Support for sdk 26, 27, 28?

Hi!
I know that thunkable havent supported api on android Oreo and Android P. (At least on me thunkable isnt working on 8.0-9.0)
But how about makeroid?

Our beta server currently supports up to 8.0 included, don’t worry about that. Apps made there work on Oreo

As soon as Google releases Android P 9.0 we’ll add its support

1 Like

And BTW all apps that are made with makeroid use target api 26.

So this Android Developers Blog: Improving app security and performance on Google Play for years to come will not be a problem for our users.

4 Likes

Hello makers…
I have said a big mistake in the past…

Makeroid don’t have API 26 as target API option.

We have since month API 27!!! as target API :smiley: :smiley:

4 Likes

That’s great, @Mika!

P.S. For those concerned, the guidelines require you to Target API 26 and above, so you needn’t worry.

Yeah that’s true.
We added SDK 27 since the beginn of this year.
The only mistake that was done it was not set in the manifest :smiley:

I looked today at the manifest of one of our apps and then I had seen, that our target sdk api was wrong :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:
For our relaunch every app will have target SDK 27 as default.


It is really funny that NO other builder have current SDK 26 as target.
Makeroid is current the first and only builder which have it. :sweat_smile:

4 Likes

@Mika (I keep tagging like this because replies are broken for me :confused: )

Also, could we have MinSDK and MaxSDK?

Yes of course! This is ready!
Btw. there is in android no Max SDK option :smiley:
123

You can choose for your app your own min sdk option.

1 Like

BTW don’t forget to tell everyone that MAKEROID gives every other builder A$$KICK’S on our relaunch :wink:

2 Likes

Could not find it yesterday, probably just missed it. Thought it got removed for some reason. :sweat_smile:

I totally messed that one up. :joy_cat:

Roger that. :wink:

1 Like

But don’t tell it to other builders :smiley:
I don’t want that they CRY like kids and copy us like always :wink: :sweat_smile:

2 Likes

Maybe it sounds a bit rude, but I’m with @mika :sweat_smile:

I’m preparing the topics (yeah, topicS, in plural) for the relaunch, and each time I read the full release notes I’m like: “Whoa, I can’t believe we’ve done this!”

I think all other builders will be “jelaous” of us :sunglasses:
What we’ve done in this months is something that has been never done before and it will revolutionize AppInventor community (because lots of things we’ve created are compatible with AppInventor :wink:)

4 Likes

I think they’ll be jealous you stole there people :joy:

2 Likes

BTW, there is a bug for the community on my phone where at times the Reply button doesnt work after I entered what I want to reply with.

Do you have any plan to advertise Makeroid on Google AdWords?

1 Like

They have lots of users as is

I mean, advertise themselves so they appear on the first Google results. For example, if I search for “program apps android” on Google, App inventor :appinventor: appears the 3rd of the second page and Thunkable :thunkable: appears the 9th of the 5th page. I haven’t seen Makeroid :makeroid: or AppyBuilder :appybuilder: in any of the first 12 pages.

3 Likes

This seems aggressive, I mean if you think about it with your logic, then all the components you made which were implemented into other builders before, are copied. Adding the same idea with a different concept is not copying. I’m not seeking for a beef, but I think

You are currently the one who is crying for someone else implemeting same features while (don’t try to lie), Makeroid sometimes does that too.

1 Like

@Ben

Wait for a few days… You’ll see what Mika meant.

1 Like

I meant that “if you call people copiers for adding same idea, when you do that yourself” is not crying and copying…