Could reopening the funding help boost the pace of development for the iOS version?
Hello Point
Nothing is being "reopened". Funding is a necessity for the development to continue.
If you want to substantially increase the funding, to cover the cost of bringing in extra developers for example, that's a different story but it is up to MIT to decide what they want with regards to something like that.
Are you offering to sponsor with a very large sum of money?
I thought if the funding reopened and we reached the $ 100,000 requested then they could work more on the iOS version and so it would come out faster (I would happily donate if it reopened, but I think this time people will want to get an outline that is more accurate and reliable)
I say again - the donation funding is not closed, so there is no "reopen". Also, the recent changes to Android, especially Security Measures, are a huge burden for such a small development team. With over 400,000 Users per month, AI2 for Android has to be prioritised.
Not possible with only a small team and no advanced knowledge of what future changes to Android and iOS might be. Add to that, the Apple App Store approval process is not exactly a walk in the park. Everything is moving so fast in the industry - spend six months enhancing your software + compiler only for late OS changes to force you to take two steps back.
2 Likes
Got it, I have an idea (I'm not sure how successful it can be), Apple has always pushed people to learn and develop applications (especially for their platforms), I think if we turn to Apple and tell them the whole story then maybe they can help a little development and maybe facilitate all Kinds of processes. I would love to hear what you think
I have no idea of what Apple may have already said and done. I have heard they can be quite hostile at times, even with well established names on their platform -and of course App Inventor was once Google's baby!
Given App Inventor's popularity and it's mission in education, I would expect Apple to already be as helpful as they possibly can be, but whether they are or not obviously cannot be disclosed by MIT.
1 Like
Okay, in any case you can contact them (at least to their community) from here: https://discussions.apple.com/create/question?login=true
I think it is also worth mentioning Kodular - as the more professional and less learning side
(Maybe it's better for someone senior in app inventor to write the post)
Evan answered that on September 9th . When the ios version will be available to the public depends upon
- fixing existing bugs within the Android/ios version; yes there are still bugs
- obtaining agreement from Apple that the new Companion will meet their strict requirements
App Inventor committed to using a framework very different from what Thunkable was able to negotiate with Apple. The MIT framework should mean that there will be greater compatibility of current Android features available in ios. Everything available in Android will not be available in the ios version but probably will have more compatible tools than Thunkable.
MIT and Thunkable do discuss things together and the developers do exchange ideas and code.
ios will be available when Apple is satisfied Companion meets Apple's requirements. App Store Review Guidelines - Apple Developer
What Android developers in the ios TestFlight program can do is often misunderstood. Those individuals can create ios apps for their iPhones but cannot create an executable to the Apple Store. What can be done using their ios creations is limited. Users will have to wait for Apple approval before the ios will be available to all (a production version) and users will be able to share their ios apps.
Not happy. Use a platform that can create ios apps and Android apps in one go (notably Delphi Community Edition and B4x) now or just be patient and/or use Thunkable if you don't have the skills to use a scripting language.
1 Like
After making a $ 250 donation, I believe you will receive an invitation to the beta test.
That option was only for people who participated in the crowdfunding program.
The information above shows that financing is still possible, but in fact after entering the financing page, it appears that the project is closed.
1 Like
The companion has been available on the App Store since March of this year.
1 Like
I know that sir, Thanks for that.
But what I am asking about is the block codes.
I'm just being eager to lunch my first appinventor ios app in apple store.
I think you mean the ability to compile apps. In that case, we don't have a solid timeline for when we'd be able to support submitting apps to the App Store. Apple typically requires that apps be submitted via Xcode (which requires a Mac), but at the very least we are aiming to support ad hoc installs. The latter is in a closed beta test where people can build their apps and install them on their own phones. Apple used to provide an upload mechanism to the App Store in the early days where one could just upload an IPA file, but as far as I can tell that is no longer the case which makes developing with non-Apple hardware that much harder unfortunately.
2 Likes
Hell @ewpatton,
Maybe would be possible to have a first step for publish in App Store using a Mac (Xdode) and in a second step to find other solution more open. Is it possible?
This is something that we are considering, that essentially we would emit an xcarchive file that one could upload via Xcode to the App Store.
Thanks for all your effort,
But did not sound like you are sure that would be achieved?
And if that is done, can one be able to compile the same blocks used for android app to it or would there be another blocks for it?
I'm just being curious!
All of this is achievable with enough time/effort. The challenge is that there are constraints on those resources.
There are no iOS-specific blocks at this time. One of our goals is that any App Inventor project (excepting those with extensions) should ideally work on both platforms without modification. In most cases, we consider perceived incompatibilities as "bugs," although we recognize that due to differences in the platforms sometimes it's just not possible to provide equivalent functionality.
2 Likes