Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Justin Giles » Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:01:56 GMT


Sponsored Links
 This is happening on my free app though.  Big time.  I've lost 17% so far.






> > 



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Justin Giles » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:18:49 GMT


 I haven't touched those settings.  Still have 17% drop.





>


Sponsored Links


Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Greg Donald » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 01:06:20 GMT


 


Same here.  I released recently but no min/max sdk changes.


-- 
Greg Donald
 http://destiney.com/ 

--



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Justin Giles » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 03:11:35 GMT


 I have 21,600 downloads.  A 17% drop in active installs over the past few
days means over 3600 people uninstalled the app.  Just doesn't make sense
when all data before this time was trending at the 77% level whereas now it
is at 60%.


On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Maps.Huge.Info (Maps API Guru) <



>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Wayne Wenthin » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 03:18:36 GMT


 I saw someone suggest that the downloads generated from an update are
failing.   I noticed this with ProjectInf.   I cannot get it to download
even after a reboot.   This means that as far as the market is concerned
I've uninstalled it.    I would put more faith in this explanation if others
are seeing the same thing.    I had just done an update and I started
dropping install base.   No one has come forth and said anything about not
getting the update either.

Wayne





>>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Dan Sherman » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:17:57 GMT


 Bah (sorry to hijack)

If you can't download the new ProjectINF, we can post it somewhere for you
to download...

- Dan






>>>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Wayne Wenthin » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:45:22 GMT


 I was just pointing it out as an example of what might be going on.
Honestly I can't get into it.   I love all your other games and am jealous
of the "chat" feature though.







>>>>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Dan Sherman » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:49:52 GMT


 No worries, was just making sure you could get it if you wanted :)

- Dan








>>>>>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Justin Giles » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:24:05 GMT


 My stats trended the same way as you reported.  My app was updated targeting
the 1.5 sdk with minsdkversion = 3.  No changes have been made to those
settings since I released the app almost 2 months ago.




>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Greg Donald » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:26:59 GMT


 


Same here.  I released my app targeting 1.5 and haven't ever changed it.


-- 
Greg Donald
 http://destiney.com/ 

--



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Justin Giles » Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:52:19 GMT


 Here's an official answer:

 http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Android +Market/thread?tid=4c5752ca3e5af4ff&hl=en





>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Joshua Frank » Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:51:26 GMT


 Anyone here how long till they get it fixed? I dropped from 86% active
to 41%. Also, if you ever wanted to know if the amount of active users
affects you ranking in the market, it sure does. One of my programs
fell 15 spots.






>> >



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Wayne Wenthin » Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:04:22 GMT


 I am trying to space updates around once a week but since I'm in beta I do
update major issues right away.  Hopefully the people that are using the
game are not getting annoyed and understand that frequent updates will be
the norm for awhile.






>



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Greg Donald » Sun, 27 Dec 2009 01:45:11 GMT


 On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:37 AM, matt smith



Still not fixed here either.


-- 
Greg Donald
 http://destiney.com/ 

--



Anyone noticing more uninstalls of their app than usual over last weekend/today?

by Greg Donald » Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:38:14 GMT


 


There's been no fix from Google, just that one person confirming the
problem followed by weeks of silence.


-- 
Greg Donald
 http://destiney.com/ 



Other Threads

1. sharedpreferences and http post , give back force close ... where's the problem ?:(





Debug your program.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TreKing <http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking> - Chicago
transit tracking app for Android-powered devices

-- 

2. Page fault limit in HTC's kernel

Hi,

I'm one of the developers of Mono for Android and I just realized that
HTC put some hack into their customized kernel to kill a process after
encountering more than 10 page faults.

I have an HTC Desire HD.

Kernel version:
2.6.32.21-g1e30168
htc-kernel@and18-2 #1 Fri Dec 10 18:43:12 CST 2010

Build number:
1.75.161.2 CL301245 release-keys

Software number:
1.75.161.2

I actually checked the kernel sources of this particular kernel and
found the following in arch/arm/mm/fault.c:

====
void
__do_user_fault(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned long addr,
                unsigned int fsr, unsigned int sig, int code,
                struct pt_regs *regs)
{
        struct siginfo si;
        struct task_struct *g, *p, *selected = NULL;

#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_USER
        if (user_debug & UDBG_SEGV) {
                printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: unhandled page fault (%d) at 0x
%08lx, code 0x%03x\n",
                       tsk->comm, sig, addr, fsr);
                show_pte(tsk->mm, addr);
                show_regs(regs);
        }
#endif
        if (sig == SIGSEGV)
                tsk->segfault_count++;

        if (tsk->segfault_count > 10) {
                tsk->segfault_count = 0;
                printk(KERN_ERR "unhandled page fault at 0x%08lx, code
0x%03x\n",
                        addr, fsr);
                show_pte(tsk->mm, addr);
                show_regs(regs);

                do_each_thread(g, p) {
                        task_lock(p);
                        if (p == tsk)
                                selected = g;
                        task_unlock(p);
                } while_each_thread(g, p);

                if (selected) {
                        printk(KERN_ERR "%s: triggered too many
segfaults, force killing parent: %s\n",
                                tsk->comm, selected->comm);
                        force_sig(SIGKILL, selected);
                        return;
                }
        }

        tsk->thread.address = addr;
        tsk->thread.error_code = fsr;
        tsk->thread.trap_no = 14;
        si.si_signo = sig;
        si.si_errno = 0;
        si.si_code = code;
        si.si_addr = (void __user *)addr;
        force_sig_info(sig, &si, tsk);
}
====

Is there any reason why they put a restriction like this into their
kernel ?  I'm very surprised to see something like this and it's also
causing problems for our product.

I ran into this because Mono's soft de{*filter*} uses page faults to
generate single-step and breakpoint events and all my test apps
silently died when running in the de{*filter*}.

I have a patch to work around this by checking some variable rather
than using page faults to single-step / breakpoint events and Mono's
JIT engine already has an option to explicitly check for null
pointers, so the next update of Mono for Android should also work on
this hardware.

However, I'm still worried that a restriction like this may cause some
unforeseeable problems in future.

Does anyone know why they put this patch into their kernel ?  I just
can't think of any good reason to arbitrarily limit the number of page
faults that a process can have - especially if you install a SIGSEGV
signal handler which actually handles these.

Martin

-- 

3. help: dont display Toast

4. Widgets: Lanscape vs Portrait

5. LVL Retry Count

6. STK Menu

7. Live wallpaper canvas flickers when it includes a bitmap