Andromo App Maker for Android v4.6.2 Released
Andromo App Maker for Android version 4.6.2 has been released.
Here is a list of changes in this version:
Here is a list of changes in this version:
- Updated the Google Play Services client library to version 8.4 which contains version 8.4 of the Google Mobile Ads SDK (AdMob).
- Added 2, 3, 4 minutes to the interstitial timings options.
- Fixed a potential crash in Audio activities if a server returns an invalid SHOUTcast 7.html file.
- Made it so Audio activities don't keep trying to retrieve the 7.html file if it was invalid.
- Removed MobileCore from Andromo's monetization options.
- Removed Tapgage from Andromo's monetization options.
- Removed AppLovin Banner Ads from Andromo's monetization options.
Comments
The fix for the audio activities is very useful And of course the Admob change.
What's the situation with AdMob now? Do we need to update the apps or can we leave them as they are and the ads will keep showing. There was a discussion not long ago, if the SDK needs to be updated or not.
Thanks!
"After
talking with the rest of the team, the note you have gotten about the
SDK needing to be higher than v6.4.1 refers to a legacy, standalone
Mobile Ads SDK that was deprecated back in February 2014,
and that had its own versioning system. That deprecation does NOT refer
at all to the use of Google Play services. What that means is even if
you are using Google Play services 4.0 which was released back in October 2013, you are still OK."
"If you are on Google Play services, you are safe from the warning that
was sent out via emails. That deprecation refers to the legacy,
standalone, SDK."
@darryl, based on this info, I guess even if we don't update our apps, the ads should keep working, right?
Thanks.
Sigh...well I guess that was a lot of wasted time and work That was my initial assumption too, but unfortunately the answer I received from AdMob's support seemed to indicate otherwise even though I was specifically asking that question. So that along with a few other comments here and there made it unclear. However based on the information you posted above, you would indeed be fine either way.
Thanks for the answer.
Better safe, than sorry, I guess. They probably weren't sure as well at the time.
Thanks again.