let's suppose they only write some single facile sentence in the README about, "marketers/growth experts welcome" in response.
I would hold that just having that single, facile sentence buried in the README from the outset is more powerful and persuasive to the project's developer base than the most detailed proposal that a marketing/growth expert could possibly write after the fact.
Maybe another way to say this: if you showed up to a consumer OSS product that had this facile sentence in it there, the entire developer base would welcome you make a marketing pitch to them. Without it, they would interpret it as noise.
As new hyped up social networks come along with missing things we have this. I can only see this unofficial app eventually withering away as soon as the Android app is ready. (Whenever that is)
The main concern is the private API. With this, individuals can abuse the API very easily. If the invite system is phased out, it creates an opportunity for bots to ruin the app.
Here we go again.
it kills authenticity same as all the other services that create humans that consider themselves "influencers". it's not too different from the CCP's SCS only that we are too propagandized into thinking that this won't create a society of digital slaves who bow to the one with the highest karma.
If someone can make bots do convincing voice chat with groups of the glitterati, heckling Elon with persuasive counter arguments, that would be quite impressive.
It might even be understandable if you are an underdog while bootstrapping while not having enough resources, but Clubhouse should have more than enough resource to make a simplified wannabe Discord app on Android.
Any semi-competent mobile dev should be able to do it.
Reading now other's comments makes kind of sense, Clubhouse is positioning itself as an elitist app, so of course they are trying to build exclusivity.
Good luck to them, but I personally go out of my way to not use apps or services like that. I know this might come as a shocker, but some people don't like the Apple "Stockholm syndrome" ecosystem.
I prefer my Android phone over an iPhone, even though I have and use an iPad, and I still prefer my Windows PC over a Mac for developing, even though I have a Mac ( I only use it for signing apps for iOS).
Looks like having a different taste and preferring a choice is unpopular in this decade.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/cl...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/barrycollins/2021/02/10/clubhou...
why does it send traffic to China?
why is audio sent over unencrypted UDP in 2021?
who in their right minds would want to listen to footage of what are essentially meeting recordings. I get why people who are enchanted by their own voice, and want to get on it to hear themselves talk, but why on earth would anyone else want to listen to boring audio of people dialogue. it sounds flippant but it's an honest question. the ratio of those who derive utility from this is skewed tremendously toward the speaker (not the listener)
why no ADA compliance?
why the unenforcable ToS?
why no sane way for users to unsubscribe from the service? (not compliant with GDPR)
Those are all good questions for someone who works at the service in question. I just don't think the person you're responding to is that person.
I think the kinds of shared digital experiences is what is helping keep people sane while we are all isolating so I welcome all new attempts at new social platforms.
smughouse.xyz
So you're cool if you're already in, you know?
It got hyped up when Elon Musk joined and roasted Vlad from Robinhood, and suddenly everyone wanted an invite.
It's a interesting concept, but it was driven by celebrities hype and exclusivity ... but what isn't like that currently? Stocks, Crypto, you name it.