Voyager

8253 readers

39 users here now

The official lemmy community for Voyager, an open source, mobile-first client for lemmy.

Rules

Be nice.
lemmy.world instance policy

Sponsor development! 👇

💙

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

aeharding@lemmy.world

aeharding@vger.social

Persistent "Error: App Limited" (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by sneezycat@sopuli.xyz to c/voyagerapp@lemmy.world

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Using an old phone with android 7, voyager runs great. But recently I've noticed an error saying the app is limited and I should update system webview.

On clicking the link to the app store, I only see a button to remove updates, which makes me think I'm on the most recent version for this Android.

Even so, I still get the red icon at the bottom bothering me. It's purely anesthetics, but I'd appreciate some way to remove the warning.

And yes, I understand this is a very old phone, but if the app works someone is going to use it :P

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] diffaldo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Its too dangerous to use outdated webview so I urge you to use the webapp version of Voyager in modern browser (firefox, chrome..) Also the webapp version performs the same as the android version.

I recommend peel app to run the webapp, it might not work but give it a try!

[–] Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Bad news about Peel, the minimum Android version is 9 and OP is running 7.

[–] diffaldo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh well, hope they get lucky with firefox..

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 2 points 23 hours ago

Unfortunately, Firefox runs very poorly on that phone. Via browser works well, so I guess I can try that. But who am I kidding, I'll keep using the app, because it's convenient and it works well. I'll just have to endure the red warning :P

(It is an old phone, so I'm not too worried about possible security issues)

load more comments (2 replies)